UPDATED: Snowden In Search Of Pockets of Freedom

China, Foreign Policy, Government, Intelligence, Media, Propaganda, Russia, Technology, Terrorism, The State

You should have long since said adieu to the quaint idea of absolute freedom. With the triumph of the suprastate over the individual, achieved by rigid central planning and the harmonization of laws across the globe—only pockets of freedom remain. Robert Wenzel of Economic Policy Journal counters mainstream media’s backward reasoning, according to which Edward Snowden is no freedom fighter because he has been protected by two other unfree powers (one spent; the other nascent).

That ridiculous notion has found expression in Henry Blodget’s smarmy tweet:

Snowden flees one paragon of freedom and privacy, China, for another–Russia

The Blodget conceit amounts to thinking in aggregates, reasons Robert Wenzel:

[Blodget] writes as though the circumstances for freedom are the same for everyone in a given country. This is far from the truth. I have written many times that even in a heavily totalitarian state some may be able to live just fine, a surfer dude for example. For others, in the US, time may be already up for some in the financial sector. Anyone putting deals together for very small companies, say, may find it much more attractive to work outside the constraints of US securities laws, which benefit no one other than major established players.

Pax Dickinson, contends Wenzel, is closer to the mark, tweeting sarcastically that, “Snowden should have fled to a noble & free country like the USA where we hold whistleblowers naked in solitary confinement without trial.”

Read Robert’s EPJ post (where you can also catch up on my latest weekly column, “Trying to be neighborly in the Evergreen State”).

Yesterday I heard a legal expert based in Hong Kong venturing that the imperative to hand Snowden over to US authorities was “not within the ambit of the American-Chinese extradition treaty.”

Yippee.

Today came the news, via the intrepid Guardian, that “Edward Snowden heads for Ecuador after flight to Russia leaves authorities in various countries amazed and infuriated”:
Snowden was five hours into his flight from Hong Kong, having already been served one of two hot meals, when news of his departure to Moscow began to electrify media organisations all over the world.
The Hong Kong authorities waited until Snowden was safely out of Chinese airspace before sending out a short press release that confirmed the intelligence whistle-blower had been allowed to leave on Aeroflot flight SU213, bound for Russia.
The 30-year-old had not been stopped on his way to Chek Lap Kok airport, and was allowed to slip away on a hot and humid morning, despite American demands that he be arrested and extradited to face trial for espionage offences.
The reason?
The Americans had mucked up the legal paperwork, the authorities claimed in a statement released at 4.05pm local time.
Hong Kong had no choice but to let the 30-year-old leave for “a third country through a lawful and normal channel”.
If the sudden “discovery” of a flaw in legal proceedings prompted sighs of relief around the island and across the rest of China, there would have been sharp intakes of breath in Washington and London, where diplomats and intelligence officials had been hoping the net around Snowden was finally tightening.

MORE.

UPDATE: Via The New York Times:

…Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, said in an interview from his own refuge in the Ecuadorean Embassy in London that he had raised Mr. Snowden’s case with Ecuador’s government and that his group had helped arrange the travel documents. Baltasar Garzón, the renowned Spanish jurist who advises WikiLeaks, said in a statement that “what is being done to Mr. Snowden and to Mr. Julian Assange — for making or facilitating disclosures in the public interest — is an assault against the people.”
Obama administration officials privately expressed frustration that Hong Kong allowed Mr. Snowden to board an Aeroflot plane bound for Moscow on Sunday despite the American request for his detention. But they did not revoke Mr. Snowden’s passport until Saturday and did not ask Interpol to issue a “red notice” seeking his arrest.
Legal experts said the administration appeared to have flubbed Mr. Snowden’s case. “What mystifies me is that the State Department didn’t revoke his passport after the charges were filed” on June 14, said David H. Laufman, a former federal prosecutor. “They missed an opportunity to freeze him in place.” He said he was also puzzled by the decision to unseal the charges on Friday rather than waiting until the defendant was in custody. …
…While officials said Mr. Snowden’s passport was revoked on Saturday, it was not clear whether the Hong Kong authorities knew that by the time he boarded the plane, nor was it clear whether revoking it earlier would have made a difference, given the Ecuadorean travel document that Mr. Assange said he helped arrange. When Mr. Snowden landed in Moscow, he was informed of his passport revocation.
Mr. Assange said he did not know whether Mr. Snowden might be able to travel beyond Moscow using the Ecuadorean document. “Different airlines have different rules, so it’s a technical matter whether they will accept the document,” he said.

MORE.

Join the conversation on my Facebook page.

UPDATE IV: Ann Coulter Is Sally-Come-Lately To Mass Immigration Vexation, But She’s Still Splendid

Ann Coulter, Classical Liberalism, Conservatism, Ilana Mercer, IMMIGRATION, Reason

As I’ve written before, Ann Coulter has been late to blossom politically (otherwise she’s very pretty). Having avoided the immigration vexation until recently, Ms. Coulter has realized the need to become a single-issue powerhouse NOW, so as to make up for her past, politically correct driven neglect.

Sean Hannity cowered in the corner, tonight (June 20, 2013), preferring to cleave to a “gaffe President Obama made in Ireland.” Not Ms. Coulter. As Mediaite (?) puts it, “Coulter quickly shifted to immigration reform, ‘the most important issue facing our nation’ right now.'”

“But before the Obama bashing could go much further, Coulter quickly [more like masterfully] pivoted to immigration. She said that a lot of TV hosts are misleading the public on the bill, and slammed Republicans supporting immigration reform for using the same ‘silly’ arguments and ‘lies’ the Democrats are to justify the bill’s passage. Hannity couldn’t fathom why securing the border first is such a controversial idea in the first place.”

Coulter declared that the Democrats only want reform ‘“because it will help them electorally,” and smacked down the “idiot argument” that Hispanics will somehow “hate Republicans more” if this doesn’t pass. …
Coulter concluded that the Republicans cannot take up any bill that even mentions immigration until the Senate is majority-Republican. She sent a direct message to anyone with a Republican representative who backs the reform bill: “Punish them, voters.”

More regaling than the humdrum report above was watching Ms. Coulter point out that Irish doctors and engineers listening to Hussein’s silly speeches are not favored immigration candidates under Teddy Kennedy’s 1965 immigration bill.

It’s easy to forgive Annie-come-lately for years of silence when she invokes her trademark power syllogisms. For example, likening the silly liberal “argumentation” regarding “de facto amnesty” thus:

“We have de facto amnesty for murderers in America as thousands of murderer are not caught. Do we grant them amnesty?”

Splendid.

By the way, there is someone who has been covering “The Immigration Scene” forever.

Click “Immigration “ on the Articles Search, for four pages of columns going back to 1/30/2002. Some of us are consistent and consistently correct.

UPDATED I (June 20): James Huggins (on Facebook): Ms. Coulter is spot on but a decade late. That’s a big and calculated “mistake.” Unless you recognize how PC she’s been—you cannot appreciate how professionally suicidal the folks at VDARE, NumbersUSA, Michelle Malkin, and yours truly have been all along.

UPDATE II (6/22): From Facebook thread, again: I mean, James Huggins—and you should know what I mean by now—that Ann Coulter could have effected change a long time ago. You and I know she’s smart enough to have done what she’s doing now, back WHEN IT COUNTED. She’s jumping into the immigration debate now, when it no longer matters. We’ve passed the tipping point. “The D-Bomb Has Dropped.” Ultimately, the woman does what’s safe. There is nothing dangerous or admirable about that.

UPDATE III: Immigration Reform Bill: Full text. Try making sense of this bit of proposed legislation. It ought to be forbidden to write, much less pass, a bill written in such impenetrable legalese.

UPDATE IV: Jack Kerwick:

Whether border security attracts or alienates voters is of no consequence: a country’s borders must be secured. It is conditional upon nothing other than the relationship that obtains between a citizenry and its government.

Join the conversation on my Facebook page.

UPDATE II: The Evergreen State’s Profligate Oink Sector

Constitution, Crime, Debt, Democracy, Government, Law, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Private Property, Taxation, The State

“The Evergreen State’s Profligate Oink Sector” is the current column, now on WND. An excerpt:

“By now, Americans with a modicum of cerebral alacrity have a sense of the attitude among Washington State Democrats toward the immutable right of the people to keep their earnings. You all witnessed the despicable Jim McDermott’s intimidating verbal assaults, leveled at conservative property owners, during the House committee hearing on the den of iniquity and vice that is the Internal Revenue Service. For what is the seeking of ‘tax-exempt status’ if not a plea, directed at our overlords who art in D.C., to keep more of what is rightfully ours?

What Edmund Burke said about the House of Commons in his day applies in spades to a House packed with the likes of Rep. Jim McDermott D-Wash. ‘Designed as a control for the people,’ the House has become a control ‘upon the people.’

And the trend extends to local governments, gone from which are the old-fashioned county governors, once devoted to low taxes and careful spending.

Here goes.

While trying to be neighborly, I made the mistake of being less than reverential about my property taxes in ‘The Evergreen State,’ and in particular, the 51.4 percent appropriated for ‘State and Local Schools.’

I was informed in high decibels that my husband and I, hardworking both, ought to thank our lucky stars for this valuable index—thousands paid per year toward ‘State and Local Schools’—for without it we’d be clueless about … the value of our home. (If anything, taxes distort market prices. But more about the curious fallacy of the benevolent property tax, as a price signal in the housing market, in a follow-up column.)

Yes, siree. The bad tempered diatribe then swerved to the plight of local law enforcement, who, my interlocutor alleged, were powerless to police a squatter camp in the North Bend vicinity, for lack of resources. Some believe that twice did a man from this homeless encampment invade a homestead in the community.

We fork over thousands in property taxes per annum, yet, as was being asserted, the police were without the necessary funds to fulfill the State’s only constitutional duty: protecting the people. Naturally, where the State fails to carry out its sacred duty, as is almost always the case, The Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution instantiates the individual’s natural right to do exactly what the heroic homeowners did to safeguard life and property: hastened the intruder’s descent into hell.

Commensurate with the value this Washington-State locality places on limited authority and republican virtues—none at all—law enforcement is not even itemized in the property-tax bill issued.

The truth is that the lion’s share of our property taxes goes toward …

Read the complete column. “The Evergreen State’s Profligate Oink Sector” is now on WND.

If you’d like to feature this column, WND’s longest-standing, exclusive paleolibertarian column, in or on your publication (paper or pixels), contact ilana@ilanamercer.com.

JOIN THE CONVERSATION:

• At the WND Comments Section. Scroll down and “Say it.”

• On my Facebook page.

• By clicking to “Like,” “Tweet” and “Share” this week’s “Return To Reason” column

UPDATE I: The “wasteful monstrosity” discussed above was celebrated by the local newspaper’s intrepid reporters. It too is local in name only—for most “local newspapers” are corporately owned. In our case, the pabulum published weekly is by permission of The Seattle Times Co. When our local rag is not reporting on a theatre that will close, a cinema that is hiring, or a pizza place that’ll host “Raise the Dough for Seattle Children’s”—the newspaper simply parrots the partyline on everything. I know, because I line my parrot’s cage with its pages.

Join the conversation on my Facebook page.

UPDATE II (7/24): For more of an idea of the all-pervasive profligacy of the oink sector in my state, check out the “Seattle Parasite-To-Resident Ratio.”

UPDATED: Oscar-Wood, Non-Stop Naughty

Environmentalism & Animal Rights, Family, Ilana Mercer, Intelligence, Parrots

Sipping Afternoon OJ.

“

“Don’t Look At Me Like That. I Will Eat The Wall.”

“No Wall Protection Will Stop The Beak.”

“Nice Wall.”

What Can I Break?

Peek-A-Bird.

Wine Rack Or Roost?

Unpacking Mommy’s Shopping.

Stealing Snow Peas.

Grog For Oscar-Wood.

Don’t You Dare Move Me.

What Can I Evict Next? (Oscar-Wood loves nudging dishes and cups off the countertop and watching them crash.)

Mommy Won’t Find Me Here In The Pantry.

More about Oscar-Wood and the genius (and neediness) of parrots.

P.S.: Believe it or not, the rest of the home is tastefully appointed. The kitchen, however, is Oscar-Wood’s turf; he does the “renovations” there. A design solution that combines Oscar-Wood’s tastes and ours is bound to present itself one day.