Slashdot Mirror


French Gov't Runs Vast Electronic Spying Operation of Its Own

Freshly Exhumed writes with this news (quoting The Guardian): "France runs a vast electronic surveillance operation, intercepting and stocking data from citizens' phone and internet activity, using similar methods to the U.S. National Security Agency's Prism programme exposed by Edward Snowden, Le Monde has reported. An investigation by the French daily [en français; Google translation] found that the DGSE, France's external intelligence agency, had spied on the French public's phone calls, emails and internet activity. The agency intercepted signals from computers and phones in France as well as between France and other countries, looking not so much at content but to create a map of 'who is talking to whom,' the paper said."

136 of 214 comments (clear)

  1. Now taking bets... by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 4, Funny

    Now taking bets on which country will be implicated next in sketchy and/or illegal domestic monitoring.

    --
    Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
    1. Re:Now taking bets... by girlintraining · · Score: 1

      Now taking bets on which country will be implicated next in sketchy and/or illegal domestic monitoring.

      Post the house odds first, dear... I want to know where Antigua and Barbuda are on the list... because I'm guessing long odds there and I intend to "leak" their intelligence operation to the Washington Post shortly after you put it up.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    2. Re:Now taking bets... by hedwards · · Score: 1

      I suspect most if not all nations do it to some extent, the questions are which ones and to what extent.

    3. Re:Now taking bets... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      we couldn't care less if they check 'who is talking to whom'.

      I don't care if they see I'm talking to a divorce lawyer or AIDS doctor. Really, the whole world can see this. The websites I visit ? Public knowledge and in no way shameful or compromising. My friends ? All of them ordinary, upstanding guys with no political interests or inclination for subversive activities. It's not like I'm one of those Muslims who are all at 5 degrees of separation to a known terrorist. My day to day location and CCTV images ? Public. My full financial data ? No problem there, I'm 100% free of any tax related problem - I have the tax code memorized (all it's 14K pages). I have nothing to hide !

    4. Re:Now taking bets... by 0123456 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As long as they do not look into the content of our emails/phone calls, we couldn't care less if they check 'who is talking to whom'.

      That's presumably why you're posting anonymously.

    5. Re:Now taking bets... by Joce640k · · Score: 4, Insightful

      > we couldn't care less if they check 'who is talking to whom'.
      > we
      I think you meant "I".

      Are you 100% sure you know what the people you call do in their free time?

      You might be calling a terrorist/pedophile/drug dealer without knowing it.

      --
      No sig today...
    6. Re:Now taking bets... by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      I suspect most if not all nations do it to some extent, the questions are which ones and to what extent.

      ...and how many of them profess to be the "Land of the Free".

      --
      No sig today...
    7. Re:Now taking bets... by H0p313ss · · Score: 1

      I suspect most if not all nations do it to some extent, the questions are which ones and to what extent.

      It's not a question of who is spying, it's a question of who is going to get caught spying.

      Honestly if I was working for GCHQ or NSA my response would be: "Of course we're bloody spying, that's what you damn well pay us to do."

      --
      XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
    8. Re:Now taking bets... by geoskd · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't care if they see I'm talking to a divorce lawyer or AIDS doctor. Really, the whole world can see this. The websites I visit ? Public knowledge and in no way shameful or compromising. My friends ? All of them ordinary, upstanding guys with no political interests or inclination for subversive activities. It's not like I'm one of those Muslims who are all at 5 degrees of separation to a known terrorist. My day to day location and CCTV images ? Public. My full financial data ? No problem there, I'm 100% free of any tax related problem - I have the tax code memorized (all it's 14K pages). I have nothing to hide !

      I have some bad news for you, you are almost certainly within 5 degrees of separation from some "person of interest". Pretty much everyone is. Otherwise why would they have to gather data on everyone.

      The problem isn't that this particular set of collected data is or isn't a danger to all of our freedoms. The problem isn't whether or not there is proper oversight for the people conducting the spying. The problem is that this amount of power will inherently lead to corruptions and abuses, and as such, no government can be trusted with it. The very fact that the government felt the need to conduct this spying in secret is ample evidence that their intentions are not on the up and up. If you tell everyone that you are monitoring who they communicate with, then the paranoid people will act to prevent the eavesdropping, but their behavior alone will single them out, giving the would-be-eavesdroppers just as much useful intelligence as having all of that metadata. The idea that the spying has to be secret to be effective is absurd in practice. Since the given reason for the secrecy is false, the only remaining explanations are far more sinister. We now hear that the french are partaking of this level of spying? Is foreign terrorism that big of a threat in France? I suspect that the biggest terrorist threat in France is the same as the US: good old fashioned homegrown whackjobs. No amount of communication surveillance is going to help find and catch the lone bomber, or the dedicated pair of crazies. There are only two uses for that level of survailance: Post-incident investigation (they already admitted that no one looks at the data in real time). And oppression. Just because it makes the investigators jobs easier for the first option doesn't mean its worth risking the second option.

      -=Geoskd

      --
      I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
    9. Re:Now taking bets... by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 1

      Wait till they arrest you and charge you with being part of your father's brother's former roomate's plot to bomb his unfavorite place.

    10. Re:Now taking bets... by richlv · · Score: 3, Insightful

      woosh ? :)

      --
      Rich
    11. Re:Now taking bets... by rzr · · Score: 1

      "> I have nothing to hide ! "
      .... nothing to hide to anyone I guess ... So Gimme your Credit card numbers and login/passwords ...

      --
      -- http://rzr.online.fr/
    12. Re:Now taking bets... by bfandreas · · Score: 1

      I'm not betting on the German services since they managed to claim for 30 years there's no such thing as right-wing terrorism in Germany. And not huge data gathering clued them in but sheer dumb luck did. Our guys genuinely have no clue whatsoever.

      Yet still this is the time to ask in what way this mass trawling for information actually helped preventing any bullshit going down. Sure as hell helped in law enforcement but good old-fashioned targeted information gathering by lawenforcement gets the job done, too. I guess it's awefully convenient that the US postal services kept extensive records on who sent what to whom and when. Helped catching those bozos who sent poisonous letters to the POTUS. But the letters still didn't get intercepted at the source and could still have left a trail of dead like those Anthrax things did in 2001. We also know who those cavemen with those machetes talked to or who those two disgruntled boys in Boston were. But that didn't help prevent anything. And after the fact we got wiser a couple of days earlier than we would have been without that mass data gathering. So sitting on huge data bases let's some talking head bring you the film at 11 while the TV station goes on a multi-hour adult diaper commercial.


      Seems like everybody snoops on the general populace and sits on huge amounts of data. Turns out it is so much data they can not act on it without getting some other pointers to goings on going on. I do not see the benefict in that versus targeted investigations. Also how is them telling everybody how they snoop impede their snooping? I mean telling dog+world they are gathering mass data doesn't prevent them from data gathering. And those who are proper targets are using one-way mobiles and TOR anyway.


      Plus of course what our secret services do goes against everything we were supposed to stand for and what they claim they are protecting.

      --
      20 minutes into the future
    13. Re:Now taking bets... by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

      we couldn't care less if they check 'who is talking to whom'.

      I don't care if they see I'm talking to a divorce lawyer or AIDS doctor. Really, the whole world can see this. The websites I visit ? Public knowledge and in no way shameful or compromising. My friends ? All of them ordinary, upstanding guys with no political interests or inclination for subversive activities. It's not like I'm one of those Muslims who are all at 5 degrees of separation to a known terrorist. My day to day location and CCTV images ? Public. My full financial data ? No problem there, I'm 100% free of any tax related problem - I have the tax code memorized (all it's 14K pages). I have nothing to hide !

      Note to poster: there are certain rhetorical devices that are not widely understood by many Slashdotters. Amongst these are irony, sarcasm, satire and facetiousness.

      Note to Slashdotters: Irony, sarcasm, satire and facetiousness are described in many places, including Wikipedia. For many of you, a refresher course is recommended.

    14. Re:Now taking bets... by marcello_dl · · Score: 1

      I suspect most if not all nations do it to some extent, the questions are which ones and to what extent.

      ...and how many of them profess to be the "Land of the Free".

      Every single one of them, with their own choices of words of course.

      The USA wasn't always like this, and citizens in general believe the propaganda fed to them and live it as an ideal. But many people believing this scam actually managed to make themselves and their country better.
      That's why I still sing the national anthem, for those honoring their ideals. A nation is people! (/soylent green).

      --
      ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
    15. Re:Now taking bets... by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Wow really? Talk about being out to lunch. I'm sure you also believe that they "rigged the election." As a fun and useful note, the only side that was actually charged with that one was the Liberals. And seeing as how the case with regards to the conservatives went all the way to the supreme court(which is stacked with liberal appointees) and found some, but no total evidence. Well I guess that's that.

      I'd also hazard you're one of the line9 nutbars while we're at it. Who believes that oil flowing in the opposite direction is bad.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    16. Re:Now taking bets... by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      I suspect most if not all nations do it to some extent, the questions are which ones and to what extent.

      ...and how many of them profess to be the "Land of the Free".

      No that's not the problem. Spying on your citizens is fine. Everybody knows they do it. As usual what gets them in trouble is denying they're doing it. As soon as they were aware that Snowden had the data, which was hopefully before he went public, but who knows, they should have released that they were doing this. People wouldn't have liked it, but it wouldn't be a scandal. It's not the deed that gets you in trouble, its the denial and cover-up.

    17. Re:Now taking bets... by budgenator · · Score: 1

      I suppose it's all on how you define look at. When a machine sucks up a meassage, scans it for keywords, especially in Arabic or Farsi, then records the headers without human intervention, has it been looked at?

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    18. Re:Now taking bets... by hedwards · · Score: 1

      I doubt there's any that overtly claim to be "land of the slaves and home of the despots."

      It's a skewed view of the world to suggest that nations don't cover it up or otherwise obscure what they're doing. The worst nations often times have huge propaganda campaigns to convince the citizenry not to be concerned about it.

    19. Re:Now taking bets... by icebike · · Score: 1

      Computers are nothing but automated intelligence.
      If the communications analyst would have dismissed idle chatter and gossip in english, then presumably the software would too.
      If the Analyst would have been more suspicious of the same content in Arabic then the software would as well.

      So yes, computerized analysis counts a being looked at.

      But the current thread is about the naivete and self delusion necessary to assume that the entire content of letters, email, voice calls, etc is NOT recorded or even scanned, and ONLY metadata is recorded. There isn't shred of evidence to support this view and Snowden and others have specifically stated that it is not so.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    20. Re:Now taking bets... by osu-neko · · Score: 1

      Honestly if I was working for GCHQ or NSA my response would be: "Of course we're bloody spying, that's what you damn well pay us to do."

      Mr. Clapper didn't take that approach because he knows damn well if he told us what he was doing, we'd tell him to stop and/or stop the payments.

      --
      "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
    21. Re:Now taking bets... by St.Creed · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But the current thread is about the naivete and self delusion necessary to assume that the entire content of letters, email, voice calls, etc is NOT recorded or even scanned, and ONLY metadata is recorded. There isn't shred of evidence to support this view and Snowden and others have specifically stated that it is not so.

      True. However, for most purposes they really only want to know who's talking to who. In most cases, drone-strikes can commence based on just that data. Google "Karen Stephenson" and "The Quantum Theory of Trust" to see why all the agencies are on top of this.

      Also relevant: "I'm looking for needles in haystacks. So I'm gathering haystacks." - Dutch Intelligence Chief. I guess this would explain their modus operandi as far as the "gathering of data" goes.

      The Germans did it first though, with their "Schleppnetzfahndung" (dragnet investigations), in the 1970's. It lead to a lot of innocent people losing their jobs and livelihood due to being suspected of sympathizing with terrorism. I don't need a crystal ball to predict how this round will end, if the crisis continues and people start organizing to put pressure on their local rulers. The gloves *will* come off in that case.

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
    22. Re:Now taking bets... by Hamsterdan · · Score: 1

      Canada and every first-world country.

      --
      I've got better things to do tonight than die.
    23. Re:Now taking bets... by Znork · · Score: 1, Troll

      Great. Just like 4 guys around here. Well, up until they got the security forces storming into their apartments and showing them, their wives and children to the floor with automatic rifles to their back, then dragged away for some time in a cell.

      See, some housewife had heard a guy talking on the phone about blowing up a bomb in a mall. So the security police pulled the call records on the nearby cell towers, the housewife identified the talker off a drivers license, tracked down who he'd been talking to and stormed the apartments.

      Of course, one of the less dense analysts pointed out that the housewife couldn't have heard that guy talking on the phone like she said as the records on her phone showed her elsewhere at the time that matched the cell records. Which nobody cared about. The rest couldn't wait to get themselves some of that hot terrorist action. Yay, count another terror deed averted! (Or, well, a schizophrenic hallucination indulged in, but 'terror plot foiled' sounds much better when asking for funds).

      So, you have nothing to hide. Are you certain nobody anywhere near where you are has something to hide? No chance that any ip address resembling yours might access some bad place at a some time that may or may not be when you're at a computer plus minus misread time zones on the logs? Because the goons don't give a shit that you have nothing to hide and they're certainly incompetent enough to get you shot due to a clerical error. And if they ever do feel like targeting you because some neighbour was bored one day and a bit pissed off at you, you can be damn sure that none of the data they have will be used to clear you. Instead every byte will be used to dig as deep a hole as possible for you. And after a few days of water boarding they'll have your signed confession, so obviously you did have something to hide.

    24. Re:Now taking bets... by H0p313ss · · Score: 1

      Honestly if I was working for GCHQ or NSA my response would be: "Of course we're bloody spying, that's what you damn well pay us to do."

      Mr. Clapper didn't take that approach because he knows damn well if he told us what he was doing, we'd tell him to stop and/or stop the payments.

      Mr. Clapper does not take that approach because he's not allowed to take that approach. Like the Marines, if the NSA is doing something it's because they've been TOLD to do something. (Same for SAS and GCHQ)

      --
      XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
    25. Re:Now taking bets... by Gr8Apes · · Score: 2

      I have nothing to hide !

      says the AC....

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    26. Re:Now taking bets... by meta-monkey · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah, but when we do it, it's not spying, it's Freedom Listening.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    27. Re:Now taking bets... by Calydor · · Score: 1

      Your pizza guy is also a drug runner.

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    28. Re:Now taking bets... by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      We now hear that the french are partaking of this level of spying?

      You doubted this with the French ban on encryption? Why else would it be illegal to use encrypted communications?

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    29. Re:Now taking bets... by 0111+1110 · · Score: 2

      No that's not the problem. Spying on your citizens is fine.

      Speak for yourself. 1984 was never intended to be an instruction manual. Is that really the kind of society you want to live in? Your every communication monitored like you are some kind of lab animal?

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    30. Re:Now taking bets... by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      I believe the original intent of the GCHQ and NSA was to spy on foreign enemies for the purpose of winning wars either current wars or expected ones. So I don't think just saying, "that's what you pay us to do." would be a very good defense. Unless you want to make it sound like your own citizens are the enemy.

      Armed forces are paid to kill, but that doesn't work as an excuse for a Tiananmen Square massacre. "Well you pay us to kill. We were just doing what you pay us for. And I think we did a good job because we killed a lot!".

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    31. Re:Now taking bets... by H0p313ss · · Score: 1

      Shoot the messenger much? It's the political bosses that are to blame, not the foot soldiers.

      --
      XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
    32. Re:Now taking bets... by H0p313ss · · Score: 2

      You are very, very naive. NSA IS a core part of government and they have a "intelligence" shitpile on EVERY American by now. They decided Obama's shitpile was smelling better than Romney's.

      The NSA were just following orders. All the programs you are so scared of now were put in place during a Republican mandate and are only scaled up versions of what they have been doing for decades. I can only speculate why they were allowed to continue.

      Complaining that a lawful government agency was following orders and fulfilling a mandate related to national security is naive.

      --
      XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
    33. Re:Now taking bets... by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      No that's not the problem. Spying on your citizens is fine.

      Speak for yourself. 1984 was never intended to be an instruction manual. Is that really the kind of society you want to live in? Your every communication monitored like you are some kind of lab animal?

      You miss the point. The government is already spying on its people and was doing so long before the information age. Technology has only made it easier. Most people knew or already suspected that. One only has to look at the history of the FBI or McCarthyism to realize that it has been going on in the US ages. However, both the FBI and McCarthyism were more or less public spying. Nobody denied it was going on. The NSA got caught spying on the public after saying they weren't. That is why it is such a scandal.

      Cell phones and facebook and email don't enable the government to spy on their citizens, they just make the task much easier.

    34. Re:Now taking bets... by hedwards · · Score: 1

      What needs to happen is for their charters to be changed to reflect that.

      But, OTOH, that would mean this would fall to the FBI that was chartered for this sort of thing, and it's not like they have a particularly pristine track record to crow about either.

      It's a fine line and as long as politicians are tripping over themselves to be harder on terrorists without any particular concern for protecting the rights of innocent Americans, it will continue.

    35. Re:Now taking bets... by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      You are wrong ! A simple search shows that it was illegal until very recently.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    36. Re:Now taking bets... by gagol · · Score: 1

      Following orders is not an excuse to break laws. US itself made it a point in Nuremberg.

      --
      Tomorrow is another day...
    37. Re:Now taking bets... by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

      That they have done it for a long time doesn't make it right! And even if they have been doing it for a long time, there was an even longer time when they didn't do it. For example the US didn't even have an intelligence agency until after WWII, and in no way was the FBI of 193x and 194x involved in mass surveillance of the public.

    38. Re:Now taking bets... by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

      According to "The Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA", all that Truman really wanted was a news agency that could give him summaries of political trends in foreign countries so he could make informed decisions in foreign policy.

    39. Re:Now taking bets... by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      Excuse me... Did you just try to cop the Nuremburg Defence on behalf of the NSA?

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    40. Re:Now taking bets... by lgw · · Score: 1

      From your posting history you seem sane and well-balanced, so you probably want to avoid rants about neocons. The neoconservative movement is primarily about using US military force to actively make the world a better place (in their eyes) with a strong pro-Israel focus on the Middle East. They are thus strongly identified with Israel, and those who rant against neocons are very often strongly anti-Semitic losers who have discovered that if they say "neocon" instead of "Jew" people will actually listen to their rants.

      Unless of course this account is a front for skinheads posting on /., in which case carry on. (Or, better yet, don't.)

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    41. Re:Now taking bets... by H0p313ss · · Score: 1

      Excuse me... Did you just try to cop the Nuremburg Defence on behalf of the NSA?

      I'm just saying you need to blame the politicos who are responsible.

      --
      XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
    42. Re:Now taking bets... by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      That they have done it for a long time doesn't make it right! And even if they have been doing it for a long time, there was an even longer time when they didn't do it. For example the US didn't even have an intelligence agency until after WWII, and in no way was the FBI of 193x and 194x involved in mass surveillance of the public.

      I never said or implied it was right, but the outrage that has been expressed isn't that they have been doing it. Everybody knows they have been doing it. The outrage is that they lied and said they weren't doing it and then Snowden released the documents showing they actually were.

      As for US intelligence capabilities prior to the WWII and the FBI, you are free to believe what ever you want so you can sleep easy, but the Library of Congress has many volumes documenting what was going on now that much of it has been declassified.

    43. Re:Now taking bets... by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 1

      In Canada, the politics of the Conservative Party take on many of the features of the governments of Bush and Reagan, which is why I use the label. I do not intend to imply anything to do with international relations or make any racial or religious accusations; while he does seem to hold a strong pro-Israel perspective, I don't consider this important, and I suppose in retrospect this is probably a misuse of the label on my part.

      The comparisons I actually wanted wanted to draw were the following: he's been systematically secretive, created the largest deficit in the country's history, and suppressed environmental science. (He's also raised taxes for the poor and lowered them for corporations, and cut social services, but those aren't a neoconservative affectation as much as it's just regular old small-government conservativism.) And it's the secrecy that's really the issue; no one would ever believe that a Canadian government prior to Harper's would have the Machiavellian wit to organise an effective intelligence-gathering operation.

      --
      Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
    44. Re:Now taking bets... by TranquilVoid · · Score: 1

      According to the inquiry findings section of that article the judge ruled;

      There is no evidence to indicate that the use of the CIMS database in this manner was approved or condoned by the CPC.

      So looks like Harper is legal to me, and this line tallies well with the GP's "some but no total evidence".

    45. Re:Now taking bets... by Coeurderoy · · Score: 1

      It so happens that the patterns of your calls marks you as a member of party FOO, so the nice gerymander agent will put your home location in the FOO zone, so that your BAR congressman will not risk its seat, unfortunately it will mean that your public services will not be managed by your elected FOO representative, since geographically your "city center" is in BAR zone. (and not Bar ...).

      It also happen that you have two N+1 contacts who happen to be vocally against WHATEVER, you actually do not agree with them, but the company you are applying to is using services, and you resume is directly filed into the trashcan...

      The same is also evaluating you as a person who know too many poor persons; so you should probably not be trusted with large loans, which is actually a boon in disguise if you are planning to buy a house, but the company you wanted to create ? forget about it.

      And the hassle you have at the airport, no we are not going to tell you why ....

      Who calls who is "very interesting"....

    46. Re:Now taking bets... by Camael · · Score: 2

      I have nothing to hide !

      ...says the person posting as Anon C. Well played troll, well played.

    47. Re:Now taking bets... by davester666 · · Score: 1

      When wasn't it like this? Before WWII?

      Is there any gov't which doesn't have dirty secrets which would outrage either it's own citizens and/or people in other countries if they were made public?
      You can also substitute "religion, followers" for "gov't, citizens".

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    48. Re:Now taking bets... by lgw · · Score: 1

      Makes your point far more effectively to spell it all out IMO.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    49. Re:Now taking bets... by mythix · · Score: 1

      It's not like I'm one of those Muslims who are all at 5 degrees of separation to a known terrorist.

      *facepalm*

    50. Re:Now taking bets... by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      That's presumably why you're posting "anonymously".

      FTFY.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    51. Re:Now taking bets... by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1

      Freedom fries. I had almost forgotten about those...

    52. Re:Now taking bets... by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

      I think that there's quite a bit difference between what the Secret Service was doing at that time and what the CIA, NSA and DHS is doing today. They don't even come close.

  2. See!!? by FriendlyLurker · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Everyone is doing it. It must be ok then... so move along, "don't rock the boat - keep your head down Just another fool in the crowd"...

    /sarcasm

    1. Re: See!!? by Threni · · Score: 1

      Perhaps they're investigating which boat full of protestors they're going to blow up next.

    2. Re:See!!? by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      Everyone is doing it. It must be ok then... so move along, "don't rock the boat - keep your head down Just another fool in the crowd"...

      /sarcasm

      No, it doesn't make it okay, but like most things, lying about it definitely makes it worse.

    3. Re:See!!? by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Everyone is doing it. It must be ok then... so move along, "don't rock the boat - keep your head down Just another fool in the crowd"...

      /sarcasm

      I have little doubt that each country has a specific legal regime that enables their intelligence agencies to engage in their work in a manner that is lawful to their own country. As is repeatedly pointed out on Slashdot, Europeans are not under American law. By the same token, Americans are not under European law. And Germans are not under British law. The French are not under Swedish law. ..... Feel free to mentally complete the combinatorial exercise.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  3. Oh for the love of fuck... by girlintraining · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This has been known publicly since the release of the book the Sword and the Shield in the 1990s, and well-known by most larger companies since well before that even. We're persecuting Snowden for being the Captain Obvious of the intelligence community. "Oh noes! The french are spying on us!" Dude. Fucking duh. The french have been spying on everyone since the dark ages. Hell, where do you think the word sabateur comes from? The french pretty much invented industrial espionage.

    In other news... why are we threatening the lives of other countries leaders and going on a mad witch hunt for Snowden, wheeling and dealing in backroom deals reminiscent of the cold war era again? Oh right... because he came forward and confirmed what everyone either already suspected, or knew. Which was only necessary because so many people are living in a level of denial that makes the comment "Windows 8 is the best operating system ever!" look like criticism. -_-

    --
    #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    1. Re:Oh for the love of fuck... by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Saboteur" refers to the practice of ruining the innards of weaving machines by throwing in your shoes - a type of wooden clog called a "sabot". It has no espionage connotations at all.

      And it probably originates in the Netherlands.

    2. Re:Oh for the love of fuck... by caluml · · Score: 2

      The word saboteur is French, I think.

    3. Re:Oh for the love of fuck... by Jmc23 · · Score: 1
      Interesting. Though there's a kernel of truth in what you wrote, it's hard to find in the misunderstanding.

      Thanks anyways though.

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
    4. Re:Oh for the love of fuck... by chill · · Score: 1

      They're persecuting Snowden for removing plausible deniability. By rubbing everyone's nose in this, the powers that be can no longer make silly hand gestures to the general public and claim "paranoid conspiracy nonsense!" and "that's what you get for believing Hollywood fairy tales".

      Of course, the only thing most of the general public is going to bitch about is how the NSA is messing with the voting on American Idol.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    5. Re:Oh for the love of fuck... by tyrione · · Score: 1

      Witch hunt? Thanks for the laugh.

    6. Re:Oh for the love of fuck... by WaroDaBeast · · Score: 2

      Ever heard about semantic drift? http://fr.wiktionary.org/wiki/saboter#Verbe.C2.A01

      No, you cannot disagree. I'm a native speaker, as well as a language graduate.

      --
      "The body may heal, but the mind is not always so resilient." -- Deus Ex: Human Revolution
    7. Re:Oh for the love of fuck... by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      They don't need plausible deniability anymore. Everything can be done out in the open now, and nobody is going to stop them.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    8. Re:Oh for the love of fuck... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Sorry dipshit, some of us actually pay attention to the world we live in. Unlike certain others like you who stumble and stagger form outrage to outrage when they learn things they would have already known had they been paying the slightest amount of attention.

    9. Re: Oh for the love of fuck... by CODiNE · · Score: 1

      Neat story, I looked it up. Maybe not that simple where it originated however.
      http://saboteur.askdefine.com/

      --
      Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
    10. Re:Oh for the love of fuck... by Bradmont · · Score: 2

      Interestingly, the word "espionage" actually *does* come from the French "espion," for spy, and "espionage," for spying.

    11. Re:Oh for the love of fuck... by AndrewX · · Score: 1

      "Saboteur" refers to the practice of ruining the innards of weaving machines by throwing in your shoes - a type of wooden clog called a "sabot". It has no espionage connotations at all.

      And it probably originates in the Netherlands.

      ...that sounds like industrial espionage to me...? Why would one ruin their own weaving machine?

    12. Re:Oh for the love of fuck... by Charliemopps · · Score: 1

      Keep in mind, you have no idea what he hasn't released yet. They might not know what he has either. From the reports I've read he did not have access to some of the systems the data he released came from so either he found some security holes or he had accomplices. In either case he could have access to practically anything and they have no idea what. Their gusto in going after him is very telling indeed. Weather he has it or not, they clearly have something they don't want revealed. The fact that the media is taking what is probably the most significant news story in generations so lightly should give you a good idea of the feds control over our media as well. If not for the internet this story would likely be completely dead by now.

    13. Re:Oh for the love of fuck... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The hand weavers didn't like being replaced by machines that did it faster and cheaper.

    14. Re:Oh for the love of fuck... by NicBenjamin · · Score: 2

      I'm stunned everyone doesn't know this story.

      In the early 19th century, before mechanical looms got big, many thousands of people made clothe in their homes, and made a decent wage as skilled workers. Then industrialization happened, Mechanical Looms put almost everyone out of business, and everyone else was making starvation wages so the loom-owners could afford gold-plated carriages.

      So some of them took to invading factories and destroying the Looms with their clogs. In French a clog is a "sabot," so this was called "sabotage."

    15. Re:Oh for the love of fuck... by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      I don't think they ever needed it. The NSA, FBI, and CIA know that they have nothing to fear from us. I don't see us rising up in an armed revolt any time soon and that is the only thing that will stop us from reaching the full vision of George Orwell eventually. We are certainly more than halfway there already. As others have pointed out it's probably technology rather than the Patriot Act that is really responsible for this. To think that there are any checks on the power of these spooks is naive to the extreme. I don't think laws mean very much to them.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    16. Re:Oh for the love of fuck... by Prof.Phreak · · Score: 1

      Yes, also, from startrek. If the boot fits or something.

      --

      "If anything can go wrong, it will." - Murphy

    17. Re:Oh for the love of fuck... by Flere+Imsaho · · Score: 1

      Obviously girlintraining isn't a true geek, or she would have known this from watching Star Trek VI

      --
      It gripped her hand gently. 'Regret is for humans,' it said.
  4. It's understandable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    France does have a huge population of immigrants from N. Africa who after escaping their oppressive Third World shitholes, riot and protest in France because they don't like the society they live in or some such non-sense.

    It's the same formula - leave oppressive fundamentalist Islamic society for a Western one and then riot because your new country doesn't have oppressive Islamic laws.

    And they wonder why they're prejudiced against.

    1. Re:It's understandable. by Cenan · · Score: 1

      For the love of all that is unholy, how the fuck did this go to +2 Insightful? France has a huge population of pretty much any ethnicity you can think of, thanks to aggressive emperialistic aspirations for hundreds of years (Hello, Vietnam war). You're gonna have to either start sharing those 'shrooms you've been gulping, or take it down a notch, you're gonna have a stroke.

      --
      ... whatever ...
    2. Re:It's understandable. by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 5, Informative

      France does have some pretty hardcore racists, the National Front party is quite popular. The rioters however are usually second or third generation who complain they aren't being given equal opportunities in employment or education. How true this is I don't know, but having lived in France for quite a while I'd say it's entirely possible.

    3. Re:It's understandable. by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

      Nothing magical about it. Chameleons have an even larger palette.

    4. Re:It's understandable. by BioTitan · · Score: 1

      That's true. I bet a lot of this is to monitor Algerians. They're the main "terror suspects" over there.

    5. Re:It's understandable. by Jmc23 · · Score: 1

      I think you misspelled politician :)

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
    6. Re:It's understandable. by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

      No, I used a synonym.

    7. Re:It's understandable. by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      You know what pisses them off?

      Western Christians who hear a Muslim is angry, and automatically assume said Muslim could only be angry because he's not living under Sharia. That is exactly the same as saying a white Christian who is angry must be angry that the feudal system has been dismantled.

      Check out the prosecution of Bouchra Bagour. She has a terrible sense of humor, but if you want to impose Sharia Law on France generally you don't get a middle class office job, dress like a western woman, etc.

      If you'd actually treat them as human beings, with thoughts of their own, you'd probably find out they are actually pissed off because they don;t think that France gives them the same opportunities it gives it's white residents.

    8. Re:It's understandable. by NicBenjamin · · Score: 3

      From what I've seen France really sucks at integrating immigrants. the only French pol I can name with non-French ancestry would be Sarkozy, and Sarko's family has been in the country for roughly a century.

      In the US he'd be an old-line blueblood. In France the National Front thought he was un-French.

      Europe as a whole seems to suck at integrating immigrants. Which is unfortunate, because basically the entire point of the EU is to allow random Romanians to get jobs in London.

    9. Re:It's understandable. by WaroDaBeast · · Score: 1

      From what I've seen France really sucks at integrating immigrants.

      You're totally right there. For a long time, we have been completely ignoring migration waves.

      By that, I mean that no measures were taken for migrants to be fully integrated in society. It's fine not to take care of integration while immigration is low, but when it happens en masse, you have to regulate. Instead, we decided that it was okay to let people enter our country without much regulation, which led to the creation of ghettos.

      Basically, we're reaping what we once sowed.

      --
      "The body may heal, but the mind is not always so resilient." -- Deus Ex: Human Revolution
    10. Re:It's understandable. by godrik · · Score: 1

      I haven't lived in france for a few years. But that is pretty much true. There are some emigration problems in France. But most of it is caused by improper and discriminatory government policies or police actions. The population coming from emigration suffers wide discrimination even generations after they becoming citizens. That's the problem we have in France. After being told that they are worthless, thug, crack dealers and beligerant, well some start acting on it.

  5. Yes and no by silviuc · · Score: 5, Informative

    Al EU nations have to abide by an EU directive that requires telecom companies and internet service providers to record and store the meta-data.

    Read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Retention_Directive

    The article is worded such that I don't yet understand whether the data was stocked for years (because the directive does impose time limits) or if the program has been going for years which is accurate since the directive was issued in 2006.

  6. France banned crypto for years by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, duh. Of course they do - this is France, the country that made cryptography illegal until it was pointed out to them that this was destroying their ability to participate in electronic commerce.

    1. Re:France banned crypto for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Has this changed?? Last i checked, Windows went into MoronMode if you set country to FR and disabled real encryption...

    2. Re:France banned crypto for years by BioTitan · · Score: 2

      Now I think of it, a lot of countries banned crypto. Remember when all the different countries were banning Blackberries because they couldn't tap them?

  7. iNSAption by knotprawn · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is not unexpected, but each revelation just makes the whole situation seem more and more hilarious. The following scenario is probably playing itself out somewhere right now.

    NSA Agent 1: "Sir, we've intercepted a French transmission that I think you should take a look at"

    NSA Agent 2: "Why, what does it say?"

    (Transcript of translated Transmission reads) "Sir, we've intercepted an American transmission that I think you should take a look at"

  8. English Version from Le Monde by nospam007 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here's their own English Translation, just the graphics are only in the french version.

    http://www.lemonde.fr/societe/article/2013/07/04/revelations-on-the-french-big-brother_3442665_3224.html

    1. Re:English Version from Le Monde by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      No luck trying to read the original french version:
      "L’accès à la totalité de l’article est protégé".

    2. Re:English Version from Le Monde by auric_dude · · Score: 1

      Perfidious French.

    3. Re:English Version from Le Monde by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      No luck trying to read the original french version:
      "L’accès à la totalité de l’article est protégé".

      Because it's French, or because it's protégé?

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  9. ignorant, provincial and uninformed. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Over the last decade or so , there have been quite a few major riots by N. African Muslims in Western Europe - especially France. Most times it's because they are incapbable of living in a Free Secular Western society - a society that treats women as equals.

    For the love of all that is unholy, how the fuck did this go to +2 Insightful?

    You'd understand if you weren't so ignorant, provincial and uninformed.

    ...thanks to aggressive emperialistic aspirations for hundreds of years...

    My great grandparents were mistreated themselves and I don't go around rioting over something that happened to some ancient ancestor of mine. I don't think anyone does this so your reason is unjustified.

  10. Look over there! Shiny! by gmuslera · · Score: 1

    I suppose that they could had intercepted all the communication i sent to france based search engines, social networks and mail servers, if ever happened that. But as im not in france, not even in europe, odds that it happened are pretty low. In the other hand, in US most if not all central internet services are located there, my communication with other regions of the world usually goes thru there, and even if not, they went actively going against networks and services located other countries. Could be debatable if the government of a country could watch or not on their own people (specially if we talk about real democracies, not self proclaimed ones that just pick between Kang and Kodos every election), but there is no debate about the right of snooping on every people on the planet.

    1. Re:Look over there! Shiny! by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      Somebody who believes that Human Rights have legal standing. How cute.

      International law is a deal between the 190-odd nation-states of the world. They have agreed to recognize certain rights in solemn treaties that are not actually legally binding. No court in the US is going to invalidate any death penalty on the basis of international law. Many of these states have included some rights in either their domestic law codes or their Constitutions. In both cases any actual legal case involving those rights will be based on either the local Constitution or the local law codes, not some international treaty.

      In other words every nation state has the right to snoop on you. This right is only restricted by other nation-state's ability and desire to stop said snooping. The pieces of paper you are depending on to defend your freedom are roughly as relevant to the actual protection of said freedom as the 15th Amendment was to black voting in South Carolina in 1935.

      Good luck.

  11. Next one by vikingpower · · Score: 1

    will be the Netherlands. Word got around, today, that the major Dutch telecom providers have been doing exactly the same thing for several years, in a completely illegal setting.

    --
    Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
  12. So much for the idea that the US is uniquely evil by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 2

    Looks to me like all the major western democracies are engaging in this sort of thing.

    The original article seems to indicate that this is actually illegal in France. Interesting. At least they could have passed a secret law and set up a secret court to make it appear better.

    Who next to be exposed? Germany? Surely with the all those ex-Ministerium fur Staatssicherheit employees to draw from it would have been easy.

  13. Quick... by Arkh89 · · Score: 1

    Close your Dailymotion account now... Because, sadly, that's the only online service they can spy on...

  14. Gotta Love European Hypocrisy by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

    Seems like their shit does stink after all. Gotta love that haughty European hypocrisy, and their outrage over American practices. Of course I expect this sort of thing from politicians and the like, but real people are another story. Certainly not all Europeans are like this, but enough to be annoying. I'm as far as you can get from a wrap yourself in the flag and say everything about America is wonderful type, but I do get sick of "you Americans" type posts. It's especially ironic coming from Britons, considering GCHQ practices. Now we know we can add France to the list. I can't wait for the revelations about Germany though, and their vaunted privacy laws. And from the fact is stranger than fiction dept.: it'll turn out that Russia is the least guilty.

    P.S. I'm definitely not defending any government's practices, rather I'm say that many practice this snoop up everyone's ass garbage and they should all be condemned.

    P.P.S. Thank you Edward Snowden. It seems that you've not only helped the US, but France as well. More countries coming up.

    1. Re:Gotta Love European Hypocrisy by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      I'll agree the French are hypocrites on these issues. But the French Republic is pretty unique that way. The French are incredibly Machiavellian.

      I'll be stunned if the Swedes, Germans, or any other northern European state gets caught up in this dragnet.

    2. Re:Gotta Love European Hypocrisy by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      You do realize that France is not the only country in Europe, right? They have the best cheese and bread and pastries and the prettiest girls and the most beautiful language and overall probably some of the best food if you can afford it, but there are other countries. I mean, they do exist even if they cannot bake a croissant to save their lives.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    3. Re:Gotta Love European Hypocrisy by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

      I'll be stunned if the Swedes, Germans, or any other northern European state gets caught up in this dragnet.

      You mean they're better at not getting caught?

    4. Re:Gotta Love European Hypocrisy by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      Umm...

      Apparently you know nothing about Africa. In Sweden/Germany/etc. nobody ever sides with an anti-Democrat against a Democrat just to get another vote in the UN General Assembly. If the guy selling guns to third-world gives bribes in Northern Europe he gets outted by his home country, and the bribee gets to go to jail.

      France, OTOH, was recently faced with a situation where the French-allied-government was accused of using hundreds of thousands of Chinese machetes which he intended to hack his political opponents to death with. There was video. The French hemmed and hawed and vetoed at the UN Security Council because the government swore the video was staged. A month or two later the murderers were basically done because they'd run out of victims, but their opponents turned out to be really good at winning battles so they were all about to be arrested and sent to the Hague. Which would look really bad on TV for France. Especially since the anti-government types not only had very good reasons to be pissed at France personally, they were also basically an army unit from English-speaking Uganda, and therefore virtually guaranteed to not vote with France in the UN.

      France leaped into action. Within days a UN Force was on it's way to "stop the fighting," which was code for "protect the French-allied government because their ass is getting kicked by fighting." France's puppets ended up fleeing the country to Zaire, which they turned into the huge mess we now call the Democratic Republic of Congo. The Prime Minister responsible for allowing those 800k innocent civilians to die in the Rwandan Genocide, and the subsequent multiple Congo-Wars which killed millions? Jaques Chirac, who subsequently became President. And nobody cares about this in France because it's fucking France.

      So yeah, I'll be stunned if the worst surveillance-violations Le Monde can come with is this metadata crap. There's probably a database of Malians who look at the foreign legion funny, with a hotline to the local torturer in case some poor bastard does it twice.

      But I expect a lot better from the Northern Europeans. France are self-righteous assholes because that's how the game is played. You pretend to be the most moral country ever, and everybody needs you so you get away with it. Sweden/Germany/etc. are self-righteous assholes because actually try to be righteous. Collecting data while complaining that the US collects doesn't sound righteous, therefore it's unlikely they do it.

    5. Re:Gotta Love European Hypocrisy by golodh · · Score: 1
      You wouldn't want to deny them the right to be hypocritical would you? It's bound to be covered by Fundamental Human Rights somewhere.

      Joking apart though, as I understood it they weren't so much taking offense at the US monitoring its citizen's electronic traffic as against having their offices bugged (both in Brussels and in Washington).

      If I recall, the US weren't very thrilled at its discovery that Jonathan Pollard "was sharing" information with the Israeli's. And how would the US respond if it caught the EU installing microphones and email taps in, say, the Department of Commerce?

      So as far as I'm concerned those Europeans are entitled to 1 (one) good howl of indignation, after which there will be a series of nice face-saving committee meetings, some discreet give-and-take, and business as usual. From what I read they had already reached that conclusion (soon after their leaders were briefed by their own intelligence people).

      That's what I like about Europeans: they're reasonable, predictable, and (in the end) easy to do business with. Even if they tend to come across a mite smug at times.

  15. This is not news by HangingChad · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Long before the Chinese were the country in the hotseat for spying, France and Israel were already established professionals in the industrial espionage arena.

    Before traveling overseas in the late 80s and early 90s we got lectures about how the French probably had bugs and cameras in our hotel rooms and that they routinely spied on visitors.

    Just like the NSA spying shouldn't have been news, but most people act surprised. Seriously, what's the next headline we're going to wake up to? That the Koch family has been funding a vast propaganda network to influence public opinion? That the Chinese have stolen the design of every nuclear warhead in our arsenal? That Pakistan is giving safe harbor to terrorists? Or the FBI was been tipped off and missed both 9/11 and the Boston Marathon bombers?

    It's like living in Groundhog Day.

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
    1. Re:This is not news by PPH · · Score: 1

      Yeah. But the French never really hid the fact that they were spying on their own population. Look at their restrictions on encryption and similar technologies and try to come up with alternate justifications.

      Fortunately, thanks to France's policies on linguistic purism, if you insert a few borrowed English words, the authorities are not allowed to listen.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    2. Re:This is not news by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately the masses do not know these things.

      Which means that now the various government have to spend weeks complaining about each-other's spies, whicl quietly re-assuring everyone nothing's changed, and prying no Wikileaks-type group has evidence they're lying asses off...

      I'm guessing the next "revelation" is gonna be that it's really hard to be gay in Africa. The only drawback is that it doesn't embarrass anyone Putin dislikes, therefore it's unlikely to make headlines in Le Monde or the Guardian.

    3. Re:This is not news by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1

      Or the FBI was been tipped off and missed both 9/11 and the Boston Marathon bombers?

      ... or more appropriately, that they have deliberately missed the hints about both bombings. You know, it's in their best interest to let the occasional act of terrorism happen, and the bigger the better. Indeed, such events mean more funding, and laws more favorable to them.

      Currently, in Luxembourg there is a lawsuit going on about terrorist activity in the eighties. And everything points towards actors within the government. And, this is not just some conspiracy bullshit, this is serious enough that many people call for the resignation of the Prime Minister.

      So, if the Lux government can do state terrorism, so can the US government! This is being proved in a court of law after all, and not just exposed on a shady blog.

    4. Re:This is not news by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1
      ... and, as many people here say: Snowden did not actually reveal anything which most of us didn't already know or could reasonably have guessed. Yet, despite the obviousness of his revelations, the US government is sufficiently pissed off at him to risk an international diplomatic incident in order to get him.

      They are surely not concerned about what he has revealed, but more about what he might yet reveal (or confirm) in the future...

  16. Re:This all sounds very expensive by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

    I'm so glad I live in a country that can't afford a massive surveillance program like this. At least I'll be spied on by everyone else.

    The financial cost of surveillance has come way down, and continues to drop.

  17. Re:This all sounds very expensive by Hartree · · Score: 1

    So, you're saying you live in North Korea? ...

  18. Chill. Its the French government. by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

    We're all curious about exactly what data they have, but it shouldn't take more than a sternly worded letter to get the French government to surrender all the data...

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  19. Far easier served as a gag by smittyoneeach · · Score: 1

    BREAKING: Easter Island announces "Hey, we're too insignificant to spy on anyone, domestic or international. Come for the statuery, stay for the liberty."

    --
    Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
  20. Re:So much for the idea that the US is uniquely ev by NicBenjamin · · Score: 2

    Keep in mind that if they're reporting on this they're likely privacy advocates, and privacy advocates tend to have a much more expansive view of what is private then the Courts do.

    For example state-side you have the right to not talk to the police, but refusing to talk to police can be considered probable cause to get a warrant. It can also be used as evidence against you during your trial. Every privacy advocate hates this, and when the Supremes recently confirmed it there were terrabytes of counter-arguments on the internet; but that didn't change the law.

  21. the timing is suspicious by 0111+1110 · · Score: 2

    I figure there are a few possibilities. The first, and the one that I favor, is that the CIA or NSA is ultimately responsible for this leak about France. If there's one thing the US needs right now it is to spread the blame. To show that other people are doing the same. To some people that will seem like a valid defense.

    A second possibility is that Snowden, despite his predicament, inspired a French agent to do the same, except anonymously. I find this only slightly less probable than the first possibility.

    And finally there is the possibility that the timing is a complete coincidence. I think it's more likely that the moon is made of cheese, but I suppose it is not impossible.

    --
    Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    1. Re:the timing is suspicious by mouf · · Score: 1

      Call me a conspirationist, but I find the article quite strange. We learn in that article that France has one of the biggest computer systems, and it looks to me like they are trying to promote the electronic surveillance operation rather than demote it. Plus, this news arrives exactly on the day where we learn that France is refusing asylum to Snowden. Therefore, the so called "leak" might also be organized on purpose by the government, to explain why the French government is saying no to Snowden (when it fact, it is receiving a huge pressure from the US...) This is unlikely, but also possible.

  22. In other words by onyxruby · · Score: 1

    Every nation on earth that can spy at any given level does exactly that. This is why you have nation states which have the technological means to spy keeping their mouths shut about the whole Snowden affair. This is also why backwaters like Bolivia and Ecuador are quick to condemn and make an uproar about the whole thing.

    Those countries that can spy, do, those that can't, don't - but they would if they could. Why do you think Russia bluntly asked Snowden to stop leaking documents if he wanted asylum? In the real world every such country does the same damn thing and the US just happened to be the one to have their Snowden come forward. It could have just as easily happened to any other country and the world states know it. Why do you think Snowden hasn't had anyone actually grant him amnesty when he has what would seem to be a treasure trove of intelligence?

  23. Standard by echen1024 · · Score: 1

    Every frigging country does this now. The Americans care about our privacy, so they don't spy on us (sarcasm). The brits do, and they pass this info right on to the yanks at the NSA. I think every country spies on their own citizens to some degree, be it the US, China, France, Israel, GB, or Japan. As Benjamin Franklin said, "Any country that would give up a little liberty for a little security will gain both and deserve neither." That is what is happening now. *sigh*

  24. This is no PRISM by manu0601 · · Score: 1

    Of course french people should be concerned, but it is worth noting that this is not PRISM: There is no access to Gmail mailboxes for instance. And as a proof the scope is much smaller than NSA's spying is the size of the datacenter, which fits in a building inside Paris.

    But while we get upset, we should not miss why this is revealed right now, while it was obviously known for some time, with parliamentary reports dealing about it. IMO the goal is to minimize Snowden's leaks so that everyone forget about him, and make sure french people do not pressure their government to grant him asylum. And I bet that will work.

    1. Re:This is no PRISM by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      Of course french people should be concerned, but it is worth noting that this is not PRISM: There is no access to Gmail mailboxes for instance. And as a proof the scope is much smaller than NSA's spying is the size of the datacenter, which fits in a building inside Paris.

      And I'm sure the U.S. having almost five times the population of France, and being such a major hub for world Internet activity, has nothing to do with that...

    2. Re:This is no PRISM by manu0601 · · Score: 1

      I did not say anything else. If we limit the discussion to telecom metadata retention, I understand the difference is that US spies the world while France mostly spies its own citizen. That is a few billions against a few millions, hence the difference of datacenter size.

  25. Re:Does France Have an 4th-Amendment Equivalent? by manu0601 · · Score: 1

    There the Informatique et Libertés law, that gives you the right to access the data about you, and request them to be corrected or deleted. But as TFA says, that program is in the murky waters of national security, and it is not obvious if security prevail over that law or not. I understand we need someone to go to a court to know.

  26. So much for that stupid straw man. by Uberbah · · Score: 1

    So much for the idea that the US is uniquely evil

    ...which is nothing more than the 10,000th iteration of "nothing to see here, move along" buuuuuuuuullshit concern trolling. Yeah, we really all have heard of Echelon, Stasi, Carnivor, the Great Wall of China, COINTELPRO, etc etc. Really.

    Wrong is wrong, it doesn't matter who's doing it, or how long it's been around.

  27. Islamophobic shitbaggery by Uberbah · · Score: 1

    Over the last decade or so , there have been quite a few major riots by N. African Muslims in Western Europe - especially France. Most times it's because they are incapbable of living in a Free Secular Western society - a society that treats women as equals.

    Or, because they're tired of putting up with racist bullshit and discrimination from bigots like yourself and the AC who started this thread.

  28. Casablanca anyone? by Alimony+Pakhdan · · Score: 2

    If ever there was a perfect chance to use the "I'm shocked, SHOCKED" meme, it would be here.

  29. He did by Camael · · Score: 1

    Excuse me... Did you just try to cop the Nuremburg Defence on behalf of the NSA?

    I'm just saying you need to blame the politicos who are responsible.

    Ergo, blame the politicos, not the NSA. Perfect application of the Nuremberg Defence.

    Superior orders (often known as the Nuremberg defense or lawful orders) is a plea in a court of law that a soldier not be held guilty for actions which were ordered by a superior officer.

    This is a legal defense that essentially states that the defendant was "only following orders" ("Befehl ist Befehl", literally "an order is an order") and is therefore not responsible for his or her crimes. Colloquially "Befehl ist Befehl" is known as "orders are orders".

    1. Re: He did by H0p313ss · · Score: 1

      Not to mention the fact that they're comparing possibly unlawful wiretapping with genocide.

      I mean seriously?

      --
      XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
  30. Nuremberg Principle IV by Camael · · Score: 2

    I refer you to the Nuremberg Principle IV

    Principle IV states: "The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him".

    This principle could be paraphrased as follows: "It is not an acceptable excuse to say 'I was just following my superior's orders'".

    There is always a choice not to follow. One could take the courageous example of acting attorney general James Comey, FBI director Robert Mueller and others in the Bush era :-

    Nine years ago, top officials in the Justice Department and FBI threatened to resign over then-President George W. Bush's sweeping domestic surveillance policy, which they believed to be illegal. As the Washington Post reports, acting attorney general James Comey, FBI director Robert Mueller, and top leadership in the Justice Department began drafting resignation letters in March of 2004, after the National Security Agency (NSA), at Bush's direction, began collecting metadata on emails and Skype calls sent and placed within the US.

    Comey and Goldsmith found the NSA's argument tenuous, and threatened to resign over it. Bush at first pushed forward with the program, even after Comey ordered a halt to it, but ultimately reversed course after Mueller threatened to resign.

  31. Well off course by Errol+backfiring · · Score: 1

    The French are the Americans of Europe. The Americans think they are the entire world, the French think they are the whole of Europe. Nothing new here.

    --
    Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
  32. Re:This all sounds very expensive by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1

    I'm so glad I live in a country that can't afford a massive surveillance program like this.

    Are you sure? Even a small country such as Luxembourg can afford to have a (small) intelligence agency, still capable of creating a big mess!

    No country is too small to spy, no person is too insignificant to be spied upon!