4 ms·

> He would have had the chance to go to trial and defend himself and seek whistleblower protection status. Is this what you would've done in Snowdon's shoes?

mike_d 3y ago
Absolutely. When you make the choice to become a whistleblower, you are making the decision that the information you have is more important than your personal freedoms. Any major US news publication or the EFF would have put their legal team to work protecting him. He could have fled to a friendly country like France that has strong civil liberty protections. He could have gone to a neutral country like Switzerland. Instead of trying any of these things, he went right to Russia and horse traded information for protection - which plays a lot more like an asset coming home than a legitimate whistleblower.
- mikem170 3y ago
  > When you make the choice to become a whistleblower, you are making the decision that the information you have is more important than your personal freedoms. So it's wrong to expose a corrupt government without becoming a martyr? It's better to let the public to be fooled? Not everyone thinks this way. Sometimes it matters, and sometimes it doesn't. > he went right to Russia and horse traded information for protection Do you have a source for the above statement? It's my understanding that the U.S. revoked his passport while he was en-route to Ecuador, trapping him in Russia. I haven't heard that he gave the Russians any intelligence.
- jalapenos 3y ago
  Poking a rights-violating government in the eye by exposing their rights violations, and then asking that government to protect your rights, isn't such a genius move. Running away and getting protection from a different rights-violating government that you haven't poked in the eye sounds quite a bit less masochist. It's also common knowledge he didn't go directly to Russia but had his passport canceled by the US, leading to the Russian airport he was transferring through not letting him leave.
- holoduke 3y ago
  You have no idea how whisleblowers are treated in even the most democratic and rich countries. There are numerous examples of people becoming the enemy of the state and a fair trial never ever happened. The legal system does not apply for those.
- hnben 3y ago
  > He could have fled to a friendly country like France that has strong civil liberty protections. He could have gone to a neutral country like Switzerland he could not [1] > Instead of trying any of these things he did try [1] > horse traded information for protection when he was in russia, he had nothing more to give them [1] [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37401495 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37401495
soraminazuki 3y ago
Of course not. GP would happily accept and participate in illegal mass surveillance, not blow the whistle on it.

mike_d 3y ago

Absolutely. When you make the choice to become a whistleblower, you are making the decision that the information you have is more important than your personal freedoms. Any major US news publication or the EFF would have put their legal team to work protecting him. He could have fled to a friendly country like France that has strong civil liberty protections. He could have gone to a neutral country like Switzerland. Instead of trying any of these things, he went right to Russia and horse traded information for protection - which plays a lot more like an asset coming home than a legitimate whistleblower.

mikem170 3y ago
> When you make the choice to become a whistleblower, you are making the decision that the information you have is more important than your personal freedoms. So it's wrong to expose a corrupt government without becoming a martyr? It's better to let the public to be fooled? Not everyone thinks this way. Sometimes it matters, and sometimes it doesn't. > he went right to Russia and horse traded information for protection Do you have a source for the above statement? It's my understanding that the U.S. revoked his passport while he was en-route to Ecuador, trapping him in Russia. I haven't heard that he gave the Russians any intelligence.
jalapenos 3y ago
Poking a rights-violating government in the eye by exposing their rights violations, and then asking that government to protect your rights, isn't such a genius move. Running away and getting protection from a different rights-violating government that you haven't poked in the eye sounds quite a bit less masochist. It's also common knowledge he didn't go directly to Russia but had his passport canceled by the US, leading to the Russian airport he was transferring through not letting him leave.
holoduke 3y ago
You have no idea how whisleblowers are treated in even the most democratic and rich countries. There are numerous examples of people becoming the enemy of the state and a fair trial never ever happened. The legal system does not apply for those.
hnben 3y ago
> He could have fled to a friendly country like France that has strong civil liberty protections. He could have gone to a neutral country like Switzerland he could not [1] > Instead of trying any of these things he did try [1] > horse traded information for protection when he was in russia, he had nothing more to give them [1] [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37401495 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37401495

soraminazuki 3y ago

Of course not. GP would happily accept and participate in illegal mass surveillance, not blow the whistle on it.