Snowden Does Not Deserve the Threat He Faces

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/18/opinion/snowden-does-not-deserve-the-threat-he-faces.html

by danielsiders • 10 years ago

136 58 10 years ago

jmcdiesel2• 10 years ago

It doesn't matter.

He's either "protected" in Russia or dead. I seriously doubt he could return to the US without suffering some horrible traumatic body-and-evidence-destroying "accident" ...

edc117• 10 years ago

Honest question - do you truly think that could happen? I've no doubt certain individuals would like it to, but would the people in power allow it?

I personally suspect at this stage, his death would turn him into a martyr and the last thing the individuals operating these illegal surveillance programs want is more attention back on what they are doing.

devoply• 10 years ago

I don't know how he could really do much more damage at this point. What would killing him achieve. And also can't they get him in Russia too? I mean in a country like that with all the mafia, etc. A few million would go a long way. I wonder how much Russia is protecting him from a CIA hit. In Russia he's much more of a threat as Putin's useful idiot than he would be on American soil. I am not saying he's a useful idiot, I am saying he's a useful idiot to Putin and that's why Putin has given him protection. Also I don't think that you hand over a chip like Snowden without serious concessions from the US. But could happen under Trump.

res0nat0r• 10 years ago

I'm sure the USG would love to put him on trial if he would return to the USA.

Obama said as much in why he pardoned Manning and not Snowden, in that Manning has already gone through the justice system whereas Snowden has not.

RUG3Y4• 10 years ago

I think the public has a short attention span. What if Snowden disappeared without a trace? He wouldn't be a martyr - intelligent people might assume that he's dead, and everyone else would be worried about the current distraction in media and entertainment.

gervase• 10 years ago

First, let's accept the conceit (for now) that nation-states have both the desire and the capability to do this.

In that context, it's very easy to imagine ways to frame the death such that it would prevent him from seeming a martyr. Died in a car accident, strangled during auto-erotic asphyxiation, shot in a drug deal gone bad, depression-related suicide, etc. The right context could be used to discredit him further, in addition to silencing any potential impact by giving speeches or serving as a public figure for a privacy-focused organization in the future (for example).

Of course, you could then respond that it would still spawn conspiracy theories, but the doubt planted would certainly blunt the kind of wide-spread movement (or public outrage) that might otherwise sprout from a bald-faced assassination. Realistically, conspiracy theories will pop up in any situation in which Snowden doesn't die of old age at 95, so this isn't much of a dissuading factor for our hypothetical villains.

We know that state-sponsored assassination is possible, based on the basically-obvious case of Litvinenko. Crucially, we can also never know of any attempt which was successfully reframed, which makes it impossible to determine whether or not these "accidents" exist; there are many, many deaths which have been nominated as candidates, but no conclusive evidence of those that I'm aware of.

So, rather than "would the people in power allow it", I think the following 3 questions are more pertinent:

1 - Are nation-states competent enough to plausibly disguise the attempt?

2 - Which nation-states conduct this kind of behavior?

3 - Who in the intersection of Q1 and Q2 cares enough about Snowden to do it?

pvg5• 10 years ago

Why on earth would the US government bother doing this and what 'evidence' is there to destroy? This weirdly popular idea that Snowden (or Assange, etc) are the targets of active, persistent USG plots to murder them doesn't make much sense. What could the US gain by this, for the hassle?

atmosx2• 10 years ago

I think that the risk of Assange ending in the US via Sweden, if he leaves the embassy is very real.

gkoberger• 10 years ago

Assange perpetuates these ideas for publicity. Snowden likely fears for his safety (rightfully so; Trump's CIA pick has said he wants Snowden dead), but seems to be much less hysterical about hitmen and death.

artursapek• 10 years ago

It would probably be done to

1) get revenge (human nature)

2) scare other potential whistle blowers

RUG3Y4• 10 years ago

They'd have much more incentive to wipe him out if he hadn't leaked the documents already. After the leak, there's not much further damage he can do.

cm21875• 10 years ago

A Snowden delivered in handcuffs would be a nice gift from Putin to Trump.

tn132• 10 years ago

Putin wont gift. Putin might trade. When Snowden gets delivered people are going to ask what did Mr. Trump gave in return. It would raise many eyebrows.

Not to mention once Snowden is in USA there will be far more attention to him and his issues in media and public. I will not be surprised of ACLU gets to raise 10X more money because of this event.

All good for liberty but bad to Washington's hatemongers.

nerfhammer2• 10 years ago

Putin wont gift. Putin might trade.

How about weakening NATO?

joezydeco2• 10 years ago

Not to mention once Snowden is in USA there will be far more attention to him and his issues in media and public.

If Snowden is brought to the USA, you won't see or hear from him ever again. He'll be whisked quietly to Gitmo without any public announcement.

Does Obama have the option of restoring Snowden's passport just before the inauguration? He could frame it as "I hope he makes the right decision and comes home", and then Snowden silently makes it to Ecuadorian territory.

finid• 10 years ago

You must be one of those "patriotic Americans".

JustSomeNobody• 10 years ago

Why? Because he exposed the fact that my Bill of Rights is being eroded away to nothing?

There's not an asterisk at the bottom that says the above is null and void in the internet age.

cm21875• 10 years ago

My point (and the point of the article) is rather than Obama is missing a chance to prevent a nice gift being offered to Trump.

rootusrootus• 10 years ago

If that was all he had done, it would be easier to support him. Unfortunately he went a little further than that, into territory that arguably is a national security issue.

pdabbadabba• 10 years ago

True enough. But what does this have to do with GP's comment?

I took his point to be simply that, if Putin wants to boost Trump politically, and strengthen the connection between their administrations, then handing over Snowden might make sense. GP was just pointing out this possibility, not endorsing it.

xyzzy42• 10 years ago

The Bill of Rights is just a piece of paper. What really matters is how the people in various government branches interpret it.

ed2• 10 years ago

I agree with you and don't follow the arguments against this – Snowden represents a bargaining chip in Russian international relations, by definition by being "wanted" makes Snowden an asset in the hands of Russia – this isn't a moral thing, beyond the calculus of how Russia's image is affected...

cm21875• 10 years ago

But Obama is sitting on a cheap option to make this asset worthless and to rob Trump of a small victory.

mac01021• 10 years ago

I'm not sure President Trump wants to have to be in a position where he's required to say what should be done with/about Mr. Snowden.

cm21875• 10 years ago

I don't think Trump caters to the libertarian crowd. I can already see him sparkling cables in front of an electric chair on TV while he announces Snowden being returned to the US.

csours2• 10 years ago

OT - It would be nice to add what section of the paper this comes from to the HN title, in this case Opinion. People see the headline and the website and may assume that this is a New York Times article approved by the NYT Editors.

huac• 10 years ago

The headline offers an opinion, which journalistic articles do not, but editorials do.

ed2• 10 years ago

It's an op-ed from an editor at the paper responsible for breaking Snowden's story (The Guardian), and it's sitting on the front page of NYT as we speak – what more do you want?

csours2• 10 years ago

All of that is learned after clicking through to the article - I'm talking about how it is presented on HN only.

DrScump• 10 years ago

It's ironic to me that they make their op-ed pieces subject to their paywall. You'd think they'd want their opinion pieces shared as widely as possible.

dirkg• 10 years ago

Its sad, and telling, that the majority of people in this country still believe that he's a traitor, should be punished, and that the govt is right and should be allowed to abuse power.

People actually believe that someone revealing information about crimes is more guilty than the criminals. Hypocricy at its finest.

dandare• 10 years ago

I am wondering if people today are somehow more irrational than they used to be or if it just me noticing it more.

Grue3• 10 years ago

Oh, please. Hard to feel pity for him, when whistleblowers face threat of being murdered here in Russia. And Snowden has the "threat" of due process. How awful.

Snowden Does Not Deserve the Threat He Faces

Related Stories