Edward Snowden & The N.S.A Revelations
Comments
-
JimmyV wrote:
Of course, and I did not deny it.
I will say that I think Benghazi was more of a tragedy and an example of the dangers of bureaucratic red tape than a scandal, but I hear what you are saying.
Same as me. I thought it was a tragedy. The GOP made it a scandal, imo. I was devastated to hear what happened, and then when I found out that the talking points were messed up or whatever, I was pissed that we had dumbshits in charge of that. I was glad Clinton stepped down after that.~Carter~
You can spend your time alone, redigesting past regrets, oh
or you can come to terms and realize
you're the only one who can't forgive yourself, oh
makes much more sense to live in the present tense - Present Tense0 -
what say you about this then? I'm assuming you still hold a British Passport, do you not?Byrnzie wrote:Guitar92player wrote:I am getting the hint you think my views are complete bullshit. Well, my views are mine. In America you can think what you want, and believe what you want. Is it wrong I have hope that my government isn't using their powers for evil against us? I know the gov't does some shady stuff, but I bet every country does. Sorry your country (whatever it is) is so perfect. No one is perfect.
Regarding those statistics, I don't give a shit. The PRISM program can be used to fight more than terrorism. I hope it caught and stopped many criminals. If it hasn't, it should be used for that. It doesn't matter if terrorism rarely happens, when it does it is terrifying and it hurts people more than just a simple death from a car accident; it means that someone purposely killed you (or someone you know) because of religious, social, racial means. If those people can be stopped, that is great. You can't predict a lightning strike, you can't predict when you are about to choke, you never know when a police officer is gonna abuse and/or kill you, you never know when you will be in an accident, but you CAN stop a PLANNED attack despite it rarely happening. If you can stop it despite the fact it kind of intrudes on our lives, is that wrong? Yeah, its secretive, but has it hurt you? No.
You live in China, you are not here. If you were, you'd also realize that it doesn't affect us personally. Yeah, most of us are mad civil liberties are intruded upon, but at the same time we get it. Sorry we think rationally.
I understand your main argument is that its secretive, but many powerful countries probably do something like this as well. China isn't perfect (I know u are not Chinese); they do many shady things as well.
Take secretive out of the equation, what is so bad about it? If its the statistics crap, then reread what I said earlier.
Snowden's motive was genuine, but it was also illegal to give up any kind of defensive strategies to anyone, even if it was a newspaper. Taking that job he knew the consequences of such a situation; hero or not he broke the law. (which I am sure you will counter-argue that the gov't broke the law, but that could be debated due to interpretations of the 4th Amendment).
To me there is no other way to fight terrorism, so they did not convince me of anything. If thinking rationally is being a sheep, then you should try it. :roll:
Sorry if any of this sounded like I am being an asshole. I do not think negatively toward you. I enjoy our conversations on this thread. (I always like to clarify this, sorry if it sounds dumb. lol)
For the record, I don't think your views are bullshit, and I don't think you're an asshole. The only issue I have here is that It sounds to me like you have too much faith in your government. Those fuckers could begin using the information they've gleaned from you and every other American at any time in the future, for nefarious ends. They only need to make a radical policy change - such as widening the definition of the term 'terrorism' to include anything they deem threatening to their interests - and then everything else will fall into place for them, and by then it will be too late.
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=209925_____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '140 -
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... rd-snowden
'Those who wail about the leaks affecting national security might consider the words of Bruce Schneier, a security specialist, who wrote in the New York Times: "The argument that exposing these documents helps the terrorists doesn't even pass the laugh test; there's nothing here that changes anything any potential terrorist would do or not do."0 -
London Bridge wrote:Byrnzie wrote:London Bridge wrote:Hey Mr. Anti-American.
Because pointing out U.S government wrong doing makes someone anti-American, right?
Anyone here feel like they're living in the 1950's?
No, because you think American freedoms are a fucking joke.
1950's....reading about something and actually living in it are 2 different things.
I don't agree with everything my American government does, but in the current spying issue presented by Edward Snowden, I take a stance with my government.
I don't think American freedoms are a fucking joke. I think that portraying America as the Land of The Free is a fucking joke.0 -
Byrnzie wrote:I don't think American freedoms are a fucking joke. I think that portraying America as the Land of The Free is a fucking joke.
To me it says the same thing.
By the way, how is your country's surveillance program coming along? :corn:0 -
pjhawks wrote:Byrnzie wrote:pjhawks wrote:I find it very interesting there are no comments from you in the Chinese worker thread yet you continue to trash the US in every post in this thread.
I find it interesting that that there are no comments from you in the Chinese worker thread either.
why? it's not hypocritical of me to NOT respond in that thread as i'm not going around criticizing other governments like you are.
It's not hypocritical of me not to respond to that thread either. Just because i live in China doesn't mean I'm obliged to respond to every single thread about China.0 -
London Bridge wrote:Byrnzie wrote:I don't think American freedoms are a fucking joke. I think that portraying America as the Land of The Free is a fucking joke.
To me it says the same thing.
By the way, how is your country's surveillance program coming along? :corn:
It's not the same thing. I don't think that the freedoms Americans have are a fucking joke. But I do think the idea that America is the land of the free is a fucking joke. And the fact that you have less than 5 percent of the world's population, but almost a quarter of the world's prisoners, and the fact that the population is almost completely de-politicized - see the Chomsky piece I linked to above - and are not concerned about their government lying to them, and spying on every single U.S citizen, tells me that you are anything but free. You also have a media that operates in almost total subservience to the rich and powerful, which is why Edward Snowden chose a foreign news outlet - the Guardian - to release his information to.0 -
Byrnzie wrote:London Bridge wrote:Byrnzie wrote:I don't think American freedoms are a fucking joke. I think that portraying America as the Land of The Free is a fucking joke.
To me it says the same thing.
By the way, how is your country's surveillance program coming along? :corn:
It's not the same thing. I don't think that the freedoms Americans have are a fucking joke. But I do think the idea that America is the land of the free is a fucking joke. And the fact that you have less than 5 percent of the world's population, but almost a quarter of the world's prisoners, and the fact that the population is almost completely de-politicized - see the Chomsky piece I linked to above - and are not concerned about their government lying to them, and spying on every single U.S citizen, tells me that you are anything but free. You also have a media that operates in almost total subservience to the rich and powerful, which is why Edward Snowden chose a foreign news outlet - the Guardian - to release his information to.
Although I agree with you, America actually still has more freedom and opportunities than most countries. I am free to go from city to city, get a job, earn a living, etc. Sure they spy on us, but they haven't affected our lives negatively. When you say America isn't free it sounds like you think America is a place where everyone being directly controlled by the government. They can see who we talk to, but they don't control how we live our life.
Yes it is sad the government watches us, but it is just your opinion on its severity.
The whole "America: Land of the Free and Home of Opportunities" is true but is over-hyped and over-exaggerated, but its still here, imo.~Carter~
You can spend your time alone, redigesting past regrets, oh
or you can come to terms and realize
you're the only one who can't forgive yourself, oh
makes much more sense to live in the present tense - Present Tense0 -
Uh oh....
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/ju ... -us-france
'...A sense of naked outrage gathered momentum across Europe at the reports that US agencies were bugging and tapping EU offices in Washington and New York, as well as the embassies of several EU member states. The push for clear answers from the Americans threatened to derail long-awaited talks on a transatlantic free trade pact between the US and the EU to create the world's biggest free-trade area.
"Washington is shooting itself in the foot," said Germany's conservative Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung newspaper. "Declaring the EU offices to be a legitimate attack target is more than the unfriendly act of a machine that knows no bounds and may be out of the control of politics and the courts."
..."The Americans justify everything with combatting terrorism," said the Luxembourg foreign minister, Jean Asselborn, who on Sunday described the latest allegations as disgusting. "The EU and its diplomats are not terrorists."
Elmar Brok, the veteran MEP who chairs the European parliament's foreign affairs committee and is from Merkel's Christian Democratic party, said the opening of the trade talks next week had been jeopardised. "How can you negotiate when you have got to fear that your own negotiating position has been intercepted in advance?" he asked.
...France's justice minister, Christiane Taubira, said, if confirmed, the US behaviour was of unspeakable hostility.0 -
Guitar92player wrote:Although I agree with you, America actually still has more freedom and opportunities than most countries. I am free to go from city to city, get a job, earn a living, etc. Sure they spy on us, but they haven't affected our lives negatively. When you say America isn't free it sounds like you think America is a place where everyone being directly controlled by the government. They can see who we talk to, but they don't control how we live our life.
Yes it is sad the government watches us, but it is just your opinion on its severity.
The whole "America: Land of the Free and Home of Opportunities" is true but is over-hyped and over-exaggerated, but its still here, imo.
I didn't say America isn't free. What I am saying is that Americans, possibly more so than in any other country, are subjected to a daily barrage of government propaganda, disguised as 'news'. At least in China everyone knows the government are full of shit, and nobody here bothers reading newspapers. Also, the Chinese know that their communications are spied on by the authorities, which is why most people use VPN's, e.t.c. But then China doesn't pretend to be a democracy. Democracies aren't supposed to carry out covert mass-surveillance operations against their own citizens, with no transparency or accountability, and with no Congressional oversight.
If the Chinese system is so bad, then why is the U.S government trying to hard to imitate it?0 -
Imagine if some dangerous, far right-wing idiot like Michelle Bachman, or Rick Perry, were elected President in the future and declared it an act of terrorism to criticize Israel? They could then trawl through all the e-mail and phone records at their disposal and begin rounding up the undesirables.
You don't think that such a thing could happen in the U.S? Maybe that's the difference between Europeans and Americans - Europeans know what too much power in the hands of the few can lead to.0 -
Byrnzie wrote:Guitar92player wrote:Although I agree with you, America actually still has more freedom and opportunities than most countries. I am free to go from city to city, get a job, earn a living, etc. Sure they spy on us, but they haven't affected our lives negatively. When you say America isn't free it sounds like you think America is a place where everyone being directly controlled by the government. They can see who we talk to, but they don't control how we live our life.
Yes it is sad the government watches us, but it is just your opinion on its severity.
The whole "America: Land of the Free and Home of Opportunities" is true but is over-hyped and over-exaggerated, but its still here, imo.
I didn't say America isn't free. What I am saying is that Americans, possibly more so than in any other country, are subjected to a daily barrage of government propaganda, disguised as 'news'. At least in China everyone knows the government are full of shit, and nobody here bothers reading newspapers. Also, the Chinese know that their communications are spied on by the authorities, which is why most people use VPN's, e.t.c. But then China doesn't pretend to be a democracy. Democracies aren't supposed to carry out covert mass-surveillance operations against their own citizens, with no transparency or accountability, and with no Congressional oversight.
If the Chinese system is so bad, then why is the U.S government trying to hard to imitate it?
Well, here is how Americans are: As kids we know nothing, then as we get older we slowly realize how bullshit the world is, and we also begin to realize how corrupt politicians are. Also, ones who read and watch a lot of news here begin (in later teens and early adulthood) to know which channels and newspapers are the most biased and "more true than others." We know the news is changed and "disguised", but that doesn't mean the event isn't true or is not happening. If a fertilizer plant exploded, it exploded. Simple as that. If a country is mad at another country for whatever reason the news gives, we know there is much more going on than whatever the news said.
The reason why many don't care, in my opinion, is that there lives are so great that they don't care.
But just know that all Americans are not the same, and we are not dumb. You didn't say that, I just want to disclose that. Like I said before, many are living nicely so they don't care what is really happening, and that is a problem, but you can't blame them for being worry-free if they are not being physically harmed.~Carter~
You can spend your time alone, redigesting past regrets, oh
or you can come to terms and realize
you're the only one who can't forgive yourself, oh
makes much more sense to live in the present tense - Present Tense0 -
Guitar92player wrote:Well, here is how Americans are: As kids we know nothing, then as we get older we slowly realize how bullshit the world is, and we also begin to realize how corrupt politicians are. Also, ones who read and watch a lot of news here begin (in later teens and early adulthood) to know which channels and newspapers are the most biased and "more true than others." We know the news is changed and "disguised", but that doesn't mean the event isn't true or is not happening. If a fertilizer plant exploded, it exploded. Simple as that. If a country is mad at another country for whatever reason the news gives, we know there is much more going on than whatever the news said.
The reason why many don't care, in my opinion, is that there lives are so great that they don't care.
But just know that all Americans are not the same, and we are not dumb. You didn't say that, I just want to disclose that. Like I said before, many are living nicely so they don't care what is really happening, and that is a problem, but you can't blame them for being worry-free if they are not being physically harmed.
I have nothing against Americans, and i understand perfectly well why the majority of people don't give a toss about the government. Same in England, which is where I'm from, by the way. But In England, I think the government are kept on a tighter leash, though still with little success. The British government don't give a fuck about the people of Britain, as was evidenced in the run-up to the Iraq war, when they completely ignored the massive outrage and demonstrations. Another example is the massive austerity cuts in the wake of the financial crisis, which targeted the poor, and protected the bankers who caused the whole mess in the first place.
I just wonder how far Americans will let their government go before doing something about it. Allowing people like Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden to be flushed down the shitter because of their whistle-blowing is not cool.Post edited by Byrnzie on0 -
Byrnzie wrote:Imagine if some dangerous, far right-wing idiot like Michelle Bachman, or Rick Perry, were elected President in the future and declared it an act of terrorism to criticize Israel? They could then trawl through all the e-mail and phone records at their disposal and begin rounding up the undesirables.
You don't think that such a thing could happen in the U.S? Maybe that's the difference between Europeans and Americans - Europeans know what too much power in the hands of the few can lead to.
Well, that my friend is called extreme paranoia and you sound like many extremists here who believe the government will do such a thing and are currently planning it.
But I doubt you are like the crazy ones here. 
In order to do that they would have to use the military and/or police force to do that, and since those people have families they will most likely not do such a thing. (I hope). If it does more people got guns today and there will be a backlash.
Granted such a thing kind of happened during the 40s and 50s with McCarthy, but it wasn't as extreme as the scenario you are making up. By the way, I would be one of those people because I cannot believe America is such a great ally to Israel. lol. But that's another topic entirely.~Carter~
You can spend your time alone, redigesting past regrets, oh
or you can come to terms and realize
you're the only one who can't forgive yourself, oh
makes much more sense to live in the present tense - Present Tense0 -
Byrnzie wrote:Guitar92player wrote:Well, here is how Americans are: As kids we know nothing, then as we get older we slowly realize how bullshit the world is, and we also begin to realize how corrupt politicians are. Also, ones who read and watch a lot of news here begin (in later teens and early adulthood) to know which channels and newspapers are the most biased and "more true than others." We know the news is changed and "disguised", but that doesn't mean the event isn't true or is not happening. If a fertilizer plant exploded, it exploded. Simple as that. If a country is mad at another country for whatever reason the news gives, we know there is much more going on than whatever the news said.
The reason why many don't care, in my opinion, is that there lives are so great that they don't care.
But just know that all Americans are not the same, and we are not dumb. You didn't say that, I just want to disclose that. Like I said before, many are living nicely so they don't care what is really happening, and that is a problem, but you can't blame them for being worry-free if they are not being physically harmed.
I have nothing against Americans, and i understand perfectly well why the majority of people don't give a toss about the government. Same in England, which is where I'm from, by the way. But In England, I think the government are kept on a tighter leash, though still with little success. The British government don't give a fuck about the people of Britain, as was evidenced in the run-up to the Iraq war, when they completely ignored the massive outrage and demonstrations. Another example is the massive austerity cuts in the wake of the financial crisis, which targeted the poor, and protected the bankers who caused the whole mess in the first place.
I just wonder how far Americans will let their government go before doing something about it. Allowing people like Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden to be flushed down the shitter because of their whistle-blowing is not cool.
I usually have talks with friends about how we wish our government here were like England's. We don't know exactly how the gov't there works, but it seems better than here. (I am curious to know more about your government, whether through on this thread, PM, or a link would be nice.) ~Carter~
You can spend your time alone, redigesting past regrets, oh
or you can come to terms and realize
you're the only one who can't forgive yourself, oh
makes much more sense to live in the present tense - Present Tense0 -
Guitar92player wrote:I usually have talks with friends about how we wish our government here were like England's. We don't know exactly how the gov't there works, but it seems better than here. (I am curious to know more about your government, whether through on this thread, PM, or a link would be nice.)
They're not much better. At the moment the countries run by a couple of public school boys who are both in the pocket of the bankers. I just don't think they can get away with quite as much as in the U.S. People in the U.K have a tendency to take to the streets and burn shit down when they're pushed too far. Though that doesn't happen nearly half as much as it happens in France.0 -
Hilarious:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/ju ... ian-troops
US military blocks entire Guardian website for troops stationed abroad
Troops deployed to Afghanistan and elsewhere in the Middle East and South Asia have 'theater-wide block' to Guardian
Spencer Ackerman in New York
guardian.co.uk, Monday 1 July 2013
The US military has blocked access to the Guardian’s website for troops in the Middle East and south Asia, after disclosures about widespread US surveillance.
On Friday, the Pentagon and the US army told the Guardian that automated content filters installed on Department of Defense (DoD) networks to prevent the unauthorized dissemination of classified information had blocked access to selected aspects of the Guardian’s website.
But in for troops in Afghanistan, the Middle East and south Asia, the restriction applies to the entire website.
“This is a theater-wide block,” reads a page that loads when troops in Afghanistan using the Defense Department’s non-classified internet protocol (NIPR) network attempt to access the Guardian online...0 -
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... eu-bolivia
James Clapper, EU play-acting, and political priorities
Fixations on denouncing Edward Snowden distract, by design, from the serious transgressions of those who are far more powerful
Glenn Greenwald
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 3 July 2013
'...it has been undeniably clear that James Clapper, the Director of National Intelligence, outright lied to the US Senate - specifically to the Intelligence Committee, the body charged with oversight over surveillance programs - when he said "no, sir" in response to this question from Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden: "Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?"
That Clapper fundamentally misled Congress is beyond dispute. The DNI himself has now been forced by our stories to admit that his statement was, in his words, "clearly erroneous" and to apologize. But he did this only once our front-page revelations forced him to do so: in other words, what he's sorry about is that he got caught lying to the Senate. And as Salon's David Sirota adeptly documented on Friday, Clapper is still spouting falsehoods as he apologizes and attempts to explain why he did it.
How is this not a huge scandal? Intentionally deceiving Congress is a felony, punishable by up to 5 years in prison for each offense. Reagan administration officials were convicted of misleading Congress as part of the Iran-contra scandal and other controversies, and sports stars have been prosecuted by the Obama DOJ based on allegations they have done so.
Beyond its criminality, lying to Congress destroys the pretense of oversight. Obviously, members of Congress cannot exercise any actual oversight over programs which are being concealed by deceitful national security officials.
...But Clapper isn't the only top national security official who has been proven by our NSA stories to be fundamentally misleading the public and the Congress about surveillance programs. As an outstanding Washington Post article by Greg Miller this week documented:
"[D]etails that have emerged from the exposure of hundreds of pages of previously classified NSA documents indicate that public assertions about these programs by senior US officials have also often been misleading, erroneous or simply false."
Please re-read that sentence. It's not just Clapper, but multiple "senior US officials", whose statements have been proven false by our reporting and Edward Snowden's disclosures. Indeed, the Guardian previously published top secret documents disproving the claims of NSA Director Gen. Keith Alexander that the agency is incapable of stating how many Americans are having their calls and emails invaded without warrants, as well as the oft-repeated claim from President Barack Obama that the NSA is not listening in on Americans' calls without warrants. Both of those assertions, as our prior reporting and Miller's article this week demonstrates, are indisputably false.
...In what conceivable sense is this not a serious scandal? If you, as an American citizen, let alone a journalist, don't find it deeply objectionable when top national security officials systematically mislead your representatives in Congress about how the government is spying on you, and repeatedly lie publicly about resulting political controversies over that spying, what is objectionable? If having the NSA engage in secret, indiscriminate domestic spying that warps if not outright violates legal limits isn't a "scandal", then what is?
For many media and political elites, the answer to that question seems clear: what's truly objectionable to them is when powerless individuals blow the whistle on deceitful national security state officials. Hence the endless fixation on Edward Snowden's tone and choice of asylum providers, the flamboyant denunciations of this "29-year-old hacker" for the crime of exposing what our government leaders are doing in the dark, and all sorts of mockery over the drama that resulted from the due-process-free revocation of his passport. This is what our media stars and progressive columnists, pundits and bloggers are obsessing over in the hope of distracting attention away from the surveillance misconduct of top-level Obama officials and their serial deceit about it.
What kind of journalist - or citizen - would focus more on Edward Snowden's tonal oddities and travel drama than on the fact that top US officials have been deceitfully concealing a massive, worldwide spying apparatus being constructed with virtually no accountability or oversight? Just ponder what it says about someone who cares more about, and is angrier about, Edward Snowden's exposure of these facts than they are about James Clapper's falsehoods and the NSA's excesses.
What we see here, yet again, is this authoritarian strain in US political life that the most powerful political officials cannot commit crimes or engage in serious wrongdoing. The only political crimes come from exposing and aggressively challenging those officials.
How is it anything other than pure whistleblowing to disclose secret documents proving that top government officials have been systematically deceiving the public about vital matters and/or skirting if not violating legal and Constitutional limits? And what possible justification is there for supporting the ability of James Clapper to continue in his job despite what he just got caught doing?
EU Leaders
Then we come to the leaders of various EU states. These leaders spent the last week feigning all sorts of righteous indignation over revelations that the NSA was using extreme measures to spy indiscriminately not only on the communications of their citizens en masse but also on their own embassies and consulates - things they learned thanks to Edward Snowden's self-sacrificing choice to reveal to the world what he discovered inside the NSA.
But on Tuesday night, the governments of three of those countries - France, Spain and Portugal - abruptly withdrew overflight rights for an airplane carrying Bolivian President Evo Morales, who was attempting to fly home from a conference in Russia. That conduct forced a diversion of Morales' plan to Austria, where he remained for 13 hours before being able to leave this morning.
These EU governments did that because they suspected - falsely, it now seems - that Morales' plane was also carrying Snowden: the person who enabled them to learn of the NSA spying aimed at their citizens and themselves that they claim to find so infuriating. They wanted to physically prevent Bolivia from considering or granting Snowden's request for asylum, a centuries-old right in international law. Meanwhile, the German government - which has led the ritualistic condemnations of NSA spying that Snowden exposed - summarily rejected Snowden's application for asylum almost as soon as it hit their desks.
A 2013 report from Open Society documents that Spain and Portugal were among the nations who participated in various ways in rendition flights - ie kidnapping - by the US. In particular, the report found, "Spain has permitted use of its airspace and airports for flights associated with CIA secret detention and extraordinary rendition operations." Similarly, "Portugal has permitted use of its airspace and airports for flights associated with CIA extraordinary rendition operations." The French judiciary previously investigated reports that the French government knowingly allowed the CIA to use its airspace for renditions.
So these EU states are perfectly content to allow a country - when it's the US - to use their airspace to kidnap people from around the world with no due process. But they will physically stop a plane carrying the president of a sovereign state - when it's from Latin America - in order to subvert the well-established process for seeking asylum from political persecution (and yes: the US persecutes whistleblowers).
All of this smacks of exactly the kind of rank imperialism and colonialism that infuriates most of Latin America, and further exposes the emptiness of American and western European lectures about the sacred rule of law. This is rogue nation behavior. As human rights law professor Sarah Joseph put it:
As the Index on Censorship said to EU states this morning: "Members of the EU have a duty to protect freedom of expression and should not interfere in an individual's attempts to seek asylum. Edward Snowden is a whistleblower whose free speech rights should be protected not criminalised."
As usual, US officials and their acolytes who invoke "the law" to demand severe punishment for powerless individuals (Edward Snowden, Bradley Manning) instantly exploit the same concept to protect US political officials, their owners and their allies from the worst crimes: torture, warrantless eavesdropping, rendition, systemic financial fraud, deceiving Congress and the US public about their surveillance behavior. If you're spending your time calling for Ed Snowden's head but not James Clapper's, or if you're obsessed with Snowden's fabricated personality attributes (narcissist!) but apathetic about rampant, out-of-control NSA surveillance, it's probably worth spending a few moments thinking about what this priority scheme reveals.0 -
http://search.yahoo.com/r/_ylt=A0oG7lrR ... 52558.html
By Timothy Heritage and Steve Gutterman
MOSCOW (Reuters) - Edward Snowden should find another country to seek refuge in, a Russian official said on Thursday, signaling Moscow's growing impatience over the former U.S. spy agency contractor's stay at a Moscow airport.
Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said Russia had received no request for political asylum from Snowden and he had to solve his problems himself after 11 days in the transit area of Moscow's Sheremetyevo airport.
President Vladimir Putin has refused to extradite the American and Russian officials have delighted in his success in staying out of the United States' clutches since revealing details of secret U.S. government surveillance programs.
But Moscow also has made clear that Snowden is an increasingly unwelcome guest because the longer he stays, the greater the risk of the diplomatic standoff causing lasting damage to relations with Washington.
"He needs to choose a place to go," Ryabkov told Reuters. "As of this moment, we do not have a formal application from Mr Snowden asking for asylum in the Russian Federation."
Ryabkov told Itar-Tass news agency separately that Russia "cannot solve anything for him" and the situation should now be resolved "one way or the other".
His remarks echoed comments by Putin, who has urged Snowden, 30, to leave as soon as he can.
France and Italy, both U.S. allies, said they had rejected asylum requests from Snowden.
"Like many countries France has received, via its ambassador in Moscow, an asylum request from Edward Snowden. For legal reasons and given the applicant's situation, it will not be processed," Interior Minister Manuel Valls said in a statement.
Valls had said earlier that France's relations with the United States would not allow it to harbor Snowden.
Italian Foreign Minister Emma Bonino said any asylum request would have to be presented in person at the border or on Italian territory, which Snowden had not done.
"As a result there do not exist the legal conditions to accept such a request, which in the government's view would not be acceptable on a political level either," she told parliament.
On Monday, Putin said Snowden could only be granted asylum by Moscow if he agreed to stop actions that could harm the United States.
Putin's press secretary, Dmitry Peskov, said on Tuesday that Snowden had withdrawn his interest in asylum in Russia after Putin spelled out the terms. His options have narrowed further since then as no country has agreed to grant him asylum.
INDEPENDENCE DAY
Russian officials have kept Snowden at arm's length since he landed from Hong Kong on June 23, saying the transit area where passengers stay between flights is neutral territory and he will be on Russian soil only if he goes through passport control.
Moscow has also done nothing to trumpet his presence or parade him before cameras and Putin has avoided the temptation to mock Obama when asked about the affair in public. He said last week he would prefer not to deal with it at all.
Relations with Washington have been strained since Putin's return to the presidency last year. He has accused the United States of backing protesters demanding his removal and Washington is concerned that he is cracking down on dissent.
But there have been signs of an improvement as the sides try to cooperate more on security since the April 15 Boston marathon bombings, in which two ethnic Chechens are the main suspects. The United States has also shown some restraint in its remarks.
"We continue to talk with the Russian government every day (about Snowden), absolutely every day, including myself," U.S. ambassador Michael McFaul told reporters. "We hope to resolve this ... in a way that we want to have it ended and so far we're very happy with our interactions with the Russian government."
In a message to Obama on U.S. Independence Day, Putin said the United States and Russia shared a special responsibility for global security and counter-terrorism and that he is certain they can agree on key issues despite differences, the Kremlin said.
Russia's Interfax news agency underlined Washington's own determination to keep ties on an even keel, quoting an unnamed source as saying Snowden's case had not been raised by U.S. Justice Department officials at recent talks in Moscow.
Russia has, however, reveled in the diplomatic fallout since Bolivian President Evo Morales, a Putin ally, was held up on his way home from an energy meeting in Moscow because a number of European countries refused initially to let his plane into their airspace over suspicions that Snowden was on board.
Bolivia blamed the delays on Washington and the Russian Foreign Ministry criticized three European Union member states.
"The actions of the authorities of France, Spain and Portugal could hardly be considered friendly actions towards Bolivia," it said. "Russia calls on the international community to comply strictly with international legal principles."
(Additional reporting by Natalie Huet in Paris; Writing by Timothy Heritage; Editing by Robin Pomeroy)_____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '140 -
During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.
George Orwell.
"Often the best source of information about waste, fraud, and abuse in government is an existing government employee committed to public integrity and willing to speak out. Such acts of courage and patriotism, which can sometimes save lives and often save taxpayer dollars, should be encouraged rather than stifled. We need to empower federal employees as watchdogs of wrongdoing and partners in performance. I will strengthen whistleblower laws to protect federal workers who expose waste, fraud, and abuse of authority in government. I will ensure that federal agencies expedite the process for reviewing whistleblower claims and whistleblowers have full access to courts and due process" -- Barrack Obama 2008live and let live...unless it violates the pearligious doctrine.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.8K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110K The Porch
- 274 Vitalogy
- 35K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.2K Flea Market
- 39.1K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help