General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsTo be clear: the NSA DID spy on Merkel's cellphone. But Obama didn't know.
Here's how I arrive at that conclusion:
From the Guardian:
But Berlin promptly signalled that the rebuttal referred to the present and the future and did not deny that Merkel's communications had been monitored in the past.
Caitlin Hayden, the White House's National Security Council spokeswoman, said: "The United States is not monitoring and will not monitor the communications of Chancellor Merkel. Beyond that, I'm not in a position to comment publicly on every specific alleged intelligence activity."
compare & contrast to the following, from the Frankfurter Allgemeine
Translation: A speaker for the american National Security Council said the US would not monitor the communications of british PM Cameron. In answer to a followup question, she said Cameron's digital communication wasn't monitored in the past either.
No, that isn't proof that could stand up in a court. But it's clear enough to draw a conclusion.
Interestingly, Obama supposedly did not know, as reported by The Telegraph.
That explains why some of the first reactions from Germany included the phrase "The NSA spying has gone too far, and is beyond democratic control". That may have been the conclusion from assurances on Obama's part to Merkel that he didn't personally know.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)actually.
kelliekat44
(7,759 posts)this government. Not unlike other Presidents, the war machine and secret ops are mostly in the hands of Rambo types who enjoy what they do not for the sake of the of the country but for their own enjoyment and the power play of the wealthy unelected and unelectable icons who salivate at hurting whatever President they don't like. Kennedy was one they didn't like and Reagan was one they just laughed at and used for cover.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Well bellow Cabinet level (until now)
Targeting foreign heads of state does indeed require presidential imprimatur. It could very well seen as an act of war, indeed it was in olden days. At the very least it will create serious diplomatic headaches, even the break up of NATO worst case here. (It's not just Germany)
So either the President knew and they are trying some lovely deniability, or the President did not and the Agency has gone rogue.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)grasswire
(50,130 posts).....or WH is obfuscating.
Either way, this is really stupid.
pinto
(106,886 posts)May well be true. Yet I think getting to a conclusion on what someone didn't say is a stretch.
intaglio
(8,170 posts)from a similarly unsupported story from Der Spiegel is there any evidence that Chancellor Merkell's phone was tapped? Please note that Spiegel would publish evidence if it had it.
This seems to be yet another attempt to denigrate the US President.
As to your own sentence
Please not that I am not saying it did not happen just that on the evidence you present is not in any respect evidence.
BelgianMadCow
(5,379 posts)Der Spiegel learned of it via Merkel's number in Snowden docs, informed three German security services, they investigated and found it legit enough to convince Merkel to be uncharacteristically sharp and call Obama.
Check my older OPs, you'll see. You can say there is no proof, that's fine. But to say there is no evidence?
intaglio
(8,170 posts)and a spokesperson not outright denying a question is not evidence, it is a refusal to speculate and often a refusal to give a rumour even the courtesy of a negation.
BelgianMadCow
(5,379 posts)I was kind enough to summarize it to you.
Start from the thread in LBN maybe http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014630106
They must all be going on about a rumor
bye now
intaglio
(8,170 posts)and that assertion was given no credence by either The Guardian or the NYT and both of those have had access to similar material to Der Spiegel
The story you cite is about German reaction to that unevidenced charge and stop trying to pretend otherwise.
BelgianMadCow
(5,379 posts)The confidential memo reveals that the NSA encourages senior officials in its "customer" departments, such the White House, State and the Pentagon, to share their "Rolodexes" so the agency can add the phone numbers of leading foreign politicians to their surveillance systems.
The document notes that one unnamed US official handed over 200 numbers, including those of the 35 world leaders, none of whom is named. These were immediately "tasked" for monitoring by the NSA.
The revelation is set to add to mounting diplomatic tensions between the US and its allies, after the German chancellor Angela Merkel on Wednesday accused the US of tapping her mobile phone.
Just using your post to point out this extra info, and it also links to their earlier pieces, so there goes your "no credence" claim.
You can have the last word! (start off with saying the new Guardian piece doesn't prove the NSA spied on Merkel!!8!) People can read for themselves.
intaglio
(8,170 posts)Unsupported assertion.
Also 35 world leaders is not many; amongst the 35 I guess there will be about 5 in China, a similar number in the Russian Federation and others in the former USSR, there will be several in Latin America, others in Iran and Syria. If there are only 35 world leaders monitored then I would actually think that very restrained of the NSA.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/25/world/europe/allegation-of-us-spying-on-merkel-puts-obama-at-crossroads.html?_r=0
intaglio
(8,170 posts)My objection was to the initially unsupported nature of the claim in this OP
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)It is considered one of the top news sources world wide. It is up there with the NYT in reputation. Actually, due to a few incidents (Iraq war) Der Spegel is currently considered a better source.
Nothing shocks me anymore.
intaglio
(8,170 posts)I said that Der Spiegel's original claim, subject of an OP on Thursday, was unsupported.
Please do not try to put word into my mouth.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)And I am not putting words in your mouth. It is derived from what you wrote in the above exchange you had with the OP. It is a logical conclusion. You accepted the story as possible until the English language top tier papers went there.
I am sorry if you did not intend that conclusion, but it was derived from your own writing. On the web we lack visual cues, which are, iirc, 90% of human communication. Why I try to be very precise. But to each their own. Now the story is getting even worst. So there is where we are.
Suffice it to say that this, to be extremely precise with the language, so we avoid misunderstandings, this is a major diplomatic incident. In olden days it could even be treated as an act of war. We are a Nuclear armed power, so skinning this kitty becomes difficult for a second tier power.
So we are clear.
That is where we are. The OP gave you links, plenty of them. I will save the link to the getting worst part. Suffice it to say it is in GD.
intaglio
(8,170 posts)had supported Spiegel's assertion.
Indeed the impression I had from the BBC article was that there may be another NSA leaker.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Sieves are starting to come to mind
soundsgreat
(125 posts)She wouldn't have done it if she wouldn't have proof.
Obama should grow a pair and fire Alexander and Clapper. Will he? Probably not.
dkf
(37,305 posts)That's what makes collection of all data so insidious. I bet Obama has no idea what the NSA has on him.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)cannot be aware of all of those functions that are going on. He is still responsible for them, but knowing all of them? Even knowing 1% of them is impossible.
leftstreet
(36,109 posts)by Greg Henderson
August 07, 201312:44 AM
President Obama defended the US government's surveillance program, telling NBC's Jay Leno on Tuesday that: "There is no spying on Americans."
"We don't have a domestic spying program," Obama said on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno. "What we do have is some mechanisms that can track a phone number or an email address that is connected to a terrorist attack. ... That information is useful."
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/08/06/209692380/obama-to-leno-there-is-no-spying-on-americans
KoKo
(84,711 posts)what he's been told...and that was what were were doing was not what we were doing and he didn't question it even when Snowden's information started to come out.
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)You lie, Mr. President, you lie.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)lovuian
(19,362 posts)about it?
FarCenter
(19,429 posts)Although maybe not so bad as if he had given her a back rub.
struggle4progress
(118,295 posts)BelgianMadCow
(5,379 posts)Security services called the surveillance "zeitweilig" - temporary.
And the mobile she used wasn't her encrypted one, but her "Parteihandy" - the one she used as CDU party leader. She's been that since 2000.
I though I saw in german press that they had a from - to range when she used that handy, but I can't find it at the moment.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)BelgianMadCow
(5,379 posts)Last edited Sat Oct 26, 2013, 06:57 PM - Edit history (1)
as per De Morgen (Belgian MSM), source = NYT but can't find it online.
http://www.demorgen.be/dm/nl/990/Buitenland/article/detail/1729984/2013/10/26/Obama-wist-niet-dat-Merkel-werd-afgeluisterd.dhtml
On edit: here's the Guardian
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/26/nsa-surveillance-brazil-germany-un-resolution
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)Not seeing how that helps.
Buns_of_Fire
(17,183 posts)Clapper lies to Congress, Alexander thinks he's Captain Kirk... we're not dealing with a completely stable bunch, here.
Dreamer Tatum
(10,926 posts)The leader of the free world goes to a critical, crucial, historical ally and says, with a straight face,
"Oh, that started under Bush, and kept on, and I had no idea it was happening. Bush is a doo-doo
head. I'm not. I had no idea."
What weak, silly, stupid, and pathetic sauce.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)madville
(7,412 posts)They always deny knowledge of everything, it's standard procedure. That's why I can't stand to watch the press secretaries of any administration, they're all full of shit and rarely actually answer anything.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)MisterP
(23,730 posts)Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)"Obama did not halt the operation but rather let it continue," the newspaper quoted a senior NSA official as saying.
Her number was still on a surveillance list in 2013.
It says sources, plural, which means more than one. I'm not sure how many Bush Co holdovers there may be, but the Germans BELIEVE that this allegation is true, and belief is a very powerful force.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Worst to be fair
Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)Are you saying I'm going to portray it worse or that the BBC will?
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)I no longer post analysis here. I have taken that off site. But I will wait for some of this to shake up.
Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)From here on out the Europeans will doubt any assurance we give. Use Roswell as an example. Those who believe that the UFO crashed will never believe anything else. You can give them a ton of paperwork and investigative reports, and those are all lies to the true believers. As for me, I don't know. I know the Government lies regularly, Delta Force as an example. It was years after the Chuck Norris movies that the US Army finally admitted that they had a group called Delta. Their excuse was that it wasn't called Delta Force, but Special Operations Detachment Delta, which is completely different you see.
It will be years, perhaps a decade, before the Europeans begin to trust our assurances again. We may never regain the level of trust we once had.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)But as I said, I no longer do analysis here.
All I will say, next high command meeting in Brussels (NATO), I wish I were a fly on the wall.
BelgianMadCow
(5,379 posts)but the main of my OP, that it happened in the first place, is not under dispute. And that it still took place under Obama looks certain as well.
I've also seen several recent reports about Obama knowing, but they all go back to Bild Am Sontag. I'm not sure how credible a source they are, Bild is something of a tabloid. That they would get info from a high-up in the NSA seems weird.
But who knows. It sure looks like some PR war is going on. To me, what Obama personally knew or not isn't that much of an issue. The overreach was put in overdrive under Bush, and continued under Obama, that's all I need to know. But I understand it matters to people on DU. Thanks for adding to the thread!
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)The easy explanation of a rock rolling down the hill. The earlier you shift it's course away from the cottage, the less you have to do to change the direction. The longer the rock rolls, the faster it goes, the harder it is to change that course because the momentum it now carrying it towards the destination you don't want.
Often times, when faced with a plethora of information, it is easier to simply allow the status quo to continue because you don't have time to consider every issue. What should have happened is that the Justice Department, the State Department, and the NSA should have sat down and discussed the policy and procedures. The Justice Department is looking to see if we are violating international law, the State Department to see if we are violating treaties, or betraying the trust of our foreign friends. Then they prepare position papers, and present the President with the issues laid out with chapter and verse so that he can make an informed decision instead of an off the cuff on the fly let's keep going with that because again, momentum keeps us moving that way.
What I can imagine happening by filling in the blanks of the news stories is this. In 2010, a full year after President Obama was sworn in, the NSA got around to mentioning that they were monitoring and listening in on foreign leaders telephone calls and reading their faxes and emails. They probably pointed out good political intelligence we were getting on the direction of the EU etc. It was probably one of a long laundry list of things the President was briefed on, and he may have asked if everything had been reviewed to make sure it was all legal. That is reference to the inevitable contortions written up by staff lawyers for the various agencies who explain how the unthinkable is perfectly legal so long as we say it this way or don't say that. There is a joke that the reason that FDR selected Bill Donovan to run the COI, later the OSS was that when you're going to break the law, the first person you call is a lawyer, and Donovan was a very smart lawyer.
Partly the momentum I am speaking of is the willingness to trust your subordinates. You can't be as expert on the program after a few short minutes of briefing as they are with years of experience. Partly it's the way the programs are portrayed, as minimally invasive, or whatever terms they throw in there. From what I can gather, the NSA had all the email accounts, fax numbers, and phone numbers for these leaders. But I'm sure someone decided to describe it as minimally invasive, or some other twist of a phrase. And finally, partly it is an unwillingness to shake up a whole department over a few short minutes of briefings. That again falls to the subordinates you have to trust to do the right things, and to carry out your instructions, and more importantly the intent of your instructions.
BelgianMadCow
(5,379 posts)was rather big by the time it fell in Obama's lap. Who knows, but I can imagine it's a bit of a shock once you get briefed on what exactly Bush* set in motion the morning after 9/11.
That machine, and the MIC it is part of, has been decades in the making. It will take something more else than a president to stand up to it.
But I don't see a significant number of people standing up to it, not even a majority on DU (I did under Bush years), and the president embraces american exceptionalism. From there, it's a small step to justifying the unjustifiable.