17 ms·

U.S. spy agency bugged U.N. headquarters: Germany's Spiegel

78 points by Suraj-Sun 13y ago

ferdo 13y ago
It might make for a shorter list if we name the people and groups that the NSA hasn't spied on.
- eli 13y ago
  It's almost as if that's their whole purpose.
  - zxcdw 13y ago
    Could someone elaborate what for is such spying happening in the first place? What is it really needed for? What would happen without it?
    - rainsford 13y ago
      Very generally I think spying happens because nations and non-state groups have interests that are often not aligned with each other, and nations protect their own interests by trying to understand the interests of other nations. Since very few nations are totally up-front about what their interest, goals and behind the scenes actions are, intelligence gathering becomes necessary. In a perfect world, this wouldn't be necessary. Not only would countries be totally open with each other, but everyone would work together to further the best interests of all. Since we don't live in that kind of world, everyone gathers intelligence on everyone else. I think it's worth mentioning that people have made the (reasonable, IMO) claim that spying in general actually makes the world a safer place since it removes a great deal of uncertainty in international relations. If countries had to deal with the rest of the world as a black box with uncertain motivations and potentially hidden actions, I think it's reasonable to suggest that mutual suspicion would significantly impede international cooperation.
    - alan_cx 13y ago
      The core basic legitimate reason is to verify what is said with what is actually happening; to discover the genuine intentions of the opposition. So, olde days, USSR says "we have no intention of starting WW3", and US spying would seek to verify that. If of both sides can convince themselves that the opposition is being honest, diplomacy can work. If you cant be sure of what is being said, you quickly end up in trouble. Both sides legitimately do this as much as they can. Its a confidence builder. It is why both the US and USSR tolerated spies and had a no assassination rule. They both new, in the olde days, that it was beneficial to both to allow each other to spy and gain confidence in each others position. Trouble comes when nation states extend that to seek political or commercial advantage, or apply it to their own citizens and / allies, who expect to get the benefit of the doubt. Worse still when law enforcement and spy agencies start to combine. This is why I assert that the US, and UK governments treat their citizens as enemies. We have seen plenty of times what its like when intelligence agencies and secret services (SS) are turned on the population. Unless Obama and Camoron do something now to reign this in, some very dark days are ahead of us.
    - a3n 13y ago
      My guess is that economic and industrial espionage is a big part of it.
    - saraid216 13y ago
      alan_cx has the best explanation that I've read on HN yet (though he's wrong about the "allies" part). It's essentially "trust, but verify". You might trust a business partner to not screw you, but you should still read the contracts you sign with them. That's why we tell you to "get it in writing". Unfortunately, that kind of verification works because there's a legal system in place that you can invoke for punishment of contract-breaking, or at least compensation. At the nation-state level, that verification mechanism breaks down for several reasons. (1) There is no higher legal power to appeal to. The UN is a deal-broker, but it doesn't have the weight to throw around. (2) Things like the Great Firewall and propaganda will naturally make official news sources untrustworthy. You can see some of this on the stock market: most shareholders only have press releases and news reports to decide how the company is doing. But this is only half the story, which is why insider trading happens at all. So how do you get around these problems? By finding out directly in ways that are harder to fake. Which is what spying is all about.
rayiner 13y ago
"Citing secret U.S. documents obtained by fugitive former intelligence contractor Edward Snowden, Der Spiegel said the files showed how the United States systematically spied on other states and institutions." So you mean, the very purpose for which the NSA exists?
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- Zirro 13y ago
  They are most likely referring to allies of the U.S, who may not expect being targeted by the NSA.
  - ianhawes 13y ago
    All countries are aware of each other's foreign intelligence services, though they are most likely not aware of specific intrusions. Smaller countries like to pretend they're outraged at even the thought of foreign intelligence, however that is the nature of the game. In fact, one of the countries that spies on the United States consistently is Israel, one of our biggest allies. Mossad has repeatedly spied on the U.S. since the creation of that agency.
- ferdo 13y ago
  It's safe to say that "bugging our allies" probably isn't in the NSA mission statement.
  - rayiner 13y ago
    Spying on allies is a time-treasured practice. Countries have no allies, just frenemies.
    - ferdo 13y ago
      If it's not part of the mission statement, it's off mission. I don't consent to rogue intelligence agencies at the heart of my government.
Millennium 13y ago
I'd suggest finding a list of countries that haven't bugged the UN headquarters. It is probably shorter.
- fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
  Given the location of the UN Headquarters, it isn't possible for any country to be more effective at spying than the US. Like I said in another thread[2], if you spy on the UN, you own it. You have a disproportionate advantage in all negotiations (unless other countries are also effective at spying[1]). You might think that it is fine that the US effectively owns the UN, but its credibility is ruined. The compromised UN is effectively a body for representing and legitimizing the wishes of the cabal of US allies as if they were the actual consensus of all UN member states. [1] But it is still not possible for any nation to be more effective at spying than the US, given the UN's location. [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6272458 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6272458
  - Millennium 13y ago
    None of what you say refutes my assertion that spying on the UN is a common activity. If anything, it sounds like you're saying it's only wrong when the US does it.
malandrew 13y ago
The US really could stand to learn a few things from Henry L. Stimson, who held many important political positions related to foreign policy during the first half of the 20th century. Here are two choice quotes: "The only way to make a man trustworthy is to trust him; and the surest way to make him untrustworthy is to distrust him and show your distrust." and "Gentlemen don't read each other's mail." The US Government doesn't act with trust and goodwill towards anyone and therefor should not be surprised that no one else shows us trust and goodwill back. Given this news, it would be most fitting if the UN decided to move its headquarters elsewhere. My vote is for Berlin.
- gruseom 13y ago
  Stimson was talking about people. Nations aren't people (they "have no friends, only interests", as the saying goes), and it's a mistake to anthropomorphize them.
  - devx 13y ago
    I disagree. What made US so great and so loved by the world were its values, and being a role model (a good one that is) for every other country. Being just as bad as China or Russia and showing complete distrust in partners and allies, and forcing their hands to do what they want is a good way to ruin that whole image for US, and create an environment that is hostile towards US internationally, instead of everyone wanting to cooperate with US (without being threatened or blackmailed, that is). People have interests, too. They just learned to cooperate with each other in a harmonious environment to be as productive as possible. Double crossing and being conflictual at every turn is not productive for people, nor for nations. Besides, it's people that create those relationships between nations.
    - ianhawes 13y ago
      No, what makes the United States so great and loved by the world is the opportunity it provides.
- saraid216 13y ago
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
lukejduncan 13y ago
Is this link broken? I'm taken to an article titled "U.S. spy agency edges into the light after Snowden revelations" Another comment quotes the article as saying the following, which doesn't appear in the article I'm reading. "Citing secret U.S. documents obtained by fugitive former intelligence contractor Edward Snowden, Der Spiegel said the files showed how the United States systematically spied on other states and institutions." This is the link I'm being sent to http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/us-usa-security-nsa-idUSBRE97O08120130825 http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/us-usa-security-ns...
- lukejduncan 13y ago
  I think this is the link that was intended http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/uk-usa-security-nsa-idUKBRE97O08B20130825 http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/uk-usa-security-nsa...
ianhawes 13y ago
I don't see how Snowden can justify releasing top secret documents that DON'T show the United States spying on it's own citizens. One of the goals of NSA is to gather foreign intelligence. The UN constitutes foreign intelligence. While it may not be popular opinion here, there is a distinction between NSA spying on United States citizens and NSA spying on foreign and international organizations. The former is illegal; the latter is expected.
- dlinder 13y ago
  Is it certain that these leaks actually came from Snowden? In light of the Independent's GCHQ story [1][2], it sounds like there may be State actors providing leaks in the name of Snowden that cast him in a negative light. Ideally, these news outlets would be able to confirm it's the real Snowden via GPG fingerprint or something. [1] http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/exclusive-uks-secret-mideast-internet-surveillance-base-is-revealed-in-edward-snowden-leaks-8781082.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/exclusive-uks-... [2] http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/23/uk-government-independent-military-base http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/23/uk-gove...
  - ianhawes 13y ago
    Ah! Interesting angle. It could certainly be possible, and if it were I definitely wouldn't hold it against Snowden. In fact, the Der Spiegel article [1] fails to release the source document(s), so I'm fairly dubious about who provided this information. [1] http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.spiegel.de%2Fpolitik%2Fausland%2Fnsa-hoerte-zentrale-der-vereinte-nationen-in-new-york-ab-a-918421.html http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=n&prev=...
    - dlinder 13y ago
      There's an English version of the article now, co-authored by Greenwald/Snowden-related journalist Laura Poitras. Looks like the Snowden connection is solid! http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/secret-nsa-documents-show-how-the-us-spies-on-europe-and-the-un-a-918625.html http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/secret-nsa-documen...
jacquesm 13y ago
Earlier thread. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6271259 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6271259
mcantelon 13y ago
In the past the State Department, under Hillary Clinton, also tried to do things such as steal the DNA of UN leaders. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cables-spying-un http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cabl...
- eli 13y ago
  It's questionable [1] how much Hillary Clinton had to do with that order and I'm not sure "steal the DNA" is a fair characterization. Also, that order had its roots at least as far back as 2001. [1] http://www.nationaljournal.com/whitehouse/hillary-clinton-didn-t-turn-diplomats-into-spies-20101130 http://www.nationaljournal.com/whitehouse/hillary-clinton-di...
  - throwaway_yy2Di 13y ago
    I'm not sure "steal the DNA" is a fair characterization. Your National Journal link describes an order "to collect the 'biometric data'... including DNA". What's unfair about this characterization?
    - eli 13y ago
      It's out of context. It suggests the memo is primarily about "stealing DNA" when, in fact, the letters "DNA" do not appear in it: http://www.theguardian.com/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/219058 http://www.theguardian.com/world/us-embassy-cables-documents...
      - deleted 13y ago
        [deleted]
      - jacquesm 13y ago
        http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cables-spying-un http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cabl... f3, DNA, enter.
splrb 13y ago
Because when you're keeping the American people safe, there are no rules - it's a jungle out there you know.
hyperventilator 13y ago
Pretending this is just an American problem actually benefits the US because the info sharing deals will continue uncontested as participating countries are given a pass. Never mind those military bases in Germany or the five eyes. The West is intertwined, hell the whole world is, but deceive yourself if you like.
fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
I think the article text and headline has been changed! What's the name of that news article diff website? This is what was at the link: http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/uk-usa-security-nsa-idUKBRE97O08B20130825 http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/uk-usa-security-nsa... Now it is this: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/us-usa-security-nsa-idUSBRE97O08120130825 http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/us-usa-security-ns... EDIT: Newsdiff doesn't diff Reuters, I guess.

78 points by Suraj-Sun 13y ago

ferdo 13y ago

It might make for a shorter list if we name the people and groups that the NSA hasn't spied on.

eli 13y ago
It's almost as if that's their whole purpose.
- zxcdw 13y ago
  Could someone elaborate what for is such spying happening in the first place? What is it really needed for? What would happen without it?
  - rainsford 13y ago
    Very generally I think spying happens because nations and non-state groups have interests that are often not aligned with each other, and nations protect their own interests by trying to understand the interests of other nations. Since very few nations are totally up-front about what their interest, goals and behind the scenes actions are, intelligence gathering becomes necessary. In a perfect world, this wouldn't be necessary. Not only would countries be totally open with each other, but everyone would work together to further the best interests of all. Since we don't live in that kind of world, everyone gathers intelligence on everyone else. I think it's worth mentioning that people have made the (reasonable, IMO) claim that spying in general actually makes the world a safer place since it removes a great deal of uncertainty in international relations. If countries had to deal with the rest of the world as a black box with uncertain motivations and potentially hidden actions, I think it's reasonable to suggest that mutual suspicion would significantly impede international cooperation.
  - alan_cx 13y ago
    The core basic legitimate reason is to verify what is said with what is actually happening; to discover the genuine intentions of the opposition. So, olde days, USSR says "we have no intention of starting WW3", and US spying would seek to verify that. If of both sides can convince themselves that the opposition is being honest, diplomacy can work. If you cant be sure of what is being said, you quickly end up in trouble. Both sides legitimately do this as much as they can. Its a confidence builder. It is why both the US and USSR tolerated spies and had a no assassination rule. They both new, in the olde days, that it was beneficial to both to allow each other to spy and gain confidence in each others position. Trouble comes when nation states extend that to seek political or commercial advantage, or apply it to their own citizens and / allies, who expect to get the benefit of the doubt. Worse still when law enforcement and spy agencies start to combine. This is why I assert that the US, and UK governments treat their citizens as enemies. We have seen plenty of times what its like when intelligence agencies and secret services (SS) are turned on the population. Unless Obama and Camoron do something now to reign this in, some very dark days are ahead of us.
  - a3n 13y ago
    My guess is that economic and industrial espionage is a big part of it.
  - saraid216 13y ago
    alan_cx has the best explanation that I've read on HN yet (though he's wrong about the "allies" part). It's essentially "trust, but verify". You might trust a business partner to not screw you, but you should still read the contracts you sign with them. That's why we tell you to "get it in writing". Unfortunately, that kind of verification works because there's a legal system in place that you can invoke for punishment of contract-breaking, or at least compensation. At the nation-state level, that verification mechanism breaks down for several reasons. (1) There is no higher legal power to appeal to. The UN is a deal-broker, but it doesn't have the weight to throw around. (2) Things like the Great Firewall and propaganda will naturally make official news sources untrustworthy. You can see some of this on the stock market: most shareholders only have press releases and news reports to decide how the company is doing. But this is only half the story, which is why insider trading happens at all. So how do you get around these problems? By finding out directly in ways that are harder to fake. Which is what spying is all about.

rayiner 13y ago

"Citing secret U.S. documents obtained by fugitive former intelligence contractor Edward Snowden, Der Spiegel said the files showed how the United States systematically spied on other states and institutions." So you mean, the very purpose for which the NSA exists?

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
Zirro 13y ago
They are most likely referring to allies of the U.S, who may not expect being targeted by the NSA.
- ianhawes 13y ago
  All countries are aware of each other's foreign intelligence services, though they are most likely not aware of specific intrusions. Smaller countries like to pretend they're outraged at even the thought of foreign intelligence, however that is the nature of the game. In fact, one of the countries that spies on the United States consistently is Israel, one of our biggest allies. Mossad has repeatedly spied on the U.S. since the creation of that agency.
ferdo 13y ago
It's safe to say that "bugging our allies" probably isn't in the NSA mission statement.
- rayiner 13y ago
  Spying on allies is a time-treasured practice. Countries have no allies, just frenemies.
  - ferdo 13y ago
    If it's not part of the mission statement, it's off mission. I don't consent to rogue intelligence agencies at the heart of my government.

Millennium 13y ago

I'd suggest finding a list of countries that haven't bugged the UN headquarters. It is probably shorter.

fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
Given the location of the UN Headquarters, it isn't possible for any country to be more effective at spying than the US. Like I said in another thread[2], if you spy on the UN, you own it. You have a disproportionate advantage in all negotiations (unless other countries are also effective at spying[1]). You might think that it is fine that the US effectively owns the UN, but its credibility is ruined. The compromised UN is effectively a body for representing and legitimizing the wishes of the cabal of US allies as if they were the actual consensus of all UN member states. [1] But it is still not possible for any nation to be more effective at spying than the US, given the UN's location. [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6272458 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6272458
- Millennium 13y ago
  None of what you say refutes my assertion that spying on the UN is a common activity. If anything, it sounds like you're saying it's only wrong when the US does it.

malandrew 13y ago

The US really could stand to learn a few things from Henry L. Stimson, who held many important political positions related to foreign policy during the first half of the 20th century. Here are two choice quotes: "The only way to make a man trustworthy is to trust him; and the surest way to make him untrustworthy is to distrust him and show your distrust." and "Gentlemen don't read each other's mail." The US Government doesn't act with trust and goodwill towards anyone and therefor should not be surprised that no one else shows us trust and goodwill back. Given this news, it would be most fitting if the UN decided to move its headquarters elsewhere. My vote is for Berlin.

gruseom 13y ago
Stimson was talking about people. Nations aren't people (they "have no friends, only interests", as the saying goes), and it's a mistake to anthropomorphize them.
- devx 13y ago
  I disagree. What made US so great and so loved by the world were its values, and being a role model (a good one that is) for every other country. Being just as bad as China or Russia and showing complete distrust in partners and allies, and forcing their hands to do what they want is a good way to ruin that whole image for US, and create an environment that is hostile towards US internationally, instead of everyone wanting to cooperate with US (without being threatened or blackmailed, that is). People have interests, too. They just learned to cooperate with each other in a harmonious environment to be as productive as possible. Double crossing and being conflictual at every turn is not productive for people, nor for nations. Besides, it's people that create those relationships between nations.
  - ianhawes 13y ago
    No, what makes the United States so great and loved by the world is the opportunity it provides.
saraid216 13y ago

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

lukejduncan 13y ago

Is this link broken? I'm taken to an article titled "U.S. spy agency edges into the light after Snowden revelations" Another comment quotes the article as saying the following, which doesn't appear in the article I'm reading. "Citing secret U.S. documents obtained by fugitive former intelligence contractor Edward Snowden, Der Spiegel said the files showed how the United States systematically spied on other states and institutions." This is the link I'm being sent to http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/us-usa-security-nsa-idUSBRE97O08120130825 http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/us-usa-security-ns...

lukejduncan 13y ago
I think this is the link that was intended http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/uk-usa-security-nsa-idUKBRE97O08B20130825 http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/uk-usa-security-nsa...

ianhawes 13y ago

I don't see how Snowden can justify releasing top secret documents that DON'T show the United States spying on it's own citizens. One of the goals of NSA is to gather foreign intelligence. The UN constitutes foreign intelligence. While it may not be popular opinion here, there is a distinction between NSA spying on United States citizens and NSA spying on foreign and international organizations. The former is illegal; the latter is expected.

dlinder 13y ago
Is it certain that these leaks actually came from Snowden? In light of the Independent's GCHQ story [1][2], it sounds like there may be State actors providing leaks in the name of Snowden that cast him in a negative light. Ideally, these news outlets would be able to confirm it's the real Snowden via GPG fingerprint or something. [1] http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/exclusive-uks-secret-mideast-internet-surveillance-base-is-revealed-in-edward-snowden-leaks-8781082.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/exclusive-uks-... [2] http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/23/uk-government-independent-military-base http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/23/uk-gove...
- ianhawes 13y ago
  Ah! Interesting angle. It could certainly be possible, and if it were I definitely wouldn't hold it against Snowden. In fact, the Der Spiegel article [1] fails to release the source document(s), so I'm fairly dubious about who provided this information. [1] http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.spiegel.de%2Fpolitik%2Fausland%2Fnsa-hoerte-zentrale-der-vereinte-nationen-in-new-york-ab-a-918421.html http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=n&prev=...
  - dlinder 13y ago
    There's an English version of the article now, co-authored by Greenwald/Snowden-related journalist Laura Poitras. Looks like the Snowden connection is solid! http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/secret-nsa-documents-show-how-the-us-spies-on-europe-and-the-un-a-918625.html http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/secret-nsa-documen...

jacquesm 13y ago

Earlier thread. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6271259 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6271259

mcantelon 13y ago

In the past the State Department, under Hillary Clinton, also tried to do things such as steal the DNA of UN leaders. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cables-spying-un http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cabl...

eli 13y ago
It's questionable [1] how much Hillary Clinton had to do with that order and I'm not sure "steal the DNA" is a fair characterization. Also, that order had its roots at least as far back as 2001. [1] http://www.nationaljournal.com/whitehouse/hillary-clinton-didn-t-turn-diplomats-into-spies-20101130 http://www.nationaljournal.com/whitehouse/hillary-clinton-di...
- throwaway_yy2Di 13y ago
  I'm not sure "steal the DNA" is a fair characterization. Your National Journal link describes an order "to collect the 'biometric data'... including DNA". What's unfair about this characterization?
  - eli 13y ago
    It's out of context. It suggests the memo is primarily about "stealing DNA" when, in fact, the letters "DNA" do not appear in it: http://www.theguardian.com/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/219058 http://www.theguardian.com/world/us-embassy-cables-documents...
    - deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
    - jacquesm 13y ago
      http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cables-spying-un http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cabl... f3, DNA, enter.

splrb 13y ago

Because when you're keeping the American people safe, there are no rules - it's a jungle out there you know.

hyperventilator 13y ago

Pretending this is just an American problem actually benefits the US because the info sharing deals will continue uncontested as participating countries are given a pass. Never mind those military bases in Germany or the five eyes. The West is intertwined, hell the whole world is, but deceive yourself if you like.

fnordfnordfnord 13y ago

I think the article text and headline has been changed! What's the name of that news article diff website? This is what was at the link: http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/uk-usa-security-nsa-idUKBRE97O08B20130825 http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/uk-usa-security-nsa... Now it is this: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/us-usa-security-nsa-idUSBRE97O08120130825 http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/us-usa-security-ns... EDIT: Newsdiff doesn't diff Reuters, I guess.