Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: USA Spies on Brazil for Personal Gain!

  1. #1
    Creepy-theticalanti

    Default .

    .
    Last edited by theticalanti; 06-18-2016 at 02:49 AM.

  2. #2
    Samuel the Gabriel H. MisterNi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA.
    TIM
    C-IEE Ne (862)
    Posts
    1,131
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The NSA = A curious monkey, but with also a gun and an 11 billion dollars a year budget.

    IEE Ne Creative Type

    Some and role lovin too. () I too...
    !!!!!!

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    White
    TIM
    FSE
    Posts
    715
    Mentioned
    62 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    that story has been out all day.

    It's not a surprise if you've been reading through executive orders and national security-related bills and have a basic understanding of authoritarianism.

    HOPE, CHANGE: http://www.theverge.com/2013/9/8/470...administration

  4. #4
    Robot Assassin Pa3s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Germany
    TIM
    Ne-LII, 5w6
    Posts
    3,648
    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Old news. Except that the German politicians have declared the issue to be "over".
    „Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
    – Arthur Schopenhauer

  5. #5
    Samuel the Gabriel H. MisterNi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA.
    TIM
    C-IEE Ne (862)
    Posts
    1,131
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    If the issue is "over" then it was probably deemed a minor gaff by the NSA and not something to upset diplomatic relations over. I still stand by my original statement, btw.

    IEE Ne Creative Type

    Some and role lovin too. () I too...
    !!!!!!

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    White
    TIM
    FSE
    Posts
    715
    Mentioned
    62 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MisterNi View Post
    If the issue is "over" then it was probably deemed a minor gaff by the NSA and not something to upset diplomatic relations over. I still stand by my original statement, btw.
    Do you have any idea what the scandal is about?

  7. #7
    Samuel the Gabriel H. MisterNi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA.
    TIM
    C-IEE Ne (862)
    Posts
    1,131
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Legerdemain View Post
    Do you have any idea what the scandal is about?
    It was all over the news a few months ago. French and German securities agencies being upset with the NSA for spying on them. It was more fallout from Edward Snowden's visit to Hong Kong to tell them of US surveillance activities. The entire incident was a bit of a farce here in the US.

    IEE Ne Creative Type

    Some and role lovin too. () I too...
    !!!!!!

  8. #8
    xerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,464
    Mentioned
    53 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by William View Post
    Apparently the United States is not using surveillance defensively against terrorism, but offensively to invade the intelligence of other countries for personal economic gain!
    in other news, water is wet
    You can do anything with a bayonet except sit on it.

  9. #9
    Robot Assassin Pa3s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Germany
    TIM
    Ne-LII, 5w6
    Posts
    3,648
    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by William View Post
    It looks like the German politicians keep trying to cover it up but failing.
    There are federal elections being held this month. I'm pretty sure the governing parties don't want to decide about more "difficult" issues than absolutely necessary. They were also very reserved about the crisis in Syria, neither openly supporting a war nor clearly rejecting it. It's like they're closing their eyes and cover their ears until the election is over and they have another 4 years.
    „Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
    – Arthur Schopenhauer

  10. #10
    xerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,464
    Mentioned
    53 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by William View Post
    Yes, but not everyone may realize water is wet. Awakening the American people from their bubble of comfort is a crucial task.

    We've had people on this very forum state that they didn't think major news networks like CNN, Fox, etc., were using any sort of propaganda to deceive anyone... personally I find that naive viewpoint very disgusting. I was naive for a very long time until I found out what was going on.
    yeah, well, there's a concerted effort to make us westerners as dumb as possible.
    You can do anything with a bayonet except sit on it.

  11. #11
    OldPathWhiteClouds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    The Cosmos
    TIM
    Ne-EII 5w4 sp/so
    Posts
    69
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    OMG, nations spy on each other.. what a shocker..

  12. #12
    what is essential is invisible to the eye fox's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Space
    TIM
    Seer
    Posts
    12,804
    Mentioned
    367 Post(s)
    Tagged
    9 Thread(s)

    Default

    I was kinda hoping this would read "US spys on Brazil for big booty bitches"
    Quote Originally Posted by jxrtes View Post
    betas should be kept in zoos for children to stare and throw pop corn at.

  13. #13
    LauriesCrusador's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    TIM
    α-ω
    Posts
    293
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Legerdemain View Post
    It's not a surprise if you've been reading through executive orders and national security-related bills and have a basic understanding of authoritarianism.

    HOPE, CHANGE: http://www.theverge.com/2013/9/8/470...administration
    Tru dat.


    Quote Originally Posted by William View Post
    Nice article. But it looks like it's far from "over". It looks like the German politicians keep trying to cover it up but failing.

    "Given these circumstances, the Snowden affair is far from over -- especially for the parliamentary opposition in Berlin."

    "
    "What we still don't know is from where, and to what extent, the NSA accesses information about German citizens," Oppermann says. "The NSA is saying nothing about this, and the German government has not been able to find out anything," he adds."
    Naw, nothing will change after the election. Just words!
    Perhaps some of the German policitians were surprised by the scale of it but that's it. This issue already made the headlines before and nothing happened ( Der Spiegel 1989 - NSA: America's big ear: The National Security Agency, the most aggressive U.S. intelligence, monitors friend and foe – only available in German )

    Well, normally, German politicians have the duty to defend/protect German citizens' fundamental rights but face it, none of them is truly interested in pursuing the issue further because 1) they are all more or less involved in this, 2) they have a common purpose and profit from US mass surveillance and 3) because of their incredible and complete submissiveness towards US directive.

    Also
    NSA: permission to spy in Germany

    Germany has been under surveillance by the United States for decades, and German leaders have been fully aware of it, says historian Josef Foschepoth. The reason? Secret post-war accords.

    Deutsche Welle: The NSA spy scandal continues to ruffle feathers in Germany, Mr. Foschepoth. As a historian, you say the surveillance has been going on since the early days of post-war Germany. So, the revelations of Edward Snowden were not a surprise to you?

    Josef Foschepoth: No, not really. I was surprised instead by the initial reactions, in particular, from the political side. They were as if this had happened for the first time, as if it was something terribly bad and unique. But that is not the case. From my own research, I know that this happened countless times in the 1960s in Germany.

    Deutsche Welle: How do you explain the rather low-key response from the German government?

    Josef Foschepoth: Well, such affairs are always very uncomfortable because they bring to light something that had functioned in the shadows. And this function should not be disturbed, so it's played down. But now, this is no longer the case because it is an instance of severe and intensive surveillance. And moreover: it has been conducted by a friendly state.

    Deutsche Welle: This surveillance, as you've said, has been going on for decades, since the beginning of the Federal Republic of Germany in 1949. What rights did the occupation forces - among them, the Americans - have at that time?

    Josef Foschepoth: Let's be clear that the victorious forces were in Germany to occupy the country. They wanted to make sure that Germany would never again be a threat as it was during the Nazi dictatorship. But, after the victory over Nazi Germany, a further conflict began with the Soviet Union and the Cold War was born. It was a two-fold conflict that required a new strategy from the United States. A policy of double containment ensued: containment of the Soviet Union on the one hand and Germany on the other. And an essential element of this policy was surveillance.

    Deutsche Welle: The so-called General Treaty, which regulated ties between Germany and the three allied powers, went into effect in 1955. The Federal Republic was to have the full powers of sovereignty over its domestic and foreign affairs. What did that mean for the surveillance strategy of the Americans?

    Josef Foschepoth: These formulations, of course, are always very nice and are meant for the public, more than anything. Ten years after the end of World War Two, the Germans felt the fundamental urge to be a sovereign state once again. But that was not the case at all because in the treaties from 1955 - it was volumes of treaties - were secret supplemental agreements which guaranteed key rights for the Western allied forces; among them, the right to monitor telephone and postal communications.

    Deutsche Welle: What was the motivation for the German side behind all this?

    Josef Foschepoth: The Americans exerted massive pressure. They did not want to give up this territory, which was geostrategically important for its surveillance operations. German leaders, of course, wanted to be able to say that we now had a bit more sovereignty; in other words, a few strokes for the reawakening national psyche. Of course, what they didn't say was we had to accept the same circumstances we had in the past under the occupation in the future as well, due to the international treaties and secret agreements. And these agreements are still valid and binding for every German government, even today.

    Deutsche Welle: How could these agreements survive all these years?

    Josef Foschepoth: They were secret. The US had build a little America with its bases, in which the German government could not govern. When then-chancellor Helmut Kohl worked to clinch German reunification, he realized that this issue was a little difficult and controversial, so he said let's just ignore it, and so, there were no negotiations over America's special status rights. Therefore, these supplemental agreements are still in effect.

    Deutsche Welle: Chancellor Merkel stresses that Germany is not a 'big brother' society. You say that Germany is one of the most closely monitored countries in Europe.

    Josef Foschepoth: The phrase 'big brother society' is certainly a bit polemical. But let me put it this way: The fall from grace happened in 1955 when Konrad Adenauer agreed to the special status rights in negotiations with the allied forces. The recognition of these rights by the chancellor meant that there was no going back to the sanctity and privacy of post and telecommunications, as it is written in the German constitution. That is how the large German-allied intelligence complex arose.

    >>Source
    So much for German sovereignty...


    However, instead of at least deliberating on whether to put all those old laws and secret agreements to the test or cancel them Friedrich, current Federal Minister of the Interior from Merkel's sister party CSU who is well-known of being a huge supporter of data-retention and in favor of a strong control of the internet and also created his "super basic right of security" (he'd be happy if he was able and allowed to do what the NSA/GCHQ does!), rather came up with a no-spy treaty with the US in an attempt to put oil on troubled water - a treaty that is worth nothing and can be thrown in the trash can right away because it'll be negotiated between the BND and NSA. Why such a no-spy treaty is needed if the NSA neither violated fundamental rights of German citizens nor spied on German companies anyway, as he claims, will remain his secret.

    IMO, the EU has to start caring about protecting the rights of its citizens and ACT by putting the passenger flight data agreement and the SWIFT agreement on banking data transfers to the test... or better cancel both for the time being, finally pushing through that its citizen get access to US courts in case their rights are violated and by forcing US companies which are operating within the EU to comply with EU laws by fining them if they're caught passing on data of its citizens to the NSA. Far as I know the EU is working on the latter for 2 years already, they just need to push this through! It's overdue!

    While none of that will stop the NSA from collecting everything they can get - the only way to stop mass surveillance by the NSA is to defund them but that isn't going to happen either because the panic-card will be successfully played - it will at least make US companies who are operating in the EU more careful and will prolly also make them put pressure on their own government.

    I, personally, doubt the EU actually pushes this through because they aren't much different than German politicians (incredibly submissive towards US directive) but I hope I'm wrong!
    "The spirit of resistance to government
    is so valuable on certain occasions,
    that I wish it to be always kept alive.
    It will often be exercised when wrong
    but better so than not to be exercised at all.
    I like a little rebellion now and then.
    It is like a storm in the atmosphere."
    Thomas Jefferson

  14. #14
    A Little Birdy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    TIM
    SEI-Si 9w8 sp/so
    Posts
    12
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Brazilian president: US surveillance a 'breach of international law'

    Dilma Rousseff's scathing speech to UN general assembly the most serious diplomatic fallout over revelations of US spying




    Brazil's president, Dilma Rousseff, has launched a blistering attack on US espionage at the UN general assembly, accusing the NSA of violating international law by its indiscriminate collection of personal information of Brazilian citizens and economic espionage targeted on the country's strategic industries. Rousseff's angry speech was a direct challenge to President Barack Obama, who was waiting in the wings to deliver his own address to the UN general assembly, and represented the most serious diplomatic fallout to date from the revelations by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden.

    Rousseff had already put off a planned visit to Washington in protest at US spying, after NSA documents leaked by Snowden revealed that the US electronic eavesdropping agency had monitored the Brazilian president's phone calls, as well as Brazilian embassies and spied on the state oil corporation, Petrobras. "Personal data of citizens was intercepted indiscriminately. Corporate information – often of high economic and even strategic value – was at the centre of espionage activity.

    "Also, Brazilian diplomatic missions, among them the permanent mission to the UN and the office of the president of the republic itself, had their communications intercepted," Rousseff said, in a global rallying cry against what she portrayed as the overweening power of the US security apparatus.

    "Tampering in such a manner in the affairs of other countries is a breach of international law and is an affront of the principles that must guide the relations among them, especially among friendly nations. A sovereign nation can never establish itself to the detriment of another sovereign nation. The right to safety of citizens of one country can never be guaranteed by violating fundamental human rights of citizens of another country."

    Washington's efforts to smooth over Brazilian outrage over NSA espionage have so far been rebuffed by Rousseff, who has proposed that Brazil build its own internet infrastructure. "Friendly governments and societies that seek to build a true strategic partnership, as in our case, cannot allow recurring illegal actions to take place as if they were normal. They are unacceptable," she said.

    "The arguments that the illegal interception of information and data aims at protecting nations against terrorism cannot be sustained. Brazil, Mr President, knows how to protect itself. We reject, fight and do not harbour terrorist groups," Rousseff said.

    "As many other Latin Americans, I fought against authoritarianism and censorship and I cannot but defend, in an uncompromising fashion, the right to privacy of individuals and the sovereignty of my country," the Brazilian president said. She was imprisoned and tortured for her role in a guerilla movement opposed to Brazil's military dictatorship in the 1970s.

    "In the absence of the right to privacy, there can be no true freedom of expression and opinion, and therefore no effective democracy. In the absence of the respect for sovereignty, there is no basis for the relationship among nations."

    Rousseff called on the UN oversee a new global legal system to govern the internet. She said such multilateral mechanisms should guarantee the "freedom of expression, privacy of the individual and respect for human rights" and the "neutrality of the network, guided only by technical and ethical criteria, rendering it inadmissible to restrict it for political, commercial, religious or any other purposes.

    "The time is ripe to create the conditions to prevent cyberspace from being used as a weapon of war, through espionage, sabotage and attacks against systems and infrastructure of other countries," the Brazilian president said. As host to the UN headquarters, the US has been attacked from the general assembly many times in the past, but what made Rousseff's denunciation all the more painful diplomatically was the fact that it was delivered on behalf of large, increasingly powerful and historically friendly state.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •