Slashdot Mirror


Berlin's Digital Exiles: Where Tech Activists Go To Escape the NSA

An anonymous reader writes with this story about how Berlin has become a haven for Laura Poitras and other journalists who want to limit the amount of NSA disruption in their lives. "It's the not knowing that's the hardest thing, Laura Poitras tells me. 'Not knowing whether I'm in a private place or not.' Not knowing if someone's watching or not. Though she's under surveillance, she knows that. It makes working as a journalist 'hard but not impossible'. It's on a personal level that it's harder to process. 'I try not to let it get inside my head, but I still am not sure that my home is private. And if I really want to make sure I'm having a private conversation or something, I'll go outside.'

.....We're having this conversation in Berlin, her adopted city, where she'd moved to make a film about surveillance before she'd ever even made contact with Snowden. Because, in 2006, after making two films about the US war on terror, she found herself on a 'watch list'. Every time she entered the US – 'and I travel a lot' – she would be questioned. 'It got to the point where my plane would land and they would do what's called a hard stand, where they dispatch agents to the plane and make everyone show their passport and then I would be escorted to a room where they would question me and oftentimes take all my electronics, my notes, my credit cards, my computer, my camera, all that stuff.' She needed somewhere else to go, somewhere she hoped would be a safe haven. And that somewhere was Berlin."

28 of 231 comments (clear)

  1. Land of the Free by narcc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Germany?

    How times have changed...

    1. Re:Land of the Free by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 5, Informative

      Berlin has a history of this. I believe, during the Cold War, it was the one place under West Germany's governance whose residence were not subject to the German military draft. So it became a haven for left-leaning I dividuals.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    2. Re:Land of the Free by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Germany experienced first hand how democracy and government can go bad, so now has some of the strongest privacy and protection laws in the world. They are determined never to let it happen again.

      Plus, Germany is not part of Five Eyes.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re:Land of the Free by grcumb · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Germany?

      How times have changed...

      Er, not so much. Berlin in the 1920s was an island of intellectual freedom and experimentation in all kinds of artistic, social and political philosophy before the corruption and incompetence of the Weimar regime brought everything crashing down.

      In the 1970s, it was haven for an entire generation of the European avant-garde. David Bowie's song Heroes is pretty much a story about two lost young lovers living in a besieged Berlin:

      I can remember
      standing by the wall
      while guns shot above our heads
      and we kissed as though nothing could fall.

      It's no accident that the song is available in German as well as English.

      You can go back even farther if you like. Similar to London's position as the maritime gateway to the Continent, Berlin's position at the crossroads between East and West, North and South in Europe has ensured that it's a popular mixing spot for political, social and artistic cultures.

      --
      Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
    4. Re:Land of the Free by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Apropos of your sig:

      This Laura Poitras is a hell of a reporter. She's got a documentary out right now called "Citizen Four" and it's about her initial contacts with Edward Snowden.

      If any of you want to see a movie that's a real-life thriller and will have an impact on you beyond anything else that's in the theaters, go see this movie. It's going to win the Oscar for Best Documentary.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    5. Re:Land of the Free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      You can't even mention a Nazi or you'll be imprisoned.

      That's complete nonsense.

      It's like they think all of that bad history will simply disappear if they outlaw any discussions or symbols attached to it.

      While a number of symbols are outlawed indeed, discussions are not. What caused you to be this misinformed?

      I would hate to think what the German government would do to me if I went there and they saw my swastika tattoo. Despite being a part of my cultural heritage and part of my belief system, they'd probably label it a Nazi symbol and throw me in prison.

      As long as you don't show it in public, you're fine.

      Please stop spreading bullshit like this; it would generally be advisable to not comment on subjects you don't know jack shit about.

      Signed,
      A German

    6. Re:Land of the Free by Zanadou · · Score: 3, Funny

      Well, there's your problem right there.

      The iPad doesn't have keys!

    7. Re:Land of the Free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Er, not so much. Berlin in the 1920s was an island of intellectual freedom and experimentation in all kinds of artistic, social and political philosophy before the corruption and incompetence of the Weimar regime brought everything crashing down.

      It happened in Germany, it can happen in the USA.

    8. Re:Land of the Free by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Torrent please?

      So basically, she does all that ballsy reporting, and you now want her to not get paid for it? Awesome.

    9. Re:Land of the Free by Eythian · · Score: 3, Interesting

      More usefully, will there be/is there a place to buy it DRM-free legitimately?

      The irony would be too painful if it were only available locked up.

    10. Re:Land of the Free by jelizondo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Does that include plane tickets?

      Contrary to what you think, not all of us have cineplex nearby or the inclination to be surrounded by strangers in a dark place...

      The studios make the mistake you are making, it's not only about money; it's about convenience. Make it available and I will gladly pay for it.

      I own a couple of hundred movie DVDs and about 500 hundred music CDs, plus perhaps a thousand books; but if I can not buy something which is available thru piracy, then a pirate I become...

      Content-producers need to realize it's a big, big world and stop thinking of their little corner of it.

      --
      Be very, very careful what you put into that head, because you will never, ever get it out. - Cardinal Wolsey
  2. Who would've thought by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    that the USA's NSA would be the successor of East Germany's Stasi, 25 years after the Berlin wall fell.

    1. Re:Who would've thought by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I cant even have dinner conversation with someone over the age of 30 in the USA without rampant jingoism and political correctness. If I really spoke my mind I would be killed. By the state, by the minions of the state, by ignorance, and by complacence.

      I have a cousin a nephew. Who is a 'veteran' (yet he doesn't even have his ID, his DD214, or any legit story about his service). I question everything they say. They randomly support this jingoistic attitude.

      I have random friends at school. I can't tell them about the horrors I've seen. I don't dare. I don't want to be ostracized.

      I served honorably.

      Many soldiers. Many people who are patriots and supported the US feel this way. Are this way now. When, where and how do we take a stand for what is right?

    2. Re:Who would've thought by SuricouRaven · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Different time periods, different tools. The Stasi needed a huge state machinery in order to carry out their monitoring because so much of the activity had to be done by an individual worker - listening to calls, reading letters. The NSA has the advantage of automation: Computers can read every email automatically and pick out only the interesting highlights or patterns.

      How much effort would it have taken the Stasi to find out 'who has sent the traitor a letter over the last year?' Today, it's one SQL query.

  3. I remember by HangingChad · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I remember when the US was the country people would come to when they wanted to get away from oppressive regimes.

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
    1. Re:I remember by nitehawk214 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You must be getting up there in years. At 35, I am not sure I am old enough to remember it.

      I am old enough to remember "ra ra tear down this wall" and other propaganda bullshit from the 80s, but I was too young to understand this was just grandstanding. I can remember the "if you don't support bombing countries you are unamerican" from both the Republicans and Democrats in the 90s. And I remember the day the USA became a police state. It was after the turn of the century on a day in September.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    2. Re:I remember by swb · · Score: 5, Informative

      You could argue that the last time the US was "free" was prior to about 1910.

      Before the 1911 passage of the 16th Ammendment the government's power to collect income taxes was extremely limited. A good chunk of the loss of financial freedom could be attributed to the income tax and all the various laws that grew up around enforcing it, such as limits on cash transactions, financial reporting, etc.

      1909 saw the passage of the "Smoking Opium Exclusion Act" which barred the importation of opium, the first time a substance was banned for consumption. Followed up with the Harrsion Act in 1914 which got tougher on opioids and restricted them to medical uses. This leads to the next step, alcohol prohibition in 1920. Although it was overturned, it was the first big attempt at wholesale regulation of previously free behavior. The entire thing grew into the war on drugs and all the loss of freedom we now associate with it, including contributing to controls on cash transactions, a total erosion of search and seizure and mass incarceration.

      Lots of other firsts from that era -- the Red Scare, the rise of Federal law enforcement, etc.

      You can say we were "more free" in the 1970s or 60s or whatever, but it seems like we really started to lose it around 1910 when the Federal Government began to assert itself as a central law enforcement and control authority.

    3. Re:I remember by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's interesting to contrast the German/European concept of freedom with the one out outline in your post about the US.

      In Europe people see the government as their instrument to protect themselves from marauding corporations, poor health and extreme poverty. In the US those things are welcomed in exchange for the slim chance of getting rich, or at least no interference from government. In one view the government is a tool that society uses collectively, in the other it is a necessary evil that is inflicted on you. The reality is probably somewhere in the middle.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    4. Re:I remember by HiThere · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The US is still a country that isn't oppressive...not measured against a global average. It's just headed the wrong direction, and taking "not currently oppressive" steps that will make the slide into an oppressive state difficult to stop.

      E.g., a database identifying everyone by photo and voiceprint isn't, in and of itself, oppressive. It's only when you mix it with authoritarian legislation that it becomes so. Alternatively it could be a database for ensuring that sick or injured people could be treated with due care to avoid medications that they were allergic to.

      The problem is that the government is untrustworthy. You can't trust them to have good intentions, so when they do something that has multiple possible uses, you need to expect that they will abuse it. They may also use it beneficially, but here a kind of inequality rears its head: Any one act can do a lot more damage than good. So if you think something will be used for both good and bad, you need to expect that the bad will to a lot more damage than the good heals.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  4. pretty foolish by silfen · · Score: 3, Informative

    Germany has "strict" privacy laws, but they largely apply to organizations that don't pose a big threat to privacy in the first place. Police, courts, financial institutions, businesses, tax authorities, secret service, "state police", health insurers, and employers can have a field day with your private data in Germany. The government can easily use telecoms and online services to access private data. This is a country where you must declare your religious affiliation to the government and that spies on democratically elected members of parliament as a matter of course. To the degree that it provides a refuge for Americans on no-fly-lists and under special scrutiny, that's just because it is a separate country; I think you can be pretty certain that as an American activist in Germany, you are closely scrutinized.

    We clearly have serious problems with a government that has become far too intrusive and invasive in the US. But Europe has no good ideas for how to fix these problems, least of all countries like Germany.

    But, hey, if you disagree, name some specific German laws that we could adopt in the US that you think would help, and explain how they would make a difference.

    1. Re:pretty foolish by NoKaOi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Germany has "strict" privacy laws, but they largely apply to organizations that don't pose a big threat to privacy in the first place. Police, courts, financial institutions, businesses, tax authorities, secret service, "state police", health insurers, and employers can have a field day with your private data in Germany.

      The US has strict privacy laws too (more specifically the Bill of Rights), and those laws apply to everyone. The problem in the US isn't the absence of such laws, it's the absence of oversight and enforcement of those laws.

    2. Re:pretty foolish by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The US has strict privacy laws too (more specifically the Bill of Rights),

      Uh what? No it doesn't. While the Supremes have traditionally held that you have a right to privacy which is implied by the rights which are enumerated, there is no strict right to privacy — especially in the bill of rights, which explicitly does not define what level of privacy you're entitled to. It leaves that up to laws to be defined by the federal government later (their power to do so being elsewhere granted) when it for example prohibits "unreasonable" search and seizure. Since it's not actually defined, the government is free to define it elsewhere. What needs to be on a warrant is defined there explicitly. Warrants are still a thing. There is a lesson to be learned there, and the lesson is that when they left certain things open-ended, they completely punted on them.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  5. No you don't, you just remember incorrectly by Overzeetop · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No you don't. You just don't realize that the people who fled here in the 17th century to avoid the oppressive regime in England created a whole new oppressive regime for the indigenous people. And it was so rampant into the 18th century that they wrote an entire constitution (that didn't apply to said indigenous people, or the slaves that were imported) to try and protect it. Then in the 19th century, half the country tried to repress the other half - destroying their entire way of life. By the 20 the century we were into your bedroom and your liquor cabinet trying to impose morality on the immoral. And we can't forget McCarthysim - oooh, that was a really good one, followed by the Hoover FBI.

    Oppression is as much a part of humanity as humanity itself.

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    1. Re:No you don't, you just remember incorrectly by Deadstick · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Indeed. If you're talking about the Mayflower Pilgrims, they had found religious freedom in the Netherlands and it scared the shit out of them.

    2. Re:No you don't, you just remember incorrectly by The+Ickle+Jones · · Score: 4, Insightful

      McCarthy was right in the same way that the people terrified of terrorists are right; communists existed, and terrorists do exist, but both threats were overblown. And none of this justifies infringing upon people's liberties.

  6. Two options: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Through force or feet :) Given that the soap box and ballot box aren't working, you should consider the foot boxes, or the soapbox turned racer and roll right on out of the country!

    Seriously though American isn't going to change until the people have to deal with the full consequences of their own actions, and those of us who've been telling them why those actions are a bad idea really have no reason to still be here when the 'sky falls down' as it were.

    Find a place or make a place. If you can't trust those around you, make yourself a group or society where you can.

    Captcha: lifeboat

  7. Fear of the USA by MildlyTangy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Over the years, I have said quite a few things critical of America and its surveillance state, and of its gun culture, on this site.

    Because of this, I think there is a pretty good chance that if I ever went to the US that I would discover that Im on some watchlist, and that travelling there would be quite scary and difficult.

    Thankfully there is no reason for me to ever travel there.

    Now I can see what they mean by "chilling effect". This is some pretty scary stuff.

    The moral of the story?
    Dont say anything critical of the US on any digital device. It will come back to haunt you.

  8. Holocaust Survivor Leaving US - Sees What's Coming by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Granted from 2005: http://www.rense.com/general65...
    "I had been stationed in Germany for two years while in the military, so I lit up, and commented about how beautiful the country was, and inquired if he was going back because he missed it.
    "No," he answered me. "I'm going back because I've seen this before." He then commenced to explain that when he was a kid, he watched with his family in fear as Hitler's government committed atrocity after atrocity, and no one was willing to say anything. He said the news refused to question the government, and the ones who did were not in the newspaper business much longer. He said good neighbors, people he had known all his life, turned against his family and other Jews, grabbing on to the hate and superiority "as if they were starved for it" (his words).
    He said he was too old to see it happen right in front of his eyes again, and too old to do anything about it, so he was taking his family back to Europe on Thursday where they would be safe from George W. Bush and his neocons. He seemed resolute, but troubled, nonetheless, as if being too young on one end and too old on the other to fight what he saw happening was wearing on him. ...
    I have related this event to you in the hopes it will serve as a cautionary anecdote about the state of our Union, and to illustrate the path we Americans are being led down by a group of fanatics bent on global economic and military dominion. When a man who survived the fruits of fascism decides its time to leave THIS country because he's seeing the same patterns that led to the Holocaust and other Nazi horrors beginning to form here, it is time for us to recognize the underlying evil inherent in the actions of those who claim they work for all Americans, and for all mankind. And it is incumbent upon all Americans, Red and Blue, Republican and Democrat, to stop them."

    What has really changed from the Bush years of great significance in that regard?

    See also:
    "They Thought They Were Free: The Germans, 1933-45"
    http://www.press.uchicago.edu/...
    ""What happened here was the gradual habituation of the people, little by little, to being governed by surprise; to receiving decisions deliberated in secret; to believing that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act on information which the people could not understand, or so dangerous that, even if the people could not understand it, it could not be released because of national security. And their sense of identification with Hitler, their trust in him, made it easier to widen this gap and reassured those who would otherwise have worried about it.
    "This separation of government from people, this widening of the gap, took place so gradually and so insensibly, each step disguised (perhaps not even intentionally) as a temporary emergency measure or associated with true patriotic allegiance or with real social purposes. And all the crises and reforms (real reforms, too) so occupied the people that they did not see the slow motion underneath, of the whole process of government growing remoter and remoter."

    Jews who moved to Israel seem to me overall to have interpreted "never again" in terms of who has the most guns. But there is another perspective on that, which is to think that "never again" should be about militaristic bureaucracy getting out of control. A culture like the USA (or Israel for that matter) can be full of guns and people who know how to use them, but still infested with militarist bureaucracy infesting every aspect of life (including via perpetual full-surveillance "schooling"). Like bureaucracy, humans have had a long association with fire, and fire is useful to warm our homes and cook our meals, but it is a terrible thing when it rages out of control.

    That said, how should we behave when we are essentially t

    --
    A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.