
U.S. spy agency bugged U.N. headquarters: Germany's Spiegel - Suraj-Sun
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/us-usa-security-nsa-idUSBRE97O08120130825
======
malandrew
The US really could stand to learn a few things from Henry L. Stimson, who
held many important political positions related to foreign policy during the
first half of the 20th century. Here are two choice quotes:

    
    
        "The only way to make a man trustworthy is to trust him; 
        and the surest way to make him untrustworthy is to 
        distrust him and show your distrust."
    

and

    
    
        "Gentlemen don't read each other's mail."
    

The US Government doesn't act with trust and goodwill towards anyone and
therefor should not be surprised that no one else shows us trust and goodwill
back.

Given this news, it would be most fitting if the UN decided to move its
headquarters elsewhere. My vote is for Berlin.

~~~
munin
Stimson was also the Secretary of War during WW2, which saw the creation and
explosive growth of signals intelligence. As Secretary of War, he would have
overseen the bulk of American signals intelligence and cryptanalysis, which
let us view the Japanese and German thoughts in real-time and gave us an
incredible advantage. ULTRA and related efforts saved convoy shipping across
the Atlantic, gave the Allies North Africa, and won Midway (among many other
victories).

The irony is that he said "Gentlemen do not read each other's mail" as the
Secretary of State, when he was made aware of the American Black Chamber. The
Black Chamber was the one of the first "production line" signals intelligence
units in the US government, and Stimson had it shut down due to his ethical
concerns. This set the US at a signifigant disadvantage entering WW2, as we
had to start on signals intelligence from scratch and learn a lot from the
British (and what was left of the French and Polish signals intelligence
units). It is telling that when it became truly necessary, these earlier
ethical concerns were discarded in the face of military necessity.

~~~
grey-area
Nowadays, of course, the US is eternally at war with a ever-changing and
indistinct enemy, the terrorist, and so military necessity requires ignoring
those ethical concerns permanently.

------
rayiner
"Citing secret U.S. documents obtained by fugitive former intelligence
contractor Edward Snowden, Der Spiegel said the files showed how the United
States systematically spied on other states and institutions."

So you mean, the very purpose for which the NSA exists?

~~~
belorn
It would be wonderful to see the US reaction if Canada was found to
systematically spied on the united states. Being an other country and all, it
surely doesn't matter if US phone lines was tapped, US internet cables was
intercepted, and data centers was encourage to give up emails about US
citizen.

And... how wrong would it really be if diplomats from Canada planted a bug in
the Whitehouse. Surely nothing wrong with that.

~~~
jacquesm
> how wrong would it really be if diplomats from Canada planted a bug in the
> Whitehouse.

Not much worse than when they burned it down.

Anyway, Front street 151 in Toronto carries a substantial amount of US
traffic. Maybe someone should check the place for taps.

~~~
ojbyrne
Technically that was Britain. Canada didn't exist in 1814.

------
Millennium
I'd suggest finding a list of countries that haven't bugged the UN
headquarters. It is probably shorter.

~~~
fnordfnordfnord
Given the location of the UN Headquarters, it isn't possible for any country
to be more effective at spying than the US. Like I said in another thread[2],
if you spy on the UN, you own it. You have a disproportionate advantage in all
negotiations (unless other countries are also effective at spying[1]). You
might think that it is fine that the US effectively owns the UN, but its
credibility is ruined.

The compromised UN is effectively a body for representing and legitimizing the
wishes of the cabal of US allies as if they were the actual consensus of all
UN member states.

[1] But it is still not possible for any nation to be more effective at spying
than the US, given the UN's location.

[2]
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6272458](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6272458)

~~~
Millennium
None of what you say refutes my assertion that spying on the UN is a common
activity. If anything, it sounds like you're saying it's only wrong when the
US does it.

------
ferdo
It might make for a shorter list if we name the people and groups that the NSA
hasn't spied on.

~~~
eli
It's almost as if that's their whole purpose.

~~~
zxcdw
Could someone elaborate what for is such spying happening in the first place?
What is it _really_ needed for? What would happen without it?

~~~
alan_cx
The core basic legitimate reason is to verify what is said with what is
actually happening; to discover the genuine intentions of the opposition. So,
olde days, USSR says "we have no intention of starting WW3", and US spying
would seek to verify that. If of both sides can convince themselves that the
opposition is being honest, diplomacy can work. If you cant be sure of what is
being said, you quickly end up in trouble. Both sides legitimately do this as
much as they can. Its a confidence builder. It is why both the US and USSR
tolerated spies and had a no assassination rule. They both new, in the olde
days, that it was beneficial to both to allow each other to spy and gain
confidence in each others position.

Trouble comes when nation states extend that to seek political or commercial
advantage, or apply it to their own citizens and / allies, who expect to get
the benefit of the doubt. Worse still when law enforcement and spy agencies
start to combine. This is why I assert that the US, and UK governments treat
their citizens as enemies. We have seen plenty of times what its like when
intelligence agencies and secret services (SS) are turned on the population.

Unless Obama and Camoron do something now to reign this in, some very dark
days are ahead of us.

------
lukejduncan
Is this link broken?

I'm taken to an article titled "U.S. spy agency edges into the light after
Snowden revelations"

Another comment quotes the article as saying the following, which doesn't
appear in the article I'm reading. "Citing secret U.S. documents obtained by
fugitive former intelligence contractor Edward Snowden, Der Spiegel said the
files showed how the United States systematically spied on other states and
institutions."

This is the link I'm being sent to
[http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/us-usa-security-
ns...](http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/us-usa-security-nsa-
idUSBRE97O08120130825)

~~~
lukejduncan
I think this is the link that was intended
[http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/uk-usa-security-
nsa...](http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/uk-usa-security-nsa-
idUKBRE97O08B20130825)

------
fnordfnordfnord
I think the article text and headline has been changed! What's the name of
that news article diff website?

This is what was at the link: [http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/uk-
usa-security-nsa...](http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/uk-usa-security-
nsa-idUKBRE97O08B20130825)

Now it is this: [http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/us-usa-security-
ns...](http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/us-usa-security-nsa-
idUSBRE97O08120130825)

EDIT: Newsdiff doesn't diff Reuters, I guess.

------
ianhawes
I don't see how Snowden can justify releasing top secret documents that DON'T
show the United States spying on it's own citizens.

One of the goals of NSA is to gather foreign intelligence. The UN constitutes
foreign intelligence. While it may not be popular opinion here, there is a
distinction between NSA spying on United States citizens and NSA spying on
foreign and international organizations. The former is illegal; the latter is
expected.

~~~
dlinder
Is it certain that these leaks actually came from Snowden? In light of the
Independent's GCHQ story [1][2], it sounds like there may be State actors
providing leaks in the name of Snowden that cast him in a negative light.
Ideally, these news outlets would be able to confirm it's the real Snowden via
GPG fingerprint or something.

[1] [http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/exclusive-
uks-...](http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/exclusive-uks-secret-
mideast-internet-surveillance-base-is-revealed-in-edward-snowden-
leaks-8781082.html)

[2] [http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/23/uk-
gove...](http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/23/uk-government-
independent-military-base)

~~~
ianhawes
Ah! Interesting angle. It could certainly be possible, and if it were I
definitely wouldn't hold it against Snowden.

In fact, the Der Spiegel article [1] fails to release the source document(s),
so I'm fairly dubious about who provided this information.

[1]
[http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=n&prev=...](http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.spiegel.de%2Fpolitik%2Fausland%2Fnsa-
hoerte-zentrale-der-vereinte-nationen-in-new-york-ab-a-918421.html)

~~~
dlinder
There's an English version of the article now, co-authored by
Greenwald/Snowden-related journalist Laura Poitras. Looks like the Snowden
connection is solid!

[http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/secret-nsa-
documen...](http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/secret-nsa-documents-
show-how-the-us-spies-on-europe-and-the-un-a-918625.html)

------
mcantelon
In the past the State Department, under Hillary Clinton, also tried to do
things such as steal the DNA of UN leaders.

[http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-
cabl...](http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cables-
spying-un)

~~~
eli
It's questionable [1] how much Hillary Clinton had to do with that order and
I'm not sure "steal the DNA" is a fair characterization. Also, that order had
its roots at least as far back as 2001.

[1] [http://www.nationaljournal.com/whitehouse/hillary-clinton-
di...](http://www.nationaljournal.com/whitehouse/hillary-clinton-didn-t-turn-
diplomats-into-spies-20101130)

~~~
throwaway_yy2Di
_I 'm not sure "steal the DNA" is a fair characterization._

Your National Journal link describes an order "to collect the 'biometric
data'... including DNA". What's unfair about this characterization?

~~~
eli
It's out of context. It suggests the memo is primarily about "stealing DNA"
when, in fact, the letters "DNA" do not appear in it:
[http://www.theguardian.com/world/us-embassy-cables-
documents...](http://www.theguardian.com/world/us-embassy-cables-
documents/219058)

~~~
jacquesm
[http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-
cabl...](http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cables-
spying-un)

f3, DNA, enter.

------
jacquesm
Earlier thread.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6271259](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6271259)

------
splrb
Because when you're keeping the American people safe, there are no rules -
it's a jungle out there you know.

------
hyperventilator
Pretending this is just an American problem actually benefits the US because
the info sharing deals will continue uncontested as participating countries
are given a pass. Never mind those military bases in Germany or the five eyes.
The West is intertwined, hell the whole world is, but deceive yourself if you
like.

