6 ms·

It's used throughout the comments and the topic generally. I don't call it out (for meaning a state with borders aligned with an ethnicity) because I get the po

It's used throughout the comments and the topic generally. I don't call it out (for meaning a state with borders aligned with an ethnicity) because I get the point being made. As for sponsorship, states sponsor their industries by providing labor trained at public expense, promoting them abroad through trade agreements, access to trade representation etc. so there is the technical definition of sponsorship met. The revolving door between Unit 8200 and surveillance startups is documented as is Israel's courting of KSA and the UAE with access to intelligence sharing and capabilities as a bargaining chip. And why wouldn't they? It's good for the state and its industry. Just sucks for everyone else. The definition of sponsorship doesn't matter when it is met in every sense of the word.

montblanc 5y ago
> Just sucks for everyone else Not necessarily. I assume you mean it fortifies despot regimes in the Middle East right? I no longer think at this time there is any sane alternative.
- Sporktacular 5y ago
  Because that's worked out so well until now. So may as well make a little cash on the side of it, eh? Do you think the path to end tyranny was so smooth in developed countries? Think back through Western revolutionary history and now immediately forget the name of every leader the moment you think of them - because that's what's happening, right now, in these countries at this exact stage of their political development. The technology now exists to make effective popular resistance impossible. Every possible rebellion strangled at birth. Every potential leader, every sympathetic journalist, religious or opposition figure, immediately identified, located and silenced. And apparently that's worth a comfortable 6 figure salary to a lot of engineers and managers in comfortable, developed countries. Do you really think you'd be in the position you're in if your ancestors never had the chance to remove their despotic king/emperor/dear leader? If you don't think it would be another North Korea, maybe it's because of some ahistorical belief that your culture is inherently more civilised. So you probably don't see the racism that's implicit in your statement. From my experience in the Middle East, seeing people march for an end to corruption, for justice, for a chance for their kids, I realise I hardly know anyone back home as brave, as prepared to risk everything for their political and civil rights. They aren't marching for another ruler. They deserve a chance. So fuck NSO and its deplorable staff.
  - montblanc 5y ago
    I don't care about NSO at all, they can shut down tomorrow for all I care. I'm just saying if the alternative is between something like the Islamic Revolution of Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood type movements - to something like the military regime Egypt has now or whatever the Saudis came up with, I take the latter. What you said about resistance being impossible - it won't get any better under a radical Islamic rule as we are seeing in Iran. All I am saying it can get way worse. it CAN become North Korea. What we have now in several areas there may be the best we can get for now. And a big part of how I feel about this is about self survival - the Iranian regime hates the West (and especially the U.S but not only) in very deep ways that Saudi Arabia/UAE/Egypt/etc do not. That's how it is. As long as it is what it is selling stuff to Saudi Arabia doesn't sound super terrible.
    - Sporktacular 5y ago
      They don't just use sales to oppose the Muslim Brotherhood! They are bombing innocent Yemenis who have ZERO connection to Iran. They backed Salafis, like Al-Qaeda for decades (forgotten about those guys?) They use them to jail journalists for reporting on corruption, women rights activists for driving. People just trying to make their countries a bit better. You say "if the alternative is between...", and then proceed to just accept the false choice that it's either tyranny or anarchy, using that reasoning to give a pass to the scum making a buck from some of the most disgusting regimes on the planet. Western countries took generations of incremental improvements to arrive here, all while tyrants always used that argument to try stay on top. You're uncritically buying the line that Iran or the Muslim Brotherhood are the worst (which could be argued) but the other less so, because they are on "our side". If you prioritise human rights, that lives on both sides are equally valuable (and I suspect from this thread that you don't) then such a distinction is meaningless. It's a fear-driven siege mentality and terribly short sighted to think that in the region that brought us Gadhafi, Saddam, Daesh and the Mujahaddin, somehow KSA, Egypt or the UAE will magically always align with however your interests evolve. Thanks to NSO they ARE a step closer to North Korea and destabilising the region in the long term with repression and misery. But you're only interested in short term outcomes for Israel/Western countries, kicking the can down the road when the consequences of such sales will have unknown impacts for decades. After seeing how it's played out, it's just exhausting to see this kind of mentality after all these years, lost lives and lessons apparently unlearned. Along with greed, this mentality is why the mercenary surveillance industry exists. For the sake of everyones kids both need to end.

montblanc 5y ago

> Just sucks for everyone else Not necessarily. I assume you mean it fortifies despot regimes in the Middle East right? I no longer think at this time there is any sane alternative.

Sporktacular 5y ago
Because that's worked out so well until now. So may as well make a little cash on the side of it, eh? Do you think the path to end tyranny was so smooth in developed countries? Think back through Western revolutionary history and now immediately forget the name of every leader the moment you think of them - because that's what's happening, right now, in these countries at this exact stage of their political development. The technology now exists to make effective popular resistance impossible. Every possible rebellion strangled at birth. Every potential leader, every sympathetic journalist, religious or opposition figure, immediately identified, located and silenced. And apparently that's worth a comfortable 6 figure salary to a lot of engineers and managers in comfortable, developed countries. Do you really think you'd be in the position you're in if your ancestors never had the chance to remove their despotic king/emperor/dear leader? If you don't think it would be another North Korea, maybe it's because of some ahistorical belief that your culture is inherently more civilised. So you probably don't see the racism that's implicit in your statement. From my experience in the Middle East, seeing people march for an end to corruption, for justice, for a chance for their kids, I realise I hardly know anyone back home as brave, as prepared to risk everything for their political and civil rights. They aren't marching for another ruler. They deserve a chance. So fuck NSO and its deplorable staff.
- montblanc 5y ago
  I don't care about NSO at all, they can shut down tomorrow for all I care. I'm just saying if the alternative is between something like the Islamic Revolution of Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood type movements - to something like the military regime Egypt has now or whatever the Saudis came up with, I take the latter. What you said about resistance being impossible - it won't get any better under a radical Islamic rule as we are seeing in Iran. All I am saying it can get way worse. it CAN become North Korea. What we have now in several areas there may be the best we can get for now. And a big part of how I feel about this is about self survival - the Iranian regime hates the West (and especially the U.S but not only) in very deep ways that Saudi Arabia/UAE/Egypt/etc do not. That's how it is. As long as it is what it is selling stuff to Saudi Arabia doesn't sound super terrible.
  - Sporktacular 5y ago
    They don't just use sales to oppose the Muslim Brotherhood! They are bombing innocent Yemenis who have ZERO connection to Iran. They backed Salafis, like Al-Qaeda for decades (forgotten about those guys?) They use them to jail journalists for reporting on corruption, women rights activists for driving. People just trying to make their countries a bit better. You say "if the alternative is between...", and then proceed to just accept the false choice that it's either tyranny or anarchy, using that reasoning to give a pass to the scum making a buck from some of the most disgusting regimes on the planet. Western countries took generations of incremental improvements to arrive here, all while tyrants always used that argument to try stay on top. You're uncritically buying the line that Iran or the Muslim Brotherhood are the worst (which could be argued) but the other less so, because they are on "our side". If you prioritise human rights, that lives on both sides are equally valuable (and I suspect from this thread that you don't) then such a distinction is meaningless. It's a fear-driven siege mentality and terribly short sighted to think that in the region that brought us Gadhafi, Saddam, Daesh and the Mujahaddin, somehow KSA, Egypt or the UAE will magically always align with however your interests evolve. Thanks to NSO they ARE a step closer to North Korea and destabilising the region in the long term with repression and misery. But you're only interested in short term outcomes for Israel/Western countries, kicking the can down the road when the consequences of such sales will have unknown impacts for decades. After seeing how it's played out, it's just exhausting to see this kind of mentality after all these years, lost lives and lessons apparently unlearned. Along with greed, this mentality is why the mercenary surveillance industry exists. For the sake of everyones kids both need to end.