Treason?
polaris_x
Posts: 13,559
http://www.thestar.com/news/world/artic ... on-youtube
*******************************
Story of a Syrian refugee who cut his arm to load a memory card of videos shot from inside Syria - videos that could not be uploaded in Syria because of the tight controls on the internet there.
Anyways - was wondering if we should extradite this guy back and have him tried for treason?
*******************************
Story of a Syrian refugee who cut his arm to load a memory card of videos shot from inside Syria - videos that could not be uploaded in Syria because of the tight controls on the internet there.
Anyways - was wondering if we should extradite this guy back and have him tried for treason?
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
actually i was thinking about wikileaks ... but sure ...
syria
I guess Chaney is right in not wanting to set foot in Toronto, because he really knows that he belongs with everybody else in the Hague.
The poison from the poison stream caught up to you ELEVEN years ago and you floated out of here. Sept. 14, 08
I would think extratition would be a political exchange of some sort..I didn't read the story but with what I have read on here it makes me wonder why it would be concidered unless there was something to gain by the US.
Godfather.
http://www.international.gc.ca/international/syria-syrie.aspx?lang=eng&view=d
:ugeek:
Given that the actions videotaped by the refugee in question tend to illegitimize the government of which you insinuate he is guilty of treason against, i would say, "no".
International opinion, and international law - if it ever got around to that, would most likely side with the refugee, acknowledging the gross human rights abuses of the Syrian government, and would grant the kid asylum based on his refugee status.
I think i sort of see your point in trying to call out the hypocrisy of the US government in one or two recent cases, but the difference here is that the cases you are referring to involve the public disclosure of "state secrets" or "classified" information. Does that classified information contain evidence of human rights or us sovereign rights abuses? Sure, probably. But the issue was the classified nature of the documents.
In the case of this Syrian kid, his disclosure was
a. not related to state secrets
b. not against a country generally considered to have a "legitimate" government by most global parties
? there. i got in to it.
If I opened it now would you not understand?
oh.
Well in that case ...
:roll: :roll:
If I opened it now would you not understand?
i'm not sure what is so funny ...
the reality is in both instances ... information is kept hidden to avoid embarrassment to the state and to prevent crimes from being shown ...
i think i was just agreeing with you, but also saying, boy that's funny. ie. - i take your point now -- sure is ridiculous -- "banned the release of videos not sanctioned by the state" is so over the top dictatorial as to be laughable.
To the topic of discrepancies still remaining, while i admittedly take your point on the "abuse" of "state secret" status to avoid embarrassment, the comparison still seems off in the sense that what is being addressed in the US cases is the divulgence of *actual* classified material (be it justly classified or not) versus this Syrian case where the world community would seemingly reject the claim that personally recorded public activity could be considered by any legitimate government to be de facto classified in any but the most narrow of cases, if at all.
I guess what i'm still trying to get at is, although there is some use in pointing out how this Syrian case makes the US government look somewhat hypocritical, there is still a real difference to be reconciled between the US cases where recorded & government kept intelligence is leaked, and this Syrian example where the accusation of "treason" is something that international opinion &\or law would not uphold as legitimate, based probably on grounds of fundamental human rights.
If I opened it now would you not understand?
to me ... it wasn't ever to say one was exactly the same as the other ... only to point out the hypocrisy as well as how our biases shape our positions ...