Why do Refugees Flee to the USA and UK?

by pamela wills

The asylum process differs from country to country and as does the length of time to make a decision, be that positive or negative.

According to the 2005 UN statistics, the USA admitted the highest number of asylum seekers in the developed world in the past five years with the UK not far behind. I have been to New York and established Polish and Irish communities already exist from previous mass movement of refugees after the potato famine in Ireland and World War II which led to millions of Poles relocating around the war after Stalin had stated that any Poles that fought for the allies would face persecution under the Russian controlled communist government of Poland at that time.

May people see the USA and UK via cable TV and think that the streets are paved with gold. It’s only when they arrive in these countries that they realise that life is not easy and that poverty and homelessness still exists in two of the richest countries of the world. The UK has strong colonial links from the days of the British Empire with a third of the world once coming under its protectorate. These strong links, its multi-cultural society and the English language mean the UK is often favoured as a destination for claiming asylum.

The highest number of asylum seekers are coming from Iraq, Iran, Somalia and an increasing number of Chinese are claiming asylum in the UK. The reasons for claiming asylum vary from Political and Religious Oppression to Tribal Conflict and Sexual Orientation in a country that has no freedom regarding sexuality.

The problem is removing those asylum seekers that have been refused asylum as they often disappear into society working illegally and moving from location to location to avoid detention and deportation. Charles Clark is the third Home Secretary in past few years to lose his jobs over the problem of immigration. These problems are leading to the Far-Right British National Party making political gains due to the immigration problems.

But this increase in far Right popularity has not stopped asylum seekers coming to the UK in search of safety and sanctuary and with the continuing trouble in Iraq, political and nuclear problems in Iran, renewed fighting in Somalia and the ever lasting border war between Ethiopia and Eritrea; It looks like the USA and UK will continue honouring its agreement under the UN Convention for years to come.

I work with the Green and Ethical directory GuideMeGreen.com .This growing green resource lists 100s of Organic, Fairtrade, Eco and Ethical companies, Jobs and Articles

Article Source: www.article-hangout.com

Reading Between the Lines: The News or Propaganda

by Dr. John W. Gilmore

The news media simply covered the speeches, marches, protests, wars, and so on, and reported what they saw objectively, allowing those who watched to make up their own minds about what was happening. This, according to Thomas Jefferson and several people of his time, was the job of the media. Thomas Jefferson and many of the writers of the constitution recognized that an uninformed population could not participate in democracy. The encouraged the production of several types of newspapers with low cost postage so that varying opinions could be distributed.

They theorized that the public, after watching several points of view and having several discussions, could then use their democratic power to pass information on how to better manage the country up, instead of ways to manage the country being passed down. This concept may seem odd, and downright revolutionary. The only reason this is the case, however, is that the news and the media are no longer doing their job. If they were, I would not be the first one letting you know this. During the Reagan era in the 80’s, the laws that didn’t permit corporations to monopolize by buying up all the media were abolished to the point that there are only now six corporations with interchangeable boards owing all of the media.

These articles, therefor, are articles about how you may discover the truth about the news. You can discover what is happening behind the scenes and what kind of propaganda that the news media is pushing by simply watching and remembering. Watching them and seeing what they are saying or not saying, and remember the previous messages you have heard in the news the same day, or even months ahead of time. We will be going over many complicated concepts, but as we take them step by step, over a period of time, they will be completely understandable. The first concept that we will discuss actually comes from a type of biblical criticism that is used to determine what various scripture and stories in the bible seem to be trying get across and what they aren’t. This is called Narrative Theological Criticism.

Even though it has to do with the bible and all of that, this type of criticism can be applied to any type of literature. What is the news, except for spoken literature? First we will go over the process of all theological criticism and then Narrative criticism. The root concept concerns what is known as a hermeneutic circle. It goes like this:

Whenever we read something and try to get information from it, we should know at least three things. One thing is about the context in which the information is written. What kind of people wrote it? What are their belief systems? What are their biases? What point are they trying to get across? In other words, what is their agenda?

The next thing is to understand our context. What do we bring to the text? What is our belief system. What is the belief system of the place in which we live? Where are our biases? How can they influence what we here?

Lastly we understand what the text actually says. What is the written and literary meaning of the text? If we can understand these three things it is very possible that we can understand what the text actually says. We can understand what the message is actually saying. As we do this we change and our understanding changes, so we begin to get a deeper, more truthful understanding of the text—in this case, the news.

As we watch the news, we need to begin to understand the context. Where do the news casters get money? What stations are they on? What is their point of view? What are their biases? What happens if they speak out against the interest of those who are paying them?

We should also work at understanding what we bring to the text. What are our biases? What type of stereotypes have be been subjected to when it comes to Gay people, minorities, women, Arabs, Communists, Koreans, and so on? These stereotypes, of course, shape our beliefs about these people on a subconscious level. What ones do we have and how are they interpreting what we see in front of us on the news?

Lastly, what is the news actually saying. Is it setting up new stereotypes, or purposely playing on the stereotypes and biases we have? What is the news not saying? Are we hearing points of view that are totally the same, stated two different ways, or are we hearing apposing points of view? Or apposing points that have consensus when it comes to what we should do? More importantly, are the questions for any good story being answered? All good stories should answer the questions who, what, when, where. Many newscasters are good at answering these questions, but they are not very good at going deeper. They are not good at asking why, and how? These two questions are the most important. If they do not ask these questions and provide answers for them, it is most likely they are not doing good reporting. They are simply trying to stop us from thinking deeply by supplying us with answers that make us guilty of surface thinking.

F. Scott Peck wrote about the problem with many people in our day being surface thinking. He said that the mind is somewhat like a muscle. If we use it and think a lot, thinking deeply becomes easier. If we do not think a lot, it becomes more and more difficult and uncomfortable until we cannot think anymore. We may even become angry if we are forced to think deeply. I would dare suggest that much of the media, news and also movie, is providing us step by step with simple answers, so that it is difficult for us to think now. It is important, therefor, to read between the lines. When we hear a story, whether they provide the answers or not, it is important for us to ask, internally, why? Why is this happening? Why would this person do this? Why is this story on right now? And also how. How could these people do the things of which they are accused.

As we do this we will begin to think more deeply and will understand that the news that we think is so informative is just a propaganda machine for the six corporations that own 98% of the print, radio and TV media, and the advertisers that pay for their services. If the news program you watch interviews people asking the question why over and over again until it is answered and presents you with those answers, it is very likely that you are looking at a very good news program.

In our next article we will discuss Narrative Theological Criticism, which states that the writer of the narrative is purposely trying to pass on his or her information to you and the text is only a vehicle to do so. We will see how the same principles apply to all forms of news. I hope that you will enjoy this article. Most of the enclosed information can be found in our book: A Return to Being Human Religiously, by Dr. John W. Gilmore. This book can give you the tools to free yourself from social conditioning and surface thinking so that you will have complete understanding about the western frame that influences all of our thinking.

Dr. John W. Gilmore is a writer, martial arts teacher, a certified massage therapist, Reiki Master Teacher and Reflexologist. He received his D. Min. Degree in Reinventing Work and Spirituality. For more articles like this see our free journals at our website www.dswellness.com, or visit our free Cyber Circle of Spirituality. You can visit it from a link on our website.

Article Source: www.article-hangout.com

ETCHLON - they are listening.

"

Imagine a global spying network that can eavesdrop on every single phone call, fax or e-mail, anywhere on the planet. It sounds like science fiction, but it's true.

Two of the chief protagonists - Britain and America - officially deny its existence. But the BBC has confirmation from the Australian Government that such a network really does exist and politicians on both sides of the Atlantic are calling for an inquiry.

"

This is what the BBC reported back in 1999, it may not be news but it is still going on. Seven years later and there has been little done about it.

Echelon is perhaps the most powerful intelligence gathering organization in the world. Several credible reports suggest that this global electronic communications surveillance system presents an extreme threat to the privacy of people all over the world. According to these reports, ECHELON attempts to capture staggering volumes of satellite, microwave, cellular and fiber-optic traffic, including communications to and from North America. This vast quantity of voice and data communications are then processed through sophisticated filtering technologies.
http://www.echelonwatch.org/

"

Computer users across Europe should encrypt all their e-mails, to avoid being spied on by a UK-US eavesdropping network, say Euro-MPs.

The tentacles of the Echelon network stretch so far that the UK's involvement could constitute a breach of human rights, they say.

...the system, which also eavesdrops on telephone calls, was set up after World War II and was used to glean vital information in the Cold War.

But the committee says ordinary individuals and companies are now being spied on, and they should routinely encode their e-mails and faxes if they want them to remain private.

BBC, 2001

See here for a summary of the EU reports on the subject.

The only question I have to ask is how the hell the UKUSA managed to miss both the twin towers and the underground attacks with all that "quality filtering". We have to face the fact that ETCHLON does not work or that it is not being used as a counter terrorist technique. I wonder what history will show to be the facts?

Can file shredder be hidden in system?

by Bob Elliott

Some facts about file security in Windows
If you concerned about your privacy then I'm sure you know about file shredders and what they do. These tools address the security problems associated with deletion operation. In Windows ® operation system user cannot do a secure deletion of files. This means that anyone who has access to your computer or to the hard disk of your computer can recover your deleted files.

Let me list some facts and questions that often discussed when we talk about secure deletion of files.
§ The first fact is that any deleted file can be recovered. There is no need to buy expensive tools, even freeware file recovery utility can do this job for you or for other person.
§ The second fact is that pressing delete + shift keys don’t make file irrecoverable. Anyone can still recover your sensitive information.
§ The third fact is that emptying Recycle Bin will not help secure your files too.

So why developers of operation system don’t include this feature? A good question, and the answer is that we actually don’t want all files to be irrecoverable. There is a chance that you might delete some really important file. Developers of operation system give you a choice – to use or not to use file shredders. Those who are concerned about security prefer to user file shredders.

Tools to wipe sensitive files
There are a lot of ways to secure your files. Some works well, other don’t actually help. The most popular approach is wiping free disk space regularly. This is a good idea, but you must have in mind that you will be able to wipe free space only in the end of working day or week, so some files and information could be recovered before this. Also, some software products silently delete and create files, so wiping free space is not a 100% guaranty of file security. Our research shows that wiping free space will cover only 90% of all deleted information. What are others 10%? It’s temporary files and cached files. In other words it’s your sensitive data and internet browser history. More over, wiping free space is a routine, time-taking computer task that may be a real hassle for your security administrator.

Another idea is to use a file shredder every time you wish to securely delete your file. It’s a great idea as you know what files are really important and should be deleted without possibility to recover. The bad news is that you will need to do some additional steps to process file to file shredder. But in most cases it is just few more clicks. Not a big price to stay secure.

Analyze your security risks
Actually, there are some security holes. First, we should consider files that are created by programs silently, these files can be a cached data or temporary file that office programs always creates. In this case file shredder simply doesn’t know what to wipe! As temporary file may actually appear at your hard disk for a second, but will contain a valuable information.

For sure, wiping free space is performing better, but remember that it will wipe only space that is actually free. It will not consider cached data (the history and cache or your internet browser), it will not consider some sectors just because the shredder could damage your data.

Another security risk is remote users that may access your hard disk by network. You don’t know what do these users do, if they delete files or not. Due to security limitation, these users will not be able to use a file shredder at your hard disk.

Wiping free space – does it work for temporary and cached files?
What you need to look at is a file shredder that works in background mode. Actually, you need a file shredder that will capture all deletion operation that your system do. In this case, you won’t need to drop files to file shredder, as it captures all deletion operation and can “see” all file that you do delete. Also, the problem of temporary files will be solved as other program utilize a common system interface to delete files and it will be possible to capture all operations with temporary and cached files.

More file security risks…
Are temporary and cached file a great security risk? Actually, they are. For instance, temporary files of office wording tools contains a copy of all file text data. So anyone who recover temporary file will have access to your sensitive data. For sure, wiping free space can do 90% of job you need to be done for deleted sensitive files, but there are still from 2-5% of files that could be recovered and might contain sensitive information.

For instance, if you clear cookies or cache of your web-browser, you cannot use file shredder utility. Also, the hard disk space dedicate to cached file will still be occupied, this means that wipe free space will not actually secure this information. In this case only background mode file shredder will be able to wipe files in a proper way.

When to drill your hard disk?
It’s a good idea to use background mode file shredder to stay secure now. Does this method guaranty 100% privacy? Actually not. There still might be some chance of recovering files. So, if you will ever need to completely destroy data, then you will need to destroy computer hard disk physically. As for other purposes, for instance when you need to provide day to day file security– using background file shredder is a great option.

Protect your privacy now!
Actually, it was the art when only security admin knew about tools we had to use. Various file shredders, wiping free space every weekend and so on. For now, ask your security admin to install a background mode file shredder and …forget about your security risks. Well, you still might face a problem as wiping operation is a little longer that deletion. So it would be great if you could fine tune your shredder to wipe only specific files or files within a specific location. In this way you will save your time and will still stay secure.

Bob Elliott is security business consultant at AKS-Labs software development company. His interests include sensitive file security, security policies, preventing information leakages, security audit methods. AKS-Labs has developed Shred Agent, a background-mode file shredder that we will be happy to recommend to all users, including users of our QuickWiper. Learn more at www.shredagent.com

Article Source: www.article-hangout.com

Safe to Speak

I found a wiki (google that if you don't know what one is) that had a novel idea for change in UK law.

Want this badge?

The Baker Report - Fiction after the Facts - Bark with no Bite

I saw this article and as it allows reprint I have posted it here in full with the hope of getting a little opinion on it from any passing readers.

The Baker Report - Fiction after the Facts - Bark with no Bite by Stephen J. Morgan

The Baker Report : Fiction after the Facts

The fact that the “Baker Report” has become a best-seller reflects how trapped the American people feel by the current Iraqi nightmare and how frantically search for anything that seems to offer a coherent way out. Unfortunately, however, the report has been classified in the non-fiction, rather than fiction section of the bookshop. Despite some refreshingly honest comments about the general state of affairs in Iraq, the proposals it comes up with are pure fantasy. Its power of effect is largely derived from the veracity of a few descriptions of the state of affairs in Iraq, when set against years of lies, distortion and deception from the White House. In terms of really offering a way out it, its about as useful as using a map of Beijing to get around Baghdad. Its findings amount to little more than finely worded contradictions intended to hide the truth that there is no honourable retreat. Its key recommendations are unworkable. The report itself admits that events there may have “already overtaken” its findings. But, in truth, they never came within sight of reading its number plates.

The key military proposal involves empowering the Iraqi Army by installing some 20,000 US army trainers inside Iraqi units during combat missions. However, this idea immediately shrivelled up like a piece of lighted cigarette paper in an ashtray, when an Iraqi government minister asked where they would find the small army of 20,000 translators? To those who like floating ideas in geo-political bubbles, this annoying little technical detail brought down the report like a re-run of the Hindenburg disaster. Think it through! The CIA itself can’t find a few hundred Arabic speakers for counter-intelligence in well-paid, cushy surroundings. Where then will the military find 20,000 volunteers, fluent, bi-lingual translators (and, therefore most likely of Iraqi or other Arab nationality,) who are prepared to risk their lives on the frontline, as well as risk death and/or torture at the hands of militia death-squads? Without this huge, elite force of “kamikaze linguists”, you might just as well send in another 20,000 Humvees without steering wheels, or 20,000 fighter planes without navigation equipment. It’s a non-starter.

Secondly, the Baker report, like Bush, is demanding that the Iraqi government to make “substantial progress” in reducing sectarianism, achieving reconciliation and strengthening “security and governance.” Otherwise, it threatens to massively reduce US “political, military and economic support.” Apart from the obvious Catch 22, that it will reduce support, while demanding more efficiency from the Iraqi government and then reduce forces anyway if the government isn’t successful, the idea that the Iraqi government can fulfil this role is just peddling a lie.

The Iraqi government is suspended in mid-air observing a situation over which it has no control. It is a government in name only. Its writ runs no further than pieces of paper floating in the wind. Every time the government attempts to impose a curfew in Baghdad, it is forced to revoke it, because they have no power to enforce or sustain it. The militias just continue firing mortars across the city and death squads roamed unrestricted carrying out revenge attacks. The police and army are powerless to stop them and prefer to stand aside or participated in the attacks.

At the end of the day, the state boils down to bodies of armed men willing and able to enforce the will of a government or other state institution, which commands it. Where this is not the case, as in times of civil war and revolution, the Army itself sometimes becomes the state. The Iraqi government, however, hasn’t an Army or a police force. Neither force is motivated or able to support it and, neither can be depended upon to carry out its will. They are token institutions displayed for symbolic international reasons under US pressure.

In reality, the Iraqi Army couldn’t repulse an attack by the Swiss army on bicycles. And the police are little more than a fresh change of clothes for the militias. Furthermore, to imagine the US forces are standing in as substitutes and somehow holding up the Iraqi government, is just gobbledygook. The moment the leaders of the main militias decide to withdraw totally from government participation, the government will just collapse. All the cardboard cut-outs will topple over and all the stage props will fall down. The Iraqi Army will disappear along with its weapons and the police will turn their equipment over to the respective militias. And don’t imagine there will be any new elections, because the fact is, NO IRAQI STATE EXISTS to carry them out and no popular demand exists for new ones.

As for the US Army, they are about as effective as the average UN observer force. Worse still, they have, in fact, already become a training force, but one for the insurgents and militias to hone their military skills for use against each other and for the Al Qaeda to its groom its forces for future re-deployment around the region.

Whatever pressure Baker or Bush might like to impose, there simply is no Iraqi government capable of fulfilling any of its roles, be they one’s of economics, politics or security. And there is no one individual or group of individual capable of forming a real government. The Baker Commission, and Bush included, might just as well set benchmarks for the Icelandic government to disarm the militias, as expect anything concrete to be carried out by the so-called government in Baghdad! In reality it is a ghost government with a phantom army, which has no hope of taking on substance, let alone fulfilling any of the demands made on it by the Baker Report or the Bush administration.

As for calling for discussions with Iran and Syria, this is both an admission by the US that the situation is out of its control and a rather vain and desperate, last ditch attempt to limit the damage to the US and the region. But even if certain insurgent and militia groups are aided in by open borders or supplies of equipment and training, the truth is that the scale and determination of the insurgency is not controlled by, or dependent on, any outside nations, and is not motivated by them. It doesn’t really matter whether Syria or Iran are interested in fermenting unrest or prefer seeing it reduced. Whatever influence they do have, still won’t fundamentally alter the final outcome of events.

The only perspective for Iraq now, and the only central question deliberately ignored by the Baker Report, is the break up Iraq into three separate states. Its omission from the report is quite incredible. Even if they don’t think it likely, nobody can ignore the fact that it is very real possibility, with huge consequences for Iraq, the US, the region and the world as a whole. To simply ignore it, because they won’t entertain the idea, don’t want it to happen, or don’t fancy dealing with it, is astounding. Arguably, it is not just stupidity to omit it, but a dereliction of duty from such supposedly, high servants of the American state who are entrusted with the responsibility of delivering such an important report.

Indeed all the report really says is what everyone knows. That the situation is “grave and deteriorating”. The Report acknowledges that “ A slide toward chaos could trigger the collapse of the Iraqi government and a humanitarian catastrophe. Neighbouring countries could intervene. Sunni-Shia clashes could spread. Al Qaeda could win a propaganda victory and expand its base of operations...” By this do they mean that Iraq will split into three states? If so what are the implications in terms of a rethinking of America’s military priorities as stated in the objectives of the committee and its report? Silence. Nothing to recommend? If the situation is “grave and deteriorating”, how will it be after the year it takes to begin putting their proposals into effect? Are we supposed to imagine that “grave and deteriorating” is a condition in suspended animation? Couldn't it well be that US troops will still be on the ground when the government falls and Iraq breaks into 3 states? What will they do then? What does the committee suggest as America's military priorities if this happens in the next few months?

How should they react? Should they leave Baghdad and mixed areas to descend into sectarian genocide? Should they simply accept the Shia state ? Should they try to forge alliances with current nationalist insurgents to fight Al Qaeda in the Sunni state or simply give up Al Anbar and re-deploy special forces to neighbouring states? How will they respond if other countries in the region begin to break apart? This we suppose is beyond the remit of the Iraq Study Group, which only rethinks American military strategy one year in advance according to condition remaining exactly in correspondence with their proposals. Otherwise, some committee will have to deal with it, no doubt?

Of course, the Iraq Study Group are well aware that this is the likely scenario. Their denial of it is not accidental. In fact, the ramifications are so devastating for the US and the consequences so grave for the region and the world, that the Study Group have evidently thought it prudent not to present this before the American people, at this time. Obviously, it would mean admitting total and utter defeat. They would have to explain how the war on terror and with invasion of Iraq had resulted not in a model democratic state , but the creation of an Al Qaeda state in the heart of the region, strengthening global terrorism and increasing the threat against the United States itself. They would have to explain how the world’s most powerful army crumbled under attack from urban insurgency and sectarian militias. How a Shiite theocratic regime hostile to the US and friendly to Iran came into being and how the hitherto almost unknown conflict between Sunnis and Shias had mushroomed into a destabilizing force throughout the region. Finally, how, not only did Iraq became a battleground for foreign powers, but how continental-scale civil war and regional wars engulfed the whole region, destabilizing oil markets and the global economy, pushing the US and the world into recession or even a new economic depression. Clearly, the Group was unable to deal with this or felt it better brushed under the carpet for the time being. The only thing it can suggest is to call for a regional conference on stability. Set against the Armageddon-like scenario, this single, rather limp recommendation sounds like a rather feeble admission of impotency.

Nevertheless, despite not entertaining the full implications of the catastrophe in Iraq, the report lets seep out some of the very real concerns of the American ruling class for the stability of their system. In the words of the report, “our ship of state has hit rough waters,” “The global standing of the United States could be diminished. Americans could become more polarized.” Behind the scenes even more blunt and hard words are being expressed. There is palpable concern that an unacceptable level of damage is being done to the credibility of the US, its institutions - most notably the Presidency- and the standing and morale of its Army. This is not only of concern globally, but also domestically, where the faith of the American people in the whole American system is being put to test.

Consequently, the report serves the purpose more of a domestic tactically weapon, than the global, strategic document it has been blown to be. The purpose of the report is to corner a President who is not prepared to privately heed instructions from the shrouded inner circles of the American ruling class. Bush is, therefore, being given a public, last chance. But so far, and not totally unexpectedly, his response has served not only to divorce him further from the ruling elite, but from the American people as a whole. Increasingly, he appears divorced from reality, looking less like a person in denial and more like someone in a state of clinical delusion. Between the lines of the report, the true message is not whether American forces will be withdrawn by 2008, but whether the President will have to be stood down before that.



Article Source: www.article-hangout.com

ECHELON - locations list

This is a more compleate lsit of locations participating in spying on UK and US citizens by thier own government(s). Much of this is public record information.

"...ECHELON is also being used for purposes well outside its original mission. The regular discovery of domestic surveillance targeted at American civilians for reasons of “unpopular” political affiliation or for no probable cause at all in violation of the First, Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the Constitution – are consistently impeded by very elaborate and complex legal arguments and privilege claims by the intelligence agencies and the US government." 
http://fly.hiwaay.net/~pspoole/echelon.html 

Stations exist in some or all of the following locations: 

• Australian Defence Satellite Communications Station (Geraldton, Western Australia) 
• Agios Nikolaos (Cyprus - UK)
• Bad Aibling (Germany - US)
• Buckley Air Force Base (Colorado, US)
• Guam (Pacific Ocean, US)
• Kunia (Hawaii, US)
• Leitrim (south of Ottawa, Canada) 
• Medina Annex (Texas, US)
• Alert (Ellesmere Island, Nunavut, Canada)
• Bremerhaven (Germany - UK)
• RAF Chicksands (Bedfordshire, UK) 
• Diego Garcia (Indian Ocean - US-UK)
• RAF Digby (Lincolnshire, UK)
• Elmendorf Air Force Base (Alaska - US)
• Feltwell (Norfolk, UK)
• Fort Gordon (Georgia, US)
• Fort Meade (Maryland, US) (headquarters of NSA)
• Gander (Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada)
• Gibraltar (UK)
• Griesheim (near Darmstadt, Germany - US)
• Mount Gabriel, Midleton, Co. Cork, Ireland (satellite communications station)
• Karamursel (Turkey - US)
• Malta (Malta - UK)
• Masset (British Columbia, Canada)
• Mount Olympus, Troodos range, Cyprus (UK)
• Menwith Hill (Yorkshire, UK)
• Misawa Air Base (Japan)
• Morwenstow (Cornwall, UK)
• Rota, Spain (Spain, US)
• Osan Air Base (South Korea, US)
• Pine Gap (Northern Territory, Australia - close to Alice Springs)
• Sabana Seca (Puerto Rico - US)
• Sugar Grove (West Virginia, US)
• Shoal Bay Receiving Station (Northern Territory, Australia)
• West Point, New York (NY, US)
• Aflandshage, Denmark (Denmark)
• Tangimoana (New Zealand) 
• Naval Communication Station Harold E. Holt (Exmouth, Western Australia)
• Yakima (Washington, US) Map
• Waihopai (New Zealand)
• Woodgreen (London, UK)

The USA's National Security Agency (NSA) has a global spy system, codename ECHELON. 

ECHELON captures and analyses virtually every phone call, fax, email and telex message sent anywhere in the world.

"ECHELON is controlled by the NSA and is operated in conjunction with the Government Communications Head Quarters (GCHQ) of England, the Communications Security Establishment (CSE) of Canada, the Australian Defense Security Directorate (DSD), and the General Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) of New Zealand. These organizations are bound together under a secret 1948 agreement, UKUSA, whose terms and text remain under wraps even today." 
http://fly.hiwaay.net/~pspoole/echelon.html 

ECHELON uses

• Voice recognition
• Optical character recognition
• Text analysis

ECHELON is fairly simple:

"...position intercept stations all over the world to capture all satellite, microwave, cellular and fiber-optic communications traffic, and then process this information through the massive computer capabilities of the NSA, including advanced voice recognition and optical character recognition (OCR) programs, and look for code words or phrases (known as the ECHELON “Dictionary”) that will prompt the computers to flag the message for recording and transcribing for future analysis. Intelligence analysts at each of the respective “listening stations” maintain separate keyword lists for them to analyze any conversation or document flagged by the system, which is then forwarded to the respective intelligence agency headquarters that requested the intercept." 
http://fly.hiwaay.net/~pspoole/echelon.html 

If only this information was limited to this kind of use you would be OK but it is not. It is widely believed that the US and the UK use ECHELON to monitor all minority political groups, those profiled as likely to be a danger and a cross section of people (mostly within the US) that carry out actions that conform to patterns that are considered the soul domain of terrorists.

"An international surveillance network established by the National Security Agency and British intelligence services has come under scrutiny in recent weeks, as lawmakers in the United States question whether the network, known as Echelon, could be used to monitor American citizens. ...a former CIA analyst, is part of a growing contingent in the United States, Europe and Australia alarmed by the existence of Echelon, a computer system that monitors millions of e-mail, fax, telex and phone messages sent over satellite-based communications systems as well as terrestrial-based data communications. The system was established under what is known as the "UKUSA Agreement" after World War II and includes the security agencies of the United States, Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand." 
http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/05/cyber/articles/27network.html 

The regularity of such internal spying is roughly comparable to Google producing regular irrelevant results on every page. Is is rumoured that the recent US legal demands against the search giant may be to allow ECHELON more powerful analytics.

"...ECHELON is also being used for purposes well outside its original mission. The regular discovery of domestic surveillance targeted at American civilians for reasons of “unpopular” political affiliation or for no probable cause at all in violation of the First, Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the Constitution – are consistently impeded by very elaborate and complex legal arguments and privilege claims by the intelligence agencies and the US government." 
http://fly.hiwaay.net/~pspoole/echelon.html 

Stations exist in some or all of the following locations: 

• Agios Nikolaos (Cyprus - UK) 
• Bremerhaven (Germany - UK) 
• RAF Chicksands (Bedfordshire, UK) 
• RAF Digby (Lincolnshire, UK) 
• Feltwell (Norfolk, UK) 
• Gibraltar (UK)
• Malta (Malta - UK)
• Masset (British Columbia, Canada)
• Mount Olympus, Troodos range, Cyprus (UK)
• Menwith Hill (Yorkshire, UK)
• Morwenstow (Cornwall, UK)

Please note many news sources for this story have "gone 404" from leading websites.

I can only surmise that posting this information will result in take down notices from the US. 

Please copy this post and put it on your blog.

Working Links:

• DEVELOPMENT OF SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY AND RISK OF ABUSE OF ECONOMIC INFORMATION
• The National Security Agency: The Secret Unveiled
• THE NSA'S GLOBAL SPYING NETWORK