I agree with you, but Snowden doesn't. He's frequently asked the journalists who have communicated with him to downplay his name in the story, because he believes the story is so much more important than his involvement.
I don't know how to combine that desire for the story to take the lead and for him to get credit with the American people he deserves (and get the public sentiment so firmly on his side that the powers that be have to pardon him, or face a vengeful public).
I also don't know how to inform Americans about how many of our politicians endorse all of these illegal actions (and the legal ones that aren't ethical). Every one in America should be furious at Obama, Pelosi (so much rage at Pelosi is warranted), Feinstein, Lindsey Graham, etc. But, they aren't. Even people who think the Snowden and Manning leaks were a good and necessary thing aren't connecting the dots that Obama is where the buck stops.
And, those very few senators and members of the house who've had the guts to support Snowden and Manning should be getting a whole lot of praise. Bernie Sanders and Rand Paul (who I'm loathe to say nice things about) deserve respect for standing up on this one.
The way to credit Snowden is to get things to change, ideally so that he can come home.
The way to get things to change is to clearly, calmly, quietly, and confidently educate all the people you know on what the government has done and why this runs so contrary to the American spirit. You don't need to bluster or make emotional pleas. You do need to come down firmly on the side you believe is right, and educate the folks around you.
I had a discussion about Snowden recently with a number of friends and acquaintances of mine. I had offhandedly mentioned his name as a leader in a discussion on the nature of leadership, and someone vociferously objected to my terming him as such, even playing the "traitor" card. I didn't have to respond to him, however, because about 5-6 of my friends chimed in, explaining the facts about what the government had done and why this meant that it was the NSA in the wrong here and not Snowden. And then several bystanders who previously knew nothing about Snowden said that even without knowing all the facts of the case, they were much more swayed by the Snowden supporters because we presented reasoned, sourced debate rather than impassioned name-calling. These were not techies - they were well-educated, generally professional 20- and 30-somethings.
I don't know how to combine that desire for the story to take the lead and for him to get credit with the American people he deserves (and get the public sentiment so firmly on his side that the powers that be have to pardon him, or face a vengeful public).
I also don't know how to inform Americans about how many of our politicians endorse all of these illegal actions (and the legal ones that aren't ethical). Every one in America should be furious at Obama, Pelosi (so much rage at Pelosi is warranted), Feinstein, Lindsey Graham, etc. But, they aren't. Even people who think the Snowden and Manning leaks were a good and necessary thing aren't connecting the dots that Obama is where the buck stops.
And, those very few senators and members of the house who've had the guts to support Snowden and Manning should be getting a whole lot of praise. Bernie Sanders and Rand Paul (who I'm loathe to say nice things about) deserve respect for standing up on this one.