Those sources still don’t say that Snowden gave information to china. He talked to a newspaper. And to that newspaper he confirmed that, among other places, the NSA hacked chinese computers. No mention of a quid pro quo.
That newspaper is a Chinese newspaper, now an English propaganda apparatus of the Chinese government. Why do you think he went to Hong Kong to begin with? Why do you think he specifically knew he had those documents in his trove of documents that he claimed he didn’t look at?
The conspiracy-brain is strong in you. But there are perfectly rational arguments for all your allegations.
Snowden went to Hong Kong, because it offers comparably high living standards to the US and was still somewhat free back then, while being squarely outside of the US sphere of influence. So he didn’t need to fear being extradited or kidnapped while being able to take advantage of the freedom of the press that existed back then in Hong Kong.
He absolutely had some idea of what information he had at hand, as he was able to give the journalists pointers on what to report on first. Furthermore, the first reporting that SCMP did that you linked was on June 13th. The first reporting done on the leaked material was done by the Guardian on June 5th, so by the time Snowden gave the interview to SCMP, he and the journalists had to have dug through the material already.
The SCMP is, as you said, a chinese newspaper. So it absolutely makes sense that they’d ask China-focussed questions like “Were there chinese systems compromised?”
There has been absolutely no reporting on Snowden meeting with chinese officials.
The SCMP is, as you said, a chinese newspaper. So it absolutely makes sense that they’d ask China-focussed questions like “Were there chinese systems compromised?”
And Snowden claimed to be a patriotic American. Why would he tell the Chinese about the systems that the U.S. had compromised? He also told the SCMP that he chose Hong Kong years ago, so telling them about these hacks clearly wasn’t some spur of the moment decision made with little forethought.
This is not some vast conspiracy theory requiring dozens of people to be in on some secret plan. This is a simple analysis of a single simple-minded man.
Thing with patriotism is that everyone understands something different. Some may think that not questioning your leaders and doing what they tell you is what it means to be patriotic. Others may think that fighting injustice and corruption in your own country, so that every citizen may live in a free and just society, is what being patriotic is about. Some may even go so far as to say that fighting for your country to be fair and honest not only to your own citizens, but also other countries is patriotic. Snowden is part the latter group. You seem to be part of the first.
And of course leaking that amount of material is not a spur-of-the-moment decision. He clearly planned carefully for a long time. How is this even a point you are trying to make? He did exactly what conscientious whistleblower should do.
And calling Snowden simple-minded truly betrays your ignorance. It is you, in fact, who is simple-minded, as you jump to conclusions based on conjecture devoid of facts.
Absolutely not. I’m for fighting government abuse. I’m against helping antagonistic foreign dictatorships like China. You and Snowden seem to be for the latter.
And calling Snowden simple-minded truly betrays your ignorance.
His plan to live in Hong Kong didn’t work for what to me seems obvious reasons. He completely misinterpreted the PRISM slides. He failed a very simple analyst test. He’s unironically a libertarian. He didn’t understand whistleblower laws at all and didn’t even bother to consult a lawyer. For all of these simple thinking errors, he now finds himself living under Putin’s thumb. All the available evidence points to one conclusion.
Those sources still don’t say that Snowden gave information to china. He talked to a newspaper. And to that newspaper he confirmed that, among other places, the NSA hacked chinese computers. No mention of a quid pro quo.
That newspaper is a Chinese newspaper, now an English propaganda apparatus of the Chinese government. Why do you think he went to Hong Kong to begin with? Why do you think he specifically knew he had those documents in his trove of documents that he claimed he didn’t look at?
The conspiracy-brain is strong in you. But there are perfectly rational arguments for all your allegations. Snowden went to Hong Kong, because it offers comparably high living standards to the US and was still somewhat free back then, while being squarely outside of the US sphere of influence. So he didn’t need to fear being extradited or kidnapped while being able to take advantage of the freedom of the press that existed back then in Hong Kong.
He absolutely had some idea of what information he had at hand, as he was able to give the journalists pointers on what to report on first. Furthermore, the first reporting that SCMP did that you linked was on June 13th. The first reporting done on the leaked material was done by the Guardian on June 5th, so by the time Snowden gave the interview to SCMP, he and the journalists had to have dug through the material already.
The SCMP is, as you said, a chinese newspaper. So it absolutely makes sense that they’d ask China-focussed questions like “Were there chinese systems compromised?”
There has been absolutely no reporting on Snowden meeting with chinese officials.
And Snowden claimed to be a patriotic American. Why would he tell the Chinese about the systems that the U.S. had compromised? He also told the SCMP that he chose Hong Kong years ago, so telling them about these hacks clearly wasn’t some spur of the moment decision made with little forethought.
This is not some vast conspiracy theory requiring dozens of people to be in on some secret plan. This is a simple analysis of a single simple-minded man.
Thing with patriotism is that everyone understands something different. Some may think that not questioning your leaders and doing what they tell you is what it means to be patriotic. Others may think that fighting injustice and corruption in your own country, so that every citizen may live in a free and just society, is what being patriotic is about. Some may even go so far as to say that fighting for your country to be fair and honest not only to your own citizens, but also other countries is patriotic. Snowden is part the latter group. You seem to be part of the first.
And of course leaking that amount of material is not a spur-of-the-moment decision. He clearly planned carefully for a long time. How is this even a point you are trying to make? He did exactly what conscientious whistleblower should do.
And calling Snowden simple-minded truly betrays your ignorance. It is you, in fact, who is simple-minded, as you jump to conclusions based on conjecture devoid of facts.
Absolutely not. I’m for fighting government abuse. I’m against helping antagonistic foreign dictatorships like China. You and Snowden seem to be for the latter.
His plan to live in Hong Kong didn’t work for what to me seems obvious reasons. He completely misinterpreted the PRISM slides. He failed a very simple analyst test. He’s unironically a libertarian. He didn’t understand whistleblower laws at all and didn’t even bother to consult a lawyer. For all of these simple thinking errors, he now finds himself living under Putin’s thumb. All the available evidence points to one conclusion.
Like I said, different definitions of what it means to be patriotic. But don’t call Snowden simple-minded, that is just plain stupid.
Sorry, I updated my comment before you responded. Please go ahead and update your response, and I’ll then cross out this comment.