|
|
|
|
|
|
by keepamovin
1060 days ago
|
|
|
Well obviously they would pick someone who had the right ego-bias / personality to act as this savior figure. Someone who wouldn't just do their duty but love it and go beyond it. The selection of the right patsy would be half the problem! Even under the weaker assumption he wasn't like that to begin with, a savvy and ambitious person would ride such a wave of opportunity and "grow into the role" so to speak. But yea, it's well designed, so it's supposed to be "hard to believe". The public is supposed to believe the simple fable that Snowden is a hero exposing privacy violations, and that it's about privacy. This is no denigration of the public really, it's just the sophistication of the storytellers! :) |
|
|
It's so "well designed" that it makes no sense :) Reminds me of Rick and Morty's heist plot developed by that robot. At the end of the day you can come up with endless conspiracy theories and plots if your imagination is good enough and you watched all the Mission Impossible movies, and then then when people question it you just tell them "it's so well thought out that it's hard to believe" and you win every argument.
Why is it so hard to accept that Snowden really walked out with confidential info and sent it to the press out of his own accord over his own worries of privacy violations he was in charge of? The simplest expatiation is usually the right one, no need to come up with false flag spy plots.
FFS, some teenager working for the Airforce leaked military intelligence on the war in Ukraine on some Discord server just to win an online argument. Do you think that was some false-flag op too? Intelligence blunders happen all the time, it's a wonder we don't get even more leaks.