By Darren Smith, Weekend Contributor
During a conference held to award Journalist Glenn Greenwald the Siebenpfeiffer Prize for Journalism, Greenwald reported a conversation in which German Vice Chancellor Sigmar Gabriel. In this the Vice Chancellor commented to him that the United States threatened Germany with withholding vital intelligence of terrorist activity if the nation granted asylum to Edward Snowden or otherwise allowed him to travel to Germany.
The event shows the extreme measures the Administration is willing to take regarding whistleblowers and others labeled as threats.
The revelation began when Vice Chancellor Gabriel, speaking of the plight of Edward Snowden, was interrupted by an audience member who asked why Snowden was not offered asylum in Germany. Gabriel replied that Germany would be required to extradite Snowden to the United States.
Here is a video via Saarbrücker Zeitung containing excerpts of the Vice Chancellor’s and Mr. Greenwald’s speeches.
Later, when Greenwald had an opportunity to speak to the Vice Chancellor in person, he enquired about the asylum issue. Greenwald later revealed to the public this conversation via Greenwald’s news service.
In the article, Mr. Greenwald wrote of some truly troubling behavior on behalf of the Obama Administration:
Afterward [the ceremony], however, when I pressed the vice chancellor (who is also head of the Social Democratic Party, as well as the country’s economy and energy minister) as to why the German government could not and would not offer Snowden asylum — which, under international law, negates the asylee’s status as a fugitive — he told me that the U.S. government had aggressively threatened the Germans that if they did so, they would be “cut off” from all intelligence sharing. That would mean, if the threat were carried out, that the Americans would literally allow the German population to remain vulnerable to a brewing attack discovered by the Americans by withholding that information from their government.
This is not the first time the U.S. has purportedly threatened an allied government to withhold evidence of possible terror plots as punishment. In 2009, a British national, Binyam Mohamed, sued the U.K. government for complicity in his torture at Bagram and Guantánamo. The High Court ordered the U.K. government to provide Mohamed’s lawyers with notes and other documents reflecting what the CIA told British intelligence agents about Mohamed’s abuse.
In response, the U.K. government insisted that the High Court must reverse that ruling because the safety of British subjects would be endangered if the ruling stood. Their reasoning: the U.S. government had threatened the British that they would stop sharing intelligence, including evidence of terror plots, if they disclosed what the Americans had told them in confidence about Mohamed’s treatment — even if the disclosure were ordered by the High Court as part of a lawsuit brought by a torture victim. British government lawyers even produced a letter from an unnamed Obama official laying out that threat.
The full article may be read HERE.
Later, the Vice Chancellor’s office declined to comment to the German medium Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung about the asylum issue and declared there was no legal basis to offer Edward Snowden asylum.
Deutsche Welle reported the Obama administration has denied the accusation of threatening to withhold information from Berlin, according to Washington newspaper The Hill, which quotes a statement from a senior official calling the suggestion that the US threatened to withhold intelligence “baseless.”
But the question of how “baseless” Glenn Greenwald’s or Vice Chancellor Gabriel’s assertions are is not certainly arguable considering the actions of the Obama Administration in the Snowden matter. All one has to do is look at the past actions of The Administration for guidance.
We have an Administration that declares that the accusations are baseless, yet the same administration’s NSA tapped into Chancellor Angela Merkel’s cellphone, ordered the grounding and search of the aircraft of a head of state on mere suspicion that Edward Snowden might be aboard, and made a similar threat to another NATO ally, the United Kingdom.
The row comes down to a matter of credibility of either side in the Edward Snowden controversy. Who is the more trustworthy, The Obama Administration or Glenn Greenwald?
Sources:
The Intercept
Deutsche Welle
Saarbrücker Zeitung via YouTube
The views expressed in this posting are the author’s alone and not those of the blog, the host, or other weekend bloggers. As an open forum, weekend bloggers post independently without pre-approval or review. Content and any displays or art are solely their decision and responsibility.
http://www.politicususa.com/2015/03/15/general-accuses-tom-cotton-gop-47-mutiny.html
“General Eaton said “I would use the word mutinous. I do not believe these senators were trying to sell out America. I do believe they defied the chain of command in what could be construed as an illegal act.” However, since it is unlikely there are no precedents to prosecute the miscreant 47, one seriously wishes that Cotton and his coup-cohorts were active military so they could be summarily arrested and court marshaled by a military tribunal for mutiny and face the harshest possible military punishment.
General Eaton explained why, as former military, he had no reservations asserting that Cotton willingly violated more than protocol or the Logan Act. Eaton said “What Senator Cotton did is a gross breach of discipline, and especially as a veteran of the Army, he should know better. I have no issue with Senator Cotton, or others, voicing their opinion in opposition to any deal to halt Iran’s nuclear progress. Speaking out on these issues is clearly part of his job. But to directly engage a foreign entity, in this way, undermining the strategy and work of our diplomats and our Commander in Chief, strains the very discipline and structure that our foreign relations depend on, to succeed. The breach of discipline is extremely dangerous, because undermining our diplomatic efforts, at this moment, brings us another step closer to a very costly and perilous war with Iran. I think Senator Cotton recognizes this, and he simply does not care. That’s what disappoints me the most. I expect better from the men and women who wore the uniform.””
To call a decorated veteran who is simply stating the requirements of the Constitution a traitor is what I would expect of you mespo.
No kidding Cotton is a religious militaristic fanatic, good to hear Glen Greenwald agree.
mespo
Ol Glenn is starting to grow on me.
= = =
Been following Greenwald since before Salon at his old site.
Unclaimed Terroritory http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/
Long time fan of his…
Iran’s Kahamenei calls for the destruction of Israel
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/11/09/iran_s_khamenei_israel_must_be_annihilated.html
Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei took to Twitter to call for the destruction of Israel over the weekend. He first started with a string of vitriolic anti-Israel tweets that called for the destruction of the “barbaric, wolflike & infanticidal regime of Israel.”
He then culminated by posting a “neat table,” as Haaretz puts it, that lays out nine key questions on why—and how—his plan to destroy Israel should be implemented. The post begins with the basic: Why? Because throughout its existence “the fake Zionist regime has tried to realize its goals by means of infanticide, homicide, violence & iron fist.” But rest easy, Iran definitely does not want “the massacre of the Jewish people” but rather Iran has proposed “a practical & logical mechanism” to eliminate Israel through a referendum involving “all the original people of Palestine, including Muslims, Chrsitians and Jews” anywhere in the world.
The referendum would then give rise to a new government that would then have to decide whether Jews who have relocated to Israel can stay there or “should return to their home countries.” Khamenei is confident that the plan “can enjoy the supports of the independent nations and governments.”
Until the day when Khamenei’s plan can be realized, “powerful confrontation and resolute and armed resistance” is the only way to deal with “this ruinous regime.” And what should be the first step? Arming the West Bank. Isn’t a compromise possible? “The fact that Yasser Arafat was poisoned and killed by Israel while he had the most cooperation with the Zionists proves that in the viewpoint of Israel, ‘peace’ is simply a trick for more crimes and occupation,” Khamenei writes.
mespo,
Nope and neither has any poster on this blog. Interesting.
= = =
may I direct you to my comment above?
Oh, you’re talking about the supporters of the 47…
… Why, it’s never when they support it.
There was a time before 1776 when we who lived in N. America in the 13 colonies were British subjects. Evil things were being done to us and to our civil liberties. We rebelled. Paul Revere told us when “the Redcoats are coming!” We are living the 1776 Parallels. They are similar to the 1933 Parallels discussed on the blog before. Now we have a government which is taking away our civil liberties. In 1776 it was in the name of King and Queeny. In 1933 when the Reichstag Fire occurred the Germans went after the Communists. The Reichstag Fire Decree was issued and all civil liberties went South. After 9/11 we passed the Patriot Act and all civil liberties are going South. Snowden is a Paul Revere of sorts. He told us that the theft of our civil liberties was going on.
Now we have people in government and in the media like that Chuck Todd dork on NBC who tell us that Snowden is a traitor.
Ok, Chuck, you are like a Tory. You Chuck are like the Reichstag Fire Decree boys who brought on the Holocaust.
I boycott NBC.
I will vote against any politician who calls Snowden a traitor.
I can vote early and often because I am a guide dog for blind people at the polls.
Vote Dogocrat.
Sorry, Inga, I take it back. Here’s greenwald on the website, The Intercept:
“GOP efforts to sabotage a peace deal with Iran are heinous on the substance: the combination of dogmatic religious fervor for Israel, a cartoon-like Manichean view of the world, and a bottomless thirst for war continues to lead them to a commitment to rogue militarism — though there are plenty of Democrats who share all of those views. Tom Cotton, the prime author of the letter, is at least as much a dangerous religious fanatic as anyone in the Iranian government, and certainly a more militaristic one. (And just by the way, Rand Paul’s signing of the Cotton letter further exposes what a shallow fraud is his pretense to having some sort of heterodox foreign policy positions).”
Ol Glenn is starting to grow on me.
trooper:
You can keep laughing all the way to her inauguration. You think Obama is liberal? You’re in for an education.
Inga:
Nope and neither has any poster on this blog. Interesting.
I don’t hate Hillary. I laugh at her. Just as I laugh at you. She will not be the nominee. You can do better.
Trooper York:
Despite what you and your “loving life” SoCal snowbird pal says about Iran, their intentions to destroy Israel are far from a “given” as key Israelis not named Bibi freely admit:
“Take General Benny Gantz, chief of staff of Israel’s armed forces (the IDF), who described Iran’s leaders as very rational people and who stated that Iran has not yet decided whether to build nuclear weapons. Take ex-Mossad chief Meir Dagan, and other Mossad leaders in general, who have stated numerous times that they believe Iran is not trying to pursue nuclear weapons. Netanyahu is far from being a unanimous Zionist or Jewish voice on the issue of Iranian nuclear intentions, as this group of 180 retired Israeli veterans show.
Then there is the intelligence estimates of other bodies. The IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) inspected Iran, found no evidence for bomb-making and certified that no uranium had been diverted to a weapons program. All 16 US intelligence agencies reached a consensus that Iran was not pursuing a nuclear weapon agenda. Here are 2 quotes from former CIA head and current US Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta:
“Are they trying to develop a nuclear weapon? No. But we know that they’re trying to develop a nuclear capability.”
“I think [Iran is] developing a nuclear capability [but] our intelligence makes clear that they haven’t made the decision to develop a nuclear weapon.”
Who is more likely to know the truth about Iranian nuclear intentions – Israeli politicians or Israeli and other intelligence agents?
Iran’s Own Statements of Its Nuclear Intentions
We also need to listen to Iran’s side of the story. Iranian politicians have consistently stated that they have no intention of attacking any country; and this statement carries a lot of weight given that Iran has been a relatively peaceful country in its recent history. The Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei issued a fatwa statement forbidding the development of a nuclear bomb.
Another points indicating that Iranian Nuclear Intentions are peaceful is that, as Juan Cole has pointed out, Iran reduced its stockpile of low-enriched uranium at 19.75%, turning it into plates to fuel its medical reactor (which is what Iran has all along said it was doing with that uranium).”
http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/truth-about-iranian-nuclear-intentions/
So, I wonder, has Glen Greenwald commented on the letter that the 47 traitors wrote?
Odd how Spinelli thinks he knows how everyone lives, lol. I’ve never before run across anyone who claims to ‘knows’ so much ( so little actually) about how others live. Well good now we can get back on topic.
Old nurse:
You hate what you fear. That’s why I love Nicky and Trooper.
The Republicans are the only thing standing between the annihilation of the State of Israel by Obama’s buddies the Iranians. He is trying to circumvent the Constitution as usual by going through the UN as he facilitates the Iranians getting a bomb.
The only question is will the so called friends of Israel in the Democratic party stand up for Israel. Menendez tried but they went after him to neturalize him. What will Schumer and Pelosi and Hoyer and Reid do when the rubber hits the road?
Love Greenwald.
I’m afraid that every comment section for the next two years is going to be taken over by people who want to diss Hillary Clinton. I’m not voting for her, but god, please let’s not let every single comment section degrade into talking about her.
Watch the salt in that risotto, Nick!
“Once again you lie mespo. The Republicans didn’t undercut anything. Any treaty with Iran has to be sent to Congress for its advice and consent. The President can not stop the sanctions s set by Congress by Imperial decree. He has to go to Congress. These are simple facts. The letter was addressed to the Iranians so they could learn what is in the Constitution.”
*****************
Whatcha smoking there, Trooper? We’re talking about Snowden and Darren’s acceptance of one source to defame the US Administration, not the treasonous letter from the 47 dwarfs. Must be those voices in your head again.
Ya gotta love Caddyshack!