Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

NSA monitored calls of 35 world leaders

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 231 posts

Re: NSA monitored calls of 35 world leaders

#221

Post by grey-area »

jmilloy wrote: post #218
grey-area wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Possible concrete repercussions include: Refusal of the EU bloc to cooperate over sharing banking and passenger data, and potentially other treaties down the line Refusal of large South American nations to do trade deals or negotiate with the US, and a decline in US influence in the region A move away from American dominance of the internet, and a reluctance to use companies with servers based in based in the US The…

Okay. Thanks. >Refusal of the EU bloc to cooperate... Sharing of banking and passenger data is not something I know a lot about. Why do countries share this data now, and why would they stop because their prime minister is being spied upon? How the spying affect the pros and cons of sharing the data? > Refusal of large South American nations to do trade deals... Can you explain why a South American nation would not m…

Well clearly these are partly predictions and speculation, but I do expect to see, and we have already seen, concrete repercussions from the exposure of spying on allies, because the actions of the US state have put its interests in clear conflict with those of its allies.

The excuse given for sharing banking and passenger data was fighting terrorism; as that's been shown to be far from the truth by these latest revelations, the EU parliament recently voted against sharing SWIFT data:

http://www.dw.de/european-parliament-rejects-swift-deal-for-...

Can you explain why a South American nation would not make a trade deal that made sense economically because of foreign espionage? How do the economics change as a result of the espionage?

These decisions are not made on a purely economic basis. Rousseff cancelled a trade visit as a result of US spying:

http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/09/17/brazilian...

From the article: Brazil is one of the wealthiest and most powerful countries in Latin America, so Rousseff's decision to postpone her visit - and her obvious anger at the U.S. -- has potentially far-reaching implications for Washington's standing and influence in the region. It is extremely rare for a head of state to call off an already-scheduled state visit, so the move is also a profound embarrassment for the administration.

The administration tried to spin this in the US as a joint decision, but this was a significant snub (along with her damning UN speech) from the largest country in the region and a huge setback for US influence in SA.

Who would avoid using servers based in the US as a result of espionage of 35 specific foreign officials?

The officials certainly have an incentive to move (in a way they didn't when they believed US gov assurances and thought only the little people were being spied on), and they may move the massive EU gov market away from any dependence on American owned servers. South American government have discussed doing the same (including Brazil, the biggest country). This will impact US internet companies long term, and I suspect just encourage an already emerging globalisation of the internet.

Are countries going to make decisions that are not in their best interests in order to spite the US?

It has been fully exposed just how little respect and rewards being a US ally earns you, and therefore a lot of countries will rethink the relationship. This has nothing to do with spiting the US and everything to do with protecting their own interests, which are less and less seen as congruent with the US due to its bullying behaviour.

Re: NSA monitored calls of 35 world leaders

#222

Post by prof_hobart »

DanBC wrote: post #216
prof_hobart wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The most obvious approach would be to wait until someone's given you at least the tiniest hint that they could possibly be planning on attacking you before treating them as a potential enemy. What kind of legitimate threat would the US government even be watching out for with the German Chancellor? Are they so paranoid that they think the Fourth Reich is just over the horizon, or did Merkel's statement that "Islam is…

> What kind of legitimate threat would the US government even be watching out for with the German Chancellor? Cancelling some important weapons contracts? ECHELON was used for industrial espionage.

Hence my use of the word "legitimate".

I'd like to think that even those who think that it's fine for the state to spy on everyone on the miniscule chance that they might be a terrorist, and even those who think that it's OK to spy on everyone just in case they are planning to commit a crime, would agree that the state shouldn't be spy on people for the purposes of commercial advantage.

And what better way to encourage another country to trust you enough to buy military equipment from you than by spying on their government?

Re: NSA monitored calls of 35 world leaders

#223

Post by Kiro »

ceejayoz wrote: post #6

This is the understood and expected function of the NSA, isn't it? Collecting signals intelligence from foreign sources? Does anyone honestly believe the Germans aren't regularly trying to figure out ways to listen to American officials' communications? I find the NSA's domestic spying to be appalling... but this is the sort of thing everyone knew the NSA was responsible for since its inception.

Why do you find domestic spying to be appalling? It's done because of the same reasons they spy on foreign sources.

Re: NSA monitored calls of 35 world leaders

#224

Post by meowface »

Zigurd wrote: post #174
w_t_payne wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hope not. Possible, though.

100% of every possibility regarding NSA surveillance has gone from "That's possible, but surely they wouldn't" to "Wow, they did, and did it bigger than anyone imagined." Why wouldn't that include suppression of political initiatives that could interfere with the NSA's mission?

It's conceivable, but it would be a considerable step-up from what has been leaked so far.

I am more willing to accept the possibility if it's shown to be true that they've been conducting surveillance on US politicians and officials. Not that spying on foreign politicians is good or moral, but the reasons are different at least.

Re: NSA monitored calls of 35 world leaders

#226

Post by meowface »

comrade_ogilvy wrote: post #211
pradocchia wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it ended with his death and there was a backlash from power. That's what doesn't make me worry about the NSA actually spying on US political figures. On the contrary, FBI Deputy Director W. Mark Felt brought down Nixon through the Washington Post, in his role as Deep Throat of Watergate fame. This all happened after Hoover died in 72.

There will always be career men/women who have seen a lot of laundry, who might be bitter when passed up for promotion in favor of a political crony, and find that helping along justice makes for sweet revenge. That is why extremely malicious conspiracies involving more than a dozen or so people are not believable. As the circle of those in the know increases, the likelihood that someone will think they did not get d…

>That is why extremely malicious conspiracies involving more than a dozen or so people are not believable. As the circle of those in the know increases, the likelihood that someone will think they did not get dealt fairly goes up rapidly, and those with gripes will find they are holding the moral equivalent of nuclear weapons against those who wronged them.

Exactly.

That is one of many reasons why I find all the 9/11 conspiracies completely infeasible. Especially since those would require the cooperation of not only a few dozen, but probably a few hundred people.

Re: NSA monitored calls of 35 world leaders

#227

Post by Zigurd »

meowface wrote: post #224
Zigurd wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

100% of every possibility regarding NSA surveillance has gone from "That's possible, but surely they wouldn't" to "Wow, they did, and did it bigger than anyone imagined." Why wouldn't that include suppression of political initiatives that could interfere with the NSA's mission?

It's conceivable, but it would be a considerable step-up from what has been leaked so far. I am more willing to accept the possibility if it's shown to be true that they've been conducting surveillance on US politicians and officials. Not that spying on foreign politicians is good or moral, but the reasons are different at least.

Why would you consider it "a considerable step up?"

We already know that surveillance in the US is pervasive. And that includes politicians, judges, and everyone else in government.

It's just a small step to using that information for safeguarding NSA's mission.

Re: NSA monitored calls of 35 world leaders

#228

Post by meowface »

Zigurd wrote: post #227
meowface wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's conceivable, but it would be a considerable step-up from what has been leaked so far. I am more willing to accept the possibility if it's shown to be true that they've been conducting surveillance on US politicians and officials. Not that spying on foreign politicians is good or moral, but the reasons are different at least.

Why would you consider it "a considerable step up?" We already know that surveillance in the US is pervasive. And that includes politicians, judges, and everyone else in government. It's just a small step to using that information for safeguarding NSA's mission.

Well, you're suggesting they are actively engaging in blackmail and political manipulation to retain their position. Even if they do have the information to blackmail in many cases, it does not mean they actually are.

Perhaps I'm just naive, but I like to think at their core they're not so immoral as to degrade themselves to that sort of behavior.

Re: NSA monitored calls of 35 world leaders

#229

Post by Zigurd »

meowface wrote: post #228
Zigurd wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you consider it "a considerable step up?" We already know that surveillance in the US is pervasive. And that includes politicians, judges, and everyone else in government. It's just a small step to using that information for safeguarding NSA's mission.

Well, you're suggesting they are actively engaging in blackmail and political manipulation to retain their position. Even if they do have the information to blackmail in many cases, it does not mean they actually are. Perhaps I'm just naive, but I like to think at their core they're not so immoral as to degrade themselves to that sort of behavior.

Just as I am certain they do not think of anything we are certain that they do a crime, neither would they think of using available information to influence political support a crime, either.

Re: NSA monitored calls of 35 world leaders

#230

Post by jessaustin »

venomsnake wrote: post #165
adventured wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Virtual behavior modification and prediction. Inducing an entire culture to gradually change how it behaves, and its beliefs, through a mixture of opportunism on real events, simulated events, and trial balloons. Some of that isn't new, but the ability to use vast computing resources to map behavior prediction of 300 million people to an accurate degree, is. They no longer need your friends, family and neighbors to r…

The fascist state is not rising in America. Fascism is ideology not way of governing a country. Since USSR was oppressive too is like saying the communist state is raising in America. What USA is having is the possibility of devolving into totalitarian state, but what ideology will rule it is yet to be seen IF that happens. The moment when a drone kills US citizen on US soil without judicial oversight you will know t…

The moment when a drone kills US citizen on US soil without judicial oversight you will know that that danger is real. But you are still far far away from that.

What, six months? Three years? What can be done, will. It's possible it's already happened but isn't yet deemed appropriate for public knowledge. When it is, either for the intimidation factor or because it's become so widespread it can't be hidden, the copfan broadcast media will celebrate it rather than question it.

Post reply on HN