undefined | Better HN

0 pointsshtzvhdx6mo ago0 comments

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.

0 comments

hammock6mo ago

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?

somenameforme6mo ago

Congressmen don't have classified access by default. Even those involved in oversight often rely on briefings which are written by the people potentially breaking the law and include whatever they choose to include, or not. It's akin to regulatory authorities that operate by asking those being regulated 'Are you still operating under all appropriate regulations?'

And laws are also written extremely broadly, which gives the intelligence agencies extreme leeway in interpreting them as they see fit. And even if they go beyond that, it's not like there are any consequences. For one of the most overt - James Clapper indisputably lied under oath and absolutely nothing happened. Furthermore politicians are generally ignorant on most topics, especially on anything remotely technically related. But revealing that ignorance is politically damaging, so they turn into yes men on most of these topics.

hammock6mo ago

It’s not a secret that there’s a legal loophole and how it might be used. And congress don’t need classified access to change the law. So I don’t see how any of that relates. The problem of effective oversight is likewise orthogonal to the issue I raised which is that “getting spied on by their own subordinate agencies” is conduct that has been legally permitted by lawmakers

eviks6mo ago

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!

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

hammock6mo ago

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?

somenameforme6mo ago

hammock6mo ago

eviks6mo ago

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!

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse