Slashdot Mirror
Brazil Admits To Spying On US Diplomats After Blasting NSA Surveillance
cold fjord writes with this excerpt from The Verge: "Brazil this week admitted to spying on diplomats from countries including the US, Russia, and Iran as part of a domestic program launched 10 years ago ... The program was first revealed in a Monday report from the newspaper Folha de São Paulo, which obtained documents from the Brazilian Intelligence Agency, commonly known as ABIN. The revelations come at a sensitive time for current Brazilian president Dilma Rousseff, who has been among the most outspoken critics of the widespread surveillance conducted by the US National Security Agency (NSA). According to Folha, Brazilian intelligence spied on rooms rented out by the US embassy in Brasilia from 2003 to 2004. ... The report also claims that ABIN targeted Russian and Iranian officials, tracking their movements within the country ... Rousseff's office acknowledged Monday that the spying took place, but stressed that the operations were carried out within the law. The administration added that publishing classified documents is a crime in Brazil, and that those responsible 'will be prosecuted according to the law.' ....the revelations may put Rousseff in an awkward position. The Brazilian president cancelled a state dinner with Barack Obama earlier this year ... and lashed out against US spying in an impassioned speech to the UN in September."
the article details some very basic surveillance of foreign personnel in the country. if brazil's intelligence service *wasn't* doing this, it would be a scandal.
oh shock, oh horrors, oh whatever. why am I not surprised. let he\she who is without sin cast the first stone.
I spy on you...
You spy on me...
We're a spying family...
With a great wiretap and a dead drop from me to you...
Why can't we just spy on everyone too?
And we always have. We always will. It doesn't matter if it's an ally or an enemy - everybody spies on everybody else. Additionally, everybody knows that this happens.
It isn't even a problem when it is discovered - it's more of a game than anything else. Gotcha! Caught you spying! Oh, you naughty person! Tee-hee! Now we get to beat you up in the media for a bit as a penalty for your mistake, and then we can get back into it.
Sauce for the goose? Or is it crow? I wonder how they prepare crow in Brazil?
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
Comparing routine counter-intelligence operations with direct tapping of communications from a Head of State is, at the very least, an exaggeration.
It's almost as if governments, in general, are not to be trusted. Wow! Who would have ever imagined that their own government would do something like that? I mean, it is not as if every single government since the beginning of time as eventually gotten out of control or anything like that. Oh, wait....
This story reeks of the NSA trying to do damage control and doing a piss-poor job of it.
As best as I can tell it boils down to brazil having tailed some foreign diplomats while they were in country. OMG! So that makes them even with the NSA breaking into anything and everything on the internet. It's totally the same!
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
I fail to understand why international espionage comes as a shock to anyone. Nations (or states or political entities or nation-states or what-have-you) have been spying on each other since someone figured out that knowing more about someone than they know about you can give you an advantage.
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
Following agents of a foreign country inside the territory of your own country is not the same as spying on the entire conencted population of the world. One is targeted and low key, aimed at the potentially nefarious activities of foreign nationals potentially connected to foregin security services, on your own territory, the other is a gross and global invasion of privacy. a total abuse of privileged position, a collosal breach of trust that undermines the safe usage of all forms of modern communication. No modern system that contains American or British electronics or communicates with systems or over connections held on the territory of those nations or their allies, is beyond suspicion. No router, no computer, no modem, no chip, no mobile. In fact those very devices should be considered as compromised and unfit for use.
They do. All the govs do.
Nerdy news for your nerdy needs? http://www.soylentnews.org Soylent News is people!
I'm shocked that there's spying in this casino!
Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
Pretty sure that no country on earth is "clean" at this point.
Keep this fully in mind when some country is spouting off on their outrage, or thinking about offering services because of their "strong privacy laws".
None of these bastards, nor their successors, will hesitate for a fraction of a nanosecond if they think they'll gain something by violation of your rights.
And if you think they will, because of something written down on a piece of paper someplace, you're fucking deluded.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
The difference is that the US makes such a big deal about being free, that irony continues to gush uncontrollably from the whole NSA scandal, the PATRIOT act, the TSA bullshit, the constant invasions of other countries, the attempts at blocking healthcare for poorer citizens, etc, etc...
which is totally what she said
The nerve!
Uh, I don't even think the biggest detractors of the NSA would fault the agency for legally spying on foreign diplomats who are currently on US soil. That fits squarely within any intelligence agency's mandate no matter what country you're talking about. It was the NSA's dragnet spying on Brazilian ordinary citizens and businesses through co-opted national telcos that got the Brazilian government pissed off. Not the same at all.
governments routinely spy on eachother. Governments do not routinely spy wholesale on the citizens of other nations and claim it as their privilege.
The concern remains as stated: a country that practices rendition, torture, and indefinite detention without trial is now spying on anyone and everyone. this is a country that has operated secret prisons and invaded without cause soverign nations. America bombs indiscriminately anyone it decides through secret process to be an enemy combatant with any unintentional target in the bombing posthumously declared an enemy combatant. This is a country that is perpetually at war, maintains the highest prison population in the world, and its now spying for all intents and purposes on absolutely everything and everyone. In my opinion as an American, concerns from the international community are absolutely valid and reasonable.
Good people go to bed earlier.
Ah yes, the "He did it too!" defense. Now, what was it that mom or dad would say when you said that?
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Dear NSA,
The fact that another country spies on the US doesn't make what you did any more legal, acceptable or less egregious.
Sincerely,
Most of the US population
Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
Petrobas
Well, as long as it's legal, I see no ethical dilemmas. And as long as I can make up laws with no oversight I don't see any practical dilemmas either.
The distinguishing mark of a true criminal (and not simply a lawbreaker) is an extralegal mentality: "the law applies to others (and with extreme prejudice), but not to me." To these people the law is often mrely a tool to achieve political ends - though sometimes it is an obstacle - but in and of itself is meaningless. Unfortunately, many of these people end up running for democratic office. And winning.
And this... http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/canada-s-spying-touches-nerve-in-brazil-susan-ormiston-1.2054334
We've been doing our damndest to change that, but when close to half the population -knowingly- and -willingly- supports said practices, plus benefits from a military-industrial economy that is geared up to specifically support that, then change is going to be a long time coming. Almost half our populace is tribalistic to the point where they are willing to support all of what you described, simply because it's done to those who aren't members of the tribe. Furthermore, the easy political solutions to this (liberal fascism, abolishment of the Congress and turning the Executive into a true tyrant, etc) come at too high a cost. What you're arguing about is the dark side of human nature... come back to me when you've come up with a cure that doesn't involve tyranny or death.
Here's to hot beer, cold women, and Glaswegian kisses for all.
Not at all. This isn't about one child claiming that the other child took a cookie, too. This is one child, upon finding out that the sibling took a cookie, says, "oh my, you know you should never, ever take a cookie without permission!" only to have to admit 5 minutes later that they surreptitiously took a cookie too.
This isn't about whether it's right or wrong, it's about getting caught in a double standard.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Seems that you can spy on anyone, as long as you don't spy on:
Important people
Non-important people
That leaves very little room for spying, don't you think?
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
The next time you say, "how the fuck did they not see that coming," remember that you were the one who told them to keep their eyes closed and their ears covered.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Direct tapping of communications from a Head of State IS routine counter-intelligence operations for every country with the technical ability to do so. I'm curious - if Al Assad or Ahmadinejad or Putin had/has the ability to tap Obama's (or Hussain or Musharraf's) phone, do you think they would have said, "Oh, no, he's a head of state - make sure the security service doesn't tap his phone - those are privileged conversations and we have no interest or right in listening in"?
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
...or just spillover from outrage at domestic surveillance?
It strikes me that at first we had the outrage about NSA collecting information on Americans and conducting espionage that infringes on the privacy of Americans.
Then we had revelations of intensive surveillance of friendly governments with outrage at that. I get (but don't totally agree with) the outrage this may have had in Germany, but it seems a little bit misplaced domestically in the US and I don't completely understand why Americans would be particularly bothered with foreign surveillance, unless they're just bothered by surveillance generally.
Germany (as one example) as a state has a national agenda of their own and their diplomatic goals might be divergent from US interests in sensitive areas, whether it's relations with Russia or Middle East policy or even domestic political agendas. It's certainly possible to see Merkel cutting diplomatic deals with Russia which might undercut US diplomatic goals with Russia, for example. Knowing what deals Germany has made can very much aid US diplomacy.
States may voice moral or ideological aims, but in reality are far more Realpolitik oriented, and that means pursuing your goals without regard to ideology or morality within the limits of pragmatism. If you can spy to gain advantage, you will, and I think all states do within the limits of their resources. The US just has far greater leverage and capability.
NSA spying on foreign governments (even allies) is one of the most basic functions of pretty much any state intelligence operation. We spy on them, they spy on us, and this is the way it's always been.
This has been why, other than pearl clutching, there have been precisely zero real consequences for our relations with other countries... once you start punishing allies for spying on you, soon enough you won't have any allies left.
None of this excuses the NSA's domestic activities, but acting like there's something uniquely horrible about this particular incident of international espionage is pretty silly.
Every agency which is getting paid for it will grab as much as they can. That's not the question.
The limit, however, is not what they technically can do, but what they are allowed to do. That does not just concern secret services, but any government service: they have to act within their constitutional frame. Secret services are problematic in that they are, well, secret, and so the oversight is sort of paradoxical. Secretly acting entities are most in danger of turning into their own autocratic endeavor trying to subjugate the regular government like Hoover's FBI did (after Hoover who was emperor of the FBI for life died, the Senate established laws to restrict the emperorship of the FBI to 10years to avoid a repetition of this sort of person-bound powerplay. The current emperor is in place for 12+ years already and nobody dared to notice).
NSA/FBI are currently the modern-day version of Gestapo/SS and pretty much shit on Congress. The question is whether the elected officials have a chance to wrest the power back from the autocratic structures and put them back under democratic control.
Good luck with that. The most important part is that the Americans have to get their priorities regarding liberty and security right again.
...is hardly comparable to spying on foreign heads of state in their own countries, or even spying on your own citizens.
TFA says:
The administration added that publishing classified documents is a crime in Brazil,
and that those responsible "will be prosecuted according to the law."
There's a degree to which one watches each other, that used to be unspoken. IMHO, it needs to be publicized widely as "we will spy on your spies". Canada's RCMP, and the U.S. FBI are supposed to be counter-spies and spy on enemy spies.
They not only should do so, but they should be seen to do so. Brazil's ABIN, if they're the FBI-equivalent, should do so too.
Then we can go back to looking for regular evil spies and shooting them (:-))
--dave
davecb@spamcop.net
The difference is that the US makes such a big deal about being free, that irony continues to gush uncontrollably from the whole NSA scandal, the PATRIOT act, the TSA bullshit, the constant invasions of other countries, the attempts at blocking healthcare for poorer citizens, etc, etc...
How does blocking Obamacare qualify as irony in regards to being free?
How many times did I state that every country on earth does this kind of thing only to get labelled a troll by the naive tin foil hat crowd? I've said before and I'll say again that every country on earth spies to the greatest extent that their resources allows. This has been true since pre-history times. The naive acted outraged and pretended only a single party was responsible for such things.
The internet is Americas house. Don't like it? Build your own.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
so I could see why they'd be wary of us. Also, their spying does not reach into our internet traffic--but the reverse certainly isn't true. This sort of information is always absent from Cold Fjord's servile presentation of his overlords, wherein the US government is always the victim, acting only in retaliation to the unjust actions of other countries. Time to get a new account or just post anonymously, cold fjord.
Perhaps it would help to contextualize: In Latin America, US Embassy= Coup d'etat Headquarters.
The US delegations routinely meet with opposition forces, funds """"human rights organizations""""", and meddles in internal political affairs of every country they are in.
Brazil has "probable cause" to be on the defensive regarding US sabot... er.. diplomats
If you are an adult and you deal with other adults you'd witness incompetence on a daily basis.
Well, I get that you can be "free to be sick and not afford health insurance". But any nation that's pushing freedom, should also be promoting at least a good basic quality of life for its citizens.
I know it's a bit cliched to say by now, but if you cut down on military spending, you could easily afford for everyone to have decent health care, and I'm sure make your country greater in many other ways too. There is no rational justification for your "defence" budget being so ridiculously large.
which is totally what she said
Technology yes, but I think it is more about Corporate affiliation. The NSA are basically using corporate infrastructure to spy on the cheap, They demand these companies do so. These are *supposedly* global international companies. If Brazil went to Apple and said I demand all the information you have on Obama, what do you think the response would be? Vice Versa? Should nations be scared of using technology produced by america? Yes. This is why since the Patriot Act came into being, I would never ever use any cloud based system, particularly should the servers be physically located in the US (which most are).
It isn't so much a technological advantage, it is more that the most of the companies that do, are american, and are beholden to the government. Which is actually pretty funny to say considering how sold out the government is to corporate masters, I guess it goes both ways. Makes me think of those dystopian futures where the world is controlled not by national countries, but blocks of affiliated corporations. GO Capitol Corporation!
Truly I think it is ironic that it was the US not that long ago, making grave accusations of the PRC and the production of hardware and software that might be used for spying with built in backdoors etc... When really the whole time doing it themselves. American Policy on Everything: Do as I say, not as I do! :)
After watching "Apologies of an Economic Hitman", any country in the world better be watching all US personnel in foreign countries really closely. Not doing so, would a treason.
In truth, a big chunk of the people that did oppose Obamacare were opposing it on the basis of freedom. The first thing that popped in my head when I heard it was: Here comes Orwell. That is not why I oppose it, but I do understand the argument as I do believe the Feds (Obama especially) are abusing the commerce clause to the extreme. The justification they used makes it impossible to see the limit of what impacts interstate commerce, and therefore what is in the power of the Feds to control.