I'm a little shocked that even here on Hacker News, most of the top-level comments fell for the headline, rather than focusing the attention back where it belongs: the reason why Snowden needs asylum in the first place.
Enough of this drama. Snowden has served his purpose in revealing the extend of the NSA shenanigans, but we really shouldn't have to read about his every move.
This Reuters news release does not even mention the nature of the leaks that put Mr. Snowden in this situation. It's truly a sad state of reporting and public discourse.
Edit: taking a bit of my own advice:
We need to stop the NSA snooping all of our communications and restore due process for searches and seizures!
One problem here is that Snowden is one side, and "the NSA" is the other. It's not a person. It's not a drama. There is no coverage of how the people on the other side are scrambling to explain and excuse their behavior. That's what needs to change: the wrong-doers here need to be named and a microscope put on them, their careers, and their lives.
I don't see that his personal drama detracts from the NSA story at all. If he was being painted as a liar or a Chinese pawn, or mentally ill, or a sociopath, that would be sheer distraction -- but what happens to him is of great importance, especially to those who might follow in his footsteps.
We will always tend to gravitate towards the human aspect of any event, particularly individuals. This is why we donate to charities that depict a lone starving African child instead of millions of starving children in a hot country halfway around the world. He's the face of the leaks in the same way that Colonel Sanders is the face of KFC, and a single limping dog is the face of an animal charity. Without the human and individual element people lose interest entirely. Having said that, every time his name is mentioned it needs to be tied in to the worldwide wholesale surveillance by various governments. Just like businesses need both a product and a brand, the stories should be just as much about him (the brand) and the revelations (the product).
I think there's the fact that a lot of people care about what happens to someone who has delivered some vitally important information to the world at large. In a sense, by keeping him in the public spotlight he's a little bit more protected. It's also likely that this latest grant of asylum is a PR stunt, one that wouldn't have materialized had it not been for the ongoing media circus.
This is a very common reply for any HN post about Snowden. I agree that it would be a shame if we focused only on him, but the truth is that we don't! There is tons of coverage here about NSA, spying, restore the 4th, etc. I'd say there much, much more of that than there is about Snowden. And we do get to talk a little bit about him, no?
This article is a brief update on Snowden's asylum status and it conveys just that. Not every article on the matter needs to discuss the full depth of the issue.
I agree with the sentiment, but this is an important development. If whistle-blowers get protection, we will likely see more of them.
I'm OK with some news about Snowden from time to time as long as the number of stories about surveillance largely outnumber the ones about Snowden. I think HN has a healthy ratio.
Where he ends up is very important to the goal of ending these programs. If a democratic country like Iceland or France were to take him it makes it much easier for a US Senator or Congressmen to agree that he is a whistleblower and not a traitor then if he's taken in by one of our so-called enemies. Getting some more Senators and Congressmen on his side would add tremendous energy to stoping these programs.
I understand what you say. I really do. But you see, the thing is that the way things are, the chance of having future revelations from new whistleblowers is -I fear- very much related to the ways Snowden finds -or not- to avoid getting caught and jailed by his government.
Sure, the revelations of NSA overreach are important.
But I think the Snowden story is important as well, perhaps even more important. It's not really about Snowden, personally. It's about the power and secrecy of the government. It's about individual conscience and defiance. It's about how we, as a society, deal with non-conformity.
Compare Snowden with Bradley Manning. Compare Manning with previous whistleblowers like Daniel Ellsberg, Mark Fein or Thomas Drake. Manning's leaks were much more consequential than those that came before him, but things turned out pretty badly for Manning himself. Snowden clearly thought about how to increase the impact of the information he released, as well as how to decrease the negative consequences for himself. The next leaker, whoever it turns out to be, will undoubtedly learn from Snowden's example, just as Snowden learned from Manning.
Snowden's story is important for the rest of us as well. Most of us will never have the chance to do what Snowden did. But we all face situations where doing the right thing could lead to negative consequences. Seeing what happens to Snowden, seeing how we collectively react to what he did, in the media and in person, who can avoid putting himself in Snoweden's shoes? Who can help asking, "What would my family say about me if I did something like that?"
I think the focus on Snowden's story can help us figure out what kind of society we want to have, as 911 recedes into the past. Ultimately that's more important than the news that the NSA, the government's largest spy organization, is actually spying.
Everyone knows why he is on the run, so they don't need to repeat it ad nauseam. Everybody loves a good chase and his run serves to keep the story front and center.
There can never be any serious political dissent in the US or the EU, or anywhere else really, when it is impossible for a person to travel freely against the wishes of any one powerful government. As Maduro puts it: "The European people have seen the cowardice and the weakness of their governments, which now look like colonies of the United States," It's an important issue in its own right.
Just abandon him after he served his purpose seems not nice, to say the least. He did the world a favor and the world really should care that he remains well. And not talking about him may increases the risk that he just disappears when nobody looks - and I am not talking about disappearing from the media.
Actually I am worried about Snowden's fate, because that will determine if there will be future whistleblowers or not. There can always be secrets, even now the NSA can just say "ok guys, we are winding all this down", while actually it continues in secret.
CNN, and many other liberal "news sources" whose primary charter is to support the Obama administration can be blamed for most of this. They were minimizing the importance of the scandal, relegating those who were upset over it to the tinfoil hat club, and focusing on smearing Snowden personally from Day 1. This just shows that they have been successful in their endeavor.
Assuming Venezuela provides Snowden with some sort of travel document to leave Russia, the next big question is, how far is the US willing to go to apprehend him? How exactly is Snowden going to get a flight plan that allows him safe passage to Venezuela.
Obama previously said 'he's not scrambling jets' to catch him, but given this week's events I don't believe him. I wouldn't at all be surprised if the US went after his flight somehow. It seems like this administration is willing to be the international villain in their attempts to catch Snowden.
And maybe the CIA wouldn't dare forcibly take Snowden out of Russia or China, but who's to say they wouldn't do so to a smaller, less powerful country?
I live in Venezuela. It is routine here that politicians air private conversations, by telephone, or even recorded inside houses. Until a few weeks there was even a TV program, sponsored by the government, that now and then aired private conversations by opposition leaders, for political benefits of course.
I really don't know if Snowden knows that, but it would be really ironic if he accepted the proposal.
I don't understand why people are trying to hold him to some kind of saintly standard.
He wanted to do what he could to expose what he believed to be wrongdoing. And now he simply wants to avoid prison if possible, like pretty much anyone else would. There's no nobility in throwing away his lifetime in an American jail -- he's already exposed the NSA's programs, and prison accomplishes nothing more.
Sure, it's easy to call him a hypocrite for applying for asylum in countries "less free" than the US. But as long as "free" countries allow themselves to be pressured by the US, what choice does he have? Would you do anything different in his shoes?
Originally Snowden went to Hong Kong because of their supposed freedoms but right now I think he's mainly concerned about finding a place where he won't end up in an American dungeon for the rest of his life.
That's like saying "it would be ironic if Snowden ended up in a solitary confinement cell, where you don't have any privacy at all."
Snowden didn't do all this to enhance his personal freedom. He knew from the start it would be degraded, one way or another. He sacrificed his own freedom for the sake of ours.
> there was even a TV program, sponsored by the government
> then aired private conversations by opposition leaders
The government owns the TV in Venezuela. This is a very different premise (one is about political propaganda and another is about general population privacy).
The most concerning part of this article are the comments which to me feel like they have been paid for.
Take this for example:
'Snidely70448 Snowden STOLE 3 NSA computers with top secret classified government documents in violation of his employment agreement with Booz Allen, theft alone is a basic crime and when the theft involves top secret government documents it’s in violation of the Espionage Act. Flight to avoid prosecution is also a crime in this country. These laws weren’t written yesterday just for Mr. Snowden. The U.S. is seeking Edward Snowden to answer to those charges. Plain and simple. He isn’t being singled out or vilified. You claim that NSA is violating the 4th Amendment (Congress and the Patriot Act disagree with you), yet you ignore that Snowden violated basic laws of the land.'
Assuming he makes it down there, who is up for visiting sometime? I've never been to Venezuela -- Angel Falls is really the only tourist thing which interests me there.
In the video you can see Maduro, Venezuela's President, making the official decision public. Of course, it's still to be seen if Snowden decides to go there, and how\when is he going to do it.
One thing I don't understand is why Mr. Snowden did not remain anonymous when he leaked his information? Wouldn't that have given him more options for avoiding reprisal? Or did he reveal his identity to protect himself?
Heh, quite stylish that Maduro mentioned the US/Israel's proxy war in Syria in the same breath. Interestingly, pre-conflict Syrian relations were discussed pointedly by Assange with Nasrallah, the head of Hezbollah, in his The World Tomorrow interview: https://assange.rt.com/nasrallah-episode-one/ Dig the beard.
> "Who is the guilty one? A young man ... who denounces war plans, or the U.S. government which launches bombs and arms the terrorist Syrian opposition against the people and legitimate President Bashar al-Assad?" he asked, to applause and cheers from ranks of military officers at the parade.
Going with Iceland kind of seems like a no-brainer. He initially went to Hong Kong, which has a much lower incident of Government corruption than even the US (forgot the link, saw this mentioned in an article). I'm guessing that Venezuela is not going to score very high on that list compared to Iceland. In addition, as others have mentioned, it becomes much more political, as there is an "enemy"/animosity vibe between us and some Latin American countries, whereas there is not with Iceland.
It would end up being kind of ironic and sad if he had to live in a country that ended up being just as corrupt and used this level of spying on its own citizens. Pretty confident that Iceland would not be pulling crap like that.
Assuming he were to fly commercial. What way can he get from SVO to Caracas (CCS)? Like what's a possible route whereby he isn't flying over france/italy/spain which have supposedly not allowed him to fly over their airspace?
Is a jet chartered for him? Does a G4 have the range? Where does it need to stop to refuel?
I was actually fearing that Argentina would volunteer for this. I appreciate that they got the jump on us in this case. I dont think we(Argentina) should meddle on this one.
[+] [-] clarkmoody|12 years ago|reply
Enough of this drama. Snowden has served his purpose in revealing the extend of the NSA shenanigans, but we really shouldn't have to read about his every move.
This Reuters news release does not even mention the nature of the leaks that put Mr. Snowden in this situation. It's truly a sad state of reporting and public discourse.
Edit: taking a bit of my own advice:
We need to stop the NSA snooping all of our communications and restore due process for searches and seizures!
[+] [-] javajosh|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rfugger|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kintamanimatt|12 years ago|reply
I think there's the fact that a lot of people care about what happens to someone who has delivered some vitally important information to the world at large. In a sense, by keeping him in the public spotlight he's a little bit more protected. It's also likely that this latest grant of asylum is a PR stunt, one that wouldn't have materialized had it not been for the ongoing media circus.
[+] [-] bajsejohannes|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Goopplesoft|12 years ago|reply
I think your problem is that you're seeing one article as the indicator of the state of public discourse. Heres a bunch more:
https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&authuser=0...
This article is a brief update on Snowden's asylum status and it conveys just that. Not every article on the matter needs to discuss the full depth of the issue.
[+] [-] gasull|12 years ago|reply
I'm OK with some news about Snowden from time to time as long as the number of stories about surveillance largely outnumber the ones about Snowden. I think HN has a healthy ratio.
[+] [-] untog|12 years ago|reply
Does every article need to recount all the events leading up to the current situation? Where do we draw the line, exactly?
[+] [-] wavesounds|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pitiburi|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] oinksoft|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cwp|12 years ago|reply
But I think the Snowden story is important as well, perhaps even more important. It's not really about Snowden, personally. It's about the power and secrecy of the government. It's about individual conscience and defiance. It's about how we, as a society, deal with non-conformity.
Compare Snowden with Bradley Manning. Compare Manning with previous whistleblowers like Daniel Ellsberg, Mark Fein or Thomas Drake. Manning's leaks were much more consequential than those that came before him, but things turned out pretty badly for Manning himself. Snowden clearly thought about how to increase the impact of the information he released, as well as how to decrease the negative consequences for himself. The next leaker, whoever it turns out to be, will undoubtedly learn from Snowden's example, just as Snowden learned from Manning.
Snowden's story is important for the rest of us as well. Most of us will never have the chance to do what Snowden did. But we all face situations where doing the right thing could lead to negative consequences. Seeing what happens to Snowden, seeing how we collectively react to what he did, in the media and in person, who can avoid putting himself in Snoweden's shoes? Who can help asking, "What would my family say about me if I did something like that?"
I think the focus on Snowden's story can help us figure out what kind of society we want to have, as 911 recedes into the past. Ultimately that's more important than the news that the NSA, the government's largest spy organization, is actually spying.
[+] [-] michaelwww|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fnordfnordfnord|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] danbruc|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] quantumpotato_|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|12 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] nos4A2|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Kiro|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] downandout|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] GVIrish|12 years ago|reply
Obama previously said 'he's not scrambling jets' to catch him, but given this week's events I don't believe him. I wouldn't at all be surprised if the US went after his flight somehow. It seems like this administration is willing to be the international villain in their attempts to catch Snowden.
And maybe the CIA wouldn't dare forcibly take Snowden out of Russia or China, but who's to say they wouldn't do so to a smaller, less powerful country?
[+] [-] ciroduran|12 years ago|reply
I really don't know if Snowden knows that, but it would be really ironic if he accepted the proposal.
[+] [-] crazygringo|12 years ago|reply
He wanted to do what he could to expose what he believed to be wrongdoing. And now he simply wants to avoid prison if possible, like pretty much anyone else would. There's no nobility in throwing away his lifetime in an American jail -- he's already exposed the NSA's programs, and prison accomplishes nothing more.
Sure, it's easy to call him a hypocrite for applying for asylum in countries "less free" than the US. But as long as "free" countries allow themselves to be pressured by the US, what choice does he have? Would you do anything different in his shoes?
[+] [-] guelo|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] DennisP|12 years ago|reply
Snowden didn't do all this to enhance his personal freedom. He knew from the start it would be degraded, one way or another. He sacrificed his own freedom for the sake of ours.
[+] [-] fnordfnordfnord|12 years ago|reply
Snowden's not exactly in a position to be so picky, at the moment.
[+] [-] gasull|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] PavlovsCat|12 years ago|reply
It's also really ironic for people who aren't whistleblowers to criticize the limited options of whisteblowers.
[+] [-] mbesto|12 years ago|reply
> then aired private conversations by opposition leaders
The government owns the TV in Venezuela. This is a very different premise (one is about political propaganda and another is about general population privacy).
[+] [-] unknown|12 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] unknown|12 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] evolve2k|12 years ago|reply
Take this for example:
'Snidely70448 Snowden STOLE 3 NSA computers with top secret classified government documents in violation of his employment agreement with Booz Allen, theft alone is a basic crime and when the theft involves top secret government documents it’s in violation of the Espionage Act. Flight to avoid prosecution is also a crime in this country. These laws weren’t written yesterday just for Mr. Snowden. The U.S. is seeking Edward Snowden to answer to those charges. Plain and simple. He isn’t being singled out or vilified. You claim that NSA is violating the 4th Amendment (Congress and the Patriot Act disagree with you), yet you ignore that Snowden violated basic laws of the land.'
[+] [-] iaskwhy|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rdl|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dfc|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] reaganing|12 years ago|reply
[1]: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10...
[+] [-] pitiburi|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bitops|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] contingencies|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] norswap|12 years ago|reply
I had to laugh at the sheer absurdity.
[+] [-] cupcake-unicorn|12 years ago|reply
It would end up being kind of ironic and sad if he had to live in a country that ended up being just as corrupt and used this level of spying on its own citizens. Pretty confident that Iceland would not be pulling crap like that.
[+] [-] jsumrall|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] RRRA|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] brianbreslin|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|12 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] digisign|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] conanbatt|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pwnna|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] shell0x|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] panacea|12 years ago|reply