First Edward Snowden interview & analysis on BCfm - interviewer Hubert Seipel NDR TV Germany

• Report rights infringement
• published: 08 Feb 2014
• views: 36048

Tony Gosling with former Amnesty, NEF, & CAFOD's 'Old Labour' Oxford economist Martin Summers Analysis starts here http://youtu.be/7pgNEsSz54I?t=29m49s The Nazis' IBM Hollerith database of the German population, then of occupied Europe, made the Holocaust possible... Only after Jews were identified -- a massive and complex task that Hitler wanted done immediately -- could they be targeted for efficient asset confiscation, ghettoization, deportation, enslaved labour, and, ultimately, annihilation. It was a cross-tabulation and organizational challenge so monumental, it called for a computer. Of course, in the 1930s no computer existed. But IBM's Hollerith punch card technology did exist. http://www.ibmandtheholocaust.com German Television does first Edward Snowden Interview (ENGLISH) German Television Channel NDR does an exclusive interview with Edward Snowden. Uploaded on LiveLeak cause German Television thinks the rest of the world isn't intereseted in Edward Snowden. Read more at http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f93_1390833151 Whistleblower Edward Snowden leaked the documents about US mass surveillance. He spoke about his disclosures and his life to NDR journalist Hubert Seipel in Moscow. "The Five Eyes alliance is sort of an artifact of the post World War II era where the Anglophone countries are the major powers banded together to sort of co-operate and share the costs of intelligence gathering infrastructure. So we have the UK's GCHQ, we have the US NSA, we have Canada's C-Sec, we have the Australian Signals Intelligence Directorate and we have New Zealand's DSD. What the result of this was over decades and decades what sort of a supra-national intelligence organisation that doesn't answer to the laws of its own countries." "If you ask the governments about this directly they would deny it and point to policy agreements between the members of the Five Eyes saying that they won't spy on each other's citizens but there are a couple of key points there. One is that the way they define spying is not the collection of data. The GCHQ is collecting an incredible amount of data on British Citizens just as the National Security Agency is gathering enormous amounts of data on US citizens. What they are saying is that they will not then target people within that data. They won't look for UK citizens or British citizens. In addition the policy agreements between them that say British won't target US citizens, US won't target British citizens are not legally binding. The actual memorandums of agreement state specifically on that that they are not intended to put legal restriction on any government. They are policy agreements that can be deviated from or broken at any time. So if they want to on a British citizen they can spy on a British citizen and then they can even share that data with the British government that is itself forbidden from spying on UK citizens. So there is a sort of a trading dynamic there but it's not, it's not open, it's more of a nudge and wink and beyond that the key is to remember the surveillance and the abuse doesn't occur when people look at the data it occurs when people gather the data in the first place." "That's a very difficult question to answer. In general, I would say it highlights the dangers of privatising government functions. I worked previously as an actual staff officer, a government employee for the Central Intelligence Agency but I've also served much more frequently as a contractor in a private capacity. What that means is you have private for profit companies doing inherently governmental work like targeted espionage, surveillance, compromising foreign systems and anyone who has the skills who can convince a private company that they have the qualifications to do so will be empowered by the government to do that and there's very little oversight, there's very little review." "The contracting culture of the national security community in the United States is a complex topic. It's driven by a number of interests between primarily limiting the number of direct government employees at the same time as keeping lobbying groups in Congress typically from very well funded businesses such as Booze Allen Hamilton. The problem there is you end up in a situation where government policies are being influenced by private corporations who have interests that are completely divorced from the public good in mind. The result of that is what we saw at Booze Allen Hamilton where you have private individuals who have access to what the government alleges were millions and millions of records that they could walk out the door with at any time with no accountability, no oversight, no auditing, the government didn't even know they were gone." http://www.ndr.de/ratgeber/netzwelt/snowden277.html