Edward Snowden being interviewed by the Council of Europe
webtv.coe.int
webtv.coe.int
- The interviewers asked questions about his relationship with the press, specifically Snowdens request/condition that the media confer with the governments involved about what could and could not be published, given implications on national security. - Did Snowden personally look through all the material? Pretty much, yes. - Danish representative asked about the involvement of Denmark (the reply was a very diplomatic answer to the effect that such rumours should not be considered unfounded). - They asked about his relationship to the Russian government (none official, bureaucratic contact mostly conducted through lawyers, they probably consider him a pain in the ass). - Would others, such as Russia and China have similar abilities? Most probably, yes.
At the end, they lost the connection with Snowden and there was some outrage at EU governments denying Snowden asylum or even entry into the country to testify. There was some mention of extra problems brought to light by Snowden's revelations and things that need to be fixed, including in the treatment of whistleblowers.
Cable connections were opened to Denmark in 1867 and to Great Britain in 1869.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/06/13/cia_rendition_jet_wa...
The Council of Europe, which is the group doing the interview, is a European human rights organization. The EU Court of Human Rights is a Council of Europe body.
I think you mean the European Court of Human Rights.
Of course, the EU has 24 official languages, and needless to say, the translations of these terms are rarely literal, so the confusion is multiplied.
Seriously, the people who come up with this are either brain-dead or they don't want ordinary people to understand this system. I don't know which option frightens me more.
The Council of Europe, which is the organization that did this interview, has nothing to do with the European Union.
There is at least one other similarly-named entity, the Council of the European Union, which is one of the houses of the EU legislature. The names are quite confusing.
Interesting that Pieter Omtzigt, the Dutch committee member, seemed to suggest in his comments at the end that technical problems with the video link to Snowden might be related to interference by an outside party. He also commented that the committee had tried to facilitate Snowden's attendance in person but seemed to imply that the UK and Germany had blocked the attempt.
There was also a member of a whistle blower's support organisation (I forget the name) who had some interesting comments at the end about the challenge of protecting whistleblowers at multinationals who may not have protection in their own country but who may be releasing information of importance to another country's citizens eg: say a German company poisoning a river in South America but the German employee does not have whistleblower protection in their own country.
Edit: Oh God. It's basically old people complaining and thanking each other.
This should not actually be a complicated inquiry.
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/may/27/-sp-privac...