7 ms·
As far as I'm aware, the country of which I am a citizen does not take an adversarial approach to other countries. If I learned that it's spying on people of ot
by dictum 13y ago
As far as I'm aware, the country of which I am a citizen does not take an adversarial approach to other countries. If I learned that it's spying on people of other countries, I'd be just as concerned as I am about the NSA/the USG. None of that changes the fact that the NSA and the USG have a us vs. them mentality and it's only natural that Americans look at their government with a corresponding us vs. them view.
I can understand the USG watching a tourist, since they might commit a crime on US soil. But I'm a not a tourist. I'm not on American soil. My data is flowing through servers in the US, American-developed routers and American-developed OSes only because of the historical accident that the US loved globalization so much that its corporations now dominate the world and made the technical standards the whole world depends on.
If I could limit my exposure to the USG, I would. I want nothing from them, just as I don't expect an appendix removal from the NHS.
The line drawn between foreigners and American citizens stands on very thin ground. It's fraying. Think about it: who are the people with the greatest power to commit a terrorist act, the people who are already inside the US or the people who are outside?
Americans will be spied on. The NSA merely collects all data, and the magic of parallel construction will distribute it to the FBI or your friendly corrupt local authority.
- diminoten 13y agoThe US has organizations which look inward for terrorists - the FBI, DEA, ATF, TSA, local law enforcement, etc. We have our own country fairly well covered, with well-establish legal precedent and rules of engagement. The NSA is an intelligence gathering organization for the parts of the world we don't have covered, and its goal is to collect global intelligence. It doesn't treat anyone adversarially, as it has no "troops" with which to engage foreigners. It's massively near-sighted to think there are no groups in the world plotting the harm of US citizens. You might not be part of those groups, but how do we know if we don't look at you?
- dictum 13y ago>it has no "troops" with which to engage foreigners. It has no troops, but it has the CIA, who can assemble a makeshift covert "troop" in no time. >You might not be part of those groups, but how do we know if we don't look at you? Exactly the reasoning soon to be used to allow domestic mass surveillance. Mark my words.
- diminoten 13y agoThat is hardly the most significant thing I wrote in my comment. edit: US citizens already get looked at by other government orgs. What you're talking about already happens.
- dragonwriter 13y ago> it has no "troops" with which to engage foreigners. Well, if you ignore that thing where the NSA is an part of the Department of Defense, and that its director is also the commander of a sub-unified command of the US military, sure.