Slashdot Mirror


NSA Monitored Calls of 35 World Leaders

Hugh Pickens DOT Com writes "The Guardian reports that the NSA monitored the phone conversations of 35 world leaders after being given the numbers by an official in another U.S. government department. According to a classified document provided by whistleblower Edward Snowden, the NSA encourages senior officials in its 'customer' departments, such the White House, State and the Pentagon, to share their 'Rolodexes' so the agency can add the phone numbers of leading foreign politicians to their surveillance systems. The NSA memo dated October 2006 that was obtained by the Guardian suggests that such surveillance was not isolated, as the agency routinely monitors the phone numbers of world leaders – and even asks for the assistance of other U.S. officials to do so. However, the memo acknowledges that eavesdropping on the numbers had produced 'little reportable intelligence.' At the daily briefing on Thursday, White House press secretary Jay Carney again refused to answer repeated questions about whether the U.S. had spied on German Chancellor Angela Merkel's calls in the past."

310 comments

  1. Nothing of Value by Anne_Nonymous · · Score: 0, Troll

    >> NSA monitored the phone conversations of 35 world leaders

    And nothing of value was gained.

    1. Re:Nothing of Value by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Sure there was. It has embarrased the Obama administration, and destroyed his credibility with American allies. He now has about a 40% approval rating, just about where George Bush was at this time. The best part is that it didn't take any Republican or other resistence in order to show that Obama was a bad choice for the office. He did it all to himself.

      Next time, please choose a US President that actually HAS some political experience, and not the token Democratic black man.

    2. Re:Nothing of Value by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But all respect for the U.S. was lost along the way.

    3. Re:Nothing of Value by i+kan+reed · · Score: 3, Informative

      No, this is pretty much normal spying. If you had a spy agency and didn't monitor other nations for strategic advantage, you'd wonder what the hell they were doing. I'm not saying it's unreasonable to be opposed, because moral objections are best objections, just that pretending it's bad spycraft is silly.

    4. Re:Nothing of Value by intermodal · · Score: 1

      So in that respect, it was just like the same leaders' public speeches.

      --
      In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
    5. Re:Nothing of Value by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      He did it all to himself.

      "The NSA memo dated October 2006"
      Seems to me it is just another case of Obama getting blamed for the actions of the Bush Administration.

    6. Re:Nothing of Value by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      No, this is pretty much normal spying.

      Heh, I bet you when they report Germany spied on Obama's phone, US will order a nuclear strike in a show of outrage.
      It's only "normal" spying because we do it and not them.

    7. Re:Nothing of Value by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      >> NSA monitored the phone conversations of 35 world leaders

      And nothing of value was gained.

      Only 35? Im surprised that out of the 196-ish countries in the world, only 34 of them are considered as bad or worse than Germany.

    8. Re:Nothing of Value by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      No, this is pretty much normal spying.

      Heh, I bet you when they report Germany spied on Obama's phone, US will order a nuclear strike in a show of outrage. It's only "normal" spying because we do it and not them.

      Yeah, riiiight.. we'd order a nuclear strike. Cause we throw nukes around like candy. Grow up.

    9. Re:Nothing of Value by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Sure there was. It has embarrased the Obama administration, and destroyed his credibility with American allies.

      No, no, no, no and no.

      This is all just a bunch of political bullshit people. There are a wide variety of world leaders being monitored by a wide variety of governments, and the politicians and world leaders are all perfectly aware of this fact.
      All these stories are, is various politicians jumping on various iterations of the NSA story for their own political purposes. They are playing off anti-US sentiment among their populaces to further their own agendas. Which is fine, that's how politics works, but stop acting like this is something unique to the US because it's not.
      Other people might be easily manipulated, overly emotional idiots, that doesn't mean you have to be one as well.

    10. Re:Nothing of Value by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Got to love it when republicans make fools of themselves

    11. Re:Nothing of Value by paulpach · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Did Obama do anything to stop the spying after taking office?

      Well, then isn't Obama just as guilty as Bush on this issue?

    12. Re:Nothing of Value by neo8750 · · Score: 1

      And you missed his point completely...

    13. Re:Nothing of Value by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It has embarrased the Obama administration, and destroyed his credibility with American allies.

      I am afraid that much more had been destroyed than Obama's personal reputation.

      I am afraid that the reputation of THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA had been severely destroyed because of what Obama administration has done.

      First, it was Brazil. Then, France. Followed by Mexico, and then Germany.

      And when Angela Merkel angrily called up Obama regarding matter, you know what Obama did ?

      THAT GUY DENIED EVERYTHING !!

      Obama was caught with his hands in the cookie jar and yet he acted just like a little kid telling bold face lies.

      As an American, I rather my president comes clean, admitting his faults, remedy the mistakes, than telling seriously inane bold face lies.

      Obama seemed to forget that he is THE POTUS - and as the PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, his category denial has shamed the nation of the United States of America.

      I am sure, by now, no government in the world would ever trust the President of the United States, nor the nation of the United States of America.

      In other words, Obama has shamed all of us, the Americans !!

      --
      Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    14. Re:Nothing of Value by i+kan+reed · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No, he quite distinctly had 2 points.

      1. Hypocrisy
      2. Free-slinging of nukes as a foreign policy.

      #2 is hyperbole, but there's nothing wrong with identifying hyperbole and asking for a more restrained perspective.

    15. Re:Nothing of Value by kthreadd · · Score: 5, Informative

      It depends on if he knew about it. If he did then he's obviosly responsible. If he didn't then that's of course also bad. Either way is not good for him.

    16. Re:Nothing of Value by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Seems to me it is just another case of Obama getting blamed for the actions of the Bush Administration

      Seems to me that you liberals can't get pass the blame game, can you ?

      Yes, it was that idiot Bush who started the ball rolling.

      But Obama had SIX MOTHER-FUCKING LONG YEARS to stop the program.

      Did Obama stop the eavesdropping program ?

      Did he ????

      Now that he has been caught with his hands in the cookie jar Obama DENIED EVERYTHING.

      This is not what a President should do.

      A President is not a commoner.

      A President (even for a teeny tiny country) should be MAN ENOUGH to admit his guilt.

      But did Obama admit his guilt ?

      Why not ?

      Why is Obama still insist of telling BOLD FACE LIES, even in a time like this ???

      --
      Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    17. Re:Nothing of Value by nospam007 · · Score: 1

      "Only 35? Im surprised that out of the 196-ish [about.com] countries in the world, only 34 of them are considered as bad or worse than Germany [bbc.co.uk]."

      They should be glad that they have friends that patiently listen to them, it's what friends do.

      Especially friends who still have their nukes in storage at your place.

    18. Re:Nothing of Value by erikkemperman · · Score: 1

      In other words, Obama has shamed all of us, the Americans !!

      Not to worry, US reputation had been plummeting for a while before Obama took office.

      Besides, I think most international observers will recognize that the US govt does not represent its people. Which is a shame, of course, but also means that US citizens have some credit left whereas their government does not.

      What's freaking me out, though, is there doesn't seem to be a bottom -- rock or otherwise.

      --
      Gosh, thanks. That must be why the other ships call me Meatfucker -- GCU Grey Area (Eccentric)
    19. Re:Nothing of Value by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Can you point to where Obama "DENIED EVERYTHING"?

      Because I'd love to see that.

      Also, scream for Bush to admit his guilt too. Unless you're, shall we say, slightly biased.

    20. Re:Nothing of Value by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 1

      Besides, I think most international observers will recognize that the US govt does not represent its people.

      I am an American staying outside America, and in my personal experience, most of the world people (non-Ameicans) do not seem to separate the American government from the people of the United States of America.

      In other words, the world at large treats what the American government did as if it was done by the citizens of America.

      --
      Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    21. Re:Nothing of Value by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you seriously believe that this is the first time this has happened?

      Or do you just want to point fingers at Obama?

      Guess what? Trust in the USA was at an all time low before Obama entered the office. 40 years of poor international policy has made sure of that.

      But yea, it's all Obama's fault.

      As an American, I rather my president comes clean, admitting his faults, remedy the mistakes, than telling seriously inane bold face lies.

      So where was your crying for all the last 20+ president's faults?

    22. Re:Nothing of Value by gmuslera · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'd say that Germany wanting their own internet now, joining the BRICS countries to do so is something of value.

      It's time that the world realizes that internet is incompatible with having a bully with power over it.

    23. Re:Nothing of Value by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 1

      just that pretending it's bad spycraft is silly.

      Surely you mean tradecraft not spycraft :)

      --

      Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

    24. Re:Nothing of Value by erikkemperman · · Score: 1

      I am an American staying outside America, and in my personal experience, most of the world people (non-Ameicans) do not seem to separate the American government from the people of the United States of America.

      In other words, the world at large treats what the American government did as if it was done by the citizens of America.

      Well, I don't know where you are located, but in my limited surroundings (Netherlands) I think my statement is accurate.

      it's changing all the time, of course. The US is a democratic republic so, as time goes on and administration after administration of both major parties get away with all kinds of wicked behaviour -- unpunished by the electorate -- maybe more and more outside observers may conclude that, well, maybe a majority of citizens do support this stuff after all.

      But like I said, at least where I am, this doesn't seem to be the majority view. People I talk to seem to think the US citizens are basically just another bunch of victims of a once great nation now well on its way to becoming police state.

      --
      Gosh, thanks. That must be why the other ships call me Meatfucker -- GCU Grey Area (Eccentric)
    25. Re:Nothing of Value by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You cannot lose what you do not have...

    26. Re:Nothing of Value by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You American are such a shameless creatures !!! Such a shameless!!!

      Nuke the hell of two civilian cities and claim it has been to avoid more bloodshed, occupy several countries and claim your bringing freedom to them and now spy on every human being on the planet and say it is normal....

      Where were you when they were giving shame to humans?!! These secondary claims are even more disgusting than those actions.

    27. Re:Nothing of Value by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He knows about it now.

    28. Re:Nothing of Value by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1

      No, not really. Tradecraft refers to the individual skills and best practices used in actual espionage. I was trying to use a term referring to the overall national strategy and chose a distinct one on purpose.

    29. Re:Nothing of Value by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It depends on if he knew about it. If he did then he's obviosly responsible. If he didn't then that's of course also bad. Either way is not good for him.

      If he knew, he's responsible. If he didn't, he's incompetent. Which do you prefer ?

    30. Re:Nothing of Value by mrbester · · Score: 1

      That would be because every time a story appears, especially here, and someone says it's the fault of Republicans / Democrats / whoever, the usual response from a fellow citizen is "it's YOUR fault because you voted them in". As if that were true. Nevertheless, those outside don't know who to blame and the only viewpoint given is that it is the fault of the populace. Therefore that is what is thought.

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
    31. Re:Nothing of Value by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1

      The nukes weren't even the deadliest bombings by the U.S. against Japan in WWII, much less including the blitz or the bombing of dresden. The tools used don't alter the morality of killing in war. Tokyo was worse, Dresden was worse, London was worse, some parts of southern Italy may have been worse.

    32. Re:Nothing of Value by Liquid+Len · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It depends on if he knew about it. If he did then he's obviosly responsible. If he didn't then that's of course also bad. Either way is not good for him.

      If he knows, he's responsible. If he doesn't, he's incompetent. Which do you prefer ?

    33. Re:Nothing of Value by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Obama has shamed all of us, the Americans !!

      I just can't figure out why you have a towering erection over it though.

    34. Re:Nothing of Value by dinfinity · · Score: 1

      No, this is pretty much normal spying. If you had a spy agency and didn't monitor your enemies for strategic advantage, you'd wonder what the hell they were doing.

      FTFY.

      'Allies' is supposed to mean more than "we buy each others' stuff".

    35. Re:Nothing of Value by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I liked George Bush. Both irresponsible and incompetent. But he had some personality.

    36. Re:Nothing of Value by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1

      The U.S. has treaties of some sort with essentially every nation on the planet, with the exception of those we pretend don't exist. You can't think of international diplomacy like high school, where you've got friends and you've got foes. All alliances between nations are ones of convenience, and not of any sort of emotional bond.

      In fact, the U.S's "closest allies" are all nations we've waged war or proxy war against in the past: U.K., Canada, Germany, Japan. Realpolitik dominates international diplomacy(and its best buddy, espionage), and not without reason.

    37. Re:Nothing of Value by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He knows about it now, and I don't see him rushing to stop it or even speak out against it.

    38. Re:Nothing of Value by X.25 · · Score: 1

      No, this is pretty much normal spying. If you had a spy agency and didn't monitor other nations for strategic advantage, you'd wonder what the hell they were doing. I'm not saying it's unreasonable to be opposed, because moral objections are best objections, just that pretending it's bad spycraft is silly.

      Breaking local and international laws is ok?

      Breaking into networks, which US itself has declared to be an 'act of war', is ok with you?

      Do you think people should be immune to rule of law just because they work in some government agency?

    39. Re:Nothing of Value by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1

      Rolling my eyes so hard here. I said it was okay to object. It's great. Please do so. Pretending it's not business as usual for decades now is what was silly.

    40. Re:Nothing of Value by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      Badness isn't the criteria. There's no point in spying on Robert Mugabe. You spy on the powerful and wealthy countries like Germany that you can profit by stealing info from.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    41. Re:Nothing of Value by KingMotley · · Score: 1

      And if that happened, I would expect pretty much the same thing. Obama would publicly make a press statement condemning it, make some silly demand for retribution (release some spy or whatnot) then get on with his business as usual.

    42. Re:Nothing of Value by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We were in the line getting larger penises. Looks like you missed that one.

    43. Re:Nothing of Value by locofungus · · Score: 1

      These are possibly 35 allies where the US was given privileged access to telecommunications systems so they could investigate "terrorism".

      And they abused that access.

      The other 161 didn't give them that privileged access and so they weren't able to indulge in this wholesale phonetapping. They probably still tried but will only have got snippets of some conversations because tapping a mobile phone depend on either being close enough to the phone to intercept it's transmissions or tapping into the telecoms infrastructure after the radio phase.

      --
      God said, "div D = rho, div B = 0, curl E = -@B/@t, curl H = J + @D/@t," and there was light.
    44. Re: Nothing of Value by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can come and load them up. Nobody really wants them.

    45. Re:Nothing of Value by Somebody+Is+Using+My · · Score: 2

      I agree with most of the above except for one:

      A President is not a commoner.

      Yes. Yes, he is. He is a common citizen just like the rest of us, who has been temporarily granted the authority to help lead this country. He is, in the end, nothing more than the chief bureaucrat of this nation.

      To presume anything else is a mistake. He is not a king. He is not a lord. When he leaves office, the country continues without him very well. He is a peon. That We-The-People have allowed this jumped-up-clerk (and that's the President in general, not Obama specifically) to increasing take on the trappings of a monarchy is a mistake that needs to be reversed. He's been given a mansion, a praetorian guard, secret police, walled him from the people he supposedly represenents and treated the officeholder as if he is some great prophet appointed by heaven to lead us to the holy land.

      The president is none of that (or at least, should be none of that). He's just some chump we've saddled with the unpleasant duty of running the nation and I don't see why he should be afforded any more (or less) respect than the head of my local post office.

    46. Re:Nothing of Value by ae1294 · · Score: 1

      Can't we implement the NSA in Minecraft and be done with them...

    47. Re:Nothing of Value by jcr · · Score: 1

      Well, the choice available to the D brand of the Ruling Party was between Hillary Clinton (incompetent), John Edwards (sleazy ambulance-chaser who cheated on his terminally ill wife with a groupie), and Barack Obama (man, he sounded good giving speeches.) There was also this guy Dennis Kucinich who was a genuine Democrat, but he didn't look good on TV.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    48. Re:Nothing of Value by jcr · · Score: 1, Troll

      Oh, didn't you get the memo? Obama is exonerated for any crime if he can show that Bush did it first. If you disagree, you're a racist.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    49. Re:Nothing of Value by jcr · · Score: 1

      Yes, it was that idiot Bush who started the ball rolling.

      Not likely. The NSA has been around since the Eisenhower administration or thereabouts. I don't believe for a second that they were clean up until the second Bush administration.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    50. Re:Nothing of Value by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, I don't know where you are located, but in my limited surroundings (Netherlands) I think my statement is accurate.

      it's changing all the time, of course. The US is a democratic republic so, as time goes on and administration after administration of both major parties get away with all kinds of wicked behaviour -- unpunished by the electorate -- maybe more and more outside observers may conclude that, well, maybe a majority of citizens do support this stuff after all.

      But like I said, at least where I am, this doesn't seem to be the majority view. People I talk to seem to think the US citizens are basically just another bunch of victims of a once great nation now well on its way to becoming police state.

      I think the mistake is assuming that the US is a democratic republic. Money (advertising, etc.) is the key element to winning elections. Even local elections have money constraints, but at a Federal level, it is a given that Congress and the President will spend the majority of their time and effort getting money to win the next election. If money is the key to winning political power, it is no longer a democratic republic. It is a plutocracy. Ostensibly, there is still voting so it's not quite a pure plutocracy. It may be fairer to call what currently exists in the U.S. a plutocracy tempered by democratic elements.

      Considering: decades of increasing income inequality, increasing education inequality, money to be legally equivalent to speech, non-human entities legally considered U.S. citizens (in particular for political campaign purposes), pervasive surveillance, huge prison populations, lack of medical care, I think it's apt to consider the vast majority of the U.S. citizens victims.

    51. Re:Nothing of Value by Poorcku · · Score: 1

      I bet he learned it from the news, like always. /sarcasm off

      --
      I take my children to see Madonna(..), but I never for once ever thought I was in the same business.Chris Rea.
    52. Re:Nothing of Value by balbus000 · · Score: 1

      because of what Obama administration has done

      From the summary:

      The NSA memo dated October 2006...

      Yes Obama is at fault for continuing it, but calling him out as the sole person responsible is not the way to fix this.

    53. Re:Nothing of Value by SerpentMage · · Score: 1

      Oh give me a break!

      Let's play devils advocate...

      Obama: "NSA stop everything no more spying! I am cutting off your funds."

      Reaction from the pundits: "Obama likes the evil guys and supports terrorists!" That is exactly what the pundits will say. Simply put Obama is dammed if he does, and dammed if he does not. The problem here is that this is not a president issue, but a security system that has gotten out of control!

      --

      "You can't make a race horse of a pig"
      "No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
    54. Re:Nothing of Value by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretty much. The grandparent sounded Asian to me, too.

    55. Re:Nothing of Value by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      US citizens have some credit left whereas their government does not.

      No. The American people support their government on this one. Just look at the responses here: "Everybody does it. Why is anyone surprised? It's the NSA's job." There's hardly a voice which calls for stopping the spying, let alone apologizing for what has been done. American people are only upset that their government spies on them too. If the American people could be sure that the NSA only spies on foreigners, this wouldn't even be news.

    56. Re:Nothing of Value by dinfinity · · Score: 1

      You can't think of international diplomacy like high school, where you've got friends and you've got foes. All alliances between nations are ones of convenience, and not of any sort of emotional bond.

      Straw man and irrelevant.
      If you believe the alliances between the U.S. and its Western allies have not been hurt by the spying revelations, you are blind.

      In fact, the U.S's "closest allies" are all nations we've waged war or proxy war against in the past: U.K., Canada, Germany, Japan. Realpolitik dominates international diplomacy(and its best buddy, espionage), and not without reason.

      You're not really helping the U.S. here. If you had included examples of 'Realpolitik' by countries other than the U.S., it would have been stronger.

    57. Re: Nothing of Value by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You really can't shut up, can you?!

    58. Re: Nothing of Value by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whenever you become smart enough to comprehend the sad fact that these orders come from entities much bigger than Obama or Bush, democrats or Republicans, then, you can comment! As I've come to understand your comments over a relatively long time now, you just hate Obama! You Can't help it, can you?!

      ou can

  2. How may I direct your call ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    NSA ?
    There are already on the line.

  3. A classic mistake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A classic mistake, you're only supposed to snoop on the powerless who can't do anything about it. Sadly I don't think anything will change.

  4. Most world leader seem to be Ok with it. by FriendlyLurker · · Score: 0

    Sure they make a little public stink about it and feign outrage to get re-elected (yes that means you, Merkel), but where are whole of goverment cross-department investigations into the telecoms and rush of new laws to raise the criminal penalties for any telecoms personnel to knowingly allow foreign intelligence monitoring of national networks? Oh thats right - it has not happened (well maybe Brazil has some balls). Compared all the knee jerk reaction anti-terrorism laws that got rushed through, it is obvious that most of our countries leaders/politicians do not work for their actual country or are too afraid to do so. Voters to blame, as usual...

    1. Re:Most world leader seem to be Ok with it. by FudRucker · · Score: 1

      the voters are not to blame, they have been deceived and lied to, and besides that dont you think those elections are rigged?

      --
      Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
    2. Re:Most world leader seem to be Ok with it. by FriendlyLurker · · Score: 2

      Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me... fool me for decades on end - WTF are we boiling frogs here!!??

    3. Re:Most world leader seem to be Ok with it. by Ihlosi · · Score: 1
      Sure they make a little public stink about it and feign outrage to get re-elected (yes that means you, Merkel),

      The election was last month. She doesn't have to worry about getting reelected for several years.

    4. Re:Most world leader seem to be Ok with it. by FriendlyLurker · · Score: 1

      You must have missed this story then: German Federal Police Helicopter Circles US Consulate - right before the election. What a publicity stunt, but the Germans fell for it obviously...

    5. Re:Most world leader seem to be Ok with it. by Pinky's+Brain · · Score: 1

      Have you been paying attention to the news?

      The EU parliament voted to suspend SWIFT, commission will ignore them of course ... but it will come up for renewal in 2015 and they need parliament then. A law with absolutely huge penalties (a percentage points of annual company revenue) on sharing data with foreign intelligence has been passed (slightly toothless at the moment due to safe harbour agreements, but at this point I doubt those agreements will last long).

    6. Re:Most world leader seem to be Ok with it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, in 2000 the elections were DEFINITELY rigged. 5-4.

    7. Re:Most world leader seem to be Ok with it. by FudRucker · · Score: 1

      they've been rigged for decades, every one of em, since JFK was assassinated, starting with LBJ there has not been a clean and honest election, they've all been rigged

      --
      Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
    8. Re:Most world leader seem to be Ok with it. by s.petry · · Score: 1

      I have a word for you, that word is "media". That is why it has been so easy to deceive people, and why I agree with FudRucker that it's not the people's fault. Journalists are supposed to be the biggest check against abuse. While politicians were being bought by a select few with too much money, the media was also being taken over by the same group, as was the eduction system.

      If people are deprived of information and intentionally fed false information it should not be a surprise that they are misled. It at least warrants a small amount of sympathy.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    9. Re:Most world leader seem to be Ok with it. by FriendlyLurker · · Score: 1

      Soo... there has been a vote to suspend Swift data sharing that will be ignored anyway + leave plenty of time to "sway" parliament vote by 2015 when it comes up for review. By then the people would have forgotten anyway and public outrage will be even more fringe than it already is.

      You mention a toothless sharing data law (link?), but as we see from todays news there is nobody in goverment willing to enforce it - it takes a bunch of law students to even get some kind of acknowledgment of the problem.

      If that is the best examples we have of world leaders are falling over themselves to protect the national interests of their citizens and private companies against mass spying, then my original observation still stands. Most (affected) world leaders seem to be Ok with it all/do not work for their citizens or private home grown companies.

      Where are all the nationalistic flag waving types now on this issue - all silent...

    10. Re:Most world leader seem to be Ok with it. by FriendlyLurker · · Score: 2

      I agree with you that mass media is hugely to blame but it is catch-22/chicken and the egg problem - if the politicians we voted for are willing to relax media laws, allow entertainment to be marketed as news, and worst of all not allow independent journalists to interview political candidates outside of marketing scripted election "rallies" - then we get what we voted for. Media just helps solidify power into the same old hands, only voting differently can ever hope to change that (discounting any type of revolution, obviously).

    11. Re:Most world leader seem to be Ok with it. by nospam007 · · Score: 1

      "Sure they make a little public stink about it and feign outrage to get re-elected (yes that means you, Merkel), "

      She got re-elected a couple of days ago.

    12. Re:Most world leader seem to be Ok with it. by FriendlyLurker · · Score: 1
    13. Re:Most world leader seem to be Ok with it. by s.petry · · Score: 1

      I don't see it as a chicken/egg problem. I see it as a select group of people planning very well to take over. The corruption in the US has been at every level simultaneously. It took a lot of logistics and planning to do so, but it's been effective.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    14. Re:Most world leader seem to be Ok with it. by FriendlyLurker · · Score: 1

      So if you think it is easier for a countries population to change corporate mass media rather than changing out the corrupt politicians, then I am all for the idea!

    15. Re:Most world leader seem to be Ok with it. by s.petry · · Score: 1

      I stated that the corruption was thorough, which does not imply that we only need to clean out one area to fix things. All corruption is bad so we must clean it all.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    16. Re:Most world leader seem to be Ok with it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's why the mob had to kill the Kennedy brothers.

  5. 35 World Leaders ?!? by ctrl-alt-canc · · Score: 0

    So this does mean that President Obama's calls were not intercepted, isnt' it ?

  6. NWO by Rik+Sweeney · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Makes you wonder which country is the real threat in this world.

    1. Re:NWO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The realist will acknowledge that every instance of coercive authority is a threat. The only meaningful difference between them is the scale of death, destruction, and injustice they are capable of. Clearly, superpower governments are capable of orders of magnitude more death, destruction, and injustice than "tin-pot" governments. However, all instances of coercive authority necessarily result in death, destruction, and injustice, owing to the simple reality of coercion.

    2. Re:NWO by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Well, it's unlikely that the Republic of Iowa would be devoting resources to spying on Chancellor Merkel. There's probably some point where one government is too big, too rich, and too powerful.

      Perhaps not coincidentally, the population of Iowa is about the same as the the entirety of the United States when it was formed. Some system designs don't scale indefinitely.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    3. Re:NWO by Pino+Grigio · · Score: 1, Insightful

      What is WRONG with you people? Every country is spying on every other (with some exceptions). It's part of Statecraft. The British are spying on the Americans, who are spying on the Germans, who are spying on the French, who are spying on the British, the Americans and the Germans, etc. etc.

      Seriously funny that you people are all so pig ignorant about it and that this is somehow a surprise. Grow up.

    4. Re:NWO by s.petry · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The system was designed to scale just fine. What happened is that the system has been corrupted, and that corruption has been very thorough. Remember that the United States is supposed to separate powers and responsibilities. Three separate branches of Government with no ties to keep each other in check. Separate levels of Government with the same branch separations were supposed to keep the Federal level from becoming too powerful.

      After a reset, we must remember what Socrates stated. In order for a Republic to succeed the members of the Republic must be highly educated, and that a Political class must be guarded against. People have been deprived of education in Philosophy and Rhetoric. Without those two things, it's very easy for a small group to manipulate them. It's happened over and over again through history, and we are no exception.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    5. Re:NWO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dear US,

      We aren't wondering anymore.

      Sincerely, The rest of the world.

    6. Re:NWO by ZombieBraintrust · · Score: 1

      Republic of Iowa would be spending all its resources on conqueror territory so it had access to the great lakes.

    7. Re:NWO by timeOday · · Score: 1

      Meh, that's like arguing "all countries have militaries and all have been in wars." OK, it's a true statement. But it overlooks awfully important differences in the size of those forces and how aggressively they use them, both internationally and against their own citizens.

    8. Re:NWO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If this was reddit, I would upvote this and then create a throwaway and upvote it again.

      Lawyers are the core of our political class and they have fscked us over.

    9. Re:NWO by HeckRuler · · Score: 1

      Oh god no. We don't want to touch Chicago with a 10' pole. (And that super-train from the Quad Cities to Chicago is a really bad idea)

      We'd probably try to make some sort of food-equivalent to OPEC.

      More likely, Monsanto would establish it self as an evil vizier and end up owning half the land before too long.

      And then it's nothing but weevils.

    10. Re:NWO by Pino+Grigio · · Score: 1

      Ah, the "it's not fair" argument. Yawn.

    11. Re:NWO by khallow · · Score: 1

      After a reset, we must remember what Socrates stated. In order for a Republic to succeed the members of the Republic must be highly educated, and that a Political class must be guarded against.

      When you say "Socrates stated", you really mean "Plato stated" since every word Socrates is alleged to have stated was recorded by Plato. This is important because Plato had his own biases and blind spots about what constituted a "political class". For example, Plato created a political class of "philosopher kings".

    12. Re:NWO by HeckRuler · · Score: 1

      I preferred statecraft II. It gave the Chinese that overseer->Changling power. It balances out mid-game scouting against French observers and American scanner sweeps.

    13. Re:NWO by JigJag · · Score: 1

      I recently read "Animal Farm" by George Orwell (yes, that one). I found the modern day political scene very much in sync with the book.

      --
      "The hallmark of humanity is the ability to move beyond sensory inputs" - Mary Helen Immordino-Yang
    14. Re:NWO by timeOday · · Score: 1

      Did you actually read what I wrote?

    15. Re:NWO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're forgetting that no Future Metaphysics has ever showed up:-) Objectivism showed some promise at showing the way, but *of course* it is just a rank sophomoric pretension, right? Right? Certainly in the hands of Peikoff the Clueless M$ fanboi, at least. Phenomenology, on the other hand, offers many possibilites to approach the ineffable, but, alas, it is so, well, subjective, and just, well, goofy and mystical, aka Casteneda. Any better candidates for a philosopy for the Great Unwashed? Anything has to be better than the Positivist (Im)Materialism rampant today.

      The Naive Realist wants to know.

    16. Re:NWO by OneAhead · · Score: 1

      Encore! Now do an ad hominem on Thomas Jefferson.

      All the way distracting from the trivial observation that uninformed people will cast uninformed votes.

    17. Re:NWO by s.petry · · Score: 1

      When you say "Socrates stated", you really mean "Plato stated" since every word Socrates is alleged to have stated was recorded by Plato.

      Let me give you a very brief history lesson, which you can easily verify. Plato wrote numerous books, and in addition to being a Philosopher he was a Historian. Socrates on the other hand was a pure Philosopher. Socrates refused to write philosophy, his claim was that without dialogue teaching Philosophy was impossible. Socrates claimed that writing is not dialogue, and therefor he dismissed it as an impossible method of teaching or conveying Philosophy. (Pardon the redundancy, it's intended for clarity and not emphasis.)

      In both Plato's Republic and the Dialogues of Plato, Plato gives a historical account of Socrates words and deeds. Plato does not take any credit for the words or Philosophy and tells us in his writings that he was acting as a Historian for Socrates. Plato had numerous other works for which he does not credit Socrates as well, so there is no logical reason to discount Plato's own claim.

      Given that information, claiming that Plato should take credit for the works of Socrates is like claiming that a court reporter should take credit for a witness's testimony or a judge's verdict. It's irrational to do so, if you really stop and think about it.

      The only rational way a person could make such a claim, and I have seen this, is by claiming that Socrates never existed and that he was a pen-name or alter-ego of Plato. History dismisses this concept very handily, so making such a claim is simply false.

      While I believe you were trying to show some pedantic interpretation, I also believe that if you stopped to consider what you were claiming you would see that it's incorrect (see the court reporter example).

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    18. Re:NWO by s.petry · · Score: 1

      I chose Socrates intentionally, since he was the one that designed the Republic form of Government. The work is very complete and extremely well thought out. I have read thousands of other Philosophers who may touch on things like "what is justice" but not a complete work describing the why and how for a fully functional society.

      I agree that teachings countering our materialism would be beneficial, but without looking at the complete picture we would most likely just be trading one form of abuse for another. Trading Aristotle for Machiavelli for example would not change the fate of society or the lives of the citizens.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    19. Re:NWO by davester666 · · Score: 1

      Sorry, we had to drain them, because some drunk American pissed in one of them and posted the video of doing it, and people complained, because we use it for drinking water.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    20. Re:NWO by WrongMonkey · · Score: 1
      The concept of states keeping the Federal government in check hasn't been relevant since the Civil War, which demonstrated why the concept was flawed in the first place.

      As for education, we have the most educated populace is the history of this nation. The college graduation rate today is twice as high as the literacy rate was 1820.

      When Socrates talked about a Republic, he was thinking of governing a city of about 150,000 people. Looking to him for answers of how to govern a continent spanning country of 300 million people is exactly the scaling problem GP is talking about.

    21. Re:NWO by s.petry · · Score: 1

      The concept of states keeping the Federal government in check hasn't been relevant since the Civil War, which demonstrated why the concept was flawed in the first place.

      The Civil War did not do away with the separation of power or the dissolution of States. I am tempted to resort to ad hominem here because it's not very difficult to see where you are fabricating history to suite a delusion, but I'll refrain and ask you to go study history instead of repeating propaganda.

      As for education, we have the most educated populace is the history of this nation. The college graduation rate today is twice as high as the literacy rate was 1820.

      When Socrates talked about a Republic, he was thinking of governing a city of about 150,000 people. Looking to him for answers of how to govern a continent spanning country of 300 million people is exactly the scaling problem GP is talking about.

      That statement is absolutely repeating propaganda and has no reality involved. Absolutely no part of that is true except for the "college degree" numbers which is not a measure of education. Schools, even 2 year Colleges have become platforms to A) create debt and B) refine an uncanny ability to believe what you are told over actually thinking which gets instilled in public education.

      Any "teacher" will tell you that the system is failing and made to fail by Government policy and intervention. Kids learn to take tests, not to think. We have at least 2 generations now with a majority that can't grasp a simple appeal to emotion fallacy, let alone debate a complex topics like creation, justice, or morality.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    22. Re:NWO by Nyder · · Score: 1

      The system was designed to scale just fine. ...

      Yes it was. It was designed to keep the rich voting (only land owners were allowed to vote), Men only (women were not allowed to vote), and of course, the lawyers were the ones making the laws.

      It's worked out really great. Now the 1% own everything and run the country, while the rest of us get the illusion that our vote actually means something, in this Corporate Fascist Country that the USA has become.

       

      --
      Be seeing you...
    23. Re:NWO by WrongMonkey · · Score: 1

      I am tempted to resort to ad hominem here because it's not very difficult to see where you are fabricating history to suite a delusion,

      Sad to see someone swear off temptation and not even make it to the end of the sentence before giving in.

      go study history instead of repeating propaganda

      That statement is absolutely repeating propaganda

      Any "teacher" will tell you that the system is failing and made to fail by Government policy and intervention

      How convenient that everything that disagrees with your narrow worldview is propaganda.

    24. Re:NWO by s.petry · · Score: 1

      Claiming a person is fabricating information is not an ad hominem, sorry. Read a history book, I pointed out something factual. If it hurts your feelings don't fabricate information regarding history.

      I realize that history and alternative perspectives to your own are difficult, so here is a nice start for teachers that are telling you that the system is broken and that the Government intervention is the problem.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    25. Re:NWO by s.petry · · Score: 1

      Just in case you missed reading another important book, here is the definition of propaganda.

      propaganda
      /präpgande/
      noun
      noun: propaganda;noun: Propaganda
      1.
      derogatory

      information, esp. of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view.

      Now when a person omits or defies reality (recorded history in your case) and repeats a message to further an agenda, it is propaganda. That is what you are doing by repeating a fabrication such as "we have the most educated populace is the history of this nation." or "The concept of states keeping the Federal government in check hasn't been relevant since the Civil War."

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    26. Re:NWO by khallow · · Score: 1

      Given that information, claiming that Plato should take credit for the works of Socrates is like claiming that a court reporter should take credit for a witness's testimony or a judge's verdict. It's irrational to do so, if you really stop and think about it.

      No, the problem here is that it is Plato's works fundamentally. We only know of Socrates and his beliefs and actions through the filter of Plato and others (who had their own axes to grind) - even if Plato really were acting as just "historian" (which I doubt incidentally). Of those, Plato is the one who discusses Socrates's philosophical outlook in great detail (though Xenophon might mention it to some degree).

      In your examples above, there's a legal penalty if a court reporter fabricates what is said or ruled in a court room. There was no similar penalty for Plato or his contemporaries.

      There are two fundamental problems. First, Plato was rehabilitating the reputation of Socrates and probably as a result libeled the opponents to Socrates to varying degree (for example, the Athenian politicians who attempted to exile Socrates or the Sophists who were a common foil for any philosopher of that time). This is par for the course for any historian of that time.

      Second, Plato was using this image of Socrates to further his own beliefs and opinions. Many of Plato's arguments were presented as debates between Socrates and others of the time with Socrates winning the debate in question. Since when has one philosopher never disagreed with a second?

      It's not at all unbiased work by Plato and one doesn't need to resort to claiming Socrates didn't exist in order to observe that.

      Why this is relevant to the current discussion is that Plato was a considerably different person than Socrates. While the latter was deliberately poor, Plato apparently was wealthy enough to maintain his school, the Academy and was part of what passed for the political elite in Athens.

      Plato's criticisms of political systems are informed and biased by both his station and by the political misfortunes he suffered (particularly, the execution of Socrates and the marginalization of the political faction to which Plato and Socrates were aligned at the time).

      For example, he had the conceit that the wise could somehow rule the rest of humanity better than the rest of humanity could rule itself. Or that rulers should isolate themselves off from society by divesting of all wealth and relinquishing any trade they might have practiced.

      I don't believe these assertions make any sense at all because they don't consider human nature, which doesn't go away merely because you've picked up a little philosophy.

    27. Re:NWO by s.petry · · Score: 1

      We only know of Socrates and his beliefs and actions through the filter of Plato and others (who had their own axes to grind) - even if Plato really were acting as just "historian"

      Removing your opinion that every history has an axe to grind we have a statement that is absolutely incorrect, which is why I stated that you can verify through historical records. While countless written records were destroyed during various times in history, enough survived where Plato's are not the only accounts of Socrates. It is a well established fact that Socrates was put on trial for example, and his punishment was death for heresy.

      (which I doubt incidentally).

      Well then, I guess that you should also discount nearly every part of history where we only have historical accounts of people's words and deeds based on your "axes to grind" statement. Pythagoras, Ramses, Herod, and countless other historical figures must also be rubbish because of your _opinion_ that anything not first hand is false.

      Many of Plato's arguments were presented as debates between Socrates and others of the time with Socrates winning the debate in question. Since when has one philosopher never disagreed with a second?

      I removed the first sentence because this is simply you repeating your incorrect conclusion. From the remaining, if you study the Sophists it would make more sense to see why Socrates would debate. You would also see why it's important that Socrates could do so and win, you would know why Socrates despised the Sophists. You would also know that Socrates had a specific definition for Philosophers which the Sophists did not match. Lastly, you would know that it's not very uncommon for Philosophers to disagree and debate. Back then, those debates could last for days.

      For example: If you were a Philosopher how long could you and I debate on the definition justice? Then, how long could we debate on the purpose of the same justice? How long then would we refine both our definition and use of the word through debate?

      I'm not going to critique the rest of your writing, because it's all based on two false premises. Socrates not being a person and Plato not being a historian. You either ignore or are ignorant of written history during that era regarding the role of Philosophers and what the Sophists were. If you choose to ignore, discount, or remain ignorant of history to support your opinion I say that you are acting without reason and irrationally.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    28. Re:NWO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope... I haven't had to wonder in a long time, I know.

    29. Re:NWO by s.petry · · Score: 1

      One more quick point, apology for neglecting it.

      In your examples above, there's a legal penalty if a court reporter fabricates what is said or ruled in a court room. There was no similar penalty for Plato or his contemporaries.

      My example did not claim that a court reporter was fabricating information. Go back and read it again. It has nothing to do with a penalty, it is a very logical analogy of your claim that Plato owns the words and deeds of Socrates.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    30. Re:NWO by khallow · · Score: 1

      Removing your opinion that every history has an axe to grind we have a statement that is absolutely incorrect

      So why is it a good idea to "remove" evidence of being wrong? I see no point to the rest of your post since it is based on flawed premises and the ignoring of contrary evidence and conflicts of interest.

      I'm not going to critique the rest of your writing, because it's all based on two false premises. Socrates not being a person and Plato not being a historian.

      I asserted neither.

    31. Re:NWO by khallow · · Score: 1

      My example did not claim that a court reporter was fabricating information.

      My point remains. There are penalties to a court reporter not getting it right. They can lose their jobs or even go to jail depending on the action and their intent. There were no similar penalties for Plato not getting things right. That's a huge difference.

  7. Who's surprised? by schneidafunk · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Guess what, the U.S. has spy agencies and their job is to spy. It just confirms they're doing an effective job, which is rare in government.

    --
    Some people die at 25 and aren't buried until 75. -Benjamin Franklin
    1. Re:Who's surprised? by synapse7 · · Score: 1, Funny

      Also, we know Al Gore invented the internet and we all know ownership is nine-tenths of the law..

    2. Re:Who's surprised? by sI4shd0rk · · Score: 1

      No one with a brain is surprised. Government thugs are acting like government thugs by using their powers in ways that they shouldn't; what else is new? Semi-intelligent people may not be surprised, but they are (and have been) angry, and justifiably so.

      --
      Ignorance is a choice
    3. Re:Who's surprised? by Ragzouken · · Score: 1

      Yeah I think this a lot. The US has a government, their job is to govern, and yet it's always news when the government governs in a way the people don't like. And here I am just like HELLO, they're a government: it's their job to govern things JEEZ.

    4. Re:Who's surprised? by sl4shd0rk · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It just confirms they're doing an effective job

      Despite breaking the law, disregarding the constitution and making secret laws using a secret court which the people who they serve have no right to access? You may want to do a little more research on how the NSA is 'doing an effective job'

      The real rarity in government is elected officials actually serving with an interest in the people.

      --
      Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
    5. Re:Who's surprised? by schneidafunk · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Don't get me wrong, I adamantly oppose the NSA spying on American citizens. However, this article is focused on world leaders of other countries.

      --
      Some people die at 25 and aren't buried until 75. -Benjamin Franklin
    6. Re:Who's surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know whether they are really doing an effective job, but spying on other country's leaders is certainly one of the things spies should be doing.

      But I wouldn't trust spy agencies enough to give them the power to spy on "everyone", since they are likely to abuse it eventually.

    7. Re:Who's surprised? by Pinky's+Brain · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Their job is not to get caught, especially when spying on allies ... they're not doing an effective job.

    8. Re:Who's surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can blame that one Edward Snowden.

    9. Re:Who's surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Back to the Cold War it is, eh? Only this time, a cold war between allies and friends. So what to you think about eliminating the spies of they're caught on foreign soil?

      [ ] legitimate, kill them

      [ ] not okay, do not kill them

      If the second option, why not? Just curious about what apologists like you think about this.

    10. Re:Who's surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A double-standard is twice as good as a regular standard. And, besides, North Korea is doing it too so it's all good and proper.

    11. Re:Who's surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except we never gain anything of value and then was caught doing it, which is much worse than having ever spied at all.

    12. Re:Who's surprised? by Ihlosi · · Score: 1

      Second option. Having some spies in prison provides good leverage during the more shady kinds of negotiation.

    13. Re:Who's surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Breaking which law? The Patriot act that created the NSA's sweeping power to tap any phone that is 'suspected' no matter where he/she resides?
      Hmm.

    14. Re:Who's surprised? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      An effective job would be getting human spies near leaders, press, mil and having total signals intelligence coverage too.
      The US seems to have its crypto ENIGMA like 'win' but you can really only play that emerging telco/radio tech trick once.
      What are the options?
      The US totally fooled 35 nations signals intelligence teams 100% of the time for how many decades now?
      Or the US was fed slight disinformation by 35 nations signals intelligence teams for many years.
      Its rare for 35 other governments to be that ineffective. Most of their staff might be trained by the USA, enjoy the trips, shopping, further education, parties and defence projects. Enjoy the great speeches about 35 special relationships. When they get back home are they all going to sell out their nations?

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    15. Re:Who's surprised? by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Guess what, the U.S. has spy agencies and their job is to spy. It just confirms they're doing an effective job, which is rare in government.

      Guess what, the U.S has armed forces and their job is to blow stuff up. That does not mean that it's a good idea to have them blow up America's allies. I know everybody spies on everybody else but when you are treating your allies like enemies it's time to re-examine which is more important to you, your alliances or knowing what the president of France eats for breakfast or where the chancellor of Germany buys her strudel. As for doing their job, I fail to see how US intelligence can be said to be doing its job in view of their complete inability to keep a lid on their operations and keep in mind that we haven't even begun to take into account the miserable US intelligence failures that led to the Iraq war which must surely lead one to lower the competence rating of the US intelligence services still further.

      --
      Only to idiots, are orders laws.
      -- Henning von Tresckow
    16. Re:Who's surprised? by gstoddart · · Score: 3, Informative

      Don't get me wrong, I adamantly oppose the NSA spying on American citizens. However, this article is focused on world leaders of other countries.

      So, the rest of the world has your permission to start spying on US citizens then?

      I sincerely hope that comes true for you.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    17. Re:Who's surprised? by schneidafunk · · Score: 1

      What double standard? The NSA is part of the military. You do not use the military on your own citizens.

      --
      Some people die at 25 and aren't buried until 75. -Benjamin Franklin
    18. Re:Who's surprised? by schneidafunk · · Score: 2

      They can & do try. It's not exactly a secret that Russia has physical spies in the U.S. or China has been cyber-attacking the U.S. or 'friendly' nations like France doing corporate espionage.

      --
      Some people die at 25 and aren't buried until 75. -Benjamin Franklin
    19. Re:Who's surprised? by schneidafunk · · Score: 1

      In 2010 we caught some Russians and deported them.

      --
      Some people die at 25 and aren't buried until 75. -Benjamin Franklin
    20. Re:Who's surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who the hell kills foreign spies nowadays? This isn't the eighteenth century, no one's putting them in front of a firing squad and handing them a cigarette.

      When spies are caught - and it's fairly frequent - they're usually just quietly kicked out of the host country. Sometimes there's more of a media circus, if there are some political points to be made from the embarrassment.

      For reference, see the Russian spy ring trial in the U.S. a couple of years ago, or the U.S. Embassy employee who was kicked out of Russia a few months back. That's just off the top of my head.

    21. Re:Who's surprised? by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      Guess what, the U.S. has spy agencies and their job is to spy. It just confirms they're doing an effective job, which is rare in government.

      Think about what would happen if this weren't signals intelligence.

      Imagine if US agents were routinely captured breaking into offices of senior leaders rifling through filing cabinets. That would be considered a SERIOUS diplomatic incident.

      It also highlights the weaknesses in cell phones. For the most part they involve security by obscurity, which isn't good for something that broadcasts all of its data by radio.

    22. Re:Who's surprised? by schneidafunk · · Score: 1

      Allies today, enemies tomorrow? Things change quickly. We were fighting Germany & Japan 60 years ago.

      Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan are all supposed allies, we have treaties and security counsels with them, but are they really our friends? This was 3 years ago.

      --
      Some people die at 25 and aren't buried until 75. -Benjamin Franklin
    23. Re:Who's surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since when is a country's leader considered a civilian? Targeting a world leader is exactly who they should be going after.

    24. Re:Who's surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a Spy vs Spy world out there.

    25. Re:Who's surprised? by dcollins · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Guess what, the U.S. has spy agencies and their job is to spy. It just confirms they're doing an effective job, which is rare in government."

      You guys who say this have to realize that all of this belligerent surveillance winds up targeted squarely at the heads of American citizens at home. The security apparatus does have one quasi-legitimate problem with their current mission -- If the idea is to tap all of the world's communications all the time, on the Internet, packets are not tagged with geographic or political-state indicators. So the only solution, really, is to suck up every packet, American and non-American alike, which is what they are now doing.

      With Internet packet switching, the only way for Americans to expect communication privacy rights is for everyone in the world to have communication privacy rights. Surveilling everyone means surveilling all Americans, all the time. Do you really want that?

      --
      We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
    26. Re:Who's surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guess what, the U.S. has spy agencies and their job is to spy. It just confirms they're doing an effective job, which is rare in government.

      Guess what, the U.S. has an army and their job is to kill. So things like the My Lai massacre and the Collateral Murder videos just confirm they're doing an effective job.

      There is a reason the U.S. is considered the devil incarnate by a number of nations, and you and your applause for spitting on human rights are part of that reason. Keep the fascism restrained to your own country and turn the U.S. into the Orwellian dystopia you dream of, but leave the rest of the world alone.

    27. Re:Who's surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We wish they would do their job.

      All they seem to do is try to get re-elected.

    28. Re:Who's surprised? by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      Since when is a country's leader considered a civilian? Targeting a world leader is exactly who they should be going after.

      If the stated goal is to prevent terrorism, then going after your allies is NOT how you do that.

      This has now become "we'll spy on everybody because we want to and because we can". It's doing far more than the stated purpose, and damaging your relations with other countries.

      If you still think that's a good idea, well, that's your problem.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    29. Re:Who's surprised? by rmstar · · Score: 1

      When spies are caught - and it's fairly frequent - they're usually just quietly kicked out of the host country.

      That's not entirely correct. When caught, spies go to jail.

      For reference, see the Russian spy ring trial in the U.S. a couple of years ago,

      IIRC, the spies fled the country at the very last moment, otherwise they would have rotten in prison.

      or the U.S. Embassy employee who was kicked out of Russia a few months back.

      He enjoyed diplomatic immunity.

      As an example: a while ago, russian spies where caught in germany; they do sit in jail.

    30. Re:Who's surprised? by Kingofearth · · Score: 1

      So your ok with Russia, China, and France spying on you? If that's not ok, then it's either not ok for us to do it, or your argument that them spying and us spying are similar on a moral level is invalid.

    31. Re:Who's surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Check out the history of the NSA, from its very origin: "The NSA is tasked with the global monitoring, collection, decoding, translation and analysis of information and data for foreign intelligence and counterintelligence purposes.". It's never been specifically about terrorism, its focus is about communications intelligence. http://www.nsa.gov/public_info/_files/cryptologic_histories/origins_of_nsa.pdf

    32. Re:Who's surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have a naive sense of the term ally. Name an ally that has not been an enemy at one time.

    33. Re:Who's surprised? by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      If the stated goal is to prevent terrorism, then going after your allies is NOT how you do that.

      Well see, your premise is incorrect. The NSA's stated goal is to "gain a decision advantage for the Nation and our allies under all circumstances".

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    34. Re:Who's surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guess what. You are a fascist cunt. Guess what. Throughout history, it always ends up badly for fascists cunts.

    35. Re:Who's surprised? by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      Well see, your premise is incorrect. The NSA's stated goal is to "gain a decision advantage for the Nation and our allies under all circumstances".

      And how's that gonna work for you when you become persona non grata when your allies all get fed up with you?

      If you're undermining your allies and pissing them off, and they tell you the legal facilities you have need to close up shop and go home, you've only hurt yourself in the long run.

      Depending on how irate some of these governments get, they could be far less willing to cooperate in the future.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    36. Re:Who's surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hell yea, let them try and spy. The U.S. is better at it. What world do you live in where the U.S. suddenly stops spying and the rest of the world magically stops too?

    37. Re:Who's surprised? by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      That, of course, is why the goal is to not get caught.

      (In this case, of course, exposing the NSA's illegal domestic surveillance was entirely worth the collateral damage of pissing off our allies, so I'm glad the NSA did get caught. I'm just not upset about this particular kind of spying.)

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    38. Re:Who's surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except they got caught in the worst possible way -- someone really, really low on the totem pole has a bone to pick so makes public the dirty secrets a tthe highest levels that already already knows but are unwilling to admit.

    39. Re:Who's surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So do you think they were not also listening to calls coming from those same White House officials?

    40. Re:Who's surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think you know what fascism means.

    41. Re:Who's surprised? by thoromyr · · Score: 1

      Hmmm....

      There's a difference between "I expect them to spy on us for their benefit and our detriment" and "I want them to spy on us and in fact I like it". Quite a bit of ground between those two. Maybe you are too bent on this supposed dichotomy, but there is a lot of difference between "I expect our spy agencies to spy on other countries for our benefit and their detriment" and "I expect our spy agencies to spy on us for their benefit and our detriment".

      And I think you *do* get it. Or are you arguing that we should disband our military? After all, their fundamental purpose is to "kill representative of other countries and take property from other countries". Yes, it rarely is stated that bluntly, but a military is used to take control of territory (and inherently what resources that territory contains). Even defensive usage can be expressed in this way as otherwise you are ceding territory to another state when they invade and take it (and its resources) from you.

      But, being in support of *our* having a military to conduct military operations *against* other states does *not* mean support using *our* military to conduct operations *against* ourselves. In fact, domestic military operations are forbidden in the US (there is a touchy area about using troops in support of domestic issues because it can be grey -- it is okay to use troops to help put out a forest fire, right?)

      So, to be *consistent* with your anti-spying argument you must be in favor of disbanding our military. Are you?

    42. Re:Who's surprised? by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 1

      Allies today, enemies tomorrow? Things change quickly. We were fighting Germany & Japan 60 years ago.

      Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan are all supposed allies, we have treaties and security counsels with them, but are they really our friends? This was 3 years ago.

      The point is that it doesn't have to be that way and only a bunch of total morons (read the NSA) would push us closer to that unfortunate scenario with idiotic behaviour. Both the German and the French leadership have been pretty reluctant to raise a stink over the Snowden affair (even though they are definitely pissed off about it) partly because they are pretty eager to finalize that EU/US free trade agreement ASAP and Snowden's revelations are screwing everything up at the worst possible time. One gets the feeling they made calls to Washington a while ago and asked Obama et al. whether there were any more stink-bombs coming down the pipes and were told 'no'. They then made statements based on that assurance only to find themselves with a fresh batch of stink-bombs on their hands. I have to hand it to Snowden, If it is his intention to wreck the EU-US relationship his timing is perfect. Vlad Putin must be watching this farce unfold and laughing his ass off. The only ones gaining by this carnival of stupidity are Russia and possibly China.

      --
      Only to idiots, are orders laws.
      -- Henning von Tresckow
    43. Re:Who's surprised? by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      You have a naive sense of the term ally. Name an ally that has not been an enemy at one time.

      So, all those countries who consider the US an ally should stop being naive and assume the US is (or could be) an enemy and stop trusting them then?

      Because that might be what's happening right now.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    44. Re:Who's surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Iraq war "intelligence" is small potatoes in their Field of Fail.

      How about missing the impending economic collapse of our -primary enemy- for the entirely of the Cold War, the USSR?

      There has to be some point at which "Oops, my bad, here, sign this appropriation for another few billion dollars" ceases to be a convincing value-proposition.

    45. Re:Who's surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you don't get it. See, on one hand you have spying. And then on the other hand you have the sudden realization that you have no privacy.

    46. Re:Who's surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, there are plenty in government with "an interest in the people". That could be considered the whole problem, in fact. The fox, after all, has an interest in the chickens.

      I think you perhaps mean "serving with the people's interest in mind." I would argue that this is only marginally better, because it is so easy to rationalize what you wrote as what I believe you meant. Just like it is easy to rationalize the general welfare clause to mean that the government is responsible for your food, shelter, education, retirement, healthcare, and so forth, with utterly predictable if unfortunate consequences. But hey, they came out four-squre to help the folks, right? Can't blame them. No sir.

    47. Re:Who's surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The fox, and the farmer, too. Heh. The end for the chickens is the same.

    48. Re:Who's surprised? by Poorcku · · Score: 1

      True. How very true. But since everything has a consequence, please don't come to my country (Germany) never in your life.

      You are not welcome anymore. Go to Las Vegas, gamble a bit, see Disneyland and absorb all the culture your society has produced. Don't bother coming here. Spy on me from where you are and don't hope for reconciliation any time soon. /Vented :)

      --
      I take my children to see Madonna(..), but I never for once ever thought I was in the same business.Chris Rea.
    49. Re:Who's surprised? by schneidafunk · · Score: 1

      Remember WWII and the holocaust? Everything has a consequence yea? Like the NSA was a DIRECT consequence of breaking your codes to spy on Germany.

      Your country has been pretty evil in the grand scheme of history, but we still allow Germans to come to the U.S. and have been pretty nice to your country considering what you did.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Plan
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconstruction_of_Germany

      --
      Some people die at 25 and aren't buried until 75. -Benjamin Franklin
    50. Re:Who's surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And how's that gonna work for you when you become persona non grata when your allies all get fed up with you?

      That's not a reason not to spy; it's a reason to keep your spying secret.

    51. Re:Who's surprised? by Poorcku · · Score: 1

      Our generation was no part of those atrocities. Blaming us for actions that took place over 70 years ago is pretty insidious. You however sanctioned and continue to sanction the current government with your vote. Oh and of course in exchange for the Marshall plan you are so fond of, you've got our gold as hostage. http://nsnbc.me/2013/07/31/mystery-about-germany%C2%B4s-gold-in-the-us-solved/ What, you didn't know? how inconvenient... Again, stay the hell away.

      --
      I take my children to see Madonna(..), but I never for once ever thought I was in the same business.Chris Rea.
    52. Re:Who's surprised? by Solandri · · Score: 1

      Despite breaking the law, disregarding the constitution and making secret laws using a secret court which the people who they serve have no right to access?

      Strictly speaking, the Constitution does not apply to foreign nationals living abroad (there's even some question as to if it applies to U.S. citizens living abroad). While it's extremely poor form and a betrayal of trust to spy on your own allies, there's nothing illegal about it.* Unless the country decides to pass a law making it illegal (e.g. the law we have making it illegal to target a head of state of a foreign country for assassination).

      This does present an opportunity on another unrelated legal front though. The U.S. seems to want to apply its copyright laws to foreigners doing something with movies/music which is completely legal in their own country. If the U.S. can extradite these people from those countries and prosecute them in the U.S., by the same reasoning Germany and France can extradite NSA officials and prosecute them for wiretapping.

      * I do agree that if you say "all men are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights," then those rights should transcend the nationality and residence of a person. But you also have to make allowances for political reality. If we were forced on principle to afford all Chinese citizens living in China 4th Amendment rights, while the Chinese were free to take what info they want from Americans in the U.S. because they have no such protections, that creates a disparity which puts the country with fewer rights at a political an economic advantage. The best compromise I've been able to come up with is treat people by the standards of their own country.

    53. Re:Who's surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guess what? I couldn't care less if the NSA spy on american people. I hate it when they spy on ordinary people in my country though. Wouldn't mind so much if they ensured american safety by spying on a few shady characters here - but this 'spying on everybody' business is not good. One way of striking back is to cancel all sorts of deals with americans. And trade oil in other currencies than dollars . . . spying has its costs, see if it is worth the price.

    54. Re:Who's surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, what UN regulation enforces this?

    55. Re:Who's surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guess what, the U.S. has spy agencies and their job is to spy. It just confirms they're doing an effective job, which is rare in government.

      Guess what, the U.S. has spy agencies and their job is to spy on the enemy. It just confirms they're doing an ineffective job.

      With friends like this, who needs enemies. Looks to me like the NSA may be running a shill spin campaign.

    56. Re:Who's surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not effective if they get caught .

    57. Re:Who's surprised? by crimson+tsunami · · Score: 1

      You have a naive sense of the term ally. Name an ally that has not been an enemy at one time.

      Australia

    58. Re:Who's surprised? by crimson+tsunami · · Score: 1

      You can blame that one Edward Snowden.

      or NSA incompetence.

    59. Re:Who's surprised? by crimson+tsunami · · Score: 1

      Allies today, enemies tomorrow? Things change quickly.

      They change quicker if you give them reasons to distrust you. Stealing their secrets, sabotaging their negotiations/businesses etc.

    60. Re:Who's surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And whats the point of being allies with America when they screw you over in every possible way with trade agreements treaties.
      Maybe it will take a little longer for your country to be bombed, push you a little further down the list, but otherwise whats the point?
      Im surprised America has any allies at all. Maybe all its allies are just phoning it in and waiting for a better option to turn up (China maybe).
      Maybe America knows this too, and is the reason its tightening the screws as much as it thinks it can get away with.

    61. Re:Who's surprised? by sydbarrett74 · · Score: 1

      US intelligence failures that led to the Iraq war which must surely lead one to lower the competence rating of the US intelligence services still further.

      We must consider the distinct possibility that shoes-on-the-ground CIA operators and their handlers and analysts told Cheney through appropriate channels that there was no evidence of WMD's, but he didn't like that answer because he had vested interests in reality being the opposite -- so after the fact he could claim, 'Shucks, I guess there weren't any WMD's after all, but the doggone CIA fed me rubbish intelligence so blame them for getting us into that kerfuffle.' He had already made his money through the bombing and subsequent occupation and rebuilding, so he didn't give two shits about throwing the entire intelligence community under the bus.

      I'm not saying that the CIA and other US intelligence bodies aren't completely rotten at the top, but when the (mostly) hard-working and honest people lower down in the hierarchy get blamed whole-cloth for policy failures, let's all take a step back and see whose agenda is most suspect.

      --
      'He who has to break a thing to find out what it is, has left the path of wisdom.' -- Gandalf to Saruman
    62. Re:Who's surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do realise your laws dont overrule other countries laws.
      And your constitution definately overrules your laws.
      Its quite possible most treaties you have signed do as well.

    63. Re:Who's surprised? by schneidafunk · · Score: 1

      Your response is such a rambling mess I don't even know where to start. I do not blame you for WWII, if you re-read my comment, I am saying the NSA was created as a result of WWII and their original mission was to spy on Germany. The fact they continue to do so is not surprising nor do I have a problem with it. You talked about consequences, well you got them from your previous generation.

      I did hear about the gold and it is considerably off-topic. And, I will be going to Germany in the next few months regardless of your thoughts on Americans.

      --
      Some people die at 25 and aren't buried until 75. -Benjamin Franklin
    64. Re:Who's surprised? by Kingofearth · · Score: 1

      My post wasn't intended to be more about consistency than spying in general. If you're ok with our government spying on any foreigners for any reason, then you must be ok with foreign governments spying on us for any reason, at least if you want to be able to claim your argument is based on some fundamental concept of right and wrong and not just "I want the world to revolve around me."

      We should be spying on nations, organizations, and people who are a direct physical threat to the safety of our country, and I would expect and be fine with other countries doing the same. We should have a military that will protect our country from those physical threats as well, as should every other country. Just because I disagree with many of the people our agencies spy on doesn't mean I want our spies gone altogether, I just want them to be focused only on the people who are out to cause us harm.

      More to my original point, if I am not planning harm against Russia or France, I would say it is immoral for them to spy on me. On the other hand, if I were planning an attack against those countries, I may not like them spying on me, but it would be hard to argue that it is immoral for them to do so.

  8. US considered hostile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This would be an act of war if it were done to the US by any other country. Why should we not treat it as one?

    1. Re:US considered hostile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Bullshit. China, russia, and france have all recently been busted spying on the U.S.

    2. Re: US considered hostile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Links on EACH country spying from a reputable source or I call bullshit on you.
      I'm sick of wankers who justify this behavior by pointing at others. If the local bully hits my kid 10 times and the victim raises the hand if defence ... The bully says "see, see - be tried to hit me". A common misdirection tactic.

      Mods need to be fired.

  9. Good by BitZtream · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That is their job after all. If this surprises you, you're a moron.

    They aren't supposed to spy on their OWN citizens, but the very definition of their job is to spy on important people in other countries.

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    1. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is their job to spy under a framework of lawfulness and ethics, reporting and obeying to a publicly transparent system of civilian oversight. I'm sure that's what you meant.

    2. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This.

      I dislike being spied on as much as the next guy, but what exactly did people think the NSA was doing?

    3. Re:Good by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      the image presented was spying on the Soviet Union, Soviet allies and neutral nations falling under Soviet influence. Add in keeping the codes safe and the US mil informed e.g. warning of a Tet Offensive.
      For that they got quality funding and where able to attract the best staff per generation. Later it gets interesting with the CIA, private sector contractors and the domestic surveillance issues.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    4. Re:Good by Kingofearth · · Score: 1

      How does spying on friendly nations ensure our security? That is the job of the National Security Agency, isn't it? To ensure our security? Seems to me that pissing off our allies would do more to threaten our security than spying on them would do to help it.

    5. Re:Good by aaaaaaargh! · · Score: 1

      Really? Why is it their job to spy on Angela Merkel, if Obama could just read the newspaper or call her up to find out what she's thinking? Nobody says the NSA shouldn't spy on North Korea, but how about the right balance ? Shouldn't they spy on the military infrastructure of enemy countries rather than close allies and trade partners?

      Anyway, the bright side of this news is that the cooling down of relations between the US and EU countries might result in less violations of constitutional rights of citizens on both sides of the pond. Perhaps the illegal procedure of just asking a befriended agency for information about your own citizens will become less customary.

    6. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is people like to force your government to outsource the spying to foreign governments.

      Do you realize how many high-paying jobs lost because of people like you?

  10. Odd a Bush era program would get such coverage... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And I'm not surprised that's not stopping the breathless dishonest coverage of the issue to make it look like it's continuing.

  11. I don't care by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The NSA is suppose to spy on other countries.

    Sure it's embarrassing when that fact gets printed in the newspaper, but who else are they supposed to spy on?

    And of course the "World Leaders" feign outrage while their spy organizations are trying to do the exact same thing to us.

    Maybe they're more upset because their spies aren't as successful as the NSA.

    The real news is still that the NSA is spying on Americans and lying about it, which they are Constitutionally prohibited from doing.

    1. Re:I don't care by sI4shd0rk · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The NSA is suppose to spy on other countries.

      I'd prefer it if they spied on countries that are actively hostile towards us, if they're going to spy at all. No, spying to collect evidence is not okay (or else spying on citizens would also be okay).

      This apologist nonsense is not surprising, but it is an absolute eyesore.

      --
      Ignorance is a choice
    2. Re:I don't care by Pinky's+Brain · · Score: 2

      The NSA gets huge volumes of data from the EU free of charge ... companies get a carte blanche to share data with the NSA by the EU. They are jeopardizing all of that by getting caught like this ...

  12. So.. NSA is doing its job? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is the NSA fufilling its role.. full stop. If you're not a US citizen and you're doing something of interests to our intelligence services you should be targeted.

    If you're a citizen of an Echelon country, you have no room to talk because your nation is a partner. (To be honest, I thought Echelon was Anglosphere only, but there's the Netherlands in the fray.. wow. )

    And do not for a second act as though other nations don't do this. You can start with Frenchelon. And to those who bleat about economic and industrial espionage, the French have been known for this since the seventies.

    1. Re:So.. NSA is doing its job? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Echelon is 5 nations. Other countries e.g. Sweden's FRA helped. Germany's BND would give everything (all telco) within (~West) Germany to the NSA but knew it would never get anything back as a swap or deal that the Echelon nations enjoyed. Germany would be thanked in return via mil/signals projects.
      Sweden and Switzerland had emerging commercial crypto exports and had to be contained too so gov deals where done.
      Cyprus, Greece, Turkey, Ethiopia, Libya, Kenya, Morocco, India and Pakistan all helped with aspects like spy plane flights, stations/sites/bases...at some time in different ways.
      Anglosphere is a very unique term to use as the NSA and GCHQ where very open to other countries around the world. e.g. spy plane overflight deals, cell phones and commercial encryption export "weakening" from neutral and friendly nations where often repaid by the NSA and GCHQ in many different ways.
      Staff from the 5 trusted nations worked very well in each others nations. But they all knew the USA could turn the data flow off at any time.
      Different layers and deals depending on the decades and dictators, juntas, regimes, princes, free elections, crypto exports or location.
      The NSA and GCHQ wanted the world as their own telco network. They got it all :)
      What France can do is track words in real time in France on their Frenach phone system or internet - a bit like any other nation can internally with deep packet inspection.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  13. World "Leaders" are just Figureheads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These people aren't actually doing anything. They don't call the shots.

    The shots are called by these subversive government agencies, corporate insiders, freemasons, and bilderbergers.

    The world is run by the underground power dealers. These "leaders" are just put there to create the illusion of democracy and the illusion that people can actually change things.

    The life you are living - every minute detail of it - is chosen for you by your underground masters. Enlighten yourselves please and realize there is no spoon.

  14. Is'nt this what the NSA is supposed to do? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Monitoring the communications of Foreign governments. That's what the NSA is for. Sure those govenments won't like it, but hey, they have security agencies too. As far as Snowden leaking this information. I think he has gone too far.

    Now monitoring US citizens, no, they are not supposed to do that. That is not what they are for. Let the foreign Government's agencies do that:)

    1. Re:Is'nt this what the NSA is supposed to do? by ZombieBraintrust · · Score: 2

      Well technically that is what the CIA is for. NSA is just supposed to keep our military secret's secret.

  15. Britfags vote these arseholes out of existence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And British MP Liam Fox thinks the Guardian should be investigated? Fuck, Britfags. Why do you put up with these arseholes? Vote them out of existence and that David Cameron arsehole too. http://dissenter.firedoglake.com/2013/10/16/british-prime-minister-endorses-parliamentary-investigation-into-guardian-for-publishing-snowdens-leaks/

    1. Re:Britfags vote these arseholes out of existence by Justpin · · Score: 1

      What makes you think we have any power to do anything? Much as I hate Russel Brand, he was interviewed last night and pretty much told us how it was. That voting changes nothing as you vote for corporate stooges who act in their own interests. Which is why he doesn't vote.

  16. hah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "how dare you have sex before wedlock!?"
    [goes home and has a long S&M session with a hooker to relieve stress]

  17. Obvious by guytoronto · · Score: 2

    Everybody knows the U.S. intelligence community is paranoid as hell, and always listening. If not the NSA, then maybe the CIA, FBI, or any of the dozens of other intelligence agencies in the U.S.

    None of these world leaders are shocked or surprised.

  18. Why is Anyone Surprised? by Kagato · · Score: 2, Informative

    Here in the US countries like France are heavily restricted from operating and managing US entities that have ties to US security and law enforcement operations. (Bio-metrics, AFIS, Facial Recognition, Crypto, Official Identity and Credential Solutions, etc.) Because they are foreign? No. Because they have been caught spying on the US.

    The only different here is the US isn't flopping over and whining like a European Soccer player about a little spying.

    1. Re:Why is Anyone Surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And how is restricting other countries not "flipping over and whining"?

      Actually I've yet to see any country that is as crybabyish and as self-obsessed as the US.

    2. Re:Why is Anyone Surprised? by TheP4st · · Score: 1

      The only different here is the US isn't flopping over and whining like a European Soccer player about a little spying.

      Do you seriously believe that US politicians wouldn't feign the same outrage if the roles were reversed and documents about the French tapping congress and your President leaked out?

      And no one would be childish enough to rename French Fries to Freedom Fries in the congressional cafeterias.

      --
      "I have downloaded hundreds and hundreds of records, why would I care if somebody downloads ours?" Robin Pecknold
    3. Re:Why is Anyone Surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the roles were reversed the Atlantic fleet would be sailing at top speed eastwards towards little old Europe with one aim to sort out the frigging Frenchies/Krauts/Brits/Eyties/etc once and for all.
      Remember the US has a long history of Shoot First and dont answer questions after.

      The US Government IS scared of everyone including their own citizens. The trouble is that most of the US only listens to Fox News and we all know what level of inteligence that is aimed at so the average Joe Sixpack jst does not know it yet.
      The US is in danger of repeating the same mistakes of isolationism they did in the 1930's.
      Sad really but as every day goes by, the US becomes more and more irellevant in the Global Scheme of things.

    4. Re:Why is Anyone Surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only different here is the US isn't flopping over and whining like a European Soccer player about a little spying.

      You may have been asleep and missed the whole Snowden thing. The US is now having an international hissy fit because he stole all these secrets from under their noses. He's a spy, its what they do. Man up America.

    5. Re:Why is Anyone Surprised? by minstrelmike · · Score: 1

      We do get a little peeved when the Iranians or the Chinese do it to us. But that's okay because we're real Americans and Europeans aren't, n'est pas?

    6. Re:Why is Anyone Surprised? by Kagato · · Score: 1

      The French were caught red handed spying on US soil. They are on the list of known states that have been caught infiltrating the US Gov't. It's not a secret, but it's also not something the US goes out of the way to point out either.

  19. What are other nations doing? by AHuxley · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Where are their spies? Its as if they just let their top political leaders stumble around the world stage as bait for the NSA. Congrats on the election win, here our tested 'safe' phone, fax machine. Use it a lot.
    A vast pile of documents are then sent.
    In some safe house an inner group of political leaders meet as another group of political suits 'act' on the world stage with their leaky phones.
    Giving the NSA and US just what it wants/expects to hear?
    All the same countries faced the same intercept threats from communists, fascism, their own press and political rivals yet show zero skill when using the US global telco networks?
    Are all the signals intelligence staff of 35 nations really more loyal to the USA than their own leadership?
    Or are we seeing 35 nations playing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Quicksilver_(WWII) with a US gov so entranced with its own intercept skills? With little to no human spies left for "reality" what is the US really gathering other than what 35 govs select to talk about on phones they know are junk.....

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    1. Re:What are other nations doing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Are all the signals intelligence staff of 35 nations really more loyal to the USA than their own leadership?"

      Wake up and smell the (not so) New World Order baby!!! Ain't torture and a disregard for the geneva conventions and the fourth ammendment to the US constitution grand! (you see, once the powerful in the U.S. realized they could just be brutish dominating assholes to their own people, deciding to coerce the rest of the world with human rights violations just came naturally)

  20. Why so surprised or offended? by dysmal · · Score: 1

    Why are people acting surprised or offended by this? This is what alphabet soup agencies do! Don't tell me that other governments agencies aren't doing the same thing. Intelligence agencies spy on everyone friend or foe. It's their job. The only real reason for shock about this is that they got *caught*.

    1. Re:Why so surprised or offended? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Intelligence agencies spy on everyone friend or foe.

      "No nation has friends, only interests." -- de Gaulle

    2. Re:Why so surprised or offended? by X.25 · · Score: 1

      Why are people acting surprised or offended by this? This is what alphabet soup agencies do! Don't tell me that other governments agencies aren't doing the same thing. Intelligence agencies spy on everyone friend or foe. It's their job. The only real reason for shock about this is that they got *caught*.

      Are you ok with thungs freely killing people and not being held accountable, because they work for governent?

      Just curious.

    3. Re:Why so surprised or offended? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think they are held accountable in a different way. I've never read or heard of a war where there were no innocent lives lost, no dishonorable things done. Oh, wait, I did -- in bad fiction.

      Spying on the leader of a country? Please -- tell me why any country would not want to spy on their neighbors. There are numerous examples in the Cold War where without spying we would not be here to discuss the merits of the practice.

  21. whats the big deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    so what if they spied on foreign countries, isn't that what their supposed to do? what their not supposed to do is spy on me, for any reason, what-so-ever.

    i feel like i am in Brazil, or THX-1138, or somewhere in-between...

    people shouldnt care that a spy agency spy's on foreign people. how many people that work for our govt are working for the Germans, or the Chinese? that should be the concern.

  22. Amerikans are douchebags ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Amerika has become one of the most belligerent and aggressive countries on the planet these days.

    Your security and trade interests are not more important than those of the rest of the world.

    We're tired of your shit and your assertions of "we're Amerika, we can do anything we want".

    I sincerely hope the rest of the world leaders start sanctioning you, because if any country was shown to be doing this to the US there would be warships deployed and loud wailing about how your sovereignty was violated.

    You guys need to fix your culture of entitlement and the continued belief in your own supremacy. The rest of the world might be willing to work with you, but not be dictated to.

    I used to respect and admire the US, but now they've become everything they've ever claimed to be against -- a paranoid surveillance state, beholden to corporations, and with an over-inflated sense of entitlement and a smug sense of superiority.

    1. Re:Amerikans are douchebags ... by sirnomad99 · · Score: 1

      Look to your own leaders. I guaranty that they are guilty of the exact same activities as you are so outraged that America is being criticized for.

    2. Re:Amerikans are douchebags ... by bussdriver · · Score: 1

      "America is the greatest purveyor of violence in the world" -MLK.
      That was back during Vietnam, things are much worse today.

      A little political backstabbing is normal but that does not mean it is ok. When you accept the secret norm so it can become flagrant, you merely raise the bar on what they can easily do or attempt in secret. At least they take a great deal of effort secretly breaking ideals, morals, and laws - why make it any easier for them?

  23. Perfectly normal by Issarlk · · Score: 2, Informative

    You never know when a world leader goes Al Qaeda suicide bomber all of a sudden, unless you listen it her calls. I'm sure Angela Merkel wears a Burqa secretly when alone at home.

  24. Thanks Obama! by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

    nm, just seems an appropriate tag for a Bush Era memo.

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  25. This is news to who? by sirwired · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Countries spy on each other all the time. Even allies. It has ever been thus, for centuries even. Heck, when I had a summer job at the DoD, we were sternly warned that spies can come from any country, and were provided a list of the current "hot spots." More than a couple close allies were up there in the rankings.

    From my perspective, Edward Snowden would have been a whistle-blowing hero if he restricted his disclosures to borderline-illegal domestic spying. But apparently he's done a document dump of every electronic intelligence program he could get his hands on... that ain't whistleblowing, that's espionage. If the US ever gets his mitts on him, he'll almost surely never leave prison, and rightly so. Why did he EVER take a job with the NSA if he thought all forms of electronic intelligence were bad and worthy of spilling the details about to the whole world?

    1. Re:This is news to who? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      to WHOM

    2. Re:This is news to who? by BitZtream · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why did he EVER take a job with the NSA if he thought all forms of electronic intelligence were bad and worthy of spilling the details about to the whole world?

      Because the CIA fired him for those very reasons. He's not a hero, he's just an attention whore like Assange. Both do things in the name of the moral high ground ... yet utterly ignore the fact they do shit to harm all sorts of people.

      I'd bet the only reason we heard about domestic spying FIRST from Snowden is because some newspaper reporter looking at the documents found them and wanted to run with it first, not because Snowden pointed it out. He's just another Bradley Manning, all pissed off he wasn't getting his way and determined to stick it to the man.

      He is by definition a traitor and is just trying to use someone else's crimes (domestic spying by NSA and its ilk) to divert attention from his own treason.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    3. Re:This is news to who? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it was espionage and not whistle-blowing.

      Then that was his job, he was a spy. Why are Americans crying about it. Everybody does it apparently. Snowden (and most likely others) were just better than you. Lift your game NSA if you want to play in the big leagues.

    4. Re:This is news to who? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You seem to have a short attention span. You might want to follow up on what was published after the initial slander on the CIA stuff. Until you do stop spreading nonsense. Thank you.

    5. Re:This is news to who? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Edward Snowden would have been a whistle-blowing hero if he restricted his disclosures to borderline-illegal domestic spying."

      I could concur with your last paragraph, but I do believe Snowden is a hero in this respect: He has succeeded in making the typical American boob with his/her head up their ass realize that something *way* wrong is happening.

      I just wish he would see the importance of giving some Federal judges, up to and including the Supremes, the chance to demonstrate their realization of this, but then I'm not in his shoes. I do encourage him to continue articulating his position and definitely get more help analyzing his disclosures rather than leaving it to a possibly compromised news outlet to dole out piecemeal in suspiciously-timed, gratuitously damaging ways.

    6. Re:This is news to who? by sirnomad99 · · Score: 1

      The "revelations" Snowden shared were not big secrets. Anyone with any kind of IT training that is surprised at this is either naive or stupid. We knew the technology exists and to think with the resources our nation has at its disposal that they are not using it is ridiculous.
      The only part of this worth noting is the verification that yes indeed the NSA is using its resources domestically against American citizens in violation of the 4th amendment.

    7. Re:This is news to who? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The CIA. You mean the Cartelofbankers Intellgence Agency? The Communist Intelligence Agency? The Corrupt Intelligence Agency? Ah, yes, they would fire him, hero or not, just so they could play him like a two-dollar whore.

      A Company fan-boi is a fine one to be passing judgement on people's character.

    8. Re:This is news to who? by khallow · · Score: 1

      He is by definition a traitor and is just trying to use someone else's crimes (domestic spying by NSA and its ilk) to divert attention from his own treason.

      No enemy was aided and abetted by this. Instead, it was the people of the US and of its supposed allies who benefited from these revelations.

    9. Re:This is news to who? by X.25 · · Score: 1

      Countries spy on each other all the time. Even allies. It has ever been thus, for centuries even. Heck, when I had a summer job at the DoD, we were sternly warned that spies can come from any country, and were provided a list of the current "hot spots." More than a couple close allies were up there in the rankings.

      You guys are trying really hard.

      It doesn't work, though.

      But keep trying.

    10. Re:This is news to who? by X.25 · · Score: 1

      Because the CIA fired him for those very reasons. He's not a hero, he's just an attention whore like Assange. Both do things in the name of the moral high ground ... yet utterly ignore the fact they do shit to harm all sorts of people.

      I'd bet the only reason we heard about domestic spying FIRST from Snowden is because some newspaper reporter looking at the documents found them and wanted to run with it first, not because Snowden pointed it out. He's just another Bradley Manning, all pissed off he wasn't getting his way and determined to stick it to the man.

      He is by definition a traitor and is just trying to use someone else's crimes (domestic spying by NSA and its ilk) to divert attention from his own treason.

      Sure thing tiger.

      What you wrote says nothing about Snowden, but says a lot about you.

    11. Re:This is news to who? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's not a hero, he's just an attention whore like Assange.

      And your plan is to complain about him? You must have never dealt with an attention whore before.

      the fact they do shit to harm all sorts of people.

      So then it should be easy for you to provide an example of a single person who has actually been hurt by Snowden, right?

    12. Re:This is news to who? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In point of fact, some people have been aware of all kinds things domestic spying related for decades. You tell people about it, you either get "USA! USA! USA!", get called a paranoid conspiracy nutjob, or some MotherJones degenerate subversive. No one was listening. No one wanted to listen, where the buffalo roam.

      No one can challenge the veracity of anything Assange, Manning, or Snowden, has put out there. Among many others going back to as authoritative a source as Ike, even. Yes you can arguably question their motives, but that's irrelevant in the long run. What is important is they have put things out there that no one can ignore, even to avoid collateral damage, except at their peril. I'll let history judge who the heroes and villains are to be, but first the US government has to decide who the hell's side it is on.

      I know what my opinion is, at least.

    13. Re:This is news to who? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Countries spy on each other all the time. Even allies. It has ever been thus, for centuries even. Heck, when I had a summer job at the DoD, we were sternly warned that spies can come from any country, and were provided a list of the current "hot spots." More than a couple close allies were up there in the rankings."

      This is a good point, and why the (human/geopolitical) world is at the critical point of evolution where things like global conventions on human rights is so important. Whether you want to claim that your rights to be free of malevolent persecution come from God, come from Logic, or come from the Crazy urge in you to boil alive anyone who violates those rights, doesn't matter so much. What matters is that there are "inalienable rights". And there are also people that smirk at that concept noting how frequently those rights are alienated every day and every where.

      It's time to start executing those shitheads. And by shitheads, I mean the rest of the CIA and the NSA. Snowden bought his life by not turning traitor to my God Given Inalienable Human Rights.

    14. Re:This is news to who? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Countries spy on each other all the time. Even allies.

      Well, then they can stop NOW. Women have also been raped all the time, but what kind of argument is that?

    15. Re:This is news to who? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      whine all you like. for the rest of the world he is a hero, no matter what filth you guys like swim in..

    16. Re:This is news to who? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Countries spy on each other all the time. Even allies.

      A few countries do. Not many. And against allies even less. This smells like a shill NSA spin campaign to me.

    17. Re:This is news to who? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The other surprising thing is that they are so bad at it.
      The most important thing is not get caught.
      If they know you know, the information isnt as useful as it could have otherwise been.
      Getting caught has consequences, look at all the fuss it's causing, is the bad publicity really worth the information you gained?
      If you're going to collect everyone's secrets, keep them secret!!!
      If you cant keep this secret, why should people cooperate with you in the future.
      NSA is just coming of looking incompetent in this whole situation.
      Massive dragnet of questionable value, political fallout that damages relations and reputations between "friendly" countries.
      Was it worth it?

  26. Shield by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Was interesting to hear discussion about NSA and Snowden on Shield last night. Since it's all so out in the public now, you can bet that next year's inspector gadget gizmos coming to you from NSA will be not as easy to detect than this year's versions... Go go gadget phone tap.

  27. And as someone pointed out on NPR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Germany (Siemens) sold nuclear technology to Iran. Who next, North Korea?

    1. Re:And as someone pointed out on NPR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The U.S. sponsors or supports the vast majority of dictatorships and has trained and supplied many of the most prominent terrorist groups. Germany isn't the problem.

  28. Bring it by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    > "eavesdropping on the numbers had produced 'little reportable intelligence."

    Of terrorism, of course not. But what's to stop US factions from reporting conversations to favored parties in those countries, of their opposition's activities?

    What's to stop them from doing the same thing in this country? "You're supppsed to get a warrant" is like telling a kid "you're supposed to ask me before sneaking a cookie. I'm going to the store now bye."

    With little to no technological barriers and hundreds of agents with fingertip access, it is almost certainly happening here already -- not just spying on girlfriends. Yet these same people tell you not to worry -- while with the other side of their mouth say you need donation restrictions to stop just the appearance of corruption, mch less actual corruption.

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  29. Bye bye US-military bases in Europe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm just joking. They bring in way too much money.

  30. Dear German spies: by Entropius · · Score: 5, Funny

    Can you please spy on my government and tell me what the hell they're up to these days? I have no clue, and they're certainly not telling.

    Thanks,
    An American

    1. Re:Dear German spies: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dear American,

      we just did. Most of the articles provided for by Snowdon tell you exactly what your government is up to. You just choose to believe them when they say they are not doing it to you! Even us excellent European spies can't protect you from your own gullibility

    2. Re:Dear German spies: by Entropius · · Score: 1

      Dear European,

      Snowden told us what the NSA's up to. I want to know what the rest of the clowns are doing. I hear the dulcet strains of Yakety Sax drifting down Pennsylvania Ave. from the White House, but bugger me with a cactus if I can figure out what they're doing in there.

    3. Re:Dear German spies: by behrooz0az · · Score: 0

      Dear American,
      In europe, government organizations actually cooperate. It's not our fault that your government happens to be the other way around.

      --
      Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion. -- Spazmania (174582)
    4. Re:Dear German spies: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are getting re-elected.

  31. and the reason they did it was by utnapistim · · Score: 1

    ... because they could.

    As opposed to all other intelligence/counter-intelligence agencies in the world, who do exactly the same thing, for exactly the same reason.

    I think the reason they got "little reportable intelligence" is because when you are in a position like that (president of a country, foreign dignitary, etc) , you at the very least _assume_ your allies will try to listen to your conversations.

    At this level "reportable intelligence" conversations are not carried over public/listed phone lines, but on non-public lines, where you can set up privacy and security checks, encryption and authentication protocols and so on (i.e. send a USB stick by a courrier you trust or something).

    --
    Tie two birds together: although they have four wings, they cannot fly. (The blind man)
  32. uh by buddyglass · · Score: 1

    The U.S. spies on other countries? SHOCKING!!!

  33. The funny thing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Spy agencies do illegal things in other countries, it's their job. BUT: If the NSA (or any other US, GB or French spy agency) taps Merkel's phone they're not violation of German laws.

  34. If anyone is wondering why the US has no friends by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    they only need to look at the response to being caught spying on their allies: "Good. It's the NSA's job. Why is anyone surprised? You do it too."

    Fuck you.

  35. The French Also Spy on the US by goombah99 · · Score: 4, Informative

    http://www.france24.com/en/20131024-nsa-france-spying-squarcini-dcri-hollande-ayrault-merkel-usa-obama

    And the french DSGE has been doing Economic INtelligence (Industrial secrets) for decades. For example in 1991 they were caught bugging all the seats in Air France jets.

    Mon Du, Gambling at Ricks!

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:The French Also Spy on the US by buchner.johannes · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Those comments are distracting. Just because others do it, does not make it any better.

      The answer to spying is not reverse spying (ala "give me my secret information back") but to exert pressure. Spying is a sign of mistrust and means communication is poor.

      --
      NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
    2. Re:The French Also Spy on the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's an important distraction because the French are outraged, the Germans are outraged, "breach of trust" etc., which they do because the one whistleblower we have happens to be American and not French or German. They're playing outraged because they think secrecy will let them get away with it. How is this different than Alexander lying to congress? It's not a side issue. It's the main issue.

    3. Re:The French Also Spy on the US by goombah99 · · Score: 1

      Your last statement is a good starting place for a conversation. I was just laying the cards on the table. Let's not start the discussion with illusions. The problem is not "Stopping the US form spying" but how do we want to deal with the fact that everyone who can spy will spy. Should we all mutually agree not to? should we just accept that it's going to happen anyhow?

      More to the point, there's a reasonable argument that spying is a good thing really. It lessens misplaced suspicions and reduces fear between countries. What we need is better spying. We would should have had better intel on Iraq for example. What we want to avoid is not the spying but the improper use of private information. It really shouldn't matter if angela merkel like to wear mens underwear. It might matter knowing if Kim Jong UN is really delusional or just plays that on TV.

      But it's not a distraction to point out that the french spy too unless you flatly deny that spying has any value.

      --
      Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    4. Re:The French Also Spy on the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just because others do it, does not make it any better.

      No it doesn't, but what it does do is show that all of the recent U.S. shaming is just hypocritical bullshit that politicians are doing to drum up support in their own countries.

  36. Left out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Out would you like to be the poor leader who gets left out. What a pussy of a country.

  37. so much for terrorists by kirthn · · Score: 1

    so how do they want to defend that it is to foil terrorists attack??

    --
    Famous last words:"but...."
  38. Just because others are eating shit ... by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... should you eat shit as well ?

    This is all just a bunch of political bullshit people. There are a wide variety of world leaders being monitored by a wide variety of governments

    I am getting VERY FUCKING TIRED of listening to this asinine excuse !

    Just because the whole world is eating shit, would you eat shit too ?

    The world's government may be tapping each others, but they are NOT caught in the action.

    America, on the other hand, did.

    Why can't Obama just admit what happened, and then proceed with action to remedy the problem, instead of issuing a CATEGORY DENIAL to everything ?

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    1. Re:Just because others are eating shit ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      America didn't get caught. They got told on.

      It's not like the other nations didn't know this wasn't happening, or that we don't know it's happening to us. For >50 years. It's just now documented publicly, so biased people like yourself can point fingers.

      Category denial? WTF?

    2. Re:Just because others are eating shit ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What exactly is it that you want Obama to do? The problem is largely two-fold: (1) the technology exists now to make such widespread spying viable economically and practically, and (2) the post-911 gutting of the federal security forces and the outsourcing of their duties to private contractors. That is, the rise of the ultra-profitable security sector of the economy.

      From (2) plus the lack of campaign finance regulations (which you may know are being challenged in the Supreme Court currently) you can infer a massive financial interest in keeping the spy apparatus working as-is. Obama tried to pass a relatively minor Republican-originated health care reform and the government shut down for two weeks. If he publicly takes on the spy program now you are bringing the livelihoods of people like Cheney and Rumsfeld directly into the mix and things will get extremely ugly for Democrats rather quickly.

      The best strategy now for the president is to lay low and let an election or public sentiment decide the issue. There's really nothing much else he can do that won't hand the country over to a party that will make things much much much worse.

      Now if you ask me, it's a shitty system when a president has to put up with evil to remain electable. But instead of getting bent out of shape calling for Obama's head, why don't we calm down, examine the problem from an objective point of view and try to come up with a solution. You have to take into account the constraints of the current system or you can't possibly work to change those constraints. And if you don't change those constraints you can't possibly see real change in the country.

      You want to see real change? Push for campaign finance reform. Once laws and contracts are no longer bought and sold, the general public can participate in politics again. You can vote for tech savvy intelligent people that will oppose the NSA's spying program. Currently such people don't run because they aren't willing to sell out their beliefs in exchange for campaign funds from private donors.

  39. Douchebag by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 2

    The REAL douchebag is Obama, definitely not Snowden.

    We ought to be grateful to Edward Snowden in allowing us, the Americans, a chance to redeem ourselves.

    The NSA, the PRISM PROGRAM, the TAPPING of foreign leaders, are way out of bound.

    If not for Edward Snowden, more despicable schemes might commence, with even worse consequences to the Americans and the rest of the world.

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    1. Re:Douchebag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, just wait until the republicans get into office.

      The consequences will even worse!

      Thanks, Obama.

  40. Spying is normal, getting caught is bad spycraft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're right. Spying is what a spy agency is for.

    The bad spycraft parts are:

    A) becoming so morally bankrupt that one of your guys defects rather than continue being part of your team, and

    B) allowing said defector to abscond with the books.

    When you are fighting for the good guys you can do stuff like this. When you are fighting against freedom and self-determination all over the planet, spying on your own people in order to betray them to foreign economic and political interests, and promoting and condoning torture -face it, you're going to have defectors, and nobody's going to forgive you for the things they reveal.

  41. Please read the following ... by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 5, Informative

    From http://www.aljazeera.com/news/americas/2013/10/us-denies-tapping-merkel-mobile-phone-20131023185133142198.html ---

    US President Barack Obama had assured German Chancellor Angela Merkel that the US is not monitoring her communications, according to the White House spokesman.

    From http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-24647268

    The White House said President Obama had told Chancellor Merkel the US was not snooping on her communications.

    "The United States is not monitoring and will not monitor the communications of the chancellor," White House spokesman Jay Carney said on Wednesday.

    From http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/23/merkel-phone-tapped_n_4150812.html

    For its part, the White House denied that the U.S. is listening in on Merkel's phone calls now.

    "The president assured the chancellor that the United States is not monitoring and will not monitor the communications of the chancellor," White House spokesman Jay Carney said. "The United States greatly values our close cooperation with Germany on a broad range of shared security challenges."

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    1. Re:Please read the following ... by hazeii · · Score: 4, Informative

      Look at the tense of the language.

      Translates as "We are not doing it at this precise instant" (as widely reported, it seems very likely they did so in the past - and, no doubt, will do so again in the future, if they think they won't get caught).

      --
      All your ghosts are just false positives.
    2. Re:Please read the following ... by Gavagai80 · · Score: 2

      Look again at the language you're replying to. It says "will not", which is a clear promise not to do it again. Not a particularly believable promise, but more believable than if they outright lied by denying that it ever happened.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    3. Re:Please read the following ... by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      It depends what the meaning of "is" is

      Apparently.

    4. Re:Please read the following ... by houghi · · Score: 1

      the White House denied that the U.S. is listening in on Merkel's phone calls now.

      So how do you know that?
      Well, she is not on the phone right now. Hold on, she's getting a call

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    5. Re:Please read the following ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The question whether or not the US was snooping Angela Merkel's phone is like the question where Jimmy Hoffa was buried. It will become part of the popular culture and will be talked about decades to come. After Angela Merkel's death will her crave stone mysteriously include the gang tag "Listened by NSA for life", detected by the relatives during the next All Saint's day after the burial.

    6. Re:Please read the following ... by Nyder · · Score: 1

      From http://www.aljazeera.com/news/americas/2013/10/us-denies-tapping-merkel-mobile-phone-20131023185133142198.html ---

      US President Barack Obama had assured German Chancellor Angela Merkel that the US is not monitoring her communications, according to the White House spokesman.

      From http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-24647268

      The White House said President Obama had told Chancellor Merkel the US was not snooping on her communications.

      "The United States is not monitoring and will not monitor the communications of the chancellor," White House spokesman Jay Carney said on Wednesday.

      From http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/23/merkel-phone-tapped_n_4150812.html

      For its part, the White House denied that the U.S. is listening in on Merkel's phone calls now.

      "The president assured the chancellor that the United States is not monitoring and will not monitor the communications of the chancellor," White House spokesman Jay Carney said. "The United States greatly values our close cooperation with Germany on a broad range of shared security challenges."

      Maybe when he said U.S. he actually meant us, as in him & his wife? Or that will be his next excuse?

      --
      Be seeing you...
    7. Re:Please read the following ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It says "will not",

      Not the same as "will never". "Will not" is indefinite e.g. "will not, for now".

      which is a clear promise not to do it again.

      To you and I maybe but not to a spin doctor.

  42. Re:Spying is normal, getting caught is bad spycraf by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1

    Yes, you're free to object on moral grounds. I said that. I'm quite sure of it.

  43. Re:Thanks again Snowden by gmuslera · · Score: 1

    America's first sport: shooting the messenger. With so much people asking for this I suppose that in american courts should be normal that witnesses are all sent to jail while criminals are getting paid and sent back to home.

  44. do you even understand what the word trust means by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Do you understand what broken trust is?
    Do you understand that you will be the outcast bully because all you do is fling shit at your former friends and allies.
    Do you understand that nobody wants to play with you any more because you turned into a arrogant paranoid dick?
    Do you understand what do undo others ... means?
    You lost all your morals and with it any claims to be of any value to the world.
    Stop excusing your paranoid behavior and rediscover your former values. It will be long way of humility to rebuild any of the completely burned bridges.
    Whom am I kidding? You never had any humility.
    You just like a scared dog in a corner.
    The sad part is you all brought it unto yourself.

  45. Re:SIX ... LONG YEARS to stop the program by DocSavage64109 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Do you think Mitt Romney or John McCain would have stopped these programs? If so you I would say you are confused. Otherwise, what is your point?

  46. How is this news? by JeffAtl · · Score: 1

    Of course the NSA spied on foreign nations - it's a spy agency after all.

    Allies have always spied on one another. In the past British intelligence has provided information to the FBI that it had gathered while spying on Americans.

    The outrage was that the NSA was spying internally on Americans, since that should require a warrant.

  47. Re:If anyone is wondering why the US has no friend by JeffAtl · · Score: 1

    Allies have always spied on one another. It's the way foreign intelligence works.

  48. Re:Spying is normal, getting caught is bad spycraf by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    spying on your own people in order to betray them to foreign economic and political interests

    I'm wondering which interests you have in mind.

  49. NSA doing their job? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm shocked. Shocked, I tell you.

    I'm more concerned, though, about who the NSA is really working for these days, and I'm frankly alarmed about who apparently clueless contract administrators like Alexander and Clapper are allowing to actually run the programs and who THEY are sharing data with. Military signals intelligence is one thing, but when a country's military is spying on its own citizens en masse, and sharing the data with everyone from law enforcement to political parties' campaign apparatuses to muck-raking journalists formerly employed by known CIA-controlled/manipulated news orgs to your friendly local mafia^H^H^H^H^H media advertising group, well, then something is definitely very, very wrong. Especially when you see the Feds doing things like this.

  50. Who isn't on that list of 35? by Vitriol+Angst · · Score: 1

    Mr. Unimportant from the land of Do Not Disturb. ... and that guy is hurt and offended.

    ***
    Kidding aside, I can't imagine anyone in these governments being actually surprised -- what I figure is that the corporations NOT on the "Multinational Stranglehold of Governments" team is the group that is saying; "Hey, maybe we lost those trade negotiations while someone was spying on Al Qaeda, they were really doing corporate espionage."

    And then the SHOCK once the American public realizes; wow, our military and intelligence companies don't work for our interests but for global oligarchies called Multinational Corporations. Wake up and smell the imported coffee people!

    --
    >>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
  51. Shocked and Odd by minstrelmike · · Score: 1

    So they listen in on phone conversations of world leaders and find little intelligence there ;-)
    Should we be shocked? I don't find that odd at all.

  52. It was the former president by mdsolar · · Score: 1

    But what I don't get is why, if he has her private number, he didn't just do heavy breathing on the phone instead of the shoulder rub thing. Better to be creepy in private if you are President.

  53. Hello McFly by sirnomad99 · · Score: 1

    All the fervor over our spying on other nations is pure showmanship on the world leader’s part. There is absolutely nothing new about us spying on allies as well as enemies. Every leader shouting his outrage is a hypocrite since somewhere in our borders is someone that serves the same function reporting to him.

    Every nation on this planet keeps tabs on every other nation to the extent of their abilities and every leader is fully aware of that fact. It is simply good manners in diplomatic circles to ignore that fact. This nonsense of blaming Obama or Bush for this is stupid in the extreme. If you want to place blame for spying on allies you might as well assign blame to Washington's administration because that is how far back it goes for our nation.

    One of the most common mottoes in the intelligence community is "In God We Trust, Everyone Else We Monitor." One of the most common cards played in diplomacy is the sharing of collected intelligence with allies. It is a game played on a global scale with our various intelligence and counter-intelligence agencies as our front line players. We send intelligence officers into other nations and at the same time try to detect and neutralize the officers sent into ours. And often many of the officers we catch do not report to China or Pakistan or Iraq. They belong to England, France, Germany, or Japan, you know these guys, our allies.

    1. Re:Hello McFly by PPH · · Score: 1

      It appears that the NSA has been monitoring these leaders' cell phone conversations. And odds are that what they were monitoring was more personal conversations than high level strategic conversations. People in Angela Merkel's position don't conduct sensitive business via cellphone. Those conversations were more along the line of whether to pick up a pizza or Chinese take out dinner on the way home.

      That's what makes this sort of monitoring particularly intrusive. Its the sort of thing the police do when they are tailing a suspect that they are about to apprehend.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
  54. Re:do you even understand what the word trust mean by sirnomad99 · · Score: 1

    The sad part is that you believe that. Intelligence gathering is a normal function of every government on this planet and that includes allies as well as enemies. It is simply not considered good manners in diplomatic circles to mention that fact.
    In God We Trust, Everyone Else We Monitor is not just a humorous motto it is that fact of life for just about every nation you can name.

  55. Incompetent by phorm · · Score: 3, Informative

    Really? So if your company SysAdmin is secretly spying on your email, it's the CEO's fault? Even though the SysAdmin is the one with the technical knowledge to both implement and hide the spying?
    Not saying that Obama is innocent, but not knowing doesn't make him incompetent. It might just mean that the NSA are good at covering up.

    If you want to fault him for something, fault him stepping on those who blow the whistle on these sort of activities, instead of commending them like he should.

    1. Re:Incompetent by jodido · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's a clear case of plausible deniability. The NSA made sure Obama didn't know what they were up to so he wouldn't be obliged to either stop them or lie. That's what good underlings do. "Will no one rid me of this cursed priest?"

  56. Re:SIX ... LONG YEARS to stop the program by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 1

    Do you think Mitt Romney or John McCain would have stopped these programs?

    You are asking something that NOBODY COULD ANSWER FOR CERTAIN, because IT NEVER HAPPEN.

    What ACTUALLY TOOK PLACE is that Obama DID NOT stop the program despite given SIX MOTHERFUCKING LONG PRECIOUS YEARS of time to do so.

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  57. Re:SIX ... LONG YEARS to stop the program by Richy_T · · Score: 1

    Whilst completely true and comparably despicable, they were not promising the most transparent administration ever in their electioneering.

  58. Re:SIX ... LONG YEARS to stop the program by tendrousbeastie · · Score: 1

    So your argument is that two wrongs (even if one of them is hypothetical) do indeed make a right?

  59. Would you guys please cut the crap ? by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 1

    Yeah, just wait until the republicans get into office.

    The point being ... THE REPUBLICANS HAD NOT BEEN IN THE WHITE HOUSE FOR THE PAST SIX MOTHERFUCKING LONG YEARS !!!

    Would you guys please grow the FUCK up ??

    It is as if Robber A had robbed the neighborhood 7-11 and killed the clerk.

    Instead of punishing Robber A for his crime, you guys are saying "Yeah, wait till Robber B arrives" ...

    Exactly how insane can you guys be ?

    Why are you guys STILL trying so hard to defend the TOTALLY UNDEFENDABLE ???

    Party politics can only go so far ...

    What is truth, is truth.

    Obama has fucked up.

    No matter how you guys want to deny the whole thing, Obama still fucked up !!

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    1. Re:Would you guys please cut the crap ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He still fucked up less than a R president would have.

      :)

  60. Crime X happens every day, ignore it! by bussdriver · · Score: 1

    Many crimes and immoral acts happen every day; just because it's not a new freaky kind of crime doesn't mean we don't need to hear about it. I would like to know if the daily murders are migrating towards my neighborhood. Plus, while murder is OLD the victims and situation changes which each one - therefore it IS news.

    Real reporters and editors make the decisions and have the resources to filter the data down to what people need to know - dumping data on them to filter is exactly what you should do. A free press has more RIGHT to cause collateral damage than the military does. Think about it. Don't let government scare you with scare tactics into gutting the press with government "security" censorship. Some people may die and that is the price for freedom! The gov would love to blame TRUTH as much as they can so you hate it as much as they do; simultaneously, they justify all their collateral damage as the price for freedom... WAKE UP

    Countries spy but who, when, how, frequency, and acceptability differs. In a functional democracy, the public has a NEED TO KNOW because they are the oversight (whether or not they are inept is another matter.) For practical reasons, some of the information has to be temporarily hidden EXCEPT from the people's representatives who must always be kept in the loop. Problem is, they seem to quickly convert nearly every rep... perhaps it's because they tap all their phones? cough...J. Edgar Hoover.. cough cough

  61. The Guardian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If this news reporting is truly a guardian, it lacks the most elementary wisdom reporting what an enemy of the free world and #1 traitor in US history purports to release in an attempt to destroy millions of lives, and in choosing to join in with leaking to the entire world tactics that may, in fact, be used to keep the world free of the worst kind of debauchery, control and destruction, it has made itself an enemy of the US and its allies..

    1. Re:The Guardian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hardly, US is inflicting all those things on the world. the world is less free with the US in it. History has a lesson for empires like this, and its not pretty.

  62. Privatization is why it happened by bussdriver · · Score: 1

    Snowden had a motive which wasn't filtered out in the hiring process because privatization has taken over and THAT is why this was so easily done. In the older days, somebody would have to work at the job for years to gain trust, be desensitized, get promoted and gradually be exposed to objectionable things instead of being horrified and overwhelmed with how bad things are. Moving government jobs to contractors is almost always foolish and expensive in the long term.

    Going to military and security contractors is unbelievably idiotic... plus they then go to work for smaller players who could never afford to pay the TRUE COST for the tech, experience, and funding their mega-huge primary customer does at tax payer expense.

    Corrupt and extremely idealistic politicians did this; the paranoid had little sway.

  63. Re:SIX ... LONG YEARS to stop the program by berashith · · Score: 1

    how does this matter. Only one of the three names mentioned here ran specifically against the policy of the Bush administration. Part of the reason he got elected was to have the country stop acting like an ass. The other two did not get elected, partly because the country knew they wanted to continue many policies that were unpopular.

  64. Follow the money. . . . by sgt_doom · · Score: 1

    Interesting to keep in mind, that when this was initiated (2006), Angela Merkel had just pushed for the successful change in Germany's laws pertaining to private equity/leveraged buyouts (which had lowered Denmark's national tax revenues by an estimated 10% due to the LBO of Denmark's major telecom firm, TDC), and later, around 2008 or thereabouts, would push for the ending of naked swaps, the economic weapon of mass destruction which the US Treasury department is permanently enamored with. The timeline is important and cogent to this discussion because, as always, one should follow the money.

  65. Touch us and you'll pay by ISoldat53 · · Score: 1

    My thoughts, Ankh-Morpork, are of thee/ Let others boast of martial dash/ For we have boldly fought with cash/ We own all your helmets, we own all your shoes./ We own all your generals - touch us and you'll lose./ Morporkia! Morporkia!/ Morporkia owns the day!/ We can rule you wholesale/ Touch us and you'll pay. Terry Pratchett

  66. Can't have it both ways... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, the American people can't have it both ways; either they're a democracy, which means what the government is doing *is* their fault, since they voted them in, and the peoples' will is being served; or they're NOT a democracy, and their government is not serving their interests.

    Many American do appear, from the outside, to be in a permanent state of denial; either of their lack of real functioning democracy, or of their responsibility for their government's doings.

  67. Re:do you even understand what the word trust mean by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In God We Trust, Everyone Else We Monitor is not just a humorous motto it is that fact of life for just about every nation you can name.

    I was going to make a joke about Somalia here, but then I found out that Somalia has made significant progress in rebuilding it's government in the last year, so Somalia Intelligence does exist....

  68. There were no "intelligence failures" about Iraq by Catbeller · · Score: 1

    The Iraq war was not caused by intelligence failures. They had no evidence whatsoever that Iraq was involved with AQ. Cheney did not accept this answer, and had a squad of three nitwits go through the rejected intel pile untill they found Screwballs' testimony. "Screwball", according to the CIA's report, was a schizophrenic liar, a real piece of work, and not to be taken seriously. His 'intel' was shitcanned by the professionals.

    Good enough! Cheney took the crap that his people dragged in, told Powell to shoot it at the UN, and the war's your uncle. The great bit is that since the crap story was "from the CIA", and the CIA *cannot hold press conferences* to denounce the lying sack, they knew they were going to take the hit. And did. We only know because some CIA officers walked off the job and told us about it, in real time. And were ignored, of course. War war war Iraq war terrorists Iraq war.

    Cheney. Ashcroft. Wolfowitz. Rice. The four shits of the apocalypse. They did it on purpose. Three were writers of the Project for the New American Century paper, which insisted that the US take the Iranian and Iraqi oil fields for itself, to deny China and Asia access to the two giant sweet crude sources in the world, for the sole purpose of blocking their economic power.

    The CIA was a victim of Cheney and his little squad of economic warriors. We failed them by not prosecuting the murderers. And it was mass murder, for Realpolitik and for cash. And don't forget, this bordered on treason, because Osama got clean away for ten years while Cheney and company were looting Iraq clean.

  69. Donald Herman And Willow Creek Are awesome!- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Donald Herman Is An Honorable Man! Donald Herman is Great! Willow Creek Assisted Living Is Awesome! A great community serving the Las Vegas Valley for many years now. A top notch facility with the nicest staff around. Willow Creek and Donald Herman are a class act! If you have a loved one who needs care later in life, look no further! Donald Herman Operates with integrity and class.

  70. Re: Spying is normal, getting caught is bad spycra by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is it any wonder that the US's reputation and credibility is at an all time low? Listen to yourselves, we don't care if Obama knew or not. This is the US spying on your friends and allies, not terrorists but European politicians and ordinary folk. As a Brit I think that the special relationship is dead, it's just our lapdog government that doesn't see it.

  71. Arrogance, not truth. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Our system has fucked up every other country that has tried it since our founding.

  72. NSA monitoring of "world leaders" is justified! by ibsteve2u · · Score: 1

    If the Iraq War taught the world nothing else, it should lie in the example set by Tony Blair and George W. Bush: Just being a "world leader" won't stop an individual from lying...and human lives are among the stakes.

    Now if you're really upset, then simply demand that the NSA share all of the conversations of the "world's leaders" with the world's peoples.

    Then a possible negative is made into an absolute positive.

    --
    Orwell: "In a Time of Universal Deceit, telling the Truth is a Revolutionary Act"
  73. Re:If anyone is wondering why the US has no friend by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The only friends we really care about are knee-deep in the FiveEyes stuff with us.

    If you weren't in that program you can guess where you fall on the "Friends" list.