>I actually do appreciate this response. I think it well encapsulates the gist of the debate of what's going on here on HN.

I guess that's sarcasm. That's fair. I called you trollbait. I think you're taking the propaganda campaign against Snowden at face value, and perhaps not considering the limits of Snowden's real alternatives.

>There's a great irony going on that I think few people here are appreciating. Snowden "blew the whistle" on illegal and unethical government programs and surveillance. This is a noble deed for a citizen. There is little disagreement there. And he make these revelations precisely because governments shouldn't do illegal and unethical things.

I'm glad we can agree on that.

>And then it turns out he's seeking refuse in places that have (less sophisticated, but) much more violent and brutal intelligence and police arms.

I'm ashamed to have to say it, but I disagree that a US citizen can make such a claim after the disclosure that our country has rendered prisoners to Jordan, Syria, Egypt, who knows where else, with the knowledge and intention that they'd be tortured. Also, the obvious point of the continued operation of the Guantanamo Bay facility, and the known treatment of prisoners there. Also, the carelessness with which our gov't carried out those operations, that has allowed the torture of so many now known to be unrelated to any warfighting, terrorism, or otherwise aggressive actions against the US. We have no room to talk, in fact it is much worse that we are both barbarian thugs and hypocrites.

>Not to mention countries that have completely rigged elections (Venezuela, Russia) or no elections at all (Cuba, HK to some extent),

Don't look now, but elections in this country don't pass the giggle test. Electronic black box voting machines which have no ability to audit them? In one case manufactured by a partisan businessman who promised victory to a presidential candidate?

> and countries in which journalists are routinely murdered (Russia) or forbidden (Cuba).

No comment.

>So now I'm confused to what his point is? (I need to flee from a country that spies on its citizens.... to a country that terrorizes its people, but hey, as long as it's not me it's cool.)

Maybe every move he makes is not made with the intention of making a point? Maybe, it's the adversarial nature of those relationships that he is depending upon to protect his safety. Can you give me a list of countries that you'd approve of Snowden fleeing to, that have the political/economic clout to resist US demands? Oh, btw, WE the USA, our country terrorizes its people, how else do you explain people confessing to crimes which they did not commit in order to avoid a trial? How else do you explain attorneys giving their clients that advice?

>What is your point? (Nevermind the thousands of political prisoners etc in these countries, at least they are a place for US whistleblowers to seek refuge)?

What about the prisoners in our country? What about the treatment that people receive from our own country?

>Why couldn't he have gone straight to Iceland, Norway, Switzerland... any number of countries for which extradition to US may be difficult but at least have nominal respect for human rights.

I don't know.

> Perhaps it's also asking too much, but - IMO - if he really wanted to make a statement with full moral authority he could have just pulled a Socrates and stood trial here in the US.

Come on, I thought we were having a mildly serious chat. Binney, Drake, Radack, Edmunds, Tice, Manning, Tamm, Leibowitz, every one of these people and more have suffered terrible consequences for whistleblowing. Most used official channels, none fled to adversarial jurisdictions. Most support Snowden's flight, none have condemned him for it.

>tldr - while sitting comfortably in his seaside villa in Cuba or Venezuela, I'll regain respect for Snowden when he criticizes his host country as vocally and forcefully as he criticizes the US intelligence apparatus, but I think he's too much of a hypocrite/coward to do that.

You expect saintly impeccable behavior from critics of our government? Saintly people are busy feeding starving children, they have no time for a job at the NSA. And who cares how much you respect Snowden? Why does it matter? Look man, the "rule of law", our constitutional principles, it's a sham. The Emperor has no clothes. Why would you be surprised if the naked Emperor tried to discredit anyone who reported his nakedness?