After a student leader of the historic Tiananmen Square protests entered a 2022 congressional race in New York, a Chinese intelligence operative wasted little time enlisting a private investigator to hunt for any mistresses or tax problems that could upend the candidate’s bid, prosecutors say.
“In the end,” the operative ominously told his contact, “violence would be fine too.”
As an Iranian journalist and activist living in exile in the United States aired criticism of Iran’s human rights abuses, Tehran was listening too. Members of an Eastern European organized crime gang scouted her Brooklyn home and plotted to kill her in a murder-for-hire scheme directed from Iran, according to the Justice Department, which foiled the plan and brought criminal charges.
The episodes reflect the extreme measures taken by countries like China and Iran to intimidate, harass and sometimes plot attacks against political opponents and activists who live in the U.S. They show the frightening consequences that geopolitical tensions can have for ordinary citizens as governments historically intolerant of dissent inside their own borders are increasingly keeping a threatening watch on those who speak out thousands of miles away.
Whataboutism? Really? That’s the game we’re playing?
Sure, okay, I’ll bite.
Edward Snowden: He’s a hero, no doubt in my mind. But from this perspective, no one has attacked him since his departure from the US. Formal requests have been made to extradite him and they’ve been turned down. Once on foreign soil the US respected Russian sovereignty.
Julian Assange: Okay personally I find Assange to be a piece of shit, but that aside, the extradition process has been followed legally.
Chelsea Manning: Broke the law. And while her initial imprisonment situation was absolutely concerning, it was legal. The legal process was followed, and the sentence given was far short of the maximum. Her sentence was commuted by a sitting president. No foreign governments were involved, so no sovereignty was violated.
Drake and Binny: Always were on US soil. No foreign involvement whatsoever. They were raided and Drake was changed with crimes. He received probation and community service. Once again, the legal process was followed and no foreign sovereignty violated.
Boeing Whistleblowers: What the fuck is this arguement? You think the US is happy one of it’s biggest military manufacturers and transportation providers has serious quality issues? You think the US is taking action against the whistleblowers? Be serious.
Basically: you’re saying the US charges people who violate the laws around information handling as criminals. Yes, that’s true. Now, I personally am sympathetic to most of these cases. I assume you are too. Whistleblowers should be better protected, but at the same time some information, like the names and personal information of government assets abroad, reasonably should be protected. It’s a delicate balance, and one I think the US could greatly improve.
However, these are not similar to the cases in question. The cases in question are actions by governments on foreign soil or against US citizens. This is an enormous violation of sovereignty, legality, and due process. That’s the issue at hand.
Im not trying to justify the crimes of Russia or China, Im trying to point out the hypocracy of the AP. I’m not sure this qualifies as whataboutism.
Hiding behind legality isn’t a convincing argument. In my opinion, what happened to Chelsea Manning was ‘legal’ in the same sense that slavery was once ‘legal’. Its an absolute disgrace and a moral stain on the nation.
So the remaining distinction is the violent violation of sovereignty, legality, and due process. When the US wants to violate these international norms, we label the target as a ‘terrorist’. We have killed thousands this way.
So maybe a better analogy to this situation is the murder of Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, 16 year old US citizen dissident who was killed by Obama without a trial. Iran and China are following our example, and the way AP covers these stories shows their bias.
Are you really calling al-Awlaki a “dissident”? What a load of crap, dude was straight up al-Qaeda! We didn’t “label” him a terrorist, he was one.
I think you are confused, you seem to be referring to Anwar al-Awlaki, while I was referring to his son, Abdulrahman al-Awlaki.
You’re right, I was confused. That’s partially because your comment implied the US targeted him specifically, which was the case for the father but not for the son.
You also appear confused, since you refer to him as a “dissident”.
It’s tragic, but maybe don’t hang out with a bunch of terrorists. His father is to blame for taking his son into that company.