Message from Moscow
Locked
12
12
 
|
A high ranking German politician has spoken with Edward Snowden in Moscow. Here is the letter he brought back: http://www.spiegel.de/media/media-32616.pdf -J. Sent from Android ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
|
Any chance Germany will give Snowden asylum, Jochen?
On Nov 1, 2013, at 9:04 AM, Jochen Fromm <[hidden email]> wrote:
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Jochen Fromm-5
On 11/01/2013 06:04 AM, Jochen Fromm wrote:
> A high ranking German politician has spoken with Edward Snowden in Moscow. Here is the letter he brought back: > http://www.spiegel.de/media/media-32616.pdf "I am confident that with the support of the international community, the government of the United States will abandon this harmful behavior." This is one of: rhetorical, hopelessly optimistic, or disingenuous ... or perhaps some combination of the three. I got this in the mail this morning: Secretary of State Kerry: Reinstate Edward Snowden’s passport! http://act.rootsaction.org/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=8711 But I'm having trouble imagining that he'll ever get his passport back or be treated as anything other than a traitor here. ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
|
Snowden's supervisors should be arrested for dereliction of duty. Oh, but I forgot, anarcho-capitalism teaches that government employees, including military officers, can never be competent, effective, or preferable to profit-driven and self-interested contractors. Even in matters of espionage.
BTW, I will make clear that some of what Snowden revealed about privacy violationsl was reasonable to whistle blow on and these disclosures will benefit the public. ---- Pat On Friday, November 1, 2013, glen wrote: On 11/01/2013 06:04 AM, Jochen Fromm wrote: -- The information contained in this transmission may contain privileged and confidential information. It is intended only for the use of the person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or duplication of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. To reply to our email administrator directly, please send an email to [hidden email]. ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by glen ropella
The whole thing (Snowden's disclosures and the fallout from it) is
riddled with half-truths and misplaced strong rhetoric... I mean the whole situation, not just Snowden's statements... his are perhaps the *least* egregious but egregious nonetheless. He tries to paint his patently *illegal acts* (disclosing classified information) as "political speech". I am very sympathetic with his motives and grant him the moral right/unction to do what he did, but not because doing so was not technically illegal. What he did was technically illegal. In fact, that is what makes it so powerful... he may have done "the very right thing" against the rule of law and with the threat of dire consequences. It is up to those who the law represents (we the citizens of the US) to respond by fitting his acts into the framework of our collective morality as well as our laws. The challenge is either how to *pardon* his illegal acts based on their presumed "greater good" or to find a way to change the laws so that there *is* a way for him to have "done the right thing" without breaking the law and bringing down the wrath of the US Security apparatus. On the other side, (roughly the "side" presented by officials of the US gov't right up to President Obama) the rhetoric is unforgiving. It does not acknowledge even the possibility that Snowden's "outside the law" acts were anything but traitorous cowardy. I think to most, this is patently not true. While the allegations that Snowden might have acted from egotistical and naive motives, I don't think many really can believe that he was honestly trying to harm the US citizenry. Quite the opposite, even if he might have been misguided (and I don't concede he was), he was *trying* to help the US citizenry, specifically against rogue behaviour by our government. I am thankful that the world leaders, the world population including much of the US, have stood up in shock and outrage in response to the revelations, no matter how they came about. While it may be obvious that any security/intelligence apparatus *wants* total information awareness about everyone, friend or foe, and that it is natural for them to believe that they can do their jobs more effectively, it is NOT obvious that the tradeoff is worth it. It is also not obvious in the least that just because such organizations want and seek that kind of power, that they are granted that level of power by our laws. Even the Patriot Act and FISA didn't expand their powers that entirely and it seems clear to me that the public debate *will* lead to severe curtailment even of those laws and possibly others which may represent "loopholes" in privacy. I'm glad Snowden did what he did, roughly the way he did it. I may be proven wrong, but he is likely to go down as a martyr if not a hero and the US and the world will likely be a better place for his actions. He may have to suffer for his actions, but that is the definition of "hope" that I subscribe to: "doing the right thing, whether you think it will turn out well or not". >> A high ranking German politician has spoken with Edward Snowden in >> Moscow. Here is the letter he brought back: >> http://www.spiegel.de/media/media-32616.pdf > > "I am confident that with the support of the international community, > the government of the United States will abandon this harmful behavior." > > This is one of: rhetorical, hopelessly optimistic, or disingenuous ... > or perhaps some combination of the three. I got this in the mail this > morning: > > Secretary of State Kerry: Reinstate Edward Snowden’s passport! > http://act.rootsaction.org/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=8711 > > But I'm having trouble imagining that he'll ever get his passport back > or be treated as anything other than a traitor here. > > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
|
I'd have much more respect for him if he'd stayed in the US and accepted the attendant risks acting on his ideals.
On Friday, November 1, 2013, Steve Smith wrote: The whole thing (Snowden's disclosures and the fallout from it) is riddled with half-truths and misplaced strong rhetoric... I mean the whole situation, not just Snowden's statements... his are perhaps the *least* egregious but egregious nonetheless. -- The information contained in this transmission may contain privileged and confidential information. It is intended only for the use of the person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or duplication of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. To reply to our email administrator directly, please send an email to [hidden email]. ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
|
On 11/1/13 10:55 AM, Patrick Reilly
wrote:
I'd have much more respect for him if he'd stayed in the US and accepted the attendant risks acting on his ideals.Barring that, I'd have more respect for him if he would be (yet more) clear that he understood that what he was doing was illegal, not just something "daddy might spank me for". I think he *is* clear on that but the nature of his public statements tend to obscure that I think. He can still offer to return to the US and the control of the US legal system... but maybe not quite yet? When is a good time? On the opposite side, I'd respect our intelligence folks and our administration more if they would say something like: "What he did was illegal, but we acknowledge that his disclosures do not appear to substantialy harm national security. There are aspects of what he disclosed which are important for the public to know about and despite the unfortunate way these things came to light, we are ready to accept public and congressional scrutiny that might have been lacking before these disclosures. We do not condone cowboy vigilante actions but we do understand that there is a legitimate role for whistleblowers and we need to take that into account"I'm not holding my breath, however. - Steve ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
|
http://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/nov/01/snowden-nsa-files-surveillance-revelations-decoded
Why does the conversation always hinge on Snowden's morality? We all knew the US government is rotten -- so no news there? But an individual breaking an oath to hide this fact -- that is news? How dare he reveal what we all knew was likely the case? Snowden was well aware of how whistleblowers are treated in the US http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Andrews_Drake, specifically with character assassination, legal prosecution, and physical and psychological intimidation. Why exactly would it be more honorable to sacrifice himself ineffectually? It seems the manner he chose got his message out and he has been able to continue to shape and argue his case. Something he would not likely have been able to do had he given himself up to the US's prison system that allows for punitive isolation, something he would likely have received to protect us, his victims, from any more of his dangerous ideas and information. --joshua ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
|
S'funny - I thought the Right celebrated illegal acts of political
protest. Remember the Boston TEA PARTY?
On 11/1/13 12:07 PM, Joshua Thorp
wrote:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/nov/01/snowden-nsa-files-surveillance-revelations-decoded ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
|
Well, One must admit that the original Tea Party acted in disguise and didn't stick around to get arrested.
On Friday, November 1, 2013, Grant Holland wrote:
-- The information contained in this transmission may contain privileged and confidential information. It is intended only for the use of the person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or duplication of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. To reply to our email administrator directly, please send an email to [hidden email]. ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Pamela McCorduck
Good question, Pamela. I don't know. Yes, there is a chance. At the moment probably not, the pressure from the US is too strong, but the situation is about to change slowly. The German government already denied asylum to Snowden a few months ago. Now the situation has changed, though. The Chancellor has been reelected and a new government is about to be formed. If the Green party would rule, I think asylum would be granted immediately. The Green party is like the political arm of Greenpeace, it is strongly against any kind of war, environmental pollution or nuclear energy. They support nonviolence, social justice, sustainable development and renewable energy. And by the way it is my favorite party. Unfortunately they are probably not part of the government this time, although they got 8.4% of the votes in the federal election. Hans-Christian Ströbele who visited Edward Snowden is a leading member of this party, and he also is the longest serving member of the Parliamentary Control Panel, the part of Germany's parliament which supervises the intelligence agencies. The ruling conservative party is tradtionally in favor of strong trans-atlantic relationships, but the recent revelations have changed a lot. Until now, the German government seems to have thought they could trust the American government, at least to a certain degree. That trust is largely gone. When she learned that US intelligence agencies tapped and monitored her cell phone for years and decades, chancellor Angela Merkel was really upset and angry. She uses her phone quite frequently, and she is still deeply disappointed and frustrated. As a first step, I have heard she is currently preparing a UN resolution together with Brazilian president Dilma Rousseff against spying and snooping on the Internet. But I believe the anger and frustration is still not strong enough to act against the interests of the US, which has issued a warrant for Snowden's arrest. I wonder what will happen if it goes on like this. Will the European governments finally change their mind about the US? Or will something change in the US? I am currently reading "The last train from Berlin" from Howard K. Smith, where he describes life in Germany at the time of WWII. He says the Third Reich was like a rotten apple with a thick, shiny skin. The skin that's the army, the military, and the secret state police. The core that's the society, the infrastructure, the cities and the economy. America under the Bush administration started to look like this, a rotten apple which looks shiny on the outside, but bad within. Impressive aircraft carriers in the Persian Gulf, but rotten cities like Detroit at home. I wonder if Obama can really change anything/something for the better. I think he can. Jochen On 11/01/2013 03:13 PM, Pamela McCorduck wrote: Any chance Germany will give Snowden asylum, Jochen? ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Grant Holland
S'funny - I thought the Right celebrated illegal acts of political protest. Remember the Boston TEA PARTY?My wife tells the story of when she first learned to read and cried for hours because she saw there was a (Tea) Party on the calendar and she wasn't invited.
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Pamela McCorduck
Why would he want asylum in Germany? Not that that might not be
spiffy from some perspectives, but still....
Nice letter, with the font and all. Diplomatically says, no, would have to be insane to take you up on your kind offer. Might be fun to have a beer in Munich someday, but you know how it is. Yours, etc, etc.... Really, what did said German politician think would happen? C. On 11/1/13 8:13 AM, Pamela McCorduck
wrote:
Any chance Germany will give Snowden asylum, Jochen? ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
|
His asylum in Russia is temporary, it is limited to a year. He would like to get asylum in a western country. And most of all he would like to testify before members of the US congress. From what I have read today, it is legally possible that the German government denies the extradition to the US if he comes to Germany. You know the whole affair makes big waves here. The majority of Germans sees Snowden as a hero, and not as a traitor. Because of their troubled history, the Germans are sensitive to any form of surveillance and spying on the own people. We had a massive secret state police at least two times, first in Nazi Germany (SS & "Gestapo", Geheime Staatspolizei) and second in Eastern Germany during communism ("Stasi", Staatssicherheit). Other countries are sensitive to different issues, our neighbor Poland for instance still discusses the causes for the crash of the Polish Air Force Tu-154, where president Lech Kaczyński and many other people were killed. The general public opinion here is that we don't want any form of state surveillance as it occurred during fascism and communism. The people should control the secret agencies, and not the other way round. Therefore it is not surprising that the politician of the German government who is the responsible for the secret agencies - the current head of the chancellery - is not very popular in the general public. I think the German politician who spoke with Snowden really wanted to know what he knows. And he is a bit angry at the chancellery and the head of the chancellery, which is responsible for the German intelligence agencies. He said there have been at least four meetings of the parliamentary control panel in the course of the NSA affair, and he has not got any useful information in them. In other words the part of the parliament which is responsible for the supervision of the German intelligence agencies does not really know what these agencies are doing. We know that government agencies and public authorities are usually only effective when it comes to vacation tricks and coffee making, however they should not be allowed to do anything which is technically feasible. Luckily we have still some politicians who don't give up if it becomes difficult or uncomfortable. -Jochen On 11/02/2013 05:38 AM, Carl Tollander wrote: Why would he want asylum in Germany? Not that that might not be spiffy from some perspectives, but still.... ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
Administrator
|
Everybody who cares to: sign the petition. -- Owen On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 8:05 AM, Jochen Fromm <[hidden email]> wrote:
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Jochen Fromm-5
My understanding is that it is renewable each year.
There is no particular evidence that his politics are especially "green". Has he said he would especially like to get asylum in a 'western' country? Why would he risk going someplace new based on a promise of what is "legally possible"? Does it get him home or some other place he wants to get back to under more favorable conditions? C. On 11/2/13 8:05 AM, Jochen Fromm wrote:
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Joshua Thorp
I agree with Joshua. All this biz about being honorable is fine when the other side is too. But we have so much evidence that it isn't.
I'm getting some shocking (though unverifiable by me) reports on how the FBI has been treating "friends of friends" of the two Boston Marathon bombers. We know one such "friend" was shot dead (very mysteriously) in Florida; the other reports aren't reassuring. On Nov 1, 2013, at 2:07 PM, Joshua Thorp <[hidden email]> wrote:
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
|
Good argument. Still, if one elected heroism, one should act a bit heroically . . .
On Sunday, November 3, 2013, Pamela McCorduck wrote:
-- The information contained in this transmission may contain privileged and confidential information. It is intended only for the use of the person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or duplication of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. To reply to our email administrator directly, please send an email to [hidden email]. ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Jochen Fromm-5
Thanks for your thoughtful reply, Jochen. If I were Frau Merkel, I'd be damned mad myself. As today's NY Times put it, the National Security Agency "emerges as an electronic omnivore of staggering capabilities, eavesdropping and hacking its way around the world to strip governments and other targets of their secrets, all the while enforcing the utmost secrecy about its own operations. It spies routinely on friends as well as foes, as has become obvious in recent weeks; the agency's official mission list includes using its surveillance to achieve "diplomatic advantage" over such allies as France and Germany and "economic advantage" over Japan and Brazil, among other countries."
So the atmosphere is changing in the U.S. too. I quoted from a front page article, not an editorial. Pamela On Nov 1, 2013, at 5:54 PM, Jochen Fromm <[hidden email]> wrote:
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
|
Pamela, Jochen, et al-
I wonder how it is that many of us claim that what Snowden disclosed, "we already knew", yet it takes his overt disclosure to raise our ire? I'm asking this as genuinely as I can, not trying to undermine the (possible) transformation underway, but trying to refine it's quality. To expand the debate beyond simple outrage and simple defensiveness. I'm no expert on International law, but it does seem that the US Intelligence apparatus and Executive Branch is hiding behind some sort of presumed "of course we all do this!" argument not dissimilar to the post-911 approach to torture... we first assert "we don't torture" and then we follow with the circular argument that "since we don't torture, then whatever we are doing at the moment isn't torture!". It seems that international law (e.g. Geneva Convention, etc.) depends entirely on voluntary compliance and to a lesser extent "censure by our peers". I think the grassroots support around the world (especially our nominal allies) and the leadership (especially when it is as personal as it became with Merkel) can lead to a significant change in "what is acceptable". The US has been in a position for some time that appears to be "beyond censure"... I hope we can change that. I'm hoping that the debate about what kind of country we want to be (domestic policy, foreign policy, fiscal policy) will be radically different before the 2016 circus than it was in 2008. Without trying to explain precisely why our Hopey-Changey administration has failed to make many of the changes it promised, it seems evident to me that much stronger or more fundamental changes need to be made than happens when we switch out blue ties and black shoes for red ties and brown shoes or vice-versa. I doubt that Gary Johnson can win a presidential election, but I sincerely hope he can engage in the process and inform, or even lead aspects of the debate. I'm not sure I would actually want him as a president (or any Libertarian) but I do think their perspective can significantly move the conversation to more relevant topics. I wish we had a Green party more aligned with that of the EU in general... I'd be more inclined to want a Green steering our ship than a Red (Republican), Blue (Democrat) or ???(Libertarian) with their various flavors of Capitalism-cum-growth-Consumerism-at-all-costs doctrines. Thanks for your thoughtful reply, Jochen. If I were Frau Merkel, I'd be damned mad myself. As today's NY Times put it, the National Security Agency "emerges as an electronic omnivore of staggering capabilities, eavesdropping and hacking its way around the world to strip governments and other targets of their secrets, all the while enforcing the utmost secrecy about its own operations. It spies routinely on friends as well as foes, as has become obvious in recent weeks; the agency's official mission list includes using its surveillance to achieve "diplomatic advantage" over such allies as France and Germany and "economic advantage" over Japan and Brazil, among other countries." ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
«
Return to Friam
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |