Obama Opens Secret Laboratories to Germany

[Miss America]

The Americans have always kept their research into anti-terrorism technologies top secret -- until now. A new treaty between Germany and the US will give German scientists access to highly restricted laboratories.

It was a productive start to the week for US Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and German Research Minister Annette Schavan. The two women met at 7:15 a.m. on Monday for breakfast at a five-star hotel in Berlin to discuss one of the most explosive issues in the era of international terrorism: How can the population and infrastructure be protected against catastrophic attacks without Western democracies being turned into Orwellian regimes?

read the rest here (http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,613532,00.html)

I'm not sure how I feel about this...I don't think that Obama really believes in our sovereignty.

[jprin]

The Americans have always kept their research into anti-terrorism technologies top secret -- until now. A new treaty between Germany and the US will give German scientists access to highly restricted laboratories.

It was a productive start to the week for US Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and German Research Minister Annette Schavan. The two women met at 7:15 a.m. on Monday for breakfast at a five-star hotel in Berlin to discuss one of the most explosive issues in the era of international terrorism: How can the population and infrastructure be protected against catastrophic attacks without Western democracies being turned into Orwellian regimes?

Sounds smart to me. After the Iraq intel bungle, it's hard to figure how more cooperation and communication would be a bad thing in the current global cimate. Especially since the Germans' information and recommendations were purposely ignored by GWB in the leadup to Iraq.


I'm not sure how I feel about this...I don't think that Obama really believes in our sovereignty.

You aren't "sure how (you) feel...." but don't think Obama "believes in our sovereignty?" Sure. :))

[Navy Nuke]

The more we share the technology, I think the more chances the terrorist will have to obtain the technology and find a work around. If we can not have that risk, I wouldn't have a problem working with out allies to increase the amount of information gathered.

And the areas pointed out for co-operation aren't bad:
The research offensive began after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 and has been fuelled with huge sums of money ever since. Universities, companies and secret laboratories are carrying out research into highly sensitive surveillance cameras, bomb detectors, biometric analysis software and vaccines against biological weapons, among other things. Until now, neither the general public nor the governments of the US's Western allies have learned much about the contents of that research.

[Navy Nuke]

Sounds smart to me. After the Iraq intel bungle, it's hard to figure how more cooperation and communication would be a bad thing in the current global cimate. Especially since the Germans' information and recommendations were purposely ignored by GWB in the leadup to Iraq.

You aren't "sure how (you) feel...." but don't think Obama "believes in our sovereignty?" Sure. :))


Sorry, but Clinton was the one that destroyed our intel gathering capabilities. GWB worked to expand that, but you can't do everything right away. There's also this bit in the article:
Although the preparatory work for the agreement was begun under the previous US administration of George W. Bush,

I'm not sure what he started on, but you seem to be neglecting some facts.

[Ex_Spy_Guy]

Im all for secrets....especially when they are in other countries...and the knowledge is public.

[Conservatismfirst]

Sorry, but Clinton was the one that destroyed our intel gathering capabilities. GWB worked to expand that, but you can't do everything right away. There's also this bit in the article:


I'm not sure what he started on, but you seem to be neglecting some facts.

Of course they are neglecting facts...they always do. I wonder how long president Bush's mistakes will continue to be brought up? Perhaps we should talk about the future since history is 20/20.


It sounds like a great idea on the surface (as do many democratic/liberal ideas) but when you dig a little deeper it does have some possible consequences. If something bad happens I guess that will be Bush's fault too. I over slept for work today...must have been that damn GWB again, my car is having trouble...yep I'll bet it's Bush again. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

[jprin]

Of course they are neglecting facts...they always do.

What facts? This one?

Sorry, but Clinton was the one that destroyed our intel gathering capabilities.

That's not fact. Not even close.

I wonder how long president Bush's mistakes will continue to be brought up? Perhaps we should talk about the future since history is 20/20.

Hugely ironic since you're jumping on the tired "blame Clinton" bandwagon. Maybe if folks would quit trying to blame Clinton for everything they think is wrong, then it wouldn't be necessary to point out the ongoing incompetence that was Bush?