You’d think after all the “traitor” media narrative and digging hard for evidence of Edward Snowden’s espionage link with China, Snowden’s own words on why he is seeking political asylum would make the news – well guess again:
Here’s are couple Google search comparisons:
“the government of the United States is intercepting the majority of communications in the world”
– 2 hits in Google News, 260 hits in full search
Edward Snowden traitor
– 32,600 hits in Google News, 22,600,000 hits in full search
While the Official Narrative on implicating Snowden to China, Russia continues, almost no one in our supposedly free and objective media bothered to publish Snowden’s own words, seemingly in a coordinated way to silence him thru self-censorship (recalling AP editor memo directing reporters not to use the term “whistleblower” to describe Snowden).
Ironically the first place I read Snowden’s asylum request letter in its entirety was from China, a place I’m told is without press freedom:
http://english.caixin.com/2013-06-26/100547132.html
I, Edward Snowden, citizen of the United States of America, am writing to request asylum in the Republic of Ecuador because of the risk of being persecuted by the government of the United States and its agents in relation to my decision to make public serious violations on the part of the government of the United States of its Constitution, specifically of its Fourth and Fifth Amendments, and of various treaties of the United Nations that are binding on my country.
As a result of my political opinions, and my desire to exercise my freedom of speech, through which I’ve shown that the government of the United States is intercepting the majority of communications in the world, the government of the United States has publicly announced a criminal investigation against me. Also, prominent members of Congress and others in the media have accused me of being a traitor and have called for me to be jailed or executed as a result of having communicated this information to the public.
Some of the charges that have been presented against me by the Justice Department of the United States are connected to the 1917 Espionage Act, one of which includes life in prison among the possible sentences.
Ecuador granted asylum to the founder of Wikileaks, Julian Assange, in relation to this investigation. My case is also very similar to that of the American soldier Bradley Manning, who made public government information through Wikileaks revealing war crimes, was arrested by the United States government and has been treated inhumanely during his time in prison. He was put in solitary confinement before his trial and the U.N. anti-torture representative judged that Mr. Manning was submitted to cruel and inhumane acts by the United States government.
The trial against Bradley Manning is ongoing now, and secret documents have been presented to the court and secret witnesses have testified.
I believe that, given these circumstances, it is unlikely that I would receive a fair trial or proper treatment prior to that trial, and face the possibility of life in prison or even death.
— Edward J. Snowden
Allen says
How do you know it’s self-censorship – and not government directed censorship? Not that it matters…
Charles Liu says
@Allen
I simply don’t have proof of that. However the disparaging Google results, and previous report of media coordination does show it’s at a minimum coordinated:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-calderone/ap-snowden-whistleblower_b_3416380.html
melektaus says
The most common explanation in the US media of why he isn’t a good individual and ought to be arrested from the US media is that he broke the law. But notice that when China uses this kind of reasoning when it had jailed Liu Xiaobo (for breaking Chinese laws) many American pundits/bloggers rebutted this saying it was a deficient answer. Yes, some laws you ought to break. In my opinion, Snowden did not break any just laws (if he did break any laws at all) but Liu broke some laws with at least minimal justification (the PRC laws against advocating for the violent overthrow of the government by a foreign power).
Zack says
more on obama’s war on journalism. :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xBm-DRmRP9g
Charles Liu says
@melektaus
I know, while Liu Xiaobo took nearly a million dollars of our tax dollars, via NED grants, to conduct domestic policy (foreign sponsorship of domestic politics is universally outlawed), he gets a Nobel for being a traitor.
Compare that with Edward snowden, who appears to have no financial connection with the Chinese government, is labeled a Chinese spy, with a very poor prospect of receiving a Nobel.
pug_ster says
@Zack
Funny how Michael hastings died.
http://tv.yahoo.com/news/michael-hastings-death-still-feuling-speculation-week-fatal-231245116.html
Black Pheonix says
1 quick comment on the Western media’s clenching A-holes calling to NOT call Snowden a “whistle-blower”:
That’s just another BS argument based upon ignorance of law and bias.
A whistle-blower, as defined under the “Whistle-blower protection act”, is someone who exposed what he/she “reasonably believed” to be wrong-doing, illegal conducts, etc.
In other words, it’s not whether the exposed information ultimately proves to be wrongdoing, but rather whether a person would have reasonably believed, based upon information available, that the conduct was wrong or illegal.
Snowden bashers are making ridiculous assertions that Snowden somehow must 1st prove that the NSA program is ultimately wrong/illegal. That’s just ridiculous, and not in accordance with US law.
I’m not saying whether Snowden is necessarily right or wrong, but the Western Media’s understanding of US law on this matter is deeply flawed. (And perhaps they should clench their A-holes a little harder, instead of leaking fecal matters of their own making).
Black Pheonix says
If Snowden is a traitor, then so is pretty much everyone else.
US government and media are arguing that since China and Russia derived advantages from Snowden’s disclosure, that Snowden is a traitor.
By that logic, China has derived a lot of advantages over the decades from pretty much all Americans, media, and government.
US companies, enable China to derive economic and technological advantages.
US politicians, enable China to derive economic and political advantages.
US media, actively selling their products in China, enable China to derive lots of informational advantages.
By comparison, what Snowden revealed were highly generalized information, nothing specific that China or Russia can actually verify or use. China undoubtedly became more aware of US spying, and became more alert, but China undoubtedly also knew about it ahead, and like any responsible large government, had been searching for US cyber-spies all along (See China’s finding US bugging devices on Boeing plane).
melektaus says
@pug_ster
Richard Clark said that his death is consistent with the government’s use of remotely controled vehicles. He said that the government now has the power to control your car by remote control. The crash is very suspicious. Hastings was going over a hundred miles per hour, then fish-tailed and skidded into a tree.
Zack says
it’s fitting that google has been complicit in this government gag order, as Daniel Ellsberg of the Pentagon Papers fame, whistleblowers of his calibre in this day and age would’ve been ‘disappeared’ a long time ago, like Bradley Manning. It’s only thanks to Assange and Wikileaks repetitively bringing up his case that the whole world continues to be aware of Manning.
Anyway, here’s Ellsberg’s piece:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/daniel-ellsberg-nsa-leaker-snowden-made-the-right-call/2013/07/07/0b46d96c-e5b7-11e2-aef3-339619eab080_story.html?hpid=z2