Spy Expert Says Australia Operating As "Listening Post" For US Agencies

First time accepted submitter ozduo writes in with news about Australia's alleged involvement with the ongoing NSA spying program. "Intelligence expert Professor Des Ball says the Australian Signals Directorate — formerly known as the Defense Signals Directorate — is sharing information with the National Security Agency (NSA). The NSA is the agency at the heart of whistleblower Edward Snowden's leaks, and has recently been accused of tapping into millions of phone calls of ordinary citizens in France, Germany and Spain. Mr Ball says Australia has been monitoring the Asia Pacific region for the US using local listening posts. 'You can't get into the information circuits and play information warfare successfully unless you're into the communications of the higher commands in [the] various countries in our neighborhood,' he told Lateline. Mr Ball says Australia has four key facilities that are part of the XKeyscore program, the NSA's controversial computer system that searches and analyses vast amounts of internet data. They include the jointly-run Pine Gap base near Alice Springs, a satellite station outside Geraldton in Western Australia, a facility at Shoal Bay, near Darwin, and a new center in Canberra."

Comments

lolwut?

[girlintraining]

"Intelligence expert Professor Des Ball says the Australian Signals Directorate â" formerly known as the Defense Signals Directorate â" is sharing information with the National Security Agency (NSA).

Let's rewrite that to be a bit more accurate and a bit less, er, leading:

One of America's closest allies and long-time member of ECHELON recently reminded the world that they haven't stopped sharing intelligence.

Re:lolwut?

[bill_mcgonigle]

ob. link.

From the linked article there:

Together with the giant American National Security Agency (NSA) and its Canadian, British, and New Zealand counterparts, DSD operates a network of giant, highly automated tracking stations that illicitly pick up commercial satellite communications and examine every fax, telex, e-mail, phone call, or computer data message that the satellites carry. ...
According to the former Canadian agent Mike Frost, it would be "nave" for Australians to think that the Americans were not exploiting stations like Kojarena for economic intelligence purposes. ""They have been doing it for years," he says. ""Now that the Cold War is over, the focus is towards economic intelligence. Never ever over-exaggerate the power that these organisations have to abuse a system such as Echelon. Don't think it can't happen in Australia. It does."

My, how much progress we've made in fifteen years...

Re:lolwut?

[thesupraman]

Dont worry, they are busy spying on themselves for the Americans..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waihopai_Station
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tangimoana_Station
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9070435/Controversial-GCSB-laws-pass-by-two-votes

They are, after all, part of the same 'club'.

I bet politicians from both are now (if they didn't realize/get reminded earlier) aware that they are owned..
After all, all their dirty little secrets will be as useful to the 'protectors of the free world' as those of the evil
Germans and French!

After all, we must all be protected from any form of true democracy and/or choice!

Re:lolwut?

[thesupraman]

Oops, was meant to go on the thread below about the kiwis ;)

Re:lolwut?

[girlintraining]

My, how much progress we've made in fifteen years...

We've made considerable progress in 15 years. 15 years ago, nobody thought the internet was much more than an academic curiousity. All the big players today didn't exist 15 years ago -- Google, Facebook, eBay, Amazon... didn't exist. 404 Business Not Found. But 15 years ago, and people seem to forget, the telecommunications networks that the internet was built on, and later developed a symbiosis with, was being tapped, surveilled, and that data shared with these same governments; As they had done since a few years after WWII, when the world leaders held summits and asked: How can we prevent the next Nazi Germany? And the answer was the same one that won the Allied Powers WWII: Computers. Cryptography. Information Awareness. Back then, information awareness came down to radios, radars, and phone lines, but the doctrine hasn't changed in 50 years: Knowledge of the enemies communications and positions is what wins wars. It's how Germany kicked the everloving shit out of Europe -- blitzkrieg. Be fast. Go unseen. Rain death from above. And be gone before the enemy can mount a response.

And people act like this is some kind of new thing... like the mentality and the methodologies being used by the NSA and its foreign counterparts are this big revelatory thing. But it's not. Not when you understand that we have our eyes and ears everywhere -- you can't move an army anywhere on Earth without us (and by that, I mean America and her allies) knowing about it, and being able to respond with lightning speed. This is common knowledge today. From satellites to realtime worldwide communication... intelligence assets can now be placed, developed, analyzed, and acted upon through the chain of command in less time than it takes you to brush your teeth in the morning.

Which means there's only one place left a threat can hide: By being small and decentralized... by flying under the radar.

And lookie lookie -- what's the NSA been up to these past few years? They aren't just tracking standing armies now. They aren't even just tracking companies, factories, and infrastructure that those armies would need for logistics. They've gone right now to street level. They're going house by house, cable by cable, looking for anyone and anything that could still fly under the radar.

Good? Bad? Depends on who you ask. But the one thing I've gotten real damn tired of hearing on Slashdot and hundreds of other websites is the tired mantra of "Oh noes! The NSA is spying on us!" ... without bothering to answer the question of why much beyond "Because they're just evil, you know." People have developed the NSA's true motives in their minds about as well as Hollywood develops Star Trek villains! "I'm gonna be bad because... I feel like being bad."

Re:lolwut?

[Anonymous Coward]

without bothering to answer the question of why much beyond "Because they're just evil, you know."

The reason people don't bother is because the answer is irrelevant; their actions are morally wrong and unconstitutional. Freedom is what matters.

Re:lolwut?

[s.petry]

While you make a nice speech you have a huge misnomer in your statements. We are not seeing a "spying on enemies and troops"! If it was only spying on the military of foreign agencies, people would not have an issue with it. It is spying and tracking individuals who are NOT military. It is spying on allies with the same fervor you would an enemy. It is spying on businesses who are not working for a foreign military.

This spying has resulted in squashing free speech in the US, Germany, the UK, Italy, etc.. These are not military actions by foreign enemies, these are people that are not content with what their selected leaders are doing. Police show up before rallies in both countries (I have friends and relatives in Germany and live in the US) and start arresting people. They insert agent provocateurs in some of these events to disrupt movements (Canada, the US and Germany are all proven to have done this).

This spying has resulted in massive misinformation campaigns against real world problems. They can see where people are getting data and disrupt communications. They see hot debate topics and flood the media outlets with disinformation and ad homimen when they can't disrupt the data.

If it was _only_ military spying like you hint at we would probably be happy about it, but even this has become either a honey pot or distortion. Look at the whole of the Middle East as well as North Korea for examples.

The fear people have is that this data is being gathered for the same reason the SS cataloged and monitored every German. Do something someone does not like and you are a "sympathizer" and killed or jailed. We already see buds of this happening.

Nothing good can come from this level of spying and information gathering. Nothing! To claim that we all claim "Oh noes" without considering all of the facts and consequences based on historical evidence is not only unfair, but absolutely wrong. Perhaps _you_ have not paid attention or not weighed much, but many of us have!

Re:lolwut?

[AHuxley]

You can read the classic sock puppets out on any NSA story on slashdot. I think they still try and post about "fear" and 'not' looking at global finance for insider trading in some desperate struggle for legitimacy.
With every Snowden news report they look more and more lost. The world now understands the reach and fascination the NSA has with all calls, faxes, emails, chats, logs, junk encryption. Now they also understand how their own govs staff and contractors subvert their own govs over generations.
What was sold as looking outward at the Soviet Union only was also always inward too. Everybody understands now and many crypto developers will be much smarter. US tech brands will be enjoyed but never trusted again.

Re:lolwut?

[Tofof]

All the big players today didn't exist 15 years ago -- Google, Facebook, eBay, Amazon... didn't exist.

2013 -15 = 1998.

Google: September 4, 1998. Ebay: September 3, 1995. Amazon: July, 1994.
For values of 'all' that equate to 'none but one', sure, that statement is true.

The rest of the statement reads just as similarly to a memorandum from the Ministry of Truth.

Re:lolwut?

[symbolset]

15 years ago, nobody thought the internet was much more than an academic curiousity.

Um, no.

Re:lolwut?

[tragedy]

Good? Bad? Depends on who you ask. But the one thing I've gotten real damn tired of hearing on Slashdot and hundreds of other websites is the tired mantra of "Oh noes! The NSA is spying on us!" ... without bothering to answer the question of why much beyond "Because they're just evil, you know."

I think most of us have asked and answered that question. The obvious answer is _power_, just as you say. Theoretically, the NSA is meant to amass this power on behalf of the people. The problem is that they're obviously using these capabilities for power _over_ the people. Evil? Not sure. Corrupt? Pretty much by definition considering the principles in the corruption (the fact that we're now constantly being told that the constitution doesn't mean what we think it means, is just more corruption).

Re:lolwut?

[icebike]

It would be fine if the NSA watched the US borders, and the Australian Signals Directorate watched the Australian borders.

But that isn't what is happening. The NSA has taken it upon itself, even before 9/11, to monitor every aspect of American life, and
I'm sure the Australian Signals Directorate is doing the same down under.

I'm not so naive as to believe there aren't people IN the US and IN Australia and IN Great Britain, that want to do damage to their country.
But that's a local police matter, not something that should be trusted to national agencies with worldwide scope.

Watching everyone isn't the answer, in fact its more a cause of hatred of one's own country than a cure for it.
I can't remember a time when Americans distrusted their own government as much as they do today.

Re:lolwut?

[khallow]

Nothing good can come from this level of spying and information gathering. Nothing!

I quite agree, s.petry! Even if you did for some reason trust the current people in power for the rest of time, they won't stay in power. Even if the current people have good intentions for such abuses of power, that doesn't mean a future more ruthless regime won't take their place. In fact, such a regime might be more likely to happen as a result of this spying and data collecting!

Re:lolwut?

[icebike]

Nothing good can come from this level of spying and information gathering. Nothing!

Exactly.
This level of distrust BY our government breeds hatred and distrust OF our government.
This can't end well.

Re:lolwut?

[readacc]

The thing that will really turn someone's head is if you question whether your Government is one of the "good guys". If it can be shown that, say, the US aren't the good guys, then and only then will it click in people's brains that perhaps all this collection of data on citizens might actually be cause for concern.

Yes, some Governments are worse than others, but it takes the first step in realizing that all Governments look out for themselves first and their citizens a distant second, before you realize why pervasive surveillance is a problem

Re:lolwut?

[icebike]

Anyone wishing to have a meaningful discussion about the NSA also needs to factor in all the other countries who do the exact same thing. It's not a "two wrongs make a right" argument it is just putting the whole issue into context.

I really don't care if Russia or New Zealand spy on every single citizen in their respective countries.
I do care if my government is reading my email.

That other countries do it is no excuse, and I see no reason to consider that fact, even for "context".

Our government should be spending its resources preventing foreign governments from accessing our
mail, tapping our calls, and tracking our communications, and generally hardening our internet.
Instead they are doing exactly the opposite.

Re:lolwut?

[Dynedain]

We've made considerable progress in 15 years. 15 years ago, nobody thought the internet was much more than an academic curiousity

Bullshit, 15 years ago, AOL was sending floppies and CDs to everyone in America. The internet was still novel for most people, but it had grown orders of magnitude outside of academic circles.

The biggest reason why the major players of 1997's Internet aren't major players in 2013's Internet are because most of them* went under in the Dot-COM bubble.

*Amazon.com re-branded/launched in 1995 and by 1997 was already the biggest online retailer except for perhaps EBay (also 1995). BTW, why didn't EBay make your list (or for that matter, Yahoo, Apple, Microsoft, IBM, Oracle, Cisco, Disney/Go.com, Slate/MSNBC, or a slew of others)?

Re:lolwut?

[msobkow]

The problem is we have yet another fascist-leaning government running the spy agency in question. They kowtow to corporatism. The ignore the will of the people. They publicly and blatantly take bribes. They launch the police against their own people should they protest their behaviour. They launch wars and kill millions over resources.

And all while flag-waving patriotism claims this bullshit is "freedom" and "democracy."

What a farce the world has become.

The Nazis could only dream of achieving what the US has done with their hegemony.

Re:lolwut?

[msobkow]

Before you deny it, maybe you should read Mussolini's definition of Fascism.

The most important point he makes? Give the people just enough decision making power for them to believe they're in control, while reserving the true decision making power for the state.

Re:lolwut?

[Sardaukar86]

The most embarrassing thing about this (for me anyway) is that New Zealand is also complicit in this arrangement. As I understand it our Waihopai facility near Blenheim (attacked by activists in 2008, they were acquitted in 2010) is an important part of the surveillance programme. I expect to see a similar article about us in due course.

I jeered at the trio when I saw the original news item. At the time I called them Luddites, trespassers and vandals, unaware of the larger issue they were taking on. For shame! When the NSA scandal broke I suddenly understood what they were about and realised they were actually everyday garden-variety heroes standing up for something they believed in.

Re:lolwut?

[davester666]

This is totally "GCHQ isn't the only agency spying on their citizens for the US. We do it too!"

Re:lolwut?

[rtb61]

Free speech has been squashed in America, since the law enFORCEment started publicly torturing protesters and the court system was blatantly abused with false accusation and extended trials where the travail through that court system was the punishment (lawyers fees as fines and of course imprisonment during the trial process, with bail blocked by false claims of terrorist like activities).

As for on the record according to you human rights only applies to US citizens, well, screw you, "everyone else is fair game", you don't even try to hide your psychopathy, seriously sick stuff.

Re:lolwut?

[s.petry]

Since when has free speech been squashed in the US?

Is this a serious question? Did you bother to stop and read any history at all, look at any recent laws at all, or read what I wrote above?

You do realize that we have "Free Speech Zones" in the US as of very recent laws, and those zones still require permits in most cases. Go find 100 other people to gather with you in protest and see what happens (No, I won't bail you out). You do know that at least 2 teenagers went to jail for posting on Facebook with the exact same terminology that young men have used as intimidating rhetoric for centuries. You do realize that there are countless News outlets that do not release any "Press" that the Government does not approve first (New York Post has had several whistle blowers which should be a quick Google start).

To claim that we are not as bad as another country does not change facts, it makes you look like an idiot. It's like a Chinese person arguing that China is better than North Korea because in China they only go to jail for life for protesting, they don't get killed for it. They are also squelching free speech, only the methods and punishments are different.

This pretty much describes anyone who is hyperventilating about this whole spying non-sense.

Then you go from a failure to think critically directly to an ad hominem and appeal to emotion. So far, I don't think very highly of your comments. You can't discount anything I claimed, you simply ignore it and slander anyone that does not agree.

The general public does a much better job than any government could ever do in this regard.

Idiocy! If the public is uninformed or intentionally mislead, that is not the public's fault. This is not an uncommon issue, and has happened time and time again through history when power gets entrenched in the same hands for too long.

And for the record the US constitution only applies to US citizens but everyone else is fair game.

That statement is a lie. Go read the US Constitution. You don't even have to study it, just read it.

Anyone wishing to have a meaningful discussion about the NSA also needs to factor in all the other countries who do the exact same thing

On that statement I will tell you that you are either a sock puppet or lack any critical thinking abilities. Don't bother to reply, either shill somewhere else or try and heal your broken head.

Re:lolwut?

[FriendlyLurker]

Since when has free speech been squashed in the US?

Here is one recent example. NSA helping shut down a political movement. There are many other examples please pay more attention.

Re: lolwut?

[apc512599]

Looks like Operation Infektion 2.0 is going according to plan.

Re:lolwut?

[bradrum]

Yes but the problem with going house by house and cable by cable looking for anyone flying under the radar is that you start trying to detect an extremely low level signal out of a ton of noise. You can't cheat statistics though and the false alarm rates of your detection algorithms become increasingly significant. So you start picking more and hopefully "better" data looking to detect a higher level signal in less noise.

Civil liberties and freedom go right out the window as you try to declare war on an idea. So now you go after people expressing an idea.

Or you just become insanely power hungry and corrupt from the incredible power that you have been entrusted with.

Either way, you broke they system you were trying to "protect"

Re:lolwut?

[berberine]

Amazon did exist 15 years ago. It went online in 1995 and I've been buying books from them since around 1997. Ebay was founded in 1995 as well. Google was founded in 1998, so it just makes the 15 year old mark. They may not have been the behemoths that they are today, but they were there and they were well known even in the late 90s.

Re:lolwut?

[Dexter Herbivore]

Governments should fear their people, not vice versa.

Re:lolwut?

[Dexter Herbivore]

Psssstttt... be careful what you say, they're listening here too.

Re:lolwut?

[B5Fan]

I really don't care if Russia or New Zealand spy on every single citizen in their respective countries.
I do care if my government is reading my email.

Seriously, your government probably isn't reading your email. Think about the number of emails sent each day, excluding spam. But, assuming you live in the USA, your government is storing your emails, and if you ever become interesting to them they can read your emails (including where they were sent from, who to/from, etc), listen to most of the phone calls you made (it's digital, and not much data), txts you sent/received, see where your phone went and who was nearby, etc. Obviously they have your Facebook data, so they know everyone you claim to know. That's why they need a new data centre that can store exabytes of data. And of course if one of their computers notices something potentially interesting about what you say or do online including on your smartphone, or where your mobile goes, a human might take a look. They would love everyone to carry a smartphone with GPS turned on, and to actively use something like Facebook, Google+ or Twitter. It would make their metadata so much richer. If you become interesting to them, they hope you still use Windows because they'll have easy access. It's more effort to break into iOs or Linux. So when you start to encrypt as much as possible to slow them down, be careful about the encryption tools that you use. Check what the experts say.
I don't live in the USA and my government assures me that they don't spy on me or get my data from another country. Now. But I assume that the USA, China, and probably England are storing as much data about me as possible. Especially the data that goes outside my country. And some of that might come back to my government.

Our government should be spending its resources preventing foreign governments from accessing our
mail, tapping our calls, and tracking our communications, and generally hardening our internet.

Good luck with that. If you can still use it easily, it can be accessed/tapped/tracked. And BTW my government should be preventing your government from accessing my mail, calls and communications. I hope that's okay?

Re:lolwut?

[nedlohs]

Google, eBay, and Amazon all existed 15 years ago. Maybe not starting with an obvious lie would make for a better argument?

Re:lolwut?

[CrimsonAvenger]

All the big players today didn't exist 15 years ago -- Google, Facebook, eBay, Amazon... didn't exist.

2013 -15 = 1998.

Google: September 4, 1998. Ebay: September 3, 1995. Amazon: July, 1994. For values of 'all' that equate to 'none but one', sure, that statement is true.

It's the end of October. Fifteen years ago today, Google had been around for two months...

So, more correctly, for values of 'all' that equate to 'none', that statement is true.

Re:lolwut?

[Runaway1956]

"15 years ago, nobody thought the internet was much more than an academic curiousity."

Dude, this is 2013. The internet stopped being an academic curiosity around - ohhhh - 1995 or so. I guess Windows 95 is a safe mark with which to make my point. 95 was marketed widely, to common consumers, and small businesses, as well as students. Fifteen years ago marked Win98 of course, and regular consumers were a well established part of the intartubez by that time.

20 years ago, few people thought the internet was much more than an academic curiosity - but even then forward thinkers were plotting.

Re:lolwut?

[cavreader]

So your upset because the government is reading your e-mail? The government has neither the resources, both human or technical, to read every ones e-mail. If you are going to be upset pick a real issue and not some self induced paranoia. By ignoring the context of a situation your analysis and opinions are flawed and worthless.

Re:lolwut?

[Runaway1956]

"Our government should be spending its resources preventing foreign governments from accessing our
mail,"

The fact is, our government had agreements with the UK and most (probably all) of the old English Commonwealth countries. "It's illegal for US to spy on OUR citizens, and it's illegal for YOU to spy on YOUR citizens - so WE will spy on YOURS while YOU spy on OURS. That way, we break no laws, but we can share information!" These agreements were in place long before the digital age began.

Re:lolwut?

[Runaway1956]

You should scroll up to B5Fan's post. I quote: And BTW my government should be preventing your government from accessing my mail, calls and communications. I hope that's okay?

See, my government is supposed to be looking out for the interests of me, and my fellow citizens. YOUR government, on the other hand, should be looking out for your, and your fellow citizen's interests. In a perfect world, no one would feel any need to abuse anyone's rights, of course - but even in a more perfect world than we have, your government would be your primary defense. If your government doesn't protect you - maybe you need a new government?

Re:lolwut?

[s.petry]

Seriously, your government probably isn't reading your email. Think about the number of emails sent each day, excluding spam. But, assuming you live in the USA, your government is storing your emails, and if you ever become interesting to them they can read your emails (including where they were sent from, who to/from, etc), listen to most of the phone calls you made (it's digital, and not much data), txts you sent/received, see where your phone went and who was nearby, etc.

This is a speculation, and worth just as much as the person claiming that they are individually being watched. Neither of you know because the program is secret, and all of the activities and actions associated with the program are secret. You _assume_ no nefarious intent, someone else _assumes_ that there is nefarious intent, and neither of you can prove your case and both of you are making an assumption. This is why JFK stated "The very word “secrecy” is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings [...] " (and you should take note of the complete and full speech).

I agree with the rest of your statements, regarding them wanting more data. I'm more concerned with this modern mentality that a new nasty tyranny or dictatorship can't happen "here", where "here" is what ever Government you currently live under. It _can_ happen "here", and in fact it has been moving in this direction in dozens of countries that consider themselves above the influence of human nature.

Re:lolwut?

[s.petry]

Nobody here understands the capabilities of tens of thousands of people that understand basic SQL and Perl/Python? Don't answer that, I'm showing how idiotic your claim is. They don't need to read all of your email, they only need to have something pop up in a generic query running against a set of data.

By ignoring reality "your opinions are flawed and worthless.". I would warn you against self incriminating fallacy, but your statements in this thread are full of fallacy.

Re:lolwut?

[s.petry]

I have seen many interesting posts from the same person, which opens the possibility that it's not point whoring but rather trying to instigate further debate. I often attempt to initiate debate myself, so am guilty of not "whoring" in my opinion but rather arguing an alternative view. Many of the more interesting people and posts on this site may not be precise with certain information, use incorrect generalizations, etc.. but that does not imply they are simply whoring or shilling. There are those too, but, I don' think so with this person.

Re:lolwut?

[girlintraining]

While you make a nice speech you have a huge misnomer in your statements. We are not seeing a "spying on enemies and troops"!

You need to go look up the word misnomer. I said that was the case... FIFTY YEARS AGO. Today's threats are small, highly mobile, and thanks to technology small groups of people can have huge force multiplers in their favor. We can now bomb entire armies to dust with one guy sitting in a room using remote-controlled airplanes. And likewise... one guy can strap a bomb to his chest, run into a crowd, and kill or maim many of them.

The days of limiting surveillance to only troops and governments is long gone. It is incredibly naive to suggest we dial back the clock fifty years because you got a hair up your ass about privacy getting stepped on. You want reform in the government? You want the NSA to have reasonable restrictions on their spy programs? That's fine. Let's have that discussion. But saying they should just board up and close shop? Get real.

Our enemies are not going to be so kind as to march in nice, regular rows, and then line up single file so we can shoot at them; That hasn't happened since we fought the British during our war for independence. You may well recall, that tactic didn't work very well for them. We're dealing with small and highly mobile threats. Threats like someone buying an automatic assault rifle, walking into a school, and killing people by the dozens to hundreds. People loading up cars with tanks of gasoline and gun powder, and driving into a gathered crowd. There are lots of people out there right now that have been made desperate due to poor economic conditions and some of them are going to get the idea that it would be pretty "cool" to make a bunch of other people part of their last political statement on this Earth.

Maybe you can handwave that away. Maybe you think the restrictions are too onerous to contemplate, and so we should just accept that the price of freedom is every few weeks hearing about a bunch of innocent people going up in flames. But a lot of people don't. And almost none of our representatives feel that way.

And if we're going to convince anyone to either support or reject what the government is doing, we need a better position than "fire bad, tree pretty."

"Nothing good can come from this level of spying and information gathering. Nothing! "

We caught the boston bomber in a matter of days... using surveillance information from civilian resources. Shop cameras. Cell phones. Television footage. You can't say that "nothing" good comes from it. You might be able to say "not much" good comes of it... small comfort I suppose to the victims, but go ahead and say it. But surveillance has caught many criminals so far. You can argue that's not enough to justify what's going on, but you're being either incredibly naive, or so biased as to be effectively blind, if you say there has been no benefit.

Perhaps _you_ have not paid attention or not weighed much, but many of us have!

Oh, I'm paying attention. I'm just resisting this mob mentality right now over all things NSA and surveillance. It came about for a reason, and I'd rather understand that reason and make informed decisions about what to tell my representatives as far as where the lines need to be drawn, and to be able to assert my position with such force and logic as to command their assent. But going to my representatives and knee-jerking my way through the conversation isn't going to convince them that anything is wrong (or right). It doesn't improve anyone's understanding of the issues.

Your entire post is nothing but conjecture, doomsday prophecy, and knee-jerk reactionism. It doesn't even attempt to ask the most fundamental question here: Why did they do it? You offer absolutely nothing for motive. You put nothing on the table to bargain with. You give neither me, nor your representatives, nor anyone who has read any of your comme

Re:lolwut?

[s.petry]

You need to go look up the word misnomer.

I know what the word means, I was pointing to the difference between espionage/surveillance and spying. Spying is what a military would do, espionage and surveillance is what the NSA has been doing.

I said that was the case... FIFTY YEARS AGO.

Sorry, that is not what you stated. That may be what you meant, but that is not what you stated. You stated "but the doctrine hasn't changed in 50 years: Knowledge of the enemies communications and positions is what wins wars. It's how Germany kicked the everloving shit out of Europe when referencing "FIFTY YEARS AGO".

When giving your statement, you also refer only to the Military applications of "spying" which is what I stated is a misnomer (mislabeled, inaccurate description). What people are upset about is not "spying", they are upset about Government surveillance and espionage against non-military targets. It's been conveniently lumped into a single category, but it's not accurate in a lump category.

Your next statements again deal with Military, not domestic spying. Yes we should know if Russia is massing troops in front of Sara Palin's house because she is not always on the porch looking. Yes we should know where China's nukes are and how many they have. Yes we should have a way to gauge someone's military capacity, I never discounted that. No point in trying to argue points I agree with.

Then however, you go to the fear mongering. Take away the far mongering appeals to emotion and what do you have? The argument that the US Government needs to spy on every US citizen to ensure us that someone from Yemen does not drive a car bomb into a building. You are confusing border security with domestic espionage and surveillance, they are two vastly separate areas for concern. Mentioning that both parties wanting the surveillance is a straw man. It does not change whether it should be done or not, nor does it change the fact that it has been happening.

"Nothing good can come from this level of spying and information gathering. Nothing! "

We caught the boston bomber in a matter of days... using surveillance information from civilian resources. Shop cameras. Cell phones. Television footage. You can't say that "nothing" good comes from it. You might be able to say "not much" good comes of it... small comfort I suppose to the victims, but go ahead and say it. But surveillance has caught many criminals so far. You can argue that's not enough to justify what's going on, but you're being either incredibly naive, or so biased as to be effectively blind, if you say there has been no benefit.

None of that had anything to do with the NSA or PRISM. Nothing! The programs didn't prevent the event, and they had nothing to do with capturing the alleged criminals.

I'll go one up on you. Every plot foiled that the Government is crediting to the surveillance state has been a setup by the FBI. Everything from the underwear bomber to the present that the FBI has raided, has been facilitated and "handled" by the FBI. They have taken people and given them money and plans, and even the non-functional bombs that they tried to detonate when they were "miraculously captured". The joke is on you, do you get it?

Your entire post is nothing but conjecture, doomsday prophecy, and knee-jerk reactionism. It doesn't even attempt to ask the most fundamental question here: Why did they do it? You offer absolutely nothing for motive. You put nothing on the table to bargain with. You give neither me, nor your representatives, nor anyone who has read any of your comments in this thread, any reason to act. It is simply a propaganda piece without any real substance or analysis.

Conjecture and doomsday? Go back and read it again. There is no doomsday anything, but I do claim that nothing good can happen with that much information in the Gover

Re:lolwut?

[girlintraining]

What people are upset about is not "spying", they are upset about Government surveillance and espionage against non-military targets.

What the government is saying is you can't tell the difference in today's world: Terrorist don't wear uniforms.

You are confusing border security with domestic espionage and surveillance, they are two vastly separate areas for concern.

No. The government has repeatedly stated those things are now relevant and related. Sorry if you didn't get that memo back in 2001.

I'll go one up on you. Every plot foiled that the Government is crediting to the surveillance state has been a setup by the FBI. [...] The joke is on you, do you get it?

*facepalm* The Tin Foil is strong with this one.

Next, you miss the whole point of being a constitutional republic. It's not a democracy and "what's good for me", it's about a rule of law and what's good for society as a whole.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Please tell me why if "rule of law" and "good for society" were so important, the declaration of independence didn't open with that instead? Answer: Because the purpose of a democracy (or a republic, if you want to be a pedant) is not to create a great country, but to create great people.

If you desire order above happiness, then you get despotism. But don't take my word for it; "" Law and order exist for the purpose of establishing justice . . . when they fail in this purpose they become the dangerously structured dams that block the flow of social progress. " -- Martin Luther King, Jr.

Conjecture and doomsday? Go back and read it again. There is no doomsday anything, but I do claim that nothing good can happen with that much information in the Government's hands

Actually, I was pointing out that your all or nothing thinking regarding government surveillance was a logical fallacy. You claimed surveillance never helps. Ever. Not even once. We academics call people who make statements that use the word always, never, or similar, outside of the context of mathematics to be, achem... coo coo for cocopuffs.

You started by claiming that everyone who questions is wrong and just claiming "oh noes" without questioning "why". That is absolutely wrong.

This just in: Motive is irrelevant. Also, the price of tin foil is rising.

I gave a very cohesive argument against spying, you don't like the answer.

âoeHow many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.â -- Abraham Lincoln.

Re:lolwut?

[s.petry]

What the government is saying is you can't tell the difference in today's world: Terrorist don't wear uniforms.

Wrong, that is not what the Government is saying. They are saying that it's perfectly legal to spy on citizens in what ever fashion they wish. Go listen to or read every speech given by the NSA, FBI, and defenders of PRISM. They all parrot the same lines, and interestingly it was released today that the NSA gave them all "talking points" referencing fear mongering tactics when defending the program. The talking points document is searchable and was found through a FOIA request.

*facepalm* The Tin Foil is strong with this one.

Really, you still resort to ad hominem to support your delusion (or perhaps the delusion you wish others to have) instead of reading facts after being warned? You do know that what I stated is not only factual, but was backed as factual by Courts on several occasions. The easiest to find would be the Michigan Lawsuit regarding the underwear bomber. I'll ask again, do you need someone to Google that for you? I can stoop to LMGTFY links if you insist.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Please tell me why if "rule of law" and "good for society" were so important, the declaration of independence didn't open with that instead? Answer: Because the purpose of a democracy (or a republic, if you want to be a pedant) is not to create a great country, but to create great people.

What does the Declaration of Independence have to do with the rule of Law? or your MLK quote, or your Lincoln quote?, or your own made up ad hominem? Setting up more straw man is all I can think of. You can't be daft enough to be trying to claim that the USA is a pure Democracy and is not a Democratic Republic. You could not believe that false information is made factual by ad hominem and straw men. Yet this is your only approach!

There are no straw men left standing!

Funny how again after your ad hominem and fallacy is removed the only thing remaining for you to defend are two false statements. If you are just going to respond with more fallacy and fantasy, please don't bother. Fact checking is really not that difficult, even if it is time consuming. Nor is it difficult to have civil dialogue which you claim we should be able to have based on our education and vision of our founding fathers.

Re:lolwut?

[jamstar7]

Since when has free speech been squashed in the US?

The previous regime's 'Free Speech zones', located far far away from what was going on, far away from pesky news cameras and reporters. Step outside of them during an 'Event', and you got your head knocked in. And no pesky reporters and news cams to record said bashing.

Re:lolwut?

[jamstar7]

My email read by human beings? Not likely, unless the computer that does read it flags it for special attention of a pair of Mark 1 eyeballs. My email read by computers programmed to look for key words like jihad, Tealiban, plutonium, revolution, and so forth? Almost a certainty. Military hardware is a generation or more ahead of what you'll find on the street, and the TLAs have access to military hardware as well as the funding to pull it off.

Re:lolwut?

[jamstar7]

Maybe not so much an 'obivous lie' as a failure to remember history correctly and failure to check facts before posting.

Re:lolwut?

[girlintraining]

Wrong, that is not what the Government is saying.

Wrong. You're wrong. Because wrong.

Really, you still resort to ad hominem to support your delusion...

Dude, it's your tin foil hat, not mine. You just suggested the most massive conspiracy theory since the faking of the apollo moon landings. So yes, I'm gonna mock you. Mercilessly. The idea that the FBI has faked every single capture of every single terrorist... ever... is so incredibly stupid that I award you no points sir, and may God have mercy on your soul.

What does the Declaration of Independence have to do with the rule of Law?

Yes... what does one of the most seminal works in the annals of political writing have to do with anything? Nothing, that's what! Because I'm a delusional tin-foil hat wearing nutjob who thinks the FBI is fake and baking their criminals! ahaahahahaha.... and now I shall demonstrate the power of crystal healing on this inanimate carbon rod!

There are no straw men left standing!

No, that's because you used them all already.

Fact checking is really not that difficult...

No, but being as short bus special as you is.

Look, at this point you've completely given up on any semblence of rationality and you're just trying to get in the last word... so let me save you the trouble:

You're not going to get it. If there is but one thing I can do for your retarded ass, it's to deny you this thing. I will continue replying until slashdot closes this thread down. And it will be only, and solely, to mock the utter depths of your incompetence.

Re:lolwut?

[rtb61]

I expect my government to uphold the principles of law globally as is does within the country. I expect my government to respect the rights of other countries citizens especially within their own country. I expect my government to act honourably and with integrity when dealing with other countries.

The difference between us is insurmountable, when representative from your government interact with representatives from my government within my governments borders. I expect my government representatives to treat your governments representatives like psychopaths, persons not to be trusted in any way shape or form and only very limited numbers to be allowed within the country at any time and to be kept under close observation at all times. I would consider all treaties agreed too and mere paper and never to be trusted.

Re:lolwut?

[nedlohs]

Which are the same thing, given it takes a few seconds to check. Both mean the rest of the claims are suspect and not worth the effort checking - the whole argument can just be ignored (of course given the moderating a bunch of people didn't). Whether the rest of the argument is suspect because the poster lies or because the poster had a bad memory and doesn't double check (a bad combination) doesn't make a practical difference.

Re:lolwut?

[s.petry]

Wrong. You're wrong. Because wrong.

If you deny facts to support your belief then there is no possible way to have a rational discussion. That and the consistent ad hominem in place of facts or positions makes me question why I have previously defended you. Have fun in what ever fantasy land you are living in, and no I won't make the mistake of trying to defend someone that lacks the ability to have a rational discourse again.

Re:lolwut?

[s.petry]

There is no change in facts if you claim a machine searches through your email vs. a human searching through your email. Your email is still being searched. In fact I would state that the machine is much worse for numerous reasons (lack of morality, indiscriminate targeting, faster methods of processing, etc...). If it was restricted to human viewing and listening only, we would have many more whistle blowers and many more stories to generate outrage.

Re:lolwut?

[girlintraining]

Wrong. Wrong. So. Very. Wrong.

Re:lolwut?

[s.petry]

Because you deny facts and say so. Impeccable logical skills.

Re:lolwut?

[girlintraining]

Wrong. Wrong. So. Very. Wrong. Very.

Blame it on the Kiwis.

[retech]

Yeah they've gotta keep an eye on those damn kiwis and their international threat to a 70hr work week.

Re:Blame it on the Kiwis.

[thesupraman]

Dont worry, they are busy spying on themselves for the Americans..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waihopai_Station
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tangimoana_Station
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9070435/Controversial-GCSB-laws-pass-by-two-votes

They are, after all, part of the same 'club'.

I bet politicians from both are now (if they didn't realize/get reminded earlier) aware that they are owned..
After all, all their dirty little secrets will be as useful to the 'protectors of the free world' as those of the evil
Germans and French!

After all, we must all be protected from any form of true democracy and/or choice!

(repost after putting on the wrong thread above, damn!)

Re:Blame it on the Kiwis.

[girlintraining]

After all, we must all be protected from any form of true democracy and/or choice!

The people who work at these agencies would probably remind you that without all this surveillance, you'd be hiding under your bed waiting for the next terror attack or IED. Democracy would be on the evening news every night waving a flag over the bodies of its adherents while its opponents marched in the streets, celebrating victory after victory.

People forget that we do have enemies; There is more than one way to organize a society, and a lot of people feel like the best way to deal with a society different than your own, is to advocate, encourage, and even practice violence against them "so they know their place." Are the threats as big as they say? Are the sacrifices we've made to keep those threats at bay worth it? I don't know. But don't you dare get on a soap box and preach about "true democracy" without answering the question: How do we protect it?

You do not just get to handwave away the threats. You have to answer them -- even if it's just to say "Then that is the price we will pay." It's okay to say everything they're doing is wrong; Afterall, this is a democracy right? But if you won't suggest an alternative, then you don't really care about democracy. You just want to rage against "the man" and be a rebel without a cause. You want to feel righteous, but without all that hard work of enduring tensions, making compromises, and reasoning out not what's best for you -- but what's best for an entire country.

And if you do that, then I have no respect for you. You want to bitch about the NSA? Okay, fine. I grant you that. But what's your alternative? Put something on the table for the rest of us to discuss, or give up your chair for someone who's willing to not just talk about democracy, but sit down and actually do it.

Re:Blame it on the Kiwis.

[Anonymous Coward]

The people who work at these agencies would probably remind you that without all this surveillance, you'd be hiding under your bed waiting for the next terror attack or IED.

Well, of course they would say that; that is by no means a surprise.

And whether it's true (highly unlikely) or not is irrelevant.

People forget that we do have enemies

No, they don't.

But if you won't suggest an alternative, then you don't really care about democracy.

It's because I care about freedom that I oppose the NSA's actions.

You just want to rage against "the man" and be a rebel without a cause. You want to feel righteous, but without all that hard work of enduring tensions, making compromises, and reasoning out not what's best for you -- but what's best for an entire country.

Individual rights should not be 'compromised' away. The constitution should not be 'compromised' away.

But what's your alternative?

How about... no more unconstitutional/immoral spying? I'm not compromising on that.

or give up your chair for someone who's willing to not just talk about democracy, but sit down and actually do it.

You don't seem to like it when others put forth answers you believe to be vague, yet here you are using the word "democracy" every other sentence; it doesn't even seem to make sense.

Re:Blame it on the Kiwis.

[Daniel Dvorkin]

You do not just get to handwave away the threats. You have to answer them -- even if it's just to say "Then that is the price we will pay."

Okay: then that is the price we will pay.

More precisely, that is the price we might pay. Personally, I think the price will be a lot lower than you say--but I'm willing to take that risk. Because there is nothing al-Qaeda or any other bunch of troglodytes is going to do to us that's worse than what we can do, and are doing, to ourselves.

Happy now?

Re:Blame it on the Kiwis.

[AHuxley]

Well GIT it gets a bit complex.
Say your Australia and have sent a group of special forces soldiers on a drunken gap year "tour" of the world. Fit, bright, accents, real "fake" passports and they blend in perfectly. Australia did not tell any other nation about such missions.
30, 20, 10 years ago some Australian telco/crypto expert shares upgrade details with the NSA and GCHQ.
Australian military encryption is good but not really hardened in many places via unique networks.
That phone home safe house in suburbia is now not so safe.
So what happens when the GCHQ and NSA, contractors and their 'staff' some with other loyalties to distant faiths or nations stumble over this 'gem' in their region?
Thats why most nations really think about who gets to set their deep domestic networking hardware and software.
What's best for an entire country is simple - keep your codes, telco system safe. Once other nations and their "cleared" contractors know - thats getting to be a long list.

Re:Blame it on the Kiwis.

[Anonymous Coward]

But don't you dare get on a soap box and preach about "true democracy" without answering the question: How do we protect it?

You do not just get to handwave away the threats. You have to answer them -- even if it's just to say "Then that is the price we will pay." It's okay to say everything they're doing is wrong; Afterall, this is a democracy right? But if you won't suggest an alternative, then you don't really care about democracy. You just want to rage against "the man" and be a rebel without a cause. You want to feel righteous, but without all that hard work of enduring tensions, making compromises, and reasoning out not what's best for you -- but what's best for an entire country.

You know, as someone that lives in a democracy where I feel I can actually have a part in the decision making process I don't have any urge to rage against "the man", simply because "the man" works for me. If you have a controlling ruler class "the man" you are doing democracy all wrong. Just saying. Maybe OP doesn't feel it's democratic anymore, when one of your own agencies is breaking the laws and getting away with it?

Re:Blame it on the Kiwis.

[Anonymous Coward]

... you'd be hiding under your bed waiting for the next terror attack ...

The USA has invaded Korea, Vietnam, Grenada, Afghanistan, Iraq. In the name of freedom it has created dictators and civil wars. Added to that are assassinations in Pakistan and Yemen. No, if I hide under my bed, it will be to avoid the USA.

... Are the sacrifices we've made to keep those threats at bay worth it? I don't know.

And you're not demanding an answer from your government like you demand from me. Patriotism is the "refuge of the scoundrel" because it argues for 'the greater good' without being accountable for the sacrifices it forces down my throat.

... preach about "true democracy" without answering the question ...

There have been many threats to US democracy: The civil rights protest in the '60s, anti-war in the '70s, anti-nuclear in the '80s, anti-capitalist in the '90s, anti-war in the '00s, anti-abortion and anti-gay marriage protests in the '10s. It's strange how the US survived all these threats and no public servants died. In hindsight, these protestors never had the ability to damage government process or power; ie democracy. What they threatened was the stability of the elites; those capitalist figureheads who 'deserve' government handouts and then treat their employees and fellow citizens with such contempt.

... if you won't suggest an alternative ...

If you don't think there's an alternative to being treated as a terrorist or traitor then, yes, my disgust at the behaviour of so-called public servants is incomprehensible to you. In the past, there was a limit to the number of unimportant citizens the government could watch: Terrorist attacks and mass shootings could easily occur. Yet terrorists of today have the same success as they had in the past. A "war on terror" and a new, improved 'big brother' hasn't provided an alternative either.

Re:Blame it on the Kiwis.

[RoTNCoRE]

My alternative - read the Constitution. Follow it. Tear up the Patriot Act. Shift all NSA funding into infrastructure. Have a national, single payer health care system. All government employees earning more than 6 figures at any point in their career sign an agreement similar to a non-compete, where they cannot move into a private sector job that in any way is awarded contracts or funds, or else their new employer will suffer hefty conflict of interest fines. Enforce it.

You don't have to know where you are going to know you can't stay on the road you are on, and astroturfing someone who is rightly angry because they don't have all the alternatives for you is intellectually lazy.

Re:Blame it on the Kiwis.

[Sabriel]

True democracy, as I understand it, requires the _informed_ consent of the people - something the government is unwilling to allow, since its dominant unwritten policy can be mostly summed up as "better to risk getting caught in a lie than to be honest from the beginning".

Every single official in government has a duty and obligation to uphold the Constitution. If they want to have a secret intelligence organisation that reads everyone's letters and listens to everyone's conversations, because they truly believe the only way to protect our freedom is to create and control a global panopticon?

They should follow the law and seek an Amendment, like everyone else. Otherwise they're just hypocrites violating their oath of office.

Re:Blame it on the Kiwis.

[girlintraining]

Happy now?

No. I'll be happy when we start having a discussion about how to address the threats before us. It doesn't sit right with me saying it's okay for people to come into my home (America) and start blowing shit up and for us to just sit back and say "Well, not much we can do about that." Is what we're doing right now the right answer? I don't know. But it's a better answer than not meeting the threat at all.

Here on slashdot and all across the blogosphere, I find people raging against the NSA and surveillance, but I don't see anyone offering up a better way to deal with the threats they have been tasked with handling. We need a response. Maybe not this response, but we need some response. And comments like yours and others here don't do that.

These threats aren't abstract; The Boston marathon bombing happened. School shootings are a weekly thing. China is actively trying to hack into our financial systems, industrial control systems, infrastructure like water and electricity, etc. The threats they describe are tangible things with evidence to back up their claim.

We need to balance out our response with the need for citizen privacy, and the rights outlined in the Constitution and elsewhere. I do feel that there is a lack of oversight and guidance from Congress and from private citizens, regarding mass surveillance and other threat-response technology. Full body airport scanners were a tragic mistake -- people got cancer from them, and it was a preventable mistake because the same thing happened when x-ray technology was discovered. There has been a lot of mismanagement and incompetence that didn't need to happen. And there are a large number of government programs that have shown only limited benefit, if any.

All of these are legitimate concerns to raise. But people raise them as absolutes, as black and white; Like privacy is some kind of inviolate thing for the government, while these people give it away for fractions of a penny to Google and Facebook! I'm sorry, but it's hypocritical and almost every argument against the government has been either propaganda, mob mentality, or false dichotomy thinking. There are good arguments to be had here.

The "that is the price we will pay" is the one that only barely manages to cross the line that delineates the rational ones from the irrational. We can do better.

Re:Blame it on the Kiwis.

[jamstar7]

People forget that we do have enemies;

I agree on that point. However, I think we diverge when I say the enemies the United States really has are not necessarily the 'enemies' we see paraded about on the nightly news.

Re:Blame it on the Kiwis.

[jamstar7]

But don't you dare get on a soap box and preach about "true democracy" without answering the question: How do we protect it?

You do not just get to handwave away the threats. You have to answer them -- even if it's just to say "Then that is the price we will pay." It's okay to say everything they're doing is wrong; Afterall, this is a democracy right? But if you won't suggest an alternative, then you don't really care about democracy. You just want to rage against "the man" and be a rebel without a cause. You want to feel righteous, but without all that hard work of enduring tensions, making compromises, and reasoning out not what's best for you -- but what's best for an entire country.

You know, as someone that lives in a democracy where I feel I can actually have a part in the decision making process I don't have any urge to rage against "the man", simply because "the man" works for me. If you have a controlling ruler class "the man" you are doing democracy all wrong. Just saying. Maybe OP doesn't feel it's democratic anymore, when one of your own agencies is breaking the laws and getting away with it?

"In a mature society, 'civil servant' is semantically equal to 'civil master'" -- Robert A Heinlein, "Time Enough For Love/The Notebooks of Lazarus Long"

And this is news..

[Billlagr]

How? I'm an Aussie, and this is no great unexpected revelation. Pine Gap is a joint Aus/US operated facility, and I'm pretty sure that nobody really thought that it was just a nice place meeeting place for American and Australians to swap recipes.

Re:And this is news..

[AHuxley]

The problem for Australia is the legality of 20 years of 'privacy' laws and gifting Australian only data to the USA.
Australia was great for Rhyolite satellite ground station back in 1970 and no encryption was added to save weight. Australia traded its location over generations for US hardware, staff and a constant flow of data.
Australia is also on a network that was once Intelink-C so you have a lot of chatter world wide bringing staff/contractors generational closer to each other than to any elected Australian government.
We saw that with Germany where one branch of the gov 'gives' a German cleared encrypted phone while another German group works with the US gov to subvert all German encryption.
The "revelation" should be of a wake up call to old and new Australian political parties and their relationship with 'expert' gov security staff. Who's side are they really on long term?
How safe is that fast optical internet per politicians office?
Gone are the days of 'just for' watching Japan, China, the Middle East or Soviet Union. Australia always watched inwards and in the digital age everybody is in on the big privacy joke.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/12/telstra-deal-america-government-spying

Re:And this is news..

[Mister Liberty]

So?
Oh, you mean to say "I'm implicated"?

Huge surprise.

[demonlapin]

The fact that the USA, UK, Canada, and Australia have a very close relationship surprises exactly whom, these days? I mean, it goes back to WW2, if not before, and each country has its own reasons: the UK gets to exert significant influence over the world's dominant power, Canada wants the US to help pay for the resources to defend the high Arctic, and Australia found out during WW2 that due to geography, the US was a much more reliable guarantor of security than the UK.

Re:Huge surprise.

[legoblocks]

Exactly. AKA Five Eyes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UKUSA_Agreement

Re:Huge surprise.

[Anonymous Coward]

Australia found out during WW2 that due to geography, the US was a much more reliable guarantor of security than the UK.

Didn't really have much to do with geography -- more to do with the fact that GB was rather busy defending herself against the Germans (and then rebuilding, once they were defeated); whereas the US was already fighting the same Japan that threatened Australia.

Re:Huge surprise.

[demonlapin]

That might have something to do with the fact that the USA and Australia are on the Pacific, and the UK isn't.

Re:Huge surprise.

[hairyfish]

The fact that the USA, UK, Canada, and Australia have a very close relationship

Hey, hey don't forget little old New Zealand. There are 5 eyes you know, not four...

Re:Huge surprise.

[demonlapin]

Not invalid, I suppose, but consider it this way: by outsourcing primary defense to the USA, Canada has been able to position itself as the Luxembourg of North America.

Re:Huge surprise.

[AHuxley]

Not really. Australia had its own views post ww2 after learning the fine art of radio and codes alone and at war. Some suggested going alone and protecting Australia in 1945. Senior Australian mil staff recalled the mess Australia was left before and during ww2 with poor weapons, poor equipment and no good intel or code breaking help.
Australia had the skill sets and staff after ww2. Canada was the same after ww2 and took years to really come around the requests of GCHQ and NSA to finally totally sell out.
Each nation understood the pact, the deal, the loss of any privacy vs a dreamy peace time "guarantor". They sold it to their countries and staff as an outward looking system to "defend" their nations but the individuals doing the negotiations at the time knew exactly what they had signed away.
Years later Snowden and may other whistleblower filling in the gaps with crypto history.
The US and UK where to get everything telco from Australia, NZ ...Australia, NZ got most of the rest of the world back ;)

Re:Huge surprise.

[ArbitraryName]

New Zealand does not share the same relationship with the US (though yes, they are part of the five eyes SIGINT). Since the 80's up until 2008 NZ was considered a friend, but not an ally. Condoleeza Rice used the ally word in 2008 and it was shocking. The US only started allowing NZ warships into their ports in 2012 and NZ still doesn't allow US warships because of their nuclear ban. Definitely not on the same level as Aus/UK relations, though its thawing.

Re:Huge surprise.

[Demonantis]

Australia, Britain, Canada, America have a bunch of cooperation agreements to share military resources, intelligence, strategy. Not really surprising. Look up TTCP, ABCA, ASIC, CCEB.

Re:Huge surprise.

[quenda]

That might have something to do with the fact that the USA and Australia are on the Pacific, and the UK isn't.

Not really. If Britain was not struggling to avoid total invasion by Germany, British Singapore would never have fallen to Japan.
Britain would have had no trouble projecting sufficient power there, were it not all tied up in Europe and North Africa.

Re:Huge surprise.

[CrimsonAvenger]

Not really. If Britain was not struggling to avoid total invasion by Germany, British Singapore would never have fallen to Japan. Britain would have had no trouble projecting sufficient power there, were it not all tied up in Europe and North Africa.

Unlikely. Time required to move significant military resources literally halfway around the world is much larger than one might think.

Note for example the time required to move enough troops for D-Day the much shorter distance to the UK.

Five Eyes

[Moridineas]

How exactly is this news? It's even on Wikipedia--the Five Eyes (FVEY, i.e., the English-speaking countries, Australia, Canada, Great Britain, New Zealand, and the United States) share just about everything. There's also the even MORE exclusive sharing group that excludes New Zealand -- ACGU -- Australia, Canada, Great Britain, and the United States (I believe the origins of this clique go back to some disputes around US nuclear warships berthing in New Zealand).

The arrangement is specifically designed so that, for instance, the NSA can spy on British citizens for the Brits (or vice versa) without breaking any local laws. Each country has geographic regions of specialty.

Re:Five Eyes

[AHuxley]

The next step is the NSA news about politicians, finance and religious leaders.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-10-30/nsa-tapped-pope-spied-vatican-prevent-threats-financial-system
and e.g. MUSCULAR http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-10-30/how-nsa-spies-your-google-and-yahoo-accounts
"You can't get into the information circuits and play information warfare successfully unless you're into the communications of the higher commands in [the] various countries in our neighbourhood" is the real news, i.e. the US is 'in' the Australian telecommunications system - hardware and software vs the classic 'base' or just the international optical submarine "site".

Re:Five Eyes

[icebike]

The arrangement is specifically designed so that, for instance, the NSA can spy on British citizens for the Brits (or vice versa) without breaking any local laws. Each country has geographic regions of specialty.

All pretense of that have been dropped.
Both the US and the Brits have brushed aside any such local laws. Probably the Australians as well.

Spy Expert... Yeah sure.

[thatkid_2002]

I do believe they read a Wikipedia article on it once...

Don't think it can't happen in Australia, It does.

[sd4f]

"Don't think it can't happen in Australia, It does."

What a lot of Australians don't even realise is that anything can happen, our political system guarantees almost no rights to citizens, with only one real recourse; you can vote for another politician at the next election. Problem is, when the two-party system moves in step, there's pretty much nothing that can be done, and the general apathy of the public ensures that nothing will be done.

It is my understanding, that in the USA, the spying conducted by the NSA is probably illegal. The problem in Australia is, as far as I'm aware, there's no problem with the parliament passing a law permitting or compelling third parties to spy or provide data, so whatever had been happening, is perfectly legal here, and the public at large doesn't care.

You hint at it...

[s.petry]

I'll go a bit further and say the obvious implication which you hint at. It's not a "listening post for the US", it's a "partnership in a massive world wide spying program". Germany, Spain, Italy, UK, Australia, Canada, they are all in on it.

Funny that all of these people are bitching about the US doing it when they are not complaining about their own countries collusion and benefits from this spy ring.

Re:You hint at it...

[Anonymous Coward]

I'll go a bit further and say the obvious implication which you hint at. It's not a "listening post for the US", it's a "partnership in a massive world wide spying program". Germany, Spain, Italy, UK, Australia, Canada, they are all in on it.

Yes! It's almost as if they have a military alliance going back decades.

Re:You hint at it...

[s.petry]

Are you trying to claim that the NSA was only spying on military targets for military purposes? No, don't answer that because that's what you are trying to claim. Please go back to the pr0n site and let the grown ups talk.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Plus!

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

Australia, in addition to being one of our Valued Partners in Totally Legal Intelligence activities, is crucial to the supply of judicial marsupials that help keep these activities legal.

If FISA were denied the lovable noses and endearing antics of the noble Kangaroo, and forced to make do with goats or something, we'd be in serious trouble inside a week! Why, it might get as bad as that time, during the Church Commission, when we had to pretend to be reformed characters. That was harrowing.

Re:That Palin Thing says...

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

"How's that hopey-changey stuff workin' out for ya?" :: winks :: :: snaps gum ::

As much as I think Obama is a two-faced prick, the vision of Palin with unfettered access to CIA killbots and the world's largest surveillance database is pretty chilling...

Re:Unsuitable Locations

[lennier]

Alice Springs, Darwin, Geraldton - all of those are very poor places to intercept large amounts of important traffic.

In the Internet era, sure. But you have to realise that Pine Gap (and its cousin, NZ's Waihopai) was built in the 1970s, to catch satellite transmissions rather than cable. Hence the big domes hiding big dishes (so you can't see what satellite they're pointing at).

It's always possible that Pine Gap does more than one thing. There were persistent rumours for a while that it was also an emergency Undisclosed Location ("we must eliminate the mineshaft gap, Mein President!") since the centre of Australia would maybe be one of the safest places left on Earth after a nuclear exchange. OTOH, as a major US military company town Alice would probably be the first place in Australia to be hit, so maybe not so much.

It is funny seeing people constantly 'rediscover' common knowledge like this. I was wondering when Pine Gap was going to get its fifteen minutes in the Snowden spotlight.

Enough already

[dcollins117]

Why don't we just assume that someone is spying on our online activities all the time. It's a lot easier to keep track of and the only point of releasing new "leaks" in this drib and drab fashion is just to keep Snowden's name in the news.

Re:Enough already

[duke_cheetah2003]

That's when you ask yourself the question: What are they distracting me from noticing?

I mean.. really, this has been in the news for a few months now, I think we all get it. NSA has their grubby fingers into everyone's data. More revelations telling the us the same is just distraction. We know. What I don't know, is what is going on that someone feels the need to keep out of the limelight? Just my 2 cents.

Re:Enough already

[AHuxley]

The problem is the weakened junk encryption. Thats really no fun and has to be fixed. Most in the academic, crypto and developer community where still giving the sock puppets the benefit before Snowden. Its a bit like 1946 commercial/gov use of ENIGMA - the extra rotor does nothing. The world was foolish for ~60 years vs few months of reality?

Re:Unsuitable Locations

[lennier]

Correction: While Pine Gap began development in 1970, Waihopai wasn't built until 1989. But both bases roots are in the pre-public Internet era and have strong links to satellites; Pine Gap seems to be more closely involved with various US military space communications than just plain eavesdropping.

Re:Don't think it can't happen in Australia, It do

[hairyfish]

What a lot of Australians don't even realise is that anything can happen, our political system guarantees almost no rights to citizens,

Yeah that sounds all scary the way you wrote that but it overlooks one fact, Australians have it pretty bloody good. A good litmus test of any system is to see what results it produces, and having traveled extensively I can confidently say that based on my own personal experiences, the Australian system is is one of the best. Sure we may not have a bill of rights or a cool-as-fuck constitution like our American friends. And we may have monkeys running the show and no real choice of leadership, but it seems to all work out ok in the end. She'll be right mate! cor struth blimey crikey dick cobber....

Re:Don't think it can't happen in Australia, It do

[sI4shd0rk]

What's this? More garbage from a bootlicker? What a surprise!

a WASP

[Mister Liberty]

stings.
Got that?

Forget all the rhetoric about free democratic etc.
Take names of those in power. Kickass time will
be there one day.

Re:Don't think it can't happen in Australia, It do

[AHuxley]

AC its not legal from an insider trending point of view. At lot of people are seeing luctrative deals in the making before they reach the press.
Exposing this is very relevant as where the NSA can get "in" so can Russia, China, other 'friendly' countries, wealthy multinationals, ex staff (lost job), former staff (private sector for hire), then down to telco 'staff' and finally crime groups with cash to buy skilled people.
All this hardware and software does not exist as some 'secure' base in the middle of Australia air gapped under a dome. The encryption is now out as a joke and installed Australia wide.
In the rush to help the USA, Australia has set some very low crypto telco standards.

Re:Unsuitable Locations

[icebike]

I suggest those locations are probably still used for some satellite traffic, but these days satellites have very tightly controlled footprints.

These sites are more likely used for combat info systems, these days. (Drones, etc).

The cable landings are where the tap occurs. Most internet traffic goes by cable.

Re:Unsuitable Locations

[AHuxley]

You would just mirror the data like room http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A .
Australia is full of public, totally private, commercial and banking networks, splitters - who would notice another cleared contractor on site?
A lot of brands for local exchange backhaul but very little actual state wide or international.
The data could end up at any secure location for filtering and long term storage. Lots of different optical was rolled out over the years under many brands.
The tech is now so cheap national or state police can even have a go for some types of data within bulk internet traffic.

Re:Unsuitable Locations

[AHuxley]

Yes the 'You can't get into the information circuits and play information warfare successfully unless you're into the communications of the higher commands in [the] various countries in our neighbourhood" is the fun story not the older sat or known Cold War mil communication or fancy drone flying networks.
This is the US in Australian domestic telco hardware and the software code.

Gidday NSA!

[Anonymous Coward]

Welcome to Australia, when installing your equipment, please make sure you watch out for the Redback spiders and Brown snakes. And the sharks if you are. Oh, and the Stone fish and the Blue ringed octopus if you doing the undersea cables. Actually the Funnel web spiders are a bit nasty too, along with all the other spiders. I've also hear there is a native plant that thinks fibre cables are tree roots and tried to tap into them, like you do, so watch out for that happening on your cables.

Oh and we have trained the red belly black snakes to protect our pits so watch out for them. http://images.smh.com.au/2011/01/13/2131885/telstrapitmain-420x0.jpg

  Just don't steal our beer. Cheers.

Re:Don't think it can't happen in Australia!

[sd4f]

It's not the system though, it's the culture. Australia has historically been a fairly egalitarian society; far more so than the UK or the USA. That counts for a lot to this issue, because as a generalisation, for a lot of the time politicians actually worked to make the place better. I really don't think the system does anything when you have a country built around respect for your fellow citizen, because the system only serves as a constraint to prevent "bad things" from happening.

I think we are seeing a culture struggle, where you have the inner city middle class, who either directly or indirectly, work for the government, and then the suburban working class, who are engaged in small business, trades, manufacturing, pretty much everything else which isn't government work or something where you can maybe apply a communication or arts degree. The pendulum is swinging to those inner city people who invariably are in bureaucracies, government consultants, journalists and media people; positions of influence, and they have far more ready access to politics than your average dunny diver. As a result, they are writing the script to which politics is played. I think it's resulting in a culture struggle, and it's quite noticeable that you are starting to see that broad generalisation of inner city people feel superior to other Australians, and in a Randian manner, feel that their superiority entitles them to a greater say.

I'm Crocodile Dundee's

[TapeCutter]

...complete lack of surprise

News?

[tumutbound]

Pine Gap has been in operation for 25 years and has always been a US listening post. Nothing new here.

Re:News?

[tumutbound]

Pine Gap has been in operation for 25 years and has always been a US listening post. Nothing new here.

25 years as the Joint Defence Facility that is, prior to that it didn't officially exist.

This has been known for 30+ years

[wiredog]

Why do people keep acting as if something described in "The Puzzle Palace" is something new, different, and surprising?

Re:

[Charles Will]

Persons overlook that we do have enemies; There is more than one way to coordinate a humanity, and a lot of people seem like the best way to deal with a society distinct than your own, is to advocate, encourage, and even perform aggression against them "so they know their place." Are the risks as large-scale as they say? Are the forfeitures we've made to keep those risks at bay worth it? I don't understand. But don't you dare get on a soap carton and preach about "true democracy" without responding the inquiry: How do we protect it? You do not just get to handwave away the threats. You have to answer them -- even if it's just to state "Then that is the price we will pay." It's okay to state everything they're doing is incorrect; Afterall, this is a democracy right? But if you won't propose an alternate, then you don't actually care about democracy. You just want to storm against "the man" and be a rebel without a cause. You desire to seem righteous, but without all that hard work of enduring stress, making compromises, and reasoning out not what's best for you -- but what's best for an whole country. ______________________ Linksys Router Support

Re:That Palin Thing says...

[speedlaw]

Don't worry. The same folks who assigned Cheney to watch W. would make sure she spent her time with great scenic backdrops allowing large companies to strip mine, er, trim, the forests. You don't think the President, whoever he/she/it is, actually runs the place, do you ? Oh, they can drop a bomb, or something, but the financial and legal levers don't move. Why would both Bush and O be shoveling money into the back doors of the Banks, otherwise ?

Re:Unsuitable Locations

[speedlaw]

On the island of Curaco, there is one of these installations of domes. At the end of the island, unmarked, and pointed, probably, at Venezuela.

So is all this spying about terrorists

[future assassin]

or finding a way to kill most world leaders in one giant swoop while having intimate knowledge about each countires majour corporations to take ocntrol over them.

The mentality

[alfredo]

We have no friends, only enemies and potential enemies. We only cooperate when it serves our interests. Every country knows they are being monitored, but don't admit it in public. You don't want your adversaries to know you know what they are doing to you. You want to know what your competitor is looking for. Only part of the spying is military, much of the spying could be called industrial espionage.