US attempts to block Edward Snowden are 'bolstering' case for asylum - Polidicks

[QUOTE]Attempts by the US to close down intelligence whistleblower Edward Snowden's asylum options are strengthening his case to seek a safe harbour outside of Russia, legal experts claim. Snowden, who is believed to be in the transit area of Moscow's Sheremetyevo airport, has received provisional offers of asylum from Nicaragua and Venezuela, and last night Bolivia also offered him sanctuary. He has applied to at least six other countries, says the Wikileaks organisation providing legal support. Michael Bochenek, director of law and policy at Amnesty International, said the American government's actions were bolstering Snowden's case. He said claims that the US had sought to reroute the plane of Bolivia's president, Evo Morales, amid reports that the fugitive former analyst for the National Security Agency was on board, and suggestions that vice-president Joe Biden had phoned the Ecuadorean leader, Rafael Correa, to block asylum for Snowden, carried serious implications. "Interfering with the right to seek asylum is a serious problem in international law," Bochenek said. "It is further evidence that he [Snowden] has a well-founded fear of persecution. This will be relevant to any state when considering an application. International law says that somebody who fears persecution should not be returned to that country." Venezuela's extradition treaties with the US contain clauses that allow it to reject requests if it believes they are politically motivated. The country's president, Nicolas Maduro, has praised Snowden for being a "young man who told the truth" and has criticised European countries' alleged role in the rerouting of Morales's plane last week . [B]"The European people have seen the cowardice and the weakness of their governments, which now look like colonies of the US," he said on Friday.[/B] Spain said it had been warned that Snowden was on the Bolivian presidential plane, the first acknowledgement that the manhunt was linked to the plane's diversion to Austria. Foreign minister José Manuel Garcia-Margallo said: "They told us that the information was clear, that he was inside." He did not say who "they" were or whether he had been in contact with the US.[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jul/07/us-attempts-block-snowden-bolster-case-asylum?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter[/url]

[quote]"The European people have seen the cowardice and the weakness of their governments, which now look like colonies of the US," he said on Friday.[/quote] Diplomatic cooperation is now evil imperialism, eh?

[QUOTE=scout1;41355397]Diplomatic cooperation is now evil imperialism[/QUOTE] They're just more pro-american than they are pro-human rights.

[QUOTE=scout1;41355397]Diplomatic cooperation is now evil imperialism[/QUOTE] Diplomatic cooperation that goes against the will of the people that put the diplomats in power isn't true diplomatic cooperation, now is it?

[QUOTE=scout1;41355397]Diplomatic cooperation is now evil imperialism[/QUOTE] Diplomatic control? The US has too much influence over the world, that much I think people can agree on.

They litterly seems to act like they control the fucking world, with total disregard of human rights...

[QUOTE=valkery;41355457]Diplomatic cooperation that goes against the will of the people that put the diplomats in power isn't true diplomatic cooperation, now is it?[/QUOTE] Your representatives are supposed to act in your best interest, whether or not everybody agrees (and not everybody is going to agree). i.e. You trust them to look at all the information and make an informed decision, not just what the scaremongering media will give you to lap it up. Regardless you'll find that public opinion is not so one-sided as FP might make you think. I won't get into the finer points of political theory but direct democracy is a far cry from all of our democratic systems, meaning the majority opinion is not necessarily the preferred opinion. [editline]7th July 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=lifehole;41355501]Diplomatic control? The US has too much influence over the world, that much I think people can agree on.[/QUOTE] Too many people are willing to work with us? What a goddamn shame. I guess we need to go back to shooting those who disagree.

[QUOTE=laserguided;41355403]They're just more pro-american than they are pro-human rights.[/QUOTE] That's a nice soundbite but nothing about this case has to do with human rights.

[QUOTE=catbarf;41355542]That's a nice soundbite but nothing about this case has to do with human rights.[/QUOTE] Yes it does, the U.S. wants to lock up a whistleblower for embarrassing the U.S. regime, unless I misunderstood something here?

[QUOTE=laserguided;41355556]Yes it does, the U.S. wants to lock up a whistleblower for embarrassing the U.S. regime.[/QUOTE] The US wants to try in court a whistleblower for possibly doing illegal things that aren't whistleblowing. Some countries want to help the US because they're on friendly political terms. Some countries want to help him to snub the US and/or extract further intelligence from the information he's carrying. What human rights are in question here?

[QUOTE=catbarf;41355566]The US wants to try in court a whistleblower for possibly doing illegal things that aren't whistleblowing. Some countries want to help the US because they're on friendly political terms. Some countries want to help him to snub the US and/or extract further intelligence from the information he's carrying. What human rights are in question here?[/QUOTE] "illegal things that aren't whistleblowing" aka leaking secrets to the press for the people to know what their elected officials are doing. If they're so concerned about freedom, democracy and transparency then they wouldn't be locking Snowden up, they would be giving him a peace prize.

[QUOTE=scout1;41355534]Your representatives are supposed to act in your best interest, whether or not everybody agrees (and not everybody is going to agree). i.e. You trust them to look at all the information and make an informed decision, not just what the scaremongering media will give you to lap it up. Regardless you'll find that public opinion is not so one-sided as FP might make you think. I won't get into the finer points of political theory but direct democracy is a far cry from all of our democratic systems, meaning the majority opinion is not necessarily the preferred opinion. [editline]7th July 2013[/editline] Too many people are willing to work with us? What a goddamn shame. I guess we need to go back to shooting those who disagree.[/QUOTE] Or torturing the shit out of them and making sure that they don't get asylum anywhere. That works too, right? I don't really care what you think scout. I understand that the NSA wasn't going through phone records and listening in. I understand the position of the US, where it's got a man on the run with four laptops filled with data that they don't want getting out there. I understand that they are scared of what he might do and are trying their hardest to keep him from doing it. I don't agree with it in the least, and from what I recognize of the situation, I am of the firm belief that my representatives are not working in my best interests. Letting Snowden have asylum in another country should be one of his basic rights, and the fact that they are basically threatening their allies into not allowing him to stay in their countries is disgusting.

[QUOTE=scout1;41355534]Too many people are willing to work with us? What a goddamn shame. I guess we need to go back to shooting those who disagree.[/QUOTE] Are you seriously proposing that the US should use military action against European countries that don't want to cooperate with it's wishes?

[QUOTE=valkery;41355601]Or torturing the shit out of them and making sure that they don't get asylum anywhere. That works too, right? I don't really care what you think scout. I understand that the NSA wasn't going through phone records and listening in. I understand the position of the US, where it's got a man on the run with four laptops filled with data that they don't want getting out there. I understand that they are scared of what he might do and are trying their hardest to keep him from doing it. I don't agree with it in the least, and from what I recognize of the situation, I am of the firm belief that my representatives are not working in my best interests. Letting Snowden have asylum in another country should be one of his basic rights, and the fact that they are basically threatening their allies into not allowing him to stay in their countries is disgusting.[/QUOTE] Okay but I'm against torture, and these countries are misusing political asylum to snub a country they don't like, not because someone is being politically persecuted [editline]7th July 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=hypno-toad;41355610]Are you seriously proposing that the US should use military action against European countries that don't want to cooperate with it's wishes?[/QUOTE] ...No I'm being very sarcastic and saying that it's a great thing that the US and many European countries get along and it's really silly to get mad that so many countries are willing to work with us by example of hyperbole

[QUOTE=The golden;41355665]US and Europe getting along? What? The EU is fucking furious at the US right now as they just got busted hacking German computer systems.[/QUOTE] Funnily enough, from the U.S. definition, the U.S. committed an act of war against Germany.

[QUOTE=scout1;41355618]Okay but I'm against torture, and these countries are misusing political asylum to snub a country they don't like, not because someone is being politically persecuted [editline]7th July 2013[/editline] ...No I'm being very sarcastic and saying that it's a great thing that the US and many European countries get along and it's really silly to get mad that so many countries are willing to work with us by example of hyperbole[/QUOTE] [URL]http://www.unhcr.org/3d4aba564.html[/URL] Read page 18 of this document. I will accept that he does not truly qualify as a political refugee, because he isn't being chased for his pure political opinion. However, the UN allows for a person who is in fear of being tortured or badly mistreated upon return to their country to seek asylum as they choose. Snowden should be allowed asylum, and the US, which says it upholds this document, needs to allow him to get it. [B]EDITED[/B] And shit, page eleven of the document, which I should have read more explicitly, says that a refugee can also be a person who is unable, or unwilling to return to his/her country for fear of persecution. Right there in black and pink, the UN is defending the shit out of Snowden's right to asylum.

[QUOTE=The golden;41355665]US and Europe getting along? What? The EU is fucking furious at the US right now as they just got busted hacking German computer systems.[/QUOTE] Well apparently we have "diplomatic control", yet they're pissed at us? [QUOTE=lifehole;41355501]Diplomatic control? The US has too much influence over the world, that much I think people can agree on.[/QUOTE] People don't understand the diplomacy. There are many, many countries in Europe that the US can sit down with and fairly negotiate. We want something, they want something, etc. This is a good thing. We make peaceful arrangements, not, as I jabbed, kill each other over small things. But negotiating is apparently cool to hate on nowadays, because it means Europe is "bending over" to the US by not rejecting every request on the spot without regarding it. My point is that it is very silly to pretend the US runs Europe when, as we can all point out, we disagree on issues at the end of the day and the US does not always get its way, nobody does. But people like Maduro here like to use that rallying phrase because of the emotions it elicits.

[QUOTE=valkery;41355712][url]http://www.unhcr.org/3d4aba564.html[/url] Read page 18 of this document. I will accept that he does not truly qualify as a political refugee, because he isn't being chased for his pure political opinion. However, the UN allows for a person who is in fear of being tortured or badly mistreated upon return to their country to seek asylum as they choose. Snowden should be allowed asylum, and the US, which says it upholds this document, needs to allow him to get it.[/QUOTE] Informative for you. I would not like to see Snowden mistreated, though. Besides the fact that it is a disservice to my country, it's not good for our image, either, and goodness knows we don't need to be [I]perceived[/I] any worse.

[QUOTE=scout1;41355618]...No I'm being very sarcastic and saying that it's a great thing that the US and many European countries get along[/QUOTE] No it isn't, nor is this even "cooperation". If cooperation in the world isn't 100% unanimous or totally benign, then it not a good thing. What you're seeing is simply an entrenched political/military power structure [I]headed[/I] by the united states, that does not serve the best interest of it's people, be they European or American. Participation in this power structure is not voluntary, it's not cooperation; it's just the US government extorting complacency from smaller European countries against the popular public opinion from both sides. If one cannot say "no" without facing immediate repercussions, then it's not cooperation.

[QUOTE=laserguided;41355585]"illegal things that aren't whistleblowing" aka leaking secrets to the press for the people to know what their elected officials are doing. If they're so concerned about freedom, democracy and transparency then they wouldn't be locking Snowden up, they would be giving him a peace prize.[/QUOTE] Have you read anything beyond headlines? Don't you know that what Snowden leaked goes well beyond what the NSA is doing on American soil? Why do the American people need to know details of hacking programs against China, or how we track the Taliban in other nations, or what programs are operating in Germany? And why on earth should they be giving him a peace prize for disclosing classified details of operations in other countries? That isn't whistleblowing no matter how you look at it. I swear it's like the term 'whistleblowing' gets cheapened a bit more every day. Tomorrow someone could leak a list of the names of US operatives undercover in Al-Qaeda cells and I bet half of Facepunch would be cheering on the 'whistleblower' as those people get beheaded. Not all information is meant to be public. [QUOTE=The golden;41355597]They are going on a international manhunt for a man who busted their asses for massive human rights infringements.[/QUOTE] What human rights infringements did Snowden reveal? When I ask 'what human rights are in question here', the answer 'all those human rights they violated' is downright tautological and not a valid answer.

[QUOTE=valkery;41355712] And shit, page eleven of the document, which I should have read more explicitly, says that a refugee can also be a person who is unable, or unwilling to return to his/her country for fear of persecution. Right there in black and pink, the UN is defending the shit out of Snowden's right to asylum.[/QUOTE] Persecution has specific legal implications though, none of which apply here [editline]7th July 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=hypno-toad;41355766]No it isn't, nor is this even "cooperation". If cooperation in the world isn't 100% unanimous or totally benign, then it not a good thing. What you're seeing is simply an entrenched political/military power structure [I]headed[/I] by the united states, that does not serve the best interest of it's people, be they European or American. Participation in this power structure is not voluntary, it's not cooperation; it's just the US government extorting complacency from smaller European countries against the popular public opinion from both sides. If one cannot say "no" without facing immediate repercussions, then it's not cooperation.[/QUOTE] What happens when a European country says no?

[QUOTE=The golden;41355779]The gross invasion of privacy which people are supposed to be protected from by the fourth amendment?[/QUOTE] Fourth amendment does not apply in the archival of communications, only their specific access and even then it has many exceptions. I think we just discussed this in one of the other threads, actually.

[QUOTE=catbarf;41355767]Have you read anything beyond headlines? Don't you know that what Snowden leaked goes well beyond what the NSA is doing on American soil? Why do the American people need to know details of hacking programs against China, or how we track the Taliban in other nations, or what programs are operating in Germany? [/QUOTE] Spying on foreign countries is not winning any friends or resolving any problems. It's only going to cause a future of perpetual warfare and constant blowback that endangers the civilian and miltiary population.

[QUOTE=hypno-toad;41355800]Spying on foreign countries is not winning any friends or resolving any problems. It's only going to cause a future of perpetual warfare and constant blowback.[/QUOTE] I really can't think of a country that doesn't have an intelligence agency. Maybe Liechtenstein? Doesn't seem like they'll be abolished anytime soon, though. Being kind of necessary, and all.

[QUOTE=scout1;41355783]Fourth amendment does not apply in the archival of communications, only their specific access and even then it has many exceptions. I think we just discussed this in one of the other threads, actually.[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/[/url] They ignored the 12th Article, would have ignored the 13th Article if they had found him sooner, and they are actively ignoring his 14th Article right.

[QUOTE=The golden;41355779]The gross invasion of privacy which people are supposed to be protected from by the fourth amendment?[/QUOTE] The 'invasion of privacy' is contingent with legal precedents established decades ago, is subject to strict limitations and oversight, is legally supported, upheld as valid in court, and is even consistent with the wording regarding privacy in the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights. I don't see people getting up in arms over the FBI's use of wiretapping as a violation of human rights. Call it what it is- overstepping on bounds of privacy. [QUOTE=hypno-toad;41355800]Spying on foreign countries is not winning any friends or resolving any problems. It's only going to cause a future of perpetual warfare and constant blowback that endangers the civilian and miltiary population.[/QUOTE] Half the reason we [i]don't[/i] have perpetual warfare in the modern age is the use of intelligence networks to gather information on other countries. When any country goes to war with another, if we haven't seen it coming six months in advance that's considered an intelligence failure. It forces nations to be honest with each other and it makes sure that everyone's on the level. It may be an evil but it's a necessary evil and it's one that every country implicitly accepts.

[QUOTE=valkery;41355821][url]http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/[/url] They ignored the 12th Article, would have ignored the 13th Article if they had found him sooner, and they are actively ignoring his 14th Article right.[/QUOTE] Err, except for a few problems. Article 12 clearly states arbitrary, which this is not, given his list of criminal charges. Article 14 states "(2) This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations." That about wraps it up, I would think.

[QUOTE=lifehole;41355501]Diplomatic control? The US has too much influence over the world, that much I think people can agree on.[/QUOTE] Obama - World President 2016

[QUOTE=scout1;41355763]Informative for you. I would not like to see Snowden mistreated, though. Besides the fact that it is a disservice to my country, it's not good for our image, either, and goodness knows we don't need to be [I]perceived[/I] any worse.[/QUOTE] but if he goes to the usa he will be tortured and put in front of a kangaroo court. so why do you want him apprehended if you are against those things?

[QUOTE=yawmwen;41355850]but if he goes to the usa he will be tortured and put in front of a kangaroo court. so why do you want him apprehended if you are against those things?[/QUOTE] He will because... you think he will? Please elaborate.