At U.N., Brazil's Rousseff blasts U.S. spying as breach of law
Source: Reuters
(Reuters) - Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff used her position as the opening speaker at the U.N. General Assembly to accuse the United States of violating human rights and international law through espionage that included spying on her email.
Rousseff had expressed her displeasure last week by calling off a high-profile state visit to the United States scheduled for October over reports that the U.S. National Security Agency had been spying on Brazil.
In unusually strong language, Rousseff launched a blistering attack on U.S. surveillance, calling it an affront to Brazilian sovereignty and "totally unacceptable."
"Tampering in such a manner in the lives and affairs of other countries is a breach of international law and, as such, it is an affront to the principles that should otherwise govern relations among countries, especially among friendly nations," Rousseff told the annual gathering of world leaders at the United Nations.
...
Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/24/us-un-assembly-brazil-idUSBRE98N0OJ20130924
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Guy Whitey Corngood
(26,848 posts)
pnwmom
(110,251 posts)Thanks.
(And no, I'm not against our international spy agencies doing international spying. This is an entirely separate issue from the revelations about internal US surveillance, which should be investigated and debated.)
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)They're the ones doing the spying. And if you're not against our international spy agencies doing international spying, the president of Brazil might like a word with you, too.
ehcross
(166 posts)The President of Brazil should not take insult on having the U.S. doing its job of patrolling the continent for terrorists, jihadists, and weapons of mass destruction. After all, if Brazil is ever attacked the first thing Mrs. Rouseff will do is call her pal at the White House.
ronnie624
(5,764 posts)Small countries that are rich in key resources, are at FAR greater risk of being attacked by the US.
The US "patrols" South America to dominate the region. The "global war on terror", is just the current pretext. Thirty years ago, the excuse for US aggression, was "communism".
Alamuti Lotus
(3,093 posts)Petrobras was a primary target of NSA spy activity in South America. When slightly less exceptional entities do such things, it is referred to as industrial espionage, or industrial sabotage. But, I suppose the National Surveillance Agency should be thanked for...whatever it is you naively and arrogantly would have us believe they do.
mike_c
(37,038 posts)The problem is the spying.
Prometheus Perez
(23 posts)
Hydra
(14,459 posts)Alamuti Lotus
(3,093 posts)But if you call that 'exceptional', I can't be responsible for the outrageous howl that will be received with!
Hydra
(14,459 posts)Double standard is getting pretty thick. I thought that was a Republican thing?
cui bono
(19,926 posts)Snowden did the right thing. I'm thankful he did it. It's good to know what our govt is up to.
You say you're good with the revelations of domestic spying. Who is responsible for those? Snowden. Not sure why you are vilifying him.
indepat
(20,899 posts)
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)I bet most of the world's leaders are furious at the thought of the US listening in and reading their personal, political and business communications.
pnwmom
(110,251 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)
hack89
(39,181 posts)The NSA kind of thing.
Abin is not the first intelligence agency in the world to create a system of monitoring Internet networks.
According to information from Brazilian media, the initiative came after the security agencies of the country failed to alert President Dilma Rousseff about the protests that resulted in violent scenes around Brazil, including the invasion of Congress.
Thus, to prevent any future unpredicted aggressions Abin created a monitoring system called Mosaic, which filters the posts on community networks.
http://www.imassera.com/brazil-intelligence-agency-monitors-social-networks/2422135/
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)different from a blanket program that catches all records of who communicates with whom and when.
hack89
(39,181 posts)Especially when it is politicians ordering surveillance of their political opposition. Obviously you disagree with me. Not a big deal.
ronnie624
(5,764 posts)I tend to think the US is in a league of its own, when in comes to spying and such.
joshcryer
(62,536 posts)And if there was no states would become party to it.
Spying is handled by a countries' internal laws.
All states will participate in intelligence gathering, and Brazil is no exception.
Now if Brazil didn't have their own CIA (ABIN) one might have a point.
GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)Thanks, Edward, you've done the world an enormous favour! 
rso
(2,665 posts)Dilma is making these statements in order to change the conversation in her home Country. Brazil has lately experienced unprecedented levels of anti-gov't. protests, and she is trying to rally her citizens around the "outside threat". Brazil possesses its own version of the NSA and all Nations who can afford it, engage in this type of electronic surveillance. I'm sure Brazil's capabilities are not as extensive as ours, but their intentions are the same.
Alamuti Lotus
(3,093 posts)
pnwmom
(110,251 posts)is her pretending this isn't standard procedure among major countries. She's making a show for political purposes.
Alamuti Lotus
(3,093 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)I'm very confused by your anger towards Snowden. You disagree that he leaked something you say is standard practice among major companies. So what's the problem with him leaking it then if it's known to be standard practice?
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)The US government does not need to be collecting all this information on US citizens.
And should not collect it on leaders of countries that are friendly to us.
I mentioned the DEA/AT&T pen register collections to my husband.
He laughed and said, "We used to have the NDEA. Now we have the DEA."
The NDEA was the National Defense Education Act. It paid for graduate school for very talented students who performed well in college among other things.
And so, our values have changed. We used to fund education. Now we fund huge surveillance systems. Just how do the surveillance systems benefit our country? I have no idea. I just don't believe that we have enemies hiding under our tables.
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)No one likes to be spied on, but in the real world, all nations, even the closest allies spy on each other. Dilma knows this, but she has serious economic issues at home (including unprecedented demonstrations), so she is using the first rule of realpolitik, unite your people against the external threat. Having been a foreign service officer, I would not at all be surprised if Dilma informed the USG via back channel that it's nothing personal, but I have to distract my people so please understand if I have to call you out publicly.
SunSeeker
(58,235 posts)Yeah, good luck with those games, Dilma.
Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)having her legitimate, non-threatening government spied on? Are we looking for allies or vassals?
SunSeeker
(58,235 posts)It is up to the expert judgment of our intelligence agencies to determine what foreign communications we listen to. Our agencies are there to protect our national interest, not Brazil's.
GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)Like whether the US wants to maintain friendly, cooperative relations with other nations. I don't think that telling them "Fuck off, we'll do what we want" is very helpful for that. Doing that can turn friendly states into hostile ones pretty rapidly.
SunSeeker
(58,235 posts)GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)If the US government were to echo your words, that would be tantamount to saying "fuck off" in diplomatic language.
SunSeeker
(58,235 posts)Dilma's grandstanding at the UN, purposely timed to embarrass Obama as it was immediately before the President began his 45-minute speech urging UN action on Syria, was for domestic consumption in Brazil. Her government is flailing in its stewardship of her country, so this is a nice diversion that suits her selfish purposes, at the cost of important efforts to remove CW from Syria.
GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)They should not be surprised if their behavior turns hostile when the spying is discovered. I don't much care what's going on in Brazil politically, but if the US hadn't spied on them, they wouldn't have had that club to beat you with.
SunSeeker
(58,235 posts)The US has not engaged in "hostilities" with Brazil. All nations attempt to gather intelligence on each other.
GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)Snowden and Greenwald are public heroes. Snowden deserves a Medal of Freedom.
Judi Lynn
(164,122 posts)at the hands of the U.S.-supported right-wing Brazilian military dictatorship as a "selfish" woman who "grandstands" isn't going to impress those of us who know how sick that is.
Had she been a "selfish" woman she would have capitulated, gotten herself released from prison, and saved herself such hideous pain, suffering, trauma, and her family the terror of wondering what the holy hell was happening to her every minute she was being terrorized.
Doesn't work, and you would be ashamed if you only took the time to learn W.T.F. has happened.
SunSeeker
(58,235 posts)The fact that she was tortured in the past, like John McCain, does not require only cheerleading of her current actions as an office holder.
Judi Lynn
(164,122 posts)She was protesting the filthy, sadistic, brutal US-supported military dictatorship.
Quite a distance from scum like John McCain.
You call them as you "see" them, no doubt about that.
Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)I thought we were having a discussion, not trading absurdist humor?
Judi Lynn
(164,122 posts)You need to know more about the demonstrations, and you clearly need to have a grasp of what Dilma Rousseff's history as President has been, her goals, the goals rejected by the heavy right-wing domination in the legislature, and the fact that what the demonstrators had been seeking were also items Dilma Rousseff had been attempting to get legislated, herself, for ages, things which had been denied her by the right-wing assholes.
Don't insult DU'ers by coming here and attempting to push your own version of reality. The ones who don't bother to learn about anything are the RIGHT-WINGERS everywhere. They would believe you at the drop of a hat. Democrats care enough to take the time to do their research.
FYI, I am a retired US Diplomat (Foreign Service Officer) and served in Brazil, so please do not lecture me on Brazil. I am not criticizing Dilma nor the demonstrators. I myself am a progressive. I am simply referring to things you have no idea about, like what governments do to unify their people and the "backchannel" world that exists in diplomacy, about which you know absolutely nothing. The fact is that Brazil has its NSA equivalent and uses it to spy on its neighbors and allies as well as its adversaries. Dilma is doing what any politician would do, try to unite her people against the "outside threat". As I said in a previous comment, I would not be surprised if Dilma or her Foreign Minister had notified the WH or State Dept. that they would be bringing this up at the UN. Since our interest is also peace and stability in South America (our backyard), we probably would have told her, OK, we understand, do it if it helps you. Again, foreign affairs has been my life-career, so don't come here trying to impress DUers with things you know nothing about, and stick to the local political scene which is probably what you know a bit more about.
AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)Do you think that claim is credible?
Really?
rso
(2,665 posts)Your question makes no sense. Do you even know what the Foreign Service is ?. And do you not think that it has been long enough for there to be retired foreign service officers around ?. And do you even know that we have an Embassy in Brasilia as well as several Consulates throughout Brazil where foreign service officers serve and have served ?. Or are you too groggy this morning after watching Cruz's all-nighter ?
AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)rso
(2,665 posts)What's so funny about what I said ?. Your's is the typical, non-pertinent and irrelevant reply of the ignorant who have no actual reply. Are you sure that you are not a Tea Party fan ?.
SunSeeker
(58,235 posts)As you can see, posts like yours are a rarity here. But posts like yours are so satisfying that, despite their rarity, they keep me coming back to DU. I am very impressed by the broad range of progressive professionals like yourself that post here. I hope the ignorant flame-throwers don't make you turn away from DU. I've learned a lot from folks like you over the years.
Thanks for your kind remarks.
U4ikLefty
(4,012 posts)It's true cuz I says it on the internetz.
Judi Lynn
(164,122 posts)in diplomacy who harbors rancor, hostility toward people who doubt US exceptionalism is a valid excuse for what has happened in the Americas already, with so much more left for future probes, leaks, declassified records, and time itself to reveal the hideous, whitewashed, sometime outright denied truth.
Thin-skinned, hot responses concerning your career in diplomacy don't really ring true.
The U.S., as we learn, a bit at a time, has a horrific history to overcome starting so many years ago already, and it's no accident so many of the Latin American Presidents themselves have been elected after having suffered horrendously at the hands of US-SUPPORTED MONSTERS, people who have been chosen by their countries with the awareness they have been imprisoned, tortured, or have been married, or immediately related to people who have been imprisoned and tortured as political prisoners under US-supported filthy right-wing regimes.
Dilma's following in office a man who himself was persecuted, along with his brother by the grotesque Brazilian US-supported right-winger thugs.
People who believe in the pattern of profound disrespect for the people of other countries, and support those for the right-wing oligarchies which have sold out the ordinary people for personal gain may work in "diplomacy" but they are out of touch with respect for the human race itself.
Don't you ever question how people in the U.S. view the "diplomats" who aided and abetted people like Pinochet, the military dictatorship in Argentina, Brazil, the Somosas, Hugo Banzer, Luis García Meza and his former Nazi accomplice, Klaus Barbie, Stroessner, Alfredo Stroessner, who ruled 35 years, committed genocide, slavery of the indigenous, Efrain Rios-Montt, who practiced the most depraved abuse and cruelty toward the indigenous people in Guatemala, with total support from Ronald Reagan, the overthrow of a beloved Guatemalan leader in support of US corporations, years earlier, and the ongoing civil war which followed, ultimately stealing the lives of over 250,000 Guatemalan people, and leaving their loved ones in greed, despair for the rest of their lives, etc., etc., etc. That doesn't include nearly all of them, and it only concerns what has happened since 1954.
The US position toward "our neighbors" has been grotesque. They have suffered incredibly. The truth has been buried, and it is beginning to be far better known as time goes by, more people learn about it and start asking around, looking for answers themselves.
There has been NO diplomacy in US diplomacy toward the people below the Southern border of this country unless they were members in good standing of the oligarchy of each country, well established as unprincipled, racist thieves from the first.
That's why so many people in the Americas, so many US Americans looked forward with such belief to the arrival of the current President, living in complete faith he would change the course of conduct by this country, and start healing the horrendous wounds.
Your reply has little to do with the issue at hand, which is specifically Dilma's speech at the UN decrying US surveillance. Your historic references are quite old, as in fact the only dictatorship remaining in the western hemisphere is in Cuba. US diplomatic history in the Region is another issue entirely, and during the Cold War, Latin America was one of the major battlegrounds between east and west. Obviously you do not understand the subtleties of foreign affairs, and the need to sometimes align with the lesser of two evils. The fact is that Dilma's complaints against US surveillance are largely theatrical and hypocritical, as she has domestic problems at home, and she knows that nations spy on each other. And as another poster noted, you can be certain that Dilma will be first in line to request electronic surveillance info from the US before and during next year's soccer World Cup and the subsequent Olympics to be held in Brazil.
Judi Lynn
(164,122 posts)while making insinuations that progressive leaders of other countries are poseurs, who make large gestures in order to deceive their own supporters?
Is that the diplomatic thing to do?
Do diplomats really have hours to while away attempting to ridicule US Americans who expect their own government to live up to the reputation it has claimed for itself?
Speaking theatrical, hypocritical, it must have been painful representing the country with our own history in the Americas.
My examples of hideous governments supported by the US are OLD? Really? What about Colombia? What about the unbearable history still ongoing? What about Honduras? What about Guatemala? What about other countries until very recently?
What about the facts surfacing constantly about the raw, brutal behavior of the Colombia military, the paramilitaries, which have been exposed for years as the adjunct to the military, usually doing all the torture and murder, except for the times they work and worked together, the "new" gangs which are actually the same people doing the same things, etc., etc.
What about that Colombian government? What about all those billions of US taxpayers' dollars STILL being loaded into that "forward operating location" or "lillypad" in Rumsfeld's terms? What about the fact the US government knew so long ago the little monster Alvaro Uribe was up to his hairline with violent, soulless criminals, like Pablo Escobar, discussed him in reports, and still kept strong ties to the little creep?
You can't dismiss real events which have happened in the our lifetimes as being simply "too old." Nope. that doesn't work.
These events have taken place in the past, they have nothing to do with Dilma's specific speech at the UN. Dilma ultimately runs the Brazilian counterparts of the NSA and CIA, and as such, is intimately involved in electronic surveillance, a function that she now conveniently decries because she needs to rally her people. You obviously do not understand the intricacies and subtleties of international affairs. In fact, because we have very good relations with Dilma and her administration, I would not be surprised if the Brazilian Gov't. notified us beforehand that in order to "keep the peace" at home, Dilma would be bringing this up publicly. And neither would I be surprised if we expressed understanding of her situation, and told her to go ahead, with both governments realizing that Dilma's complaints are destined for domestic consumption, but the official relationship between the US and Brazil would not be affected. Problem is that you obviously have no practical experiences along these lines, and know only what you see and read in the media. Of course that's not a criticism, as there are countless other fields of endeavor in which I and most people have no practical experience either.
ronnie624
(5,764 posts)One's backyard is universally considered one's property. South America does not belongs to the United States.
It's just an expression used in geopolitics to denote an area physically close to one's own Nation, where events have major resonance in one's own Nation. Agree that it is an anachronistic expression, and perhaps a new term should be used, but it does not mean that South America or any other Region is our property.
ronnie624
(5,764 posts)seeks "full spectrum dominance" of South America. One does not seek dominance of something that is not regarded as a possession. There are also policy doctrines like the Monroe Doctrine and the Roosevelt Corollary, in which the US power establishment grants itself permission to control the Western hemisphere through force. And of course there is the actual history itself, where a clear pattern emerges, indicating US intentions in the region through its conduct, like CIA involvement in toppling democracies and organizing proxy wars.
Yes, the US power establishment does most certainly regard Latin America as its property. The evidence is abundant.
Latin Americans, at every level of the social strata, despise being referred to as "America's backyard" (as if America only exists north of Mexico). I find it difficult to believe you are any sort of diplomat.
You may choose to believe anything you wish, but I have noticed that there are many well-read individuals on DU who have no practical experience in the areas that they discuss. You are one of them.
You cite history, but I remind you that the only remaining dictatorship in our Hemisphere is Cuba. And our relations with our southern neighbors have never been conducted on a more co-equal basis than they are today.
Judi Lynn
(164,122 posts)looking for the missing information in their picture of what has been happening in their lifetimes in the Americas.
It can suddenly start occurring to people, if they are open to change, that actually they have been given strangely LITTLE information about the other countries with whom we share the "New World." There's a reason for that, since so many atrocities have been carried out covertly, behind our backs, with total financing from the US taxpayers, required by law, without the slightest idea of all the grief and unbearable suffering these covert, unacknowledged, and truly "unchristian" the history, the acts hafe truly been.
Pompous, dishonest, utterly amoral, downright evil people have been in charge far, FAR too long.
And people with heads stuffed with feathers around us wonder why on earth Latin Americans started carrying signs in demonstrations against the US saying "Yanqui, go home!"
One_Life_To_Give
(6,036 posts)Surely the ABIN never spied upon a foreign entity!
joshcryer
(62,536 posts)
BluegrassDem
(1,693 posts)They should be outraged by the vast shantytowns in Rio. This is nothing but faux outrage. Ok, you don't like it. You registered your complaint...GET OVER IT! Dilma should be more concerned about getting those billion dollar stadiums to host the World Cup and the Olympics that are woefully behind schedule and over budget before getting her drawers in a knot about some spying.
And yes, if a terrorist hit either one of those events, they would be relying on US intel to find out who did it.
ronnie624
(5,764 posts)would be reduced even further, if the US foreign policy establishment was reformed, and cooperation became our goal, instead of dominance for self-serving reasons.
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)Oh that's right. Let's point fingers at their shit. We'll just ignore the our own minor violations of international law. Typical bait & switch tactic. You people really need a new script, ya know?
Hell, we never obey international laws anyways, unless we want to. Right?
Who the hell does this Dilma chick think she is anyway, demanding that we stop violating her country's rights and the rights of the people who elected her to office?!?!?!
Goddammit doesn't she know who runs this thing!?!??!
- That the sort of thing you had in mind?
BluegrassDem
(1,693 posts)If there is, please inform me. I just want to know what law the NSA broke by spying on a foreign government?
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)And it applies to all spying which violates a country's or a person's right(s).
Then it's illegal.
Therefore, since we know that the NSA has violated the rights of numerous countries and persons illegally as result of the Edward Snowden leaks, then we also know that the spying the NSA did was illegal.
That also means that they violated international law. They violated a country's [font size=3]SOVEREIGNTY [/font] And then once having violated that country's [font size=3]SOVEREIGNTY[/font], they went about further violating the privacy rights of the citizens within the borders of another country without the permission of the authorities in-charge in that country.
Now, if you cannot commit yourself to accepting these basic principles of reality, then I'm afraid that there is no point is carrying this convo any further.
- Because then I'd know for certain that we're not speaking the same language.
One_Life_To_Give
(6,036 posts)While it would be much worse if it were not illegal. Clearly spying has existed for thousands of years. It has been a constant game of cat and mouse. That is why every country has a department focused on preventing others from spying upon them while simultaneously learning all they can about everyone else.
Now if you commit an illegal act to prove that someone else is committing an illegal act. Whom should the prosecutor charge? Is it appropriate to start a war or MAD over a single infraction? Or do you store the information for possible later use?
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)So is animal abuse, and in some places putting plastic in with the garbage. My point is that no matter whether or not it has been practiced for years and years does not in anyway excuse the behavior once the perpetrators are caught.
We were caught. Capice?
As for your last query:
''When exposing a crime is treated as committing a crime, you are ruled by criminals.'' ~Anon
One_Life_To_Give
(6,036 posts)So havn't the major powers of the world. Can't even say this is the first time the public has been informed as there are hundreds of prosecutions for espionage in the worlds history. Why is it today we have long publicly admitted to intercepting, decoding and reading Japanese diplomatic messages in 1941. Yet consider it outrageous that the practice still continues? It's illegal. Governments including our own use codes because we know the information is going to be intercepted.
So Snowden made a public announcement which was already known by the intelligence community worldwide. The leader of any country who wasn't aware that this was going on is an idiot. Are we to believe the Russian Bear bombers flying down the east coast to Cuba are just doing flight training? Couldn't be their version of our Navy EP-3 one of which crashed with a Chinese Jet in 2001?
What I find shocking isn't the illegal activities. But what the FISA court has decided are legal activities.
U4ikLefty
(4,012 posts)Pretty sad.
ehcross
(166 posts)Edward Snowden decided to become a celebrity by compromising his country's security.
Every country has its own ways to protect its citizens from a variety of threats. The United States has chosen an all-out, worldwide system of signals detection that is considered to be a feast of American ingenuity.
Signals intelligence is an integral part of the process of recognizing and making useful signals that carry information.
But signals emitted in the process can be captured by unintended receptors, hence the inconvenience that led Brazilian president Dilma Rousseff to angrily denounce the United States for spying on her very own conversations.
Signals interception has been practiced ever since radio waves were discovered.
The United States has developed sophisticated systems to detect, record and analyze signals that carry information which is usually protected by encription. The NSA operates a worldwide network of receiving and relaying signals. This system´s umbrella covers the whole world, and can identify any signal, thus offering unlimited defense capabilities to the U.S. Government.
I think the Brazilian president should not consider the NSA a spy nor an enemy. Perhaps a revision to their communications protocols would suffice to protect their signals intelligence practices.
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)Honey, you know that I love you. So the reason I spy on you all the time is to ''protect'' our relationship.
- Yeah, that'll work......
Judi Lynn
(164,122 posts)and she could be sent right back to the Brazilian torture chambers where was tortured in prison for three years, as a guest of the US-supported right-wing military dictatorship.
This is a photo taken of Dilma in a military courtroom when she was a prisoner. It's so easy to recognize the men sitting in judgment over the future Brazilian President were determined to keep their treacherous faces from being photographed.
[center]
[/center]
She was tortured on their favorite device, the Parrot's Perch, "pau de arrara", a monstrous Dark Ages piece of equipment which they originally used to punish slaves in Brazil hundreds of years ago. Her courage and endurance have been hailed in interviews with other former prisoners who still have very clear memories of their shared desperate suffering.
[center] 
"Tortura nunca mais" (Torture never again)
This is a monument constructed by the human rights group "TORTURA NUNCA MAIS." This monument depicts the atrocity of torture showing a victim of the "pau de arrara," the infamous "parrot's perch" torture rack, widely used in Brazil during the Military dictatorial regime in the late 60’s and 70’s." [/center]
You're so right in mentioning the oddness of people who believe the US is simply not meant to be limited by laws and morals. It doesn't wear well with those of us who are learning what has been done in our names.
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)Not anymore.
Syria broke the cycle.
They're losing their grip on things.
Their answer for everything has been to shake-up the populace and create someone to hate.
But the only ones finding themselves unbelieved and hated today, are the people in Washington and all aspects of their corrupt government.
- There will not be any good outcomes until this shit is ended. Once and for all......
*** - The torture, the rapes and sadistic deaths! God, I've hated every aspect of what has been done to others in our name. But now we know. We cannot remain silent.
Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)From your keyboard to God's monitor.
Judi Lynn
(164,122 posts)simply crank out new U.S. history books?
[center]
[/center]
Let's hope there aren't that many idiots among us!
Speaking of silence, Pinochet, with multi-pronged US support, was able to silence the people of Chile for years and years. He effective (with US help) scared his own countrymen and women to death, silence for years.
The information base among people is growing. People are catching up fast.
You are so right, nothing good can happen until this way of "living" (at others' expense) is put behind this country's manner of conduct.
AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)ronnie624
(5,764 posts) 
damnedifIknow
(3,183 posts)UNITED NATIONS — Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff on Tuesday delivered a stinging rebuke of electronic espionage by the National Security Agency, telling a gathering of world leaders at the U.N. General Assembly that American eavesdropping constitutes “a breach of international law and an affront” to Brazil’s sovereignty.
Without the right of privacy, there is no real freedom of speech or freedom of opinion, and so there is no actual democracy,” Rousseff said. And “without respect for [a nation’s] sovereignty, there is no basis for proper relations among nations.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/brazils-president-condemns-nsa-spying/2013/09/24/fe1f78ee-2525-11e3-b75d-5b7f66349852_story.html
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Without the right of privacy, there is no real freedom of speech or freedom of opinion, and so there is no actual democracy,” Rousseff said. And “without respect for sovereignty, there is no basis for proper relations among nations.”
AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)the orthodox views of those in power.
joshcryer
(62,536 posts)Ah, politicians are such hypocrites.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)I would suggest that what is and is not "standard procedure" is precisely what is in dispute.
And I would suggest that a certain attentiveness to ones friends and neighbors affairs is indeed to be expected, even desired.
And yet it is easy to see that this can be carried too far, just as with ones neighbors in the real world. Few will want you to watch them all the time, or think it's a friendly thing to do. Such interests are intrusive and suggest an unhealthy or prurient desire for control and domination. You want to know too much.
And THAT is the issue here, the issue of measure, judgement, and appropriateness of the surveillance attempted, and the question of the good judgement of the parties responsible and the lack of oversight of the organizations they run.
Response to AnotherMcIntosh (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
askeptic
(478 posts)Although not a treaty, one of the most widely approved international documents is the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to which the US is a signatory. Article 12 specifically states that:
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.
The information collected from sources such as the internet, emails, social media networks, internet service providers, search engines, etc., belonged to someone and it should be considered private personal data. The US neither asked for permission nor consent to collect the data.
hack89
(39,181 posts)Looks like they need their own Snowden
Abin is not the first intelligence agency in the world to create a system of monitoring Internet networks.
According to information from Brazilian media, the initiative came after the security agencies of the country failed to alert President Dilma Rousseff about the protests that resulted in violent scenes around Brazil, including the invasion of Congress.
Thus, to prevent any future unpredicted aggressions Abin created a monitoring system called Mosaic, which filters the posts on community networks.
http://www.imassera.com/brazil-intelligence-agency-monitors-social-networks/2422135/