Amnesty International: USA must not persecute whistleblower Edward Snowden

[Catherina]

2 July 2013

USA must not persecute whistleblower Edward Snowden

“The US attempts to pressure governments to block Snowden’s attempts to seek asylum are deplorable. It is his unassailable right, enshrined in international law, to claim asylum and this should not be impeded. ”

Michael Bochenek, Director of Law and Policy at Amnesty International.



The US authorities’ relentless campaign to hunt down and block whistleblower Edward Snowden’s attempts to seek asylum is deplorable and amounts to a gross violation of his human rights Amnesty International said today.

...

“No country can return a person to another country where there is a serious risk of ill-treatment,” said Bochenek.

...

"It appears he is being charged by the US government primarily for revealing its - and other governments’ - unlawful actions that violate human rights,” said Bochenek.

“No one should be charged under any law for disclosing information of human rights violations. Such disclosures are protected under the rights to information and freedom of expression.”

...

“Snowden is a whistleblower. He has disclosed issues of enormous public interest in the US and around the world. And yet instead of addressing or even owning up to these actions, the US government is more intent on going after Edward Snowden.”

“Any forced transfer to the USA would put him at risk of human rights violations and must be challenged,” said Michael Bochenek.

https://www.amnesty.org/en/news/usa-must-not-persecute-whistleblower-edward-snowden-2013-07-02

[gcomeau]

1. Prosecute =/= persecute. -eom

[rbixby]

3. That's what I think too

He knew the risks involved with letting this genie out of the bottle (and I commend him for it), but what he did was HIGHLY illegal.

[sabrina 1]

8. Persecute = torture. See Bradley Manning, Whistle Blower.

[gcomeau]

12. Which has what rto do with Snowden...

...blatantly and massively violating the law then running away to avoid prison time?

[sabrina 1]

13. Which has WHAT TO DO with what we have learned??

[gcomeau]

14. I can't even connect that response to my post...

Did you just pick that reply out of a hat?

[sabrina 1]

15. Here, let me help you. We just learned of a massive surveillance program of the American people

by their government. Did you not know what has been revealed? It took a number of messengers to get this information to the American people, going back to the Bush years. All of them have been attacked and smeared and prosecuted, but more of them keep coming forward. The latest messenger is just one more and no doubt there will be more, since people actually do care about this democracy.

But you seem focused on the messengers rather than the message. I can only assume that is because you are not aware of the seriousness of the message in terms of the survival of this democracy.

[gcomeau]

17. No... let ME help YOU...

"We just learned of a massive surveillance program of the American people by their government"

No we didn't.

"Did you not know what has been revealed? "

I do. You apparently don't. Here's what was NOT revealed:

1. Any illegal activity by the NSA (the program was authorized by Congress)
2. Active mass surveillance of Americans (Even Snowden's own fucking slides contradict him on this point)
3. Any revelation that the NSA conducts mass data mining on international communications (USA today had a cover story on this in freaking 2006, sorry you were asleep the last 7 years. Not my problem)

[sabrina 1]

18. I am a Verizon customer, I now know that every call I, and millions of other Americans

make, is being monitored by the US Government. You can't help since clearly you support these policies. I am counting on Democrats like Ron Wyden and Udall and Grayson and Conyers and all the Whistle Blowers both past, present and no doubt future, to help the American people end these egregious, anti Constitutional policies. They will have the support of all Americans who cherish the right to live free of government intrusion.

You go right on desperately trying to defend these policies. You have a right to be so very, very wrong.

[gcomeau]

19. No. They. Are. Not.

You do not now know that, you now delusionally believe that. There's a difference.

[sabrina 1]

20. Haven't been keeping up, have you? Lawsuits already filed should be interesting, especially

the discovery phases. Yes, we do know, because the POTUS confirmed it. Unless you don't believe him either.

[gcomeau]

22. Oh I believe him.

I also understood the words he spoke however. Which you clearly didn't.

[sabrina 1]

27. I don't think you did understand him. He tried to explain why they are spying on Americans

but it was extremely difficult for him to do. But he sure didn't deny it. If you believe him then you know they are guilty as charged and now scrambling to try to excuse it.

[gcomeau]

29. No he did not.

He said people were NOT listening to your calls. Those exact words. So please tell me how you go from this exact quote:

"Now, let — let me take the two issues separately. When it comes to telephone calls, nobody is listening to your telephone calls. That’s not what this program’s about."

...to your baffling belief that he said the government was monitoring every call you make?

[sabrina 1]

41. Yes, he did. He said they were 'collecting and storing' your phone data. That is disgraceful, that

is unacceptable in any free country and that is why there is so much outrage. They ARE monitoring every call we make, he admitted it. If my neighbor was logging info on when and to whom I am making calls and 'collecting and storing' that info for future reference, I would call the police and most likely be able to sue him. Peeping toms are peeping toms no matter how anyone tries to defend it.

You won't mind then if people watch your phone habits? Your internet communications? Who are these people? Private 'security' Corporations who are known for outsourcing their labor to maximize their profits. You have no idea who is watching your phone habits but you are defending it anyhow? Well give up your own rights, but don't dare to give up anyone else's. You have no problem living in a surveilled society? You do that. The rest of us will do what we can to put an end to these crimes.

[Mojorabbit]

51. There are several threads citing a large group of senators who state the opposite

Obviously they were in the dark also.

[former9thward]

49. What is your position on Daniel Ellsberg?

He ran away too after "blatantly and massively violating the law".

[kenny blankenship]

2. We always do the opposite of what they say - haven't they figured that out yet?

They should say instead, "The US must persecute Edward Snowden!"

[woo me with science]

4. K&R

Under the bus!

Under the relentless, barreling, authoritarian bus.

[ProSense]

5. Amnesty is simply repeating

a dubious claim: http://sync.democraticunderground.com/10023083345#post6

Senior US officials have already condemned Snowden without a trial, labelling him both guilty and a traitor, raising serious questions as to whether he’d receive a fair trial. Likewise the US authorities move to charge Snowden under the Espionage Act could leave him with no provision to launch a public interest whistle-blowing defence under US law.

"It appears he is being charged by the US government primarily for revealing its - and other governments’ - unlawful actions that violate human rights,” said Bochenek.

“No one should be charged under any law for disclosing information of human rights violations. Such disclosures are protected under the rights to information and freedom of expression.”

Besides filing charges against Snowden, the US authorities have revoked his passport – which interferes with his rights to freedom of movement and to seek asylum elsewhere.

“Snowden is a whistleblower. He has disclosed issues of enormous public interest in the US and around the world. And yet instead of addressing or even owning up to these actions, the US government is more intent on going after Edward Snowden.”

Snowden broke the law. To expect that the U.S. would not prosecute is silly.

Bruce Schneier:

Edward Snowden broke the law by releasing classified information. This isn't under debate; it's something everyone with a security clearance knows. It's written in plain English on the documents you have to sign when you get a security clearance, and it's part of the culture. The law is there for a good reason, and secrecy has an important role in military defense.

But before the Justice Department prosecutes Snowden, there are some other investigations that ought to happen.

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2013/06/prosecuting_sno.html

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023068663

Jimmy Carter on Snowden: "He's obviously violated the laws of America, for which he's responsible."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023119933

There Are 12 Million Stateless People Around The World, But Edward Snowden Isn’t One Of Them
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023149095

[datasuspect]

6. they never loved obama

don't they look at pictures of his dog?

[Cali_Democrat]

7. Snowden admits he broke the law

Amnesty International is saying the US can't enforce its own laws? How many Americans voted for Amnesty International?

Prosecution is not persecution.

[sabrina 1]

9. So did Manning. But he didn't expect to be tortured. Whistle Blowers from countries that torture

Whistle Blowers have traditionally sought asylum in other countries. Once this country decided to do this, it was inevitable that from now on, Whistle Blowers will be seeking asylum elsewhere.

[Cleita]

10. The fact that Amnesty International has involved themselves shows that

we are regarded as a nation that brutalizes our political prisoners.

The people who brought us here in the Bush Administration are walking around free instead of being investigated for and charged with war crimes. We have become no better than Soviet Russia, Franco's Spain or Pinochet's Chile.

[G_j]

23. exactly!

US accused of inhumane treatment over Wikileaks soldier case

Amnesty International has urged the US authorities to alleviate the harsh pre-trial detention conditions of Bradley Manning,

http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/us-accused-inhumane-treatment-over-wikileaks-soldier-case-2011-01-24

"We are concerned that the conditions inflicted on Bradley Manning are unnecessarily severe and amount to inhumane treatment by the US authorities," said Susan Lee, Amnesty International’s Programme Director for the Americas.

"The repressive conditions imposed on Manning breach the US's obligations to treat detainees with humanity and dignity," said Susan Lee.

"We are also concerned that isolation and prolonged cellular confinement, which evidence shows can cause psychological impairment, may undermine Bradley Manning's ability to defend himself," said Susan Lee.

[Vietnameravet]

26. I lived in a fascist country Ceita and you simply dont know what you are talking about..

What nonsense you are peddling..Say Hi to Glenn Beck next time you chat with him..

[Cleita]

30. Really, and what country is that?

If this is so, then you should be able to see what's going on very clearly.

[Vietnameravet]

31. I was in the Philippine Islands when Ferdinand Marcos took over..

I say again, you really dont know what you are talking about in making ridiculous comparisons..

[Cleita]

35. And how did Ferdinand take over?

He made sure he won all the elections by cheating. That's what's happening here.

[gcomeau]

36. WHAT???

What the fuck are you even talking about? How does ANYTHING to do with Snowden have ANYTHING to do with election stealing?????

[Cleita]

37. Nothing. Neither does Ferdinand Marcus but the post I was replying to was about him. n/t

[DevonRex]

11. They revoked his passport. That's what happens on extradition request.

Look it up. Snowden should have.

[sabrina 1]

16. The US Government revoked his passport. What has that got to do with any other country?

Dissidents from other nations where they may face torture, as is the case here now, will be considered for asylum by civilized countries. That the offending nation revokes their passports, which they are free to do, will not have any effect on his request for asylum, other than prove why he needs it.

[DevonRex]

28. That's what the US did. Revoked his passport. Big deal. That's what they DO

as soon as they request extradition. That's why he couldn't get into Russia at first. No passport. Then he asked for asylum. Russia had a condition. Not good enough for Ed so he's stuck at the airport.

Without a passport Ed has to request asylum. The other countries have to say yes or nay. So far they say nay. They don't want him hacking them, either. He'll never work legitimately in IT again. Nobody trusts him in the business. No country trusts him not to do the same thing to them that he did to us. Because they ALL do what we do. Most use our services. Except China, Russia, North Korea and many in the ME, that is.

South America? That would be tricky for everyone. But very, very interesting. Venezuela and Ecuador know what they'd be bringing into play. They're getting pressure from Brazil and Argentina and Colombia and Chile to stop this nonsense and stop it now, before it gets out of hand. That's an honest assessment of the situation and the forces at work, while leaving out the 4 main outside players in the field down there.

[sabrina 1]

38. Every dissident has an absolute right to seek asylum when it is clear they will not be

treated fairly in their own countries. The very act of revoking his passport demonstrates that this is a country where justice for any Whistle Blower is unlikely.

Asylum is always refused by some countries, mostly countries that are either being threatened with something, or that are in league with the country in question.

Anyhow, it doesn't matter what happens to him in terms of the much, much bigger story, which is what happens to a once proud democracy now that it has been revealed that Americans are being spied on by their own government?

That is up to the American people. No one outside can help them restore their democracy. Thankfully this is a very big issue for millions of American citizens and as has always happened in the past, it will remain so until it is resolved and those responsible named and held accountable. It may take some time, but the process has begun.

[DevonRex]

40. And each country has a right to say no fucking way. We don't want traitors

in our midst. Look what you did to a country you say you love! What will you do to US? Snowden is damaged goods.

[sabrina 1]

44. But that's now what the US does when asked for asylum, depending on who is asking. They

don't say 'we don't want traitors here' they WELCOME them with open arms and make a big deal over it.

The latest was a good decision imo, the Chinese dissident viewed in his country as a traitor, was welcomed here. However it has now been revealed that he was spied on through phones given to him as gifts after he arrrived. Unbelievable, this spying on people, it has to stop and it will. People will not tolerate this kind of oppression for long, they never have. It's always had its defenders, which has delayed the process, but in the end, the defenders generally lose. See East Germany for more recent examples of this kind of thing.

[treestar]

43. No one has a right to seek asylum in any country without

That country's permission.

[sabrina 1]

45. What?? No one has a right to ask? They most certainly do. The country has a right to either

grant that request or refuse it, but EVERYONE has a right to ask! Where do you come up with these opinions? Show me a country that has a law saying 'you have no right to ask us for asylum'?? I learn the most disturbing new things here every day! Fortunately most of them are fantasies.

[treestar]

46. If a country wanted to have that law, they could

Being sovereign nations, they have the right to have an asylum law or not. Why do you think your personal opinion of the way things should be are the ways things are, especially internationally?

[sabrina 1]

47. YOU said that 'no one has the right to ask for asylum'. That is a ludicrous statement. Of course

have a right to ask. You obviously realize that there is no such law, ANYWHERE, forbidding the asking for asylum. Only the right to accept or refuse.

[Savannahmann]

24. I wonder how many Cuban Refugee's

Arrive in Florida with passports and other travel documents? I wonder if all those undocumented workers who arrive here have their Passports up to date?

That in other words, is a petty excuse. The US is again bullying people to get what we want. For Ecuador, we threaten to slap tariff's back on if they don't co-operate. Who knows what threats we gave Russia and the rest. This incident proves one thing. We are the worlds biggest bullies all right.

[WillyT]

21. K & R !!!

[CakeGrrl]

25. They're looking to PROSECUTE. -nt

[davidn3600]

34. ...and torture and shut him up

[struggle4progress]

32. 22 CFR Subpart E — Denial, Revocation, and Restriction of Passports

22 CFR Subpart E — Denial, Revocation, and Restriction of Passports

§ 51.60 Denial and restriction of passports.

... (b) The Department may refuse to issue a passport in any case in which the Department determines or is informed by competent authority that:

(1) The applicant is the subject of an outstanding Federal warrant of arrest for a felony ... <or>

(5) The applicant is the subject of a request for extradition or provisional request for extradition which has been presented to the government of a foreign country ...

§ 51.62 Revocation or limitation of passports.

(a) The Department may revoke or limit a passport when

(1) The bearer of the passport may be denied a passport under 22 CFR 51.60 ...

§ 51.65 Notification of denial or revocation of passport.

(a) The Department will notify in writing any person .. whose passport has been revoked ...

§ 51.66 Surrender of passport.

The bearer of a passport that is revoked must surrender it .. upon demand ...

http://cfr.regstoday.com/22cfr51.aspx#22_CFR_51pSUBPART_E

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

33. AI doesn't get it. Snowden is a really scary Bogeyman who threatens the nice, privacy loving, NSA.

[Waiting For Everyman]

39. It's the pressure to talk other countries out of accepting him that is really creepy

and overbearing.

[treestar]

42. What proof do they have that anyone is blocking anything?

Most of the countries have insisted the application must be made on their soil. That is not the doing of the US.

[sabrina 1]

48. Biden calling Correa and asking him to refuse? That would seem to qualify.

[treestar]

50. Is there a transcript of the Biden - Correa conversation?