Dutch Police intelligence services unlawfully spied on whole population groups

https://nltimes.nl/2024/02/08/police-intelligence-services-unlawfully-spied-whole-population-groups

by belter • 2 years ago

286 259 2 years ago

Between February 2023 and July 1, 2022, that did not happen in three investigations, the CTIVD said. The supervisory body did not say which communities were involved but did explain that by “community,” it means a population group “based, for example, on ethnicity, religious belief, or occupational group.” So, theoretically, the police intelligence services may have been spying on visitors to a certain mosque or protesting farmers.

We really have a problem with targeted surveillance of specific communities like visitors of a specific mosque? Or a pub frequented by known nazis? I don't get it. The article doesn't have enough details to form an opinion!

n4r96• 2 years ago

I'd be miffed if the police sidestepped the law and tracked my whereabouts just because I was in an organisation where a couple of other members have suspicions raised about them.

FirmwareBurner• 2 years ago

I think that's exactly how it works. If you associate with sketchy people or groups, you automatically become a target for surveillance.

krageon2• 2 years ago

There is a dragnet law, this will happen to you and it is legal

repelsteeltje2• 2 years ago

Suspicion by association.

I guess I'm a suspect for doing banking at a large bank know to also cater for criminals. Should probably look for a different bank. ...Oh, wait.

arp2423• 2 years ago

This really depends on the details.

If, say, one member of a mosque is under surveillance for good reasons and then you extend that to everyone attending the mosque for no particular reason other than "well, maybe we'll catch something, doesn't to try": that's probably not a good thing.

On the other hand, if the imam is preaching violent rhetoric, multiple members are under surveillance for good reasons, and there's good reasons to believe that the violence is an important part of the mosque community in the first place (rather than a relatively small detail): then that's perhaps not such a bad thing. You don't "accidentally" associate with that kind of thing.

Or: you probably don't need detailed reasons to put someone in Don Corleone's employ under surveillance.

piva002• 2 years ago

Would it be ok to surveil you just because you are a Twitter user, a known place for nazi gatherings? I'd say it's not ok.

ramon1562• 2 years ago

I'm biased though. Spy on me all you want, i got nothing to hide

weberer2• 2 years ago

Why stop there? I hear Nazis use the internet. By that logic, all internet users should be tracked.

tzs• 2 years ago

Twitter has over 300 million users. A pub frequented by known Nazis has 5 or 6 orders of magnitude less users.

Doxin3• 2 years ago

The point here is that this is something the intelligence agencies are allowed to do but only if done for a well grounded reason. It seems that step has been skipped.

MisterSandman• 2 years ago

We really have a problem with targeted surveillance of specific communities like visitors of a specific mosque?

Yes? Have you opened a history textbook, like ever?

beeboobaa11• 2 years ago

I have, and it's pretty obvious that religion causes a lot of violence

odiroot• 2 years ago

That's quite a straw man. Looking back at Berlin Christmas Market terrorist attack, we can see what a failure of surveillance can result in.

ardaoweo2• 2 years ago

The real problem in Europe is that we allow radical mosques funded by shady Middle-Eastern actors to even operate. Or maybe it is the fact we have too many marginalized people who are easily brainwashed to support such ideologies.

Either way, surveillance is just a symptom of deeper political failures.

RamblingCTO8• 2 years ago

Yes I have. Look for other comments from me for nuance.

I'm thinking about extremists and terrorists. So you're against surveillance of a mosque that is known to interact on the regular with terrorists? Or a nazi pub where attacks on the state are planned?

Telemakhos• 2 years ago

like visitors of a specific mosque? Or a pub frequented by known nazis?

But the article had a slightly different example than yours:

on visitors to a certain mosque or protesting farmers

You changed "protesting farmers" to "a pub frequented by known nazis." It's emotionally easy not to have a problem with targeted surveillance of nazis, but surveilling farmers, who are currently protesting throughout Europe? That's clearly politically motivated surveillance of ordinary, peaceful, law-abiding citizens who dissent from the government's views.

Thiez3• 2 years ago

The protesting farmers have been blocking highways with their tractors and lighting fires containing asbestos (also on / near highways). You could argue that the former should be allowed as part of a protest, but the latter moves you squarely outside the "law-abiding citizens" category.

actionfromafar• 2 years ago

Blocking roads with climate activism can get you years in prison, but blocking roads with tractors and trailers of dung is law-abiding.

mschuster912• 2 years ago

That's clearly politically motivated surveillance of ordinary, peaceful, law-abiding citizens who dissent from the government's views.

Peaceful? In Germany, a particularly nasty incident made headlines where a drunk farmer tried to evade a roadblock and ended up injuring a policeman [1], just last week two got arrested for attempting to run over cops [2], others spread feces and trash over a highway and lit up barricades [3], and the large demonstration in January in Berlin had over ten arrests for violence as well as explosives [4].

[1] https://www.bild.de/regional/ruhrgebiet/ruhrgebiet-aktuell/b...

[2] https://www.ndr.de/nachrichten/niedersachsen/oldenburg_ostfr...

[3] https://www.mdr.de/nachrichten/sachsen-anhalt/magdeburg/magd...

[4] https://www.rnd.de/politik/bauernproteste-in-berlin-drei-ver...

beeboobaa11• 2 years ago

The farmers have been anything but peaceful. They've destroyed public & private property, doused it in literal shit, started fires and threatened politicians. They've also blocked roads preventing emergency services from getting through.

arp2423• 2 years ago

The "protesting farmers" is just speculation from the NOS, and might as well be Nazis or motorbike gangs or extreme-left activists or $anything_else. Previous poster merely used it as an example to illustrate that these type of specifics matter.

Also these "protesting farmers" involved a number of violent incidents, intimidation, threats, and things like that. Look, things aren't black-white here, but "peaceful, law-abiding citizens" is very much a distortion of what happened.

olliej7• 2 years ago

I have a problem with “surveilling nazis”. If they’re not actively committing criminal acts, and there isn’t a warrant demonstrating with specificity that the particular facility or group is involved (e.g the same requirement for any other warrant) they should not be subject to any more surveillance than say a Christian group, or a Muslim group, or an lgbt group, or hell a group of sports team supporters. The amount of surveillance should be zero.

I hate nazis with a passion, and would never be ok employing or working with someone who’s basic life belief is that a bunch of their coworkers (maybe including me?) don’t have the right to exist and are fundamentally inferior (if nothing else a cynical 100% capitalist take would be that having a Nazi anywhere in your management hierarchy will clearly open your company to plausible discrimination suits).

Before anyone brings up accepting others beliefs, that’s not an issue. There is a basic social contract: you can believe whatever you want without consequences until your beliefs get to “other people don’t get to have the same rights as me”. The “paradox of tolerance” is BS used by bigots to try and allow them to attack the rights of others with impunity under the guise of accepting other’s beliefs.

RamblingCTO8• 2 years ago

The article specified them as examples and I found them quite framing. So yes, I changed it to cases where no one would probably have a problem with it. I'd personally have a problem with farmers being surveilled just because they are farmers and are protesting. I wanted to show that we need more data before having an opinion, as it depends on the details.

ruszki2• 2 years ago

Since Russia through Hungary organise and support the farmer protests monetarily and politically, there is no question that they should be monitored on some level.

mschuster912• 2 years ago

We really have a problem with targeted surveillance of specific communities like visitors of a specific mosque? Or a pub frequented by known nazis?

There's one of a hell of a difference between the right to religious expression and the right to drink in a pub.

The former is protected in many constitutions (USA: First Amendment, Germany: Art. 4 Abs. 2 Grundgesetz, Netherlands: Art. 6 no. 1 Constitution) as well as in Art. 18 of the Declaration of Human Rights, the latter is not.

RamblingCTO8• 2 years ago

Well, a lot of people, including you, seem to misunderstand me. I had very specific examples in my head with demonstrated (planned) actions against others or the state. I was even thinking about a very specific nazi pub in Germany. It's not about beliefs or religion for me. I couldn't care less and don't agree with "Generalverdacht" or "Sippenhaft" at all. On the opposite.

anfogoat• 2 years ago

The article doesn't have enough details to form an opinion!

It does, unless your interest is in justifying the breaking of law and abuse of powers.

These people were granted amazing powers, are paid from taxes, and yet somehow it's too much to expect that they'd have an ounce of respect for the law and the privacy of their supposed fellow citizens. Unscrupulous individuals who work overtime to figure out ways to abuse their powers.

And it really is unfathomable to me how it's possible for someone to be an agent of government, knowing you're responsible for being that for which no one nowhere should trust their government with any powers, and somehow still being able to go about your daily activities without your conscience tearing you into pieces. Impossible to say enough bad things about these specimens.

contravariant2• 2 years ago

I have a problem with surveillance on any criteria that's only marginally more specific than 'people the government doesn't like' or 'people who don't like the government'.

lispm• 2 years ago

I would think that the biggest problem in the Netherlands is organized crime around drug imports.

coldtea4• 2 years ago

We really have a problem with targeted surveillance of specific communities like visitors of a specific mosque?

That's the very definition of the thing we should have a problem with.

pjmlp2• 2 years ago

The first rule of intelligence services is that law is flexible, anyone that belives otherwise is in for a surprise.

_cenw• 2 years ago

I'm more surprised this even surfaced. I get a feeling in most other countries, this wouldn't be known about and everyone would just assume it happens.

whoswho• 2 years ago

I would suggest, as a kind of an amusing game in possible scenario ideation, to assume that the people who wrote and published this article are running with the presumption that people already know these things are happening. So the main goal of this, therefore, would not be to enlighten an ignorant audience.

We “know” that news are orchestrated. They’re not really news because they’re often planned weeks or months in advance. We “know” that the media is there to shape public opinion. But what could they write to appeal to our biases? Perhaps make a subset of us feel righteous, angry, or smug, on a given day? Play to our vices just to play with us and keep us occupied and entertained?

Think about every person who posts something like “panem et circenses,” as a response, and imagine the smugness they feel at being so clever, has been a planned-for response from the people setting it all up.

soco• 2 years ago

I don't believe there can be a real expectation of secrecy nowadays, everything seems to surface at some point. Unless it doesn't and I would never know what I missed :)

apapapa4• 2 years ago

The main problems with laws is that there are too many of them and no one knows them all. I guess you could call that flexible because they keep adding new ones.

pjmlp2• 2 years ago

Also not all laws apply to everyone, specially to organisations that have their own governance structure.

rad_gruchalski• 2 years ago

The lead:

In the four-month period between February 23 and July 1, 2022

In the body:

Between February 2023 and July 1, 2022

Somebody needs to use less chatgpt. At least read it before publishing, geez.

nonrandomstring• 2 years ago

Between February 2023 and July 1, 2022

These are Dutch Timecops. The suspects were seen fleeing into the past.

Cthulhu_3• 2 years ago

Please refrain from baseless accusations of using AI, they (along with dutchnews.nl) are only a small company doing important work, not like large scale mainstream media outlets.

krapp4• 2 years ago

AI is in the midst of a gold rush period. Practically every media company everywhere is trying to find a way to profit from AI, not just large scale mainstream media outlets. At this point 10% of all content on the internet is AI generated, and that number is only bound to increase exponentially until the current AI hype cycle crashes.

I don't know if dutchnews.nl is or isn't using AI, but neither their size nor the "importance" of their work has any bearing on whether or not they might. If they aren't now, chances are they will sooner or later.

wkat42422• 2 years ago

It's very low-effort autotranslated, and clickbaity with all the capitals though. Being a small outfit doesn't excuse them in my opinion.

Dutchnews.nl is very different because they have their own community. They make their own content, have guides for expats on how things are working there etc. They get a thumbs up from me for that, and I would recommend them to expats.

boomboomsubban• 2 years ago

That seems like the kind of error humans have made basically forever. Editing is hard.

striking• 2 years ago

Seems like this is a translation of another article (https://nos.nl/artikel/2508037-inlichtingendiensten-onderzoc...). The source does not have the error.

techcode4• 2 years ago

That's actually very likely. Besides famous example where actual people get confused - like "half drie" is "half past two" or "two thirty" (so if Dutch person is telling me time or number in English, I double check by repeating it to them in Dutch).

In my experience Google Translate often does silly things like mix up AM/PM, day and month, and often enough it even flips the meaning (say "not required" somehow becomes "required") when translating Dutch to English.

So every now and then (when it's really important stuff) I also double check the original Dutch version.

And yeah I should do it more often, or even just turn off automatic NL to EN translations...

wkat42422• 2 years ago

NLTimes is (in my opinion) a trash site that's just publishing autogenerated translations. Very clickbaity with all the CAPITALS :P I don't know anyone that actually uses them as a news source.

I think it was linked to because all the real media are in Dutch.

https://dutchnews.nl is a way better site for English speakers.

jackfoxy3• 2 years ago

A former Oakland PD officer shared with me insight into how police intelligence worked back in the day. And I'm sure this still goes on.

It was back in the time of the SLA terrorism and Patty Hearst kidnapping. One of the brothers in East Oakland casually mentioned to a cop "What are all these hippies doing in our neighborhood?" (It turns out they were having a strategy meeting.) This got reported up the chain of command and OPD intelligence set up traffic stops all around the neighborhood perimeter. That was it. They just asked for ID of everyone leaving the neighborhood and recorded them, with special interest in anyone White.

When the sh!t hit the fan and the FBI got involved (soon thereafter) the OPD chief told the FBI they knew exactly who was involved. The FBI was dismissive and wasted valuable time. When the FBI hit a blank wall in regards to identifying SLA members they finally swallowed their pride and asked the OPD for the list. That's how the SLA membership was identified.

rocqua• 2 years ago

I presume you mean the Symbionese Liberation Army when you say SLA?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbionese_Liberation_Army

Scoundreller• 2 years ago

Probably. But Service Level Agreement Terrorism has a nice ring to it.

stronglikedan• 2 years ago

They gave some context by specifying "SLA terrorism" up front, so it's a safe presumption.

pjc502• 2 years ago

They just asked for ID of everyone leaving the neighborhood and recorded them

Ah, the famous American freedom. Papers please.

(in practice, it's practically impossible to stop law enforcement doing this kind of thing at least some of the time, no matter what country you're in or how unconstitutional it is. There will always be groups with little enough political power that they have no redress)

ysofunny2• 2 years ago

sorry, but the proper american phrase is "license and registration"

moffkalast• 2 years ago

Glory to Arstotzka.

some_random5• 2 years ago

While it is practically impossible in cases like this, there's still a huge difference between the US where police will at best begrudgingly acknowledge your rights and most other countries in the world where you do not have rights to begin with.

refurb3• 2 years ago

This is such a lazy reply. Even 10 seconds Googling would tell you Americans don't need to provide ID to the police (unlike other countries) unless you are operating a motor vehicle.

TheBlight• 2 years ago

Is it possible this story served as a parallel construction -- like when you don't want to expose your actual sources and methods?

jackfoxy3• 2 years ago

No. There was no reason for this ex-cop to tell me the story 5 years ago about something that happened 45 years earlier. And he didn't make a career as a cop, so he wasn't protecting anyone.

wolverine87621• 2 years ago

A bit of a self-satisfied, everyone-else-is-a-fool, told-you-so story for the teller. IME, those are signals that the story reveals the teller, the culture of the teller, but not facts.

Of course, I don't know. I think the hard thing in these situations is that we humans tend to trust personal stories like this one - it's rude not to. My comment is rude, in a sense, transgressing in this social interaction. But the accurate, truthful course is to treat the facts as [edit:] nothing - not as maybe true, etc., but as if they were never said.

antoniojtorres• 2 years ago

Why don’t you ask for a source?

tharmas3• 2 years ago

It's a slippery slope. Mussolini defeated the Mafia in southern Italy. However, his gov't did it in a brutal manner. Lots of innocent people rounded up too.

"The hand of Vengeance found the bed To which the Purple Tyrant fled; The iron hand crush'd the Tyrant's head And became a Tyrant in his stead." --The Grey Monk, William Blake

doktrin8• 2 years ago

It was back in the time of the SLA terrorism and Patty Hearst kidnapping. One of the brothers in East Oakland casually mentioned to a cop "What are all these hippies doing in our neighborhood?" (It turns out they were having a strategy meeting.)

The SLA only had one black member, who at the time was an escaped convict. Why would a half-dozen white hippies, and one black fugitive, leave their safehouse to hold a strategy meeting in East Oakland?

spacebacon• 2 years ago

See parallel construction comment above.

jackfoxy3• 2 years ago

They had not kidnapped Patty at that point. The only thing the SLA was taking credit for at that time was the Marcus Foster murder. They probably thought they had a safe house in east Oakland, which is why all the hippies (as described by the bystander) went there for the meeting.

refurb3• 2 years ago

Because they are under the (mostly correct assumption) that poorer neighborhoods (which are often, but not exclusively, minority neighborhoods) have lower police presence.

And also that radical hippies tend not to have a lot of money, so it's not unusual for them to live in low income neighborhoods (i.e. some members likely lived there anyways).

echelon_musk• 2 years ago

Anyone unfamiliar with the Patty Hearst kidnapping may want to read the excellent book Days of Rage [0]. I started reading it after it was recommended by another user on this forum a long time ago.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Days_of_Rage:_America%27s_Radi...

LAC-Tech• 2 years ago

Dirty hippies. Thank god those domestic terrorists were apprehended before they could murder again.

retox• 2 years ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbionese_Liberation_Army

During its existence from 1973 to 1975, the group murdered at least two people, committed armed bank robberies, attempted bombings and other violent crimes, including the kidnapping in 1974 of newspaper heiress Patty Hearst.

dang• 2 years ago

Please don't do this here.

You may not owe dirty hippy terrorists better, but you owe this community better if you're participating in it.

maxglute• 2 years ago

I feel like there's disproportionate coverage of Dutch intelligence drama/failures relative to size of the country. I'm assuming this is because their media is extra transparent or their intelligence extra leaky.

Telluur• 2 years ago

I think it's rather to do with the fact that the Dutch language corner of the Internet is relatively super small when compared to the other well connected European nations like Germany or France. We tend to mingle with the English language platforms more.

turquoisevar• 2 years ago

Pretty much this.

Plus there are a few “news” websites that bother translating Dutch news articles into English for expats and the like.

You see this happen less with French or German news, those are typically picked up by bigger US outlets and get drowned out by the plethora of news from the US and global news that is deemed more relevant to the US market.

hcfman3• 2 years ago

There is absolutely not a disproportionate about of news on this. In fact what makes is to the news is just tip of the ice berg.

And their media is nothing like transparent. In fact there’s a lot if resistance to printing anything like this. If it gets a little old due to delaying tactics on cover up’s then it’s not printed at all. Even if it’s really damning.

fransje264• 2 years ago

I'm assuming this is because their media is extra transparent or their intelligence extra leaky.

No, there is nothing extra transparent about the general media in the Netherlands. And because they seem to cater for readers with a short average attention span, the articles are generally short and, unfortunately, too often lacking depth and perspective.

As an illustration, the NOS (https://nos.nl) which has nothing of the quality of, for instance, their German counterparts. (Their cycling, ice-skating and football coverage is excellent though)

Also, the modern Dutch are not a nation of philosophers, and that shows in they way they think (or do not think) about problems.

This might also explain why these intelligence drama/failures come up more often. They will generally not hesitate a single instant to clearly (for foreigners, it is often felt as "bluntly") tell you what is on their mind, and perhaps some employees didn't hesitate to express loudly the complaints she or he might have had about certain law-braking approaches.

techcode4• 2 years ago

What happened with previous way where countries (was it "Seven Eyes"?) would spy on each others citizens, as a way to workaround such "You shall not warantlessly mass-spy on your own citizens" limitations?

From the top of my head, I recall at least USA, UK, Australia and Netherlands were among those 7.

dsp• 2 years ago

I believe you’re thinking of Five Eyes.

tromp• 2 years ago

The Five Eyes (FVEY) is an Anglosphere intelligence alliance comprising Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

says https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes

White_Wolf• 2 years ago

Maybe 9 eyes?

The countries involved in the 5 Eyes, 9 Eyes, and 14 Eyes alliances and their partners

    Five Eyes countries: United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand
    Nine Eyes countries: The Five Eyes plus Netherlands, Norway, Denmark, and France
    Fourteen Eyes countries: The Nine Eyes plus Italy, Germany, Belgium, Sweden, and Spain
    Partners of the 14 Eyes: Israel, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, British Overseas Territories

olliej7• 2 years ago

Wait it’s not that monitoring an entire community is illegal, it’s just that they didn’t haven’t sufficient justification in some cases? Wtf

nonethewiser3• 2 years ago

This will be a problem as long as there is surveillance.

apapapa4• 2 years ago

Inspired by the US government ?

hcfman3• 2 years ago

The Dutch also have a law that they cannot involve a civilian in long term observation for more than a year and then they need to provide them with a contract in advance but they don’t give a shit. I know that they have kept this up for more than 10 years and is not left at surveillance but also involves harassment and criminal offences. And also against none criminally involved people.

They have their laws and they have what they do. The laws are just to pacify people. But they are structurally ignored.

hcfman3• 2 years ago

Around 20 years ago there was a big affair in the Netherlands called "The IRT affaire", Where the government themselves were becoming the biggest drug dealer. I know about this because I built the search engine for this dossier (file) for the NRC handelsblad at the time, a very large Dutch newspaper (Before later building one of the first national search engines for the Netherlands, Search.NL (https://www.eindhovenfotos.nl/1/ilse.nl.html)). This caused a huge shit storm.

Then there was a silence for 4 years, then they started again but learned from their experience. This time they shared the blame and formed the RIEC, an intelligence agency. The RIEC actually carries out their work through "their partners", police, council etc. This shared the blame, learning from their mistakes going on here. They also have deniability, they only give the partners instructions to follow, no reasons, they are instructed to keep only the bare minimum of information in their computers (Only what is absolutely necessary, which could in principle mean everything, it could be all done by word of mouth). So they keep that secret and the partners just do what they are told, doesn't matter how immoral it is. And finally, the organisation itself was formed without a human representative as the head. This technicality makes it be above the law in the Netherlands, you cannot sue an organisation if it doesn't have a human representative at the top. So the information about all of these activities are stored in computers by the RIEC, out of touch from accountability.

This new structure was a success, and they have been undermining democracy ever since. This started around the end of 2005 and the formal organisation was started around 2008.

When 9/11 started they started to empower the word "terrorism" to allow them to use the word to justify any new laws and powers they wanted. For the Dutch and this new approach they clearly saw the power of the word and came up with their own version called "undermining". And they claim that organised crime is undermining the fabric of society and in order to fight them to prevent this it's no longer sufficient to find evidence and convict criminals, now they need to intervene and take direct action against this. No evidence needed, anything goes. So now the government itself have become the organized criminals. And when it goes wrong, it goes horribly wrong and they simply cover everything up. This is where the press are supposed to be the counter balance for all of this. Unfortunately, the Netherlands have very good muzzles for the press and the press are no where near as proactive at printing stories about this sort of thing than they should be, so they get away with it and democracy itself is undermined more by the government than by the criminals. And the Dutch pushed this approach to neighboring Belgium and Germany who have a RIEC now as well.

Why do I know so much about this? Because I was a victim of when it goes horribly wrong. In 2004, I bought a house who's entrance passed literally between 2x other houses. Then end 2005 the guy in right house was busted for growing weed and the the guy in left house strangely appeared to be harrassing him three months before. This harrassment spread to us simply because we complained. Then after more than 10 years of serious harrassment and criminality against me I forced the case to court. It took 5x years (So then 13 years later)! (https://www.limburger.nl/cnt/dmf20180522_00062344). We only got to stop it at all by interrupting a live telecast of a council meeting (https://www.1limburg.nl/nieuws/1369805/boze-families-verstor...). Video of the protest here: (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8RBSKi-UNk).

When it got to court, the prosecutor lied to the courts tried to blame it on me and then he retired, in 2018. Strangely there was a burst of prosecutors leaving their roles this year and no press investigated as to why (https://www.1limburg.nl/nieuws/1357826/leegloop-bij-justitie...). After this, once I recovered from the trauma, I investigated as to why a prosecutor would deliberately fail a case and that's when I discovered he was the former head of the RIEC and then all of the clues and events and people fell into place. And I discovered that he had lied in court before (https://www.telegraaf.nl/nieuws/1039807/liegende-officieren-...). The entire time this guy was actually being run by the Dutch government itself. I even took the police to court, they appealed, this also took 5x years and I won the appeal as well, I got to see over 1000 pages of police files, in there was evidence the the government were running and protecting the person doing the harrassing for more than 10 years (https://www.limburger.nl/cnt/dmf20180221_00056384). The rest is a huge story, which I won't put here, but in any case there was absolutely no accountability possible ever and I did not put a trivial amount of effort into this. So much for the power of the press...

Once I researched this it all make's sense. You have to find a stalking case suspicious when for more than 10 years of harrassment, attempted grevious bodily harm, theft and more the prosecutor only asked for 2 months provisional community service! WTF!! During this period, evidence vanished twice. The prosecutor had the role "recherche officier van justitie" part of whose job was to alignment with the head of team interventions as to what interventies they were going to carry out. The head of this department had migrated to be on the board of directors of the court of Maastricht before my case came to court. This same person (former head of team interventions) is also implicated in a case where 9x innocent people were put into jail on fabricated evidence (Search de villamoord https://kro-ncrv.nl/programmas/villamoord), when she was the head of the organised crime unit in Arheim before moving to become the head of the organised crime unit in Maastricht in 2010, the time at which the police had been instructed to never respond to my calls anymore.

The press were crap here, ignoring my attempts to get this published, mostly just ignoring all E-mails. No press in the Netherlands are willing to print my story. Mostly because they have ignored all of my attempts to communicate with them, but ones that didn't still wouldn't write about it.I even sent a message to the chief editor of the New York times about it who came to the Netherlands to talk to the press about how the press were the guardians of democracy. Unfortunately, she didn't didn't answer my mail. So much for that.

So don't go thinking that there seems to be a lot of press on this subject in the Netherlands, there is no where near enough.

nonethewiser3• 2 years ago

So, theoretically, the police intelligence services may have been spying on visitors to a certain mosque or protesting farmers.

Is this really that unreasonable? Im not sure I agree with any surveillance infrastructure but if you have it aren’t these the first places to start? I think it’s more a question of if surveillance is OK at all.

Doxin3• 2 years ago

Surveillance like that is not unreasonable. The part that has gotten the intelligence services in hot water is doing quite broad surveillance like that without good reason.

You can surveil a mosque if you suspect it to be a meeting ground for terrorists. You cannot surveil a mosque just because you feel like it.

nonethewiser3• 2 years ago

That's not quite the implication of the article though. If you need good cause to surveil a community and individuals then the fact that its a community is irrelevant.

gtvwill• 2 years ago

Lol? If they think this is a story just wait til they workout what the 5 eyes have been upto. Whole pop group? Pleb numbers.

Cross borders whole nation states is where it's at.

torcete• 2 years ago

And despite this big brother surveillance, they cannot protect their princess from the mafia?

Dutch Police intelligence services unlawfully spied on whole population groups

Related Stories