UK Equates Journalism With Terrorism

[bleeding heart]

Further, my OP contains a brief list of spying activities committed by British intelligence....most of which cannot be deemed "counter-terrorism", since that term seems to make people especially lenient towards government behavior. Up to and including detaining someone under "terrorist threats" concerns...with (as is freely admitted by the British)--ZERO evidence of any "terror-related" threats.

[Rue]

That's not what it states in the article you provided Bud. No where does it state the US provides info to Israel it does not present to other countries.

The fact that the US passes on raw data to Israel is another issue. It does not mean it does not pass on that sameraw data to MI 6 for example.

What you have done is to leap to a conclusion the raw data it supplies Israel is different then with other allied nations with zero proof, using an article that does not back up your allegation, then switch the topic wen you have no proof, to raise a new issue which is to infer that the raw data it does provide Israel passes on private info about US citizens and that in itself is of course a sinister hold Israel has on the US no other nation has.

You have no idea what that raw data isNot a clue. Youdo not know if the reason it passes on that raw data without sifting to see if it contains info about US citizens is because the raw data does not contain info on US citizens to start with OR because the info deals with persons identified to be in terrorist groups dedicated to blowing up both the US and Israel and other nations.

Not a clue.

You just throw out the inference the US provides sensitive information on innocent US citizens.

It is a public fact the US and Israel are involved in joint military development projects and so regularly pass on to each other raw data that no other countries would get precisely because they are working on a project that is being perfected and they don't want stolen by the Chinese or Russians.

It doesn't necessarily mean they are involved in anything sinister.

More to the point to suggest the US is a dummy nation and would send on any info without first sifting through it or making sure what it is they are passing on is absurd.

Your suggestion the US is negligent and just passes on anything without looking at it to Israel is typical though. You can't resist any thread being used to bash Israel or the US.

Edited February 26, 2014 by Rue

[Rue]

Bonam with due respect you state your positions well and I appreciate them and respect them which is why I debate them. What proof do you or I have that anything Snowden revealed is true?

You assume the info is proof> How do you know its not false information? .

Let's also talk realistically about the operational capacity and limits of intelligence gatehring. It would be impossible to monitor the phone calls of every citizen let alone every US citizen. It would be like looking for a needle in a hay stack.

What intelligence can do is after but only after a priority list is created focus on people on that priority list, You need an analyst who is a human and not a machine to sift through the conversations. Manpower alone requires limiting the focus of who is analyzed to the number of analysts you can hire, pay and of course train..

That said there are systems that in fact look for word patterns. If they detect a certain word or phrase being repeated then it can cause a notification of that pattern to be related to yet another system that then is programmed to look for other words and patterns.

Its the same technology marketing technology and political pollsters use and we all pretty much have read about it. Credit card companies use it to try monitor fraudulent charges for example and then they call us up and say check our card someone just bought something unusual on your card is that you?

The point is its not the extensive all smothering system some think it is.

More to the point I am not sure what you expect from our governments and when I say you, I mean all of us. Do we expect states, not just the US to NOT monitor their citizens? Is it now possible tolive in a society where people just do what they want with zero limitations?

You want the US to just take down and get rid of all its security? Canada too?

Interestingly most espionage carried out by countries is industrial not counter-terrorist. The counter-terrorism gets all the attention though.

Out intelligence operations are designed to protect our businesses competing with foreign businesses for the same contracts or when selling competitive products.

Most large corporations now also have their own intelligence operations that exchange information to their host countries. You can make a fortune as a political risk or market intelligence analyst or security analyst.

So often the intelligence we are talking about is corporate passed on to the government by these multi-nationals.

Not everyone being monitored is a terrorist of course. Some are citizens of allied countries like France or Belgium looking for an advantage for their companies and who have come to Canada.

The number one industry world wide remains military sales. That alone has everyone spying on everyone's latest technology.

The actual raw data Bud is trying to blow up into a Zionist conspiracy theory deals with military industrial intelligence already protected between Israel and the US because of the need for the US to test its products through Israeli technology and the need for expedited processes on mutual information to perfect that technology. It has nothing to do with US citizens but data as to how satellites or drones or lord knows what else they are developing has functioned.

No one needed Snowden to tell us that. Its already public domain. Many of us of course speculate that some of the ufos people claim to see are experimental technology.

This notion though that everyone is being spied on is nonsense. If you have made it to a known list because you are openly a supporter of a terrorist group or industrial competitor or known to police for organized cross criminal crime behaviour. Interpol has exchanged such raw data of citizens to police all over the world since its inception and yet Bud acts like the US and Israel are the only 2 doing it.

No I do not want my civil rights eroded but surely there has to be a balance between individual rights and free thought which we all cherish and security issues. No nation can look the other way if it has political extremists in its midst or people crossing international borders to commit their crimes.

Should we shut down Interpol? Should police stop exchanging info on suspects to other police forces?

Should we scrap the intelligence units of all police forces let alone CSIS or NSA?

What Snowden did in my opinion was b.,s. He knoew damn well he would be giving Russia, China, North Korea, a huge windfall. That is irresponsible. He has endangered lives not just exposing operatives but citizens all over the world who are now easier to exploit thanks to his leaks.

He had no right to use his job to expose millions of innocent people to his political opinions. None of us were given the choice. He obtained information about our privacy and security under false pretenses claiming he would never reveal it and then he did.

If he was an ethical man he would have resigned his job and written a book and he could have gotten the exact points across without having to leak info that endangers us all.

You so sure he has not compromised your security? Do you really know? I don't. I

I respect your opinion on this one Bonam you make good arguments and I get them but I am with Argus on this one. Good posts though,

[GostHacked]

Bonam with due respect you state your positions well and I appreciate them and respect them which is why I debate them. What proof do you or I have that anything Snowden revealed is true?

You assume the info is proof> How do you know its not false information? .

Let's also talk realistically about the operational capacity and limits of intelligence gatehring. It would be impossible to monitor the phone calls of every citizen let alone every US citizen. It would be like looking for a needle in a hay stack.

What intelligence can do is after but only after a priority list is created focus on people on that priority list, You need an analyst who is a human and not a machine to sift through the conversations. Manpower alone requires limiting the focus of who is analyzed to the number of analysts you can hire, pay and of course train..

The computing power that the NSA uses allows them to monitor and sift through all the material quite easily. Algorithms search for key words or phrases to the point where they can actually be contextualized and not just simply analyzed.

But a journalist should never be charged with terrorism if they are doing their job. Investigative journalism will uncover some things that people in government don't want brought to light. So the answer is to charge them with terrorism to shut them up? What kind of society do we live in now when that is the case? Accountability?

You want the US to just take down and get rid of all its security? Canada too?

Real security, not blanket 'just for show' security. From what I understand the Israeli practices are really good. They profile and make specific targets based on actions and behaviors. In the USA, everyone goes through the body scanner, facial recognition and entered into a database. Gotta wonder why over a million US citizens are on a no-fly list. There cannot be a million terrorists in the USA now can there be?

Out intelligence operations are designed to protect our businesses competing with foreign businesses for the same contracts or when selling competitive products.

Most large corporations now also have their own intelligence operations that exchange information to their host countries. You can make a fortune as a political risk or market intelligence analyst or security analyst.

The system is not for you and me, it is for corporations to make money. And that means we are in more trouble.

The number one industry world wide remains military sales. That alone has everyone spying on everyone's latest technology.

That is another problem. More money is made off of weapons that kill than things that cure. These people do not value human life.

This notion though that everyone is being spied on is nonsense. If you have made it to a known list because you are openly a supporter of a terrorist group or industrial competitor or known to police for organized cross criminal crime behaviour. Interpol has exchanged such raw data of citizens to police all over the world since its inception and yet Bud acts like the US and Israel are the only 2 doing it.

Again I ask, how does over a million people get onto the US no-fly list?

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/07/17/watchlist.chertoff/index.html?eref=time_us

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas asked Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff about "a curious and interesting and troubling phenomenon" that CNN Investigative Correspondent Drew Griffin was added to the list.

"My question is, why would Drew Griffin's name come on the watch list, post-his investigation of TSA?" Jackson Lee said.

"What is the basis of this sudden recognition that Drew Griffin is a terrorist? Are we targeting people because of their critique or criticism?"

In response, Chertoff said it was "not my understanding the reporter was put on," but that Griffin may share a name with someone put on the list.

"We do have circumstances where we have name mismatches," he said.

Griffin learned in May he was on the list, about two months after he reported on the federal air marshals program.

A reporter who was again, doing his job with some investigative journalism, gets on a no fly list. So another case where reporters are being treated as terrorists for doing their job.

Remember when investigative journalism was respected?

No I do not want my civil rights eroded but surely there has to be a balance between individual rights and free thought which we all cherish and security issues. No nation can look the other way if it has political extremists in its midst or people crossing international borders to commit their crimes.

Should we shut down Interpol? Should police stop exchanging info on suspects to other police forces?

Should we scrap the intelligence units of all police forces let alone CSIS or NSA?

What Snowden did in my opinion was b.,s. He knoew damn well he would be giving Russia, China, North Korea, a huge windfall. That is irresponsible. He has endangered lives not just exposing operatives but citizens all over the world who are now easier to exploit thanks to his leaks.

He had no right to use his job to expose millions of innocent people to his political opinions. None of us were given the choice. He obtained information about our privacy and security under false pretenses claiming he would never reveal it and then he did.

If he was an ethical man he would have resigned his job and written a book and he could have gotten the exact points across without having to leak info that endangers us all.

You so sure he has not compromised your security? Do you really know? I don't. I

I respect your opinion on this one Bonam you make good arguments and I get them but I am with Argus on this one. Good posts though,

Edited February 26, 2014 by GostHacked

[Bonam]

Bonam with due respect you state your positions well and I appreciate them and respect them which is why I debate them. What proof do you or I have that anything Snowden revealed is true?

You assume the info is proof> How do you know its not false information? .

Because the US government didn't even bother denying the allegations? Instead promising to review practices? If the information was false, you'd think Obama would have mentioned that in one of his speeches on the topic.

Let's also talk realistically about the operational capacity and limits of intelligence gatehring. It would be impossible to monitor the phone calls of every citizen let alone every US citizen. It would be like looking for a needle in a hay stack.

It's the year 2014. Technology makes this not only possible, but easy. All phone calls are monitored and recorded, analyzed by computer. Only the interesting ones get listened to by a human. The software to effectively sift through phone calls and emails is there.

That said there are systems that in fact look for word patterns. If they detect a certain word or phrase being repeated then it can cause a notification of that pattern to be related to yet another system that then is programmed to look for other words and patterns.

It's a lot more advanced than that.

More to the point I am not sure what you expect from our governments and when I say you, I mean all of us. Do we expect states, not just the US to NOT monitor their citizens? Is it now possible tolive in a society where people just do what they want with zero limitations?

You want the US to just take down and get rid of all its security? Canada too?

No, the US and Canada can keep their security measures that don't involve the mass monitoring of phone, email, and online communication.

The actual raw data Bud is trying to blow up into a Zionist conspiracy theory deals with military industrial intelligence already protected between Israel and the US because of the need for the US to test its products through Israeli technology and the need for expedited processes on mutual information to perfect that technology. It has nothing to do with US citizens but data as to how satellites or drones or lord knows what else they are developing has functioned.

Bud's ravings about a zionist conspiracy are of course beside the point, as they are in every thread. The US can share data it has with its closest allies, that's all fine. The question is what data the US should have in the first place.

No I do not want my civil rights eroded but surely there has to be a balance between individual rights and free thought which we all cherish and security issues. No nation can look the other way if it has political extremists in its midst or people crossing international borders to commit their crimes.

Terrorism is a tiny tiny threat. If this was WWIII and millions of people were dying from it, I would also support taking extreme measures to identify and destroy the enemy at any cost. But it's not. The threat is not worth sacrificing any rights or freedoms, at all.

What Snowden did in my opinion was b.,s. He knoew damn well he would be giving Russia, China, North Korea, a huge windfall. That is irresponsible. He has endangered lives not just exposing operatives but citizens all over the world who are now easier to exploit thanks to his leaks.

Where did he reveal the identities of operatives?

He had no right to use his job to expose millions of innocent people to his political opinions. None of us were given the choice. He obtained information about our privacy and security under false pretenses claiming he would never reveal it and then he did.

Umm, it's the governments that wrongfully collected and recorded this data to begin with. And you want to blame Snowden just for making it known that these programs exist? If you feel your privacy and security has been compromised, blame the people who did it, not the guy who let you know about it.

I respect your opinion on this one Bonam you make good arguments and I get them but I am with Argus on this one. Good posts though,

Thanks. It does seem like we completely disagree on this one, but I also respect your posts.

[g_bambino]

[T]he information he has released is to inform and alert its citizens of the illegal and secretive information gathering.

He did nothing of the sort. He did not uncover something illegal and gathered the pertinent proof and leaked that. No, he was so much more lazy and simply passed tens of thousands of documents on to be dumped into the public domain with no regard for what was in that collection.

[eyeball]

He did nothing of the sort. He did not uncover something illegal and gathered the pertinent proof and leaked that. No, he was so much more lazy and simply passed tens of thousands of documents on to be dumped into the public domain with no regard for what was in that collection.

Seems apropos in light of the haphazard manner by which data was dredged up from the private domain and dumped into government data banks.

[g_bambino]

Seems apropos in light of the haphazard manner by which data was dredged up from the private domain and dumped into government data banks.

Seems the opposite when one considers the nature of that data, the method of collection, and what's done with it.

[GostHacked]

Seems the opposite when one considers the nature of that data, the method of collection, and what's done with it.

People are still defending the governments actions on all this and making Snowden out to be a criminal?

Snowden blew the lid wide open on how vast and extensive the spying is. None of that was known by any of us on this board. Sure we suspected it was bad, but we did not know HOW bad it exactly was.

But treating a journalist like a terrorist means that we have crossed a line somewhere.

[g_bambino]

People are still defending the governments actions on all this and making Snowden out to be a criminal?

I think you've missed what eyeball and I were actually conversing about.

But treating a journalist like a terrorist means that we have crossed a line somewhere.

That depends on whether the journalist actually engaged in terrorism or not.

[Rue]

He did nothing of the sort. He did not uncover something illegal and gathered the pertinent proof and leaked that. No, he was so much more lazy and simply passed tens of thousands of documents on to be dumped into the public domain with no regard for what was in that collection.

Bang on pt.

[Rue]

People are still defending the governments actions on all this and making Snowden out to be a criminal?

Snowden blew the lid wide open on how vast and extensive the spying is. None of that was known by any of us on this board. Sure we suspected it was bad, but we did not know HOW bad it exactly was.

But treating a journalist like a terrorist means that we have crossed a line somewhere.

He is not a terrorist himself in that he has not physically carried out a specific attack. However he has indirectly empowered terrorists and so that in law could be construed as being an accomplice which is considered the same as doing the act itself. The act or facilitating the act in law are treated the same. I personally am also arguing the subjective moral judgement that what he did may very well empower terrorists to do something violent they may not have otherwise been able to do. Whether his leaks do lead to the facilitation of a terrorist attack I guess we might never know but he certainly has increased that likelihood and that to me was inexcusable. He had choices. He could have revealed sufficient generic evidence not to have endangered people but get his point across. He did not make that effort. Look no one says he was an investigative journalist but surely he had an ethical responsibility to ask, does the indiscriminate leak of info without taking the time to see if there was an alternative way to get the point across not constitute gross indifference to the safety of his fellow citizens?

In regards to whether what he did was criminal or not, he has violated federal US security laws and would be charged for treason. I am not sure though if he has violated US state criminal laws. Probably not.

In Canada he would probably be charged with the crime of treason. Its seldom used but in this case I think the federal government would invoke that section precisely because it exposed the name of operatives. That I think is what would push the crown to go for treason as opposed to some other charges. Would they plea bargain it? I do not know. I doubt it on such an important case.

The proper answer though is in Canada its unclear what he would be charged with while in the US they have specific laws now intended for just such a thing and their federal crimes for treason has been updated t specifically deal with this.

Our laws were drafted in anticipation of conventional spying by our civilians for states we were at war with, in particular Nazi Germany, Italy and Japan and then later North Korea or during the cold war.

The US updated their treason laws much more than we did as they of course being a superpower and frequent target of terrorism have had to constantly update their laws and then deal with iraq and Afghanistan. Some of the attempts to pass laws by George Bush were actually thrown out by the US Supreme Court others were allowed.

The US has a very complicated federal set of laws designed to protect the safety of the President, prevent counterfeit currency,

and undermine the economy in addition to other laws dealing with federal state security that might be enforced by their Secret Service , Treasury Department, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobbacco and Fire Arms, Drug Enforcement Agency, FBI and military operations such as the Judge Adviocate General's Office and NCIS. They have actually a very complicated maze of federal security enforcement agencies that might overlap when enforcing federal or state security issues. Its very complex. In Canada we simply have the RCMP really and then city police intelligence units or provincial police units that manage counter intelligence.

What we are talking about of course is counter intelligence when the spying happens in the country, intelligence when the spying is done outside the country. Outside the US the CIA and US Military have jurisdiction over things they would not have if it was occuring on US soil.

In Canada the RCMP has exclusive mandate for counter-intelligence across the country. Outside the country its CSIS. However as in the US civilian police forces have a mandate to investigate if they suspect crimes are transpiring within their jurisdiction and then their is protocal as to priority and who has mandate to lead the investigation.

Sex crimes that are international are technically headed by the RCMP but they work closely with the city police forces. Interpol usually provides its intelligence to the RCMP who then pass it to the appropriate police agency.

The FBI because its a world leader in forensic sex profiling is often called in to provide expert assistance to many police forces across the world. Since sex crimes and drug crimes are now heavily inter-related to raising money for terrorists as are smuggling of weapons its become a very complex matter as to who investigates and enforces.

Considering the amount of drug and sex crime syndicates and money laundering involved with terrorism its become a multi-disciplinary exercise involving many layers of government and therefore enforcement agencies.

Its actually amazing anything gets done with the complex maze of jurisdictions. Its an issue by itself.

Edited February 27, 2014 by Rue

[guyser]

ruh roh....

In regards to whether what he did was criminal or not, he has violated federal US security laws and would be charged for treason. I am not sure though if he has violated US state criminal laws. Probably not.

Security laws are for most part criminal laws.

In Canada he would probably be charged with the crime of treason. Its seldom used but in this case I think the federal government would invoke that section precisely because it exposed the name of operatives. That I think is what would push the crown to go for treason as opposed to some other charges. Would they plea bargain it? I do not know. I doubt it on such an important case.

Yeah?

Under what section of Treason?
Did he give info to a State agent?

The proper answer though is in Canada its unclear what he would be charged with while in the US they have specific laws now intended for just such a thing and their federal crimes for treason has been updated t specifically deal with this.

Wait, you have now contradicted yourself. You said they would, now......not so much?

In Canada we simply have the RCMP really and then city police intelligence units or provincial police units that manage counter intelligence.

In Canada the RCMP has exclusive mandate for counter-intelligence across the country. Outside the country its CSIS.

CSIS....what do they do, sell fruit on the corner when in country?


Let me guess, you worked for Foreign Affairs too? I kind of figure a lawyer, whilst trying to be authoritative, would at least be somewhat factually correct.

CSIS does counter intelligence inside Canada all the time. (but maybe they fool you with jodhpurs ?)

What does CSIS do?

CSIS collects and analyzes information and security intelligence from across the country and abroad, and reports to and advises the Government of Canada on national security issues and activities that threaten the security of Canada.

https://www.csis-scrs.gc.ca/bts/fq-eng.asp#bm04

That just doesn t happen with you. And please, dont think I am baiting you and want some long winded 4 page reply, I dont, but you havent convinced anyone that you know what you are talking about.

In the meantime , Im off to vent some stuff near the hearsay machine.

[bud]

Bud you have no clue what intelligence the US exchanged with Israel.

it looks like that you have no clue, rue. there was no "exchange".

it would help if you would read the information and links you are responding to so you wouldn't need to be corrected every time you make a post.

phone calls and emails of American citizens. The agreement places no legally binding limits on the use of the data by the Israelis.

i have no time to spoon feed you, rue. make the effort to educate yourself on the information you want to make comments on.

[Rue]

So let me get tis straight Bud, phone calls and emails of American citizens were not "exchanged" with Israel but they were sent.

Got it.

Yah that certainly clarifies it.

[bud]

So let me get tis straight Bud, phone calls and emails of American citizens were not "exchanged" with Israel but they were sent.

Got it.

Yah that certainly clarifies it.

not sure where you're trying to go with this.

what has happened is that the u.s. government has given israel raw intelligence of american citizens (and only to isreal - no other country) without receiving the same in return. 'exchanging' would constitute receiving raw intelligence of israeli citizens in return. essentially, the u.s. government is not only taking away people's rights to privacy by secretly collecting their communication information, but they're volunteering this information to a foreign country.

so every point you've tried to make in the initial comments that i responded to were untrue, because you can never focus hard enough to read what you're responding to. instead, what you end up doing is sharing all the incoherent and unfocused thoughts in your head and then throwing your hands up in the air when someone shows the patience to respond to your comments, showing how you're unable to debate and focus on any subject.

Edited February 27, 2014 by bud

[GostHacked]

In the USA, you are more likely to die in an airport via the TSA than die in a terrorist attack. That makes me feel safe.Instead of going after the real terrorists, instead there is a monitoring device on each one of us.

Snowden cannot be treated as terrorist or a traitor.

And besides, the criminals/terrorists are usually one step ahead of the game anyways. The main reason they still exist.

[Rue]

Bud as usual you twist and spin.

You claim the article stated , "that the u.s. government has given israel raw intelligence of american citizens (and only to isreal - no other country) without receiving the same in return.

The article actually stated: Bud, nd I quote; " the US government handed over intercepted communications likely to contain phone calls and emails of American citizens."

The article also makes it clear that what is handed over is and I quote: "NSA routinely sends ISNU [the Israeli Sigint National Unit] minimized and unminimized raw collection", it says.

The article also clarifies that, "Raw Sigint includes, but is not limited to, unevaluated and unminimized transcripts, gists, facsimiles, telex, voice and Digital Network Intelligence metadata and content."

So you have no clue of the above provides info as to American citizens or simply the activities they may be engaging in.

You deliberately omitted the following:

"Although the memorandum is explicit in saying the material had to be handled in accordance with US law, and that the Israelis agreed not to deliberately target Americans identified in the data, these rules are not backed up by legal obligations."

You also deliberately ommitted the following from the article as well:

"The five-page memorandum, termed an agreement between the US and Israeli intelligence agencies "pertaining to the protection of US persons", repeatedly stresses the constitutional rights of Americans to privacy and the need for Israeli intelligence staff to respect these rights."

You also declined to point out the following statement in the article;

"In a statement to the Guardian, an NSA spokesperson did not deny that personal data about Americans was included in raw intelligence data shared with the Israelis. But the agency insisted that the shared intelligence complied with all rules governing privacy.

"Any US person information that is acquired as a result of NSA's surveillance activities is handled under procedures that are designed to protect privacy rights," the spokesperson said."

It also went on to state which you also skipped:

"The memorandum of understanding, which the Guardian is publishing in full, allows Israel to retain "any files containing the identities of US persons" for up to a year. The agreement requests only that the Israelis should consult the NSA's special liaison adviser when such data is found. "

You also skipped this:

"Notably, a much stricter rule was set for US government communications found in the raw intelligence. The Israelis were required to "destroy upon recognition" any communication "that is either to or from an official of the US government". Such communications included those of "officials of the executive branch (including the White House, cabinet departments, and independent agencies), the US House of Representatives and Senate (member and staff) and the US federal court system (including, but not limited to, the supreme court)". "

On top of the above you of course deliberately ignored the crux of the issue as the article stated and I quote:

"The NSA is required by law to target only non-US persons without an individual warrant, but it can collect the content and metadata of Americans' emails and calls without a warrant when such communication is with a foreign target. US persons are defined in surveillance legislation as US citizens, permanent residents and anyone located on US soil at the time of the interception, unless it has been positively established that they are not a citizen or permanent resident."

It also stated:

"Moreover, with much of the world's internet traffic passing through US networks, large numbers of purely domestic communications also get scooped up incidentally by the agency's surveillance programs.

The document mentions only one check carried out by the NSA on the raw intelligence, saying the agency will "regularly review a sample of files transferred to ISNU to validate the absence of US persons' identities". It also requests that the Israelis limit access only to personnel with a "strict need to know".

The article also states:

"Israeli intelligence is allowed "to disseminate foreign intelligence information concerning US persons derived from raw Sigint by NSA" on condition that it does so "in a manner that does not identify the US person". The agreement also allows Israel to release US person identities to "outside parties, including all INSU customers" with the NSA's written permission"

It also stated:

"The five-page memorandum, termed an agreement between the US and Israeli intelligence agencies "pertaining to the protection of US persons", repeatedly stresses the constitutional rights of Americans to privacy and the need for Israeli intelligence staff to respect these rights."

So my problem Bud is you deliberately missed the entire article's contents and cherry picked misrepresenting it to say Israel is spying on US citizens who are innocent. That was your allegation and you did so in a thread that has nothing to do with the thread.

You then after ignoring all the above claim I didn't read the article? Lol.

Where am I going with this. Where I always do with you, to challenge your removing bits and pieces from articles to make inflammatory allegations about Israel unrelated to the thread or even the article itself.

The article stated that NSA is required by law to target only non-US persons without an individual warrant. It also pointed out that the NSA is able to collect the content and metadata of Americans' emails and calls without a warrant when such communication is with a foreign target.

So just as I stated the info is not being sifted because its criteria for collection in the first place already narrowed it down to either non US citizens or US citizens only where a warrant was first obtained. So its not unlimited at all as you infer Bud.

The law as the article states defines a " U.S. persons as US citizens, as a permanent residents and/or anyone located on US soil at the time of the interception, unless it has been positively established that they are not a citizen or permanent resident."

That means a warrant would have been obtained before the NSA obtained the info from US citizens and before it would then be passed on.

The agreement between the US and Israell as the article also stated "repeatedly stresses the constitutonal rights of Americans to privacy and the need for Israeli intelligence staff to respect these rights."

You deliberately ignored the fact that the kind of info NSA would pass on would only deal with people who are targetting foreign sites and has to be obtained with a warrant if it was obtained from NSA and returned back to the US if its not relevant or destroyed.

Also nothing in the article you provided suggests the US does not have other arrangements any differet than Israel's. The assumptions it only does this with Israel is not proven.

You assume its the only one.

The article has no knowledge of anything but a memorandum of agreement it is commenting on.

The writer may have no knowledge of other such memorandums of agreement but that does not mean they do not exist.

This is precisely why I said information charing is not particular to Israel and the article stated:

Although Israel is one of America's closest allies, it is not one of the inner core of countries involved in surveillance sharing with the US - Britain, Australia, Canada and New Zealand. This group is collectively known as Five Eyes.

You do not know neither does this article what info exchanges go on with the 5 eyes but you assume you do and they are different than what the US does with Israel with zero proof other than your assumption.

Police forces across the world constantly exchange info on each other's citizens by the way. What world do you live in to think only Israel and the NSA do it?

You don't thinlk multi-national corporations don't have vest networks of intelligence of citizens from across the world that are sold and exchanged for money?

Last point. You assume because Israel does not provide anything back in exchange for the above relationship.

That is false. Under that specific agreement it may not, but under other agreements it of course does otherwise this one would not exist.

You read what the article stated. Israeli intelligence is allowed "to disseminate foreign intelligence information concerning US persons derived from raw Sigint by NSA" on condition that it does so "in a manner that does not identify the US person". The agreement also allows Israel to release US person identities to "outside parties, including all INSU customers" with the NSA's written permission.

Interesting how you ignored that,

Although Israel is one of America's closest allies, it is not one of the inner core of countries involved in surveillance sharing with the US - Britain, Australia, Canada and New Zealand. This group is collectively known as Five Eyes.

The above arrangement came about because unlike any other of its allies, the US has direect on-going military projects going on that deal with both US and Israeli citizens that must be monitored constantly to avoid being leaked to China, iran, North Korea, Russia, Brazil, India, and virtually any other competitor not just terrorists. It was desogned to cut the red tape so the 2 countries could develop their technology and transfer it quickly and watch it for leaks. Its also part of an on-going early warning system as to extremist activity in the Middle East which Israel can concentrate on freeing the US to concentrate more of its attention on China, Russia, Eastern Europe.

So the notion the US does not benefit from this is a crock. The US is not about to exchange any intelligence for free or helter skelter as much as you might infer it does.

[Rue]

In the USA, you are more likely to die in an airport via the TSA than die in a terrorist attack. That makes me feel safe.Instead of going after the real terrorists, instead there is a monitoring device on each one of us.

Snowden cannot be treated as terrorist or a traitor.

And besides, the criminals/terrorists are usually one step ahead of the game anyways. The main reason they still exist.

Here we go again. So the US spies on you. It has a monitoring device on you.

Good gawd man if you know they are spying on you why remain here? Move to Iran or North Korea.

Edited February 27, 2014 by Rue

[guyser]

No I do not want my civil rights eroded

followed by ...

Good gawd man if you know they are spying on you why remain here

Does not compute

[Hudson Jones]

Bud as usual you twist and spin.

You claim the article stated , "that the u.s. government has given israel raw intelligence of american citizens (and only to isreal - no other country) without receiving the same in return.

The article actually stated:

What Bud said is true. All this typing and quoting and nothing in your post backs up your claim that the U.S. gives this information to other countries and that U.S. and Israel are "exchanging" raw data.

Stop trying to minimize the importance of a government which is giving personal information collected of its people to a foreign country.

[g_bambino]

Stop trying to minimize the importance of a government which is giving personal information collected of its people to a foreign country.

What personal information?

[GostHacked]

Here we go again. So the US spies on you. It has a monitoring device on you.

Apologetic tripe.

Good gawd man if you know they are spying on you why remain here? Move to Iran or North Korea.

If the world is so hostile, maybe moving to Israel might prove to be a better move for you.

See how dumb that argument is?

[Rue]

Ghost did you say just how dumb is this argument? You bet. You want me to believe you are being spied on? Lol? Right there is someone monitoring you.

Seriously both you and Hudson have advanced the position you are being spied on. Do you have any proof or is that a sort of a tingly like intuitive feeling you have? Care to share how you know?

By the way-this was a thread on the balancing of individual rights to privacy and free speech with the need to protect state security issues-never an easy task for law makers and regulators at the best of times.

Please do start a thread explaining how you are being spied upon by the CIA, Zionist Jews, or whoever it may be.

Edited February 28, 2014 by Rue

[Rue]

Hudson what Bud said was not true. He of course the information that contradicts what he said and I listed it all.

Its interesting you think I am minimizing. I am not the one who in fact minimized. It wasn't me who omitted, or as you say, minimized the article's contents and therefore its importance.

By the way you want to engage in yet another thread bashing Israel do it-stop trying to redirect this thread to an anti Israel bash session.