4 ms·

[quickly] Reading through: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_surveillance_disclosures_(2013%E2%80%93present) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_surveillanc

[quickly] Reading through: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_surveillance_disclosures_(2013%E2%80%93present) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_surveillance_disclosure... If you say that disclosing surveillance on US citizens was ok, how do you explain these leaks: * """The Norwegian Intelligence Service (NIS), which cooperates with the NSA, has gained access to Russian targets in the Kola Peninsula and other civilian targets. In general, the NIS provides information to the NSA about "Politicians", "Energy" and "Armament".""" * """In France, the NSA targeted people belonging to the worlds of business, politics or French state administration.""" * """the NSA had been monitoring telephone conversations of 35 world leaders""" * """In an effort codenamed GENIE, computer specialists can control foreign computer networks using "covert implants," a form of remotely transmitted malware on tens of thousands of devices annually.""" * """According to Edward Snowden, the NSA has established secret intelligence partnerships with many Western governments.""" * """revealed NSA spying on multiple diplomatic missions of the European Union (EU) and the United Nations Headquarters in New York.""" How are these matters relevant to the citizens of the United States? Aren't these things exactly what spy agencies are supposed to do? Why should Snowden get a pardon for disrupting normal intelligence work?

DiabloD3 10y ago
Because their versions of the NSA spy on Americans doing the same things we do for them, and then trade the information. Their NSA spies on us, our NSA spies on them, they trade to subvert their local laws. That is maybe the most important disclosure that Snowden helped make happen.
- oconnore 10y ago
  > their versions of the NSA spy on Americans doing the same things we do for them, and then trade the information. Disclosing the things I listed is not required to tell us that.
  - EdHominem 10y ago
    Actually, it is. We've had whistleblowers before who tried to censor what they told us and it didn't have half the impact. As long as the leadership of the NSA keeps treasonously lying, all leaks are necessary and thus justified.
    - oconnore 10y ago
      Whisleblower protections typically don't have clauses that protect dumping a bunch of juicy, exciting tidbits so that people pay attention. You're informing the public of what they need to know, not making a Jason Bourne movie.
      - EdHominem 10y ago
        In this case Snowden was legally required to refuse and report illegal orders. He knew the leaders were well aware of their infractions and wouldn't stop, so he couldn't just report the abuse internally. Unfortunately, dumping juicy tidbits is the only way to get the attention needed to change things. The bad guys are spending our money lying to our politicians about it. Without showing them to be liars again and again (with the release) of these tidbits, they'd simply spin their way out of it.
    - icecold12741 10y ago
      Except they didn't lie. He said he saw them lie to Congress but that was for the open-door, public session. If you think Congress isn't getting the details in closed-door, classified briefs, then you don't understand the relationship Intelligence Agencies have with Congress. None of this came as a surprise to any Congressman with interactions with Intel Agencies. Hell, none of this should have come as a surprise if you know anything about security/cybersecurity. As long as there are systems which hide info, there will be backdoors and people trying to break them. The exact same things are being done by every "first world" government on the planet. And sadly, what they do is FAR less intrusive than what Google does. They make text documents out of your phone calls to try and find new products to sell you... They have copies of every text you ever made on an Android device, every site you have visited, every e-mail you wrote or received on Gmail... All the info the NSA gathered that Snowden was "abhorred" by, was less than 1% of what Google has on you. What's the difference? Google will sell it. The NSA may look through it, but they won't sell it to the highest bidder. Every device Google makes is just another way to gather info on their users. They are, first and foremost, an advertising company. And they are the best in the world at that because of all the info they have on all their users.

DiabloD3 10y ago

Because their versions of the NSA spy on Americans doing the same things we do for them, and then trade the information. Their NSA spies on us, our NSA spies on them, they trade to subvert their local laws. That is maybe the most important disclosure that Snowden helped make happen.

oconnore 10y ago
> their versions of the NSA spy on Americans doing the same things we do for them, and then trade the information. Disclosing the things I listed is not required to tell us that.
- EdHominem 10y ago
  Actually, it is. We've had whistleblowers before who tried to censor what they told us and it didn't have half the impact. As long as the leadership of the NSA keeps treasonously lying, all leaks are necessary and thus justified.
  - oconnore 10y ago
    Whisleblower protections typically don't have clauses that protect dumping a bunch of juicy, exciting tidbits so that people pay attention. You're informing the public of what they need to know, not making a Jason Bourne movie.
    - EdHominem 10y ago
      In this case Snowden was legally required to refuse and report illegal orders. He knew the leaders were well aware of their infractions and wouldn't stop, so he couldn't just report the abuse internally. Unfortunately, dumping juicy tidbits is the only way to get the attention needed to change things. The bad guys are spending our money lying to our politicians about it. Without showing them to be liars again and again (with the release) of these tidbits, they'd simply spin their way out of it.
  - icecold12741 10y ago
    Except they didn't lie. He said he saw them lie to Congress but that was for the open-door, public session. If you think Congress isn't getting the details in closed-door, classified briefs, then you don't understand the relationship Intelligence Agencies have with Congress. None of this came as a surprise to any Congressman with interactions with Intel Agencies. Hell, none of this should have come as a surprise if you know anything about security/cybersecurity. As long as there are systems which hide info, there will be backdoors and people trying to break them. The exact same things are being done by every "first world" government on the planet. And sadly, what they do is FAR less intrusive than what Google does. They make text documents out of your phone calls to try and find new products to sell you... They have copies of every text you ever made on an Android device, every site you have visited, every e-mail you wrote or received on Gmail... All the info the NSA gathered that Snowden was "abhorred" by, was less than 1% of what Google has on you. What's the difference? Google will sell it. The NSA may look through it, but they won't sell it to the highest bidder. Every device Google makes is just another way to gather info on their users. They are, first and foremost, an advertising company. And they are the best in the world at that because of all the info they have on all their users.