5 ms·

NSA previously hosted the original UK-USA 1946 agreement[0] which was declassified in 2010 i.e. pre-Snowden (seems to 404 now). It is limited to sharing of "for

NSA previously hosted the original UK-USA 1946 agreement[0] which was declassified in 2010 i.e. pre-Snowden (seems to 404 now). It is limited to sharing of "foreign communications" which is defined as those not being UK/USA. The Snowden leaks included material acknowledging that this was the purpose of the agreement. The reason the incidental collection was controversial was _because_ it was against a strict reading of the agreement. See this article[1] which I believe is quoting straight from Snowden leaks; "[The March 1946 UKUSA agreement] has evolved to include a common understanding that both governments will not target each other's citizens/persons. However, when it is in the best interest of each nation, each reserved the right to conduct unilateral Comint action against each other's citizens/persons. "Under certain circumstances, it may be advisable and allowable to target second-party persons and second-party communications unilaterally when it is in the best interests of the US." Note that this is saying that they reserve the right to do it unilaterally i.e. without the knowledge of the other, and this is considered against the purpose of the agreement. I stand by the statement that the general understanding of the agreement - that it is a way for countries to request surveillance of their own citizens to skirt domestic law - is 180 degrees wrong. The agreement is the opposite. [0] https://web.archive.org/web/20120202160554/https://www.nsa.gov/public_info/_files/ukusa/agreement_outline_5mar46.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20120202160554/https://www.nsa.g... [1] https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/02/history-of-5-eyes-explainer https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/02/history-of-5-e...

boomboomsubban 3y ago
You keep looking at what the intelligence agencies are publicly saying and ignoring the leaked documents showing they are regularly spying on each other's citizens and then using the agreement to share the data. Like this comment >Note that this is saying that they reserve the right to do it unilaterally i.e. without the knowledge of the other, and this is considered against the purpose of the agreement Yes, the US independently decides to spy on Brits. What makes it malicious is they then share that data with the British. The UK didn't request anything, but the end result is the UK intelligence agencies having sensitive data on UK citizens.
- ChrisKnott 3y ago
  My quote wasn't said publicly, it was from the Snowden leaks
  - boomboomsubban 3y ago
    My mistake, that one part (that says it's fine for us to spy on Five Eyes citizens) was a directive to staff, not the public. Nothing in my post changes.

boomboomsubban 3y ago

You keep looking at what the intelligence agencies are publicly saying and ignoring the leaked documents showing they are regularly spying on each other's citizens and then using the agreement to share the data. Like this comment >Note that this is saying that they reserve the right to do it unilaterally i.e. without the knowledge of the other, and this is considered against the purpose of the agreement Yes, the US independently decides to spy on Brits. What makes it malicious is they then share that data with the British. The UK didn't request anything, but the end result is the UK intelligence agencies having sensitive data on UK citizens.

ChrisKnott 3y ago
My quote wasn't said publicly, it was from the Snowden leaks
- boomboomsubban 3y ago
  My mistake, that one part (that says it's fine for us to spy on Five Eyes citizens) was a directive to staff, not the public. Nothing in my post changes.