# Is Edward Snowden just a Russian spy? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 10, 2014, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-edward-snowden-just-a-russian-spy/688133 "2014-05-10T17:22:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Shalmanese](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/45deac/32.png) [@Shalmanese](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shalmanese)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2014, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-edward-snowden-just-a-russian-spy/688133/41 "2014-05-11T23:22:27Z")
The entire conspiracy theory at this point is people drawing a Venn diagram with Snowden in one circle and Russia in the other and wiggling their eyebrows suggestively until we all get confused. Keep in mind, **the entire reason Snowden is in Russia is because of the US State department**. Neither Snowden nor Russia had any idea he would end up in Russia until after he got on his flight leaving Hong Kong. > [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > Actually this almost seems intuitive to me. Additionally, why would Snowden have not released everything he has (meaning all 1.7m documents) if all 1.7m pertain to the surveillance program. There is no easy way to pierce the “veil” of classified information, but Snowden is the one who presents himself as a whistleblower. If he is, then what reason does he have for protecting the 1.7m classified documents he is known to have taken but has never released if those documents pertained to a surveillance program he wished to expose? a) He did not steal 1.7M documents. This is a lie that’s being repeated enough times in the hope it becomes a truth. The NSA publicly claimed he stole 1.7M documents while simultaneously saying their auditing systems were so weak they had no idea what he did or had access to. Greenwald claims to have received 15 - 20K documents and Snowden claims to have divested himself of all data before he left Hong Kong. b) We learnt from the Wikileaks cable dump that a dump of a large cache of unprocessed data doesn’t have a media impact as no media organization has the scoop and so is unmotivated to report on it. c) The act of releasing information takes vast amounts of journalistic resources and the combined might of 4 news organizations has managed to get through barely a fraction of it. It involves redacting of sensitive information synthesis from multiple documents, negotiation with government officials and editing and factchecking. Snowden has already publicly stated he has neither the means nor ability to do that which is why he approached select journalists who he trusted. This is all part of the public record on the situation and there’s not much use speculating if you’re not familiar with the basic facts. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2014, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-edward-snowden-just-a-russian-spy/688133/42 "2014-05-12T16:33:44Z")
The spy hypothesis requires that the Obama administration was in on it, because it was their decision to pull his passport that resulted in Snowden ending up in Russia instead of Latin America. Ergo, if you take this notion seriously, you stand with the “Obama is a socialist Nazi atheist Muslim deep agent born in Kenya” crowd. > [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > 1. Every official that has knowledge of the actual classified documents, including Democrats and Republicans on the Senate / House Intelligence Committees and all the professional NSA types has indicated it was espionage. > > 2. The vast majority of people who believe Snowden was an honorable whistleblower have been informed by articles written by people who basically have only seen a handful of documents, the small number of the 1.7m that actually served a whistleblowing purpose. These people (especially Glenn Greenwald and such) have a strong interest in portraying Snowden as a whistleblower because it directly increases their own fame, prestige, and presumably wealth. > > 3. Gen. Martin Dempsey has said the vast majority of the 1.7m documents relate to military capabilities, operations, tactics, techniques and procedures. These documents have never been released and probably never will–suggesting that Russia or China wanted them and obviously would not allow Snowden to publish them because intelligence that only you know is more valuable than intelligence that everyone knows. Martin Dempsey wouldn’t have much reason or motivation to say that someone had just seriously compromised U.S. military techniques and such, saying that is a recognition of weakness and it’d be strange for a General to concede it if it weren’t true. Next time, try putting a couple of [United Way updates](http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/1995-10-02/) in between the talking points that fall apart when the reader asks himself “what motivation do they have to say that?” and the talking point sandwiched between them that explicitly invites the reader to ask himself “what motivation do they have to say that?” ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2014, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-edward-snowden-just-a-russian-spy/688133/43 "2014-05-12T16:47:17Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > Even if the 1.7m aren’t related to military affairs and other sensitive State secrets but are just mundane/uninteresting…it’s still questionable why Snowden wouldn’t have released them since it would immediately disprove any assertions that he was doing what he did for espionage purposes. > > The only two reasons I could imagine are: > > 1. He is a legitimate whisteblower and his robot / file crawler program inadvertently got a huge amount of classified files about military matters. Snowden did not want to leak military operations secrets, so he perhaps destroyed these files before going to Russia. > > 2. He’s a spy who stole them for espionage purposes. Actually, the most credible theory suggested by the fact that Snowden was _able_ to get all this stuff is: 1. The NSA is to sound compartmentalization practice what Glenn Beck is to rational debate. This is especially true given that the [NSA admits that it has no idea exactly what Snowden got](http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/15/us/officials-say-us-may-never-know-extent-of-snowdens-leaks.html?_r=0) – I’d quit using that “1.7 million” figure, and (considering where the NSA produced it from) wash the hand you picked it up with in a hot bleach solution. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2014, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-edward-snowden-just-a-russian-spy/688133/44 "2014-05-12T18:50:32Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > He’s published no documents. He turned documents over to journalists, who published and reported on some of them. Which spies don’t do. Oh? Edward Lee Howard (a disgruntled former CIA employee) passed classified information to the Soviets, once he finally defected he found a publisher and published memoirs of his exploits. I guess he didn’t know about the “Marley rule” of what spies do and don’t do. An American CIA agent sent to spy on China probably is highly unlikely to ever talk about the fact. But that’s not the kind of spy anyone is suggesting Snowden is, if these allegations are true he’d be an alleged “asset” turned by the Russians. Not an actual covert operative from Russia, trained in Russia, loyal to the Russian government exclusively etc who is sent to the United States to work. Turncouts typically have reasons (like Ed Howard was mad at the CIA for firing him) and those reasons could very well also make it entirely sensible for them to publish things. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2014, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-edward-snowden-just-a-russian-spy/688133/45 "2014-05-12T18:54:48Z")
> [@foolsguinea](#): > > This is pretty much the scenario Snowden’s accusers have to hang their frame on, and it is reasonable. > > But that just means he _could have been an untrained spy selling out to the Russians. The motive for revealing oneself is the same for an activist. A publicly known Snowden is safer, and any whistleblowing his project is more likely to be successful, than some obscure government contractor who could be killed on the streets of Hong Kong and never make the news anywhere._ > > I don’t buy the OP’s story, because I remember that people like John Boehner called Snowden a “traitor” not a “spy” for several months, and that he was mocked early on as a youthful idealist. > > I think that Snowden is probably pretty much what he appears to be. A government contractor who—for a mix of reasons, most likely—decided he’d rather expose the NSA than keep working in the position he had. How much was driven by personal problems with his employer? How much by a guilty conscience due to the work he did? How much by a twisted desire for adventure? We don’t know, and I’m not convinced that’s as important as what he did. > > Glenn Greenwald, on the other hand, seems to be a serious idealist. Or is he a commie spy, too? Your conclusion has been my conclusion for awhile as well, but I simply heard the “Snowden is a spy” argument put together in a decent way and decided to convey it. Note that I never said **I** think Snowden is a spy, I genuinely don’t feel any certainty about what he is or isn’t. I also take minor issue with you saying “my position”, I feel I made it clear I was relating Edward Epstein’s position. > [@BrokenBriton](#): > > Snowden isn’t the point. Sure he is, that’s the only topic I’m interested in within this thread. I briefly mentioned my feelings on the whole surveillance program, which basically are “yeah, I agree we shouldn’t have been doing that without some public debate, but I’m not that interested in it as a discussion.” > [@BrainGlutton](#): > > True, if he is a spy that in no way discredits what he found and was published. I don’t think it would either. Even if he was just an Ames style spy who wanted money and just did the whistleblowing stuff to somehow distract from that it doesn’t discredit his information (especially since the government has already conceded it was legit.) It’s akin to someone putting out a fire while robbing a bank, robbing the bank doesn’t make putting out the fire any less a good deed (I’d say that cuts both ways, though.) ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2014, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-edward-snowden-just-a-russian-spy/688133/46 "2014-05-12T19:02:02Z")
> [@Shalmanese](#): > > The entire conspiracy theory at this point is people drawing a Venn diagram with Snowden in one circle and Russia in the other and wiggling their eyebrows suggestively until we all get confused. All actual espionage would look like a conspiracy theory because actual espionage requires conspiracy to work, so repeating the word “conspiracy” doesn’t necessarily undermine the espionage claim. It’s not like the JFK assassination which could be carried out by a lone gunman, espionage requires teamwork, which means conspiracy. > [@](#): > > Keep in mind, **the entire reason Snowden is in Russia is because of the US State department**. Neither Snowden nor Russia had any idea he would end up in Russia until after he got on his flight leaving Hong Kong. That’s based only on the word of Snowden and Russia, actually. We don’t know that Snowden was genuinely interested in heading to Latin America. That also wouldn’t necessarily make him not a covert agent. There have also been American turncoats who sold secrets to the Russians then fled to Latin America, primarily because some of the Latin American countries that don’t extradite are perceived to have superior living conditions to Russia. > [@](#): > > a) He did not steal 1.7M documents. This is a lie that’s being repeated enough times in the hope it becomes a truth. The NSA publicly claimed he stole 1.7M documents while simultaneously saying their auditing systems were so weak they had no idea what he did or had access to. Greenwald claims to have received 15 - 20K documents and Snowden claims to have divested himself of all data before he left Hong Kong. I don’t understand how you can call it a lie. We can’t know for sure if the NSA is lying or if Snowden is lying. The NSA says 1.7m, I personally doubt they’d make the number up. It looks like it’s based off of an NSA claim, and there are other claims out there. None of which are clearly substantiable. > [@](#): > > This is all part of the public record on the situation and there’s not much use speculating if you’re not familiar with the basic facts. None of the nonsense you just spouted tells us that Snowden did or didn’t give everything he had to the journalists he gave documents to, so maybe you’re the one who needs to be acquainted with the basics of not just the facts, but logic itself. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2014, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-edward-snowden-just-a-russian-spy/688133/47 "2014-05-12T19:05:55Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > Oh? Edward Lee Howard (a disgruntled former CIA employee) passed classified information to the Soviets, once he finally defected he found a publisher and published memoirs of his exploits. Do I even need to point out why that’s different from Snowden, or can you save me the time and just admit it? ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2014, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-edward-snowden-just-a-russian-spy/688133/48 "2014-05-12T21:14:58Z")
There’s no good way for us nobodies to figure out what’s going on. When it comes to classified documents and the powers that want to keep them that way, the only thing we can assume is that everyone’s lying about everything. I suspect we’ll never know for certain what was leaked or Snowden’s exact role because nobody thinks its in their best interest to be honest with the public. ---
**Author:** ![Shalmanese](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/45deac/32.png) [@Shalmanese](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shalmanese)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2014, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-edward-snowden-just-a-russian-spy/688133/49 "2014-05-12T21:16:16Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > All actual espionage would look like a conspiracy theory because actual espionage requires conspiracy to work, so repeating the word “conspiracy” doesn’t necessarily undermine the espionage claim. It’s not like the JFK assassination which could be carried out by a lone gunman, espionage requires teamwork, which means conspiracy. All espionage may look like conspiracy theories but not all conspiracy theories look like espionage. In particular, conspiracy theories that require enemies to co-operate or smart -people to do stupid things are probably not espionage. > [@](#): > > That’s based only on the word of Snowden and Russia, actually. We don’t know that Snowden was genuinely interested in heading to Latin America. That also wouldn’t necessarily make him not a covert agent. There have also been American turncoats who sold secrets to the Russians then fled to Latin America, primarily because some of the Latin American countries that don’t extradite are perceived to have superior living conditions to Russia. Not it’s not, it’s based on the public record available at the time. We knew via media reports that Snowden was en-route to Cuba after he left Hong Kong but before he landed in Russia. The US State Department has publicly admitted that it was their diplomatic pressure that prevented the transfer. Thus, we have the word of multiple sources who are adversarial to Snowden and have no reason to support him. If Snowden’s goal was to secretly end up in Russia, why announce his identity in Hong Kong? The only reason Snowden ended up in Russia is because the US State department **failed** to pressure the HK government and **succeeded** in pressuring the Cuban government. If your plan involves your adversary executing an improbable set of events, then it’s not a very good plan. > [@](#): > > I don’t understand how you can call it a lie. We can’t know for sure if the NSA is lying or if Snowden is lying. The NSA says 1.7m, I personally doubt they’d make the number up. It looks like it’s based off of an NSA claim, and there are other claims out there. None of which are clearly substantiable. It’s a lie because the NSA is caught in a contradiction of pushing a number while admitting they have no idea what actually happened. There’s no way the number can be true. > [@](#): > > None of the nonsense you just spouted tells us that Snowden did or didn’t give everything he had to the journalists he gave documents to, so maybe you’re the one who needs to be acquainted with the basics of not just the facts, but logic itself. I’m not saying any of it is true but it plausibly explains your objections. Honestly, the reason you seem to be pushing your ideas is because you’re mostly unfamiliar with the basic facts around the story and a lot of it has been rehashed over and over again with satisfactory answers to most “Why would he do X” questions. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2014, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-edward-snowden-just-a-russian-spy/688133/50 "2014-05-12T23:12:44Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > I don’t understand how you can call it a lie. We can’t know for sure if the NSA is lying or if Snowden is lying. The NSA says 1.7m, I personally doubt they’d make the number up. _They admitted that **they don’t know** what Snowden accessed._ That leaves no possible source for any specific number other than the depths of some NSA flack’s ass. > [@](#): > > We don’t know that Snowden was genuinely interested in heading to Latin America. So the US government created an international incident on no factual basis whatsoever? :eek: ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2014, 9:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-edward-snowden-just-a-russian-spy/688133/51 "2014-05-14T09:45:35Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > I also take minor issue with you saying “my position”, I feel I made it clear I was relating Edward Epstein’s position. Huh? Oh, honestly, I forgot you were the OP. Whatever, the WSJ story referenced in the OP still sounds like excuse-making. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2014, 1:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-edward-snowden-just-a-russian-spy/688133/52 "2014-05-14T13:45:03Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > Edward Epstein of the Wall Street Journal has put together a compelling opinion piece suggesting Edward Snowden was most likely a spy working for either China or Russia (or both), and that whistleblowing is just a public cover for this. See, that makes no sense at all. “Public cover”? Spies don’t need “public cover,” spies try to evade public notice entirely; and once Snowden blows the whistle he becomes useless as a spy as he no longer has access to anything classified and, more importantly, he’s suddenly famous, which no spy can afford to be. If he is a spy, it would have made more sense for the Russians or Chinese to keep their agent quietly in place, feeding them intel, for as long as possible. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2014, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-edward-snowden-just-a-russian-spy/688133/53 "2014-05-14T14:51:54Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > See, that makes no sense at all. “Public cover”? Spies don’t need “public cover,” spies try to evade public notice entirely; and once Snowden blows the whistle he becomes useless as a spy as he no longer has access to anything classified and, more importantly, he’s suddenly famous, which no spy can afford to be. If he is a spy, it would have made more sense for the Russians or Chinese to keep their agent quietly in place, feeding them intel, for as long as possible. Indeed. The _Wall Street Journal_ has one foot in the fever swamp, and any day now I expect them to solemnly declare that the whole NSA dustup is a diversion from BENGHAZI1!II. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2014, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-edward-snowden-just-a-russian-spy/688133/54 "2014-05-14T21:30:48Z")
In the abstract, sure, there’s plenty of room for a “one time” spy, a spy who has a limited mission, after which he is expendable. I don’t think for a second Snowden is that kind of operative, but **BrainGlutton** ’s description of spies isn’t absolutely definitional. Someone in a foreign intelligence service could have devised such a “suicide mission” operation. In this particular case, no, because what was gained was vastly less valuable than the resources that would have been dedicated to the task. Spy-masters aren’t so stupid as to expend a pound of resources for a ha’penny of results. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-edward-snowden-just-a-russian-spy/688133.md?page=2)