7 ms·

I can't say I see him as a villain, but definitely not a hero. I hold back my judgement, because we are just too far away to know what's going on. He did expos

I can't say I see him as a villain, but definitely not a hero. I hold back my judgement, because we are just too far away to know what's going on. He did expose some pretty bad practices to the general public, but asylum in Russia afterwards? Are you kidding me? That just looks super fishy to anyone with at least an ounce of critical thought in his brain. Especially in the context of the Crimea debacle.

jules 11y ago
What should he have done instead?
- blumkvist 11y ago
  I can't say what he should have done. I can say what I would do if I made the choice to whistleblow. I would stay and face the trial. Make a very big fuss about it. After all, I've decided to stand up for something. Something big. If I'm going to make that sacrifice, I will go all the way. I wouldn't risk casting shadows on my selfless act by going to an overly ambitious political rival of the US. Who also happens to have significantly worse practices in the very same domain. It's like exposing corruption in the police department and then only hanging out at the mafia's restaurant. How am I supposed at look at that guy now? That's not to say the initial act has no value. It most certainly has. But everything he says afterward I just don't value at all. I don't think you should desert to the enemy if you're trying to fix your battalion.
  - mlrtime 11y ago
    You would be locked in a cell and nobody would hear from you again. You wouldn't be able to communicate your defense to the outside world, you'd be much much worse off.
    - blumkvist 11y ago
      It's much more complicated than that, but I'm not really interested in discussing this further.
      - hobs 11y ago
        I understand that you think it is more complicated than that, but I don't think it is. Do you remember what happened with Chelsea Manning? Because that is what the GP is referring to. When you get put in military prison, they basically get to do whatever they want to you.
        ikeboy 11y ago
        But Manning was in the military when he got access to the stuff he leaked.
        jellicle 11y ago
        What are you trying to say? That Snowden wouldn't end in Fort Leavenworth? You are correct. Snowden would end up in ADX Florence. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADX_Florence http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADX_Florence I'm not sure how that is an improvement.
        ikeboy 11y ago
        The point was that Snowden wouldn't be judged by military standards, which is what allowed them to do what they did to Manning.
  - jules 11y ago
    Snowden has made a lot of powerful people very uncomfortable, so a fair trial and access to the media is unlikely. > It's like exposing corruption in the police department and then only hanging out at the mafia's restaurant. How am I supposed at look at that guy now? The whole point of staying in Russia is that he can't leave because the US made sure his travel documents were revoked, and Russia is unlikely to extradite him under political pressure from the US. If it was Snowdens goal to pass on information to Russia, he wouldn't have made such a big fuss about releasing that info to the media. So it's actually more like exposing corruption in the police department, and then seeking refuge from the wrath of those corrupt police, and the only safe place you can find is the maffia's restaurant.
- Zach_the_Lizard 11y ago
  I think he should have kept quiet about leaking the documents. It may be that he never would have been caught and could have kept his freedom. I'm unsure if this would have helped his cause though. Perhaps by coming forward it served to bring further attention to it.
asddubs 11y ago
Could you expand on that? Why is it fishy?
deciplex 11y ago
If currently-serving national-level politicians are calling for your extrajudicial assassination, Russia is one of the safer places on Earth for you to be.
- pimentel 11y ago
  Exactly. The best place to hide from the US is staying in a country who won't quickly deliver you to the US with just a fingersnap, like a good dog. Like any EU country would. Even if that means a not so free country.
blumkvist 11y ago
I DON'T AGREE WITH YOU, SO I WILL DOWNVOTE YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
- deciplex 11y ago
  I don't think we agree or disagree with you so much as you haven't made any strong statements to agree or disagree with. What do you think his fate would be now, had he released the documents then turned himself over to US authorities?
  - blumkvist 11y ago
    I replied to a commenter who asked if there were people who don't think Snowden is a hero. I don't think Snowden is a hero. That's my opinion and that was my reply. The overgrown kindergarteners of HN of course disagree and they have to show it by downvoting.
    - vinceguidry 11y ago
      Disagreement is a perfectly valid reason for downvoting someone. You should expect that comments made on political topics are going to get downvoted by people who strongly disagree with you. But moderating your tone and angle of attack on such topics can go a long way towards avoiding them and can even get people who disagree with you to upvote you. Complaining about downvotes is only going to earn you more of them.
      - marrs 11y ago
        Disagreement is a perfectly valid reason for downvoting someone. No. It isn't. How would you feel if people shut you out of a discussion because they disagreed with you? If someone says something you disagree with, debate them. If they say something factually incorrect, correct them. They may even thank you for it. And guess what, they may end up changing your mind, or correcting a mistake on your part. Actively seeking to censor somebody for having a different perspective on something is frankly abhorant. I find it ironic that this kind of behaviour is being encouraged in this thread of all. Snowden's actions will prove to be a giant waste of effort if your kind get their way.
realusername 11y ago
What other choice does he have ? He asked almost every European countries for asylum and they all refused him.
pluma 11y ago
He only had to take asylum in Russia because the US revoked his passport and prevented him from going anywhere else. Russia was never intended to be more than a stop-gap. Considering how disgustingly subservient all of Europe has been to bend over backwards to the US (e.g. forcing the landing of a presidential plane because someone suspected it was carrying Snowden) you can't really blame him. Russia is the only country in the region that doesn't care whether the US wants him or not (and would even refuse to co-operate simply to flip them off). Heck, I'd love to see him be granted asylum somewhere else but all of Europe would drop him like a hot potato the second the US told them to hand him over.
- toyg 11y ago
  > and would even refuse to co-operate simply to flip them off Indeed -- the decision on Snowden came around the same time Obama was getting ready to invade Syria. Putin is a de-facto old-school dictator, but on this he did everything right. I wish he'd completed the job by sneaking Snowden to Ecuador via submarine, but I can understand why he didn't -- he can play that card next time he desperately needs a propaganda boost.
  - pluma 11y ago
    Incidentally, the decision not to get more involved in Syria was probably the better choice at the time. No matter what you think of the dictator's morals, a good portion of the rebels was basically made up of radical Islamists. Exactly who you don't want to be in charge when ISIS enters the scene. It was interesting to see how suddenly our media (in Germany) stopped their sympathetic reporting on the Syrian rebels and how desperately they need our support (i.e. at least give them some guns) when ISIS began making headlines. I remember thinking that supporting the rebels in Syria (though it viscerally felt like the "right thing" to do) was probably the worse bad choice to make even before Russia & al heavily spoke against it. It's easy to forget that both the direct intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as the less direct support of the rebellions during the "Arab Spring" resulted in very unstable situations and a very disconcerting shift towards Islamist extremism in those regions.
- blumkvist 11y ago
wongarsu 11y ago
I don't see how asylum in Russia was fishy. Snowden probably doesn't like the Russian government, but he was stuck in a Russian airport with a revoked passport. Even if he had free choice, Russia is one of the few countries willing and able to withstand US pressure to extradite him. Being on trial in the US isn't an option for him because what he did may have been just, but was striclty illegal. Russian-US relations were at a low and Russia generally likes sending little fuck-yous. Granting Snowden asylum is also good PR for Russia because they appear strong against perceived US injustice. For both sides the choices appear completely rational without implying any foul play or hidden relations.
kr4 11y ago
Crimea debacle? You should go read GlobalResearch.ca, CounterPunch.org, WSWS.org ETC – non-MSM news outlets to get the other side of the picture. Crimea is a very strategic area to get hold of which NATO wants to break into Russia through color revolutions ETC just because Putin refused to be US dog. When Ukraine democratic government was forcefully overthrown by a US-backed Nazi military coup what choice Russia had? Just imagine how US would respond if China or Russia back coup takes place in Mexico or Canada? Why pivot to Asia, why redrawing Middle East, dividing Iraq into three small states? Supporting rebels against Serian government while helping Saudi dictatership to kill Yemen civilions just to suppress another rebels. All sugarcoded IN the name of democracy and freedom? which even US is failing to provide to its citizens. We're listening about China aggression, Russian aggression, while US is at war in almost the whole world directly or through proxies. US has accumulated enough bad karma to insure its decline, those who don't remember history are bound to repeat it. This war game and greed for hegemony by bullet at all cost has happened countless times in the past and has always resulted in complete destruction of empires and civilizations sooner or later. But public is sleeping as always, only with a vein optimism that "this won't happen to us, we're unique in the human history!" You're not unique, you're just a spec of dust in the cosmos which has eternal law of upholding justice. It's just that it comes at the right time when the bucket is full.
- dkns 11y ago
  > When Ukraine democratic government was forcefully overthrown by a US-backed Nazi military coup what choice Russia had? Wait, wait, wait. When did this happen? Because I think I might've missed something.
  - gonvaled 11y ago
    I think he is referring to this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Yanukovych http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Yanukovych Yanukovych was democratically elected and overthrown by popular protests (backed by the EU / US?).
  - kr4 11y ago
    Read this: The Truth Behind The Crisis in Ukraine. http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-truth-behind-the-crisis-in-ukraine-us-covert-manipulation-and-the-resurging-cold-war/5372408 http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-truth-behind-the-crisis-in-...

jules 11y ago

What should he have done instead?

blumkvist 11y ago
I can't say what he should have done. I can say what I would do if I made the choice to whistleblow. I would stay and face the trial. Make a very big fuss about it. After all, I've decided to stand up for something. Something big. If I'm going to make that sacrifice, I will go all the way. I wouldn't risk casting shadows on my selfless act by going to an overly ambitious political rival of the US. Who also happens to have significantly worse practices in the very same domain. It's like exposing corruption in the police department and then only hanging out at the mafia's restaurant. How am I supposed at look at that guy now? That's not to say the initial act has no value. It most certainly has. But everything he says afterward I just don't value at all. I don't think you should desert to the enemy if you're trying to fix your battalion.
- mlrtime 11y ago
  You would be locked in a cell and nobody would hear from you again. You wouldn't be able to communicate your defense to the outside world, you'd be much much worse off.
  - blumkvist 11y ago
    It's much more complicated than that, but I'm not really interested in discussing this further.
    - hobs 11y ago
      I understand that you think it is more complicated than that, but I don't think it is. Do you remember what happened with Chelsea Manning? Because that is what the GP is referring to. When you get put in military prison, they basically get to do whatever they want to you.
      - ikeboy 11y ago
        But Manning was in the military when he got access to the stuff he leaked.
        jellicle 11y ago
        What are you trying to say? That Snowden wouldn't end in Fort Leavenworth? You are correct. Snowden would end up in ADX Florence. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADX_Florence http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADX_Florence I'm not sure how that is an improvement.
        ikeboy 11y ago
        The point was that Snowden wouldn't be judged by military standards, which is what allowed them to do what they did to Manning.
- jules 11y ago
  Snowden has made a lot of powerful people very uncomfortable, so a fair trial and access to the media is unlikely. > It's like exposing corruption in the police department and then only hanging out at the mafia's restaurant. How am I supposed at look at that guy now? The whole point of staying in Russia is that he can't leave because the US made sure his travel documents were revoked, and Russia is unlikely to extradite him under political pressure from the US. If it was Snowdens goal to pass on information to Russia, he wouldn't have made such a big fuss about releasing that info to the media. So it's actually more like exposing corruption in the police department, and then seeking refuge from the wrath of those corrupt police, and the only safe place you can find is the maffia's restaurant.
Zach_the_Lizard 11y ago
I think he should have kept quiet about leaking the documents. It may be that he never would have been caught and could have kept his freedom. I'm unsure if this would have helped his cause though. Perhaps by coming forward it served to bring further attention to it.

asddubs 11y ago

Could you expand on that? Why is it fishy?

deciplex 11y ago

If currently-serving national-level politicians are calling for your extrajudicial assassination, Russia is one of the safer places on Earth for you to be.

pimentel 11y ago
Exactly. The best place to hide from the US is staying in a country who won't quickly deliver you to the US with just a fingersnap, like a good dog. Like any EU country would. Even if that means a not so free country.

blumkvist 11y ago

I DON'T AGREE WITH YOU, SO I WILL DOWNVOTE YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

deciplex 11y ago
I don't think we agree or disagree with you so much as you haven't made any strong statements to agree or disagree with. What do you think his fate would be now, had he released the documents then turned himself over to US authorities?
- blumkvist 11y ago
  I replied to a commenter who asked if there were people who don't think Snowden is a hero. I don't think Snowden is a hero. That's my opinion and that was my reply. The overgrown kindergarteners of HN of course disagree and they have to show it by downvoting.
  - vinceguidry 11y ago
    Disagreement is a perfectly valid reason for downvoting someone. You should expect that comments made on political topics are going to get downvoted by people who strongly disagree with you. But moderating your tone and angle of attack on such topics can go a long way towards avoiding them and can even get people who disagree with you to upvote you. Complaining about downvotes is only going to earn you more of them.
    - marrs 11y ago
      Disagreement is a perfectly valid reason for downvoting someone. No. It isn't. How would you feel if people shut you out of a discussion because they disagreed with you? If someone says something you disagree with, debate them. If they say something factually incorrect, correct them. They may even thank you for it. And guess what, they may end up changing your mind, or correcting a mistake on your part. Actively seeking to censor somebody for having a different perspective on something is frankly abhorant. I find it ironic that this kind of behaviour is being encouraged in this thread of all. Snowden's actions will prove to be a giant waste of effort if your kind get their way.

realusername 11y ago

What other choice does he have ? He asked almost every European countries for asylum and they all refused him.

pluma 11y ago

He only had to take asylum in Russia because the US revoked his passport and prevented him from going anywhere else. Russia was never intended to be more than a stop-gap. Considering how disgustingly subservient all of Europe has been to bend over backwards to the US (e.g. forcing the landing of a presidential plane because someone suspected it was carrying Snowden) you can't really blame him. Russia is the only country in the region that doesn't care whether the US wants him or not (and would even refuse to co-operate simply to flip them off). Heck, I'd love to see him be granted asylum somewhere else but all of Europe would drop him like a hot potato the second the US told them to hand him over.

toyg 11y ago
> and would even refuse to co-operate simply to flip them off Indeed -- the decision on Snowden came around the same time Obama was getting ready to invade Syria. Putin is a de-facto old-school dictator, but on this he did everything right. I wish he'd completed the job by sneaking Snowden to Ecuador via submarine, but I can understand why he didn't -- he can play that card next time he desperately needs a propaganda boost.
- pluma 11y ago
  Incidentally, the decision not to get more involved in Syria was probably the better choice at the time. No matter what you think of the dictator's morals, a good portion of the rebels was basically made up of radical Islamists. Exactly who you don't want to be in charge when ISIS enters the scene. It was interesting to see how suddenly our media (in Germany) stopped their sympathetic reporting on the Syrian rebels and how desperately they need our support (i.e. at least give them some guns) when ISIS began making headlines. I remember thinking that supporting the rebels in Syria (though it viscerally felt like the "right thing" to do) was probably the worse bad choice to make even before Russia & al heavily spoke against it. It's easy to forget that both the direct intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as the less direct support of the rebellions during the "Arab Spring" resulted in very unstable situations and a very disconcerting shift towards Islamist extremism in those regions.
blumkvist 11y ago

wongarsu 11y ago

I don't see how asylum in Russia was fishy. Snowden probably doesn't like the Russian government, but he was stuck in a Russian airport with a revoked passport. Even if he had free choice, Russia is one of the few countries willing and able to withstand US pressure to extradite him. Being on trial in the US isn't an option for him because what he did may have been just, but was striclty illegal. Russian-US relations were at a low and Russia generally likes sending little fuck-yous. Granting Snowden asylum is also good PR for Russia because they appear strong against perceived US injustice. For both sides the choices appear completely rational without implying any foul play or hidden relations.

kr4 11y ago

Crimea debacle? You should go read GlobalResearch.ca, CounterPunch.org, WSWS.org ETC – non-MSM news outlets to get the other side of the picture. Crimea is a very strategic area to get hold of which NATO wants to break into Russia through color revolutions ETC just because Putin refused to be US dog. When Ukraine democratic government was forcefully overthrown by a US-backed Nazi military coup what choice Russia had? Just imagine how US would respond if China or Russia back coup takes place in Mexico or Canada? Why pivot to Asia, why redrawing Middle East, dividing Iraq into three small states? Supporting rebels against Serian government while helping Saudi dictatership to kill Yemen civilions just to suppress another rebels. All sugarcoded IN the name of democracy and freedom? which even US is failing to provide to its citizens. We're listening about China aggression, Russian aggression, while US is at war in almost the whole world directly or through proxies. US has accumulated enough bad karma to insure its decline, those who don't remember history are bound to repeat it. This war game and greed for hegemony by bullet at all cost has happened countless times in the past and has always resulted in complete destruction of empires and civilizations sooner or later. But public is sleeping as always, only with a vein optimism that "this won't happen to us, we're unique in the human history!" You're not unique, you're just a spec of dust in the cosmos which has eternal law of upholding justice. It's just that it comes at the right time when the bucket is full.

dkns 11y ago
> When Ukraine democratic government was forcefully overthrown by a US-backed Nazi military coup what choice Russia had? Wait, wait, wait. When did this happen? Because I think I might've missed something.
- gonvaled 11y ago
  I think he is referring to this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Yanukovych http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Yanukovych Yanukovych was democratically elected and overthrown by popular protests (backed by the EU / US?).
- kr4 11y ago
  Read this: The Truth Behind The Crisis in Ukraine. http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-truth-behind-the-crisis-in-ukraine-us-covert-manipulation-and-the-resurging-cold-war/5372408 http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-truth-behind-the-crisis-in-...