Gentlemen do not read each other's mail...
Germany Summons U.S. Ambassador Over Merkel Phone Tapping Claim ________________________________ Top News: German authorities summoned the U.S. ambassador Thursday to demand a full explanation for claims that the United States had tapped German Chancellor Angela Merkel's cellphone, an allegation that has sparked deep outrage in Germany and revived uncomfortable memories of the extensive intelligence apparatus of East Germany. On Wednesday, Merkel called President Obama to air out her concerns about the allegations and received a promise that the United States is not monitoring her calls and will not do so in the future. That assurance, however, did not adress whether the United States had in fact monitored Merkel's calls in the past. Merkel's spokesman said the chancellor "views such practices... as completely unacceptable." "Among close friends and partners, as the Federal Republic of Germany and the US have been for decades, there should be no such monitoring of the communications of a head of government," Steffen Seibert, the spokesman, said in a statement. According to White House spokesman Jay Carney, the United States "is not monitoring and will not monitor the communications of the chancellor." Wednesday's phone call was the second time in 48 hours that the president found himself on the phone with a European leader furious with America's intelligence agencies. Earlier in the week, Obama found himself on the phone with French President Francois Hollande after allegations surfaced that the National Security Agency had collected French phone calls on a massive scale. http://us-mg6.mail.yahoo.com/neo/launch?.rand=d9jl53r3e8hhl#
I still feel offended that the leaders do not get furious over ALL CITIZENS BEING SPIED UPON but only CUTESY ME IS BEING SPIED UPON. Maybe they imagined how wrong things can go for them, and that became very vivid. But how come their fantasies about corporate espionage weren't vivid?
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 11:09:22AM +0200, Lodewijk andré de la porte wrote:
I still feel offended that the leaders do not get furious over ALL CITIZENS
I see zero evidence that anyone is furious. It's pure political theater to appease those few percent of voting cattle that are privacy-minded. Notice everybody is carefully staying away from mandating simple and the only measures which would work: strong end to end encryption, with secrets held by end users, in tamper-proofed compartments. Because this would seriously compromise their own surveillance capability. And we certainly can't have that, oh noes.
BEING SPIED UPON but only CUTESY ME IS BEING SPIED UPON. Maybe they imagined how wrong things can go for them, and that became very vivid. But
People in power are used that the common laws are strictly for the commons, so for those few clueless the outrage to be no longer exempt might be even genuine. So ruthlessly machiavellian, or clueless and entitled, pick your poison.
how come their fantasies about corporate espionage weren't vivid?
From: Lodewijk andré de la porte <l@odewijk.nl> I still feel offended that the leaders do not get furious over ALL CITIZENS BEING SPIED UPON but only CUTESY ME IS BEING SPIED UPON. >Maybe they imagined how wrong things can go for them, and that became very vivid. But how come their fantasies about corporate espionage >weren't vivid? My understanding is that many years ago, in the 1960's, many U.S. states passed laws prohibiting people from recording face-to-face conversations unless all parties were aware of the recording, and they consented to it. Why was this? I strongly suspect this: It was in the 1960's the technical ability to do such recording easily developed, with compact equipment (radio transmitters or tape recorders), and the politicians realized that anybody they talked to (lobbyists and other legislators, as well as citizens) had a powerful motivation to record them. Naturally, such recordings could surface at any time, with obvious embarrassing (and even incriminating) consequences. Politicians' primary motivation was to protect themselves, NOT to protect ordinary citizens: If such recordings were illegally done, it would tend to deter the making and/or release of them. (Although today, with the Internet and Cryptome, and Wikileaks, it might not make any difference.) Jim Bell
participants (3)
-
Eugen Leitl -
Jim Bell -
Lodewijk andré de la porte