3 ms·

Israel reportedly has unredacted data feeds from the USA(this was part of the Snowden leaks, Guardian link: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/11/nsa-am

Israel reportedly has unredacted data feeds from the USA(this was part of the Snowden leaks, Guardian link: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/11/nsa-americans-personal-data-israel-documents https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/11/nsa-americans-...). This means that they can read even the personal email of Supreme Court justices, congressmen and senators. However they have a gentleman’s agreement to not do that. “Wink”

_zoltan_ 1y ago
link to any credible report?
- shrubble 1y ago
  Updated my post with a link, thanks.
CWuestefeld 1y ago
However they have a gentleman’s agreement to not do that. Trying to remember back to Snowden, I think I recall that not only DON'T they have such an agreement, but the intelligence folks consider this a feature. The US government is Constitutionally forbidden from reading "US persons" communications, but our Constitution has no such restriction on third parties. So if those third parties do the spying for us, and then tell our intelligence folks about it, everybody wins. Well, except for the people.
- rcpt 1y ago
  That's pretty optimistic. I think it's just more likely that we send them whatever they ask for when they ask for it.
hammock 1y ago
Why would the US send unredacted personal email of justices and senators to a foreign country?
- lmm 1y ago
  Because it places a higher priority on the desires of that foreign country than on the privacy of its justices and senators?
- shtzvhdx 1y ago
  To circumvent US law prohibiting spying on Americans. It's cute, really. Country A turns a blind eye and even helps country B vacuum all of it's citizen's data. Then country B gifts back to A. And vice versa. Since country A didn't do the surveillance, it didn't break any laws. Furthermore, it's legal to accept data from third parties. As to why country A would allow even its senators and congressmen to be spied on by B? That's obvious - country A's intel agencies are most interested in their budget! But this is a special case. It's Israel.
  - hammock 1y ago
    And why would country A’s lawmakers allow that legal loophole to be used against themselves? They wrote the laws no? Or are they being blackmailed, or is their power a facade?
    - somenameforme 1y ago
      Congressmen don't have classified access by default. Even those involved in oversight often rely on briefings which are written by the people potentially breaking the law and include whatever they choose to include, or not. It's akin to regulatory authorities that operate by asking those being regulated 'Are you still operating under all appropriate regulations?' And laws are also written extremely broadly, which gives the intelligence agencies extreme leeway in interpreting them as they see fit. And even if they go beyond that, it's not like there are any consequences. For one of the most overt - James Clapper indisputably lied under oath and absolutely nothing happened. Furthermore politicians are generally ignorant on most topics, especially on anything remotely technically related. But revealing that ignorance is politically damaging, so they turn into yes men on most of these topics.
      - 1y ago

_zoltan_ 1y ago

link to any credible report?

shrubble 1y ago
Updated my post with a link, thanks.

CWuestefeld 1y ago

However they have a gentleman’s agreement to not do that. Trying to remember back to Snowden, I think I recall that not only DON'T they have such an agreement, but the intelligence folks consider this a feature. The US government is Constitutionally forbidden from reading "US persons" communications, but our Constitution has no such restriction on third parties. So if those third parties do the spying for us, and then tell our intelligence folks about it, everybody wins. Well, except for the people.

rcpt 1y ago
That's pretty optimistic. I think it's just more likely that we send them whatever they ask for when they ask for it.

hammock 1y ago

Why would the US send unredacted personal email of justices and senators to a foreign country?

lmm 1y ago
Because it places a higher priority on the desires of that foreign country than on the privacy of its justices and senators?
shtzvhdx 1y ago
To circumvent US law prohibiting spying on Americans. It's cute, really. Country A turns a blind eye and even helps country B vacuum all of it's citizen's data. Then country B gifts back to A. And vice versa. Since country A didn't do the surveillance, it didn't break any laws. Furthermore, it's legal to accept data from third parties. As to why country A would allow even its senators and congressmen to be spied on by B? That's obvious - country A's intel agencies are most interested in their budget! But this is a special case. It's Israel.
- hammock 1y ago
  And why would country A’s lawmakers allow that legal loophole to be used against themselves? They wrote the laws no? Or are they being blackmailed, or is their power a facade?
  - somenameforme 1y ago
    Congressmen don't have classified access by default. Even those involved in oversight often rely on briefings which are written by the people potentially breaking the law and include whatever they choose to include, or not. It's akin to regulatory authorities that operate by asking those being regulated 'Are you still operating under all appropriate regulations?' And laws are also written extremely broadly, which gives the intelligence agencies extreme leeway in interpreting them as they see fit. And even if they go beyond that, it's not like there are any consequences. For one of the most overt - James Clapper indisputably lied under oath and absolutely nothing happened. Furthermore politicians are generally ignorant on most topics, especially on anything remotely technically related. But revealing that ignorance is politically damaging, so they turn into yes men on most of these topics.
    - 1y ago