GIFFTEXT_20170322171039100

A few months ago I wrote an article whereby I questioned the legitimacy of labeling Edward Snowden as a traitor. Since then many events occurred suggesting an alarming trend whereby a lie presented as truth and corruption as measures to protect the public interest.

I am not sure when this process started but I believe that Donald Trump’s victory in the 2016 U.S. presidential elections is the result of it. When false statements presented as the ability to speak one’s mind, it is not surprising that facts don’t matter anymore.

RIW

Let’s just say, if Person A has a friendly relationship with Person B. Then, for some reason, Person A decides to kill Person C. Somehow Person B finds out about a committed murder and instead of reporting to police, decides to continue daily friendly interactions with Person A as if nothing has happened.

Later the police discover that Person A is a murderer and Person B knew about it almost right from the very beginning and did not report it. Possibly Person B will somewhat be held responsible for upholding crucial information by not reporting the crime to the police with all related consequences.

***

Although the highlighted example is generally correct, it does not apply to each and every situation especially when it is related to issues of big politics. However, it is fair to indicate that such exemption took place due to a silent agreement of the majority and a certain group of people has happily accepted it. Such endorsement created a precedent and allowed corrupted individuals to continue committing crimes against humanity.

I am not sure whether people’s decision to keep quiet was unintentional or due to indifference, but somehow the most important point was completely left out of the picture. It should have been understood that “looking the other way” paves the way for accelerated growth of hypocrisy. People should have realized that accepting misinterpretation creates a solid ground for a widespread confusion in term of definitions of what is right and wrong.

This mess led to severe deterioration of people’s ability to see things clearly and made them very forgetful about lessons that history has taught us. But the most dangerous consequence of this process is that logic started to become dysfunctional.

Therefore, today whoever dares to disclose information on committed crimes against humanity are immediately announced as “enemies of the nation”. In a blink of an eye, officials will appear on TV to make lengthy and complicated statements, heavily filled with patriotic words. However, if we listen carefully, it would become obvious that despite plenty of patriotism, these statements are not populated with common sense.

When Snowden’s story started to unfold, people were told that information which was published by Wikileaks shall be qualified as “unauthorized disclosure” and considered as a breach. Therefore it shall be defined as a threat to the national security. Since the majority is already confused, most of the people could not understand whether it is true and accepted the official version of the events. It led to a complete confusion and misunderstanding.

In my opinion, there is an element of doubt that qualification of Snowden’s actions is perfectly in line with the effective legislation of the United States. The purpose of the disclosure was not the receipt of material reward, neither it was disclosed to a hostile nation with the intent to cause damage to the national security. It does not seem to be related to industrial espionage as well. However. based on published materials, we may see that the information contains substantial factual evidence of numerous crimes against humanity. Therefore, it is viable to assume that Snowden and others were reporting war crimes.

I also noticed one interesting detail. Immediately after first publications, several officials made a statement illustrating Snowden’s action as treason. During countless interviews that followed no factual evidence was provided to confirm official line. I was constantly under impression that it is an intentional attempt to confuse the public even more.

It appears that few questions remain unanswered. Why is Snowden still hunted by the government? Is obligation of every citizen to report a crime is actually the crime which he is accused of committing? What classified information he has disclosed, which does not contain evidence of the crimes against humanity?

The entire story is almost identical with action movies. The main character discovers secrets of a criminal group and has to run for his (her) life. Of course, evil people set off in pursuit of the witness. The happy end of any action movie is, more or less, the same. The main character manages to survive because the law enforcement agency helps him (or her). Thus, the truth surfaces and justice prevails.

Unfortunately, it is very different in the real life. Due to completely twisted logic, many aspects of our life are affected. The “wrong” suddenly became “right”. Timeless values sustained substantial damage because political correctness made the truth almost invisible.

Unlike in the movies, there is no law enforcement agency to call for help as it is a part of the “criminal group” or is instructed by it. People who are actual criminals are free and well.

Logically, those who committed crimes supposed to have no rights to continue the pursuit of Snowden because they clearly have a conflict of interest. Instead, courts should have issued a restraining order immediately as it is required to ensure the protection of the key witness. But in the world where common sense is barely alive, it is very unlikely to happen.

I believe that at one point we lost focus and misinterpreted the meaning of democracy. We thought that democracy requires freedom of expression. Therefore, due to inappropriate politeness, which is otherwise known as “political correctness”, we decided to give a voice to stupidity.

We grossly miscalculated that democracy for the sake of democracy is useless. We forgot that by providing extremists with the opportunity to express their views, we legitimized perception making it a synonym to opinion. 

We failed to understand that perception shall never stand next to opinion. Arguments shall never be defined as discussions, Freedom of expression should never be interpreted as freedom of racism and chaos. Stupidity shall never be equal to intelligence.

I suspect that intellectual regress is encouraged because of the more “special needs” people represent the majority, the easier it is to hunt thinking people. It also helps the real criminals who started an illegal war, breached national and international laws, caused the death of hundreds of thousands of innocent people, to avoid punishment.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Advertisements