The problem with attacking Snowden...

[sibelian]

... is that large amounts of imaginary or obviously insignificant information has to be included in the attack to make it look like an attack.

Among the positions that must be adopted by those who wish to suggest that Snowden's behaviour is untoward are:


1. Snowden is not "whistleblowing" but "X" - where X is some word that essentially carries exactly the same function as "whistleblowing" but has a nebulous negative association along with it... like "leaking"

2. Snowden should allow himself to be taken to jail, which is rather easily countered with - "...um...why?"

3. There is "something fishy" about his "story", which is a little bit difficult to get any traction out of as various other public personalities have now come out and started talking about the NSA scandal so anything fishy about his story presumably also has to be fishy about theirs...

4. Foreign governments made him do it.... which is thus far denied by these same foreign governments, always to be followed with "WELL THEY WOULD, WOULDN'T THEY?" which attempts to circumvent the idea that it's idle speculation and nothing more but doesn't

5. Snowden's poledancing ballerina girlfriend and his (apparently unceremonious) dumping of her is of great significance to the national debate about the rights of citizens to control their information, which is clearly a bugfuck position unworthy of Free Republic

6. Snowden's actions were "pre-planned" which, leaving aside that this word is identical to "planned", does not actually distinguish his actions from those of any other whistleblower as Doing Things requires Planning whether they are Deeply Sinister or Otherwise and does not, in fact, impart any extra sinisterness unless you already find him sinster and would like just one more scintilla of juicy sinisterness to feel vaguely intimidated by

7. Lots of other people think Snowden is a Thoroughly Bad Lot, a Rotter, a Cad, a Naughty Bad sort of chap who is X AND Y AND Z and suffering from an elastic range of entirely convenient personality flaws, among other assessments, which doesn't really do anything other than indicate that someone somewhere has the same opinion of Snowden that you do, which is no reason for anyone else to change theirs

8. Lots of people "Trust Obama", which in and of itself doesn't really mean anything as Obama may presumably be "trustworthy" whether the NSAs muck-raking is acceptable or not and, unfortunately, carries the name of Obama into the fight, which might not go well for him... (the vast majority of posters unimpressed with the NSA's programme studiously avoided mentioning Obama's name in the initial stages of the current "discussion" and he only turned up halfway through when various paranoid Obama fans chose their "opponents'" position by calling them racist for... opposing things that have nothing in particular to do with with black people)

9. Opponents of broad-spectrum surveillance have never been part of the left but are presumably Rand Paul supporters, which is clearly nothing more than an idiotically transparent triangulation excercise that will leave no-one genuinely disturbed by surveillance at all moved and looks like an idiotically transparent triangulation exercise to anyone who, as yet, doesn't care

10. If people don't all stop whinging about the potential for giving future Republican administrations access to their personal information... GAAAAASSPPP!!! HORRORS! the Republicans will WIN and then everyone will be sorry, unfortunately this argument leaves out the possibility that the Republicans will win next time for potentially entirely different reasons and will HAVE access to the NSA surveillance programme as it stands which presumably, for some reason, isn't even worse, also the argument rests on the assumption that the left wing anti-surveillance cohort are going to magically start voting for Republicans. Which is a strange idea. It is, really, isn't it?

Have I left anything out?

All attempts to criticise Snowden AT ALL reveal EVERY TIME that the critic is more interested in celebrities than politics as Snowden's actions can be easily dismissed by making credible arguments against the necessity for his revelations, which are not, thus far, forthcoming (I think I've seen, like, two threads featuring anything even resembling an attempt to present the NSAs need to gather such information sensibly, neither of which were much more than rank assertion), being passed over in favour of reality TV style running commentary and shedding no light whatsoever on the issues raised by the NSA surveillance programme.

The critics mostly resemble a frustrated toddler with a laser pointer trying to confuse a cat that isn't interested.

[Vinnie From Indy]

1. Well done!

Another stellar offering.

Thank you!

Cheers!

[Cleita]

2. I think Snowden is the target to distract from the institutions that really are at fault.

The fact that our spy agencies have been outsourced and privatized led to Snowden getting a job he probably wouldn't have been hired for under the system the way it was say in the fifties because he wouldn't have passed the screening process. The blame really is in the hands of those who gave over our security to the private, for profit sector. They should be charged with espionage, not him. He just exposed a corrupted system to the world.

[sibelian]

7. Yes, I agree with that.

If nothing else, it's extremely disturbing that he managed to walk out with all that stuff...

[ProSense]

3. I love

6. Snowden's actions were "pre-planned" which, leaving aside that this word is identical to "planned", does not actually distinguish his actions from those of any other whistleblower as Doing Things requires Planning whether they are Deeply Sinister or Otherwise and does not, in fact, impart any extra sinisterness unless you already find him sinster and would like just one more scintilla of juicy sinisterness to feel vaguely intimidated by

...the attempt to dismiss this bit of information. Legitimate whistleblowers don't plan to steal information before getting the job.

The interesting thing is that it makes it worse for Snowden, but it complicates things for Greenwald as well.

[sibelian]

8. It doesn't matter.

He's brought the problem of behemothic surveillance to the foreground again. That matters. Whether he's a rotter or not is of secondary importance at best.

[Lns.Lns]

10. I think it does matter

Everyone keeps overlooking the fact that all these people are Libertarians. There are a couple of things progressives do agree with that are in the Libertarian purview. But there are so many that don't. I thought it was a relevant conversation to have when this first came out. However, after the meeting with Xi Jinping bringing up the the serious cyber problems and then have him tell them we are spying on them, tell me, how does that serve our interests except for China to be able to say it is a tit for tat. Right before the G8 meeting with Putin which could very well mean the difference between war or no war (starting with Syria), telling how Medvedev was being spied upon, tell me, how does that serve our interests except for Russia not to listen. Don't forget we had a chance with Russia before the Republicans interfered with the Start treaty and the talks about proximal missile defense.

I personally do not trust Libertarians, so to me it matters. I am concerned this is just a setup to divide (once again).

As for Obama, after 40+ strategic years of being drug to the right, it is like people expect him to fix it all. Even though I completely sympathize with the desire for a government that is pure of heart to it's citizens, but I also have a darn good idea what would happen if we were hit on the scale of 9/11. Bush was forgiven, but Obama would not be, just like everything else, and a Liberal agenda would be pushed back at least another decade or more. To me, that is why the motive matters.

[MrMickeysMom]

19. What makes you an expert in what constitutes a "legitimate whistleblower" does?

If I needed evidence that something is wrong about the tobacco industry's plan to use chemicals in lieu of tobacco for questionable and dangerous outcomes, I think I'd have to have evidence of it, therefore, I would have to have a clue what I was going to do at that point.

The point is, when there is trouble for those who should be protected under law, I have a reason to do what is necessary to present that evidence to the public.

Please don't act like you have defined the position description of whistleblower, because as far as I know, there isn't one. There is only what is necessary to shed the sunshine on something dangerous.

This spying is dangerous.

[bunnies]

4. "All attempts to criticise Snowden AT ALL reveal EVERY TIME...

that the critic is more interested in celebrities than politics". Interesting. All hail he who shall not be questioned.

[marions ghost]

5. Good points

--you may have left something out but you covered a lot thanks

Looks like we--US & Brit--are in the same leaky boat...Solidarity

[sibelian]

6. I don't know what to do about it. At least there's a discussion in the US...

There's NOTHING here... not to speak of anyway...

[marions ghost]

9. what's the reason for that--

Since The Guardian has been pointing out the connection I can't think people have missed it & my perception is that the American media is more likely to twist or suppress the story. What's your theory?

[Lns.Lns]

11. there is nothing that gets suppressed these days

This is a different time where all is known about almost everything. If it is not, it surely will be shortly. Just like every other "scandal" that the news covers in a non stop 24/7 fashion, the reporting is usually wrong when all the facts come out. Benghazi, IRS, Fast & Furious, no single payer, NSA, Obama is not a true progressive, blah blah blah until we are just as bad the Tea party and the Republican establishment. But all this junk does keep us busy being distracted from what is really important, bringing us back to where the people actually matter.

[marions ghost]

13. I'll try deciphering what you wrote...

OK, I see --your message is that the NSA story is "distraction." "Nothing to see here , move on....it's just a big distraction to keep us from what we should be doing"--ie. we should NOT be paying attention to it.

You wish.

[Lns.Lns]

14. Really?

Between my earlier post on this thread and this last one, that is what you got out of what I said? Ignore it, a distraction, really?

Apparently, you did miss the point.

[MrMickeysMom]

15. I believe the point was...

... you didn't have one.

[Lns.Lns]

17. Pithy

I see... if I question that Libertarians may have another agenda other than just enlightening us (which if you had been paying attention we had a really good idea about), then I apparently don't have a point. Good to know you are so wise and I am so in the dark.

[MrMickeysMom]

18. Nothing pithy about that...

You think you had an idea (labeling who these people are and what their intentions are) and I don't. Regardless, your leaves us as much in the dark as the American people are with the state of their civil liberties.

[Lns.Lns]

22. OK, I'll play.

No one has any other agenda that what they place on the table. I shouldn't wonder if there is something going on other than what is in front of my face. There was no 70's plan for taking over things like education. There was is no Alec, just spontaneous bills popping up all over the U.S. There was no two santa claus theory. There were never any false flag operations. Divide and conquer strategies that I learned in college were just a figment of my imagination. 2010 elections were just a fluke. Sorry, I guess I am just a suspicious person by nature. None of it really happened. Obama isn't really trying to right a ship that has been listing right for a very long time. He is just a monster that wants to deprive us of our liberties. It had nothing to do with taking the mantle of "Daddy state" away from Republicans. He doesn't really want people to have health care and get costs under control before Medicare goes bankrupt. He just relishes listening to our phone calls.

Look, it is not that I am not happy that the conversation is being had, I just question the messenger. This would have nothing to do with getting liberals to stay home in 2014 with all those governorship up for grabs. The 47% tape messenger stayed out of the picture for the good of the message. Giving things to other countries to gain favor, sorry, I have to wonder. If it is for us... why Putin with Syria, Iran, etc. in the cross hairs. Yeah, I guess you are right... he is a hero to the world and I am a small minded, worried about war and future of the party I care about person.

[MrMickeysMom]

23. Look, this goes beyond the future of our party...

And, if you think the powers that "be" haven't been perfected over the years how to continually hold control over the masses, we're not learning from history very well, are we?

Yes, you should question the messenger, but you should also realize that it's very hard for any body to pretend the is a very delicate balance of protection of the masses with loss of liberty ... But, you should also learn from history. There is a price for "liberty" and it's eternal vigilance. I'm as bound to point the finger at the Obama administration for what happens, regardless of who's in the WH and what they originally wished to do upon arriving in the Oval Office.

It's up to us to do something about all of this. Neither one of us is so small minded that we can't see how far off we've drifted. It's never just one administration's fault, either.

[backscatter712]

12. Excellent posts! In a nutshell, what the Snowden bashers are doing is character assassination.

And my problems with what they are doing is:

1. Character assassination is a dick move. It's a class-A violation of the Law of Wheaton. It's douchey, it's immoral, it's despicable, it's a move worthy of characters like Joe McCarthy, J. Edgar Hoover or Richard Nixon. The people participating by all rights should be hanging their heads in shame, but of course, they've demonstrated they don't have any shame.

2. It distracts from the real issue, which is that the NSA has become the American Stasi and is snooping on the communications of virtually every person in America and much of the rest of the planet. It's damned well unconstitutional, it's almost certainly illegal, and it's absolutely immoral. But the Snowden

[Luminous Animal]

16. I hope everyone reads through each and every word. This is an excellent post.

Thanks for taking the time.

[whatchamacallit]

20. Whoomp! (There It Is)

K&R!

[Harmony Blue]

21. Most of the Snowden bashers

are conditioned by the U.S. media to look at all problems from a celebrity point of view, so the character bashing commences. Outside of the U.S., journalism bubble, the world media doesn't view it as a celebrity news story but a massive story about how each country must deal with the U.S. position that "everyone is guilty until proven innocent". As you can see not all societies recognize this as fair or just, so this has severe consequences how the U.S. proceeds in future diplomacy.