NSA spied on EU

[Aaron MkII]

It is not so much that exceptions could be made, it is rather that for humanitarian reasons the embassy can give Snowden a letter of safe conduct to an embassy where he could then ask for Asylum.

The same applies to Austria and to all other nations. That no nation is willing to do so is a pretty huge indictment.

Of him or us? I see a lot of nations that talk a lot about human rights and the excesses of America on that article Stas posted (Germany included) and yet when a chance arises to do something, we sit on our hands.

[salm]

It is not so much that exceptions could be made, it is rather that for humanitarian reasons the embassy can give Snowden a letter of safe conduct to an embassy where he could then ask for Asylum.

The same applies to Austria and to all other nations. That no nation is willing to do so is a pretty huge indictment.

Apparently it is according to the Aufenthaltsgesetz Kapitel 2 Abschnitt 5 Paragraph 22:

§ 22
Aufnahme aus dem Ausland
Einem Ausländer kann für die Aufnahme aus dem Ausland aus völkerrechtlichen oder dringenden humanitären Gründen eine Aufenthaltserlaubnis erteilt werden. Eine Aufenthaltserlaubnis ist zu erteilen, wenn das Bundesministerium des Innern oder die von ihm bestimmte Stelle zur Wahrung politischer Interessen der Bundesrepublik Deutschland die Aufnahme erklärt hat. Im Falle des Satzes 2 berechtigt die Aufenthaltserlaubnis zur Ausübung einer Erwerbstätigkeit.

[FTeik]

It is not so much that exceptions could be made, it is rather that for humanitarian reasons the embassy can give Snowden a letter of safe conduct to an embassy where he could then ask for Asylum.

The same applies to Austria and to all other nations. That no nation is willing to do so is a pretty huge indictment.

Apparently it is according to the Aufenthaltsgesetz Kapitel 2 Abschnitt 5 Paragraph 22:

§ 22
Aufnahme aus dem Ausland
Einem Ausländer kann für die Aufnahme aus dem Ausland aus völkerrechtlichen oder dringenden humanitären Gründen eine Aufenthaltserlaubnis erteilt werden. Eine Aufenthaltserlaubnis ist zu erteilen, wenn das Bundesministerium des Innern oder die von ihm bestimmte Stelle zur Wahrung politischer Interessen der Bundesrepublik Deutschland die Aufnahme erklärt hat. Im Falle des Satzes 2 berechtigt die Aufenthaltserlaubnis zur Ausübung einer Erwerbstätigkeit.

Yep, that is the relevant paragraph. The problem for Snowden is, it only counts, if it is in the political interest of the BRD to do so. And since it would be against the political interests of the BRD to go against Uncle Sam ... .

[Thanas]

It is not so much that exceptions could be made, it is rather that for humanitarian reasons the embassy can give Snowden a letter of safe conduct to an embassy where he could then ask for Asylum.

The same applies to Austria and to all other nations. That no nation is willing to do so is a pretty huge indictment.

Apparently it is according to the Aufenthaltsgesetz Kapitel 2 Abschnitt 5 Paragraph 22:

§ 22
Aufnahme aus dem Ausland
Einem Ausländer kann für die Aufnahme aus dem Ausland aus völkerrechtlichen oder dringenden humanitären Gründen eine Aufenthaltserlaubnis erteilt werden. Eine Aufenthaltserlaubnis ist zu erteilen, wenn das Bundesministerium des Innern oder die von ihm bestimmte Stelle zur Wahrung politischer Interessen der Bundesrepublik Deutschland die Aufnahme erklärt hat. Im Falle des Satzes 2 berechtigt die Aufenthaltserlaubnis zur Ausübung einer Erwerbstätigkeit.

Yes, but the humanitarian example I mentioned is also applicable and - more importantly - applies to all nations who are sitting on their hands.

The same applies to Austria and to all other nations. That no nation is willing to do so is a pretty huge indictment.

Of him or us? I see a lot of nations that talk a lot about human rights and the excesses of America on that article Stas posted (Germany included) and yet when a chance arises to do something, we sit on our hands.

Of us (Germany) and of all other nations as well, of course.

EDIT: To elaborate, it is very sad how Merkel pretends to care about this by doing a song and dance numbers about evil america destroying our privacy while doing nothing to help the guy who brought this to light.

[Siege]

I find that particularly damning: you would expect someone who grew up with the Stasi would show more of a backbone in the face of such shenanigans.

In other news, Spain went as far as to deny President Morales' plane access to its airspace because they thought Snowden might be aboard: Beeb. Great message there, guys!

[Kane Starkiller]

I don't think this is a case of governments being afraid of US. After all it wouldn't be the first time a US citizen was coopted by another country to spy and then given a safe sanctuary.
I think the issue is that no government wants to send a message to any potential whistleblowers among their own citizenry that it's OK to expose your own government and that you're a hero for doing it.

[LaCroix]

I find that particularly damning: you would expect someone who grew up with the Stasi would show more of a backbone in the face of such shenanigans.

In other news, Spain went as far as to deny President Morales' plane access to its airspace because they thought Snowden might be aboard: Beeb. Great message there, guys!

Along with France, Italy and Portugal.
Morales is currently sitting in Vienna Airport, cursing the pain off the walls while trying to find an alternative flight plan that allows him to return home (safely).

[K. A. Pital]

I find that particularly damning: you would expect someone who grew up with the Stasi would show more of a backbone in the face of such shenanigans.

In other news, Spain went as far as to deny President Morales' plane access to its airspace because they thought Snowden might be aboard: Beeb. Great message there, guys!

Same for Portugal; and that was just a rumor that S. could be onboard. So what did we find in the recent days? I recall you were saying me painting Europe as a US-occupied pawn was unfair. I was almost willing to grant that, especially in the light of several European nations (Iceland, and many more after the Snowden leak about NSA spying) speaking out in favor of transparency, electronic media freedom and so on. Now I'm not so sure.

I don't think this is a case of governments being afraid of US. After all it wouldn't be the first time a US citizen was coopted by another country to spy and then given a safe sanctuary.

I think the problem is that he is not coopted. He withdrew his request for Russian asylum after Putin made it clear he should stop "damaging our American friends". If he really was just looking for another country to sell data to, he'd go for this in a heartbeat. He did not.

So the US started a fucking manhunt, and the USA are behaving like assholes, since on one hand they demand the extradition of their "citizen", on the other hand they revoked his citizenship and this is what makes him unable to travel. As for Europe, they're exposed as just a bunch of American underlays, that's all.

[Siege]

I recall you were saying me painting Europe as a US-occupied pawn was unfair. I was almost willing to grant that, especially in the light of several European nations (Iceland, and many more after the Snowden leak about NSA spying) speaking out in favor of transparency, electronic media freedom and so on. Now I'm not so sure.

You described the EU as occupied by American troops. I object specifically to that description, as if all of Europe resembles post-war Germany. It does not, and I find the image that American troops are somehow forcing compliance unhelpful to this discussion. If you had simply said that European nations frequently allow themselves to be bullied by the United States then I would have offered no objection; quite the contrary, I agree entirely. So my objection was to your colorful description moreso than to your overall point.

That's why it's my hope that Brussels, for all its faults, will offer a firm counter to US badgering. Because as is quite clear from this nonsense about stopping presidential jets quite a number of member states will happily throw people under the bus (not to mention offer offense to entire nations) if there is even the vaguest possibility that not doing so might imperil their relation with the USA.

I think the issue is that no government wants to send a message to any potential whistleblowers among their own citizenry that it's OK to expose your own government and that you're a hero for doing it.

Denying the president of Bolivia the right to fly over your country is quite the heavy-handed, not to mention roundabout, way of making that point.

[Ralin]

So the US started a fucking manhunt, and the USA are behaving like assholes, since on one hand they demand the extradition of their "citizen", on the other hand they revoked his citizenship and this is what makes him unable to travel. As for Europe, they're exposed as just a bunch of American underlays, that's all.

Say what?

There's a pretty big difference between canceling a passport and revoking citizenship. Which I'm fairly sure the US government can't actually do. Unless I'm missing something.

[Broomstick]

So the US started a fucking manhunt, and the USA are behaving like assholes, since on one hand they demand the extradition of their "citizen", on the other hand they revoked his citizenship and this is what makes him unable to travel. As for Europe, they're exposed as just a bunch of American underlays, that's all.

Stas, there is absolutely no mechanism for revoking the citizenship of a natural-born citizen such as Snowden. It can't be done. They HAVE cancelled his passport, but he's still a US citizen.

[K. A. Pital]

It is possible, actually.

The ways to lose your natural born US citizenship are detailed in 8 USC 1481:
...
6.Being convicted of committing treason.

Of course, charging him with treason and then running the process would take time - and I heard some "Senators" are at it right now (I can't seriously use the respectful word senator when referring to these despicable fat sacks).

But perhaps it won't happen. Still, cancelling the passport, then demanding him as a "US citizen" is an incredibly hypocritic way of dealing with this. Criminals don't lose their US passport, do they?

[Aaron MkII]

Yes. In many cases, they can't even get one.

Edit: For example, I have a friend in Texas who went up the river for bank robbery over ten years ago. She can't get a passport. Not even to visit me here.

[K. A. Pital]

Yes. In many cases, they can't even get one.

Edit: For example, I have a friend in Texas who went up the river for bank robbery over ten years ago. She can't get a passport. Not even to visit me here.

What. The. Hell. The more I know.

[Aaron MkII]

Dude, America doesn't just have a massive prison population, convicts who are done their time also lose their right to vote, along with the right to a passport.

But I'm sure its a coincidence that minorities make up the majority of inmates, just like its a coincidence that efforts to disenfranchise people outside of prison are concentrated on minorities.

[Ralin]

No one has been convicted of treason in the US for over half a century. Even actual spies are usually just charged with sedition or espionage or such. Technically it may be possible, but I really doubt Snowden is going to be the one who breaks that trend. And (as far as I know, I could be wrong) no one has ever been stripped of US citizenship that way. It's just not something that's done.

Criminals don't lose their US passport, do they?

Not just criminals. Delinquency on child support payments also springs to mind, and I'd put decent money on the same happening to people who default on their student loans before too long.

Though I'm not sure why the idea that being a convicted bank robber is grounds to be refused one is especially shocking?

[Aaron MkII]

Because I believe that once you've done your time, including probation that you should have your full rights restored. Its extremely offensive to me that one should be punished for life after you have been rehabilitated.

You may as well keep them forever if you intend to deny them a say in how their nation is run. You should be assessed for risk of reoffending anyways. If there is no risk, there is no reason to deny it.

[K. A. Pital]

It is very shocking to me. Being a criminal does not mean one loses a passport or is forever banned from voting! At worst a temporary withdrawal can be made by the authorities, but it is returned after serving the sentence even in a backwards country like Russia.

Say what you will, this is not normal, and it is a grave insult to human rights.

[Aaron MkII]

Keep in mind that it isn't every convict that gets this, and that there is a pardon system. I'm sure one of the American cops will come by and tell us.

Say what you will, this is not normal, and it is a grave insult to human rights.

It is indeed.

[Ralin]

Well, I don't see the need for it, but it is consistent with how convicts are commonly treated in the US. It's not like there's a right to have a passport or leave one's country, as there is with voting.

[salm]

Wouldn´t that be the right to abode. At least it´s in the human rights.

[K. A. Pital]

It's not like there's a right to have a passport or leave one's country...

Are you sure? I mean, that sounds really crazy. Leaving one's nation is a very fundamental right, is it not?

[Simon_Jester]

It is very shocking to me. Being a criminal does not mean one loses a passport or is forever banned from voting! At worst a temporary withdrawal can be made by the authorities, but it is returned after serving the sentence even in a backwards country like Russia.

Say what you will, this is not normal, and it is a grave insult to human rights.

Ah. Now this I can agree with.

In Snowden's case... well, as a brute fact, he has done something which is illegal under US law. That doesn't mean his actions were immoral, but he can be accused of a crime, disclosing top secret documents is illegal in the US.

And it's routine for governments to revoke the passports of fugitive criminals while they are running from the police, if only to keep them from outrunning the extradition hearings. So no surprise there.

Although I agree with you that permanent bans on passports (let alone voting) are totally wrong and heinous.

Wouldn´t that be the right to abode. At least it´s in the human rights.

No, the right of abode is the right to live in a country, and to enter it, without having to deal with immigration control. It's the opposite of the right to move around; it's the right to stay put.

[Ralin]

It's not like there's a right to have a passport or leave one's country...

Are you sure? I mean, that sounds really crazy. Leaving one's nation is a very fundamental right, is it not?

Well I meant according to the US constitution.

Anyway, not saying it isn't fucked up. But not compared to other US policies on the subject.

[salm]

No, the right of abode is the right to live in a country, and to enter it, without having to deal with immigration control. It's the opposite of the right to move around; it's the right to stay put.

Ah, ok, translation error.
It´s the right to freedom of movement.

(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each State.
(2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.