France Sues U.S. and UK Over Echelon 435
gaijin|dog writes, "According to this article, the U.S. and UK are to be sued over Echelon. From the article "The British and U.S. governments are to be sued in France after claims that they have spied on French companies, diplomats and Cabinet ministers. French MPs claim to have evidence that the European Airbus consortium lost a Fr35 billion (£3.5 billion) contract in 1995 after its offer was overheard and passed to Boeing." " Now, I'd rate the probablity of actually getting said money at just about the same as, say, Rob and Heather Graham dating,
Hypocrites (Score:1)
France and Japan were mentioned above as the leading infiltrators against American firms. France's spy agency, the Direction Generale de la Securite Exterieure (DGSE) , aims its effort at the same U.S. technology that is of interest to the SVR: computers, aerospace, and production tools and processes. The DGSE's specialty is infiltrating spies into U.S. and foreign offices of high-tech U.S. multi-national corporations. In 1993, a French government document listing as worthwhile targets two dozen U.S. companies - including Boeing, IBM, and Texas Instruments, was leaked to newspapers. The French are aggressive. Former CIA director Richard Helms says, "They [the French] have admitted to me in private that they go through the briefcases of visiting businessmen."
Russia and Japan are not exactly our strongest diplomatic allies. However, France and the United States are military and political allies. Should allies be spying on each other? According to Pierre Marion, director of French intelligence from 1981 to 1982, "Even during the Cold War, getting intelligence in economic, technological, and industrial matters from a country with which you are allied . . . is not incompatible with the fact of being allied." In the post-Cold War era, Marion says, "The competition in terms of technology and commerce and industry is stronger than it was during the Cold War. There should be more emphasis put on that, and on industrial espionage." The French government admits that it directly passes stolen secrets to French-owned corporations. Intelligence on the private sector for the private sector; France, a Western nation with a democratic system of government, has a view of economic intelligence that is the polar opposite of the American stance.
Re:France whining about spies? (Score:2)
You would want tiny antennas (at least in terms of the active elements) and very close range to the target of interception.
Or long range, still tiny active element and huge, perfectly paraboloid reflector. Telescopes have reflectors up to few meters in diameter, and they have no problems receiving "signals" at the wavelength of hundreds nanometers.
It's just posturing... (Score:2)
This is what used to be done in an exceedingly classy fashion as the old "international incident." Foreign power spies. You spy back. You catch $FOREIGN_POWER's spy. You make a big deal about it. Scandal ensues, lots of fun for everyone, etc. A lawsuit of any kind is just a prissier version of the same old thing.
Of course, good may come of this - greater exposure of Echelon is ultimately a good thing for everyone as it keeps the US and its allies a little more honest. Of course, the fact that we're here discussing Echelon means it's been superceded, but it's the idea that counts, eh?
-- TM, listening in on my Congressman's Phone Sex session on his cell.
Re:huh? (Score:2)
This is basically to draw publicity to what the US and UK are doing, and I'm all for it in that respect.
That's quite likely. There is also the possability of going through the EU to get at the U.K. At any rate, everyone spies on everyone else. The 'arrangement' seems to be that as long as the intelligence is not used commercially, everyone (officially/diplomatically) looks the other way. France got caught cheating in the '80s and just wants to make it clear that they're not the only ones cheating (I don't blame them there).
All told, I'm glad this happened as well. There seems to be a bit of a truth shortage these days.
Lawyer: nope (Score:2)
advice, see an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction.
French courts simply lack jurisdiction over the U.S. The U.S. has
absolutely no obligation to appear (and I'd call my congress-critters
and demand another impeachment if there were a U.S. appearance), and
would have no ability to enforce any ruling it entered.
The only way this *possibly* gets heard in a courtroom (at least
with the U.S. as a party) would be in the U.S. Supreme Court. Even
then, were a judgment entered, it could not be paid without an
act of Congress authorizing payment of funds from the Treasury.
Also, it's been a *long* time since the Court heard a case of
original jurisdiction (probably since diplomatic immunity was
established). I'm not sure the current rules of court even
provide for the situation (I'd have to look them up, and I'm just
not that interested).
hawk, esq.
French-British History (Score:3)
of anglo-french history to a group that included some Europeans.
Roughly, in the second half of the eleventh centrury, a french
duke got irritated and took the english crown for himself. He
still held about a third of France. Over time, this got whittled
down, and the british sent an army across to reclaim/expand their
french holdings. Having done so again, they got neglectful, and the
french holdings again dissipated. Periodically, the brits would send
an army that would trounce a french army three to four times its own
size.
After about 500 years of this, the french finally noticed
that they had castles to hide in. When the brits came, they simply
didn't go out and play, and eventually went home due to long supply
lines. The brits never figured out that since they held the
entire area except for the castles, that they could build their
own castles.
Then came the 20th century, and they discovered that they hated the
germans more than one another.
At this point I was interrupted with a sharp, "No we didn't."
:)
seems it was merely expedient to fight together for a few years
Anyone clued in on Airbus QC? (Score:1)
If the quality of their automobiles (internationally regarded as hideous crap eclipsed only by the former eastern bloc) is any indication of their engineering acumen, perhaps the potential client for the aforementioned contract made a *very* smart decision by going Boeing. (ooh! a pun!)
Re:US vs. French Technology (Score:1)
The 777, I don't know about. You may be right there. If so, 'DOH!'
As for airframes, I grant you that. (As well as british dominance in race engine building. HUH? 'wretched' a term I once saw describing british auto reliability. Whoda thunkit?) But Europe != france!
My beef with france is their notoriously Xenophobic, NIH attitude about just about everything. Hell, they actually have what amounts to a ministry of cultural purity!
You don't grow intellectually thinking like that. As a person, or as a nation.
Re:US vs. French Technology (Score:1)
Actually I'd like to see you take your ifs-crap vehicle where i take my solid-axle jeep.
Use the right technology for the job, and solid-axles work in some places, heavy workloads, rock-crawling, etc...
Re:For a lawyer... (Score:2)
Nick
Re:Hypocrites - or cold-blooded murderers? (Score:1)
Really? What a sweetheart. If you'd care to supply your name and address I'm sure we could find some nice biker-dude to give you an opportunity. But maybe Anonymous Coward describes you better than we thought. Tell you what, next time the Germans decide they like the weather in Paris, we'll let them keep it.
Re:In your face, USA! ;-) (Score:1)
Well at least we don't tell our citizens they're not allowed to watch too many French movies! There certainly are groups here who tend towards fascism, and fortunately many of us vote against them. There are also groups that tend towards anarchy, and they occasionally get their way too. We're a BIG country with a lot of people, and you can still drive from one end to the other without being bothered. (Unless maybe you're a black man in a nice car. That's another story.)
> and NOT a true friend of us Europeans
I really didn't want to bring this up, but this is kind of a funny remark from a guy in a country that tried to take over ALL of Europe. Twice! I have news for you, if we wanted to own Europe we could have done so already.
> here in Europe it's illegal to spy on the citizens without reasons
It's illegal to spy on US citizens without reasons here too. We have laws against it, the NSA is NOT allowed to do it and to give the individuals who work there the benefit of the doubt I'm certain most of them take that seriously. We also have the ACLU to vigorously sue the government when they go too far. Too often law enforcement is over-zealous. The FBI and Martin Luther King, for instance, or the LA cops that planted evidence and even shot people. Note they're now on trial. Nothing's perfect, but the fight goes on.
> dictatorship of total surveillance
Agreed! Unfortunately, there are many here (as in other countries) who seem to be willing to give up their freedom to catch the "bad guys". If this wasn't being fought everyday by independent journalists, the ACLU, etc etc it would've happened already.
Re:huh? (Score:1)
WWI was the UK's, France's and Canada's war.
I'm pretty sure Russia was involved as well... helped lead to nasty things like the Bolshevik Revolution.
Re:huh? (Score:2)
No, France can't take that route, and they know it. Frankly, the Airbus thing is probably just an excuse; they know they won't get their money back. What they're trying to do is set a precedent. Open the way for other nations to sue. And hopefully destroy Echelon in the process; knowing the US they'll destroy Echelon rather than hold onto it and destroy their reputation (sad to say, the only thing the U.S. government values more than keeping its power is keeping what little image it has left). This is a ploy to make the US and UK lose face, and I'm all for it if it'll hurt Echelon even a little bit.
We're just Slashdotters. When all's said and done, there's really nothing we can do about Echelon; we simply don't have the kind of power it takes. France has tons more than we do, but even it can't do much by itself. But if it takes a stand, other nations will too, and the combined power of several large nations can do something about Echelon.
I could go on for several more paragraphs extolling the guts France is showing by taking this move, but knowing my luck I'd only start a flamewar. So I'll just shut up now.
Re:huh? (Score:1)
Re:huh? (Score:1)
Re:US hardly altruistic (ever!) (Score:1)
Re:One word: Countersuit. (Score:1)
Re:Why hate Echelon? (Score:1)
an enormous (£101) approx $160/year tax on every television set
Do they still play "Neighbours"? If they do, sounds like a good deal to me. Huh huh.
Re:US vs. French Technology (Score:1)
From beyond the grave (Score:1)
Re:The big thing in this article is European Union (Score:1)
s/I'm not either/I am neither/
Re:huh? (Score:2)
Re:The big thing in this article is European Union (Score:2)
Re:The big thing in this article is European Union (Score:2)
One word: Countersuit. (Score:3)
http://www.aci.net/Kalliste/industryespion.pdf
I really hope the US and UK countersue, because then maybe more info on both issues will be revealed.
Re:huh? (Score:2)
Steven E. Ehrbar
Civil suit. (Score:1)
The reason that France has decidet to bring a civil suit agains UKUSA is simply that the laws here in France seem to protect the individual no-end.
F.ex if you wreck your car 10 times in a row and no insurance company wants to touch you with a 10 foot pole, there is a special agency that will *force* the insurance company you choose to insure you. (NOT kidding !)
Bringing a civil suit against UKUSA, in France is a sure-win.
--
Why pay for drugs when you can get Linux for free ?
Go Rob Go! (Score:1)
---
Funny, eh... (Score:1)
Certainly not the country who has Babylon-on-the-Potomac for a capital...
--
" It's a ligne Maginot [maginot.org]-in-the-sky "
Re:Allies spying on one another? NOOOOO!!!!!! (Score:1)
The satellite would be on a geostationary orbit. It must have been no mean feat to put that big a thing that high!!!
--
" It's a ligne Maginot [maginot.org]-in-the-sky "
Re:For a lawyer... (Score:1)
--
" It's a ligne Maginot [maginot.org]-in-the-sky "
Heather Graham (Score:1)
No, it's just a lousy jet with tight seats (Score:2)
Frankly, i've been on an Airbus 310, and I'd rather walk. So, my theory is that they lost the deal when someone thought they could get a better jet, the exact number Airbus offered probably didn't play into it at all.
Re:For a lawyer... (Score:1)
Do you have any idea of what's involved in seizing the equipment of another nation's military base?!?
Hint: It usually involves blowing things up.
Re:huh? (Score:2)
There is a simple solution to Echelon. Stop sending voice and data over unprotected radio, microwave and satellite links. Even if Echelon was shut down, which I think would be a terrible idea, there are plenty of other countries with SIGINT capabilities.
Re:Where to get Declassified government documents (Score:2)
Re:US hardly altruistic (ever!) (Score:2)
Re:Hypocrites (Score:3)
this is about embarassment (Score:1)
Politics is like trying to screw a cat in the ass. -- Bukowski
Re:huh? (Score:2)
Go read your histoy books again.
Russia was in the war from day 1. For your info Germans have used almost equal quantities of people and armament on both fronst. The mere difference is that Russians also fought the Austrians and Turkey.
I could continue but I will restrain. No point to answer to an ignorant prat.
Re:For a lawyer... (Score:1)
Last time I checked, France's name was "the French Republic", not "the People's Republic of France". Also, last time I checked, prices there were set by the market.
Re:UNGREATFUL FRENCH (Score:1)
> air-raids and drop bombs on someone.
France was as far as I know the second contributor (behind the US) to the air war in Kosovo, and has supplied plenty of ground troops. France has already lost several soldiers in peacekeeping operations in Bosnia.
Oh, by the way, learn English:
whinning -> whining
ungreatful -> ungrateful.
Re: legally possibly (Score:1)
I am not a lawyer, but:
Airbus could thus perhaps sue Boeing, or its executives, in France for using informations yielded by eavesdropping. If sentenced, bank accounts or properties belonging to Boeing could be seized.
There is little probability that this would happen. There is a long history of spying between NATO allies, and usually all conflicts are solved by discreet informal agreements between governments.
Pffft! (Score:1)
You and all your silly English KNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNniggits!
I don't want to talk to you no more you empty-headed animal food-trough waterer!
Now go away or I shall taunt you a second time!
--
I hope the EU does pick on Britain (Score:1)
I mean, the EU has no loyalty anymore to democratic or republican forms of government... just look at Portugal's treatment of Austria in recent weeks.
Re:I hope the EU does pick on Britain (Score:1)
Don't you agree that Britons, and Americans, also have an irrational hatred of the French?
Who is Heather Graham (Score:1)
But could somebody please tell us non-us-slashdotters who Heather Graham is? (Wasn't she mentioned on South Park as well???).
------------------------------
The French do the same thing. (Score:1)
Re:The French do the same thing. (Score:1)
;-)
Re:Anyone clued in on Airbus QC? (Score:1)
Ask Alaska Airlines guys.
An other thing : Each and every market lost by Boeing to airbus in the past 15 years (and that's half of the world's sales) have been lost because of the inability of Boeing to adopt reliable fly-by-wire technology. This involves putting hundreds of passenger's lives in the hands of computer software, something I don't want to be done in the country that made Bill Gates a billionnaire.
Re:US vs. French Technology (Score:1)
Re:But they aren't... (Score:1)
dominated company (EADS), after the merger between France's Aerospatiale Matra, Germany's DASA and Spain's CASA in the next few month. FBW technology and generaly the electronics are mainly French, the Germans making the body of the plane. UK's BAe Systems is left with the wings, and I hope with nothing soon, so that they can go and suck Boeing's cock as they have long dreamed of.
Re:French Persons! (Score:1)
Re:Who can blame the UK for siding with the US? (Score:1)
Re:huh? (Score:1)
You're wellcome. The UK's doctrinal resentment of the government promoting any industry (apart from banking, insurance of shipwrecks and other money laundering activities), has already cost them their car industry, now their aeronautics are next in line.
Re:One word: Countersuit. (Score:1)
Re:Surprisingly not in the french newspapers (Score:1)
I'm personnaly sorry of that and have some nostalgy of the times when the UK and French aeronautics industries could do great things together (e.g. Concorde and many common military programs in the 60s). The Germans are much more difficult to stimulate and do not have more ambition than the British have now for this sector, but at least they feel that there interests are common to ours and not to the US's, and their public opinion is not manipulated by constant insulting anti-French flame by tabloid newspaper.
Re:FRANCE?! hahaha (Score:1)
So this first class seats stuff is just about Air France trying American-style management and making sure the people that clean the plane do not talk about stealing headsets or newspapers left by the passengers
Re:The French do the same thing. (Score:1)
Er AFAIK we have the fourth GDP in the world.
Re:huh? (Score:1)
Things has not turned up this way however. BAe Systems is a minor and reluctant participant in Airbus, and while the French and Germans are discussing whether the A3XX should be assembled in Hamburg or Toulouse, all they manage to do is suggesting that it be assembled in the US... Thanks to our British friends for their inimitable sense of humor however.
heh (Score:1)
So, can we sue over "Frenchelon"? (Score:1)
One French official claims that "Frenchelon" intercepts about 2 million messages per month [cfp99.org]. While on an incredibly smaller scale than Echelon's estimated 3 million messages per minute, they're making themselves out to be major hypocrites here.
Hey, then again, maybe this was the reason for France's stupid effort to force French web sites to use the French language. Much easier to read those intercepted emails that way, eh Jacque?
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
But who would miss France? (Score:1)
Seriously, if France were gone from the UN, who would care? Their purpose there these days seems to be barely anything more than to oppose the U.S. It's not as if I'm even saying that all of the U.S.'s policies were right -- in fact, I disagree with a good deal of its international policies. France, though, seems to put no more deliberation into their UN votes than to see which way the U.S. is leaning and then take the opposite tack.
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
Ummm... (Score:2)
glwillia@hormel.hotmail.com writes:
Remove the producer of Spam from my email address to email me
Sorry, but I don't think that glwillia@com is a valid email address. :)
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
France's Motives (Score:1)
Re:For a lawyer... (Score:1)
You're forgetting private property. I don't think it'll happen, but they could theoretically seize property owned by american companies.
"Espionage ruined an Airbus contract? Lets confiscate some planes, office buildings and factories then..."
Unlikely in the extreme, but they certainly have ways if they want to. A lawyer might complain that this property isn't owned by the american government which did the spying. This is easily countered by the american people being responsible for electing their own government (it's a democracy after all) and american corporations are largely owned by american people.
This sort of argument wouldn't surprise me if it came from a socialist country like France. The reason they (probably) won't is the obvious trade war (or worse) that would follow.
Re:huh? (Score:1)
In your face, USA! ;-) (Score:1)
Remember, folks, here in Europe it's illegal to spy on the citizens without reasons. And just because the US is slowly being transformed into a dictatorship of total surveillance doesn't mean the rest of the world will have to follow.
Where were you when they took freedom of speech away from the Net?
elitism (Score:1)
--Shoeboy
Re:Who enforces it. (Score:1)
Are you serious? By and large, America isn't exactly thrilled about the UN. The head of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee (Jesse Helms) just gave a speech at the UN, where he said that if the UN tries to push around the US, the US will QUIT the UN. How that would actually work, I'm not sure (with UN headquarters in the US and all). The US currently owes the UN something like $1Billion in back dues. The Republicans in Congress won't pay for "family planning" programs sponsored by the UN, because many of the support abortion.
Jesse is a putz, but he's got a point. I'm not so sure that I want other countries to have any say over how I live my life and how my government functions. (I wish the US would keep its nose out of other countries, too...)
-jon
Re:US hardly altruistic (ever!) (Score:1)
Roosevelt wanted us in the war but the public was strongly against it. How could he get us into war? Hmmmm.....
Please don't use the Pearl Harbor attack as an example. Our government wanted in that war and that's why we got in.
Re:For a lawyer... (Score:2)
How can they enforce the verdict? Well.. it's not too hard actually..
Can they *make* the US pay, under threat of prison? Of course not...
Can they change national policy and not deal with the US until the US pays up? Sure they can.
Did iCrave-TV obey a US court order, even though they are in Canada? Sure they did.. why? Not because the US troops could march in and get them, but because it seems liket he *proper* thing to do: defend themselves.
Re:France whining about spies? (Score:1)
GSM phones, i.e. UHF->microwave devices.
You would want tiny antennas (at least in terms of
the active elements) and very close range to the target
of interception.
Wave theory. Very important stuff. Most people have NO
idea how much "stuff" is on the air everywhere.
Re:serious credibility issue... (Score:1)
Some background:
France is in Europe. It was setting off bombs on the other side of the world. Imagine the outcry if China wanted to set off nukes in the French countryside. The French just didn't care that this part of the world might not like having nukes set off. There is no need for empathy, we are French.
So, how does France deal with this touchy situation?
French agents went in and blew up a civilian ship in New Zealand. Saying it was Greenpeace, and the Americans, and they deserved it for messing with France does not make it okay.
As to Greenpeace not sending protesters into the interior of communist China prior to secret nuclear tests
Re:Hypocrites: both (Score:1)
Airbus (Score:1)
But they aren't... (Score:2)
Re:huh? (Score:1)
in WW2?
Don't make me laugh.
Reinvent the Russell Tribunal (Score:2)
Obviously you cannot sue the United States before any human court in this world. France can sue the United Kingdom in a court of the European Union, but it cannot sue the United States. The United Nations have been able to set up tribunals, notably to judge war crimes such as those that were committed in Bosnia, but it evidently cannot judge a state that is permanent member of the security council.
Only one court has been able to judge and condemn the United States, and that is the Russell Tribunal, during the Vietnam War. The Tribunal had no authority other than moral, but it did have very much prestige, and its role in bringing out fact to the public eye was of great importance.
This story about France sueing the US and the UK is a farce. However, it may be possible for a small group of individuals with enough prestige (say, the Electronic Frontier Foundation [eff.org]) to set up a special tribunal to judge that sort of matters. The tribunal's verdicts would not lead to any kind of punishment, but they would lead to public awareness, which is, after all, the most important thing.
Re:huh? (Score:2)
Actually, Canada was independant of both England and France in the late 1800's.
You're probably thinking of Newfoundland, where I live, which didn't join Canada until the late 1940's. We (Newfoundland) fought in the wars under Britain. The rest of Canada fought in the same way that a little brother helps out an older brother (sorry, can't think of a better analogy than that right now).
huh? (Score:2)
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Re:But you forget one important point... (Score:2)
More fundamentally, all the evils generally ascribed to corporations rely upon government as a facilitator (e.g. to take the most recent example described on /., abuse of copyright law requires the government to go along with the abusive interpretation and enforce it). On the other hand, the evils of government do not rely on corporations at all; some of the most evil governments in history did not allow the existence of private capital at all.
Hence, the root of the problem is at the government level.
/.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:huh? (Score:2)
Err
But you're right about ass-kicking not getting money back. The UK, at least, can be sued through the European Court and would probably have to pay up if found guilty. Although there is a world court, the chances of getting the US to cough up are negligable.
Go France! (Score:2)
The article did not post what the French want? Hopefully, they want damages and the shutdown of Echelon.. and don't just want in on the deal..
One thing I noticed:
Yesterday he said that he would bring an action on behalf of French civil liberty groups.
Actually, this makes it sound like it is not France suing the US and UK, but just French civil liberties groups. Can anyone clear this up?
Jeff
Re:more french cars (Score:2)
//rdj
Welcome to the Real World (Score:2)
Every nation spies on its allies. While this doesn't scale well to personal relations, you need to know what they're doing so you know that they *are* still your allies. This Is Not something that the U.S. just invented ten years ago.
Re:huh? (Score:2)
Suit #1: I wonder if France has any of those faulty Minuteman II's left. You know the ones we sold them in the 80's? I wonder what would happen if someone inadvertantly detonated a few in their tubes.
Suit #2: Naw, too messy, what with the fallout and all. Remember the stuff we got from Mitterand's Christmas party? The infrared picture of Maggie Thatcher and old Frankie on the Presidential desk?
Suit #1: Too old! A smear campaign against former heads of state is pointless, and the Brits would get pissy too. Got any embarrasing details on this French lawyer?
Suit #2: Let's see.. He had an extramarital affair with his daughter's roommate, we've got their phone sex tapes. He's got a 1000 franc a week coke habit too!
Suit #1: Think we could con the CIA into putting some added value into his dope, like they did for us with that Mexican fellow?
Suit #2: Not since the FBI busted their Columbian agent, Escobar. Goddamn Justice has been stepping all over their toes!
Suit #1: Oh well. Time to get back to watching that surveillance camera in Natalie Portman's bathroom. See if you can get some wet-work Rangers on this one. Hit him on the limey side of the channel, eh? Mabye we can use that IRA bit one more time...
Re:Today is bash the French Day! (Score:2)
Can't we all just get along?
Just because there is a distasteful troll product of the US public school system in here doesn't mean you need to insult me by proxy as well.
P-145 documents (Score:3)
Has anyone managed to find these documents?
I couldn't find anything mentioning echelon on nsa's public information releases [nsa.gov] or their list of "high-interest items" [nsa.gov].
I found a few sites mentioning echelon and P-415, though. This one [mcmail.com] mentions P-145 as being around for at least a decade. That site doesn't seem to be an unbiased source, though, because its homepage links to things like this rant [apc.org] about echelon with a really big font.
This [loyola.edu] is another site that mentions P-145 and mobile phone monitoring. It contains a document called "An Appraisal of the Technologies of Political Control" [loyola.edu], a long document which mentions echelon and discusses agreements among various countries regarding sharing of information obtained through echelon-like projects.
--
Re:huh? (Score:2)
This is basically to draw publicity to what the US and UK are doing, and I'm all for it in that respect.
French Persons! (Score:2)
Allies spying on one another? NOOOOO!!!!!! (Score:2)
Just read The Puzzle Palace, there are many documented cases, and our allies know it, so what's the big deal? They do the same thing.
Occasionally there are prices to be paid for such actions. In the late 1960's Israel attacked one of our intelligence gathering ships when they realized we were probably listening to them. Dozens of americans were killed and it was essentially buried.
We go to amazing lengths in our SIGINT (signals intelligence) efforts.
There was once a project to build a dish antenna (a damn BIG one) for the NSA that was intended to pick up faint radio signals that were being reflected by THE MOON. I believe this project was cancelled. The engineering problems were myriad to say the least.
Re:Aerospace contracts, not classified information (Score:2)
Yes, I read it. THE PUZZLE PALACE also documents examples where american intelligence gathering agencies used data they had gathered to help american corporations.
My point was not to refute the article, but to question the SURPRISE that everyone up here seems to be showing about this.
It's been happening a long time, and their intelligence agencies are helping their corporations also.
I'm not agreeing with the practice, just talking about it.
Our intelligence agencies kill people too. We tried to kill Castro. Face it, deal with it, get over it, move on.
It's going to continue to happen. Don't be shocked next time.
BRING IT TO THE INTERNATIONAL COURT (Score:2)
I think we were convicted for one or two other covert deals in the 80s.
It rocks when the US is convicted and ignores the trial.
Note: this is sarcasm, not a troll
There is no body that can convict the US Gov't, save the US Court system (to give financial awards out) and France can hardly sue the US for International espionage.
This is silly. Come on France, play the cloak and dagger game. When you catch them, make a big stink of it, announce a boycott, trade sanctions, and pull your ambassador.
Oh wait, if they try for trade sanctions, the WTO can overturn them. If they violate that, then everyone gets to counter embargo within the WTO, kick France out, our whatever they want.
Let's see an International incident over this stupid project.
GO GLOBALIZATION!
Re:huh? (Score:2)
You probably are missing something. This day and age, countries don't just go to war with each other (well, not Western countries, anyway.) Unlike the political situations of a century ago, every army is not stocked with a bunch of 16 year olds with muskets. France going to war with the UK or US would be literally suicide. (Not to mention how NATO would react.) No, nowadays political matters in civilized countries can (and should IMO) be settled diplomatically. If you found out your best friend was spying on you and caused you to lose money, would you kick his ass, or sue him for the money? I'd do the latter, because a) I can kick the ass of very few people (I'm like France) and b) kicking his ass doesn't get my money back.
On a side note, does anyone know how lawsuits between governments are handled? I've never heard of one before. Is this a UN matter?
Re:huh? (Score:2)
I agree. I think the nature of Echelon must be made public knowledge, or there must at least be public knowledge of its existence. I don't particularly care about the outcome of the lawsuit; hopefully it will generate enough media attention to get the public aware of what's going on. I'm interested in learning more about the World Court. is it a UN body? An internation treaty somewhere?
Re:huh? (Score:2)
The Court has a dual role: to settle in accordance with international law the legal disputes submitted to it by States, and to give advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by duly authorized international organs and agencies.
Seems to me that it's pretty similar to the US Supreme Court in a lot of respects. Since the ICJ is really a part of the UN, it also seems to me that they wouldn't exercise too much control over the US as far as enforcement goes; if the US is ruled against it would mean the only way they would have to pay is willingly, as it would be nearly impossible to start sanctions or military actions against the US.
For a basic summery, see their Court at a Glance [icj-cij.org] document.
Europe is fed up with the US. (Score:2)
I don't think it's about spying and money, but that Europe is fed with US being an arrogant
'bastard' ignoring and forcing forreing government to go 'The American Way'.
1) US ignores global warming. US just pis on the agreements made in Rio and Kyoto. Ignoring the fact that their largest state, Alaska, is suffering severely from global warming.
2) Forcing genetic engineered food down our throut, even though there is no evidence that it's safe for humans and environment. Actually UK have had an increase of 50% of people who is allergic to soya, after the introduction of genetic modified soya.
3) Forcing very strict encryption- and data-protectionlaws. Thanks to the US it's now illegal in Denmark to make backup-copies. Hey, it's even 'illegal' to surf the web (yeah, really stupid law, but apparently the pressure was so strung that the law needed to be rushed through).
3) Spying on everyboddy. Echelon have been a hot subject i Europe. Everyboddy have heard about it and noboddy could prove it's existence until recently.
That was the last straw, and the Airbus-issue (eg. this is NOT france vs. US/UK, but Europe vs. US/UK) is just a welcome 'excuse' to tell US to stop bullying contries around.
Bjarne