, , ,

I know its a little late considering the media coverage surrounding Edward Snowden blew over a while back, but i can’t stop thinking about the way it was dealt with. Obviously stealing top secret government documents is a crime and so the intention to imprison him is fair enough. However, if they are going to call the revelation of the these documents a crime, it just seems wrong that they are still being read, uncovered and used to criminalise people.

The ‘top secret’ documents, removed from the public eye, and branded evidence, cause and outcome of a crime should then be given back to the government without being read. Because contents of these documents have been absorbed by the people who say it was wrong in the first place, these people should then not be criminalising Snowden.

As Snowden was asked to present evidence against the US regarding the phone hacking of Angela Merkel in Germany, it immediately makes his behaviour creditable and therefore almost un-punishable. If they’re going to use the secret documents for a good cause, they should surely be thanking Snowden shouldn’t they?

The point I’m trying to make is, if Edward Snowden did commit a crime, (which all the negative consequences of his actions justify) the documents therefore should have been destroyed or returned to the government, instead of being used to criminalise. If they were going to do read through the contents of the ‘secret documents’, Snowden should not be imprisoned as, if the contents reveal illegal wrong-doings. actually that makes Snowden’s behaviour rewardable.

For him not to be able to enter his own country for fear of arrest, seems ludicrous considering the justice his crime brought. I feel as though he should have a lot more support behind him from people with influence; especially from those who his uncoverings helped.