There are a few questions people have been having about two big items on l'affaire Snowden. The first is "Why Hong Kong?" Me, I like James Clavell novels as much as the next gal, but that's a little off, no? Sure, he praised their "spirited commitment to free speech and the right of political dissent", but HK is a part of CHina,. you know? And part of his making friends and influencing people in HK has included revealing info about NSA hacking Chinese computers, leading to some speculation that he was planning to actually defect.
The second big item is his resume. There are some things about his education and background that sound a little out of place for the level of access he boasts. Also, his presentation has alarmed Naomi Wolf, who actually doesn't sound all that off to me with respects to getting legal consultation up-front, but what do I know?
So let me put it all together--this is a limited hang-out. The current surveillance paradigm was going to get leaked and Snowden is a front for the government getting out in front of it in just the kind of way that clouds the details. Or, to really go for broke: although the NSA stuff has become the big story, it's just the cover for getting the deets of the Chinese hacking (I know we're all "shocked! shocked!" to know that there is hacking in our spy establishments!) out. (Also a runner-up, if China accepts an offer to defect, we have a man inside.)
I don't believe these things, obvs, because they have absolutely no foundation whatsoever and sound kind of like the plot of a drugstore paperback. But since the US has had an interrogation program loosely based on tips from the tv series "24", anything sounds plausible anymore, you know?
4 comments:
Two Questions:
1) Are you more outraged by the fact that Snowden doesn't have a college degree, and was making $200,000 a year, V.S.?
Or by the fact that DiFi is one of the wealthiest members of Congress, thanks to her steering of Iraqi war and reconstruction contracts to her husband's firms?
2) By my count, gooper scum such as Karl Rove, Lindsey Graham, Ari Fleischer, Saxby Chambliss, John Yoo, William Kristol, and Marc Thiessen have come out supporting NSA spying in the last few days. As have Wanker Of The Decade Tom Friedman, Applebee's Salad Bar Aficionado David Brooks, and Little Richie Cohen.
Last time I remember these assholes agreeing on something this much, we got a Three Trillion Dollar War.
Are you comfortable throwing in with them?
~
I'm not outraged by Snowden's lack of a degree, just curious. Since B-A, which had this guy in its employ, was affiliated with Carlyle Group, which holds assorted war-profiteering contracts that have made any number of politically well-connected scum pretty wealthy, let's suppose I'm not "throwing in" with anyone, so much as conceding that they already made this kind of surveillance and more legal--
This tour into spycraft bizarresville is coming right as the US is about to "throw in" with arming Syrian rebels against a regime supported by Hezbollah, which, unless I'm very mistaken, will make the lot of them richer, because it seems to me that if any group of people benefit more during a military crisis, why, they'll keep having them.
Screw throwing in with sides. I'm working out what to believe. Whistleblowing heroes just isn't something I'm comfortable putting my faith in, and I'm just weirded out by the idea that there's misdirection afoot. I don't doubt some aspects of the leaks (because it's not necessarily more than I thought was going on) and I'm not after going out of my way to discredit Snowden--it's just when I see a circus, I get to thinking there might be a ringleader.
Could "The Left" be discredited by "throwing in" with a hero who turns out dodgy, fucking up any true thing that does come out from getting a proper airing? Could happen. I'm frustrated by the usual suspects behaving usually. The result is skepticism and snark.
I've already floated speculation that Snowden's leak was targeted more at bringing down Booz Allen than disrupting NSA activity
The whole Carlisle Group needs an airing out.
Could "The Left" be discredited by "throwing in" with a hero who turns out dodgy, fucking up any true thing that does come out from getting a proper airing?
Could The Left be any more discredited than by throwing in with a 3rd Way Corporatist like Obama?
I doubt it.
~
Post a Comment