The degree of pressure on reporters and politicians from the White House and Democratic leadership in the Snowden controversy was in full and embarrassing view yesterday when Rep. John Lewis walked back from an interview that he gave to the Guardian praising Snowden. He appears not to have gotten the memo: Snowden is not to be praised in the media or by members of Congress. Various reporters and new organizations have held the line in mocking Snowden or refusing to call him a “whistleblower” rather than a “leaker.” After all, the fear seems to be that Snowden has to be a traitor or Obama would look like a tyrant.
Lewis is quoted as comparing Snowden to those who engaged in civil disobedience in the the civil rights movement and said that Snowden may have felt that he had to follow a “higher law.” Many of course believe Snowden was defending the Constitution and view him as a hero.
Lewis noted that “[s]ome people say criminality or treason or whatever. He could say he was acting because he was appealing to a higher law. Many of us have some real, real, problems with how the government has been spying on people.” He is quoted as comparing Snowden to figures like Gandhi. However, such views are not supposed to be uttered, particularly by a Democrat.
Lewis seem to be frog marched back before cameras within 24 hours and denied everything short of his name, rank, and serial number: “News reports about my interview with The Guardian are misleading, and they do not reflect my complete opinion. Let me be clear. I do not agree with what Mr. Snowden did. He has damaged American international relations and compromised our national security. He leaked classified information and may have jeopardized human lives. That must be condemned.”
Whew, that was close. Snowden is back being a traitor and Lewis is back on script.
By the way, as some of our commentators have noted, Happy Whistleblower Day. While the Senate passed the resolution below, I expect that they view the day as referring to a dog whistle that only they can hear:
By a unanimous resolution the U.S. Senate declared July 30, 2013 as “National Whistleblower Appreciation Day.” The National Whistleblowers Center strongly supports the Senate’s historic action and calls on every American reflect upon the tremendous contributions whistleblowers have made to American democracy, as well as the struggles and sacrifices they have endured By a unanimous resolution the U.S. Senate declared July 30, 2013 as “National Whistleblower Appreciation Day.” The National Whistleblowers Center strongly supports the Senate’s historic action and calls on every American reflect upon the tremendous contributions whistleblowers have made to American democracy, as well as the struggles and sacrifices they have endured.
Just because my own government once condemned me to years of penurious indentured servitude in the U.S. military does not mean that I want to see a similar injustice visited upon any other young American man or woman today. Likewise, I fail to see why Edward Snowden should suffer an injustice at the hands of the U.S. government just because Congressman Lewis once did. I find such “thinking” not only perverse, but more of an apology for injustice than a demand that it cease.
We only have one life to live here on earth and not one of us should have to give it up for the ease and convenience of petty, thin-skinned autocrats who cannot distinguish the reporting of a crime from the commission of one. Stay free and happy, Edward Snowden. You’ve earned your freedom many times over for putting it at risk to inform your fellow citizens of that which they have every right and duty to know, even though many of them would love to see you in solitary confinement for disturbing their somnolent complacency. Pearls before swine, and all that.
Or, one could watch and listen to the famous scene in Easy Rider where Jack Nicholson explains to Dennis Hopper and Peter Fonda what freedom means to the average American. The first two minutes or so of the video pretty much covers the essentials.
Blouise,
She enjoys Kids Love Trains 1 & 2. She also likes to watch airplanes taking off and landing. She loves the Sesame Street characters–especially Elmo.
We recently celebrated her second birthday. It’s a blast living next door to her and getting to see her every day.
Elaine,
How were the youtube trains? My youngest granddaughter used to love watching zoo animals on youtube and Grover, of course. I never thought about trains.
Good night.
Gene H. 1, August 8, 2013 at 10:34 pm
I didn’t accuse him of being a whore, Elaine. I only stipulated that it might be a possibility in explaining his actions.
*****
I had addressed that comment to you because i had quoted your words. What I said after quoting you was meant for all the people who had called Lewis a coward.
Gene,
That’s okay. I kept getting sent back for more training in non-violent protesting because I kept punching people in the nose … my hypocrisy on display for all my fellow marchers to see. Don’t get me wrong, I wasn’t proud of it and they were very, very patient with me but come on … how in the he!! are you supposed to love some fat, smelly, newly deputized white guy who’s trying to beat the shit out of you. There was more than a whiff of hypocrisy on me.
No Balls, like Mr. O-bummer!
Blouise/Mike A./and kinda raff,
As I said, I’m going to rethink Snowden. However, the point about support systems is a very valid point.
Still, I have issues with Lewis’ statement in recanting. I’m still going with this has the whiff of coercion. At best, the whiff of hypocrisy.
Michael Murry,
“For my part, I do not believe what Congressman Lewis believes. He believes falsely.”
Good for you. It’s always best to think for oneself.
Blouise,
Since Congressman Lewis felt compelled to clarify his “complete” opinion — as opposed to his ostensibly incomplete opinion expressed previously to The Guardian — let us for the sake of argument take him as now fully unconfused and clear about what he really believes.
So, just for starters, Congressman Lewis does not believe in the presumption of innocence prior to any court verdict establishing guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Congressman Lewis instead believes that mere accusations and allegations by the U.S. government constitute a priori guilt. For my part, I do not believe what Congressman Lewis believes. He believes falsely.
Moving right along, Congressman Lewis asserts that Edward Snowden has (1) damaged American international relations, (2) compromised national security, and (3) “jeopardized lives.” In no instance does Congressman Lewis provide unambiguous evidence that Mr Snowden did any of these things. Neither did he acknowledged the more likely possibility that the crimes committed by the United States Government — as documented by Mr Snowden — have resulted the damage that he claims has occurred. Again, Congressman Lewis believes falsely..
Finally, Congressman Lewis wishes to tell the rest of us what we “must” condemn.” We must do no such thing. Quite to the contrary, we can, if we wish, celebrate Mr Snowden’s disclosures as salutary for democracy and fervently hope for more of this whistle blowing in the future. Congressman Lewis may wish to personally condemn freedom of information and the whistle blowers who provide it to us, but in that case he should take personal responsibility in his language and say: “I personally feel compelled to condemn freedom of information and the whistle blowers who provide it for reasons that I do not feel at all compelled to publicly justify or support with evidence.” He would still believe falsely and I still would not believe what he now says he believes, but at least I would respect him for having enough self-awareness and honesty to acknowledge his own preference for an Orwellian surveillance state in preference to an informed democracy.
Mike A.,
I understand what you and Blouise are suggesting that Lewis was stating that Snowden should submit to the authorities and “take his medicine” for his actions. In a perfect world I would agree, but in this day and age, I think he made the right choice to get out of Dodge. Mr. Lewis went through hell and survived, but I am not sure Snowden will. I hope I am wrong.
Gene,
Every man chooses his own way through the mine field. In Snowden’s defense it must be remembered that John Lewis had a support system and many wise mentors. Snowden, from all appearance presently known, was/is on his own.
Michael Murry:
You are spot on. Bernard Fall got it right. I still have my almost fifty year-old copy of “Hell In A Very Small Place,” one prescient piece of writing. (I also enjoy your poetry, BTW.)
I’m well aware of COINTELPRO, Blouise.
However, I am heavily persuaded by Mike A’s framing of the situation. But he knows I’m a sucker for the Rule of Law arguments. Damn it. (shakes fist at Mike)
I may even rethink my own position on Snowden as a person although I still think his actions were of enormous value to the American people. I’m even going to cut Lewis a little slack although his comments do seem hypocritical and to reflect a double standard simply because Snowden didn’t pay the “full price” of his civil disobedience.
the above was addressed to Gene … sorry, I forget it’s not an email
I don’t know what motivated Rep. Lewis to “clarify” his remarks. They were perfectly understandable. And given his history, I really can’t imagine any threat that he would lose sleep over. Besides, he is in my opinion one of those rare individuals who is entitled to the benefit of the doubt. Therefore, I think he was primarily concerned that people would believe that he was holding Mr. Snowden completely blameless for his actions.
John Lewis understands what Socrates understood. One cannot pursue justice under the rule of law without submitting to its processes. Mr. Snowden was protesting the shredding of the Constitution. But his actions do not serve as a witness to the primacy of that document unless he is also prepared to drink the hemlock. He was not. John Lewis was.
That is how you see Snowden but not necessarily how Rep Lewis may see him.
Dogs and police batons were the least of it. The FBI was into everything and everyone during the 60’s. Hoover was certain that the antiwar and civil rights movements had been infiltrated by communists who were using them to destabilize the United States.
Now lots of this stuff didn’t come to light until the 70’s and 80’s. Documents were uncovered wherein Hoover ordered people to be neutralized. COINTELPRO?
Look it up sometime when you have a few minutes to spare.
nick spinelli,
Thanks for sharing your impressions of This Town, which I have not read and probably will not. Regarding Michael Hastings and military attitudes towards whistle blowers in the press, however, let me share something with you that I had to read at Counter Insurgency School back in 1969, a year before I completed language school and deployed to South Vietnam in July of 1970:
When I read that, I realized that the United States had already started losing this “war” the year I entered high school and that eight years later the United States military still had nothing to offer the American people but endless excuses and a worn-out mythology blaming the press for screwing everything up by reporting reality. The U.S. military command learned nothing whatsoever from its humiliating defeat in Vietnam except the need to muzzle the press and keep the American people ignorant of the U.S. command’s ongoing defeats in Iraq and Afghanistan. Those reporters who get “in bed with” the U.S. military have provided little of value to the American populace and they know it. So they blame the few independent reporters like Michael Hastings for actually doing a reporters job — reporting the truth and not spewing the military’s self-serving mythology.
The real scandal involves not what mediocre deadheads like General McCrystal and General Petraeus do while drunk, but what they do while stone cold sober and too engrossed in creating their own public relations personality cults to realize that they’ve done nothing but lose again, getting their enlisted men killed, maimed, or driven to rape and suicide by the thousands. Thank goodness for a few honest whistle-blowing reporters like Michael Hastings. And no thanks at all to the “just-wanna-be-one-of-the-guys” sycophant hagiographers like Laura Logan. When you lay down with dogs you get up with fleas, as the old saying goes.
BTW, if you’ve never seen “The Fastest Gun Alive”, it’s pretty good.
It did occur to me, Blouise. And it didn’t pass the smell test. Just because Snowden wasn’t willing to put his fate in the hands of the very people he accused of violating the Constitution doesn’t mean he didn’t pay a heavy price for what he did. Consider: We have been torturing people the government considers enemies. Consider: Eric “Lapdog” Holder had to actually promise that Snowden wouldn’t be tortured in trying to entice Russia to return him. I’m not downplaying the dogs and police batons, but when you’re dealing with an opponent willing to torture and spy on its own citizenry, that’s a whole new level of villainy. Snowden is paying a price but he is doing so in a way that mitigates as much damage to himself as possible. That’s just smart when dealing with what our government has become. Is it heroic? Not really. But heroic acts need not come from heroic people. Westerns have an archetype of the weak character who rises to do one heroic thing – think Glenn Ford in “The Fastest Gun Alive”. They have that archetype for a reason. That’s how people sometimes are.
BTW … did it ever occur to anyone that Rep. Lewis may actually believe that Snowden should have stayed here to face the music instead of running off to Hong Kong?
“I said he has a right as an individual to act according to the dictates of his conscience, but he must be prepared to pay the price for taking that action. In the movement, we were arrested, we went to jail, we were prepared to pay the price, even lose our lives if necessary.” (John Lewis)