Support NeoGAF

[TCRS]

Ah, we're still dealing with the 90's. OK, I can understand why you would automatically assume that's what this is for. I disagree with the belief this is rooted in economic espionage. Was hoping for something more modern, but I won't try to change your mind.

How could you since you haven't presented any real arguments? The case for economic espionage is very plausible:

- Historical precedent
- Close cooperation between NSA and US companies
- Spying concentrated on west and south Germany, where the industry is
- Spying at the same level as other economic rivals such as China
- No other real reason to spy on Germany at that level. There is no threat to global peace and stability emanating from Germany

 

[numble]

I would advise against making the mistake of substituting stock prices for the health of a company.

Do you want to look at corporate profits then? Corporate profits are at an all time high. I don't know why you think American corporations are doing poorly.

 

[sangreal]

You were saying that this is done in the interest of the American public. You attributed this all to the war on terror. So how is spying on Germany helping you with that?

The amount of terrorist plot attempts we actually have any information on is next to none, so the only thing you could of been arguing for were the secret ones that, if I read you correctly, happen everywhere and at all times.

Clutching at straws.

Playing devil's advocate here (I think the "war on terror" has nothing to do with the spying -- and is a farce altogether), but the amount of terrorist cells broken up in Germany is non-zero, so if Germany is not cooperative with regard to sharing data, that could be incentive to resort to clandestine measures to gather the data

 

[lednerg]

You were saying that this is done in the interest of the American public. You attributed this all to the war on terror. So how is spying on Germany helping you with that?

The amount of terrorist plot attempts we actually have any information on is next to none, so the only thing you could of been arguing for were the secret ones that, if I read you correctly, happen everywhere and at all times.

Clutching at straws.

Here's 50 straws for you, then. Of course, that's testimony from NSA, so I guess it's all a lie.

"In recent years, these programs, together with other intelligence, have protected the U.S and our allies from terrorist threats across the globe to include helping prevent the potential terrorist events over 50 times since 9/11."

 

[delirium]

Your weak attemp of defending of shitting on freedom rights was it saves lives. Tell me about it, how did spying on diplomats and companies save lives?

Spying on diplomats and companies probably doesn't save lives. But it is in the national interest of the US gov't to spy on foreign countries. It gives them a complete picture when dealing in international politics (for example: are they blowing smoke up our ass when they say they're support us in X or not or if we do Y, what will be the actual fallout).

It also gives an edge in negotiations and dealings of treaties and other stuff. EVERY GOVERNMENT IN THE WORLD DOES THIS.

 

[Croyles]

Here's 50 straws for you, then. Of course, that's testimony from NSA, so I guess it's all a lie.

"In recent years, these programs, together with other intelligence, have protected the U.S and our allies from terrorist threats across the globe to include helping prevent the potential terrorist events over 50 times since 9/11."

Yep. Considering that these are only just "revealed" after the shitstorm the NSA is getting, how can you be surprised that I won't bend over and happily swallow your police state pill?

 

[Tamanon]

Yep. Considering that these are only just "revealed" after the shitstorm the NSA is getting, how can you be surprised that I won't bend over and happily swallow your police state pill?

Whoa buddy, reel it back in. You're starting to go off the rails some and it's only going to hurt your argument.

How could you since you haven't presented any real arguments? The case for economic espionage is very plausible:

- Historical precedent
- Close cooperation between NSA and US companies
- Spying concentrated on west and south Germany, where the industry is
- Spying at the same level as other economic rivals such as China
- No other real reason to spy on Germany at that level. There is no threat to global peace and stability emanating from Germany

I'd disagree about the level of plausibility, but this at least lets me know where some of the accusations are coming from, even if I disagree about the particulars(like the spying at the same level as China). I guess I just don't see Germany as that big a competitor compared to China.

 

[delirium]

No other real reason to spy on Germany at that level. There is no threat to global peace and stability emanating from Germany

Well the Euro crisis was a huge threat to global stability. Bugging Germany was probably necessary to know if Germany was going to bail out Greece and other EU countries.

 

[Croyles]

Whoa buddy, reel it back in. You're starting to go off the rails some and it's only going to hurt your argument.



I'd disagree about the level of plausibility, but this at least lets me know where some of the accusations are coming from, even if I disagree about the particulars(like the spying at the same level as China). I guess I just don't see Germany as that big a competitor compared to China.

As opposed to just calling everyone strawman?
He still hasn't answered me why he thinks Germany plays such an important role in what he believes is all because of the war on terror.
Suggesting that I shouldn't even be angry about this and should just swallow it is obviously going to get me angry.

 

[JCizzle]

Yep. Considering that these are only just "revealed" after the shitstorm the NSA is getting, how can you be surprised that I won't bend over and happily swallow your police state pill?

Intel agencies rarely publicize successful operations for obvious reasons.

 

[delirium]

As opposed to just calling everyone strawman?
He still hasn't answered me why he thinks Germany plays such an important role in what he believes is all because of the war on terror.
Suggesting that I shouldn't even be angry about this and should just swallow it is obviously going to get me angry.

I'm not him, but I would like to offer the theory that they were spying on Germany because of the Euro crisis. That was a huge threat to global financial stability. Knowing how Germany would respond to it would probably be a huge advantage for the US gov't in trying to improve its own economy.

 

[TCRS]

I'd disagree about the level of plausibility, but this at least lets me know where some of the accusations are coming from, even if I disagree about the particulars(like the spying at the same level as China). I guess I just don't see Germany as that big a competitor compared to China.

I'm not just pulling this out of my ass, this is from the leaked NSA documents. Here is the map:

As you can see Germany is yellow, while the rest of Europe is green. Even in Russia there is less activity than in Germany.

Well the Euro crisis was a huge threat to global stability. Bugging Germany was probably necessary to know if Germany was going to bail out Greece and other EU countries.

I doubt that would require a surveillance operation of that magnitude. Belgium would have been yellow in that case too.

 

[Croyles]

Intel agencies rarely publicize successful operations for obvious reasons.

Does that mean we should just believe it?
I am protecting you, I can't tell you why, but you have to believe me, while we're at it, we're going to spy on you too and your friends and allies in other countries. It's for your own good. No don't ask what threats, it will only make the threats more threatening.
Don't question the threats. Don't get angry at us not telling you about the threats.

Did I mention threats?

I'm not him, but I would like to offer the theory that they were spying on Germany because of the Euro crisis. That was a huge threat to global financial stability. Knowing how Germany would respond to it would probably be a huge advantage for the US gov't in trying to improve its own economy.

Thank you. That at least makes sense. It's obvious this isn't about saving lives.

 

[lednerg]

Yep. Considering that these are only just "revealed" after the shitstorm the NSA is getting, how can you be surprised that I won't bend over and happily swallow your police state pill?

You haven't a clue who you're talking to and how silly you're sounding. Not to brag, but my OWS group set precedent by defeating the state police in court instead of laying down and taking it like so many others. We even got our state senator to introduce a bill supporting and protecting our rights. Our 24/7 vigil lasted 4 months straight, longer than anywhere else, and only ended because we leased an office across the street from the governor. Don't talk to me about swallowing police state pills or whatever the fuck. If you want to live in a fantasy world where "oh maybe one day we can all just get along and be nice and fair to each other", then good luck.

 

[delirium]

I doubt that would require a surveillance operation of that magnitude. Belgium would have been yellow in that case too.

If I were to gather intelligence on something affecting global stability, I would cast a wide a net as I could.

 

[Tamanon]

I'm not just pulling this out of my ass, this is from the leaked NSA documents. Here is the map:

As you can see Germany is yellow, while the rest of Europe is green. Even in Russia there is less activity than in Germany.

I'd think you'd be happy then to be treated on the same level as the US itself!(is a joke, lighten the mood)

That chart references the NSA collection program, nowhere near the extent of the US intelligence apparatus. I find it funny that India has more collection than China.

If I had to wager a guess, the developed allies tend to have more because they release that information to the US. That would explain why so little in Russia and relatively little in China(map doesn't seem based on percentages of interactions, but numbers, where China would easily dwarf the amount of German interactions monthly).

 

[Gemüsepizza]

Shitting on freedom? Rights? For whom, non-US citizens? You've spun a web of platitudes around yourself so thick that you're implying everybody in the world is an American.

So non-US citizens don't deserve freedom or the right for privacy?

 

[Tamanon]

So non-US citizens don't deserve freedom or the right for privacy?

Do you believe that all citizens of the world deserve a right to privacy from every government?

 

[zoku88]

Here's 50 straws for you, then. Of course, that's testimony from NSA, so I guess it's all a lie.

"In recent years, these programs, together with other intelligence, have protected the U.S and our allies from terrorist threats across the globe to include helping prevent the potential terrorist events over 50 times since 9/11."

Assuming that they are being 100% truthful in that number, did they actually present evidence that they needed the programs in order to stop those?

As in, did they present evidence that without the programs all of those 50 attacks would not have been able to be stopped?

That is also about domestic and domestic/foreign communications. Not about communications solely in foreign lands.

I want to know how much safer I am due to the US government spying on citizens of Germany.

 

[Croyles]

You haven't a clue who you're talking to and how silly you're sounding. Not to brag, but my OWS group set precedent by defeating the state police in court instead of laying down and taking it like so many others. We even got our state senator to introduce a bill supporting and protecting our rights. Our 24/7 vigil lasted 4 months straight, longer than anywhere else, and only ended because we leased an office across the street from the governor. Don't talk to me about swallowing police state pills or whatever the fuck. If you want to live in a fantasy world where "oh maybe one day we can all just get along and be nice and fair to each other", then good luck.

Congratulations. Let's see this enthusiasm for the rights of other countries, but I forgot, spying on one of your closest allies = who cares? Right?

Who cares about foreign policy when you have your own people to worry about (that rely on the corporation of said foreigners).

The cold war mentality doesn't work in globalized trade, and when the curtain is pulled pack on all the other countries doing the same thing to less of an extent (simply because of power), you will find many more people not happy about this.

 

[delirium]

So non-US citizens don't deserve freedom or the right for privacy?

Yes they do, but a gov't is going to prioritize its own over a foreign person every time.

 

[lednerg]

Assuming that they are being 100% truthful in that number, did they actually present evidence that they needed the programs in order to stop those?

As in, did they present evidence that without the programs all of those 50 attacks would not have been able to be stopped?

The problem is that in most cases, they can't divulge that kind of information because it would compromise their sources. This is in fact the big problem with Snowden's latest revelations - it's more than just revealing 4th Amendment fuckery.

 

[Gemüsepizza]

Do you believe that all citizens of the world deserve a right to privacy from every government?

Most citizens, yes. There can be exceptions for a limited time under strong legal restrictions in certain cases which should be reviewed individually by judges when very grave criminal actions threaten the life of innocent people. 500.000.000 surveillance acts a month in a single country which are targeted at innocent civilians and politicians are not "exceptions". This is almost an act of war.

Yes they do, but a gov't is going to prioritize its own over a foreign person every time.

Wrong. Not every government threats other persons like shit.

 

[numble]

Do you believe that all citizens of the world deserve a right to privacy from every government?

I think requiring a warrant should be fine. A FISA-type court would still allow surveillance of governments, political figures, and suspected threats. I don't think it should be okay to have unwarranted surveillance on any person in the world just because they happen to be foreign, and there would be an uproar if it was revealed that say, Foxconn put a backdoor in every cell phone and computer and collected metadata for a foreign government.

The U.S. Revolutionary War was fought for in part because of the unreasonable search and seizure of Americans by a foreign power that didn't represent American interests, the U.S. wants to say it wants to spread human rights around the world but is indicating that they don't believe that a right to privacy, or unwarranted search and seizure is a right.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

That chart references the NSA collection program, nowhere near the extent of the US intelligence apparatus. I find it funny that India has more collection than China.

Nukes, and trouble with pakistan

 

[Tamanon]

Most citizens, yes. There can be exceptions for a limited time under strong legal restrictions in certain cases which should be reviewed individually by judges when very grave criminal actions threaten the life of innocent people. 500.000.000 surveillance acts a month in a single country which are targeted at innocent civilians and politicians are not "exceptions". This is almost an act of war.



Wrong. Not every governments threats other persons like shit.

So, then how would you get information on a possible terrorist cell in Pakistan to bring before a judge for a warrant? I imagine you'd have to do some surveillance to even have an idea that someone would be a terrorist.

Note: I'm not using this as justification for the supposed surveillance of Germany. I just want to understand how far a right to privacy goes.

 

[lednerg]

The problem is the USA PATRIOT Act (which comes up for renewal in May 2015, afaik). We've known that it's a fucked up policy for over a decade now. If the people can't get that onto the top of our list of national concerns by then, you know, like Paula Deen is now, then we're just going to be spinning our wheels indefinitely.

 

[delirium]

Wrong. Not every government threats other persons like shit.

Name a government that does NOT prioritize its own over foreign nationals. Name one.

 

[Croyles]

The problem is the USA PATRIOT Act (which comes up for renewal in May 2015, afaik). We've known that it's a fucked up policy for over a decade now. If the people can't get that onto the top of our list of national concerns by then, you know, like Paula Deen is now, then we're just going to be spinning our wheels indefinitely.

I actually completely agree with you on this. All of our bickering aside, this should be priority number one, because as we have found out bad policies for the U.S. often means bad policy for the world.

 

[JCizzle]

Does that mean we should just believe it?
I am protecting you, I can't tell you why, but you have to believe me, while we're at it, we're going to spy on you too and your friends and allies in other countries. It's for your own good. No don't ask what threats, it will only make the threats more threatening.
Don't question the threats. Don't get angry at us not telling you about the threats.

Did I mention threats?



Thank you. That at least makes sense. It's obvious this isn't about saving lives.

Believe whatever you want, but intelligence agencies by nature are not transparent for a reason. If they publicize how they spy, that kind of defeats the purpose. To some extent you need to have faith in the people you elect.

 

[MisterNegative]

Wrong. Not every government threats other persons like shit.

This assumption/claim is sooo naive.

 

[HocusPocus]

Still think my home country needs to go back to the isolationist viewpoints we had pre World War 2 in regards to not interfering in foreign affairs. We need to pull out across the globe everywhere and focus on this country first. Let the world solve their problems, and I would assume within a decade start begging for us to reign in an uncontrollable Russia and / or China. Not our problem. We are already bankrupt trying to play super cop to the world and failing miserably at it.

 

[Croyles]

Believe whatever you want, but intelligence agencies by nature are not transparent for a reason. If they publicize how they spy, that kind of defeats the purpose. To some extent you need to have faith in the people you elect.

Yes, very true. I am arguing against the people who suggest that we shouldn't be angry about the extent to which they think they need to go to "protect" us.

However, no election ever has had anything to do with intelligence agencies, and likely never will. Our power in democratic elections in no way reaches that far.
Serious question, seriously not trying to be sarcastic here because I may be missing something, but do U.S. citizens get to elect agencies or who runs those agencies? Did they get to vote on the PATRIOT ACT? Or did they just elect the President, Senators and Congressman who usually say something else or skirt around the issues?

 

[Omegasquash]

Believe whatever you want, but intelligence agencies by nature are not transparent for a reason. If they publicize how they spy, that kind of defeats the purpose. To some extent you need to have faith in the people you elect.

Agreed. I don't need to know the details of what/who they're looking at, and fully assume that anything they want of mine they can have whenever they want. I also fully assume that we're spying on everyone, and that everyone is spying on us too.

I'm in agreement that the Patriot Act needs to not be renewed, but I'm also of the opinion that monitoring communications is fine to an extent.

 

[TCRS]

If I had to wager a guess, the developed allies tend to have more because they release that information to the US. That would explain why so little in Russia and relatively little in China(map doesn't seem based on percentages of interactions, but numbers, where China would easily dwarf the amount of German interactions monthly).

Either I'm not understanding you correctly or you're not making any sense. Germany is listed as a third-party foreign partner, while Russia isn't listed at all. Intelligence relationships were supposedly good between US and Germany, ideologically both countries are close.

And you are right, if those are absolute numbers then Germany is being targeted even more intensively than China based on the respective populations.

I'm not satisfied with the Euro crisis explanation either, an operation of that scale doesn't make sense to me. Especially the fact that it is only concentrated in Germany and then not even in Berlin.

 

[AOC83]

The USA spying and stealing German technology? Can´t say i´m surprised.

 

[Gemüsepizza]

So, then how would you get information on a possible terrorist cell in Pakistan to bring before a judge for a warrant? I imagine you'd have to do some surveillance to even have an idea that someone would be a terrorist.

Note: I'm not using this as justification for the supposed surveillance of Germany. I just want to understand how far a right to privacy goes.

Wait a moment, have I read this right? You are suggesting that the US government should put all of Pakistan under surveillance because there might be a possible terrorist cell, which btw. can *easily* bypass any electronic surveillance by using heavy encryption, steganography or simply traditional ways of communication like mail or even face-to-face communication, which shows how fucking absurd it is to use this technology to "fight terrorism"? And why bring this example at all, when we are talking about illegal surveillance of German people in gigantic dimensions?

Name a government that does NOT prioritize its own over foreign nationals. Name one.

That entirely depends on the precise situation. The German government for example does not wiretap the American people, although it might give them some advantages in certain situations as long as it is done in secret.

This assumption/claim is sooo naive.

We are talking here about wiretapping entire nations. And as it seems, only certain countries, are doing this and are shitting on the rest of the world.

 

[lednerg]

Feel free to give us a few good examples on that. Because that is the ultimate excuse for not having to justify one's actions.

Valerie Plame is the obvious one, off the top of my head. Also this story is still pretty fresh.

 

[Tamanon]

Wait a moment, have I read this right? You are suggesting that the US government should put all of Pakistan under surveillance because there might be a possible terrorist cell, which btw. can *easily* bypass any electronic surveillance by using heavy encryption, steganography or simply traditional ways of communication like mail or even face-to-face communication, which shows how fucking absurd it is to use this technology to fight terrorism? And why bring this example at all, when we are talking about illegal surveillance of German people in gigantic dimensions?

Again, I'm not specifically talking about this program and never said anything about all of Pakistan. I'm specifically talking about the concept of a right to privacy and when you forfeit it. We don't even have to talk about metadata, we can talk about traditional intelligence gathering like bugging a place where you suspect something might be discussed. When do you lose the right to not be surveilled?

 

[delirium]

That entirely depends on the precise situation. The German government for example does not wiretap the American people, although it might give them some advantages in certain situations as long as it is done in secret.

How do you know the BND doesn't wiretap Americans? Or foreign nationals? It's main job is foreign intelligence.

 

[Croyles]

How do you know the BND doesn't wiretap Americans? Or foreign nationals? It's main job is foreign intelligence.

We don't. We DO however have proof that the U.S. does it to an alarming extent, and if/when we find out that Germany does the same, expect us to be just as if not even more outraged/distraught.

 

[Gemüsepizza]

Again, I'm not specifically talking about this program and never said anything about all of Pakistan. I'm specifically talking about the concept of a right to privacy and when you forfeit it. We don't even have to talk about metadata, we can talk about traditional intelligence gathering like bugging a place where you suspect something might be discussed. When do you lose the right to not be surveilled?

When there is reasonable suspicion that certain persons want to commit crimes which will hurt innocent civilians, then it should be possible for a government, under certain conditions, to wiretap this person for a limited time, when this is reviewed and approved from a judge. Your way of thinking, that it is ok to wiretap arbitrary people because they might commit a crime, is absurd and dangerous.

How do you know the BND doesn't wiretap Americans? Or foreign nationals? It's main job is foreign intelligence.

Certainly not at this scale. And I even doubt that they would wiretap American criminals without the knowledge / cooperation of American authorities. The German public is very sensitive regarding surveillance, and if something big like this was revealed, there would not be a happy ending for the people involved.

 

[la_briola]

How do you know the BND doesn't wiretap Americans? Or foreign nationals? It's main job is foreign intelligence.

Because the BND is fucking useless/clueless/impotent.

 

[zoku88]

The problem is that in most cases, they can't divulge that kind of information because it would compromise their sources. This is in fact the big problem with Snowden's latest revelations - it's more than just revealing 4th Amendment fuckery.

Compromise their sources? Which ones. The HUMINT ones? Or their other methods of data collection?

In any case, you can provide without compromising yourself or your sources. Like, for HUMINT, you could reveal why they can't give you certain information without revealing who they are. (afterall, there's a lot of people who can't do certain things. Telling people what information your sources can't provide doesn't provide much information.)

I am, of course, talking about terrorist plots (which is what those 50 things were) and not plots of foreign governments.

I think the "fuckery", as you put it, goes well beyond 4th Amendment violations.

But more on topic, how does spying on private citizens of Germany help me as an American private citizen? How many terror plots have been defeated?

 

[SlipperySlope]

My wife told a joke once that her teacher said (in China).

It was roughly:
Him : "All spies are bad".
Student: "Does China have spies?"
Him "Of course! But our spies are Chinese!".

 

[Croyles]

It comes down to this. If your philosophy is such that you believe intelligence agencies have the right to spy on whole countries to this extent, then we should have the right to create some sort of people's agency that secretly spies on them (never going to happen). Making sure they don't step out of line, like they have been doing. The only thing close to this that we have are whistle-blowers, who seem to have a pretty short life expectancy because they are instantly and ironically branded with treason, while simultaneously downplaying their importance.

Who watches the watchers?

I hate the assumption that I am living in some sort of fairy-tale world just because I expect non-cold war boundaries. I am not looking for happily ever after situations here, just a bit of common sense.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

But more on topic, how does spying on private citizens of Germany help me as an American private citizen? How many terror plots have been defeated?

Why do you keep focusing on terrorism? That's not the only reason we collect intelligence. But also this "spying on Germans" as far as I can is presenting this image of something the US isn't doing tell nobody is listening to phone calls or reading your email. And to be fair much of the 9/11 attack was planed and went through Germany. This isn't really always about undermining our allies but protecting our own skin if we feel the germans can't protect us.

It said the document showed that the NSA monitored phone calls, text messages, emails and internet chat contributions and has saved the metadata - that is, the connections, not the content - at its headquarters.

On an average day, the NSA monitored about 20 million German phone connections and 10 million internet data sets, rising to 60 million phone connections on busy days, the report said.

They are collecting data, that in this case, is pretty easy to get (and that the german intelligence agencies do as well) and building a database. When they then get another hint or tip of actual danger or a crime they then can search the database to provide more information. This is a common tactic that's been used by police forces for ages (at least in the US). They're are not the stasi listening into your conversations just because.

 

[Croyles]

Why do you keep focusing on terrorism? That's not the only reason we collect intelligence. But also this "spying on Germans" as far as I can is presenting this image of something the US isn't doing tell nobody is listening to phone calls or reading your email. And to be fair much of the 9/11 attack was planed and went through Germany. This isn't really always about undermining our allies but protecting our own skin if we feel the germans can't protect us.


They are collecting data, that in this case, is pretty easy to get (and that the german intelligence agencies do as well) and building a database. When they then get another hint or tip of actual danger or a crime they then can search the database to provide more information. This is a common tactic that's been used by police forces for ages (at least in the US). They're are not the stasi listening into your conversations just because.

The hyperbole really turns people off from even discussing issues with some people because they want to have this black and white conversations instead of the shades of grey that this debates deserves.

Because many people on here are justifying this by claiming it to be a part of the war on terror. In one breath, you went from asking why he is focusing on terrorism to mentioning terrorism as a reason.

Protecting your own skin does not justify spying on civilians or industry on this scale. It doesn't even add up with their alleged 50 preventions of terrorist acts that had nothing to do with Germany.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Because many people on here are justifying this by claiming it to be a part of the war on terror. In one breath, you went from asking why he is focusing on terrorism to mentioning terrorism as a reason.

Protecting your own skin does not justify spying on civilians or industry on this scale. It doesn't even add up with their alleged 50 preventions of terrorist acts that had nothing to do with Germany.

Terrorism isn't the only reason, the NSA has said as much. But its a big reason and one they can show tangible results. And regarding nothing having to do with germany? From the article in my post.

For example, it helped lead to the arrest and conviction of the would-be terrorists in Germany's so-called "Sauerland cell," led by Fritz Gelowicz. In 2006, the NSA intercepted email traffic between Germany and Pakistan. The trail led to a group of German Islamists who were planning deadly bomb attacks in Germany.

And its now a question of scale? Were is the tipping point? Is it ok to spying on 20,000 people but not all of germany? Is it the millionth or 2 millionth person where it becomes to large? Either the tactic is legitimate or its not.

 

[Croyles]

Terrorism isn't the only reason, the NSA has said as much. But its a big reason and one they can show tangible results. And regarding nothing having to do with germany? From the article in my post.



And its now a question of scale? Were is the tipping point? Is it ok to spying on 20,000 people but not all of germany? Is it the millionth or 2 millionth person where it becomes to large? Either the tactic is legitimate or its not.

Do you really believe that? If you truly believed this philosophy you would have no boundaries whatsoever. You think alcohol is ok so you become an alcoholic, because scale doesn't matter.

If the extent of something is not a viable argument, then we might as well not do anything in this world...

Don't get me wrong, I think if Germany had the means to spy on the scale that the U.S. is doing they would probably do the same thing. As they don't however, my focus for now is going to be on the U.S.