Former CIA and NSA employee source of intelligence leaks

[citizen k]

Germany ends Cold War spying pact with US, Britain

BERLIN (AP) — Germany canceled a Cold War-era surveillance pact with the United States and Britain on Friday in response to revelations by National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden about those countries' alleged electronic eavesdropping operations.

The move appeared largely symbolic, designed to show that the German government was taking action to stop unwarranted surveillance directed against its citizens without actually jeopardizing relations with Washington and London. With weeks to go before national elections, opposition parties had seized on Snowden's claim that Germany was complicit in the NSA's intelligence-gathering operations.

Government officials have insisted that U.S. and British intelligence were never given permission to break Germany's strict privacy laws. But they conceded last month that an agreement dating back to the late 1960s gave the U.S., Britain and France the right to request German authorities to conduct surveillance operations within Germany to protect their troops stationed there.

"The cancellation of the administrative agreements, which we have pushed for in recent weeks, is a necessary and proper consequence of the recent debate about protecting personal privacy," Germany's Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle said in a statement.

British Foreign Office brushed off the significance of the German move. "It's a loose end from a previous era which is right to tie up," the Foreign Office said in a statement, noting that the agreement had not been used since 1990.

A spokeswoman for the U.S. embassy in Berlin, Ruth Bennett, confirmed that the agreement had been canceled but declined to comment further on the issue.

A German official, speaking on condition of anonymity, also said the cancellation would have little practical consequences.

He said the agreement had not been invoked since the end of the Cold War and would have no impact on current intelligence cooperation between Germany and its NATO allies. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because he wasn't authorized to publicly discuss the issue.

Germany is currently in talks with France to cancel its part of the agreement as well.

Public reaction in Germany to Snowden's revelations was particularly strong, with civil rights campaigners recalling the mass surveillance carried out by secret police in communist East Germany and during the Nazi era. Chancellor Angela Merkel went so far as to raise the issue of alleged NSA spying with President Barack Obama when he visited Berlin in June.

"The government needs to do something to show voters it's taking the issue seriously," said Henning Riecke of the German Council on Foreign Relations, a Berlin-based think tank. "Ending an agreement made in the pre-Internet age gives the Germans a chance to show they're doing something, and at the same time the Americans know it's not going to hurt them. Given the good relations between the intelligence agencies, they'll get the information they need anyway."

According to Snowden, Germany has been a particular focus on U.S. intelligence gathering operations in recent years. Several of those who plotted and carried out the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks in the United States had lived in Germany.

In March 2011, two U.S. Air Force members were killed and two wounded when a gunman from Kosovo fired on a military bus at Frankfurt International Airport. The gunman told police he was motivated by anger over the U.S.-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

http://news.yahoo.com/germany-ends-cold-war-spying-pact-us-britain-145752116.html

[11B4V]

That's what they want you to think. Bullshit.

[sbr]

What's what who wants us to believe?

[jimmy olsen]

The backlash is gaining steam!

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-and-centers/polling-institute/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=1919

July 10, 2013 - U.S. Voters Say Snowden Is Whistle-Blower, Not Traitor, Quinnipiac University National Poll Finds; Big Shift On Civil Liberties vs. Counter-Terrorism

American voters say 55 - 34 percent that Edward Snowden is a whistle-blower, rather than a traitor, according to a Quinnipiac University national poll released today.

In a massive shift in attitudes, voters say 45 - 40 percent the government's anti-terrorism efforts go too far restricting civil liberties, a reversal from a January 14, 2010, survey by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University when voters said 63 - 25 percent that such activities didn't go far enough to adequately protect the country.

Almost every party, gender, income, education, age and income group regards Snowden as a whistle-blower rather than a traitor. The lone exception is black voters, with 43 percent calling him a traitor and 42 percent calling him a whistle-blower.

There is a gender gap on counter-terrorism efforts as men say 54 - 34 percent they have gone too far and women say 47 - 36 percent they have not gone far enough. There is little difference among Democrats and Republicans who are about evenly divided. Independent voters say 49 - 36 percent that counter-terrorism measures have gone too far.

Some of the largest growth in those concerned about the threat to civil liberties is among men and Republicans, groups historically more likely to be supportive of governmental anti- terrorism efforts.

"The massive swing in public opinion about civil liberties and governmental anti- terrorism efforts, and the public view that Edward Snowden is more whistle-blower than traitor are the public reaction and apparent shock at the extent to which the government has gone in trying to prevent future terrorist incidents," said Peter Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.

"The fact that there is little difference now along party lines about the overall anti- terrorism effort and civil liberties and about Snowden is in itself unusual in a country sharply divided along political lines about almost everything. Moreover, the verdict that Snowden is not a traitor goes against almost the unified view of the nation's political establishment."

When Quinnipiac University asked voters in January, 2010, whether they thought the government had gone too far restricting civil liberties or not gone far enough to protect the country, not more than 35 percent of any demographic group thought it had gone too far. Then, Republicans said not far enough 72 - 17 percent; today GOP voters say not far enough 46 - 41 percent. Democrats went from not far enough 57 - 29 percent to too far 43 - 42 percent. Men went from 61 - 28 percent not far enough to 54 - 34 percent too far. Women went from 64 - 22 not far enough to 47 - 36 percent not far enough.

"The change in public attitudes has been extraordinary, almost across the board and obviously not just related to the revelation of the phone-scanning program, given all that has transpired since 2010," said Brown. "Yet it would be naive to see these numbers as anything but evidence of a rethinking by the public about the tradeoffs between security and freedom."

While voters support the phone-scanning program 51 - 45 percent and say 54 - 40 percent that it "is necessary to keep Americans safe," they also say 53 - 44 percent that the program "is too much intrusion into Americans' personal privacy."

"Americans' views on anti-terrorism efforts are complicated," said Brown. "They see the threat from terrorism as real and worth defending against, but they have a sense that their privacy is being invaded and they are not happy about it at all."

From June 28 - July 8, Quinnipiac University surveyed 2,014 registered voters with a margin of error of +/- 2.2 percentage points. Live interviewers call land lines and cell phones.

The Quinnipiac University Poll, directed by Douglas Schwartz, Ph.D., conducts public opinion surveys in Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Florida, Ohio, Virginia, Iowa, Colorado and the nation as a public service and for research.

For more information, visit http://www.quinnipiac.edu/polling, call (203) 582-5201, or follow us on Twitter.

[CountDeMoney]

Fuck off.

[The Minsky Moment]

Almost every party, gender, income, education, age and income group regards Snowden as a whistle-blower rather than a traitor. The lone exception is black voters, with 43 percent calling him a traitor and 42 percent calling him a whistle-blower.

This is what I don't get.  What is going on with white folks these days?

What kind of whisteblower packs up his evidence and heads to that beacon of liberty . . . the PRC?  And when it turns out even they have standards, his next move is to try Cuba by way of Russia?

[Valmy]

Probably one who doesn't want to be Bradley Manning?

The fact of the matter is Snowden is actually producing results, we are getting political movement on this, when before the efforts of hardworking Senators and Congresspeople were being ignored and marginalized.  So whether he goes to Russia or the moon, zero shits given as far as I am concerned.

[mongers]

Probably one who doesn't want to be Bradley Manning?

The fact of the matter is Snowden is actually producing results, we are getting political movement on this, when before the efforts of hardworking Senators and Congresspeople were being ignored and marginalized.  So whether he goes to Russia or the moon, zero shits given as far as I am concerned.

So you're broadly in favour of what he did, the benefits of bringing this surveillance to light and public debate, out-weighing intelligence loses ?

[grumbler]

The fact of the matter is Snowden is actually producing results, we are getting political movement on this, when before the efforts of hardworking Senators and Congresspeople were being ignored and marginalized.  So whether he goes to Russia or the moon, zero shits given as far as I am concerned.

I haven't seen the political movement you have.  No new laws, no new commissions, no real swings in public opinion (other that one based on a report from a rather dubious source at Quinnipiac University that compared July 2013 data to Jan 2010 data - three years before Snowden - to get its "big swing).  The question "is Snowden more of a traitor, or more of a whistle-blower" doesn't seem particularly useful, either.  I don't think he is much of either, myself.

[The Brain]

Bacon of liberty.

[garbon]

Bacon of liberty.

FREE BACON!

[CountDeMoney]

I haven't seen the political movement you have.  No new laws, no new commissions, no real swings in public opinion (other that one based on a report from a rather dubious source at Quinnipiac University that compared July 2013 data to Jan 2010 data - three years before Snowden - to get its "big swing).  The question "is Snowden more of a traitor, or more of a whistle-blower" doesn't seem particularly useful, either.  I don't think he is much of either, myself.

Yeah, he's really not a traitor in the legal sense, just a law breaker.  And he's not a whistle blower by that particular definition, either.  He's just a self-absorbed Millennial hipster high school dropout with some PowerPoints about things that, if people were paying attention for the last 10 years, they'd know existed anyway.   And I doubt any "revelations" he delivers will result in some sort of new Church Commission.

His importance is magnified by the 24 hour news cycle, and himself.

[garbon]

I haven't seen the political movement you have.  No new laws, no new commissions, no real swings in public opinion (other that one based on a report from a rather dubious source at Quinnipiac University that compared July 2013 data to Jan 2010 data - three years before Snowden - to get its "big swing).  The question "is Snowden more of a traitor, or more of a whistle-blower" doesn't seem particularly useful, either.  I don't think he is much of either, myself.

Yeah, he's really not a traitor in the legal sense, just a law breaker.  And he's not a whistle blower by that particular definition, either.  He's just a self-absorbed Millennial hipster high school dropout with some PowerPoints about things that, if people were paying attention for the last 10 years, they'd know existed anyway.   And I doubt any "revelations" he delivers will result in some sort of new Church Commission.

His importance is magnified by the 24 hour news cycle, and himself.

[Valmy]

Probably one who doesn't want to be Bradley Manning?

The fact of the matter is Snowden is actually producing results, we are getting political movement on this, when before the efforts of hardworking Senators and Congresspeople were being ignored and marginalized.  So whether he goes to Russia or the moon, zero shits given as far as I am concerned.

So you're broadly in favour of what he did, the benefits of bringing this surveillance to light and public debate, out-weighing intelligence loses ?

My hope is that we can get the tide turned back the other way and be able to debate these sorts of things.  I think we have the momentum in our direction and Snowden, and the Guardian, have a big part to play in that.  Now whether Snowden is an admirable guy or whether the intelligence losses are vital I am not sure, I think that is still up in the air.  The real lesson is you cannot just make huge policy decisions like this involving the American people on the executive level and silence all debate about it via secrecy.  That strikes me as taking executive privilege too far and the sort of thinking that will lead to more leakers.

So I guess I hope the political process results in a new consensus in intelligence gathering that re-assures all of our Constitutional scruples and makes unfortunate things like these big leaks unnecessary and something we can all condemn.

[The Minsky Moment]

Probably one who doesn't want to be Bradley Manning?

The fact of the matter is Snowden is actually producing results, we are getting political movement on this, when before the efforts of hardworking Senators and Congresspeople were being ignored and marginalized. 

I agree there are hardworking Senators and Reps who are concerned about these issues.  Which raises the questions why the "whistleblowers" didn't come to them in the first instance as opposed to that moral giant of our era, Julian Assange, or the HK correspondence bureau of the Guardian.