Privacy and the State

[An_Inspector_Calls]

Meanwhile, in the real world, German authorities who once belittled these claims as anti-American criticism of activity designed to combat terrorism, are now - as more information emerges - pointing out that American surveillance has not only (apparently) broken US law, it has broken German law in having listening units placed within Germany.

Wake me when the veil of the temple is rent in twain.

[scottycelt]

Indeed - and, mercifully, back on topic.

Does anyone here have anything to say about this?

It's all been said countless times before so what's the point? And if some of us do say anything we'll be accused of repeating ourselves etc etc.

Anyway ... deep breath ... another go! Any spying activity involves breaking the laws of of the countries affected. I suspect every country has a spying agency. I'm not too certain about the Vatican State, though with a Jesuit now in charge it could well have the finest and most effective in the world :winkeye:

As for 'local' laws I've said before that these are broken daily by fire engines, ambulances and police vehicles being driven on the wrong side of the road in order to save lives and property. And, of course, phone-tapping and bugging are used by the police to catch criminals.

Why should the security services act any differently?

The Germans, French and others caught with their pants down should give the Yanks a stern lecture for naive public consumption then set about sorting out their internal government security arrangements.

I fully expect steps are already under way for the latter to be done, asap.

Got that, now, ahinton ... ?

[french frank]

There might, by some, be thought to be a difference between being caught doing 35mph in a 30mph limit and being caught driving at 150mph on a motorway. Drunk. But no, perhaps not.

The aggravation is that the US is such a huge, rich power that it has the resources to 'police' the entire globe. Should we be grateful to them for looking after us so solicitously?

[Mr Pee]

The aggravation is that the US is such a huge, rich power that it has the resources to 'police' the entire globe. Should we be grateful to them for looking after us so solicitously?

Yes. I think we should.

[french frank]

Yes. I think we should.

What democratic controls should there be over the relevant security services?

[eighthobstruction]

What democratic controls should there be over the relevant security services?

$$$$$ innit....should we have a license fee, or just subscription to the bits we want....????

[ahinton]

Wake me when the veil of the temple is rent in twain.

Please leave John Tavener out of this.

[ahinton]

It's all been said countless times before so what's the point? And if some of us do say anything we'll be accused of repeating ourselves etc etc.

Anyway ... deep breath ... another go! Any spying activity involves breaking the laws of of the countries affected. I suspect every country has a spying agency. I'm not too certain about the Vatican State, though with a Jesuit now in charge it could well have the finest and most effective in the world :winkeye:

As for 'local' laws I've said before that these are broken daily by fire engines, ambulances and police vehicles being driven on the wrong side of the road in order to save lives and property. And, of course, phone-tapping and bugging are used by the police to catch criminals.

Why should the security services act any differently?

The Germans, French and others caught with their pants down should give the Yanks a stern lecture for naive public consumption then set about sorting out their internal government security arrangements.

I fully expect steps are already under way for the latter to be done, asap.

Got that, now, ahinton ... ?

No. I did get the number of words in your loquacious post, though.

[ahinton]

Yes. I think we should.

Then be content with your thoughts and let the rest of us concern ourselves with realities, however unpleasant they are.

[Richard Barrett]

What democratic controls should there be over the relevant security services?

It would seem only fair that the responsibility for electing US presidents shouldn't be limited to US citizens, since the rest of us have to put up with them as well.

[ahinton]

It would seem only fair that the responsibility for electing US presidents shouldn't be limited to US citizens, since the rest of us have to put up with them as well.

Good point - but if only there were some practical way in which something like this could be achieved!

That said, although it seems clear that the obsessive meddling into the affairs of other nations and people is something of which US has the lion's share if not quite a monopoly, the example that it might be seens as setting must surely communicate itself to others and encourage them to behave similarly even if only out of fear; should we all therefore be entitled to have, in principle, some say in the election of every nation's leadership (or at least of those that do actually "elect" such leaderships) on that very premise? As I mentioned previously, the kind of thing that we're curretly witnessing is likely to have as one of its principal outcomes the fostering of increasing international distrust, for the ultimate benefit of no one at all.

[scottycelt]

Yes. I think we should.

Of course ... without 'them' we'd all now be living under jackbooted Nazis or Communists for a start.

Like any other country, the US has many, many faults but thank God it's there!

[ahinton]

Of course ... without 'them' we'd all now be living under jackbooted Nazis or Communists for a start.

Really? And how long do you think that might have lasted? "We" wouldn't likely be living under any particular régime for any great length of time but, having said that, tor what extent do you believe that our escape from being forced to live under the "jackbooted Nazis and Communists" that you mention was or is due to the activities of US? Do you really think that US was the great white light that kept Western Europe (for example) free from becoming a satellite of Hitler's Germany or Stalin's Russia?

Like any other country, the US has many, many faults but thank God it's there!

I'm not sure that God in particular is to be thanked for this (and especially not by those who do not believe in Him, even if they do believe in J S Bach), since God did not specifically create the United States of America (at least as far as I am aware although, as you know far more about Him than I do, I will bow to your superior knowledge of the subject if in fact I am wrong about that) but, of course, it is indeed good that it's there; that said, US is hardly represented in full by the activities of certain staff working withing its security services so, in saying this, you surely cannot be referring to those staff and to such activities in thanking God for the existence of US (and in any case what took him so long?). To what extent, for example, is Britain generally regarded as what it is as a direct consequence of the work of GCHQ, MI5, MI6 et al?

[Mr Pee]

Really? And how long do you think that might have lasted? "We" wouldn't likely be living under any particular régime for any great length of time but, having said that, tor what extent do you believe that our escape from being forced to live under the "jackbooted Nazis and Communists" that you mention was or is due to the activities of US? Do you really think that US was the great white light that kept Western Europe (for example) free from becoming a satellite of Hitler's Germany or Stalin's Russia?

I'm interested that you seem to think that a few years under Nazi occupation wouldn't have been such a bad thing. How many years would have been too many for you? Five? Ten?

And of course the US was not wholly responsible for the defeat of Hitler. All the European allies and Soviet forces played their part- but the D-Day landings, which were crucial, would have been impossible to carry out without them. Surely you accept that?

[french frank]

Like any other country, the US has many, many faults

Precisely the point some of us are trying to address - rather than issuing carte blanche for them to continue with apparently no way to hold them to account. That would require total trust, and in view of those 'many, many faults' not all of us have that trust.