Think about it. After leaking information about the NSA, Edward Snowden runs to Russia - a misfit country bullied by the the popular powers for twenty-five years, and desperate for power to leverage. Russia’s response is predictable: they mail Snowden’s asylum documents, paperclipped to a list of grievances.
Is Snowden a political weaver?
Look what happens next. Syria uses chemical weapons (as it had and presumably would again); the US vows to bomb; Russia backs its ally, Assad; and Snowden stays safe in a very stretched political hammock. Could Snowden predict this? Did he use the storm for shelter?
(Lies.)
Did he perhaps anticipate too much? Maybe the US, as it vowed, was supposed to strike Syria. Maybe there was supposed to be an international backlash against the United States, that Russia could milk for new (and former) allies, and that would evaporate the memory of Edward Snowden.
But there was no military strike, and the US and Russia began patching their differences without bloodshed. What could Edward Snowden do now?
(This story lies like a magician. It points to distract you from the gaps. Is it a good or bad magician? Look now, look eutheos! Good god, sensationalism.)
Perhaps Snowden planned on exacerbating the US debt situation -- to derail their hypothetical war effort -- and now goes through with the plan, not for malevolence, but for self-preservation: if the US defaults, then its relationship with many countries (China, Egypt) would be strained, and he could improvise an escape from Russia.
You scoff, but consider: since the US is so contentious, how difficult would it really have been? One top dog clogging the system at the right time, and the situation could domino.
(Consider: truth, consider: lies, consider, Stretch)
The controversy over government subsidies to Congress’s health-care was gift-wrapped for Snowden’s needs. All of the government wants their new health-care subsidized, but nobody wants to argue for subsidies and to incur a public frown. Fortunately for Snowden though, politicians do like to flex and have the world quake, especially when it shakes their rivals. Maybe he got Senator Reid to release information implicating Speaker Boehner in a plot to get subsidies. Boehner would, of course, shake back -- trying to drown the Democrats in their house by flooding the Senate with absurd anti-ObamaCare legislation, and salting a tempest of arguments for President Obama to weather.
(These are not men, they are power-mongers and puppets. The author tells them where to go -- up the floating steps; the logic is as caricatured as they are. Who is Snowden the man?)
This is of course what happened. The storm is battering Obama and the Senate, and default is only days away. Will Snowden evaporate when the storm breaks? Was he ever even there?
(All the lies end in “this,” a seductress, a gap for you to fill, amusing fragments collected.)
But such are stories and criticism: fragments begging you to form a visceral and total opinion. My thoughts? A story is lies, like faith is a lie, like a diagram is a lie. Yet, there are stories that give us a living, unconscious thought -- total and visceral -- engendered by artists and raised by criticism. These stories are pavement for our thoughts.
Is this story pavement? (Hint: Conspiracy) Are others?
We'll have to keep looking.
Is Snowden a political weaver?
Look what happens next. Syria uses chemical weapons (as it had and presumably would again); the US vows to bomb; Russia backs its ally, Assad; and Snowden stays safe in a very stretched political hammock. Could Snowden predict this? Did he use the storm for shelter?
(Lies.)
Did he perhaps anticipate too much? Maybe the US, as it vowed, was supposed to strike Syria. Maybe there was supposed to be an international backlash against the United States, that Russia could milk for new (and former) allies, and that would evaporate the memory of Edward Snowden.
But there was no military strike, and the US and Russia began patching their differences without bloodshed. What could Edward Snowden do now?
(This story lies like a magician. It points to distract you from the gaps. Is it a good or bad magician? Look now, look eutheos! Good god, sensationalism.)
Perhaps Snowden planned on exacerbating the US debt situation -- to derail their hypothetical war effort -- and now goes through with the plan, not for malevolence, but for self-preservation: if the US defaults, then its relationship with many countries (China, Egypt) would be strained, and he could improvise an escape from Russia.
You scoff, but consider: since the US is so contentious, how difficult would it really have been? One top dog clogging the system at the right time, and the situation could domino.
(Consider: truth, consider: lies, consider, Stretch)
The controversy over government subsidies to Congress’s health-care was gift-wrapped for Snowden’s needs. All of the government wants their new health-care subsidized, but nobody wants to argue for subsidies and to incur a public frown. Fortunately for Snowden though, politicians do like to flex and have the world quake, especially when it shakes their rivals. Maybe he got Senator Reid to release information implicating Speaker Boehner in a plot to get subsidies. Boehner would, of course, shake back -- trying to drown the Democrats in their house by flooding the Senate with absurd anti-ObamaCare legislation, and salting a tempest of arguments for President Obama to weather.
(These are not men, they are power-mongers and puppets. The author tells them where to go -- up the floating steps; the logic is as caricatured as they are. Who is Snowden the man?)
This is of course what happened. The storm is battering Obama and the Senate, and default is only days away. Will Snowden evaporate when the storm breaks? Was he ever even there?
(All the lies end in “this,” a seductress, a gap for you to fill, amusing fragments collected.)
But such are stories and criticism: fragments begging you to form a visceral and total opinion. My thoughts? A story is lies, like faith is a lie, like a diagram is a lie. Yet, there are stories that give us a living, unconscious thought -- total and visceral -- engendered by artists and raised by criticism. These stories are pavement for our thoughts.
Is this story pavement? (Hint: Conspiracy) Are others?
We'll have to keep looking.
