
NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden not welcome in the UK - ambuj
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/407480/NSA-whistleblower-Edward-Snowden-not-welcome-in-the-UK-as-Home-Office-issues-alert
======
arethuza
As a UK citizen I feel that he certainly hasn't done me any harm and probably
has done quite a lot of good so I find it bizarre that the government would
make such a statement, especially as he would be mad to consider coming here!

I presume the real reasons for this are:

\- To show solidarity with the US (presumably the NSA and GCHQ are as thick as
thieves)

\- So he doesn't give anyone at GCHQ ideas

I'm going to write to my MP about this:

[http://www.theyworkforyou.com/](http://www.theyworkforyou.com/)

~~~
threeseed
Why is it bizarre ?

The UK government simply doesn't want a repeat of the diplomatic mess that was
Julian Assange's asylum claim.

~~~
arethuza
I find it bizarre that they feel the need to make the statement - it's not
like there is any chance he would be considering coming here.

~~~
jacquesm
It's signaling.

------
venomsnake
That is fun. But they do have the right according to wikipedia.

 _The treaty has been claimed to be one-sided[3] because it allows the US to
extradite UK citizens and others for offences committed against US law, even
though the alleged offence may have been committed in the UK by a person
living and working in the UK (see for example the NatWest Three), and there
being no reciprocal right; and issues about the level of proof required being
less to extradite from the UK to the US rather than vice-versa.[4]_

So basically Toni Blair has bent over, spreaded cheeks and prelubed himself.

~~~
alan_cx
Exactly, yes.

More over, the US doesn't NOT need to show evidence. It just needs to make the
claim and say that it has evidence. No UK court gets to see any evidence at
all.

IIRC, it was supposed to be two way, but the US never signed off on it's half
of it, while we good little Brits let the legislation sail through.

~~~
kryten
I think we'd be better off in the UK with Europe and Russia on our side these
days.

In fact we'd probably be better off with the Eastern Bloc states if they
existed as well...

------
FuzzyDunlop
"The official spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorised to
discuss the matter publicly."

The irony is delicious.

~~~
rurounijones
"The ship of state, dear Bernard, is the only ship that leaks from the top" \-
Sir Humphrey Appleby

------
amirmc
Related: _" Senior politicians from across the political divide have united to
call for UK security services to be given greater internet monitoring powers"_
[1]

[http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22891845](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-
politics-22891845)

~~~
kryten
And this is the point at which they no longer represent us but themselves.

~~~
mattmanser
The crazy thing is they're trying to claim Nick Clegg is shielding companies
rather than the people.

I just can't understand the slightest bit why anyone thinks that snooping and
storing everyone's data is a necessary thing to do. They don't even make the
wild claim that it'll stop terrorist attacks, they want it to find out who
people were talking to after the attacks.

Madness.

And to top it off, you can't easily find a copy of the letter because it's
behind the Times' pay wall! Not a single story has a link to the actual
letter.

------
luckystarr
I guess "dealing with" Assange is expensive enough for them.

Just think about all those police officers constantly monitoring the
ecuadorian embassy.

Now think about having two of them in the country! Crikey!

------
JDGM
When the 'Hong Kong Baffled by Snowden's Hideout' WSJ article was posted
([https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5853397](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5853397)),
one paragraph that leaped out at me and also got some attention in the
comments was the following:

 _" Hong Kong is the worst place in the world for any person to avoid
extradition, with the possible exception of the United Kingdom," said one
lawyer who’s worked on a dozen extradition cases both in the U.K. and Hong
Kong"_

I don't know what to make of that or how to put it together with this Home
Office alert, but it is all rather interesting.

------
ig1
I'm not sure it's actually a bad thing.

Realistically if he was in the UK he'd face extradition to the US. The home
office putting out this alert means they won't have to do that.

The US would be happy for Snowden to enter the UK where he could easily be
arrested.

~~~
weavie
It's a bit irrelevant. There's not a chance that he would have even considered
coming to the UK.

~~~
ig1
Well hypothetically say he wanted to go to Iceland, you can't fly from HK to
Iceland so you'd have to change in Europe.

The obvious route is changing via London Heathrow, this stops him doing that.

~~~
dalore
Actually the airports of Amsterdam, Frankfurt and Paris are all bigger, better
and see more traffic than outdated Heathrow.

~~~
mercurial
As a French citizen, I'd like to object vigorously to the notion that Paris
(if you mean Paris Charles de Gaulle, Paris' main airport) is one of the
"better" airports.

If I believe wikipedia, Heathrow is actually Europe's busiest airport (CDG is
next).

~~~
dalore
As a UK citizen I vigorously object that Heathrow is the "best" airport.

------
simonsez1808
Erm. How exactly is he detrimental to the public good?

~~~
josephlord
They probably mean detrimental to the governments good. They wouldn't want to
say no to US requests but they would been seen as the bad guys while the
extradition (and/or asylum) proceedings dragged on for months.

They are also trying to pass legislation (Communications Data Bill)
[http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22891845](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-
politics-22891845) to allow[1] communications logging of metadata. Having him
in the country would make it even more newsworthy as there would be a human
interest angle.

[1] Whether they are doing it now without legal standing is an interesting
question. My guess is yes and the former Labour home secretaries are aware and
complicit and would really like it legitimised.

~~~
oracuk
They are doing it now with legal standing. (Regulation of Investigatory Powers
Act 2000)

Specifically chapter 2:
[http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/23/part/I/chapter/I...](http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/23/part/I/chapter/II)

The new legislation is updating the definition of Communications Data for the
age of application specific messaging.

------
JulianMorrison
He'd be an idiot to come here, the UK government thinks the sun shines out of
the USA's ass.

------
Fuxy
"detrimental to the public good"? How about letting the public decide that?

------
addflip
I'm sure he's very disappointed. That's a big loss for him.

------
pyalot2
HMRPR hard at work to avoid Assange 2.0

------
einhverfr
After Assange this is a surprise?

