Fresh Leak on US Spying: NSA Accessed Mexican President's Email
Source: Der Spiegel
The NSA has been systematically eavesdropping on the Mexican government for years. It hacked into the president's public email account and gained great insight into policymaking and the political system. The news is likely to hurt ties between the US and Mexico.
Read more: http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/nsa-hacked-email-account-of-mexican-president-a-928817.html
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Demeter
(85,373 posts)This is no surprise to anyone at this point...but written confirmation is good for the denialists.
okaawhatever
(9,462 posts)don't think it will come as a surprise. What Mexico will do is use it to get some concessions out of us and the new President isn't as US friendly so he will probably use it to help his campaign next go round.
Ace Acme
(1,464 posts)"Everybody's doing it," you say.
This country used to stand for something. When the only remaining superpower thinks it's exempt from international law, something has got to change.
okaawhatever
(9,462 posts)myself that if we stop anyone else will. It's not right but it is standard practice and it is expected. If we stopped spying on Mexico tomorrow, they wouldn't stop spying on us. Spying on other countries isn't a luxury it's a necessity. You say we used to stand for something. During that time we were spying, so what has changed?
Ace Acme
(1,464 posts)To compare the resources of Mexico's intelligence service with ours is absurd.
To compare this wholesale wiretapping with intelligence operations in another day is also absurd.
okaawhatever
(9,462 posts)and likely won't stop. Also, it's important for us to realize that we have now learned that our emails with the Mexican President will likely be viewed by the Chinese, Russians and N Koreans. They have a much better hacking system than we do.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)and that there is some magical fantasy world where ONLY the "bad guys" get spied on...There's no middle ground here...
If you're against spying and covert warfare, then NO country should do it, period...If you think there's ever a time and place to employ intelligence, then you don't get to choose what you think are "proper" targets and methods...
And for the record, yes, everybody DOES do it, even to us...There's no such thing as having a military without military intelligence (and this goes for pretty much every country)...Does Mexico have the technology to easily hack e-mail? Probably not...Do they still have a steady stream of intel using other methods? You bet...
Ace Acme
(1,464 posts)Murder is illegal. We all know that sometimes intel operatives commit illegal murder. It can be a rough business.
But suppose we engaged in illegal murder wholesale, that we had illegally murdered 2 million Frenchmen just because we can. Obviously, it's illegitimate to defend that wholesale illegal murder on the basis that 1) sometimes spies murder and 2) everybody does it.
There is no comparison between Mexico's legitimate defense interest in gathering intelligence about the USA through legal means and the illegal actions of the only country in the world that has ever used atomic weapons, a rogue terrorist state that thinks it is immune to international law.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)because in theory it should ALL be illegal (at the bare minimum it's at least unethical)...You're just arguing semantics over the intelligence methods, reasons, targets, and amount of information gathered...No amount of arguing over those four points can make spying "right" in my eyes...
FWIW, U.S. forces did "illegally" kill a few hundred thousand Iraqis, or whatever the most recent death tally is, and I can name any number of countries who slaughtered *millions* of foreign nationals just because they could...
Ace Acme
(1,464 posts)Subscribing to newspapers and magazines and noting the opinions and concerns expressed in them is certainly a legitimate form of intelligence gathering.
Wholesale wiretapping is not legitimate.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)Reading newspapers and magazines and noting the opinions and concerns expressed is "consumption of mass media" or in some instances, "research"
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Do they think that he might plan a military action against the US?
The response that Mexico probably does the same thing to us and that, in any event, we "know" that China hacks our leaders may be quite valid.
But how is this justified by our government.
And do they think that the Mexican president was hacking Obama's e-mail accounts?
And does the fact that other countries do it make it right or wise for us to do it?
Seems like cheating. Are we a nation that stands for cheating? Or are we better than that?
What is wrong with Chinese students coming here and cheating on exams if we cheat and secretly spy on their computers?
These are legitimate ethical questions.
Who are our enemies? Is every country to be distrusted? Why have NAFTA if we don't trust the leaders of Mexico or Canada?
What are our national interests?
The NSA scandal raises these questions and more in my mind. Time for a national discussion. I certainly don't have all the answers. But rather than put down people who are asking these questions with statements like, "He did it first" or "He does it too," why not ask the question and with the goal that all nations ask the questions of themselves. We need international protocols on respecting the privacy of certain electronic communications. When should governments carefully respect privacy? When not?
The new technology calls for new questions, new thinking, new discussions, new answers and new international laws. That the problem is bigger than our nation does not absolve us of the responsibility to lead in this international discussion. What right does and individual have to privacy in the electronic media?
okaawhatever
(9,462 posts)it's probably been tried. The Mexican President has many in his own government he can't trust due to the staggering wealth of the narco traffickers and their infiltration of the government. There is a pretty decent sized Al-Qaeda presence in Mexico. They've been coming there to learn the language and pass themselves off as Mexicans so they can move around the US with less suspicion. Venezuela has long been accused of selling passports and identity papers to Al Qaeda and foreign nationals who want to enter the US without the scrutiny their home country would garner.
Mexico has a huge money laundering presence for both enemies of our state (Iran) and narco traffickers. We can thank a couple of multi-national banks for their help with that. HSBC being the largest and I think USB was second. Justice finally busted them last year or the year before and they settled a huge lawsuit. We have a unique problem with Iran being supported by Venezuela, Cuba and Ecuador. Those three trade and have relations with Mexico. Mexico has the economy that can absorb a lot of the laundering and other activity. That's one of the reasons Iran supports Ecuador, they have access to the US Dollar which Iran needs. Mexico often gets caught in the middle of the situation.
Mexico doesn't have to invade us or be our enemy to be a security risk. They can cause danger not by being the problem, but by hosting it.
As to our enemies, I think it's pretty well settled that every country will get whatever it can on another through whatever means necessary. The Israeli's are said to have a huge spy presence here in the United States. The "five eyes" countries, those we've been close to since WWII are the ones we share intel with without reserve. Canada, UK, US, Australia & New Zealand. I think we all have kept our agreements to not try these things on one another. Other than that, I think we attempt to gain intelligence information from others and they us.
As to your part about privacy in electronic media, while I understand people equating their own email to the Mexican President's I don't think that's a fair comparison. It's not an email issue. Governments have been intercepting communications from other countries for years. From carrier pigeons to encrypted notes scribbled in invisible ink, whatever form of communication is being used, it will be at risk. Email hasn't created or increased that.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Is our government going to argue that the President of Mexico is involved with Al Qaeda or with the drug trafficking?
If not, the surveillance is most likely a huge violation of diplomatic protocol. I don't object to surveillance of Al Qaeda members or drug traffickers. Who would?
But the scope of the surveillance by the US government is, as far as we can tell, so wide, so nearly all-encompassing that it appears to be simply an attempt to take over the world by hijacking the electronic communications.
The only reason someone would be so nonchalant about having this wide e-mail surveillance, telephone pen register and other electronic communication surveillance would be if they made their living doing the surveillance.
If you are an ordinary person and therefore a potential target for unwarranted surveillance, this program is an abomination.
Hacking the Mexican President's e-mails is inexcusable. We are not making friends abroad with these methods. Everybody expects this of dictatorships like Russia and China, etc., but not of the USA. Our Bill of Rights has not yet been repealed. We have the right to speak as we wish and the government has no right to snoop on what we write and say. No right whatsoever.
Nor can the US expect the President of Mexico to act in good faith if we read his e-mails. Live does not work like that.
The person who reads others letters and e-mails, etc. will not have many friends.
okaawhatever
(9,462 posts)it's the President's personal email, but it's still a President's email and will be a target. I don't approve of all the surveillance going on with private individuals, but I think that and what happens among governments are two separate issues. Yes, the citizens of countries who find out we spied on the President don't like us. We have a PR problem from that day forward and a future security risk. The leaders who are affected usually use the opportunity to get something out of us for it. Money, weapons, trade agreements, something along those lines.
To give you an idea as to how much info is gathered, a friend of mine's father was pretty high speed in the military but not a General or public figure or anything. He was stationed in Afghanistan where he helped train the troops who fought Russia. She and her mother lived there with him. She was probably 13 years old. Twenty years later, her husband (who was a performer) had a tour of Europe. When she attempted to enter the former Czech Republic they had her name in their database and refused her entry. Now, she wasn't using her maiden name. Nor was she married to anyone in the military or the intelligence community. Her husband was a well known performer they could have checked on TV, magazines, whatever They allowed her husband and children in but said she couldn't. No reason why, they asked her about her maiden name and that's all. You can't go in. Turn around and leave.
I appreciate the sentiment about us leading the world in stopping the spying, but I don't think it will do any good. We can stop but no one else will. As to personal emails, we absolutely need to revisit the rules and laws and protect the citizens. I think the new NSA head will probably address that and we'll see if his changes will be enough. If not, we'll have to force change.
Mojorabbit
(16,020 posts)
idwiyo
(5,113 posts)Alamuti Lotus
(3,093 posts)If the Mexican president's email is not being spied on, then al-Qa'idah would probably conquer Mexico. Is that what you want, hmmmm???? This is being done for their own--and the greater--good. Nobody really minds being spied on, they just have to make a show for the press. Snowden and others like him ate the horrible monsters for bringing attention--gasp!!--to these perfectly normal, perfectly acceptable, and perfectly effective practices!!
randome
(34,845 posts)Money laundering, organized crime and human trafficking are a few of their 'areas of expertise'.
They allegedly prevented a terrorist plot in India by 'spying' on them, for which India expressed its gratitude.
I don't know why they would hack into the Mexican President's email but to spin it as something to do with Al-Qaeda doesn't really address that point.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]
Alamuti Lotus
(3,093 posts)Granted that it cobbled together--nearly verbatim--the typical loyalist arguments, I wasn't otherwise seriously advancing any of those idea fragments...
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)DUer. Just explaining.
Spying on terrorists is not a problem. Spying on the democratically elected leaders of other countries that are our allies is a big problem. It could make us very unpopular and lose us a lot of friends.
Ace Acme
(1,464 posts)We're a rogue terrorist state, despised by the peaceloving nations of the world
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)But our vast surveillance programs combined with the Iraq War won't win us friends.
Ace Acme
(1,464 posts)they love Americans.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Europeans do like Americans. Or maybe they just liked me.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)Ace Acme
(1,464 posts)We do all over the world
Purveyor
(29,876 posts)
reddread
(6,896 posts)about the abduction, horrific torture and death of
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enrique_Camarena_(DEA_agent)
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/10/10/us-intelligence-assets-reportedly-played-role-in-capture-dea-agent-in-mexico/
JackRiddler
(24,979 posts)Like the U.S. isn't neck-deep in the Mexican drug war, which is utterly corrupt and has killed tens of thousands.
Like there's no industrial espionage involved.
Dream on, FOXNEWS.
reddread
(6,896 posts)JackRiddler
(24,979 posts)quadrature
(2,049 posts)truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)to the narcos who used straw purchasers to buy them legally. There are plenty of things I'm willing to dump on the US govt about, but the inability of ATF to do its job when prevented by lax gun laws in border states and monkey wrenchers in Washington is not one of them.
quadrature
(2,049 posts)ATF forced otherwise legal gun shops to sell guns
to people that did not pass the background check.
unlike in the Bush era, there were no radio transmitters in the guns.
many guns went over the border, these guns were found at the scene of many shootouts in Mexico.
I don't see weak laws as the problem here.
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)
Shivering Jemmy
(900 posts)this is their job, after all.
Intelligence is not simply about what your enemies are doing.
Judi Lynn
(160,630 posts)
UTUSN
(70,744 posts)married to a soap opera star. When he toured the flood devastated Acapulco recently he was mugging and "joking" to the effect that things were so bad he might have to pray to St Peter and the media crowd around him were laughing with him.
Airheads in power tend to have nefarious string-pullers behind them, a la Shrub.
matt819
(10,749 posts)I said it in other posts here and on other sites, and I'll repeat it here. This is not a problem. This is what the NSA is supposed to do, and they're very good at it. This is what we want them doing, 24x7. And it's what every nation on the planet knows we're doing, and whining about it is nothing but posturing.
What is wrong is the collection on American citizens. That's where the NSA has crossed the line. But let's not treat every report of NSA collection activities against foreign nationals as a shock. It isn't, and we shouldn't.
Ace Acme
(1,464 posts)matt819
(10,749 posts)Really?
Naked tyranny?
Imposing a state of. . .?
What does that even mean? And what planet are you living on?
So you would prefer that the US make its policy decision entirely in the dark? No need to know what other countries' leaders are thinking, planning, what their policy positions are, etc., etc.?
Are you insane?
Do you think that the countries currently bitching and moaning about being targets of these activities - France, Brazil, Mexico - don't do the same, when and where they can, where their political interests are at stake?
Ace Acme
(1,464 posts)then I invite you to provide some evidence of that.
If you have no evidence of that, then do you have a point?
matt819
(10,749 posts)Are you really that dense?
To use your word, the USG hoovers up everything it can. When it comes to foreign governments, military, etc., that's as it should be. And the hoovering probably includes all forms of communications, encrypted and not. And that's as it should be as well.
Other nations whose budgets permit do the same, and that's fine, too. Perhaps their budgets are more constrained, and they are more selective in their collection efforts, but collect they do.
For countries whose budgets don't permit this sort of wholesale collection, then they are more selective. India may restrict its efforts to, say, Pakistan, China, and Sri Lanka.
The issues are, of course, far more complex, especially when you consider that many countries that would dearly love to intercept USG communications simply don't have the capacity to decrypt those communications, for example, Mexico collecting USG communications. But the largest economy in South America, Brazil, collecting this sort of intelligence on neighboring countries, there's no question that they do.
My only "evidence" is that I was in this business for 15 years and have a pretty good idea of how it works.
My only point, at least with respect to your post, is that your reference to imposing tyranny is pointless and demonstrates a remarkably simplistic worldview, and even using that word probably overstates your perspective.
Ace Acme
(1,464 posts)Thanks for proving my point.
bobthedrummer
(26,083 posts)Last edited Tue Oct 22, 2013, 06:06 PM - Edit history (1)
PRISM/US-984XN
http://cryptome.org/2013/10/nsa-prism-13-1021.pdf
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)It was so easy for them or anyone back in those days to recover or reset email passwords, and for voicemail from anywhere to use the home number.
