Hacker News Reader

Comment by kerneloftruth | Hacker News Reader

Exactly. Yet notice who he's focused his criticism on all these years. I've never heard him acknowledge the irony of how he's living.

View on HN

> I've never heard him acknowledge the irony of how he's living.

I don't have an exact source, but I remember him saying how he didn't really want to end up in Russia, how he hasn't adapted super well to it and how he would like to go back to the US if allowed a fair trial.

His original goal was to go to Ecuador for asylum. His passport was revoked while he was waiting for his connecting flight in Russia, ending up with him stuck there[0]. His end-goal was never to end up in Russia.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Snowden#Russia

Yes, but now he's silent about what goes on in his new home, regardless how he got there. He could at least acknowledge the irony. And maybe note that now he really is in a place where human rights are minimal.

I am fairly certain that he is fully aware of the irony. However he's not in any position to criticize Russia because it will lead to immediate deportation.

>Yes, but now he's silent about what goes on in his new home, regardless how he got there. He could at least acknowledge the irony.

He already almost martyred himself once to bring us the truth. Why are you demanding he does it again to tell us something everybody already knows?

"A fair trial". That's a loaded term.

Does he assume he shouldn't serve time for what he did? Snowden is a complicated figure because the core that the U.S. government was surveilling its own people beyond its bounds was correct.

But he did kind of leak a whole bunch of shit not related to that as well. And that ain't cool.

He kind of has to accept that he's going to go to jail and he's never going to work with sensitive information ever again.

I think by fair trial he means he doesn't want to be tried under the Espionage Act of 1917 which would allow the trial to be secretized, for the evidence to be withed from the jury etc. I'm writing the details from memory, so some might be inaccurate, but that's the gist I got.

EDIT:

Here's a bit of clarification (quick find on Google, not necessarily the most comprehensive): https://www.france24.com/en/20190916-snowden-says-he-would-r...

That's the thing, he could mean that. It's equally likely he means something else. Until he defines what "fair" means, we can't know.

Honestly where could he go? I suspect he's not there because he's a Russian apologist.

> the irony of how he's living

get your head out of the state influenced media, this is such a ridiculous position to have. The guy had his passport cancelled and is stuck there. What the fuck is he supposed to do?

From the government's perspective he was fleeing the US with stolen classified information. What do you think the government should do?

OP made out like snowden is making a choice to be in Russia. He’s not. And if the US government would have wanted to resolve this situation they could have over the years. They’ve chosen to basically exile Snowden.

Snowden wanted to go to Ecuador. It’s ridiculous to suggest he’s made a choice to be in Russia or support Russia.

Then again that’s literally what MSNBC, CNN and probably Fox have been saying for almost 10 years to I’m not surprised many have been brainwashed.

> And if the US government would have wanted to resolve this situation they could have over the years.

What should the US Government do to resolve the situation?

Make whistleblowing about illegal activity by government not a crime?

Trump could have pardoned him?

Offer him a plea deal to return home, plead guilty and serve some time?

> Make whistleblowing about illegal activity by government not a crime?

It's not a crime.

> Offer him a plea deal to return home, plead guilty and serve some time?

I actually like this one. That's fair.

Just because he doesn't have much of a choice doesn't mean there's no irony.

He did what he had to do to find a safe heaven. Nobody could blame him for that. However, his opinion from then on has to be treated with a huge grain of salt. Russia is more than capable of using him as propaganda as condition for protecting him. Why is that difficult to accept?

and now the real question becomes, does that change anything relating to the truthfulness of his past positions?

no, no it doesn't. if logic is valid, it doesn't matter who says it.

No, his past actions were a great service to the world.

At the same time, his current behaviour means I no longer find him to be a meaningful source of commentary. He called Trudeau "tyrannical and obscene" -- no followup comment when, days later, Trudeau revoked the Emergencies Act. He mocked the world for trusting US intelligence that Russia was going to invade Ukraine -- no followup comment when Russia then committed a full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

Again, what he did in the past: tremendous service. What he seems capable of doing today: not useful to me.

> He called Trudeau "tyrannical and obscene" -- no followup comment when, days later, Trudeau revoked the Emergencies Act

Trudeau revoked use of the Emergencies Act after using it for 10 days to destroy a protest. It's hard to characterise that any other way.

People are using the revocation as justification for enacting it in the first place.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com