[fnordfnordfnord]

Calm yourself. I haven't made out the US as "the world's worst example of tyranny". I would like to point out the hypocrisy though, of those who criticize a person for seeking refuge from the US in Russia, because he didn't instead choose "Unicornlandia" or some other similarly perfect utopian bastion of freedom and human rights.

I'm from the US, and I am proud that we ended slavery, (a little embarrassed that it took a war, but I had no control over that), but, I am not under the impression that the US is perfect, or without the potential for improvement. Critical self-reflection is an important step on the path to self-improvement. I criticize my country because it is the one that I personally have the potential and the responsibility to affect positive changes within.

[mpyne]

> I would like to point out the hypocrisy though, of those who criticize a person for seeking refuge from the US in Russia, because he didn't instead choose "Unicornlandia" or some other similarly perfect utopian bastion of freedom and human rights.

Is it hypocritical to at least ask that he pick a nation comparable to, if not better than, the U.S.? Apparently this should be the easiest task in the world.

I've argued here before, and I'll repeat it again, that I would have no problem at all with Snowden asking for asylum in Russia (or even North Korea, China, etc.) as long as he makes it clear he's simply trying to 'beat the rap', as they say.

But Snowden doesn't do this, and in fact goes farther to claim that Russia is doing this to support human rights and tickle doves with angel feathers and even encourage privacy (which is just beyond ironic, but whatever).

That is either a flat-out lie to appease his host, or stupidity. And we all know he's not stupid...

> Critical self-reflection is an important step on the path to self-improvement. I criticize my country because it is the one that I personally have the potential and the responsibility to affect positive changes within.

We're going to 100% agree twice today! Wonderful progress. :)

[fnordfnordfnord]

>Is it hypocritical to at least ask that he pick a nation comparable to, if not better than, the U.S.? Apparently this should be the easiest task in the world.

I'm sure he would go to Unicornlandia if he knew how to get there. And, yeah, it is pretty silly to ask him to expose himself by travelling through places where the US arguably has enough control to cause his detainment/extradition.

>But Snowden doesn't do this, and in fact goes farther to claim that Russia is doing this to support human rights and tickle doves with angel feathers and even encourage privacy (which is just beyond ironic, but whatever).

I don't really care what symbolic gestures he makes when he may be under duress.

>That is either a flat-out lie to appease his host, or stupidity. And we all know he's not stupid...

It's arguably true! A person has the right to asylum from political persecution. Only a few other countries have the willingness to oppose the US. We both know that Russia's motives probably aren't rooted in an altruistic commitment to human rights, but as I have said before Snowden isn't in a position to look gift horses in their mouths.

>We're going to 100% agree twice today! Wonderful progress. :)

Let's not make it a habit. If we both agree all the time, that means one of us is redundant!

[mpyne]

> A person has the right to asylum from political persecution.

Except it's not political persecution. He's not being charged with being a Communist, or anarchist, or libertarian here.

I'm assuming you disagree with the law (though even figures like Schneier agree that there is a legitimate need for government to protect secrets), but disagreement with the law doesn't make it a political prosecution.

For that matter, the laws against theft and misappropriation of public property have a long and proud history. I'm assuming you don't intend to introduce a loophole in those laws that would permit the politicians to abuse the Treasury even worse than they already manage?

[bausson]

Well, Manning was not charged either.

You can say all you want it was security detention, it's a warning send to other wannabe whistleblower, and it's torture to me.

(and if it's not a political decision, I wonder how it is called)

[mpyne]

Well given that even Snowden was careful to emphasize how different his behavior was from Manning's, I'm not sure why you think invoking Saint Bradley helps your point.