The Pursuit of Edward Snowden: Washington in a Rage, Striving to Run the World

[xchrom]

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/06/24



Rarely has any American provoked such fury in Washington’s high places. So far, Edward Snowden has outsmarted the smartest guys in the echo chamber—and he has proceeded with the kind of moral clarity that U.S. officials seem to find unfathomable.

Bipartisan condemnations of Snowden are escalating from Capitol Hill and the Obama administration. More of the NSA’s massive surveillance program is now visible in the light of day—which is exactly what it can’t stand.

The central issue is our dire shortage of democracy. How can we have real consent of the governed when the government is entrenched with extreme secrecy, surveillance and contempt for privacy?

The same government that continues to expand its invasive dragnet of surveillance, all over the United States and the rest of the world, is now asserting its prerogative to drag Snowden back to the USA from anywhere on the planet. It’s not only about punishing him and discouraging other potential whistleblowers. Top U.S. officials are also determined to—quite literally—silence Snowden’s voice, as Bradley Manning’s voice has been nearly silenced behind prison walls.

[jsr]

1. Snowden speaks truth to power

[Richardo]

40. Jesus I thought we put that idiotic phrase down for good.

[Coccydynia]

48. Nope. Jesus is still used.

[pam4water]

81. No, but, Obama is working on it with his 7th prosecution of a whistle blower :P n/t

[Hissyspit]

90. Since when is it an idiotic phrase?

[Dragonfli]

95. You have to get into the mindset of an authoritarian follower to understand -

In the mind of an authoritarian, power IS truth, that is to say, they must trust what power tells them above all else (daddy protects me and would never lie). In such a mind authority speaks truth, we merely listen, to them the idea of truth outside AND CONTRADICTORY to authority is an oxymoron. Disagreeing with power is disagreeing with truth in their eyes, it explains why they find the phrase "idiotic" IMO.

[panzerfaust]

119. Very well put.

I had never looked at it in that light, and it makes perfect sense.


Though apparently other have seen this as well.

[truedelphi]

106. Quite a while ago, this place had someone who quite innocently

Asked what phrases out there is anyone really sick and tired of?

And quite surprisingly, a whole group of authoritarian types got onto that topic and immediately slammed the phrase "Speaking truth to power" to the ground, acting like it was the most obnoxious thing ever said by any human.

Never mind that a good many of us had used it when describing MLK, or Bobby Kennedy. And never mind that it is a whole lot better than "Telling lies for the profits that the Big Industry is giving me" as so many of our elected officials do once safely ensconced inside the Beltway.

[Richardo]

115. Since overuse pounded it into insensibility duriong the Bush years.

It's like 'kitteh' and 'teh' and 'war based on lies'.

[Hissyspit]

120. 'war based on lies' needed to be put down?

You lost me there.

[Jesus Malverde]

114. Truth to power

If the shoe fits.

A phrase coined by the Quakers during in the mid-1950s. It was a call for the United States to stand firm against fascism and other forms of totalitarianism; it is a phrase that seems to unnerve political right, with reason.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=speak%20truth%20to%20power


Jesus

[kentuck]

2. Which side are you on?

[xchrom]

3. love her. nt

[bemildred]

12. I think "Napoleon" would fit well here too.

(Link not working right, removed it.)

[Monkie]

17. and this one?the king blues - your granddad didn't vote for fascists, he shot 'em

48 seconds, acoustic, short but sweet

Well he’s looking, he’s looking, he’s looking down,
Hoping you’ll clean up this dirty old town.
Finish his battle, before it turns rotten,
Your granddad didn’t vote for fascists, he shot 'em.

Yeah he shot 'em, he shot 'em, he shot 'em down,
Fired his gun till they hit the ground.
So I hope, you’ve not forgotten:
Your granddad didn’t vote for fascists
He shot 'em
down.

[bemildred]

18. Wow. But I love Ani. nt

[Dark n Stormy Knight]

92. That's awesome! Never heard of The King Blues. Obviously British. Current?

[octoberlib]

105. I like this. nt

[The Link]

4. It is pissing the powers that be off to no end that the world does not bow to America's wishes.

It is also pissing off the lackeys and minions of the powers that be.

[Myrina]

23. It's pissing the powers that be off that one nerd could punk them.

I am reminded of the scene in Shawshank Redemption where the cops are coming for the warden, toward the end, and Morgan Freeman's voice over says something to the effect of "he had to wonder how the hell Andy DuFrense ever got the best of him".

[Enthusiast]

110. Yeah.

We need more moments like that in real life.

[ucrdem]

5. Remember when Howard Hughes bought RKO in the 50s?

I don't either, but as the story goes, Hughes was a bigtime coldwar anti-commie wingnut and the first thing he did was fire all the writers who weren't on the same page. Then he hired a bunch of RW hacks to rewrite scripts in production and basically flip the p.o.v. from lefty-socialist to hard right fear and loathing. When they ran out of production scripts they started rewriting old ones.

Sometimes I get the feeling the Kochs or maybe the Carlyle group quietly bought up the entire indy/alt media sector and started dusting off articles from the Bush-Cheney era and replacing Bush with Obama before re-releasing them. And like Howard Hughes' crappy RKO movies, they mostly stink.

[zeemike]

22. Yep....

Except that now they own them all...and they even own us too because most people are job scared and they dare not speak up or they will be replaced...

[ucrdem]

27. Ha. I guess you're half right at least.

Yep they own them all and that includes alt media. I figured that out before the internets came along. Doesn't mean it's all useless, but a good part of it is.

As for people, I dunno. Look at the 2008 and 2012. Yeah I thought Obams might be some kind of plant there for a brief while, but he isn't, of that I'm sure, and he got elected twice and he's doggedly keeping his promises, so things aren't hopeless. The system isn't broken no matter what fools like Chomsky might say. I know we disagree on this.

As for being job scared, well, there aren't too many jobs where you can run your mouth off and piss off your employers, no, but have there ever been? And that includes tenured teachers and professors who can be gotten rid of easily, rest assured.

[zeemike]

38. Yes there was a time where journalist were independant.

But no one seems to remember now

But I did not think Obama was a plant and voted for him twice...and really believed that after being re elected he would pursue a progressive agenda...well the facts slapped me in the face with the chained CPI, and that woke me up to reallity...we DID get fooled again.
And to say he is "doggedly keeping his promises" is a joke in my eyes....I don't see a single promise he has kept...From Gitmo to ending the wars to "the most transparent administration"....little of that has even been addressed and things have been the same for 4 years now and I am no longer kidding myself about it.
The PTB own him and he works for them not us.

[Enthusiast]

111. I share your take.

Facts have a way of slapping the face.

[xtraxritical]

44. "fools like Chomsky" does not help your case.

[Coccydynia]

56. And by doggedly keeping promises you mean keeping Blue Dog promises

[cui bono]

93. Obama is doggedly keeping what promises? Transparency???

Wow. In the middle of this NSA mess you think he's keeping his promises? That's pretty far from the truth and has been since he started making his cabinet appointments.

Chomsky is not the fool here.

[ucrdem]

96. Yes, I think so. He's been more candid about the NSA in his last two appearances

than Bushler and Cheney were in 8 years. There's a lot more that he's done but it simply isn't reported anywhere but whitehouse.gov or below the fold on page 6 of print editions. I'd give him a B+ for transparency, sure.

[cui bono]

98. That's because he got caught! That's not being candid, that's being confessional.

Why didn't he tell us the extent of what he was doing in the first place? Why are so many members of congress surprised by it?

So you would give your kid a B+ if they snuck out of the house past curfew, took your car for a spin without a driver's license and then were candid about it after they wrecked it and got caught because they were candid when they had to confess?

[ucrdem]

100. Most was well known to anyone paying attention but I realize not everyone does.

Okay that's snarky but come on, this was shocking when Bush Cheney did it without warrants, it's hardly a shock when it's still being done WITH warrants and other forms of oversight. To me it looked like feigned outrage all around including Congress.

EDIT: left out a word

[cui bono]

101. No, what's a shock is that Obama took the steps to make/keep it "legal".

That's worse.

I'll give you that congress might have feigned outrage since I don't trust most of them. But for those that knew and just found out and don't like the program the outrage is real. A lot of us knew and expressed outrage a long time ago. Unfortunately, a lot of people lost the outrage because now Obama is the one doing it and because he made/kept it technically "legal" even though it's unconstitutional. (I can't remember now exactly when it was made retroactively "legal".)

And it doesn't change the fact that Obama only admitted it and the scope of it because he was caught.

[ucrdem]

102. The 2008 FISA amendment passed while Obama was still a senator.

Yes he voted for it. Is that what you're still shocked about six years later?

[cui bono]

103. Yeah, I was just editing my post while you responded. Obama signed the extension.

He could have stopped it.

I'm not shocked, but I'm disgusted.

Disgusted because he has failed to keep his promises, which is what started our exchange. He has failed in so many ways. It's sad really, he had such a great opportunity if he had really wanted to be a champion of the people. We were all behind him. But he sided with corporations and executive power instead.

[ucrdem]

104. I was disgusted too. I got over it.

[cui bono]

107. When did you get over it? When Obama started doing it?

yoI ask that because you said that Obama's "doggedly kept his promises" and I don't think that could be further from the truth.

(I added more to my previous post. Sorry, I have to edit before I submit, you're too fast.)

[ucrdem]

109. I got over it in 2010 I guess.

I more or less tuned out after the election at least in any serious way because it was too disappointing but by the midterms I realized Obama was in fact keeping his promises though not in a very visible way. His PR basically stinks and always has. Even at the 2012 convention, he didn't sing his own praises, and neither did Big Dog in his big speech. Bill got up and talked about Bill.

So basically you have to either study the NYT print edition, which I don't, or look it up now and again. But it's impressive. Big moments: pulling out of Iraq, ACA, not bombing Iran. TARP believe it or not also seems to have succeeded.


p.s. how I got over the FISA vote: eventually I figured that a) some things a candidate can't say no to if he wants win the White House, but more importantly, b) if the first African-American president is comfortable with that level of security, or feels it will make him safer, I can live with it. It's not like he installed it or can really do much about it anyway.

[JoeyT]

30. Yeah, because if there's one thing the Koch's hate,

it's the muscle of the American empire protecting their assets.

Y'all are REALLY having to stretch to play guilt by association. Especially when the vast majority of the people the Kochs support are completely in favor of surveillance and raging about Snowden just as much as you are.

[JackRiddler]

80. When I read bullshit on this epic scale,

I actually wonder something similar: Did the Kochs or Carlyle Group buy up a large segment of the progressive sphere and dispatch them to justify extreme right wing policies, as long as these were fronted by "Democrats"?

[cui bono]

94. Sometimes I wonder that about the Democratic Party. n/t

[Dragonfli]

97. No need to wonder really

Koch Industries gave funding to the DLC and served on its Executive Council

http://www.correntewire.com/why_its_feature_not_bug_koch_family_funds_dlc

One member of the DLC's executive council is none other than Koch Industries, the privately held, Kansas-based oil company whose namesake family members are avatars of the far right, having helped to found archconservative institutions like the Cato Institute and Citizens for a Sound Economy. Not only that, but two Koch executives, Richard Fink and Robert P. Hall III, are listed as members of the board of trustees and the event committee, respectively--meaning that they gave significantly more than $25,000.

Wall Street uses the Third Way to lead its assault on Social Security

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/04/09/1200312/-Bill-Black-Wall-Street-Uses-the-Third-Way-to-Lead-its-Assault-on-Social-Security

Guest Crosspost by Bill Black: "Wall Street uses the Third Way to lead its assault on Social Security"
Third Way, lobbyists for and from Wall Street who are leading the effort to enrich Wall Street by privatizing Social Security, was created by Wall Street to fool some of the people all of the time. I have written previously to expose their fictional claims to be a moderate or liberal Democratic group.

Eric Laursen documented Wall Street’s effort to become even wealthier by privatizing Social Security in articles and his recent book (“The People’s Pension: The Struggle to Defend Social Security Since Reagan (AK Press)).

I showed that Third Way makes itself useful by providing a faux “liberal” or “moderate” “Democratic” quote machine that can be used to discredit Democrats and Democratic policies such as the safety net. I gave examples of how Third Way gave aid and comfort to the effort to defeat Elizabeth Warren and the effort to unravel the safety net. Third Way continues to prove that you can fool some of the people all of the time.

The National Journal ran an article on November 8, 2012 entitled “Left Divided over ‘Grand Bargain.’”

[cui bono]

99. There you go.

We're so fucked. I really don't know how things are supposed to change.

[Hissyspit]

121. You are complaining about hacks?

[austinlw]

6. All I have to say about this is...

This story could end up being a really good movie. Matt Damon ya think?.

[Harmony Blue]

7. Agreed

[Lugal Zaggesi]

59. LOL

The National Security establishment hates people that think WAY outside the box.
"Do your compartmentalized job and shut up" is their motto.

I wonder if Pat Tillman pissed off some Army Ranger "inside the box" type in Afghanistan by talking about Noam Chomsky's viewpoints, and was given the ultimate "shut up" in the form of three M249 bullets to the forehead ?

Tillman's diary was never returned to his family, so it's hard to say.

[Enthusiast]

112. Nothing would surprise me at this juncture.

No actual conspiracy, government assassination, nothing. I think the more suspicious we are of the government the healthier it is, at this point. They have proven themselves to be untrustworthy.

[skamaria]

78. Greatest rant of all time...n/t

[JustAnotherGen]

9. No

Matt Damon is my age/age group as is Leonardo DiCaprio.

What about that sparkly vampire kid? Guy in his 20's in those vampire movies?

[RobinA]

19. Tobey Maguire

Matt Damon is too old and looks too much the The Man.

[austinlw]

25. Hey, Matt Damon

just played an 18 year old in that Liberace movie. But I just mentioned him because this would to be the type of movie he is often in. So maybe they'll go with the "young Matt-Damon type".

[totodeinhere]

91. Matt isn't geeky enough. I vote for Jesse Eisenberg. n/t

[JustAnotherGen]

8. We are going about this the wrong way

I think we should just let him go. Seriously. Let him go just go away.

He doesn't want to come back here or be here at all. Give him what he wants and let him fade away. He can't get anymore data if he's in Ecuador.

[ucrdem]

11. I seriously doubt if anything in this article is true.

The only actual administration responses I've heard have been Obama's, at his ACA news conference of June 7 and in his Charlie Rose interview of June 15, and in neither did he seem particularly perturbed about the NSA story, though both times he very patiently and thoroughly explained why the story is baloney in terms that only the deafest partisan could fail to understand. Both videos are posted in the BOG. p.s. hi Gen!

[JustAnotherGen]

16. I tend to agree

I think the media is trying to make this literally into a case of Catch Me If You Can. Literally - that's what morning Joe had up on the screen. It's all about drama and theatrics.

Take away the 'white bronco' - and they've got no story to make up and chase. Besides - it's not nearly as interesting as the white bronco all of those years ago.

We are never getting him back from Ecuador so why spit against the wind? That's just silly!

[truth2power]

20. With all due respect, could you please explain to me,

if this story is "baloney" then why has Snowden been charged with espionage?

As I stated in another thread, here, if someone claimed to have classified documents showing that the US govt. was having regular meetings with the "greys" with the intention of plotting the overthrow of the entire world, do you think the Obama administration would bother to charge that person with espionage?

Not likely, as the story would be bogus and be no harm to govt secrets.

What they say means nothing. I think they're sh*tting themselves. Just my opinion.

[ucrdem]

24. Article doesn't mention any charges. Read it.

[truth2power]

49. OK, let me try to explain why I think you and I are talking at cross-purposes, here...

I hadn't read the article before I replied to you, so I went back and read it. You're correct. No charges were mentioned. But that's not the point. My reply still stands. Let me explain:

The relevant parts of the article that it appears you are addressing in your post state that Snowden has provoked "fury in high places" and that the US govt pursuit of Snowden has
"evolved into a frenzied rage."

Addressing the Administration response as noted in the article, you said, in contrast, that Pres. Obama's remarks in two different venues demonstrate that "he <did not> seem particularly perturbed about the NSA story".

It appears, then, that Pres. Obama is minimizing the importance of Snowden's disclosures. So, why file espionage charges regarding something that's not all that big a deal. That was my question. It doesn't matter if "charges" were mentioned in the article.

[sabrina 1]

41. He has been charged with 'espionage', certainly an overreaction

if there is nothing to hide in what was released, and it's all 'old news' already out there.

And if you listened carefully to how the President attempted to justify the 'collection and storage' of the American People's phone records, you would have realized that even he can't explain it. I realize it's his job to try to defend the NSA, but his explanations of why this is necessary, raised even more questions and in fact, proved that these tactics do nothing for our security at all.

I am talking about the Charlie Rose interview. Rose neglected to ask the obvious follow up questions that most people ARE asking.

Maybe I'm just stupid, but his explanations made zero sense to me, and only made me wonder why they couldn't just use the reverse phone system when they 'found a number somewhere' rather than searching through 300,000,000 phone numbers. It made absolutely no sense at all.

[karynnj]

68. I understand why they want the database of numbers called

For decades, when almost all calls when through the Bell System, it was not unusual for police to request all phone records made from a suspect's phone. Think of the crime shows where one plot device was finding an important "dot" to connect from that data. Today, things are more complicated than in the days of landlines. Having several months of phone records showing the origin, termination, and duration already in a database is useful.

I realize that this information in the wrong hands can be used to create a "picture" of anyone that would show interests and connections. However, the key thing is that they need a court order to develop that profile. If though other means, they have enough information to identify contacts for someone who perhaps is already charged and in custody for terrorism is useful. This also was precisely what was done in the law enforcement example given. The key is to learn more of what was required to request that profile. (Note - this would not include what someone like a Snowden could pull for his own interest illegally any more than you could blame 1950s AT&T if an operator listened in absolutely against the code of conduct! )

This type of data is not new and it it is not new that it is being analyzed. I KNOW that similar data was the basis of much of the analysis done within the Bell System - for anything from designing market offers to designing where to add capacity in the network in future years. This was not even questionable - no more than say a clothing manufacturer using data on the quantity of styles sold in each store they market to for use in managing their business.

[Swede Atlanta]

85. Are you suggesting that it has previously been used for other purposes...

we should look the other way?

We know that our personal information is bought and sold every day. I get calls from women in India trying to tell me they can reduce my interest rate when I don't even have a credit card.

The fact this information has been collected previously for purposes that were certainly not overtly an "opt in" for marketing purposes, etc. does not excuse the fact that our government is now engaged in extra-constitutional surveillance.

This was part of the beginning of the 3rd Reich. Mark my words we are headed there with a judicial system that rubber stamps anything the NSA asks for, a Congress that is afraid of its own shadow for fear of a primary and a press that is bought and owned by corporate interests who love the idea of capturing everyone's information.

Unless we stand up now and say "HELL NO" we will become victims......You are likely already a victim and don't even know it.

[karynnj]

86. Are you saying you have a problem with the long term norm that law enforcement

can with a subpoena get the phone records?

There is a HUGE difference between the government getting the data and companies - like the credit rating companies - aggregating and selling the data. I have a huge problem with that.

As to your example - note you have NO credit card. Therefore there is no information. I get the same calls - everyone does. They do not use my name or know what card I have. They have NO information. I assume that they are blasting entire sequences of phone numbers hoping to get someone naive enough to trust them.

[CanonRay]

10. I think it is sad that someone has to seek asylum from America

instead of in it.

[RobinA]

21. I Had This Thought

We used to give people asylum.

[sabrina 1]

42. He will get it too, even in the EU now with allies countries, the rules are strict. If a country

is known to torture people, they are prohibited from agreeing to extradiction to such a country. The torture of Bradley Manning was a huge blunder, aside from anything else. As Crowley (State Dept.) finally said, it is stupid to do this' before it finally ended.

Anyone who really cares about this country has to be heart broken to see what has been done to it. Only the willfully blind are attempting to try to defend these policies. It is weakening the country by losing respect for it, as the responses from Hong Kong and Russia have shown. And calling them 'commies' or whatever, the usual thoughtless, knee-jerk reactions, do nothing to help this country. Turning away from what is obvious even to our allies now, is only harming our future in this world.

[warrant46]

118. Sorry Sabrina but he big guy is oblivious

to your words " Only the willfully blind are attempting to try to defend these policies " when the problem is that those we voted for are in fact worse than their predecessors.

[nadinbrzezinski]

45. It is not the first time

Just that the other cases never made it to the press...for their safety it had to be that way

[RC]

57. +100

Maybe after the empire crumbles, we can again. England survived, we will too. It is the between 'now and then' that can be scarey.

[treestar]

73. Oswald did

Just trying to get asylum from America doesn't prove anything. It could prove the person is a lunatic. It generally does. Ask the people who sought asylum in the US. And the thousands who still would.

[michigandem58]

116. That happens when you commit a crime in America

Funny that.

[karynnj]

13. "moral clarity"???

I understand people angry at the government spying, But taking American secrets to countries like China, Russia - and even Equador is not deserving of the words "moral clarity".

I think it is good that Obama and his administration will have to provide the public with a clearer definition of what the government is doing and what it is not doing. He COULD have done this just by his releases through Greenwald and the Guardian. Then, like Ellsberg, been willing to stand trial and even go to jail for exposing things he knew were wrong. Had he stopped there, I agree that words like "moral clarity" and hero could be used.

He stepped over a major line when he took stolen documents to countries that will use them against us. He has clearly damaged the image of the United States and diminished the likelihood of US diplomacy accomplishing anything.

[nineteen50]

26. I believe

there is a war going on between the corporate world power-elite that is trying to control and create the news, as they do most everything else, and an intellectual technological elite trying to bring real news and discussion on policy decisions and activity to the public political arena.

[bemildred]

28. "Patriotism is voluntary. It is a feeling of loyalty and allegiance that is the result of knowledge

and belief. No law will make a citizen a patriot."

- Minnesota governor Jesse Ventura, upon squelching a state bill that would have required every child to recite the Pledge of Allegiance at the start of the school day.

When the government shows itself to be loyal to us, we will consider returning the favor. Meantime they can go screw themselves with all this quasi-parental whining, they fucked up, not us.

[xchrom]

31. wel said. nt

[bemildred]

32. Well, I mean, we pay them, they are our employees.

All of us, every one. If not today, then tomorrow, we pay in.

So they owe US loyalty. They are not kings or aristocrats, they are paid public servants, and they ought to serve the public, do a good job, not just for the 1%, and they fucking well do not.

And that failure and corruption has already weakened the nation terribly. Has all thiS NSA bullshit made us stronger? Hell no. It's made us look like fools. It's made them look like fools.

[NorthCarolina]

53. We pay them

but that's peanuts compared to their income through graft, and trading votes for gold. Very few go to capital hill for any reason more than personal gain.

[bemildred]

55. Right, corruption pays much better than we do.

An honest politican practically cannot get elected these days.

[SammyWinstonJack]

108. And that is why we are well and truly screwn! coming from both sides now.

[nashville_brook]

33. Karl Rove, Ari Fleischer and a whole host of Bush-era PNACers agree with you

Enjoy the company you're keeping.

[sabrina 1]

46. What secrets did he 'take to China'? According to him, he has had no contact with the Chinese

Government, unlike our elected leaders who are in contact with the Chinese Government all the time. As a matter of fact, against the wishes of the American people due to their brutal crackdown on dissidents. But the people were ignored, and our Government helped China become a huge economic force in the world by allowing US Corporations to use child labor in that country. I have always been horrified by our Government's close ties to that Government. So forgive me if I don't see the sudden 'dealing with the Chinese is a crime' as something I believe. Maybe if those same voices had been raised against any dealing with the Chinese before this, we could have used the help, it might mean something.

Instead anytime the issue was raised we got lectures on 'Capitalism' and how this was one great thing Nixon did.

They sure know a lot about how our laws get passed to bolster the Big Corporations which benefits them, and from what we are learning, Chinese Businesses will have a say in how our laws are written under the New and Secret Trade Agreement.

So what's the big deal re China? Other than to try to dredge up old animosities towards the 'commies' which have long ago been argued against by the very people now screaming 'CHINA, TRAITOR'!

[karynnj]

61. He did release that the US "hacked" China

Given that he said he was (and may well have been) in a position to know what NSA was doing, his saying this - and speaking of the UK spying on the G8 were classified secrets.

You can argue that he exposed things that should never have happened - and I might agree - but the fact is that he DID take secrets to other countries - and he has chosen countries that have been at odds with the US.

You miss completely the point that I am making. I was NOT defending ANYTHING the US has done. I am saying that moral clarity would have been doing as Ellsberg did - releasing this in the US and staying for the consequences. Is that hard - of course it is, but that is what moral clarity is about.

[GliderGuider]

70. The whole "He shoulda done a Daniel" schtick is bogus.

It's not 1971 any more, got God's sake. Snowden knows damned well that "staying to face the consequences" would have put him in the cell next to Manning, with just as many communications privileges. If he got a job working with the kind of data he did, he just ain't that sort of stupid. Are you?

[karynnj]

72. Were you alive in 1971? It was every bit as paranoid - for good reasons - time period

Do you think people who were willing to face jail in the 60s and 70s over things they believed in were "stupid"? I guess you think that the civil rights activists were stupid -- or that Ellsberg was. It is rather interesting that you seem to think Obama is worse than Nixon. Was the US less brutal in Vietnam than in Iraq/Afghanistan etc?

Do you see the risk in going to countries - like China and Russia? Do you think that they will allow genuine freedom for him to speak on anything he wants? Do you see that there is a risk that they will use him? Where does he turn if that starts to happen? Wikileaks? How much power does Wikileaks have? (Oddly more in the comparatively open US than in Russia or China.)

As to him being "stupid", I never said he was. I also do not credit him with being brilliant on ANYTHING OTHER than computer programming. As to working on the type of data that he did, the big question is why, in spite of his technical expertise, how he passed the background checks.

[GliderGuider]

74. Oh I was around then.

I don't think Obama is worse than Nixon, but I think he's beholden to the same folks, and those guys have gotten a lot more hard-nosed where their current interests are concerned.

I'm just saying that running was much more sensible than sitting still. He has Bradley Manning's example to look at, after all.

[sabrina 1]

46. What secrets did he 'take to China'? According to him, he has had no contact with the Chinese

Government, unlike our elected leaders who are in contact with the Chinese Government all the time. As a matter of fact, against the wishes of the American people due to their brutal crackdown on dissidents. But the people were ignored, and our Government helped China become a huge economic force in the world by allowing US Corporations to use child labor in that country. I have always been horrified by our Government's close ties to that Government. So forgive me if I don't see the sudden 'dealing with the Chinese is a crime' as something I believe. Maybe if those same voices had been raised against any dealing with the Chinese before this, we could have used the help, it might mean something.

Instead anytime the issue was raised we got lectures on 'Capitalism' and how this was one great thing Nixon did.

They sure know a lot about how our laws get passed to bolster the Big Corporations which benefits them, and from what we are learning, Chinese Businesses will have a say in how our laws are written under the New and Secret Trade Agreement.

So what's the big deal re China? Other than to try to dredge up old animosities towards the 'commies' which have long ago been argued against by the very people now screaming 'CHINA, TRAITOR'!

[HardTimes99]

54. News Flash: After Abu Ghraib, Bagram and Gitmo, there is no 'image' left to damage. Snowden's

actions may actually help begin to restore our image, because he shows we're not entirely a nation yet of craven torture-enabling bootlickers who allow our leaders to escape the consequences of their criminal acts.

[bemildred]

62. +1. nt

[TheMadMonk]

67. And where do you stand on the morality of the US ACTIVELY...

...encouraging others to betray their nations?

Not openly for the world to see dirty linen in desperate need of airing, but in furtive secrecy for the sole benefit of the US and to the detriment of the betrayed.

[snooper2]

14. This isn't considered journalism is it?

LOL

[ReRe]

35. Don't tell me you haven't read Norman Solomon before...

If you haven't, Mr snooper2, you either #1 don't know the definition of journalism and/or #2 you're not a Democrat. Is it one, or the other, or both? Thanks.

[Ford_Prefect]

15. The Sturm und Drang over Snowden's dissapearing act may be as much smoke and mirrors.

Notice how little is being said about anything else? How much press is chasing Snowden one way or another, and how little is being said about escalating the arms race inside Syria, or cutting food stamps, or Fracking regulation?

For all we know they don't really want him back that soon. It seems to me they spent 10 years waiting to get Bin Laden when it was convenient to do so. If he actually does get to Ecuador what is to stop them from grabbing or killing him there, or maybe subcontracting it to one of their pet drug lords when it suits them.

Of course it looks like great Cat & Mouse drama as played in the press. Wonder how the gang at Booz Allen, HBGary et al feel now? They've been well paid to look the other way so it should come natural to them.

"The time has come," the Walrus said,
"To talk of many things:
Of shoes--and ships--and sealing-wax--
Of cabbages--and kings--
And why the sea is boiling hot--
And whether pigs have wings."

(Lewis Carroll)

[G_j]

36. good post, nt

[carolinayellowdog]

29. Snowden and Obama are both distractions from the real issue

which is what started under Bush and will continue after Obama

[Civilization2]

122. exactly,. people willfully missing the point!

Sad, and more than a little pathetic, the lengths some people will go to to avoid the uncomfortable truth.

The corporate-military i.e. our contractor based governments are becoming more and more anti-democratic, and some folks around here, and else where, eat it up with a spoon, defending their favorite 'characters' like this is a TV series.

corporatism + statism = fascism

walmart + nationalism = the six Waltons owning more than the bottom 40 percent of the population own all together!

The fact that the govt' is using private corporate contractors to monitor all communication is plainly Orwellian.

[Historic NY]

34. Well he won't be coming back here unless he is in custody...

w/o a valid passport.

[AndyA]

37. "Washington in a rage..."

Over this.

Washington wasn't in a rage when Bushco lied to everyone to start a war which cost this country thousands of innocent lives, devastated many families, and pushed us toward bankruptcy.

Washington wasn't in a rage when the Bush Administration worked to out a covert CIA agent during a time of war, and did it for political reasons, putting the lives of others in jeopardy by doing so. Isn't this treason?

Washington wasn't in a rage when the Wall Street elite threw the world economy into a severe recession because of their greed. Their actions cost people their jobs, savings, homes, health, security, safety, and more. Yet no rage, no investigations, no prosecutions. Five years later, we're still trying to dig ourselves out of the mess Wall Street created...and still...no rage.

Yet this is what it takes for Washington to get in a rage. Wonder what it's going to take for the American people to get in a rage with Washington over their shenanigans?

[harun]

39. A very poignant question I am asking myself

[RC]

64. I have been wondering about that since bu$h's first term.

What is so hard to see here? To normal people, reality is in their face. Aren't there that many normal people left?

[Th1onein]

65. Thank you for this post, AndyA

It's great.

[grasswire]

76. excellent

"if not now, when. If not us, who?"

[warrant46]

117. What would it take to get the American people in a rage

The Sheep will get in a rage if Honey Boo Boo is taken off the air or Wal-Mart starts a dress code for customers

[WinkyDink]

43. Somewhere sits a drone with "Edward Snowden" etched on it.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

50. The liights have been turned on and the roaches are frightened.

[dipsydoodle]

51. They don't mind acting like ***ts

they just mind being confirmed to be so.

[riverbendviewgal]

52. Wonkbook - Does snowden actually exist?

very interesting ..I read it and thought ...this could make sense.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/06/24/wonkbook-does-edward-snowden-even-exist/

Aeroflot flight 150, from Moscow to Havana, was packed with dozens of journalists who’d bought tickets to get a glimpse of, and maybe even an interview with, fleeing leaker Edward Snowden. But when the doors closed and the plane readied for takeoff, they made an unpleasant discovery: Snowden wasn’t on the plane.
There is, of course, only one explanation for Snowden’s absence: He never existed in the first place.
When you think about it in retrospect, it’s all so obvious. Some lone hacker — a high-school dropout, no less — with a beautiful model girlfriend and some strongly held views about transparency sacrifices his future to expose the NSA’s most secretive program and then runs to Hong Kong and then to Moscow. Oh, and his model girlfriend has a blog where she writes about life as a pole-dancing acrobat. It’s all a bit too perfect, isn’t it? (Editor’s note for the literal minded: It is not, in fact, all too perfect, and this column is not actually suggesting Edward Snowden isn’t real. It’s just a conceit to make a larger point.)
The only question is motive: Why would anyone do it? The answer, as Buzzfeed’s Ben Smith hints, is that it was necessary to keep the NSA programs safe.

[dipsydoodle]

63. You betcha life - Its a mountain in the north of Wales.

™ catherina

[gvstn]

58. I've noticed

That in all the teevee coverage there are references to Assange and Wikileaks which are fairly easy to attack on moral character because Assange has allegations of improper behavior with women. I'm not saying Assange is proven a bad guy in relationships with women but his name now is associated with that charge. They are trying to tie Snowden to Assange.

There is no discussion of Bradley Manning and his abusive treatment at the hands of the US government. Whether you love or hate Manning, he has been psychologically abused and perhaps physically abused at the hands of the US government. That appears to be fact. It goes against every American's belief that he has a right to humane treatment and a fair trial.

Snowden is using the press to attempt to get a fair trial. Without the press he would be in the "no man's land of indefinite detention". He is not a coward for wanting a fair trial. He believes he is providing a public service and that a jury of his peers will see that. He just wants to get that far. Right now, the government wants him out of the press so they can set the narrative.

I agree with OP that this is not about espionage but about the Congress, the Judicial and Executive branch actually having to admit what they are doing and take the repercussions--good or bad. Persons at that level are usually accustomed to thinking that rules and laws are for the little people

[PatrynXX]

60. This is gonna end bad

Despite the hero worship.. He's going to every anti american country he can find. think he's flipped out. Gonna make every sane Whistleblower look bad

[RC]

66. Do you really think he would remain free for long if he went to an American friendly country?

Think man, he'd be on the next plane to git'mo or some such.

[Maedhros]

82. If Ecuador is anti-American

it's only because we refuse to stop meddling in their internal politics.

[RC]

83. And a long list of other countries too.

[tblue]

88. It'd be quicker to list the countries

where we don't meddle in their internal politics.

[RC]

89. Besides maybe North Korea, China and Russia, are there any?

[RobinA]

69. He Has No Choice

Look at Ellsberg, then look at Manning. Ellsberg, tried in federal court. 30 some years later -Manning, abuse, inhumane conditions... Things have changed quite a bit, and not for the better.

[Iggo]

71. When America's after you, do you flee to a pro-America country?

[blkmusclmachine]

75. Big Brother is not happy.

NOT. HAPPY. AT. ALL.

[WillyT]

79. HUGE K & R !!!

[DeSwiss]

84. YES!

- K&R

"Every nation gets the government it deserves." ~Joseph de Maistre - 1811

[Liberal_in_LA]

87. k&r

[iamthebandfanman]

113. i think its provoked more in the media than the government...

watching two hours of CNN today with my mom almost made me want to hurl...

they even compared the guy to Bin Laden for christs sake....

good lord.

all the major outlets are seizing on the moment to make this an OJ simpson chase in a white bronco for the amusement of their good watchers..