Israel Helped the NSA Spy on Former French President According To Documents 215
rtoz writes "It wasn't the US government breaking into the private communications of former French President Nicolas Sarkozy, according to top secret documents unearthed by Edward Snowden and published in Le Monde – it was the Israelis. A four-page internal précis regarding a visit to Washington by two top French intelligence officials denies the NSA or any US intelligence agency was behind the May 2012 attempted break-in – which sought to implant a monitoring device inside the Elysee Palace's communications system – but instead fingers the Israelis, albeit indirectly. A few days back, Le Monde reported that the NSA Intercepted French Telephone Calls 'On a Massive Scale' ."
Who Says they Never Paid for those Nukes... (Score:3, Insightful)
I mean, they paid on the "One day I will call upon you to do a service for me" variety plan, but here we are.
It's too bad that system wasn't trained on the charlatans on Wall Street so their crimes could have been accounted for and punished. You know these guys are stupid enough to brag on the phone and via email about their crimes... All the hysterical email leaks from the last crisis prove that out pretty handily. These guys are so arrogant they think themselves "above the law" because they "figured it out."
Re:Who Says they Never Paid for those Nukes... (Score:5, Funny)
One of those rules for criticizing Israel while not seeming like an anti-Semitic cock is #2: not to relate your statement to a conspiracy by banks(because stereotypes).
#1 is not to deny the holocaust, but you didn't do that, so congratulations.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
One of those rules for criticizing Israel while not seeming like an anti-Semitic cock
One of the rules for thinking for yourself while not being a lemming are #2: realize that a man's hatred or love of a group of people has nothing to do with the factual truth of what is being said. #1 is to let racism or ethnocentrism be HIS problem and stop anointing yourself the arbiter of all that is righteous.
Yes that takes a bit of humility and restraint and those are in short supply these days, for nothing is more fashionable than climbing on your high horse and telling other people how they shoul
Re:Who Says they Never Paid for those Nukes... (Score:5, Insightful)
One of the rules for thinking for yourself while not being a lemming are #2: realize that a man's hatred or love of a group of people has nothing to do with the factual truth of what is being said. #1 is to let racism or ethnocentrism be HIS problem and stop anointing yourself the arbiter of all that is righteous.
That's cute and all, except European antisemitism is as endemic and as ingrained in their culture as racism is in America. It's a cultural no-no, but it's often still the guttural reaction of choice. And criticizing Israel is the natural outlet for this reaction. That is not to say that Israel doesn't have problems of its own that are worth criticism, but it certainly doesn't deserve all the shit it gets.
Nonsense. Criticism of Israel is not evidence of anti-semitism--period. If somebody criticizes Israel by saying "all Jews should drop dead" that's not "criticizing Israel," that's racism. A reasoned set of criticisms not based on the race or religion of Israelis (i.e. you can safely ignore as racism anything that attempts to use the word "Jew" as a pejorative,) is not "anti-semitism."
I didn't imply any such thing in my OP, you inferred the lot of it.
Re:Who Says they Never Paid for those Nukes... (Score:5, Insightful)
"That's cute and all, except European antisemitism is as endemic and as ingrained in their culture as racism is in America."
I've lived in Europe all my life and never seen any evidence of this. The closest thing I've seen is South park and people making Cartman parody anti-semitic comments based on that.
There are anti-semites here, but I see far more hatred between Europeans simply for being from different parts of Europe than I do any anti-semitism - people from Eastern European nations get far more of a hard time in Western Europe when they emigrate there after each EU expansion for example, the unfair attitude towards Polish people being an obvious one that comes to mind. I'd wager the Jews are a group that suffers much less prejudice than most, especially compared to various gypsy groups, or many of the African immigrant groups such as Somalians, or groups of people from countries new into the EU. Muslims are another obvious example of people who suffer far more prejudice in Europe than Jewish people do.
What Europe does speak out about much more than the US however is Israeli aggression in the middle east and illegal annexing of territory that is not Israel's, but hopefully you're not confusing that for anti-semitism.
Re: (Score:2)
1- I suppose you mean Kurdistan and the genocide of the Armenians? Yes, both subjects are openly debated here.
2- I suppose you mean Western Sahara? I admit there's not much public debate about it and I myself wold like to know more.
3- I suppose you mean the invasion of Tibet? Yes, the subject is very openly debated and European countries host the Dalai Lama as a foreign dignitary, he even had speeches in various Parliaments.
4- I'm not sure what you refer to, if it's Indochina, that was fallout of ill-fated
Re: (Score:2)
"I believe the answer to those questions is 'No!!". So that might explain why Americans tend to think that Europeans are a bunch of anti-Semtes."
Actually the answer is yes to all of them, so if America thinks otherwise then it's classic American ignorance of the world.
"You clowns can't even defend yourselves without massive American aid. Fix your own fouled nest before criticizing others."
Sorry? Which country has required European support for pretty much every war in it's history? From your dependence on Fr
Re: (Score:2)
European antisemitism is as endemic and as ingrained in their culture as racism is in America.
There is Jew hatred here in Europe. I assume you are aware how often the media usually keep silent about the harassment of Jews and people that support Israel. Based on that I understand how some may make an honest mistake and blame it on European culture. At least here in Norway the only thing you can reasonably blame on our culture is our stupid trust in government, media, text books and the consensus. The introduction of the Jew hatred is gradual. (Example: In my early teens the average person hadn't ex
Re:Who Says they Never Paid for those Nukes... (Score:5, Informative)
Find me a western country with half as much anti-Jewish sentiment as there is anti-Islamic sentiment in Israel and I'd happily ignore their opinion on the matter.
What I don't understand is why it can be stated, without being blanket refuted, that Israel is hated because Jews live there. Hell, if anything, I would think that the correlation is the other way. The actions of Israel may be fuelling hatred or at least dislike of Jews in some cases because people see what Israel does and make the false assumption that as Israelis are mostly Jews the actions of Israel are representative of Jews.
Re:Who Says they Never Paid for those Nukes... (Score:4, Insightful)
Also it amazes me how anti american they are. When i was working defense contracting i must have called over 300 places in Israel. EVERYONE there was rude as hell. Rudest people i have ever encountered. I had an easier time finding carpenters in Iraq, during a war, with me not speaking a word of arabic.
Re:Who Says they Never Paid for those Nukes... (Score:4, Insightful)
Pardon me but the ONLY rule for criticizing Israel while not seeming like an anti-semite is... not criticizing Israel.
Re:Who Says they Never Paid for those Nukes... (Score:5, Insightful)
Pardon me but the ONLY rule for criticizing Israel while not getting branded an anti-semite is... not criticizing Israel.
Fixed that for you. And I'm serious - this isn't about actual antisemitism, it's about suppression of criticism by claiming racism.
Re: (Score:2)
Pardon me but the ONLY rule for criticizing Israel while not getting branded an anti-semite is... not criticizing Israel.
Fixed that for you. And I'm serious - this isn't about actual antisemitism, it's about suppression of criticism by claiming racism.
It's standard fare in politics sadly. If you want immigration laws (even just existing ones on the books) to be enforced, you're racist against Mexicans (an accusation made by people who have never reviewed Mexico's much stricter immigration laws!). If you criticize Israel, you're an anti-Semite. If you're against President Obama's politics or Eric Holder's actions, you're racist against black people. Etc etc. I wonder what such people would say if we ever developed a real problem with millions of whit
Re: (Score:2)
"It comes from people who don't want reason and logic to enter into the discussion because these are threats to their position, a position based on self-interest and not based on what makes good policy or which view is closest to the truth. "
+1. Trying to steer towards a hidden agenda while making you look like Mother Teresa.
I suggest pick up the book "The Holocaust Industry" by Norman Finkelstein.
Re: (Score:3)
Norman Finkelstein is Jewish.
You are proving the point that any criticism regarding Israel gets you branded as anti-semite, regardless of origin or content.
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, I think that was supposed to be sarcasm, poorly executed though it may be.
Re: (Score:2)
Norman Finkelstein is a Jewish Antisemite. A useful idiot at best, a self-hating Jew at worst.
Is Chris Rock a self-hating African American for doing a skit about how he "loves black people" but "hates niggers" (his words) and fears getting mugged or assaulted by them and owns guns to protect himself from them?
The general unwritten rule of Political Correctness is that a member of a minority group who criticizes that group cannot be considered a racist or ethnocentrist.
Of course you know, the childish concern over who hates whom and what terrible name with which you should brand them has ABSOLU
Re: (Score:2)
Semites are not a "race", nor is "Judaism" a race.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semitic_people [wikipedia.org]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jews [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Neither is "black", but I'd still be classed as racist if I used a persons colour in a negative manner.
Re: (Score:2)
Good point.
However the other gentleman has already replied with a good counterpoint. The fact is that there is only one human race currently living, so strictly speaking 'racism' - if by that you mean discrimination against those of another race - is impossible. We would have to first fine a way to resurrect a neanderthal, THEN we could discriminate against him.
But in fact racism is real and rampant, but racism is not discriminating by race, it's more subtle than that. It's *the delusion that multiple races
Re: (Score:2)
But if he is literally Hitler, then he is dead and still writing on /., and no one noticed...
Re:Who Says they Never Paid for those Nukes... (Score:5, Informative)
One of those rules for criticizing Israel while not seeming like an anti-Semitic cock...
There is only one rule for that; preface every criticism of Israel with the following:
"Don't get me wrong, I love Jon Stewart, but..."
For example:
Don't get me wrong, I love Jon Stewart, bit it seems to me the Israeli government uses Judaism as a weapon against their detractors, since nobody can say anything about Israel's bad behavior without being accused of anti-semitism.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
One of those rules for criticizing Israel while not seeming like an anti-Semitic cock...
There is only one rule for that; preface every criticism of Israel with the following:
"Don't get me wrong, I love Jon Stewart, but..."
For example:
Don't get me wrong, I love Jon Stewart, bit it seems to me the Israeli government uses Judaism as a weapon against their detractors, since nobody can say anything about Israel's bad behavior without being accused of anti-semitism.
This times a million: Distract from the actual legitimate criticism of the NSA (that it would have been better used to track down wall street swine who committing multiple felonies and should have been liable for thousands of years of prison time) by accusing the speaker of an invented anti-semitism.
Congratulations: Goebbels would be proud.
Re: (Score:2)
Note that the NSA's legal mandate is EXTERNAL signals intelligence.
Sending the NSA to investigate Wall Street is as illegal as, well, having them monitor Americans' cell phone conversations.
If you want to go after Wall Street, use the Justice Department and the FBI.
Re: Who Says they Never Paid for those Nukes... (Score:2)
Remind me...why are they so easily offended?
Re: (Score:2)
Remind me...why are they so easily offended?
*shrug* try asking them.
Were I to wager a guess, I'd say they don't actually have as thin of skin as they portend to*, but as I said before, pull the race card at every given opportunity because it's handy and convenient - nobody** wants to be thought of as an anti-semite, do they?
* I of course refer to the Israeli gov't when I say this; I've known some Israeli people in my day, and they were just like the people I've met from any other culture: interestingly varied.
** Excluding obvious, overtly anti-semeti
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
... it seems to me the Israeli government uses Judaism as a weapon against their detractors, since nobody can say anything about Israel's bad behavior without being accused of anti-semitism.
Many people use anti-Zionism against Israel as a cloak for anti-Semitism.
The European Left and Its Trouble With Jews [nytimes.com]
Re: (Score:2)
... it seems to me the Israeli government uses Judaism as a weapon against their detractors, since nobody can say anything about Israel's bad behavior without being accused of anti-semitism.
Many people use anti-Zionism against Israel as a cloak for anti-Semitism.
The European Left and Its Trouble With Jews [nytimes.com]
Yes, but it's also true that many people who claim that anti-Zionism is a cloak for anti-Semitism use it as a club to bash Israel's detractors, regardless of the legitimacy of the complaints.
Basically, there are bad actors on both sides of the fence. Point being, just because someone points out the bad behavior of the Israeli government does not make them defacto anti-Semites.
Re: (Score:2)
Many people use anti-Zionism against Israel as a cloak for anti-Semitism.
The European Left and Its Trouble With Jews [nytimes.com]
Do you agree they are separate things though? Would you say it is possible to be opposed to Israel's treatment of the Palestinians and illegal annexation of land, because of the facts rather than their Jewishness? Because otherwise you're just saying "all criticism of Israel is actually anti semitic", period (let's put aside the fact that Palestinians are Semites also).
I tend to think that true anti Semites, of which there are a few but not nearly as many as Abe Foxman would have you believe, don't bother w
Re: (Score:2)
Do you agree they are separate things though? Would you say it is possible to be opposed to Israel's treatment of the Palestinians and arguably illegal annexation of land, because of the facts rather than their Jewishness?
(Sorry for fixing your quote. Otherwise your establishing your views as fact, which I'm sure you're too interested in the truth to do).
As someone who often takes part in those highly informed discussions (aka mud slinging), almost always on the Pro-Israeli side, I've come to categorize the anti-Israel commenters into three groups:
Informed Dissenters
Those are people who take an objective look at things, and decide they disagree with some of the decisions taken by the Israeli government.
You hardly ever hear t
Re: (Score:2)
According to international law the West Bank settlements are illegal, period. Nothing arguable about it.
Other than fixing my quote, you appear to be saying that yes there are various types of Israel critics, but essentially they are all different shades of stupid. Which you distinguish only by your ability to set them straight. Thankfully you allow there might be a tiny minority that is reasonable but remains unheard.
Well I can agree that it is hard to find reasonable discussion on the subject. That is on t
Re: (Score:2)
According to international law the West Bank settlements are illegal, period. Nothing arguable about it.
So, essentially, you are saying "I am right, and how dare you say otherwise". Exemplary use of logic and facts to foster discussion. Even if we accept the "illegal" part, however, (and, like I said, claiming there is no argument over that point is easily proven wrong), to the best of my knowledge, the settelments have never been annexed, unlike what your claim says.
Other than fixing my quote, you appear to be saying that yes there are various types of Israel critics, but essentially they are all different shades of stupid.
I do not think I did. In fact, I don't think any of the synonyms of "stupid" even appeared in my comment. The middle groupd I clearly labeled as
Re: (Score:2)
Nonsense.
The rule is simple: stop applying double standards to Israel.
The only double standard I've seen in Israel's case is the one where they feel they can rattle sabers at their neighbors day-in and day-out, but the minute one of those neighbors so much as builds a single 5% enrichment facility, which has no purpose other than civil power generation, Israel seems to think that's crossing some sort of line and said neighbor needs to be wiped out in a nuclear holocaust.
That said (and forgetting, for a moment, that living in a place does not mean you automatically agree with
Re: (Score:2)
You seem to be implying that Israel has nuclear weapons. Israel never said it does.
Neither has Iran; in fact, they've outright denied it.
So the question becomes, why should the IAEA believe Israel and not Iran? If Iran has to let UN inspectors check out their stuff, shouldn't logic dictate that Israel should as well? You know, to make sure they're on the up-and-up.
They have no requirement (whether legal or moral) to join the NPT. They have repeatedly stated that they would not be the first to introduce nuclear weapons into the middle east and would be willing to sign the NPT once the region cools down (peace treaties are signed with the remaining Arab neighbors).
So? I can say 'my name is Mary, Queen of Scots" all day long; doesn't make it fact. That's what the petticoats and tinfoil crown are for.
Furthermore, the US is not in the same situation as Israel. If Mexico was launching missiles and sending terrorists across your borders daily I daresay you would have bombed them back into the stone age.
[citation desperately needed]
Funny, because when I read the news, I see all sorts o
Re: (Score:2)
You seem to be implying that Israel has nuclear weapons. Israel never said it does.
Neither has Iran; in fact, they've outright denied it.
So the question becomes, why should the IAEA believe Israel and not Iran? If Iran has to let UN inspectors check out their stuff, shouldn't logic dictate that Israel should as well? You know, to make sure they're on the up-and-up.
You seem to be confusing facts. The IAEA has independently confirmed that Iran is enriching nuclear material to 20% level, and has developed a heavy water reactor. And again, IRAN HAS SAID SO ITSELF. None of this evidence depends on anything Israel has said.
So, double standard is OK because, according to you, Iran admits to enriching uranium and Israel lies about it. Yea, that makes sense.
They have no requirement (whether legal or moral) to join the NPT. They have repeatedly stated that they would not be the first to introduce nuclear weapons into the middle east and would be willing to sign the NPT once the region cools down (peace treaties are signed with the remaining Arab neighbors).
So? I can say 'my name is Mary, Queen of Scots" all day long; doesn't make it fact. That's what the petticoats and tinfoil crown are for.
I fail to see your point.
Somehow I'm not surprised. You seem to be an apologist who cares more for what the Israeli government claims than the reality evidence presents.
FWIW, my point is plainly obvious - what one says one does, and what one actually does are not necessarily the same thing.
Put simply enough for anyone to understand, liars exist. Even in Israel.
See the point yet? If not, I know I've g
Re: (Score:2)
Found the one part you think you can argue with and ignore the rest, eh? Classy.
So, double standard is OK because, according to you, Iran admits to enriching uranium and Israel lies about it. Yea, that makes sense.
Says you. Last time I checked, personal opinion does not count as a verifiable fact.
That street runs 2 ways, Captain "Makes Dubious Claims, and When Asked for Citation Tries to Weasel Out by Demanding You Provide Citation for Counter Claims."
Re: (Score:2)
ICBM = Inter-Continental Ballistic Missile. Apparently you didn't know that. The only way that Iran's missiles could be considered to be ICBMs is if they were launching it across the Behring Straight. They have a SRBM, a Short-Range Ballistic Missile, and have tested a prototype of a Medium-Range Ballistic Missile, but you don't have to worry about them launching Korans into Iowa yet.
Re: (Score:2)
One of those rules for criticizing Israel while not seeming like an anti-Semitic cock is #2: not to relate your statement to a conspiracy by banks(because stereotypes).
#1 is not to deny the holocaust, but you didn't do that, so congratulations.
One of the rules for not being a sheep is not to let other people's prejudices get in the way of legitimate criticisms of Israel, Wall Street, or anybody else. The perception, that i was connecting the two, is a result of your prejudice, not mine. I made a suggestion for a better use of such spying authority--i.e. point it at actual criminals, not private citizens. You made the leap to some sort of "conspiracy" of Wall Street and Israel.
So take yourself to task for being an anti-semite.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Rule #1 for not looking anti-Semitic is to know what a semite is, take a look:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/semite
You see, Arabs are also semites, so Israel looks quite anti-Semitic if you take that on account.
Re: (Score:2)
Where did he mention the banks? All he said was they should've spied on Wall Street to get evidence for convictions; presumably for the largest financial scandal in US history. You basically back up the fallacy that criticizing Israel will be turned into an antisemitic rant.
He made no mention or illusion of evil Jewish people running our banks, or whatever that conspiracy is.
Re: (Score:2)
I guess my benefit of the doubt doesn't extend quite as far as yours.
French media isn't credible when they blame Israel (Score:2)
If it was the Guardian making this claim, it would have some bearing. They have some authority in the leaks and have the source material to find this information.
French media just likes to blame Israel and Jews for everything, so I find little credibility to this article.
Unless I missed something in the article, everything basically says the US and Israel both deny having any involvement in spying on the French. The Guardian printed that it was the NSA that was spying on the French. While I wouldn't be s
Le Monde found guilty of "racist defamation" (Score:2)
In fact, this newspaper has even been found guilty by a French court for "racist defamation" against Israel and the Jewish people in the past.
Sources:
http://rense.com/general65/aanit.htm [rense.com]
http://www.tomgrossmedia.com/mideastdispatches/archives/000375.html [tomgrossmedia.com]
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1415355/posts [freerepublic.com]
As a poster below pointed out, the NSA practically confessed to the spying:
The American authorities noted that the activities of the intelligence service "were carried out according to law."
And the doc
Re: (Score:2)
Rense? Free Republic? I didn't realize that anyone even went to FR any more, the last time I visited it there were about 30 hard core birthers in an echo chamber left.
Re: (Score:2)
USA basically confirmed and said it was not a joint operation with Israel.
If Israel wasn't involved they would have denied israeli involvement.
The Israeli office of the Prime Minister denied and the USA said it wasn't a join operation. I'm not sure what more you want.
I don't know how you can argue that lack of proof that Israel was involved proves that they were.
As far as reputable sources for the Le Monde being found guilty, google "Le Monde found guilty racist defamation". There are dozens of other places that provided the news. Pick whichever ones you do find reputable.
Sorry, no. (Score:2)
Re:Who Says they Never Paid for those Nukes... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Knowing and watching for a stereotype is not the same as embracing it. You damn well know your logic is flawed.
Re: (Score:2)
The thing is their logic is not flawed, it is just they are feeling insecure. If your culture and ethnicity are so positive to the society, taking in a couple of stereotypes wouldn't hurt. We Chinese-American people takes in thousands of stereotypes, Confucian values taught us that not to retaliate or respond. We don't have ADL, NAACP or similar organizations to defend ourselves.
Re: (Score:2)
Right because Isreal is totally the innocent undertaker, who came to the Big Bad US looking for justice that he couldn't get through normal means :)
If I was going to use a Godfather analogy I would go more for:
Re: (Score:2)
Right because Isreal is totally the innocent undertaker, who came to the Big Bad US looking for justice that he couldn't get through normal means :)
If I was going to use a Godfather analogy I would go more for:
I never viewed the undertaker as "innocent," not in the least. I'm surprised to hear you say you did: He was a coward who wanted violence done without having to risk committing it himself--but I don't think that makes him "innocent," not in the least. He contracted for retribution from a murderous mob-boss.
Re: (Score:2)
He contracted retribution because the so-called justice system failed him. Those cock suckers walked free from court the same day, they even smiled at him. They got off after beating his daughter for resisting their attempt to rape her.
I find no fault at all with him.
Re: (Score:2)
He contracted retribution because the so-called justice system failed him. Those cock suckers walked free from court the same day, they even smiled at him. They got off after beating his daughter for resisting their attempt to rape her.
I find no fault at all with him.
"I don't blame him" and "innocent" are two different things.
I'm not saying I might not have pursued similar course of action in the same circumstances, but he was clearly far from innocent. How would he be connected enough to the mob to ask such a favor in the first place? You don't just "show-up" uninvited at the Don's daughter's wedding...
Re: (Score:2)
> "I don't blame him" and "innocent" are two different things.
I don't make much distinction and if I did I would point out that there was no scene where he was prosecuted and convicted for anything so, he is in fact, innocent. Just as we know Al Capone was innocent of everything except tax evasion.
I mean generally speaking I am against any sort of non-consensual violence, but I am no pacifist. I am perfectly fine taking the general view that committing non-defensive violent acts can merit a response. The
Re:Who Says they Never Paid for those Nukes... (Score:4, Insightful)
It's too bad that system wasn't trained on the charlatans on Wall Street
Um, hello? The Snowden revelations are almost exclusively about "economic espionage", the headlines are about who's phones were tapped and which boardrooms were bugged. "Wall street" are the people who want this data and the MI complex are delivering it to them on a silver platter. Why the fuck would they want to point a gun at their own head?
There is no conspiracy, just like minded people playing golf and screwing everyone they can, including each other, this sort of spying has been going on forever and it's not going away. Having said that and given the history of the 20th century, you would have to be a fool to be unconcerned when the NSA appear before congress and either lie or refuse to answer questions, then walk away with their career intact. That is a clear sign the MI complex is telling congress to go fuck itself (in polite political language). Whatever the pro/cons of the argument, the current belligerence of these people is a threat to the rule of law and a wedge that will polarise international relations..
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There was a politician in Peru who used to call out the military for its excesses in the battle against the Sendero Luminoso. He abruptly retired when he received a photo in the mail of his daughter leaving her grade school, taken through a rifle scope. Keep in mind that corporations like Blackwater (whatever its name is today) knowingly hire international war criminals guilty of massacres of peasants, and then tell me how much chance you think there is that Congress will "grow a pair of balls".
Re: (Score:2)
But hey, Cold War realpolitik is weird like that.
FTFY.
As Jon Stewart said recently... (Score:4, Funny)
The US NSA is the very first thing you are looking for in a good partner: a good listener!
This is becoming better and better all the time...
Old tune (Score:2, Insightful)
We all know the Israeli secret services are total bastards , they killed Arafat spy on everyone etc .. We all know the NSA is again total bastards that stop at nothing. What we need to know is how to defeat them and pull the reins back in and get back in control of those gone rogue agencies that have respect for neither Constitution ,Law nor Country . The secret services play by a different set of rules .. you have the right to do everything , as long as you don't get caught .
They got caught , yet face non
Re: (Score:2)
...What we need to know is how to defeat them and pull the reins back in and get back in control of those gone rogue agencies that have respect for neither Constitution ,Law nor Country...
That may be a tall order in some other countries, but in the United States the way to do it is with Article Five of the Constitution, which says that there are two ways to alter that document, the second one being a national convention assembled at the request of the legislatures of at least two-thirds (min. 34) of the 50 states, after which the change must be ratified by at least three-fourths (min. 38) of the states.
Article V is a powerful tool that way included specifically to bypass a corrupt Congres
Re:Old tune (Score:4, Insightful)
This, to me, is one of the many fascinating things about America. When sh*t like this happens, there is the inevitable question of what kinds of things people can do to change the way things are. Yet, when you talk with people from other countries and you talk about this kind of sh*t, they many times will respond with what they personally are doing to change the way things are.
Come on, America. You're a smart bunch of people. Save yourselves. You really need to figure it out. Seriously. There are at LOT of things that can be done to rein in your out of control three letter agencies, politicians who want to burn the place to the ground, and the greedy bankers and corporate officers who know you'll continue to buy the sh*t they have for sale. Nothing will change until you actually _do_ something. So get with it and _do_ what _needs_ to be done.
... What we need to know is how to defeat them and pull the reins back in and get back in control of those gone rogue agencies that have respect for neither Constitution ,Law nor Country ...
Re: (Score:2)
That's all fine, but Israelis seem to always come crying to us for military support. How about you all start incorporating the limitations of YOUR military into your foreign policy?
Re: (Score:2)
No reasonable person can debate that it is illegal assassination, and that it's terrorism intended to scare scientists away from any nuclear work. Whether you approve of the illegal terrorism or not is a separate issue. There are no doubt times when terrorism could be justified, though I don't think this is one of them.
You could even argue that by killing a few scientists they are preventing a full scale war which would kill many more people. This, and Stuxnet are probably the reasons why there has been no
Not a big surprise (Score:2, Insightful)
Considering how much spying Israel does on the U.S., and all the secrets they've stolen from us in exchange for unequivocal support at the UN, and then ask to have their spies returned to them because they're "heroes", this shouldn't surprise anyone.
Why all of this surprise? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Remember how the US started throwing political trouble at France after 9/11, when we found out they were selling weapons to our enemies? And remember how we've been poking fun at the Russians for years because of their Soviet history? And remember how we've been complaining about Chinese manufacturing and work conditions while still buying their products?
Everyone else remembers.
Our attitude since the Cold War has been that we are perfect infallible masters of all things political. No revolutions, a stable e
Re: (Score:2)
This is exactly right.
Of course part of the continual mutual spying is that whenever one country screws up and gets caught spying on an ally, the government of the "victim" has to feign outrage. Public opinion demands it, and a politician either rides the wave, or gets smashed against the rocks by it.
So there's really no point in trying to point out that "everyone does it" to people expressing outrage about spying. Just let the kibuki theater proceed at its own pace. Its nature's way.
Re: (Score:2)
From these "world leaders" to journalists, why all of the 'surprise?' Spying is one of the things that governments do, ALL of them. They ALL spy on their allies and foes alike and it has always been this way. In the US/Israel context, we both spy on each other all day, every day, and assist with information on other countries too. France does the same thing, so does England. Nothing new here.
I think you might be confusing "spying" with "breaking all kinds of local and international laws, crossing all possible lines and doing acts to others on a daily basis which your own government considers as acts of war".
But please, just keep justifying.
Re: (Score:2)
The only thing Snowden has really revealed was the degree of incompetence of the politicians in my country (France)
Reaction Inversely Proportional to Size of Truth (Score:2)
The thing about all this is, the speed of the reaction is inversely proportional to the size of the truth. When a reality star is caught with drugs, the reaction is instantaneous. When Congress self-destructs, it takes months and years for the reaction and its consequences to fully unfold. What we're talking about here is the ripping away of the entire illusion under which we've been living the past 60 years. It's big, and most people don't even want to try to wrap their heads around what it means; but
Re: (Score:2)
When Congress self-destructs,
Ah, to dream the impossible dream...
Hate to tell ya, bud, but all that 'self-destruction' we've seen of late is nothing but partisan brinkmanship, and has all become just another part of the political game; you can tell by the fact that congresscritters are still on TV blaming each other, rather than hiding from the lynch mobs, in fear for their lives.
I will say, I learned something from this latest government shutdown - we, the People, don't really seem to need feds quite as much as the try and convince us
US did it, read the whole article (Score:3, Informative)
Read the last lines.
"The American authorities noted that the activities of the intelligence service "were carried out according to law"."
It's almost like a confession from the US.
Main article says, France evidence points to USA. US denies it. US says it asked 1st and 2nd party countries if they did it, they say no. It did not ask Israel because Israel won't talk to US about France.
Hence finger points to Israel. Israel denies it.
Occams razor.
Look, the evidence says it was US, US spied on Merkel, US practically confesses when asked "it was done legally" and has all the tools and bases and so on.
NSA.
right (Score:4, Interesting)
Helped? (Score:3)
Israel Helped the NSA Spy on Former French President According To Documents
Where does it say Israel helped the NSA? The French accused the US, the US denied it, asked everyone else about it (except the Israelis) and everyone else denied it as well. Right?
Re: (Score:2)
That sounds like classic diplomatic-speak for "we think it was Israel, but we're not telling you that."
Why is this an issue? (Score:3)
The NSA is SUPPOSED to be spying on foreign countries. IS that not what our spy agencies do? (CIA, NSA, etc). The issues is with them spying on Americans. Hell, I WANT them tapped into every other government on the planet. The more we know about others, the better for us. Just stay out of my damn e-mail.
(To be fair, I also understand that, say, the french spy agency, would be trying to spy on OUR government. that's how the world works)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sort of conflicted. First off they're supposed to be friendly countries. Second, do you want other countries spying on you? And what's to stop other countries to resell that information back to the US or other interests? Third, wasn't the US trying to establish how hacking into the US is an act of war? Now it turns they've been doing it to everyone else?
Lastly you're undermining the internet in general. Less trust in an open network will turn people into making fragmented segments for their own count
Re: (Score:2)
Thing is, spying is not seen as a friendly act, and when you're outed, there are going to be consequences.
In other words, you can do it, but only as long as you don't get caught. That's why you keep it small and quiet, not this kind of major NSA dragnet.
And isn't it the DGSE... (Score:3)
...who spends 25% of their published budget blatantly on industrial espionage on guess who...the UK, US, Canada, China, Germany, and others...
The international espionage is pretty much *yawn*. Anyone who has ever followed international politics on any level knows everybody does it to each other. And all the players certainly know it.
Where the outrage, what little there has been frankly, is the fact that those capabilities were turned inward domestically that has some people ticked off. Again many of us highly suspected this was going on, but we lacked proof. It doesn't surprise me when it comes to things like parallel construction and massive dragnets. Yes it should be illegal, but even if it is, there are ways around it such as giving our cousins over at GCHQ the access, let them do the spying on americans and pass it back in the name of "cooperation".
What saddens me is that the only thing that can stop this insanity are the people of the United States. And most don't seem to care. As long as there is Football on the weekends to keep the masses entertained...
I said after 9/11 there were some things we needed to look at like adding armored cockpit doors to airplanes, reassessing and even so far as banning sharped objects on carryon. We needed some sort of centralized intelligence operations. It was clear there was too much politicking for budgets instead of working together. US Intelligence had all the pieces, but spread across too many agencies that wouldn't work together. That needed to be addressed by eliminating and folding agencies. Instead we got DHS. It was sold as just that kind of agency. Instead we've ended up with what is increasingly turning into a domestic para-military agency. I know, they don't have M1 Abrams yet, but they do have their own helicopter gun ships and APC's. TSA has gone from airport rentacops to VIPR teams...
I remember a couple years ago they were doing drills with the US Army & MO National Guard patrolling the streets of North St. Louis as though it was a war zone (Which maybe arguably it is) in an "Urban Pacification Drill". When the news interviewed locals they welcomed the show of force. The benefit of a doubt part of me knew this was the National Guard showing off some new toys it had gotten. But there is a part of me that also raised an eyebrow.
If you look at the past 10 - 12 years there's been a chess game afoot here in the US. The governments been setting the board. They've got small scale operations down. Look at how quickly they locked down Boston earlier in the year. Look at how quickly the people followed the orders to cower indoors because of 2 kids.
We aren't quite there yet, but unless something drastic changes and soon, we're one major "event" away from waking up and no longer in the land of free.
Re: (Score:2)
> Look at how quickly the people followed the orders to cower indoors because of 2 kids.
Really? The "2 kids" in question bombed a public event with improvised explosives, then killed a police officer, hijacked a car and the last one took refuge by hiding in a boat in a local neighborhood. How would the authorities have responded in your magical utopian 'free' country?
Re: (Score:2)
> Look at how quickly the people followed the orders to cower indoors because of 2 kids.
Really? The "2 kids" in question bombed a public event with improvised explosives, then killed a police officer, hijacked a car and the last one took refuge by hiding in a boat in a local neighborhood. How would the authorities have responded in your magical utopian 'free' country?
Question: did all that lockdown crap actually have a net positive effect, or did it take some random person stepping into his backyard (which he couldn't do during the martial-law-practice-run) to catch the bomber?
Re:Enough already... (Score:5, Insightful)
Because the brave journalists with integrity who aren't shills to the broader agenda are staggering their releases over a period of time to keep this in the public eye, the story would be buried with another Miley Cyrus or school shooting distraction if they blew their wad all at once. They are doing the right thing, fighting the good fight, and discrediting and bringing light to the corporatist warmongering pigs and the crypto-Zionists pulling their strings.
-- Ethanol-fueled
Re: (Score:2)
Oh please. They are staggering the releases to do maximum harm to the U.S. and to keep their own names in the news longer. It's showing their blatant anti-us bias more than anything.
Re: (Score:2)
The only reason why US is harmed by those releases is because US (or rather its government) did some seriously fucked-up shit in secret. Now that it's out in the open, instead of owning up and apologizing, you keep pretending that it's nothing bad, while at the same time scrambling like mad to get revenge on Snowden for exposing you with pants down. It would be sad if it wasn't so hilarious to watch. I wonder what it is the next thing that Obama (or Holder) is going to deny that will be proven to be false b
Re: (Score:2)
... the corporatist warmongering pigs and the crypto-Zionists pulling their strings.
I've heard things like that before. You think the ^wJews Zionist are behind it all? Yes, I think I hear music, I'm just not sure if it's from a play like this [youtube.com], or a parade like that [youtube.com].
The European Left and Its Trouble With Jews [nytimes.com]
If you are the real "Ethanol-fueled," it's time for treatment.
Re: (Score:2)
You know, all this confusion could be avoided by having an account and signing in.
-- Ethanol-fueled (Not a signature, just a statement of my condition)
Re: (Score:2)
We KNOW all about the intercepts now, why is it a headline everytime The Guardian throws-out a new "discovery"?
Eyeballs.
Re: (Score:2)
My question is: Where are all the nation
Re: (Score:2)
er... this is /.'s report on these reports - you're going to have to read the dupes too!
Re: (Score:2)
We KNOW all about the intercepts now, why is it a headline everytime The Guardian throws-out a new "discovery"?
Correction... WE know all about the intercepts now. But the mass audience the Guardian wants to reach isn't as well informed. Also, they appear to be attempting to leverage pressure from both internal targets of the NSA (i.e. citizens of the United States) and inappropriate external ones to exert more pressure on the government to do the right thing.
Re: (Score:2)
Correction... WE know all about the intercepts now. But the mass audience the Guardian wants to reach isn't as well informed.
What that puerile bitch Snookie is up to (and like-minded garbage) is sadly much more important to them.
The minority who try their best to be aware don't deserve to reap what the majority have sown.
Re: (Score:2)
Because...Fuck You!
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
And actually he isn't. He may be hurting the interests of the powerful in the USA. Not those of the people.
If, and once this mess is cleared, the rest of the world might hold citizens of the USA in higher esteem. I know I'm looking forward to it.
So, citizens of the USA: grab this chance. Show that you mean your values, that those values aren't just some marketing terms buried in an old and smelly document.
Go for it!
Re:Snowden claims he isn't hurting American intere (Score:5, Insightful)
I understand his reasons for releasing information about domestic spying, but what good reason does he have for releasing information about spying on the international scene?
Because he's not just an upstanding, patriotic American, he's an upstanding, patriotic human.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Spied. You had to go back 20+ years.
Sure, other nations have their skeletons in the closet too. But you know, it doesn't justify lying to them. If the Germans are such vile dogs as to deserve no privacy from the US, then let them know. Don't pretend you are the best of friends and would never consider such an act.
If there is no trust between you, very well, state that fact and let it be at that. But if you pretend there's trust, expect reactions when that trust is shown to be broken.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You got the anonymous coward part right. Go dryclean your hood.
Re: (Score:2)
Its just that this asshole continues to hap hazardly condemn innocent American lives with his wild hairs up his ass and has no way to shore up the safety for American lives he is endangering by these leaks. He has to be stopped. God Damn Him.
And this, ladies and gentlemen, is why you shouldn't smoke crack.