← Back to context

Comment by shrubble

4 months ago

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-...).

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”

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.

  • That's pretty optimistic.

    I think it's just more likely that we send them whatever they ask for when they ask for it.

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

  • 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.

    • 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?

      2 replies →

    • Country A can just a well turn a blind eye on direct spying like it has done so numerous times in the past.

      > Since country A didn't do the surveillance, it didn't break any laws.

      Of course it did, that's where the data came from!

  • 1. We don't have a right to privacy.

    2. The power of the constitution ends at the border.

    It's pretty sick, but that's what it amounts to. The CIA can't operate within US borders but it can operate at and outside borders. That means sending messages internationally are fair game for warrant-less searches.

    • That doesn’t explain why lawmakers would allow their own government to (indirectly) spy on them. Or are they so full of integrity that they would say “I must be spied on as well as my constituents, you know, for fairness”? /s

  • Because it places a higher priority on the desires of that foreign country than on the privacy of its justices and senators?