3 ms·

Clandestine intelligence service spying on non-US citizens == literally the entire point of the Agency No, and that's the whole point of why Snowden leaked tho

Clandestine intelligence service spying on non-US citizens == literally the entire point of the Agency No, and that's the whole point of why Snowden leaked those documents in the first place. There is a real danger in global mass surveillance, and it's a pity that this central point has been lost so much in all this nationalist talking. It's not literally or otherwise the point of intelligence agencies to spy on all foreigners of all other countries than your own. Not at all. Intelligence agencies are supposed to gather intelligence not just for the sake of it, but for national security purposes only. They're supposed to and allowed to spy on both foreigners and their own citizens if those people and their actions can reasonably be conceived as being vital to the national security interests. That includes the NSA, who can of course spy legally and legitimately on US citizens with a proper court order in their pocket. There can and should be guidelines and ethical standards for spying on foreigners just as there should be guidelines and ethical standards for spying on your own citizens. This problem used to be insignificant, because intelligence collection was mostly targeted, or concerned military SIGINT or analyzing written published documents. But times have changed, that is Snowden's point and that of many others. We're now talking about bulk data collection and mass surveillance that can easily be abused. To be fair, I have never seen any clearcut indication that the NSA spies in obviously unethical ways on foreigners. They are flooded with so much data that they spend great efforts in sorting out what is vital to national security automatically. But it is not reasonable to claim that problems and abuse could not happen, that no guidelines are needed or that it's no problem or even the purpose of such an agency to indiscriminately spy on all foreigners. I would expect American leaders to place a higher priority on protecting American lives. That's also their job. That's not at all what I was talking about. Edit: Flagged for stating an obvious truth.

pc86 10y ago
> It's not literally or otherwise the point of intelligence agencies to spy on all foreigners of all other countries than your own. I never said all. > They're supposed to and allowed to spy on both foreigners and their own citizens Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought the CIA was prohibited from operating on US soil? > There can and should be guidelines and ethical standards for spying on foreigners just as there should be guidelines and ethical standards for spying on your own citizens. I agree, but the bar is much lower for a US intelligence agency to spy on a Pakistani courier than it is to spy on a CPA from Bloomington, IL. > Edit: Flagged for stating an obvious truth. In violation of the community guidelines: "If you flag something, please don't also comment that you did."[0] [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- JohnStrange 10y ago
  I never said all. True, I was exaggerating to get my point across. There should be guidelines against pervasive online mass surveillance irrespectively of whether foreigners or US citizens are concerned. Otherwise you simply have double moral standards. Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought the CIA was prohibited from operating on US soil? I believe that's correct. However, CIA is allowed to spy on Americans abroad. Anyway, I was talking about the NSA who are allowed to spy on US citizens with proper court order. I agree, but the bar is much lower for a US intelligence agency to spy on a Pakistani courier than it is to spy on a CPA from Bloomington, IL. Sure, but this is an example of targeted surveillance. Nobody in his right mind is or should be against that. There are plenty of ways for US authorities to spy on US citizens by targeted surveillance. The problem is that the US has double-moral standards insofar as mass surveillance is concerned. The problem is not primarily that NSA might have spied on their own citizens too much. The problem is that they (and without any doubt non-US intelligence agencies, too) massively collect data on too many people and too indiscriminately. If you want to be egoistic, you can also easily see that this is a problem for US citizens, as it's common practice to just ask another intelligence agency for data if you're not allowed. No big point in restricting NSA when they can ask French or German intelligence for data on a US citizen, right? But the real problem is that US politicians and many US citizens talk about foreigners as if they had zero rights and they and their lives were completely irrelevant, when they think no foreigner listens. To give another example, I've recently watched some senate hearings in which senators literally discussed which regime the US should install in Syria after Assad, and not a single time did they even mention the Syrian people or their will. They also talked about disaster relief aid as a 'soft power to influence foreign governments'. In a public hearing that anybody in the world can watch. How stupid is that? This kind of talking does not occur in other countries I know, certainly not in Europe. In violation of the community guidelines: "If you flag something, please don't also comment that you did."[0] I did not flag anything and did not violate any posting guideline. I wasn't even snarky. My original post was flagged, even though it is 100% truthful and relevant, because the above article, again, only talks about US citizens as "victims" of needless surveillance and data gathering. Apparently whoever flagged it has problems with the truth and prefers instead to reiterate their own political opinion. But it's not as bad here as it is on Slashdot yet.

pc86 10y ago

> It's not literally or otherwise the point of intelligence agencies to spy on all foreigners of all other countries than your own. I never said all. > They're supposed to and allowed to spy on both foreigners and their own citizens Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought the CIA was prohibited from operating on US soil? > There can and should be guidelines and ethical standards for spying on foreigners just as there should be guidelines and ethical standards for spying on your own citizens. I agree, but the bar is much lower for a US intelligence agency to spy on a Pakistani courier than it is to spy on a CPA from Bloomington, IL. > Edit: Flagged for stating an obvious truth. In violation of the community guidelines: "If you flag something, please don't also comment that you did."[0] [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

JohnStrange 10y ago
I never said all. True, I was exaggerating to get my point across. There should be guidelines against pervasive online mass surveillance irrespectively of whether foreigners or US citizens are concerned. Otherwise you simply have double moral standards. Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought the CIA was prohibited from operating on US soil? I believe that's correct. However, CIA is allowed to spy on Americans abroad. Anyway, I was talking about the NSA who are allowed to spy on US citizens with proper court order. I agree, but the bar is much lower for a US intelligence agency to spy on a Pakistani courier than it is to spy on a CPA from Bloomington, IL. Sure, but this is an example of targeted surveillance. Nobody in his right mind is or should be against that. There are plenty of ways for US authorities to spy on US citizens by targeted surveillance. The problem is that the US has double-moral standards insofar as mass surveillance is concerned. The problem is not primarily that NSA might have spied on their own citizens too much. The problem is that they (and without any doubt non-US intelligence agencies, too) massively collect data on too many people and too indiscriminately. If you want to be egoistic, you can also easily see that this is a problem for US citizens, as it's common practice to just ask another intelligence agency for data if you're not allowed. No big point in restricting NSA when they can ask French or German intelligence for data on a US citizen, right? But the real problem is that US politicians and many US citizens talk about foreigners as if they had zero rights and they and their lives were completely irrelevant, when they think no foreigner listens. To give another example, I've recently watched some senate hearings in which senators literally discussed which regime the US should install in Syria after Assad, and not a single time did they even mention the Syrian people or their will. They also talked about disaster relief aid as a 'soft power to influence foreign governments'. In a public hearing that anybody in the world can watch. How stupid is that? This kind of talking does not occur in other countries I know, certainly not in Europe. In violation of the community guidelines: "If you flag something, please don't also comment that you did."[0] I did not flag anything and did not violate any posting guideline. I wasn't even snarky. My original post was flagged, even though it is 100% truthful and relevant, because the above article, again, only talks about US citizens as "victims" of needless surveillance and data gathering. Apparently whoever flagged it has problems with the truth and prefers instead to reiterate their own political opinion. But it's not as bad here as it is on Slashdot yet.