Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Another]

What about non-US citizens expressing their disappointment at being so totally spied upon outside of US?

What about US expressing their indifference to personal rights of non-US citizens?

What about exploiting legal loopholes like US and UK cross-spying and exchanging information despite clear intent of laws that prohibit massive warrant-less domestic spying?

[palsch]

What about non-US citizens expressing their disappointment at being so totally spied upon outside of US?

Pretty much the same as Americans (or usually their government) protesting against intrusions by, say, China or Iran. Yeah, you protest it. Yeah, you complain and accuse and do what you can to stop it. But you also do the same thing right back as soon as you have the opportunity or desire.

One of the more interesting articles I read in response to this was the threat of increased industrial and economic espionage against American companies. Such spying for financial reasons is seen as reasonable by plenty of countries worldwide, and the idea that America only spies for national security reasons is seen by those nations as a polite fiction. So stories of expansive American spying are seen as signs of economic warfare that should be responded to in kind.

What about exploiting legal loopholes like US and UK cross-spying and exchanging information despite clear intent of laws that prohibit massive warrant-less domestic spying?

Those laws still apply, in that the government couldn't take legal action based on information that is illegal for the USA to gather (no such restrictions in the UK, where gathering such information isn't so illegal, yet). They might get intelligence from the UK but couldn't act on it unless they had independent information that could hold up in court.

This sort of loophole is what has stuck the USA with GTMO inmates who can never be released. The government is convinced that they are dangerous and need to be locked up. They also are convinced based on information that could never be submitted to a court.

Information sucked up under Britain's lax privacy protections would likely be as inadmissible in American court as testimony under torture. Under a rule of law reading then minimisation procedures would be in place to select from those data troves only information that could be legally acquired and acted on.

Of course, the reverse is less true for Britain.

[PanH]

Within a country descriptions of left and right (or any other axis you care to speak of) tend to be based on that countries particular window. When comparing countries you tend to judge policies and politicians based on their position in your own window. So Obama is centre/right-right wing economically speaking in Britain's current window, but still on the left of America's. And voters in America are unlikely to give a damn about where he lies on Britain's, given the window is in no small part defined by the range of views and general perceptions of the voters themselves.

There is only one definition for right-wing and left-wing.
Right wing : accepts or supports social inequality or social hierarchy.
Left wing : accepts or supports social equality.

That's it. This is not based on the political spectrum of a country.

[DG]

Because fleeing to South America is just a thing. People just really like SA. Also, Assange is there I believe.

Seriously? You believe Assange is in Ecuador?

[GlyphGryph]

Admittedly he's in a part of Ecuador that isn't really that close, physically, to Ecuador.

[palsch]

Seriously? You believe Assange is in Ecuador?

Well technically the embassy is Ecuadorian territory...

Fakedit; ninjaed...

There is only one definition for right-wing and left-wing.
Right wing : accepts or supports social inequality or social hierarchy.
Left wing : accepts or supports social equality.

That's it. This is not based on the political spectrum of a country.

OK. Now get those definitions accepted universally by all political scientists and commentators over the more common definitions.

[XXSockXX]

Within a country descriptions of left and right (or any other axis you care to speak of) tend to be based on that countries particular window. When comparing countries you tend to judge policies and politicians based on their position in your own window. So Obama is centre/right-right wing economically speaking in Britain's current window, but still on the left of America's. And voters in America are unlikely to give a damn about where he lies on Britain's, given the window is in no small part defined by the range of views and general perceptions of the voters themselves.

There is only one definition for right-wing and left-wing.
Right wing : accepts or supports social inequality or social hierarchy.
Left wing : accepts or supports social equality.

That's it. This is not based on the political spectrum of a country.

By that definition there would be no right wing parties in many countries. You have to take political spectrums into account if you compare countries, you'll get a very distorted view of things if you don't. Political consensus in Britain may look left wing from an US perspective, but looks right wing from a German perspective.

Apparently Snowden is still in Moscow.

[MaximumZero]

There is only one definition for right-wing and left-wing.
Right wing : accepts or supports social inequality or social hierarchy.
Left wing : accepts or supports social equality.

That's it. This is not based on the political spectrum of a country.

By that definition there would be no right wing parties in many countries. You have to take political spectrums into account if you compare countries, you'll get a very distorted view of things if you don't. Political consensus in Britain may look left wing from an US perspective, but looks right wing from a German perspective.

Apparently Snowden is still in Moscow.

Germany is an L+ Utopia? When did that happen?

[XXSockXX]

Germany is an L+ Utopia? When did that happen?

It is not. But economically speaking all relevant parties are more or less social-democratic. Britain and the US are usually portrayed as using the "anglo-saxon" model of free market economy, while continental Europe tends to prefer much more regulation or "social market economy" as we call it.

[Scoops Novel]

Why the heavy FSB presence in the airport, and the "technically true" earlier denouncement by the foreign minister? He's apparently still at the airport according to Putin (incidentally having surpassed the standard transport time). Is it a case of the minister not having yet been properly briefed, changing plans or deliberate ambiguity?

[Urist McDepravity]

Is it a case of the minister not having yet been properly briefed, changing plans or deliberate ambiguity?

Neither, its just diplomatic way of telling Kerry to shut up and stop his insane demands. Putin wouldn't have to be that straight if Kerry would listen to Lavrov.

[misko27]

Because fleeing to South America is just a thing. People just really like SA. Also, Assange is there I believe.

Seriously? You believe Assange is in Ecuador?

Assange is in Ecuador the same way I am a International traveler. Sometimes I go out of my way to jump on various missions to the UN (Sometimes not intentionally. There is at least 15 or so Missions next to the Grand Central Dollar pizza place. I walk through multiple countries to get my pizza.)

[Loud Whispers]

OK. Now get those definitions accepted universally by all political scientists and commentators over the more common definitions.

HEheheheheh
A million fanatics are never wrong!

[Sheb]

But then who in its right mind listen to Lavrov? Although he's not as bad a Rogozin, whose job is to sit in NATO meeting and tweet insane stuff.

[Tarqiup Inua]

Amazed as always... Americans want Russians to extradite someone from international transit area which (as far as I understand it) isn't anyone's territory in the first place... that's like... uhh...

What will come next? Will they accuse Putin of not being a good American? It's not like they didn't claim Assange betrayed U.S. by publishing their diplomatic cables... how do you even betray country you are not a citizen of?

I am not an international law student or anything like that but I am starting to get impression neither is anyone in U.S. government.