Very odd that you read this as some kind of defense of CN or RU. It's an argument about extraterritorial application of secrecy laws.
-
-
Replying to @benwizner @speechboy71
If a New York Times reporter, say, conducted espionage against the UK from NY, the US would NEVER take the view that Britain cannot...
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @benjaminwittes @speechboy71
I'm saying we would never allow China to define the publication of their secrets as "espionage."
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @benwizner @speechboy71
but what do you mean "allow"? They do precisely that, and we don't prevent it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @benjaminwittes @speechboy71
I mean we would cry bloody murder if China charged David Sanger with espionage under Chinese law.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @benwizner @speechboy71
I think we would make a substantive argument that the activity in question is protected speech.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
or should be.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
we don't believe they should be prosecuted and we're going to protect them if they want to stay here.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @benjaminwittes @speechboy71
I wasn't trying to make a law professor argument about jurisdiction. I was trying to illustrate the danger of extraterritorial enforcement.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
It's both.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.