Snowden and many others have now said that these leaks are important and justified because the public needs to decide whether this is done in their name. Basically I disagree with that (the justification for the leak). But it does raise a basic point that it is inherently difficult for the public to make fully informed decisions about intelligence work done in its name. Yet, who gets to do this? Snowden says it’s up to the public. But it’s really more like Snowden and Greenwald have made that decision on the public’s behalf.
TPM Reader LF has some similar thoughts. I don’t agree with all of it. And he loses me on some of the points toward the end. But I’m on the same page on this basic point …
There is a lot of conversation at TPM, and around the world, about NSA intelligence programs, etc., which has come to light lately in issues about leaks of information and documents. But the announcement by the 29-year old Edward Snowden that he leaked the classified documents brings up a very important issue–who gets to leak this type of information.
Icelandic lawmaker says she’s ready to help Snowden get asylum in Iceland.
Some of Greenwald’s statements sound a bit more like threats than laying out a story.
Hong Kong-based TPM Reader RC says Beijing/Hong Kong will send Snowden back to the USA …
As a longtime HK-based journalist and Beijing observer, my view is that there isn’t really a scenario in which Beijing wouldn’t send back Edward Snowden. In their minds he is a lawbreaker of the worst, Ai Weiwei-Liu Xiaobo kind.
My friend and mentor John Judis has a piece out in The New Republic putting today’s news in the context the low-level harassment and surveillance he was put under as a pretty unthreatening New Left radical journalist back in the 60s and early 70s. I can see that John and I are coming at this whole story from pretty different sides. But John’s a smart enough guy and I’ve seen enough times when he saw things that I missed and got things right that I got wrong that I wanted to link to his piece.
From TPM Reader SG …
Hi, longtime reader here. I want to register my opinion on a couple of things.
1. I am surprised at how much you are willing to be caught up in evaluating Snowden as a messenger. It seems to me the authenticity of the materials he has provided is not seriously in question. We have these “denials” from corporations, but the intelligence community seems not to be denying anything, but rather to be claiming that we in the public don’t really understand and that the release of the info is damaging.
I just saw this fascinating thread over at TPMPrime “Wait, Josh Is On the Fence on Surveillance?” I just joined the debate. If you’re a Prime member, come on over and share your thoughts.
I flagged yesterday evening the asides in the Guardian and AP pieces noting that police and/or investigators of some sort had visited Snowden’s former home in Hawaii on Wednesday – after the original Guardian revelation but well before he revealed himself over the weekend. New reports say counter-intelligence suspicion immediately fell on Snowden as soon as the first Guardian piece on the Verizon/FISA order appeared, in part because of his disappearance from Hawaii.