In order for someone to have human rights, it is generally required as a typical prerequisite to have "humans", too. That aside, if someone can set in stone and enforce systematically to OTHERS only, human rights, without the need of self inspection or answering to OTHERS on EQUAL TERMS, then there is no facking need or point for applying those to self, too. Ergo, this is what everyone perceives as DOUBLE STANDARDS. Fundamental part of modern societies; goes well with hypocrisy, also...

Why is Bradley in here? He's a bigot. He openly promotes his personal belief that ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation should dictate whether someone has rights or not.

More to the point, he isn't human.

Is anyone in the US? You are a Cthuhlu-Avatar, the rest might as well be a mixture of corporate drones and alien invaders, for all I have learned from Hollywood.

What is wrong with Alien invaders?

And Bradley isn't from the States. God I hope he isn't!

He's from 'other'. So he's one of those alien invaders, I think.

Lead by example? ;)

I think what he meant is more along the lines of "Is there any country in the world the NSA isn't spying on?". :)

It's illegal here too. Hence the big deals about the NSA being exposed by Snowden on Wikileaks, and so many laws getting shot down in congress trying to expand the abilities to monitor of the NSA and CIA. Just because they do it doesn't make it legal. It's known about and attempted to be curtailed. It violates our rights as well as stated by our own Bill of Rights. The fourth amendment protects against unlawful search and seizure, and mass monitoring certainly falls under that.

Is there countries that don't spy on other countries at least to some extend (at bare minimium they monitor net trafic and other communications for illegal and other suspicious activity)? Obviously most of them don't go as far as NSA and listen to phones of their allies' presidents. :-p

Does any country have those really?

I don't understand the issue of spying on your own citizens. A security service should be as vigilant in securing its citizens from domestic threats as foreign threats.

That said, this issue is far worse than mass surveillance IMO:

Article 24.

Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.

In Sweden but I'm guessing in rest of Europe too there's a common practice now that you are not hired through the company who purchase your labour but instead by a mediator. The consequences? Less protection and less pay for workers.

As has already been pointed out, I think several of your points can be pretty substantially contested, so I'm not going to rehash those arguments.

I will say however that the US does a lot of things right as well, it at least tries to ensure basic freedoms for its citizens. Equally, what do you think of Russia's stance on homosexuality, or the EU's hideous handling of refugees at present?

I know it's tempting to take shot at the US, but there are plenty of other high-profile nations that have dubious policies.

While this is probably true it tells not much about how intensive some nations violate the humans rights and other don't. I mean, surely there is a huge difference between Norway and Greenland on one side and nations like North Korea, China, Russia and to some extent even USA on the other side.

It's probably quite important to measure that quantitatively if possible.

Judging by the internet certainly seems that some ex-men feel oppressed.