NSA monitored calls of 35 world leaders • Hacker News Board

Re: NSA monitored calls of 35 world leaders

#131

Post by adventured » Fri, Oct 25, 2013, 9:32 AM UTC

frank_boyd wrote: post #99

r00fus wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The big question is, who controls this security state? The information is being collected, but who's the audience? And what is their agenda?

Rule number 1: It's ALWAYS about the money. The agenda is the protection of excessive money/wealth. Which tells you where to look for "who's behind it": Rich people, very rich people. Also: The military-industrial complex. And I honestly don't know how one can take down such a power structure that's in such an advanced stage. I think it's like terminal cancer: it will only die when the host dies.

The military industrial complex is the biggest pile of assignable loot in world history.

$5+ trillion over the last decade alone. Far more if you count everything connected to it.

They knew the wars couldn't go on perpetually forever, and they'll be damned if they're going to give up all that money. One way to dictate that is through control of the political process.

Re: NSA monitored calls of 35 world leaders

#132

Post by donquichotte » Fri, Oct 25, 2013, 9:39 AM UTC

omonra wrote: post #20

I think we need a bit of context here. US is the hegemon. Therefore it's not reasonable to apply same expectations of how it acts as we do pleasant little countries like Norway or Netherlands (who are probably only independent because US defended them against Germans & Soviets).

"One of the great American tragedies is to have participated in a just war." Kurt Vonnegut

Re: NSA monitored calls of 35 world leaders

#133

Post by adventured » Fri, Oct 25, 2013, 9:40 AM UTC

fein wrote: post #3

Jay Carney issued a statement that said the US "is not monitoring and will not monitor" the German chancellor's communications. This is probably the best tell the US government has for sniffing out the bullshit. If they don't explicitly deny the event occurring in the past, it happened. Reminds me of a Spaceballs scene: Colonel Sandurz: Now. You're looking at now, sir. Everything that happens now, is happening now. D…

Their spoken words have very little value. They're willing to directly lie about all aspects of this and have demonstrated that repeatedly.

They initially - and to varying degrees still - claim they did not and do not spy on Americans.

I don't think you have to worry about tells. Given what we already know they did, assume they've done much worse. It's a very safe bet. Assume they're monitoring every single thing they can get their hands on when it comes to international leaders.

Re: NSA monitored calls of 35 world leaders

#134

Post by XorNot » Fri, Oct 25, 2013, 9:50 AM UTC

grey-area wrote: post #113

XorNot wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know what has millions of people and is entirely unlike an individual human being? A country . The convenient narratives spun to explain international politics seem entirely lost on people and are being treated as literal relations of how countries behave rather then shorthand. "China" doesn't act like a person. It doesn't have emotions, moods or opinions like a person does. When we talk about "China thinks this"…

Countries and the people who make them up also form alliances, hate betrayal, and hold grudges. If your country thinks it is acceptable to betray allies, you will soon have no allies. If you say one thing and do another and the gap is wide enough, eventually no other country will believe a word you say, even when you tell the truth. Alliances between countries are not formed in a rational way just on a specific issue…

Alliances are not formed on a specific issue, which is also why they're not broken on intangible issues. This is theatre by Merkel because it plays well with her public. I don't imagine US diplomats are losing any sleep over this.

Re: NSA monitored calls of 35 world leaders

#135

Post by omonra » Fri, Oct 25, 2013, 9:56 AM UTC

donquichotte wrote: post #132

omonra wrote: post #20

I think we need a bit of context here. US is the hegemon. Therefore it's not reasonable to apply same expectations of how it acts as we do pleasant little countries like Norway or Netherlands (who are probably only independent because US defended them against Germans & Soviets).

"One of the great American tragedies is to have participated in a just war." Kurt Vonnegut

I'd say US has a petty good record in the 20th century:

WWI WWII Cold War

All won. And for the latter two (I personally think Germany losing WWI was the worst thing that happened to Europe), I am 100% on the side of the US (particular tactics notwithstanding).

Re: NSA monitored calls of 35 world leaders

#136

Post by Volpe » Fri, Oct 25, 2013, 10:31 AM UTC

todayiamme wrote: post #11

I quite frankly don't understand why anyone would condemn such acts of espionage. They are not only essential for a nation state to function successfully, but they are also a far superior way for the US to maintain its hegemony as compared to using acts of brute force. Now I do not condone Orwellian spying on the citizens of your own republic, but this really is their job and it's quite impressive that they're this g…

I'm not sure you can class it as "We are this good at it"... when it's being discussed publicly around the world, and the president is fielding calls from world leaders asking why they are being spied on.

Will all these defences of the NSA be repeated when we discover the Germans returning the favour?

Re: NSA monitored calls of 35 world leaders

#137

Post by wyclif » Fri, Oct 25, 2013, 10:36 AM UTC

'After Merkel's allegations became public, White House press secretary Jay Carney issued a statement that said the US "is not monitoring and will not monitor" the German chancellor's communications.'

Which, of course, was a blatant lie.

Re: NSA monitored calls of 35 world leaders

#138

Post by vidarh » Fri, Oct 25, 2013, 10:46 AM UTC

junto wrote: post #123

krapp wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the Guardian is just trying to ride the NSA gravy train at this point.

I disagree. Within the UK, the general public has not favored the Guardian's reporting on the Snowden-NSA files. Many see it as anti-British and the much of the rest of the press has taken the government's side - quoting the government line concerning the protection of the country against terrorism and pedophiles. What little the Guardian has been allowed to report (outside the D-Notice that covers GCHQ coverage) has…

> What little the Guardian has been allowed to report (outside the D-Notice that covers GCHQ coverage) hasn't seen major coverage.

A D-Notice has no legal power. It carries an implied threat that just maybe some of the stuff covered might be met with a legal challenge, and could you please refrain? But it does not bar publication of anything.

Re: NSA monitored calls of 35 world leaders

#139

Post by vidarh » Fri, Oct 25, 2013, 10:56 AM UTC

omonra wrote: post #20

I think we need a bit of context here. US is the hegemon. Therefore it's not reasonable to apply same expectations of how it acts as we do pleasant little countries like Norway or Netherlands (who are probably only independent because US defended them against Germans & Soviets).

The Soviets did enter Norway towards the end of world war II, in order to defeat the German forces in the North. They then voluntarily withdrew, to the surprise of a lot of people, but seemingly without much US interference.

(The Norwegian response was rather disgusting: Remains of fallen Soviet soldiers were dug up from burial grounds all over the place and sent up the coast to be reburied closer to the border, in order to not have to let Soviet officers further into the country for memorial services etc. out of fear of spying..)

And you are right, our expectations might be different. But that does not mean that it is any more acceptable and that it will not affect the way people will deal with US diplomats and officials in the future:

Now we know that giving US officials phone numbers means those numbers will get monitored. So any government official wishing to give US officials a number now, will think twice, and then probably hand them numbers set aside exclusively for communications with the US, and will be reminded every time that the reason for doing this is that we can't trust US officials, because the US government does not trust us enough to not monitor us.

Re: NSA monitored calls of 35 world leaders

#140

Post by vidarh » Fri, Oct 25, 2013, 11:09 AM UTC

krapp wrote: post #38

conductor wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But we are not at war with everyone, and those countries involved (like Germany, France and Italy) are our partners, economical and military partners. I can accept doing SIGINT on non-friendly countries and organizations but is it correct to spy on your own people and partner countries?

>but is it correct to spy on your own people and partner countries? It's rude, but I think to a degree it is acceptable, and probably expected. Friendly countries spy on each other all the time. For one thing, friendly countries might not remain friendly forever.

To a degree, maybe. But the uproar over these NSA revelations, which has already led to proposed changes to EU law that will have substantial impacts on US businesses, demonstrates that they've gone well past what is considered acceptable.