Snowdon is a dummy

I don't believe liars like Oralloy should be left to advance their falsehoods, Olivier.

I dunno.
oralboy and jtt could be our own a2k version of

It was later revealed that the European countries’ actions were prompted by accusations made by the US ambassador to Austria, William Eacho, who alleged that American whistleblower Edward Snowden had been taken on board to help him gain political asylum in Latin America.

By intervening in what they thought were South America’s attempts to grant Snowden asylum, the United States and its allies are undermining the fundamental principles of international law, British human rights activist Peter Tatchell told RT.

“What the United States government is seeking is to obstruct Edward Snowden’s bid to seek asylum. Not to get asylum, but to seek asylum,” Tatchell said. “It has bullied and threatened and menaced other countries around the world to not grant him asylum and to not grant airspace so that a flight can take him to another country. That is a direct attack upon the United Nations’ refugee conventions, and it is shocking and appalling that a supposedly democratic government, in collusion with European governments - including the government in Britain - has been conspiring to not allow Mr. Snowden to make a valid asylum application.”

Quote:

It was later revealed that the European countries’ actions were prompted by accusations made by the US ambassador to Austria, William Eacho, who alleged that American whistleblower Edward Snowden had been taken on board to help him gain political asylum in Latin America.

I hadn't seen that before. Interesting.

From the link

Quote:

It was later revealed that the European countries’ actions were prompted by accusations made by the US ambassador to Austria, William Eacho, who alleged that American whistleblower Edward Snowden had been taken on board to help him gain political asylum in Latin America.

I hadn't seen that before. Interesting.

Quote:

By intervening in what they thought were South America’s attempts to grant Snowden asylum, the United States and its allies are undermining the fundamental principles of international law, British human rights activist Peter Tatchell told RT.

“What the United States government is seeking is to obstruct Edward Snowden’s bid to seek asylum. Not to get asylum, but to seek asylum,” Tatchell said. “It has bullied and threatened and menaced other countries around the world to not grant him asylum and to not grant airspace so that a flight can take him to another country. That is a direct attack upon the United Nations’ refugee conventions, and it is shocking and appalling that a supposedly democratic government, in collusion with European governments - including the government in Britain - has been conspiring to not allow Mr. Snowden to make a valid asylum application.”

I agree. And, as pointed out in the article Walter posted yesterday, their ridiculous reaction is only giving Snowden's position more validity.

Chancellor Angela Merkel has repeatedly said she knew nothing about American surveillance activities in Germany. But documents seen by SPIEGEL show that German intelligence cooperates closely with the NSA and even uses spy software provided by the US.

As new details surface almost daily about the PRISM program, German anger at the government in Berlin increases. The state must protect citizens as well as their privacy, constitutional lawyer Horst Dreier argues.
[...]If a private German company had conducted the surveillance, and not the US National Security Agency NSA, it would be abundantly clear that such a violation of innumerable citizens' right to freedom, privacy and informal self-determination by a private agency would be absolutely unacceptable and absolutely inadmissible. Introducing new norms would not be necessary to prevent such activity; one would merely have to apply the existing ones.

So, if the US violates German basic right,- the legal consequences are not clear?

Not that I know of. If I understand correctly what the Americans are saying, their attitude is: we are not allowed to just monitor our own citizens without control. But foreigners? Anytime and with no limits! That can't really be right; at least it is not along the lines of the German Basic Law.

Should Germany defend itself more decidedly against foreign surveillance in order to fulfill its duty of protection?

I would say so! In any case, one can not put the matter to rest simply by pointing out these are actions not taken by the German government, but by foreign authorities. The exciting question is: to what extent are the state's duties of protection activated if the infringements - violations of constitutional rights such as comprehensive illegal wiretapping - aren't instigated by other citizens, but by other states? Admittedly, these duties of protection are structured in a way that the state has a relative broad scope of discretion. But I feel it is evident that the state must in some manner fulfill these duties of protection and cannot remain completely passive.

That's reasonable, Frank.

You feel that the actions of the NSA are justified and justifiable and I think they're outrageous and violate the 4th Amendment protections of the constitution. It's not surprising that we'd have different opinions on the US government's reaction.

So, you're ok with the President of a sovereign nation being forbidden airspace over numerous European countries on the say-so of a US ambassador, being forced to land and be detained in Austria in order for his plane to be searched for a man who wasn't there? Really?

JPB wrote:

I think it is imperative that the United States bring Snowden to trial. If it doesn't, we might just as well shut down America.

O come on now, shut down America? Have a word with yourself. Snowden hasn't let out anything that compromises national security. He's exposed a system, not just American, that is bloated and believes itself to be above the law. He's more of a muckraker than anything else.

You seem to be advocating one law for spies who break America's laws, and quite another for those who break the laws of another, allied country.

Have you seen this thread?

http://able2know.org/topic/218471-1

Basically, a man who has already been found guilty of kidnap and sentenced to nine years in an Italian jail has been allowed to elude justice because of American heavy-handedness.

The message that's coming out of America is that Americans are above the law, not including Snowden of course.

I know America is still the most powerful country on Earth, but you won't be forever, and one day your very own version of the Suez crisis will happen. Your security forces' behaviour of late has seen that day move a little closer.

O come on now, shut down America?

Have a word with yourself. Snowden hasn't let out anything that compromises national security.

He's exposed a system, not just American, that is bloated and believes itself to be above the law. He's more of a muckraker than anything else.

You seem to be advocating one law for spies who break America's laws, and quite another for those who break the laws of another, allied country.

The message that's coming out of America is that Americans are above the law, not including Snowden of course.

I know America is still the most powerful country on Earth, but you won't be forever...

Our nation has entered a new era that brings profound changes to the way the National Security Agency conducts its mission. The explosion of the World Wide Web has created a need for the Computer Network Operations (CNO) mission. This very important mission is composed of three major parts: network defense, network attack, and computer network exploitation. In order to carry out these functions NSA is looking for people who are highly skilled and impassioned about winning the war in cyberspace. These are NOT your average Computer Science or Engineering jobs!

I said he broke laws and broke his oath of office.
He broke laws…and that means he is a law-breaker. Law-breakers ought to stand trial...which is what I am advocating. I really do not understand why you are not.

He broke laws…and that means he is a law-breaker. Law-breakers ought to stand trial

Quote:

Law breakers like Rosa Parks? When the rich and powerful abuse their power standing up to them is not a crime. That's why there's a difference between ethics and jurisprudence.

more to the point, can he get a fair trial in America? It's a matter of record that Bradley Manning has been tortured. Wayward spies get tortured in America.

Frank wrote:

Is that something you just made up? I do not have any idea of where that comes from?

It's an observation based on what you've said on this one thread and your no comment approach to the thread I linked. If you think criminals who break the law should be punished then America should deport Robert Seldon Lady to Italy.

Do you agree?

USA PRISM Plus will randomly, secretly take photos and tweet them; either straight to the National Security Agency, or just to your friends.

Several options are available to limit when photos are taken and what exactly will be tweeted.

The app will only take photos when your device is in use and not set to silent.

Over 300 million Americans enjoy the services provided by USA PRISM Lite, a vast personal communication data collection network. But it's not just Americans: the NSA's global jurisdiction allows it to serve countless millions more around the world.

Now you can take the next step with USA PRISM Plus, which adds photographic evidence to this collection. Photos taken from your mobile phone without your awareness will be used to determine that you are not engaging in illegal activities. Your activities can be verified by members of the community on Twitter, or you can send the photos straight to the National Security Agency for extra verification.