NSA Spying and Edward Snowden
Edward Snowden, the whistle blower who
brought to everyone's attention details of the extent of the NSA
surveillance programs, is reported ready to request political asylum
from Russia - at least until he can arrange safe passage to one of
the Latin American countries that have offered him asylum. He is
currently confined to the Moscow's Sheremetyevo airport and is
prevented from flying to other countries because US allies are
denying him access to their airspace. Pravda reported Friday on Snowden's airport meeting with human rights activists.
"During the meeting, Snowden thanked all countries that sent him
their offers - Russia, Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua and Ecuador.
Snowden said that he could not fly anywhere from Sheremetyevo, so he
could not address...international organizations because...his
personal presence would be required....Snowden wants to stay in
Russia and the only way to do it is to receive political asylum...'No
actions I take or plan are meant to harm the U.S. .. I want the U.S.
to succeed,' Snowden said. In a July 12 post in Mother
Jones, Kevin Drum writes: "One
of the arguments about Edward Snowden that I've occasionally gotten
caught up in is: What difference has he made? Has he really told us
very much we didn't know before? In a broad sense, you can argue
that he hasn't." Much of what Snowden has revealed was either
known or at least suspected by the more paranoid among us. But, Drum
continues: "It's one thing to know about this stuff in broad
strokes. It's quite another to have specific, documented details.
That's what Snowden has given us, and it makes a big difference in
public debate. A Quinnipiac University poll released this week
demonstrates this vividly. Three years ago, only 25 percent of
Americans thought the government had gone too far in its
anti-terrorism efforts. Policywise, nothing much has changed since
then, but in 2013 that number has shot up to 45 percent....This is
how change happens. The public gets hit over the head with something,
lawmakers are forced to take notice, and maybe, just maybe, Congress
holds oversight hearings and decides to change the law."
Israeli-Palestinian Peace Talks
reported on July 4: "Palestinian officials said...that U.S. Secretary of
State John Kerry is closing in on an agreement between Israel and the
Palestinians to relaunch peace talks for a period of six to nine
months....Two Palestinian officials familiar with the negotiations
said that Kerry has floated a compromise in which Israel would freeze
settlement construction outside of major "blocs" that
Israel expects to keep.... 'Kerry is trying to pave the way for
relaunching the peace process. He is serious and we encouraged him.
He made progress and we hope he can conclude a deal in the coming
week,' said one official." A week has passed since then and
nothing concrete has happened.
former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and
reviews the impediments to an early breakthrough: "The
arguments for Israel to define its borders through a two-state
settlement remain strong. 'Given the history and heritage of the
Jewish people,' Olmert says, 'we can’t occupy forever three or four
or five million people without equal rights.' ....An agreement, he
argues, would increase Israeli legitimacy, open global markets and
make a Jewish state more demographically sustainable. But these
arguments seem abstract and long-term ....The majority of Israelis
vaguely support a two-state solution, but there is no critical mass
of political support for concessions in that cause." Gerson
reluctantly concludes: "Majorities of Israelis and Palestinians
support a two-state solution. The broad parameters of a deal have
been clear since the Clinton administration....The American secretary
of state is energetically on the job. But little is likely to
change."
No comments:
Post a Comment