Here is the youtube video link. Alternative source.

edit:

US Media Blacks out Snowden Interview Exposing Death Threats

This interview is nowhere to be found on the New York Times and this was filmed Sunday. MSM where are you at? Real journalists where are you at?

Quote from the article: "The interview, broadcast by the German television network ARD, was largely blacked out by the US media. The New York Times carried not a word of what Snowden said, while the cable and broadcast news programs treated the interview with near total silence."

Thank you for your time and effort. Great idea.

That youtube mirror has been taken down.

• Not full, but the new york times hosted this on their youtube page.

I'm starting to think the big stink isn't his statements about death threats. I think it's the fact that he implicitly says the US is using surveillance for ECONOMICAL reasons. There's definitely been a backlash about privacy, but when the WORLD realizes the corporate interests that are driving such surveillance, rioting will indeed ensue.

I, personally, no longer recognize the federal government or any of it's employees as a figure of authority. Live free as you should.

I really wish it was that simple. According to recent news reports, nearly half Of black males and 40 percent of white males are arrested by age 23. So keep living free, until your not.

So you think everyone who enters into federal work is hellbent, or at least complicit, in destroying your civil liberties? Common sense would be very welcome in this subreddit I think.

Did you have some common sense to add to the conversation are were you just here judging me? Either way, eat a fat bag of dicks, Matt.

Very good point. I noticed that too. The example I gave was just within the first 10 or so seconds into the interview.

rioting will indeed ensue

Does anyone think other countries aren't stealing US company secrets? It's what they all do to the best of their ability. The US just got caught.

Also available on liveleak.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f93_1390833151

BBC ignoring too, despite news that GCHQ head suddenly announces resignation today they buried snowden on their website (could only find it via google news) and their story that GCHQ spied in Facebook & Twitter is relegated to 'technology' news and not a political or national one as it should be.

Such an obvious blackout by the MSM... informative, articulate interview.

What is the point of watching people if they don't know they are being watched? Also remember this isn't just about the NSA. The NSA is the fall guy here. While/if the NSA gets its wings clipped the surveilance state will continue on in the public private partnerships between the security agencies and corporations like pay pal, ebay, facebook and google just to name the most obvious.

Most people have trouble accepting this idea but in case you are curious here is Naomi Wolf's take on it

http://naomiwolf.org/2013/06/my-creeping-concern-that-the-nsa-leaker-is-not-who-he-purports-to-be/

Scott Creighton thinks the point of the psyop is to ease the passing of legislation favourable to corporate interests.

http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2013/06/19/the-missing-motive-of-the-snowden-psyop-cispa-yes-cispa/

Yoichi Shimatsu believes Snowden is a dupe rather than a co-conspirator and notes the extensive ties betweens Greenwald's benefactor Pierre Omidyar and the nexus of private/public security corporations involved in internet spying.

http://www.rense.com/general96/saving.html

Could Greenwald be a spy, Shimatsu thinks that their are 250 million reasons to believe he is.

Mark Ames agrees

http://pando.com/2013/11/27/keeping-secrets/

In fact once you start to look closer at this theory it starts to make a lot of sense.

If you accept that 90% of the mainstream media is owned by the intelligence agencies then why does it make sense that those media outlets would so enthusiasticaly cover the Snowden story when they have been so diligent at avoiding and minimising every other whistleblower story unless you also accept that Snowden is their boy. This is their coming out party.

The most worthy thing to note about all this I believe is the misdirection. All the coverage is about the NSA. The security agencies do not need the NSA to operate.

http://ohtarzie.wordpress.com/2013/11/14/mass-surveillance-and-no-nsa-it-happens/

By all means rag on the NSA and their immoral spying programs. But don't forget to tell your political representative when you write them, because you are going to write them right, that Internet spying is unacceptable from any public or private organisation.

So We the People have to fight two revolutions at the same time? Can we like put that on hold or something until after the SuperBowl? But seriously, We not only need to turn up and turn out for the Snowden showdown and get our lame asses into the game, but We need to first come up with a plan to get ourselves free and clear of this corporo-fascist pincer assault on our privacy and liberty. That being said, I suggest We adopt a strategy that redirects the malicious, duplicitous energies of these parasitic power junkies toward each other. As to specific tactics to employ to that end, I am not personally going to write to my freaking batshit bought-and-paid-for (trust me) representative who doesn't give a shit about my opinion. No, I have other ideas, eg, We found our own encrypted telecommunications networks and non-profit banking entities. In no uncertain terms, We the People should assert and officially establish our own separate but equal estate independent of the government 'representatives' who overwhelmingly represent the interests of their corporate masters. How to go about organizing this effort is another problem, but if entities like Bitcoin and Mozilla and Grameen Bank can do it, then We can look to those models for clues as to how to proceed. All in favor of getting in on this conspiracy say 'Aye'. The rest of you feel free to write your 'official' representative.

non profit bank

167 million dollars in revenue

I do not think that means what you think it means.

I assume that a non-profit re-invests ALL revenues in growing the company as well as the clientele.

great comment. I have had suspicions about Snowden from day 1. It all worked out rather well for him. Commenting to look at your links later

well one thing is certain greenwald is doing a great job of gatekeeping the info, i doubt we will ever see more than half of what snowden actually took with him

[deleted]

I wondered the same thing. Maybe it was just poor word choice.

Let's save this one from the memory home.

home hole.

Why is this getting downvoted?

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f93_1390833151 ... 30 minute interview, not sure if it is all of it.

Where to begin... I was going to use this as a reply to ObeyTheCowGod but decided to just make it my comment to the video. I feel it answers some questions in this thread. My answers come from Snowden, and a bit of my insights. Here is to everyone.

Did you see the whole interview? Its 30 minutes long and quite the view. Emotional, edited and cut for your viewing pleasure.(Question: Why the need to edit and cut? Why not just one camera where you can see both parties?)

What is the point of watching people if they don't know they are being watched?

Information is beneficial to national interests of the US and not its National Security.

Yoichi Shimatsu believes Snowden is a dupe rather than a co-conspirator and notes the extensive ties betweens Greenwald's benefactor Pierre Omidyar and the nexus of private/public security corporations involved in internet spying.

So the issue is about Snowden here, not Greenwald. Edward Snowden left those documents to a journalist, someone who works to inform the people. Snowden let Greenwald decide what information should be release to the public.

Could Greenwald be a spy, Shimatsu thinks that their are 250 million reasons to believe he is

Anyone could be a spy. Snowden gave those files away to journalists. People who worked to inform the public about these revelations. They will decided when to release the information. Whether they are doing it for money, well duh, he is a journalist. That is his JOB. He kind of does get paid to do that. Although I do wonder myself why they can't just release these files all at once.

If you accept that 90% of the mainstream media is owned by the intelligence agencies

While it seems easy to say that the MSM is "owned" it is not entirely true. They are rather just another tool to be used by these intelligence agencies

then why does it make sense that those media outlets would so enthusiasticaly cover the Snowden story when they have been so diligent at avoiding and minimising every other whistleblower story

Well, because "those" 10% are not "owned" by the intelligence community.

unless you also accept that Snowden is their boy. This is their coming out party.

So in order to answer your question, I have to accept Snowden is their boy. Exactly, whose boy, is Edward Snowden?

The most worthy thing to note about all this I believe is the misdirection. All the coverage is about the NSA. The security agencies do not need the NSA to operate.

I dont know if you truly did watch the video, but Snowden does touch upon this. Its about the advantage of government contractors.He describes it as a, "complex topic, driven by a number of interests, between primarily limiting the number of direct government employees, and at the same time, as keeping lobbying groups funded.

By all means rag on the NSA and their immoral spying programs. But don't forget to tell your political representative when you write them, because you are going to write them right, that Internet spying is unacceptable from any public or private organization.

The law states, Internet spying is unacceptable by a public or private organization. Spying implies intent to use information against the person(s). The government does not spy, as they do not use the information gathered, against us. They collect data, not use it.

some words that really caught my ear. Said by Snowden himself.

No matter how deeply an individual is embedded in a government, no matter how faithful they are in the government, no matter how strongly they believe in the causes of their government (as i did during the Iraq war): people can learn, people can discover the line between appropriate government behavior and actual wrong doing. it became clear to me that line had been crossed

Oh, and at the 12:28, did anyone else catch this?

I...(appears to want to say i don't know) should not say

Edit:For only grammar, I, am obnoxious.

[deleted]

I did not neglect to address Greenwald. I linked to the user comment, which linked the articles that, you, said I neglected.

We should be talking about what Snowden addressed in the video. The discussion is not about what payroll Greenwald is under. If you would like to discuss those things, feel free to created a new post, where we could discuss the issue you feel so strongly about.

I never discounted Sibel Edmonds' concerns. This is the first I am hearing about her, so how can I even discount her concerns?

You would do well by not discounting Edward Snowdens' concerns.

As to your first question, my post addresses the legitimate concerns raied in the article the said used posted. If you feel it does not address it in the right manner, by all means, please explain yourself.

Was just going to post this interview. Glad to see it is already here.

Oh let's just admit, we have all been astounded that the elected are not saying much. Remember this is based on a law passed in 2007, reviewed and blessed by the FISA Court in 2008.

The elected Congressional leaders with perhaps 5 exceptions, have mostly made carefully parsed statements.

The silence is the most interesting response.

Still on the fence about Snowden but this was a great read - the fact that MSM has been so hush-hush about it lends him more credibility, in my opinion.

How are you still on the fence? He sacrificed everything for you and millions of others. What have you done to better the world?

There have been hundreds of other whistleblowers. I just find it curious that he's able to get so much airtime when so many of the others were silenced, ridiculed, discredited, or even killed.

On the other hand, though, it wouldn't seem to make much sense for the intelligence agencies to purposefully out themselves and their blatant corruption to the masses.

I accept the validity of his revelations and their importance to millions of Americans but that doesn't mean I don't still have questions about the whole thing, mainly with regard to the fact that most of the information he's leaked has already been spoken of at length by previous NSA whistleblowers. Where's the new info?

As to your last question: we're talking about Snowden, not me. Am I not allowed to ask these questions for some reason? I never claimed to know for sure one way or the other, nor did I claim to have done anything to better the world.

Its pretty obvious Snowden is CIA trying to defund the NSA.

He has fallen on his sword for his country. I'm proud of you CIA. Thank you for trying to keep America's rights from being eroded by the Terrorist Goon Squad aka NSA.

Assuming you're being serious, what would that make the CIA? They've been committing atrocities all over the world since their inception.

That doesn't matter. What happens when funds get poured so heavily into one aspect of the gov't?(NSA)

Other parts of the gov't get defunded. This is a way for the CIA to defund the NSA.

And if you think the FBI and CIA love each other just because they play for the same overall team. Then you got some reading to do.

1. The CIA has been able to operate independently as a venture capitalist for some time. I believe this is the reasoning behind the moniker "the company." So government funding is not their only stream of money.

2. This is speculation but I am pretty sure the CIA would have access to any data that the NSA collects.

3. The CIA is known to promote or demote stories in the mainstream media so if he is indeed an operative of theirs, why wouldn't this be put on blast?

If you are going to talk about US intelligence agencies, be aware that there are many. Also i seem to recall that the DIA is larger and more funded than either the CIA or NSA.

I can kind of make sense of that but why would the CIA, who also relies on operating in the shadows/with little to no oversight, want to shine a light on a fellow intelligence agency (and thus draw more attention to themselves, even if indirectly)? Wouldn't that be kind of counter-intuitive to their goals?

I'm aware that the various agencies all operate relatively independently and don't always see eye to eye on everything but, at the end of the day, aren't they all working towards the same end goal(s)?

My problem with this "Snowden is a CIA black Op" stuff is that it sounds exactly like the rest of the garbage about Snowden:

• Snowden is a Russian spy

• Snowden is a Chinese spy

• Snowden looks like a little boy

• Snowden is a drop out hacker

• Snowden is a traitor

• Snowden is a CIA black op

• Snowden is just acclimating people to the security state

The CIA controls the media. The mainstream media appears to be covering this story with damage control in mind. They cannot just ignore it because then more people will realize the media is controlled, so they cover what they can and bury what they can. So if this is a CIA black op, then why would the CIA-controlled media be censoring parts of their own black op?

Another thing: Corbett is one of the main proponents of this theory. He runs on donations. He is losing views because more people are focused on Snowden/Greenwald. Anyone stop to think maybe he's jealous and riding this story for money?

Some people here think Snowden is a CIA black op because he was working for the CIA before. Would that make all CIA whistle blowers black ops? Some people think snowden is an NSA black op designed to give the NSA more power (stupid, I know), and other people think Snowden is just acclimating people to the security state. So which is it? This all seems like garbage to me. It's just made up shit by bored people who want new, edgy conspiracy theories because the NSA scandal went mainstream. Now they have to be different from the crowd.

Agreed with all of your points here and I haven't really come up with a credible reason for what the point of the "op" would be. All it's really done is draw global attention to the corruption, abuse, and lack of oversight for the "international intelligence apparatus" (or whatever name you want to give it).

I guess my official stance at the moment is that he is legit, he is a patriot, and I owe him my thanks. There's just something about it, though, some kind of nagging doubt that there may be something more to the whole thing. Where are the bombshell leaks? Does he not have them? Do they not exist? I don't know, these are the lingering questions that keep me just a tiny bit skeptical.

Greenwald, on his AMA, specifically said he and others who report on this story submit leaks at specific times for various reasons. They have to comb through all of the documents, re-read them, write articles, submit them to the government for redaction requests (some elements of spying are legitimate), rewrite the articles, proof read and then submit with strategy in mind. Imagine if he wrote a shitty inaccurate article. The media would parade that around for years.

The pubic is fatigued with the story in general. But, even with the two stories submitted yesterday, most people still aren't aware that they basically said the GCHQ has a live feed of the internet and they target specific people with propagnda. Nobody is talking about this because very few people actually read the stories. This sounds a lot like they use the NSA spying for 3 reasons:

1) Spying on the population

2) Using the material to target certain areas with propaganda

3) possibly used in the Sentient World Simulation program

So most people saw the angry bird story and didn't even read the other one http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news/2014/01/27/22469304-snowden-docs-reveal-british-spies-snooped-on-youtube-and-facebook?lite

That seems like a pretty big story. Also, Plumlee has stated that there's basically 2 CIA's. One good, one bad. Being in the government doesn't make you a criminal gangster. So this is slightly more complicated than everyone is trying to make it out to be. It's easy to say "Russian Spy!"

Also, Plumlee has stated that there's basically 2 CIA's. One good, one bad.

Do you have anything more on this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKsB2TlXvLo&t=10m40s

There's another reference to this around 25:10-27:00.

Snowden is just acclimating people to the security state

I will take that, because it seems to work

His altruism is maddening and baffling to people who have never done something unselfish in their lives, which is most of the people claiming he is on someone's payroll.

They cannot reconcile the fact that someone would do something that is not in their direct and immediate best interest, especially something that depends on the goodness of others to champion your cause and give it support.

Just remember, Anderson Pooper is ex-CIA too. CIA is putting Snowden front and center to discredit/defund the NSA.

Finally we can say, Good Guy CIA. They have a thankless job, but thank you CIA for this one. Now stop smuggling cocaine into the united states please.

Isn't this thread all about how the media is censoring this interview? You think they shouldn't report on Snowden at all? That would prove to the majority of Americans that the media is controlled.

I could not have said it better myself.

yeah when he was saying he wasn't an agent of any foreign power it seemed to me he gave 'agent of the usa' a wide berth. i can see him as part of a cia/nsa power struggle but would love to know more depth on that subject. all i got right now is cia had nazi roots and nsa appears to be in bed with zionism.

zionism

Which also had Nazi roots. Or did Nazism have Zionist roots? Is there even a difference?

a puzzle indeed

That's hardly obvious. It's actually not even likely. Why would the CIA want to limit the NSA's power. I feel like a lot of people here think that the various intelligence agencies are separate entities. They all work together. Where would the CIA be without communication intercepts and all the sigint technology provided by the NSA?

Sure. And the wars in the middle east were put in place because the American people voted on it and thought it was the best thing for the world.

And nuclear power plants are super safe, because they have to be. They are balls of fire that cannot be put out and if they stop being cooled then they will cause a catastrophe melt down and that part of the planet will be ruined forever, thats why no nuclear power plant has ever failed, ever.

And we have no need to spy on Merkel the German because we are allies with them. And Allies don't spy on allies. Thats why we don't do it.

And the gov't works for the people, we elected them and they do our bidding. They can not lie to us, otherwise they'll be out of a job. Thats why they never lie to us.

I like your world. Can I move in?

Completely off topic...

The schizophrenic coverage of the entire issue is a symptom of the real war behind the scenes:

Old money vs new technology.

I think that for the first time in history, smart people are in a position to seize power from rich people.

I knew he was an agent!

Hope Russia wouldn't find out...

Or they activated true whistle blowers coverage through the media.

You have one voicemail "Hey, Joe, could you please mention this Snowden a little bit more? Remember the footage I gave you last week? I think I have another one, maybe, bye"

I don't know about the OP, but I can tell you personally how I'm on the fence.

So far I haven't seen any direct evidence of domestic spying. I personally believe that it can be inferred based on the ease with which Snowden himself gained access to so much information, but so far all I've seen is about information used against foreign targets and whose primary purpose is financial.

Both of these conclusions should have been self evident, based on a variety of sources prior to Snowden's revelations.

Perhaps it is still yet to come, but that would be why I'm on the fence. As a superpower we do have a responsibility to gather intelligence on other nations. Whether or not this information is being properly used is an entirely separate matter.

....ALSO

There are also a lot of questions concerning a certain billionaire which was able to buy access to and prevent the release of many documents by a certain journalist entrusted by Snowden, which have been almost entirely ignored by this and other communities.

Well, tell us what billionaire.

As for the rest, you'll come around.

Omidyar

It's nothing new. It's been posted here and elsewhere many times.

His own connections to the NSA are interesting to say the least.

The point is that when a hungry newly minted billionaire does something you should take note. Perhaps it's nothing more than his own profit driven scheming, perhaps it's more.

So do I subscribe to Forbes then? I just wanna know!

I wanna be a billionare someday, maybe I'll buy my own asteroid and be rid of the #%$@!

Here: https://www.google.com/search?q=Snowden+Omidyar

I have no idea what he is up to.

I'm not even close to the stadium, I'm in the slave pits with you pondering the nature of the immortals.

Because you can't excuse all of his leaks...especially ones that address foreign interests.

im starting to lean on him being the pr frontman to a real leak/whistleblower.

i beleive the leaks are/were real and the info was going public regardless of what happened to the person really responsible for the leaks.

the person we see before the cameras is just the public face whos job it is to put the spin on the leaks and do damage controll when needed.

If the leaked info was real and could not be stopped the next best thing would be to get out in front of it.

i mean really everything that has been publicized so far has been more or less common knowledge amongst the type of people who follow this sort of stuff for years.

maybe im wrong but i bet the real leaker is dead. probably picked up on some airline while trying to leave the country and dissapeared. I dont watch msm hell i dont even have cable tv as im a happy cordcutter but i wouldnt be surprised to hear about somr flight getting grounded with somebody getting arrested for some reason that contradicts the inevitable cell camera youtube upload and eyewitness reports of what happened.

this edward snowden is a dog and pony show to controll the message from the real leaks and to serve as a warning to the real leakers coconspirators.

i could also just be suffering paranoid delusions brought on from various head trauma and substance abuse that hss plagued my life. this ed snowden might very well be the real deal.

time will tell

This is an interesting angle that I hadn't considered before. My only thing is that if the real whistleblower is dead (or at least, we can assume, imprisoned somewhere), then why would any more leaks have to come out? I guess I just can't come up with a reason for why the leaks would have to go public if the whistleblower isn't around.

Because the leaks already were out and were either public already or in the process of going public. The whistleblower was caught and dealt with but not before the info he had was released. The point being the damage is done as far as the info leaked is concerned. Now its all about damage control. What was leaked how big was the leak who is involved in the leak how damaging is this leak going to be. These might very well be unknowns to the NSA/CIA. This would explain why Snowden is saying he leaves it up to the journalists to decide on what issues should be reported on. Its because he is not the real person behind the leaks and they have no way of knowing for certain how much stuff was leaked. Another thought would be that by taking credit for certain leaks this snowden can also deny other more potentially harmful leaks. T

Because the MSM and the internet platforms and providers are all the same.

your government is not yours.

Till they are really gathering this information to track human behavior in order to better advertise products to sell....

America would have been better off converting to Muslim than the NAZI's we became.

IMO, Snowden did what he did INITIALLY for righteous reasons. The problem is that with time it must have become clear that he would end up in a morgue if he didn't find a way to use this information as a bargaining chip to assure his safety. This requires a go between connected enough to protect themselves, reliable in the eyes of the gov't, but who also has a vested in the information and could use control of said information for their own gain. It would have to be someone with enough money to not simply be bought off. Basically a person with clear enough motives that both the govt and Snowden can feel confident they are not being played by a double agent. Ebay guy fits the bill across the board. The govt gets a handler for the whistle blower who can use reasonable discretion to Bavoid revealing anything truly worthy of sparking a revolution. Snowden gets some marginal guaranty of safety, and can still divulge his information completely to a select few, while also opening a line of communication to make clear what he can and cannot disclose to the world at large. Ebay guy gets the information, clout within the govt and foreign powers for not releasing anything too serious, a unique position of authority in modern history , and a head start at creating a new consolidated MSM outlet. Looking at it from this perspective it is still a conspiracy but a rational one. Sniwden isnt a black op, jyst cooperating to the minimum degree he is being forced to. The govt motives are clear withiur the need to expkain WHT they wiuld create such a byzantine and elaborate scheme with so little to pitentially gain. Ebay guys wins from every angle and gains tangible effective power in the world, which is the next goal a person would persue after pure wealth.

I take it as a given that the government is simply persuing a greater degree of knowledge and control over the entire planet. No self aware power structure would choose to do anyrhing but that, if it was possible.Snowden acted on his moral compulsion to do the right thing, and must now backpeddle and mitigate the consequences of his decision. All the people who are in a position to, are using this opportunity to get a piece of the action. It isnt really a secret that this is how the world probably works. Any question of adherence to the rules, or the moral nature of anyone's actions inthis debacle misses the point that if you are really a PLAYER in the game you ACT if you are in a position to. The goverment has the technology to observe and control so they do. The whistleblower has the means and information (not to mention the training to convey it clearly... im sure they are trained extensively in the CIA on how to present information and how to withold it, in addition to theory covering propaganda and media).

ARD is having the full interview taken down with copyright requests. And they haven't put it on youtube themselves FFS.

do not link to NDR

they're assholes

Snowden is traitor. Pls understand.

How do you guys feel about one of your mods also being a moderator of a HOLOCAUST DENIAL subreddit?

you have a problem with investigating and asking questions about world war2?

WHY?

Jonnay,

Feel free to make a self post about this subject as I am not afraid in the least to defend myself against such ridiculous claims.

Keep in mind that the rules of conspiracy will need to be followed and that I will give you permission in this one instance (if you make a self post) to formally accuse me of being a "Holocaust denier" for the purposes of this debate.

Here is where you will fail (I'm telling you so that you can format your argument better)

I believe in the Holocaust.

What I don't believe in is giving people jail time for questioning an event that happened 75 years ago. I don't believe that this one event in history was recorded without political biases. And lastly I don't believe that it was "the biggest tragedy ever to effect man kind". There have been far bigger mass murders and government policies that have cause a much greater number of deaths.

Ridiculous? In what way is the truth ridiculous? Oh right, we're in r/conspiracy! None of what you said changes the fact that you moderate a subreddit which strongly espouses holocaust denial.

Good work inquisitor.

http://i.imgur.com/ejxXbFO.png

All I am saying is you moderate a subreddit which is, on it's face, in support of denying the Holocaust. There is no denying it, sorry. You have made your bed, you can sleep in it now.

You'll have to put me down yourself.

You have no where else to sleep but in the soiled bed of an ignoramus, lol. You are the idiot you have created, forever. : )

Thats pretty disgusting

A legitimate question but not for this thread.

what gave him, an average citizen the right to speak for all of us, and our whole government, and reveal our countries secrets?

He's not speaking for all of us. He's speaking to all of us. He's telling you how the government is encroaching on your constitutional rights. He's telling everybody how the government is violating international law. All of these leaks allow us to have more power to decide what the government is doing in our name. My question is what makes the government think they can speak for us when we have no say in how they operate? What makes them think they can reveal all of our personal secrets.

than he should have gone to a congressman or OUR government

Yeah that would've worked, our government is very lenient with whistleblowers...

Maybe look into Bill Binney and Thomas Drake... They tried that and it didn't work out so great for them (or for the American public).

Oh my god, why do people believe in Snowden? Oh, he's an extremely intelligent slacker who caught the attention of the government and was given special clearances he never should have had? A rebellious geek whose skills couldn't be denied despite his lack of formal qualifications? My god, he's just like me, so misunderstood and underestimated. He has a hot dancer girlfriend? He left it all behind to expose evil? my hero! It's so fabricated and sensational, I laugh when I see the guys carefully crafted 'hacker-punk' look, or hear anyone seriously debate the morality of his perfect Robin Hood tale. Yet even the skeptics eat it up.

How is anything 'fabricated'? What happens if I don't 'believe' in Snowden, is he a myth? What are you on about? So what he's a geek, do you have to be a non-geek to be believed? Here is a man who uncovered something that has is 100% proven to be true. NSA IS spying on everyone, it isn't made up, it's a fact.

Next fact is that it is extremely good to know what has been going on behind our backs. Or do you disagree with that? If you'd rather bathe in uncertainty to keep yourself sane than that is your right but other people are extremely grateful for what Snowden has done. I know I am and that is also a fact.

msm was told the story was true and thats your only proof, shit for brains

I did not neglect to address Greenwald. I linked to the user comment, which linked the articles that, you, said I neglected.

We should be talking about what Snowden addressed in the video. The discussion is not about what payroll Greenwald is under. If you would like to discuss those things, feel free to created a new post, where we could discuss the issue you feel so strongly about.

I never discounted Sibel Edmonds' concerns. This is the first I am hearing about her, so how can I even discount her concerns?

You would do well by not discounting Edward Snowdens' concerns.

As to your first question, my post addresses the legitimate concerns raied in the article the said used posted. If you feel it does not address it in the right manner, by all means, please explain yourself.

You'll have to put me down yourself.