3 ms·

That's a dangerously lax attitude to have. What threat to national security could or would the CIA curtail by bugging Ecuador's embassy in London? I'd understa

That's a dangerously lax attitude to have. What threat to national security could or would the CIA curtail by bugging Ecuador's embassy in London? I'd understand Chinese or Russian embassies, but expecting every embassy on Earth is an incredibly permissive stance to take, even as a safety-conscious citizen of the U.S.

randuser 13y ago
> What threat to national security could or would the CIA curtail by bugging Ecuador's embassy in London? Possible communications to/from Julian Assange?
- Centigonal 13y ago
  Ah -- that sure is true. Part of my post has been invalidated. I think the point about expecting every embassy to be bugged being a dangerously lax attitude remains valid, though.
prostoalex 13y ago
Because political alliances are impermanent? It would be pretty hard to bug Ecuador's embassy the day after they were deemed a threat to national security. >>> I'd understand Chinese or Russian embassies "We've always been at war with Eastasia".
- Centigonal 13y ago
  It's not so much a matter of enmity (or lack thereof) as it is a matter of capability (or lack thereof). China and Russia are capable of causing serious harm to U.S. citizens and interests. Ecuador, not so much. Of course, this view does not account for black swans, but I think the possibility of an entirely unprecedented method for a militarily and economically inferior nation to meaningfully harm U.S. citizens and/or interests being developed and put to use (not even accounting for alliances or motives) is sufficiently low that the risk is not worth surveilling the world to mitigate.
iuguy 13y ago
> What threat to national security... Ecuador's HUMINT operations and capabilities will be based out of the embassy. They may not be co-ordinated at the embassy but at some point they will make contact with them. Even so, it's not about national security, it's about protecting interests, political and business. Interests that are an extension of US/FiveEyes policy. Policies which are largely influenced by big business.

randuser 13y ago

> What threat to national security could or would the CIA curtail by bugging Ecuador's embassy in London? Possible communications to/from Julian Assange?

Centigonal 13y ago
Ah -- that sure is true. Part of my post has been invalidated. I think the point about expecting every embassy to be bugged being a dangerously lax attitude remains valid, though.

prostoalex 13y ago

Because political alliances are impermanent? It would be pretty hard to bug Ecuador's embassy the day after they were deemed a threat to national security. >>> I'd understand Chinese or Russian embassies "We've always been at war with Eastasia".

Centigonal 13y ago
It's not so much a matter of enmity (or lack thereof) as it is a matter of capability (or lack thereof). China and Russia are capable of causing serious harm to U.S. citizens and interests. Ecuador, not so much. Of course, this view does not account for black swans, but I think the possibility of an entirely unprecedented method for a militarily and economically inferior nation to meaningfully harm U.S. citizens and/or interests being developed and put to use (not even accounting for alliances or motives) is sufficiently low that the risk is not worth surveilling the world to mitigate.

iuguy 13y ago

> What threat to national security... Ecuador's HUMINT operations and capabilities will be based out of the embassy. They may not be co-ordinated at the embassy but at some point they will make contact with them. Even so, it's not about national security, it's about protecting interests, political and business. Interests that are an extension of US/FiveEyes policy. Policies which are largely influenced by big business.