Slashdot Mirror
Russia Issues Travel Warning To Its Citizens About United States and Extradition
mendax writes "The New York Times reports that the Russian government is warning its citizens to not travel to countries that have an extradition treaty with the United States, noting that 'detentions of Russian citizens in various countries, at the request of American law enforcement, have become more frequent.' The article reports the Russian foreign ministry as saying,'Experience shows that the judicial proceedings against those who were in fact kidnapped and taken to the U.S. are of a biased character, based on shaky evidence, and clearly tilted toward conviction.'"
Not too long ago that most people in the US would be worried about Russia being the bad guy in such situations.
Experience shows that the judicial proceedings against those who were in fact kidnapped and taken to the U.S. are of a biased character, based on shaky evidence, and clearly tilted toward conviction.
Yeah, Russia's the expert on that.
Still, it's amazing that the U.S. has become such a totalitarian police state that Russia can legitimately give them crap.
"Once we've identified and embraced our sickness, we'll have strength...and that's when we get dangerous." - John Waters
Americans arrest you!
Once not long ago I would have laughed now I'm just sad.
Please do not make this about "Right" vs "Left". Both parties love power, and don't really care about the citizens. When people bicker about "Right" vs "Left" it distracts from the real issues.
"No, but is an excellent propaganda phrase."
Hmmm...
prop a gan da noun
information, ideas, or rumors deliberately spread widely to help or harm a person, group, movement, institution, nation, etc.
How is this harmful? It appears to be simple truth.
Not that Russia was ever a major ally to the US, but more and more countries are ceasing to put up with the hostile nature of the US's foreign relations policy. The US is failing in all sorts of relations due to its policies on copyrights, "terrorism," worthless wars and drug enforcement, and increasingly, other nations are no longer putting up with it.
Throughout its history, the US has more or less never had any interest in the well-being of other nations they enter relations with. Of course, you could perhaps say this is true of all nations. However, if the US is going to be so self-centered in its relations, then the best thing for the world is for them to have less of an influence in strong-arming other nations into agreeing with them. This influence historically has come largely from dominating economic pressure, but we'll see if it lasts - hopefully it doesn't. The last thing the world needs is to become more like the US.
I have left slashdot and am now on Soylent News. FUCK YOU DICE.
Your comment will probably get a lot of responses, just because of the hatred and misinformation that it contains. I'm not fan of the far left (nor the far right), but let's for a minute remember who created the department of homeland security. George W. Bush. Let's also take a look at who created the TSA. George W. Bush. Who signed the Patriot Act into law? George W. Bush. I don't know about you, but I don't think any of the people listed above are part of the 'Extreme Left'. Yet somehow the people I listed above have done a fabulous job restricting freedom. I'm not really interested in left or right. I just find it sad that people like you can't distinguish the forest through the trees: ALL our politicians have contributed to this problem. The sad fact remains: Russia is right. We are becoming a police state, especially with regards to extradition and our borders where we claim our laws don't apply.
There is a joke, but it's hardly funny. The joke is that the Russians are warning their people about America in the same way that America warned it's citizens about Russia in the 70's and 80's.
The American government has a very low level of support from everyone. Also, I'm sure that in many countries, the government has been noted to shit-talk America. Why is their so much more hype suddenly since the Snowden leak(s), and Syria's civil war? Everyone's worried about war. I know people of sane mind and body, that are preparing by stocking up on canned goods. And it's the American government that they're scared of, and it's mutated mentality of destruction of anything that it deems "bad" in the light of the moment only. Who wouldn't be afraid of such a government?
It's totally sane of any country to warn it's people about not having basic human rights in America. It used to be a kick-ass place to visit. Now, not so much.
Notice that your definition of propaganda doesn't say "false information".
Spelling and Grammar errors have been added to this post for your enjoyment
The fact that you would call the US a Totalitarian Police State means that you have very little understanding of the a Totalitarian Police State actually is.
Is the US doing things it shouldn't be (Spying on its citizens, TSA, etc.), sure. But that is far from Soviet Union, North Korea, Nazi Germany. You know, actual Totalitarian Police States.
Spelling and Grammar errors have been added to this post for your enjoyment
Pay it no attention. Next thing you know the Ruskies will claim that America spies on its own citizens.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
I'm not sure what the vegans and homosexuals have to do with this, but if i remember, a lot of this started under bush and has been embraced wholeheartedly by the present administration. If you think this is about left vs. right, you don't understand american politics.
Unfortunately this is the world we in the US now live in. Courtesy of the extreme Left we are now living effectively in a police state.
Yeah, the "left". Maybe you are looking upside down at times. Both "left" and "right" are advancing it relentlessly. You know, to "protect the children" and other such diversions and lies used to impose totalitarian laws.
Police state doesn't give a fuck if it is left or right. It only cares to gain more control and maintain status quo.
I would agree that we live in a police state now. But no one has tested it yet. But everything is in place. Give it some time and we'll all look back and say *oh shit*
Forgot GITMO and the number of people detained there without ever having seen a judge, or a lawyer?
A country where you can be taken off the street without any cause, just by labeling you a 'terrorist' sounds just like the Soviet Union, North Korea and Nazi Germany..
:)
Most likely this is crap, just political gamesmanship, but the sad thing is that US actions and policies have given the country such a shady reputation that everyone has to at least give it a good look.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
These are the kinds of warnings WE used to give about RUSSIAN satellite nations.
This is all turning into a bad dream...
The extreme left? In the USA? Are you serious? To what very limited extent there even is a left in the USA it's what Europeans call the center or center-right...and this teabaggery gets modded up on /. What's next, Glenn Beck's goldline scam being pushed as sound investment and a top story? Weeping Jesus on the Cross what the Hell's happened to this place?
Actually you did imply that when you asked how it can be harmful if it is the "simple truth".
But OK. So you just didn't understand how implying that the US is issuing warrants on "shaky evidence" is attempt to bring into question the quality of the evidence that the US is using to issue warrants for Russian Citizens and how that might be harmful to US interests. But you do understand enough about the situation to make the determination that the evidence being used is indeed "shaky"
Spelling and Grammar errors have been added to this post for your enjoyment
Propaganda works best where you have at least an element of truth. The conviction rates, sentences and so on for the poor and rich in the US legal system are extremely different (look also at black vs white). Imagine how much worse it is for a poor (relative to the USA - he could be pretty rich at home) Russian who doesn't properly speak English and has the huge psychological pressure of having nobody nearby he knows at all.
Simple fact: the US legal system is deeply scary; there is a huge false conviction rate. Remember what we are always told, death sentences are the ones that are most investigated and are 100% sure. The innocence project shows the US has a minimum of a 12% false conviction rate for death sentences; other crimes must be much worse. Unlike people convicted before DNA evidence, nothing new will show up after the fact to save you.
Most convictions in the US are "shaky" and many are simply wrong. I'm sure it's even worse in most of Russia, but if you are having to compare yourself with Russia then you have already gone mad.
Holy shit, you quit taking your meds again, didn't you? There isn't, and hasn't been an "extreme left" in this country in almost 40 years. It's that the extreme right keeps moving more extremely right that makes people who used to be described as "moderate Republicans" (like Barak Obama) look like lefties. These days, idiots like you, who use sentences like the above quoted, wouldn't have allowed Ronald Reagan to run as a Republican because he wasn't "right" enough. And somebody like an Everett Dirkson, well, "hangin' would be too good for him", right?
That is exactly his point. Both sides of politics are at fault.
There is a joke, but it's hardly funny. The joke is that the Russians are warning their people about America in the same way that America warned it's citizens about Russia in the 70's and 80's.
Or alternatively, Russians are warning their people about America in the same way that Soviets warned their people about America in the 70's and 80's. The exact same bullshit about the boogiemen over there has been flung both ways for centuries. These days we have the Internet to open our eyes, but the lies are pretty much the same as those that started the Punic wars 2200 years ago.
When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
I sure hope that if the US goes through the trouble of extraditing someone, its case is "biased towards conviction".
The article cited Victor Bout. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Bout
Bout was an arms dealer who sold to both sides, as arms dealers, including Americans, often do.
I don't like arms dealers, but they're in a legal and sometimes necessary business.
They arrested somebody who couldn't break American law because he was never in America and wasn't a citizen.
I don't like Dick Cheney or Eric Prince either, and they've broken the law just as much as Bout did.
The U.S. never extradited Luis Posada, who bombed a Cuban civilian airliner and killed everybody on board, including a soccer team, despite many requests, and the U.S. never prosecuted Posada itself.
Let's follow the law and put them all in jail. Or ignore the law and don't put anybody in jail. But don't just enforce (dubious extraterritorial) laws against a Russian and not against Americans.
Since when has the truth not been harmful in diplomacy, politics, or espionage?
Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
The summary says "the Russian government is warning its citizens to not travel to countries that have an extradition treaty with the United States", but the article says:
"The Russian Foreign Ministry posted advice of a somewhat different nature on Monday, cautioning people wanted by the United States not to visit nations that have an extradition treaty with it."
Unfortunately, that small omission significantly changes the meaning of the line.
A totalitarian state is one in which people used to say, "It can't happen here."
I'm not sure what the vegans and homosexuals have to do with this, but if i remember, a lot of this started under bush and has been embraced wholeheartedly by the present administration. If you think this is about left vs. right, you don't understand american politics.
I dont think anyone understands 'Murican politics and if anyone did understand 'Murican politics it would be instantaneously replaced with something even more unexplainable and convoluted.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
I don't understand how we could legally arrest Bout. He wasn't a citizen of the U.S., he was never in the U.S., and he never committed a crime on U.S. soil.
He was a citizen of a country that often supported the side opposite of ours in conflicts, but that's not a crime.
Kissinger gave material support to regimes that were committing war crimes. If Russia wants to prosecute Kissinger, would we be legally required to turn him over? If Kissinger's airplane was forced to stop in Russia, could the Russians arrest him?
Maybe you don't believe in following international law. Maybe you believe in realpolitik and might makes right. OK, but you no longer have grounds for moral outrage when a militant group sets off a truck full of dynamite outside your embassy. They're just playing by the same rules you are.
I know people of sane mind and body, that are preparing by stocking up on canned goods. And it's the American government that they're scared of,
No you don't.
Even if you're crazy enough to imagine the feds are out to get you stocking up canned goods cannot be regarded as a sane response.
So those people aren't "of sane mind and body".
Watch this Heartland Institute video
The American government has a very low level of support from everyone.
Our Aussie politicians and Defence Signals Directorate would beg (snivel, grovel, plead and generally be a toady) to differ ;)
Patent litigation: A doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction... in which everyone seems willing to push the button
It must be horribly painful for you these days then, surfing the intarwebs, reading them bad grammars'stuff.
> They arrested somebody who couldn't break American law because he was never in America and wasn't a citizen.
According to the Wikipedia page you quote, he was arrested for smuggling arms to FARC for use by rebels in Columbia against US troops.
Perhaps you wish to quibble whether he should be treated as a war criminal, or perhaps assassinated as a war criminal?
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
As I recall, the US now basically holds the position that anyone can break American law anywhere in the world and may be prosecuted for such as soon as the opportunity presents itself.
I'm certain someone else can come up with chapter and verse ...
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
...they arrest gay people simply for being gay, and have threatened to arrest gay athletes.
This man fled Russia because of the reaction to his paintings of Putin in lingerie: http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/08/fearing-retribution-artist-behind-putin-lingerie-painting-leaves-russia/279181/
It's easy to take this as an opportunity to denigrate the US. The level of corruption is far worse in Russia and the civil rights protections a fraction of what US citizens enjoy.
If Snowdon has been Russian and escaped with FSB documents, he wouldn't be alive right now. In case nobody noticed, Russia assassinates inconvenient people.
Please help metamoderate.
The problem with false conviction actually involves a variety of issues, incredibly poor handling of eye witnesses, prosecuting attorneys counting coup towards political advancement and the punishment proffered on innocent defendants who refuse to plea out because of their innocence (and conversely innocent defendants that choose to plea out rather that face draconian sentences.)
All off this is weighted heavily against poor. Public defense is a joke in most states, and nonexistent in the very places it's most needed. Our system has slowly been reworked to criminalize poverty, mental illness and public protest. I can understand the informed of other nations wondering what the hell happened to the USA. I know I do.
He has a good point. Not sure why he was modded down to 1. Elliot Spitzer is a good example of someone who posed a direct threat to Wall Street and suddenly its discovered that he visited prostitutes and our establishment media uses it to destroy his career. I wouldn't say everything is in place just yet, however, because at some levels we still have a functioning democracy. The most important thing is to use what's left of it to get the influence of big money out of government as best we can.
Why not let US have them?
> They arrested somebody who couldn't break American law because he was never in America and wasn't a citizen.
According to the Wikipedia page you quote, he was arrested for smuggling arms to FARC for use by rebels in Columbia against US troops.
Assuming he did supply arms to the enemy of an ally, that still doesn't break US law, nor does it make him a war criminal. The arms supplier of your enemy isn't a war criminal, and someone who does something out of your jurisdiction is, like it or not, free from your prosecutors.
TLDR; US forces has no legal standing to arrest, convict or detain their enemies arms suppliers.
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
Dude... look up the word RENDITION. Dirty deeds done in the dark of night cheap. A whole lot of innocent people enjoyed the hospitality of middle eastern prisons on Uncle Sam's dime.
The department of Homoland Security... it has a nice ring!
Especially since the USA (from perspectives of Canadians at least, and probably other countries that DO have a left and right) - doesn't have a "left". At best it has an "extreme right" and a "somewhat more moderate right"
Very much "pot calling kettle"... USA and Russia are both famously historically "guilty" of this, as well as accusing each other of this.
however, all of the signs of psychological projection, in the more precise dialect.
*aside* even considering that, it's still safer to do business in the USA, for the most part. At least the illegal detentions, seizures, etc actually are well enough documented that folks who are at risk can usually avoid entering. Russia's still not very much into the concept of "free speech".
My thoughts exactly. It seems to me that US System has many flaws - no system is perfect but here the system is bad by principle - especially in drug cases. But even in normal criminal case not associated with drugs you may come to be offered confession for limited sentence or face a chance of losing the trial and getting much worse sentence because you were fighting it - how this has anything to do with justice I am not sure. Of course purpose of such solutions is not justice but efficiency i.e. making people motivated to settle down to save money for the state i.e. tax payer. This is not working properly because public prosecutors need convictions not justice. That is more efficient for them and their office. But what do I know - I am just a commie from an old continent....
It is misdirection. Point the citizenry at a different country and warn them about it, so that the citizenry overlook the problems at home. Classic propaganda is to create an external enemy.
Is the realization that the differences between Russia and the US are no longer a matter of type, but of degree.
Point the citizenry at a different country and warn them about it, so that the citizenry overlook the problems at home. Classic propaganda is to create an external enemy.
This is true, as it speaks to the reason behind the statement. Sadly, this doesn't really speak to the potential truth of the statement itself. Truth can be propaganda, as well as lies.
Judging from my experience with American law enforcement, and "justice", and everything else I've read, this smells a wee bit truthful. It still serves Russia nicely (them being, perhaps, bigger dicks than us), but I still think they might have a valid point. We're not the good guys, by any stretch. We only look out for our own interests, and by "our", I of course mean only our governments, not "our" as in "we the people".
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
North Korea and Nazi Germany are/were military dictatorships. In a military dictatorship, there's no pretense of due process. There is one leader and if you cross them, you suffer the consequences. East Germany was very much a police state, but one could argue that it was under the control of the USSR and not that unique an example.
I think categorically denying that the U.S. is a police state is dangerous. Something very unhealthy is happening in the U.S.. People don't even feel free to talk openly about it anymore. Names are being taken down via social media and citizens are being secretly spied upon without due process. The pretense of due process is still there. Guantanamo is considered "different" and the DHS operates in a space which is also "an exception". The government still feels it needs to explain its actions to the media.
Where was all this outrage and demand to bomb when the rebels used nerve gas back in May?
Both sides in the Syrian conflict are baddies. It's a bit hypocritical to bomb the Syrian government for using chemical weapons when we ignored the rebels doing the same.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
the irony, of course, is that nobody warns travellers about visiting the USA because we already know that Obama, who's been running the country for years and years, is an "elected president" in name only, and pretty much serves as an unelected, business-sponsored dictator. There is little evidence to suggest that the USA would give anyone a fair trial. ex. Chelsea Manning http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chelsea_Manning
FTFY
cost cutting is part of the reason, but increasing the conviction rate is a much bigger part, it justifies the system because there's quantifiable "proof" that it's working - they must have been guilty, if they confessed or plead guilty.
it's also useful politically, to make people or organisations seem "tough on crime".
IMO, plea bargaining should be illegal with severe penalties for prosecutors who offer it.
at the very least, the fact that a deal was offered should be enough to reduce all charges and potential sentencing to the offer as a *maximum* - the cops/prosecutor wouldn't have offered it if they thought it was too lenient for the crime.
FWIW, I live in a country where such evil shit either doesn't happen or isn't common enough to be a noticable problem - although cops here (as everywhere) always pile on resist arrest/assault police charges just because they can - it's your word against theirs, and they are presumed to be honest by the courts.
The very thought of a "justice" system where it is considered *normal* to use the threat of insanely harsh penalties to coerce a guilty plea fills me with horror.
but then, our legal system isn't politicised - deliberately so, with clear and jealously guarded separation of powers - and we don't do stupid things like elect senior cops or judges. ours are professionals that work their way up through the ranks, not demagogues - which has problems of its own, but IMO they're nowhere near as bad as the problem of illiterate, incompent, prejudiced morons being elected just because they're popular or good at lying in public.
I remember all the american anti-russian, anti-soviet, anti-communist propaganda from when i was growing up in the 70s and 80s - there isn't a single shitful thing that the evil russians were accused of then that you americans aren't doing - or exceeding - now, and with far greater efficiency due to modern computers and technology.
I would argue that this provides an opportunity for our government to either show the warrants are not "shaky" but the result of good police procedure with sound probable cause arguments, or if they are not get rid of the bad agents and impeach the bad judges. This would enhance our people's faith in good just law enforcement and strengthen our society.
As it is today, given everything else that has come out recently and all the lies Uncle Sam has been caught in on these subjects; I am more incline to take the Russians at there word. Consequently it makes it a tougher environment for law enforcement when they can't count on cooperation form their fellow cotizens
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
It must be horribly painful for you these days then, surfing the intarwebs, reading them bad grammars'stuff.
Oh it is. They just have free reign these days. It's enough to make you loose your mind. I wish they'd learn to tow the line.
There wasn't much outrage in May because there was no evidence that the rebels used nerve gas in May. There was accusations made by Carla Del Ponte who was a member of an inquiry team for the UN who once made a name for herself prosecuting the Mafia. She claimed that it was the rebels trying to make it look like it was the Syrian government... However that wasn't backed up by any concrete evidence, and her colleagues disagreed (mostly again, pointing out that there was no evidence). The biggest question mark is of course where the rebels would have gotten the nerve gas. But probably the main reason most people ignored it? The source. Carla Del Ponte has a long history of making up allegations that later prove to be false. In 2005 she accused the Vatican of sheltering Croatian war criminals. She accused NATO pilots of war crimes in Kosovo before quickly recanting. And finally she published a book about Albanian doctors butchering Serbian prisoners and selling their organs, allegations that eventually led her to prosecute. All the accused have since been acquitted as Del Ponte was unable to satisfy any sort of burden of proof.
Since we learned to cover it with so much bull and feelgood words that it doesn't matter anymore. We don't invade countries anymore, we join a peacekeeping mission, and after we won (sorry, after we reestablished peace) we don't occupy it, we establish a military presence in the area. There we don't infiltrate enemy groups and commit worse atrocities against the civilians than they do to convince them we're also some of the "bad guys", so we can ferret out their leaders for assassination, we engage in covert operations where we have to regretfully accept inevitable but necessary drawbacks for the local population, to enable us to identify top terrorists to neutralize them. And we don't do that with carpet bombing from unmanned drones where we fire at the least hunch that there might be someone we want to hit in the area, we launch preemptive strikes against the terrorist strongholds using top of the line equipment to protect the lives of our men and women serving in our military...
Need I go on or do you simply want to watch the News for more drivel like that?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
That's little different from the imprisonment refugees suffer in places like Germany and Australia. Australia has even set up extraterritorial detention camps in places like Nauru.
Bullshit. I can't speak about Australia, but just today a number of asylum seekers in Germany have gathered in Munich to protest the fact that they are not supposed to leave the administrative district they are housed in. You can think what you will about this rule, but if you believe being legally restricted to an administrative district (note that refugees are not physically prevented from leaving) is in any way comparable to being imprisoned in Gitmo, then you are nuts.
If you are considered a threat to national security, you can be taken off the street in pretty much any nation. The only thing that's unusual about the US is that this didn't use to happen here. And the sooner we return that exceptional status among nations, the better.
In civilized nations, even suspected threats to national security have to be brought before a judge within a short period of time after being arrested (in Germany it is 48 hours), and they cannot be detained for years without being charged for a crime either.
Those people aren't stocking up because the Government is out to get them specifically. What they are typically afraid of is that the Government will push the public to far and that all hell will break loose. They want to be able to hole up at home or in some safe place with their canned food and shotguns and wait it out. If they decide to come after you specifically you are toast. Other than have top notch lawyers on retainer there isn't much you can do in that situation. So what those people are preparing for is to avoid being collateral damage.
Is that a sane response? I'd say it depends upon the scale. Realistically having supplies on hand is something you should be doing as a matter of course. Down where my mother lives people typically keep hurricane supplies because you could find yourself sort of stranded for as much as a week. So if your "preperations" are on a scale like that probably it isn't insane and those supplies would serve you well in any disaster or disruption that comes along. If on the other hand you have a 5,000 square foot bunker under your house with 25 years of food and enough fire power to fight WWII you may have an "issue".
The fact that you would call the US a Totalitarian Police State means that you have very little understanding of the a Totalitarian Police State actually is.
Is the US doing things it shouldn't be (Spying on its citizens, TSA, etc.), sure. But that is far from Soviet Union, North Korea, Nazi Germany. You know, actual Totalitarian Police States.
A "Totalitarian State" strives to have total control of its subjects. A "Totalitarian Police State" utilizes the police to achieve that objective.
The states you mentioned (Soviet Union, North Korea, Nazi Germany) used violent means on a large scale to achieve such control but the US does not need to. It can use different tactics to achieve its objectives.
Let's try an example:
1) You're in elementary school. Bobby, the schoolyard bully, wants your lunch. If you don't give it to him, he and his friends will beat you up.
2) You're in elementary school. Suzy, the teacher's pet, wants your lunch. If you don't give it to her, she will accuse you of attacking her and you'll face expulsion.
3) You're in elementary school. Jimmy, the sneak, wants your lunch. If you don't give it to him, he's got a really embarrassing video of you that he threatens to put on youtube.
Bobby, Suzy and Jimmy have the same objective but their tactics are different and, depending on their intended victim, will be more or less effective.
Bottom line, the US has ways to eliminate dissent that are more subtle and sophisticated than those employed by the DPRK but are no less effective.
at some levels we still have a functioning democracy
No, you don't.
Allowing you to choose between Kang and Kodos every 4 years does not a functioning democracy make.
Do US Citizens need to fear the government knocking on the door at midnight?
Yes, actually (you're just one anonymous tip away from having a SWAT team redecorate your home), but they are more scared of being accused of a crime, put on a ter'rist list, investigated for child porn possession, or sued into bankruptcy.
Different tactics, same result.
Were John Stewart or Stephen Colbert or Glenn Beck or Bill Orielly arrested for their blatant attacks of the government?
Those people do not threaten the regime. At best they are largely ignored; at worst, they may effect a slight shift in voting patterns between the Republicrats and the Demopublicans, depending on the political party they happen to rant against, which serves nicely to distract the population from the real issues.
No? Ohh ok. Then once again, I bring up that while not perfect, the US is far from the Totalitarian state some think it is.
You don't need to beat up your slaves if other methods of control are more effective.
The word totalitarian has a meaning. A country working towards gay rights is not a country that it becoming totalitarian.
Yes, it does. Allow me to use the wording from Wikipedia: "Totalitarianism (or totalitarian rule) is a term employed by some political scientists to describe a political system in which the state holds total authority over the society and seeks to control all aspects of public and private life wherever possible."
How exactly "gay rights" interfere with totalitarianism?
Interestingly enough, the US didn't bother to charge the CEO of the New York Stock Exchange when he flew to the Colombian jungles to solicit the FARC's business. Instead Grassley got the largest bonus of any NYSE president in history. I suppose the FARC has to have some way to launder its money in order to be able to pay Bout and his kind.
"Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin