The World Says Yes to Snowden, No to Obama

Published on Wednesday, June 26, 2013 by Black Agenda Report

The World Says Yes to Snowden, No to Obama

by Margaret Kimberley

 

No one likes a bully and no one likes a liar. The United States government is surely both because other nations have no problem openly treating it with the disdain it deserves. The saga of Edward Snowden provides the latest proof of the disrespect that America has brought upon itself. Its tantrums and rants mean little to anyone outside of the USA bubble.

Snowden is the NSA whistle blower who presented proof to the world that the United States is a lawless nation which treats its own citizens as enemies. The response to his revelations proves that the American people have no friends in Washington, not in the White House or Congress or on either side of the political aisle.

  

(Photo: Steve Rhodes/ Flickr)

After making his revelations public Snowden headed for Hong Kong apparently in the mistaken belief that there he would be protected from extradition. When the United States decided to charge him and suspended his passport he flew to Russia and officially asked Ecuador for asylum. After angry denunciations from the secretary of state, senators and butt kissing so-called journalists, Russian president Vladimir Putin made all their points moot when he announced that Snowden will not be turned over. He reminded the United States that Snowden has broken no Russian laws and that there is no extradition treaty between the two countries. Not content to merely say no, Putin got in a few digs of his own. Emphasizing that he didn’t wish to discuss the matter further he said, “It’s like shearing a piglet. There’s a lot of squealing and very little wool.” 

The Chinese government was equally dismissive. After Secretary of State John Kerry issued public warnings of “negative consequences” to U.S./China relations, Chinese government spokeswoman Hua Chunying also got in her digs and reminded the United States that Snowden revealed evidence of American espionage directed at China.  “I’d like to advise these people to hold up a mirror, reflect and take care of their own situation first.” Ouch.

It is striking that both China and Russia allowed Snowden to travel despite the government’s very public requests to prevent him from doing so. Both countries were quite happy to give America a very public comeuppance. It isn’t actually very surprising considering the belligerence with which our government has behaved.

In 2011 the United States connived and got both China and Russia to agree to a no fly zone in Libya, only to turn the measure into a license to overthrow Gaddafi and have him killed. Both countries were made to look like fools but like all bullies the United States hopes that they won’t mind getting fooled twice and will go along with a similar scenario in Syria or any other place on earth where America chooses to act like a gangster nation.

All talk of reboot and rests are just that, mere talk. The U.S. goes out of its way to impede China’s inevitable rise to worldwide economic supremacy with the “pivot” that is a way to intimidate China with military force. Demands to turn over an American whistle blower consequently fell on deaf ears.

Unfortunately the lessons to be learned about the Snowden case are lost on a misinformed public. Americans haven’t even been given the most basic information about what Snowden has revealed or that the few members of congress who question the data sweep can’t reveal the nature of their concerns because the material they want to present is classified. When we should get genuine reporting we get derision and snark from “journalists” acting like mean kids in the high school clique.

Snowden may be thought of as heroic but isn’t necessary to idealize him in order to defend his actions. He is a whistle blower and prior to the Patriot Act and the Obama administration escalation of persecution, whistle blowers were protected. In 1971 Daniel Ellsberg released the classified pentagon papers to the New York Times but the Nixon administration had little legal recourse against him.

Armed with the Patriot Act and a determination to hit dissenters with the heaviest sledge hammer possible, the Obama administration threatens Bradley Manning with life in prison. One thing is absolutely certain. If Snowden hadn’t flown to Russia he would be facing the same terrible fate.

In its zeal to get another whistle blower the government didn’t even know how to use the traditional diplomatic niceties which are used to get business done. The harangues and threats had the opposite effect of making Snowden sympathetic and irritating nations already angry with American arrogance.

It isn’t clear if Snowden will ever get to another country or if he will spend his life at Moscow’s airport. Whatever the outcome of this particular case, it is clear that when America’s military might isn’t a factor it is treated with all the respect any pariah deserves.

© 2013 Black Agenda Report

Margaret Kimberley's Freedom Rider column appears weekly in BAR. Ms. Kimberley lives in New York City, and can be reached via e-Mail at Margaret.Kimberley(at)BlackAgendaReport.Com.

'Ich Bin ein Berliner': We Remember Kennedy: Obama is No Kennedy

International

'Ich Bin ein Berliner': An Indelible Memory of Kennedy's Speech

By Sophie Arts

 

Will McBride

 

In the summer of 1963 Kennedy came to the divided city of Berlin and spoke his famous words "Ich bin ein Berliner." Fifty years later, the visit of the 35th American president still shapes the city's collective memory.

Part 1: An Indelible Memory of Kennedy's Speech


A pair of slippers awaits visitors at the entrance of a cozy two-room apartment in Berlin's Westend district -- the kind one might expect in one of Berlin's many old palaces and villas. But those looking for any valuable antiques here will be disappointed. Instead, every inch of wall space is covered with old photographs. The centerpiece of the collection is a black-and-white shot of John F. Kennedy waving from an open limousine.

The day Werner Eckert took the snapshot is still vividly engrained in his mind. It was one of the most influential events of the 81 year old's life. On June 26, 1963, the 35th American president came to visit West Berlin in a demonstration of solidarity with the people living in the divided city.

"There was never anyone like Kennedy before," Eckert says, recalling the visit. "You had a feeling you could immediately become friends with him. He may have been the most powerful man in the world, but his charisma immediately made you lose any reservations."

Eckert, a former athlete and amateur boxer who looks nothing like his age, takes great pride in his small collection of Kennedy memorabilia. When Kennedy came to Berlin in 1963, the young Eckert earned a living delivering coffee to cafés across the city. The job gave the native Berliner the chance to slip through barriers erected for the state visit to see the president three times.

Goose Bumps and Tears
 
In addition to Eckert's private treasure chest, Berlin is also home to an official Kennedy museum. "The Kennedys" holds the world's largest collection of Kennedy memorabilia. Museum director Alina Heinze is only 32 and yet she can recite Kennedy's speech by heart.

Photo Gallery

• 
• 
• 

8  Photos

Photo Gallery: Kennedy's Visit in Pictures

 

"All free men, wherever they may live, are citizens of Berlin," Kennedy's voice booms from the speaker in his thick Boston accent. The speech plays in a continuous loop on a large screen. Many who witnessed the president's visit come to the museum to relive the historical experience. "They often sit in the film room with tears in their eyes," says Heinze. "I've seen the speech countless times, but it still gives me goose bumps every time."

Kennedy visited Berlin a half-century ago, but memories have never faded. Heinze herself grew up in Berlin hearing stories about the memorable day. Her parents, who were in high school at the time, also saw the president speak.
"You can ask anyone who was in Berlin back then if they saw Kennedy, and most will almost certainly answer with a yes," she says. Half of Berlin took to the streets to greet Kennedy, with estimates of the crowd ranging between 1 and 2 million.

"It was a 100 percent unanimous welcome parade," says historian John Provan, who recently published a book on Kennedy's trip to Germany. "I can't remember any event of such magnitude for one person to be welcomed by so many people."

'Things Just Clicked'
 
For many, last week's visit to Berlin by President Barack Obama reawakened memories of the historical day. But when one compares the two events, it also becomes clear just how much has changed over the past 50 years.

When Kennedy came to Berlin, the entire city was encouraged to welcome the president. School children were given the day off from school and many businesses remained closed. A half-million people flooded onto the square in front of Rathaus Schöneberg, the city hall for the Berlin district. Last week, Obama spoke in front of 4,000 handpicked guests -- many of them politicians. And whereas Kennedy allowed his open limousine to stop repeatedly so that he could shake hands with Berliners, Obama stood at the Brandenburg Gate behind bullet-proof glass. Today's security standards preclude the possibility of stirring mass events.

Politically, the presidents were at very different junctures. Kennedy came to the city under extraordinary circumstances. Practically overnight, the Eastern Bloc had started to build the wall in 1961 that would divide Berlin for almost 30 years, and only months later Russian and American tanks had faced off only months later at Checkpoint Charlie.

"We came closer to war than anyone of us wanted to realize," says Werner Eckert. "A world war that would have played out on German soil -- and that just 18 years after the war had ended. All these fears suddenly came alive again." Eckert lost his own father in World War II.

In addition, the traumatic experience of the Berlin blockade of 1949 was still fresh in many peoples' memories. For almost a year, Berlin residents had been completely cut off from West Germany. West Berlin was kept alive through the Americans' Berlin Airlift. Increasingly, however, the people of West Berlin feared the US might abandon the contested territory in order to prevent a confrontation with the Soviet Union.

"And then Kennedy came and said these words and they were just the right words to say," Heinze says. "I think it was a situation where Kennedy and the circumstances and the people just clicked."

Part 2: Kennedy's 'Pledge of Personal Reponsibility'

But it wasn't just Kennedy's famous line that enthralled Berliners at the time. Actress Anita Lochner says it was also the way Kennedy conveyed his emotional words. The daughter of a diplomat, Lochner came to Berlin as a young girl. Her father Robert was the director of RIAS, the radio station in the American-occupied sector of Berlin. During the state visit, he served as Kennedy's translator. Anita was 13 at the time. The president remained an important topic for the family for some years to come.

"Kennedy had a very special aura," she says. "There are some people who walk into a room and everybody is quiet and looks at them. That's the kind of person he was."

The teenage girl experienced that herself when she went to greet the president on the street on West Berlin's Clayallee, where the US had its diplomatic headquarters in the city. When the car stopped, she ran up with a group of American children and touched Kennedy's back. With tears in her eyes, she admitted to her mother later that day that she had fallen in love with the handsome president.

A Daring Move
 
"How strange it is," Jackie Kennedy wrote in a note to then Berlin mayor and future chancellor Willy Brandt after her husband's death. "Sometimes I think that the words of my husband that will be remembered most were words he did not even say in his own language."

It was only as Kennedy climbed the steps of the Schöneberg Rathaus and heard the roaring crowds that he decided to say the four words in German, Lochner recalls. "Then Kennedy and my father went into Willy Brandt's office to practice that and the rest is history," she says.

Kennedy's decision to change the speech was quite risky. After pushing a program of détente and peaceful outreach in his American University speech only two weeks earlier, Kennedy spoke some of the harshest words ever directed against the Russians in Berlin. Museum director Heinze believes that the shocking reality of the wall that separated families and homes truly saddened Kennedy. The fact that he changed his words after seeing this chilling view gives his speech a human touch, she says.

Military historian Provan believes that Kennedy had a gut feeling that this was the right thing to say. "Those four words underscored Kennedy's pledge of personal responsibility (to ensure Berlin's security and freedom)," Provan says. "He didn't say the US is a Berliner. He, as the leader of America and as a man, stood up for his political concept and actions. That's a daring move."

Today a note card written in Kennedy's handwriting still counts among the most cherished possessions at Berlin's Kennedy museum. Without it, the people of Berlin might never have figured out what the president was actually trying to say. In red ink and with phonetic spelling scrawled across the page, it reads: "Ish bin ein Bearleener."

World from Berlin: 'Do Costs of Hunting Terrorists Exceed Benefits?'

International

World from Berlin: 'Do Costs of Hunting Terrorists Exceed Benefits?'

 

AFP

Protesters in Berlin make reference to East Germany's Ministry for State Security, or Stasi, which engaged in massive surveillance of the populace.

Revelations that Britain has been expansively spying on German and European data has deepened a public debate over mass privacy violations. German editorialists argue that London and Washington have some explaining to do.

In Germany, a country with a long, troubled history of state surveillance, the revelation that British and American intelligence agencies have been spying en masse on European data communications has not gone over easily.

Last Friday, London's Guardian newspaper published the contents of leaked documents confirming that Britain's Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) and the American National Security Agency (NSA) have been tapping directly into fiber-optic cables to collect vast stores of information that they can then access as needed. Among these cables was the TAT-14, which carries a large share of data communication in and out of Germany, the German daily Süddeutsche Zeitung and public radio station NDR reported on Tuesday after viewing documents leaked by whistleblower Edward Snowden. 

 

According to media reports, neither the German government nor the country's foreign intelligence service, the BND, was apparently aware of the British surveillance operation, dubbed "Tempora," which was reportedly made possible with the cooperation of two telecommunications companies: Vodafone and British telecoms giant BT. Vodafone released a statement saying it abides by the laws of the countries in which it operates, but it declined to give further information, citing "national security." BT has refused to comment.

The ongoing surveillance controversy, which began last month following the disclosure of the NSA's Prism program, has been a heated topic in Germany, where the massive state surveillance of Communist East Germany is still present in the memories of many citizens.

The disclosures have spurred public debate about data protection, terrorism and changing notions of privacy in the Internet era. Concerns over the revelations about the NSA's activities threatened to overshadow US President Obama's visit to Berlin last week. And Snowden, the former NSA contractor who is now wanted by the American government on charges of espionage, is viewed almost uniformly here as a hero.

On Tuesday, German commentators reacted to the newest disclosures about the extent of surveillance on German communications. While some acknowledged the need for a degree of secrecy and surveillance, most insisted that the American and British intelligence agencies had overstepped their boundaries and were infringing on the civil liberties of German citizens.

Conservative daily Die Welt writes:

"Those in power -- not just for moral and ethical reasons, but also for reasons of efficiency -- must step in and do that which they find most difficult: They must exercise moderation and self-discipline. Since Sept. 11, 2001, standards have vanished in the US even as they have been strengthened elsewhere, such as in Germany. ... Such standards have to be reintroduced first and foremost via strict laws that are strong enough to win back trust, but also through parliamentary and public control and a reasonable analysis of costs and benefits."

"What may the state do and where does it need to control itself? And to what extent is it justifiable and democratically legitimate to ask citizens to abandon digital self-determination? The technical possibilities reach much further than do our moral capabilities."

Left-leaning Berliner Zeitung writes:

"The hero in this drama is undoubtedly Edward Snowden, this eloquent 30-year-old who is obviously equipped with a fine moral compass, as he has risked his entire future to uncover the activities of these intelligence agencies. ... The scale of the revelation is to some extent still unclear. First, there is the shocking invasion into the private spheres of billions of people and the abuse of the civil rights of large swaths of the global population. ... But the question remains under what rules a world is functioning, if every communication can be quite legally monitored on the basis of stricter terrorism laws."

Center-right Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung writes:

"The citizens of a democratic state must have confidence that certain agreed to rules are also adhered to. These days, 'data protection' is treated more like a bureaucratic chore, and not something that pertains to human dignity. But there is also an internationally guaranteed right to privacy and to the protection of the core area of our private lives against arbitrary interference by the state. ... This applies in particular to Continental Europe and especially Germany, which has had extensive experience with totalitarian regimes and where the East German Stasi on any given day opened more than 100,000 letters and packages."

"The German government has done well to begin by asking for an explanation from the involved parties, which now includes the British, who are, after all, bound by European law. It would certainly be naïve to expect complete openness. And the fact, pointed out by Obama, that attacks have been thwarted by the surveillance programs, even here in Germany, is certainly in some cases a good justification. But when the fundamental rights of German and European citizens are being comprehensively infringed on, it is a matter of course to ask that certain standards be adhered to."

Business daily Handelsblatt writes:

"US politicians are furious. They say that the revelations damage their country. And that is true. Just not quite in the way they claim. The conduct of their secret service agencies hurts the US much more than does Snowden. The surveillance regime destroys that which is referred to as America's 'soft power:' the magnetism of the ideals that the country embodies. America's superpower status is not based solely on its military might and the power of economic sanctions. Rather, it is also based on the allure of freedom and civil rights."

"The Bush era left behind deep cracks in this pillar of power. Obama wanted to repair the damage, but his efforts are rendered moot by the data siphoning system. Instead of expending so much energy on trying to drag Snowden into a court of law, America should focus on this simple question: Do the costs of the way it hunts terrorists exceed the benefits?"

Center-left Süddeutsche Zeitung writes:

"Sept. 11, 2001, deeply changed the United States. The fear of new terrorist acts still haunts most people and virtually all of those responsible in Washington. In their view, the NSA's boundless spying is necessary. The people are prepared to forfeit some of their beloved freedom in exchange for the feeling of greater security." 

 

"But governments do not have the right to conceal broad lines of policy. President Obama is operating according to an odd maxim: I am doing a lot of the same things that George W. Bush did, but you can trust me because I am the one doing it. Not even Obama is deserving of that much trust."

"There are three lessons that can be drawn from the Snowden case. America, but also some of its allies, are keeping too much under surveillance, keeping too much secret and they haven't found an appropriate means for dealing with those who expose such excesses. There is something deeply wrong when a whistleblower has to rely on the goodwill of China or Ecuadorean President Rafael Correa to find safe haven."

- SPIEGEL ONLINE Staff

Global 'Bully': As Snowden Seeks Asylum, Critics Blast US for Manhunt

Published on Monday, June 24, 2013 by Common Dreams

Global 'Bully': As Snowden Seeks Asylum, Critics Blast US for Manhunt

'Massive Worldwide Surveillance System' should be the story, not whereabouts of the man who exposed it

- Jon Queally, staff writer 

 

 

As Edward Snowden's quest for political asylum plays out as a global cat-and-mouse chase, defenders of international law say the US is acting the bully as it scrambles to locate and gain custody of the 30-year-old NSA whistleblower.


 

 Though his whereabouts remained unknown Monday, supporters of Snowden say that the US government's aggressive pursuit of the confessed NSA whistleblower—and the mainstream media's fixation on him and not the information he has delivered to the global public regarding a "massive worldwide surveillance system"—is what should most trouble those concerned about privacy, international law and civil liberties.

"The US is doing everything they can do to interfere with [Snowden's effort to gain asylum]," said Michael Ratner, president emeritus of the Center for Constitutional Rights and a lawyer with expertise in international law, during a press call with journalists on Monday. "They're bullying countries all over the world, even where they have no basis for doing so... Bullying them essentially so that they can get Ed Snowden rendered to the United States where he can be prosecuted."


Pushing back against government statements characterizing Snowden as a "criminal" "traitor" or "fugitive of justice," Ratner said the whistleblower "is not a fugitive in any sense of the word" and that there is "an important and legal basis for Ed Snowden's application for asylum" abroad.

"The Obama administration was not given a mandate by the people of the US to hack and spy upon the entire world, to abridge the US constitution or the laws of others nations." -Julian Assange, Wikileaks

Responding to comments made by US Secretary of State John Kerry and the White House warning others countries to hand over Snowden, Wikileaks founder Julian Assange blasted the Obama administration's response to the situation.

"The US secretary of state is wrong in law," said Assange. He added, "The Obama administration was not given a mandate by the people of the US to hack and spy upon the entire world, to abridge the US constitution or the laws of others nations."

"It reflects poorly on the U.S. administration, and no self-respecting country would submit to such interference or such bullying by the U.S. in this matter," he said.

Though many in the corporate US news media have been quick to follow the US government's line that Snowden should be considered a "traitor" for his release of documents that expose details of the NSA's vast spying apparatus to the US and global public, Ratner said that Snowden's actions were underpinned by a clear political motive and are therefore protected under international law.
Ratner stressed that when it comes to international law, "asylum trumps extradition" meaning that even if Russia, Ecuador, or other nations have a bilateral extradition agreement for criminal offenders, it does not necessarily mean that those countries are obligated to hand over a person seeking political asylum, especially one who has reasonable fear he will not be treated equitably or fairly by his home country's justice system.

"There's no international arrest warrant that we know of," said Ratner, arguing that Snowden's alleged crimes "are classic political crimes under the extradition treaty" and that the US' efforts should be seen as a large, powerful saying to other countries 'Send him here' when, in fact, there's "no legal basis for it."

The ongoing and aggressive attempt to extradite Snowden, added Assange, "further demonstrates the breakdown in the rule of law by the Obama administration."

Under the United Nations' Refugee Convention, Snowden would qualify for protection as someone who fears "being persecuted for political opinion," said Ratner.

"What we should be discussing, unlike what seems the attention primarily in the media right now—Where's Ed Snowden? What country is he going to?—is the massive surveillance system being carried out by the US, the UK, and perhaps other countries all over the world and the violations of rights of people all over the world." -Michael Ratner, Center for Constitutional Rights

From a press conference in Hanoi, Vietnam on Monday, Ecuador's foreign minister Ricardo Patino read from Snowden's asylum application letter in which Snowden himself discussed why we was taking such lengths to avoid US authorities.

"I have been accused of being a traitor" and "there have been calls for me to be executed or imprisoned," the letter from Snowden said. In addition, he said it would be "unlikely" that he would receive "a fair trial or humane treatment" if returned to the US.

Because the US is charging Snowden under the Espionage Act, says law professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law's Marjorie Cohn, Snowden has "a well-founded fear of persecution in the US."

And citing the treatment of another well-known whistleblower, Pfc. Bradley Manning, Cohn suggests Snowden can "probably make a good case for political asylum in Ecuador."

Norman Solomon, whose group Roots Action is circulating a petition calling the Obama administration to keep its "hands off" Snowden, decried the diplomatic bullying described by Ratner and others.

"The same government that continues to expand its invasive dragnet of surveillance, all over the United States and the rest of the world," Solomon wrote on Common Dreams, "is now asserting its prerogative to drag Snowden back to the USA from anywhere on the planet. It’s not only about punishing him and discouraging other potential whistleblowers. Top U.S. officials are also determined to—quite literally—silence Snowden’s voice, as Bradley Manning’s voice has been nearly silenced behind prison walls."

He continued, “Those at the top of the U.S. government insist that Edward Snowden and Bradley Manning have betrayed it. But that’s backward. Putting its money on vast secrecy and military violence instead of democracy, the government has betrayed Snowden and Manning and the rest of us.”

In addition to the petition effort by Roots Action, more than 113,000 people as of Monday afternoon had signed a petition on the White House website calling for President Obama to pardon Snowden.

"To charge Snowden with espionage is a severe form of political persecution." -Mark Weisbrot, CEPR

"Edward Snowden is a national hero and should be immediately issued a full, free, and absolute pardon for any crimes he has committed or may have committed related to blowing the whistle on secret NSA surveillance programs," the petition read.

Though the petition received a large enough number of signers to mandate an official response from the White House, the president is not likely to heed its urging.

That leaves Ecuador the most likely candidate candidate to offer asylum to Snowden, though its been reported that he's considering applications for other countries as well.

Mark Weisbrot, an expert on Latin America and co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, was pointed in why supporters of the public's right to know should support both Snowden and the country—whether Ecuador or another—if and when they grant Snowden political asylum.

“It is important that everyone who believes in freedom to defend Ecuador from Washington’s threats, which are very likely if the Ecuadorean government grants asylum to Snowden," said Weisbrot. "Other governments around the world – whose citizens’ rights have been violated by NSA surveillance overreach – should stand behind Ecuador if it chooses to grant Snowden asylum, as should NGO’s. To charge Snowden with espionage is a severe form of political persecution."

In the end, while the intrigue over Snowden's whereabouts and the question over whether or not he is captured by the US or receives safe passage to a country willing to protect him, Ratner was among the many commentators in the progressive community on Monday who were concerned that the focus on Snowden as an individual was partially thwarting the bigger and more important story about the contents of what Snowden's actions have revealed.
"What we should be discussing, unlike what seems the attention primarily in the media right now—Where's Ed Snowden? What country is he going to?—is the massive surveillance system being carried out by the US, the UK, and perhaps other countries all over the world and the violations of rights of people all over the world," Ratner said.

Ratner blasted the media's fixation on Snowden—his whereabouts, whether he's a "traitor" or not, and other aspects of his personal life that were a distraction to the real story which according to Ratner is the existence of a "massive worldwide surveillance system."
And as Solomon concluded:

Top policymakers in Washington seem bent on running as much of the world as possible. Their pursuit of Edward Snowden has evolved into a frenzied rage.

Those at the top of the U.S. government insist that Edward Snowden and Bradley Manning have betrayed it. But that’s backward. Putting its money on vast secrecy and military violence instead of democracy, the government has betrayed Snowden and Manning and the rest of us.

________________________________________________

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License