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.
Ken Rogers
And don’t forget the fasces in the House chambers…
… We’re such good Romans, aren’t we?
http://stateofthenation2012.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/obama-getty-imagines.jpg
https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/579734648542089218
@Not An Agitator
“The USA has a preponderance of fascist corporate whores running the country, not liberals or conservatives. Americans need to wake up that the citizenry are being played as saps by unethical politicians that use the people for the benefit of their global enablers.
“Additionally the headlines ‘U.S. Threatened Germany Over Snowden Asylum’ are deceptive. The Obama administration threatened Germany……NOT the USA.”
You packed a great deal of important truth into very few words, here.
Thank you.
Let me add that Democrat, Republican, Left, Right, Liberal, Conservative, Progressive are superficial labels that inhibit thinking and perception of the basic divide between those who are least concerned with controlling others (individualists) and those most concerned with doing so for self-interested reasons (collectivists).
On my reading of the evidence, the US government is rapidly devolving into a Corporate State whose features are broadly described by attorney David Mills in his essay, “It’s the Corporate State, Stupid.” http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7260.htm
Also read, if you will, the following list of 14 characteristics of fascist and proto-fascist regimes and consider for yourself where the US stands:
“Beyond the visual, even a cursory study of these [seven] fascist and proto-fascist regimes reveals the absolutely striking convergence of their modus operandi. This, of course, is not a revelation to the informed political observer, but it is sometimes useful in the interests of perspective to restate obvious facts and in so doing shed needed light on current circumstances.
“For the purpose of this perspective, I will consider the following regimes: Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Franco’s Spain, Salazar’s Portugal, Papadopoulos’s Greece, Pinochet’s Chile, and Suharto’s Indonesia. To be sure, they constitute a mixed bag of national identities, cultures, developmental levels, and history. But they all followed the fascist or proto-fascist model in obtaining, expanding, and maintaining power.
“Further, all these regimes have been overthrown, so a more or less complete picture of their basic characteristics and abuses is possible. Analysis of these seven regimes reveals fourteen common threads that link them in recognizable patterns of national behavior and abuse of power. These basic characteristics are more prevalent and intense in some regimes than in others, but they all share at least some level of similarity.
1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism. From the prominent displays of flags and bunting to the ubiquitous lapel pins, the fervor to show patriotic nationalism, both on the part of the regime itself and of citizens caught up in its frenzy, was always obvious. Catchy slogans, pride in the military, and demands for unity were common themes in expressing this nationalism. It was usually coupled with a suspicion of things foreign that often bordered on xenophobia.
2. Disdain for the importance of human rights. The regimes themselves viewed human rights as of little value and a hindrance to realizing the objectives of the ruling elite. Through clever use of propaganda, the population was brought to accept these human rights abuses by marginalizing, even demonizing, those being targeted. When abuse was egregious, the tactic was to use secrecy, denial, and disinformation.
3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause. The most significant common thread among these regimes was the use of scapegoating as a means to divert the people’s attention from other problems, to shift blame for failures, and to channel frustration in controlled directions. The methods of choice—relentless propaganda and disinformation—were usually effective. Often the regimes would incite “spontaneous” acts against the target scapegoats, usually communists, socialists, liberals, Jews, ethnic and racial minorities, traditional national enemies, members of other religions, secularists, homosexuals, and“terrorists.” Active opponents of these regimes were inevitably labeled as terrorists and dealt with accordingly.
4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism. Ruling elites always identified closely with the military and the industrial infrastructure that supported it. A disproportionate share of national resources was allocated to the military, even when domestic needs were acute. The military was seen as an expression of nationalism, and was used whenever possible to assert national goals, intimidate other nations, and increase the power and prestige of the ruling elite.
5. Rampant sexism. Beyond the simple fact that the political elite and the national culture were male-dominated, these regimes inevitably viewed women as second-class citizens. They were adamantly anti-abortion and also homophobic. These attitudes were usually codified in Draconian laws that enjoyed strong support by the orthodox religion of the country, thus lending the regime cover for its abuses.
6. A controlled mass media. Under some of the regimes, the mass media were under strict direct control and could be relied upon never to stray from the party line. Other regimes exercised more subtle power to ensure media orthodoxy. Methods included the control of licensing and access to resources, economic pressure, appeals to patriotism, and implied threats. The leaders of the mass media were often politically compatible with the power elite. The result was usually success in keeping the general public unaware of the regimes’ excesses.
7. Obsession with national security. Inevitably, a national security apparatus was under direct control of the ruling elite. It was usually an instrument of oppression, operating in secret and beyond any constraints. Its actions were justified under the rubric of protecting “national security,” and questioning its activities was portrayed as unpatriotic or even treasonous.
8. Religion and ruling elite tied together. Unlike communist regimes, the fascist and proto-fascist regimes were never proclaimed as godless by their opponents. In fact, most of the regimes attached themselves to the predominant religion of the country and chose to portray themselves as militant defenders of that religion. The fact that the ruling elite’s behavior was incompatible with the precepts of the religion was generally swept under the rug. Propaganda kept up the illusion that the ruling elites were defenders of the faith and opponents of the “godless.” A perception was manufactured that opposing the power elite was tantamount to an attack on religion.
9. Power of corporations protected. Although the personal life of ordinary citizens was under strict control, the ability of large corporations to operate in relative freedom was not compromised. The ruling elite saw the corporate structure as a way to not only ensure military production (in developed states), but also as an additional means of social control. Members of the economic elite were often pampered by the political elite to ensure a continued mutuality of interests, especially in the repression of “have-not” citizens.
10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated. Since organized labor was seen as the one power center that could challenge the political hegemony of the ruling elite and its corporate allies, it was inevitably crushed or made powerless. The poor formed an underclass, viewed with suspicion or outright contempt. Under some regimes, being poor was considered akin to a vice.
11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts. Intellectuals and the inherent freedom of ideas and expression associated with them were anathema to these regimes. Intellectual and academic freedom were considered subversive to national security and the patriotic ideal. Universities were tightly controlled; politically unreliable faculty harassed or eliminated. Unorthodox ideas or expressions of dissent were strongly attacked, silenced, or crushed. To these regimes, art and literature should serve the national interest or they had no right to exist.
12. Obsession with crime and punishment. Most of these regimes maintained Draconian systems of criminal justice with huge prison populations. The police were often glorified and had almost unchecked power, leading to rampant abuse. “Normal” and political crime were often merged into trumped-up criminal charges and sometimes used against political opponents of the regime. Fear, and hatred, of criminals or “traitors” was often promoted among the population as an excuse for more police power.
13. Rampant cronyism and corruption. Those in business circles and close to the power elite often used their position to enrich themselves. This corruption worked both ways; the power elite would receive financial gifts and property from the economic elite, who in turn would gain the benefit of government favoritism. Members of the power elite were in a position to obtain vast wealth from other sources as well: for example, by stealing national resources. With the national security apparatus under control and the media muzzled, this corruption was largely unconstrained and not well understood by the general population.
14. Fraudulent elections. Elections in the form of plebiscites or public opinion polls were usually bogus. When actual elections with candidates were held, they would usually be perverted by the power elite to get the desired result. Common methods included maintaining control of the election machinery, intimidating an disenfranchising opposition voters, destroying or disallowing legal votes, and, as a last resort, turning to a judiciary beholden to the power elite.”
” ‘When facism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the American flag.’ Huey Long”
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4113.htm
Ken Rogers
I often post articles and news stories by this you made. All independent “journalists”.
Ken Rogers
Correct. He hasn’t sold out to Corporate driven opinion news making…
Chinggis think Mr. Rogers should quit while he still has a head. Maybe Mr. Rogers study difference between Mongol and Mongolian. Go to university. Learn about yaks. Drink some kumis. Information about university is below.
АНУ-ын Элчин сайд болон ХЗЯ, ГХЯ-ы албаны хүмүүс АНУ-ын санхүүжилттэй орчуулгын сургалттай танилцлаа
АНУ-аас Монгол улсад суух Элчин сайд Пайпэр Кэмбэлл болон Хууль зүйн яам, Гадаад харицааны яамны төлөөлөгчид хэлний тусгай сургалтын явцтай танилцлаа. Уг сургалт нь АНУ-ын Элчин сайдын яамны санхүүжилттэй хэрэгжиж буй бөгөөд Ил тод байдлын хэлэлцээрийн дагуу хуулийн төслүүдийг Англи хэл дээр орчуулах мэргэжилтэн бэлтгэн гаргах аж.
Хоёр орны хооронд Олон улсын худалдаа, хөрөнгө оруулалтын асуудлаар ил тод байдлыг хангах хэлэлцээр байгуулан өнгөрөгч оны 9 дүгээр сард гарын үсэг зурсан билээ. Хэлэлцээрийг Их хурлын чуулганаар хараахан хэлэлцэж батлаагүй хэдий ч хэлэлцээрийн дагуух үүргээ биелүүлэхэд нь Монгол улсад туслах зорилгоор АНУ- ын тал техникийн туслалцаа үзүүлж эхэлсэн байна.
Энэхүү хэлэлцээрт бизнес болон хөрөнгө оруулалттай хамааралтай Монгол улсын хууль тогтоомжийн төслүүдийг Англи хэл дээр орчуулан гаргаж байх гэсэн шаардлага бий. Үүнд хэрэгцээтэй мэргэжилтнүүдийг чадавхижуулахын тулд АНУ- ын ЭСЯ, Монгол дахь Америк Их Сургуулийн Англи хэлний институт хамтран Англи хэлний хуулийн орчуулгын энэхүү сургалтыг Хууль зүйн яам болон Хууль зүйн үндэсний хүрээлэнгийн албан хаагчдад хийж байгаа юм.
SamFox,
You’re right, I couldn’t find a better quote! Although I should have known, Madison is much more of a heavyweight when it comes to political theory comparatively.
Maybe war wasn’t the right descriptor, but rather extermination or genocide. And indeed under the original quote by Madison, these two issues are not as preasing since they aren’t as likely to effect the stability of the state like war. I was referring to Madison’s governments policy towards native Americans. Under his administration there was a sharp decline and displacement of native Americans.
So cheers to ken Rogers’ original post and quote.
Again saddened by what used to be a unique discourse here now devolved into this mess. Prof turley you need to somehow tighten the rules of engagement
And speaking of heads in the clouds…
… Transparent clouds. Compute this:
https://twitter.com/FreedomofPress/status/577667973294477312
The USA has a preponderance of fascist corporate whores running the country, not liberals or conservatives. Americans need to wake up that the citizenry are being played as saps by unethical politicians that use the people for the benefit of their global enablers.
Additionally the headlines “U.S. Threatened Germany Over Snowden Asylum” are deceptive. The Obama administration threatened Germany……NOT the USA.
REMEMBER: Clapper said it was “legal”…
Then years later we learned they stole encryption keys.
What is “legal” about stealing keys so as to gain entry and steal info all without a court order specifying the person and artifact to be searched? Let me guess, the court order making the original theft of encryption keys is lacking…
https://twitter.com/trevortimm/status/579344713926385664
TJustice
One of the few legal commentators with an actual backbone.
= = =
Agreed. However the bigger question remains, why? Where have they gone?
@Max-1
“TJustice
“One of the few legal commentators with an actual backbone.
“= = =
“Agreed. However the bigger question remains, why? Where have they gone?”
”
One of the reasons that Glenn G. or “Glenzilla,” as many of his more ardent followers refer to him 🙂 has “actual backbone” is that he made enough money as a practicing attorney to start his journalistic blog “Unclaimed Territory” independently of the financiers and editors of the corporate media, the public relations and propaganda ministry of the USG.
See Chomsky’s and Herman’s *Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media* or Robert McChesney’s *Corporate Media and the Threat to Democracy* among dozens of scholarly works on the manipulative and repressive political role of the corporate media in the US. For something immediately available on the subject, see “Media Manipulation” at http://www.globalissues.org/article/532/media-manipulation
As a long-term reader and commenter on his blog at Salon, I’ve observed the evolution of Glenn’s political orientation and I can tell you from much experience that he started out as a centrist Democrat with an essentially uncritical faith in the US electoral political system. With prodding from several of his readers and commenters, and friends, as well as from revelatory political events in the US, he became increasingly distanced from Democratic as well as from Republican politicians, and slowly but surely became, as we used to say in the 60s and 70s, “radicalized,” that is, aware of just how deeply corrupted the US political system is in its service of the 1% at the expense of the rest of us.
As to why there aren’t more journalists like him, most of them are financially dependent on their employers, the corporate media, which have consolidated into fewer and fewer news entities, and their work is censored by their editors as well as being self-censored by their internalization of their employers’ corporate political values or by their fear of being fired. There’s the additional influence on the quality of their work of the psychological factor described by Mark Twain, I think it was, who said, in effect, “Don’t expect someone to understand something that he’s being paid not to.”
Glenn is not the only journalist doing great work, of course, as Matt Taibbi, Jeremy Scahill, Amy Goodman, Juan Gonzalez, Chris Floyd, Arthur Silber and many others around the world too numerous to list come to mind. They’re all available for reading online, which is why the internet has such revolutionary potential for personal and political enlightenment..
mespo,
Nick’s just letting his homophobic misogynistic qualities shine…
The Intercept (First Look Media) recently reported that there is now a “Christian” Taliban in the Ukraine. That slippery slope of mission-creep appears to be boomeranging!
“Terrorist Watchlists – no just for Muslims anymore!”
What if Literary Masterpieces were written by different people:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_gaqvbIOKcY/VQ8EM5A2XJI/AAAAAAAAYak/2py4ajbC0Oo/s1600/muslim%2Bpoo.jpg
Winnie the Pooh written by a Muslim.
Part of the problem is we don’t have many leaders with the mental toughness and integrity of the Framers of the U.S. Constitution – overreacting from fear does not make one a tough guy.
The U.S. Constitution is a wartime charter designed for wartime and terrorism which survived the War of 1812 when the world’s then super-power, England, was invading a weak nation of the United States. Not being attacked by an enemy without a nation that could never take us over.
Our leaders today aren’t telling us “there is nothing to fear but fear itself” but are essentially saying “be afraid be very afraid” while they steal our Bill of Rights. Most of these stoking fear today are also profiting in some way from the “Fear & Division Industry”.
Snowden’s critics are disloyal and cowardly, not tough guys!
Hey!! We already missed out on the perfert opportuity to deal with this Snowden clown. We should have sent a couple of mercenaries to Russia during the Winter Games to snap this guys neck and leave him behind the road in USSR, hell now we should just revoke his citizenship and let him stay where ever he likes just not here,problem solved.
Post by Po almost longer than Po River. Chinggis solve problem by taking away all weapons from all sides. No bombs left except Liam Neeson movies. No guns left except Bibi guns.
Chinggis think USA press more slanted than Chinggis’ eyes.
Alright reporter, based on that logic of direct causality you just made my point. Israel’s rounding up of recently released Hamas members AS PART OF A DEAL in exchange for an Israeli soldier held prisoner, plus IDF incursions in Palestinian towns and homes, plus the shooting of unarmed fishermen plus the murder of teenage Palestinians were the direct cause of the rocket response.
Thank you, I owe you one.
I agree with Squeeky above. I travelled over there in Israel and even Gaza about two years ago on my scouting for my home Planet Remulak. The first thing the terrorist have on their mind is hate. The second thing is method. The third thing is method to their madness. Israel needs to cede Gaza to Egypt and make them be responsible for the mad people. Israel needs to ced about a fifth of the West Bank to Jordan and move all the so called Palestinians into Jordan. Before 1967 all those people in the West Bank were Jordans. The word “Palestinian” is a contrivance.