3 ms·

I do appreciate your response. Thanks. On your first point, I barely disagree with you at all. The second point is where I feel like no one is paying much att

by vbtemp 13y ago

I do appreciate your response. Thanks. On your first point, I barely disagree with you at all. The second point is where I feel like no one is paying much attention: For me personally, the irony of criticizing the US on unethical activities from the patronage of countries that routinely and violently trample the human rights of their citizens completely destroys and legitimacy of the broader point he's trying to make. And your third point is also disturbing and true. I don't disagree. Edit: BTW, my above post all day long has been hovering between +5 upvotes to -5 votes. It's the wildest ride I've seen on an HN thread ever :)

grey-area 13y ago
That's a fair criticism, and actually I doubt Snowden would disagree with you, though we don't really know his views at this point. What we do know is that he has little choice if he wishes to avoid being arrested in travel, rendered or becoming a stooge to a powerful enemy of the US like China or Russia. Ecuador may be his least-worst option, as HK was to avoid detention initially. While it would be admirable to remain and try to fight the administration in spite of their policies on Manning and calls of traitor, I do understand his choice to try to remain free.
Cushman 13y ago
Can you clarify what you're saying here? That the existence of a massive unlawful surveillance state is not an issue because the sorts of tinpot dictatorships a person has to flee to to escape political reprisal by a massive unlawful surveillance state themselves have poor human rights records? What does one have to do with the other?
bobwaycott 13y ago
> For me personally, the irony of criticizing the US on unethical activities from the patronage of countries that routinely and violently trample the human rights of their citizens completely destroys and legitimacy of the broader point he's trying to make. Interesting. For me, it doesn't destroy credibility and legitimacy at all. Nor does it smell of defection. The irony, however, is what is most tangible. If we have, through the actions of our intelligence agencies, reached a point where American citizens must flee the country and take refuge in a traditionally maligned foreign power to effectively protect the Constitution and the People, it is a clarion call for the need to make a full stop, publicly work out these problems, and get ourselves back on the right track. If protecting constitutional and human rights requires one to flee a nation that champions those causes publicly, but prosecutes their defenders privately, we have a serious problem.
devcpp 13y ago
Two wrongs don't make a right. He can criticize the US all he wants. We all can. And we all can criticize whichever leaders we want for being assholes. It may be unfair but Snowden had no choice given the reaction of the US. Don't look at it as separate points. You have to understand the situation as a whole and that if you prized the US and had been in his situation and didn't want to rot in jail forever, you'd have done the exact same. EDIT: Or, you know what? Perhaps you're smarter than me. What would you have done different? It's easy to criticize but you'll have to come up with solutions. For the US, they could've just obeyed their own law and requested warrants wherever there was probable cause. But for Snowden? What could he have done different while preserving his own life?

by vbtemp 13y ago

grey-area 13y ago

That's a fair criticism, and actually I doubt Snowden would disagree with you, though we don't really know his views at this point. What we do know is that he has little choice if he wishes to avoid being arrested in travel, rendered or becoming a stooge to a powerful enemy of the US like China or Russia. Ecuador may be his least-worst option, as HK was to avoid detention initially. While it would be admirable to remain and try to fight the administration in spite of their policies on Manning and calls of traitor, I do understand his choice to try to remain free.

Cushman 13y ago

Can you clarify what you're saying here? That the existence of a massive unlawful surveillance state is not an issue because the sorts of tinpot dictatorships a person has to flee to to escape political reprisal by a massive unlawful surveillance state themselves have poor human rights records? What does one have to do with the other?

bobwaycott 13y ago

> For me personally, the irony of criticizing the US on unethical activities from the patronage of countries that routinely and violently trample the human rights of their citizens completely destroys and legitimacy of the broader point he's trying to make. Interesting. For me, it doesn't destroy credibility and legitimacy at all. Nor does it smell of defection. The irony, however, is what is most tangible. If we have, through the actions of our intelligence agencies, reached a point where American citizens must flee the country and take refuge in a traditionally maligned foreign power to effectively protect the Constitution and the People, it is a clarion call for the need to make a full stop, publicly work out these problems, and get ourselves back on the right track. If protecting constitutional and human rights requires one to flee a nation that champions those causes publicly, but prosecutes their defenders privately, we have a serious problem.

devcpp 13y ago

Two wrongs don't make a right. He can criticize the US all he wants. We all can. And we all can criticize whichever leaders we want for being assholes. It may be unfair but Snowden had no choice given the reaction of the US. Don't look at it as separate points. You have to understand the situation as a whole and that if you prized the US and had been in his situation and didn't want to rot in jail forever, you'd have done the exact same. EDIT: Or, you know what? Perhaps you're smarter than me. What would you have done different? It's easy to criticize but you'll have to come up with solutions. For the US, they could've just obeyed their own law and requested warrants wherever there was probable cause. But for Snowden? What could he have done different while preserving his own life?