I was not aware of Chelsea Manning's transition when making this video 9:20 yes, it is common for such calls to be made for motivation. The problem here is that the movie is using it to bolster Snowden's image, as I said in the review. Now stop commenting it. 10:00 that's supposed to say "become" (thx Sgt_Hoagie) Also, if you think I'm saying Snowden is a hero or traitor: You need to listen more carefully, for you are only revealing your own ignorance.
Also currently being in the U.S Army agree 100% with Cynical, none of that shit is true in the Army. O and yeah... call a Drill Sgt "Sir" and watch what happens. you'll get a nice smoke session.
Nurse here. You absolutely can walk on broken legs, it’s called fractures where the bones retain their form but have been weakened by cracks forming on them usually from stress causing them more likely to break fully or in medical terms become a different kind of fracture like comminuted, oblique, etc...
We are talking Army basic training though, so it’s not like he fractured his leg and then walked around calmly everywhere. How likely would it be for someone to pull that off in your opinion?
You're splitting hairs. Yeah, you can technically walk on broken legs but the point is that he couldn't have because he was in *basic training for the USAF.* There is no way he would have been able to grit his teeth through that excruciating of pain and no one notice.
During my basic training in 1988, our drill sergeants also had us using the phrase "Rangers" and "Special Forces" during cadence calls. It's a motivational technique that is decades old.
I could see that. I was a tanker myself, so rangers and SF were not a goal to be said by the DS, though I did become a scout later. The point here is that Stone is trying to use the cadence to illustrate Snowden as being more than what he was. Snowden has actually claimed to been SF in the past, despite not even making it out of Basic.
I agree that making a hero to be more than he really was in history is annoying. Stone is using a great deal of creative license here but I do think it is important to get the ignorant public that make up most of Umerika to know this story.
It's odd that stone gets the military wrong in this movie...he was an Infantryman in Vietnam and made arguably the best war movie of all time (platoon)
Can you cite where Snowden has claimed to have been SF? Because there are references to him being a candidate, meaning he probably gave it a shot and washed out. I couldn't find anything where he has actually claimed to have been SF or a Ranger.
I'm in favor of what Snowden did. But this movie is embarrassing. Why all the fiction? It doesn't help Snowden's case. And telling not showing? What is this a B movie?
Many directors, good directors even, have a hard time trying to balance a faithful depiction or re-telling of something historical with making a movie enjoyable.
Totally agree with you. In making much of the movie fictional - and very laughably fictional - it really diminishes what Snowden did for Americans. But I do also agree with the video that Snowden should have returned to the U.S. and make his case.
Why in favour? His actions probably got people killed, and nothing changed in the long run. If you really feel that the NSA has become ethical just because of wikileaks then you're delusional. Exposing a few crimes didn't even result in people being punished. Snowden just fed his own vanity, that is all
People who live in glass houses should beware of throwing stones... 1) Snowden was NOT "waylaid" in Moscow. Nor was his inability to get a flight out because "his infamy had become too great". The US had cancelled his passport, which meant that when he needed to change planes in Moscow he was unable to do so and was forced to remain in the transit area of Moscow's airport. 2) Snowden was charged under the Espionage Act. This is the same statute which was used to convict people of disloyalty in World War 1 for such "heinous" acts as opposing conscription. A famous example is Schenck v the United States, the case from which comes the infamous line (from Oliver Wendell Holmes) about the First Amendment not protecting those who falsely shout "fire" in a crowded theatre. (Something overturned decades later in Brandenburg v Ohio.) In yet another example (the Berger Case) a conviction under it was used to justify invoking section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment, and thereby deny Berger the seat he had been elected to in the House of Representatives. Berger himself was sentenced to 20 years, and only escaped that fate when the courts overturned his conviction on a technicality. In short, the thing is an abomination which needs to be repealed. 3) "One did not flee his country". Ellsberg himself has said that Snowden would not get a fair trial under the Espionage Act and has said that Snowden did the right thing by nit waiting around to be convicted.. 4) The Henry David Thoreau homily. Thoreau wasn't charged under the Espionage Act (which did not exist in his day). He was charged with failing to pay his taxes and objected because of the way those taxes would be used (namely, to fight the Mexican-American War). He was tried and convicted but spent only a single night in jail--because somebody (probably his aunt) subsequently paid the missing taxes against his wishes. In short, you use a quote from a guy who spent one night in jail to piously lecture someone more likely to face 20 YEARS in jail. That is simply bizarre! What you are basically advocating is that Snowden play martyr. I look forward to you berating Chelsea Manning (also charged under the Espionage Act) for accepting Obama's commutation instead of spending her full 35 year sentence in jail. 5) "I'm not going to be scrambling jets..." Obama's famous remake did not prevent someone in Washington ordering ("ya vole, mine president") or hinting to ("who will rid me of this meddlesome leaker?") America's loyal minions in France, Spain, etc to block Bolivia's president returning home from Russia when there was a chance Snowden might be somewhere onboard. 6) Your nitpick over the Ranger/Special Forces business turns a molehill into a mountain. For you are effectively basing your entire argument on a chant.1 Nowhere else is it suggested that Snowden was doing anything other than normal basic training. BTW, while the US Rangers are not Special Forces, they both ARE US Army special operations forces.
As someone who walked around on a broken leg for a few weeks during basic training, I'd like to point out that you're wrong about it being impossible. I broke my left tibia fairly cleanly (transverse fracture, bone stayed mostly in place) near the ankle, and when I went to the doctor, they said I probably had tendonitis. They gave me some codeine and a chit for a week of no PT. In that time, the bone healed enough that I was able to walk and jog with just minor pain. A week later, I did an obstacle course, and couldn't stand up the next morning. X-rays showed the bone had broken weeks earlier.
Criticism of Snowden for not going to jail is a bit harsh I think. Throwing his life away now isn't going to change anything, people who hate Snowden aren't going to change their minds. Look what happened to Chelsey Manning, despite all the unfair treatment she received, most people simply forgot about her.
Manning did have her sentence commuted though. I think people in general will remain fairly ignorant of these matters, so going to jail for it is not to raise awareness. Rather it is to be an active participant in the system that one wishes to refute. It weakens one's argument if they flee from the consequences. There's a reason why I showed MLK behind bars, because he did it correctly. It most certainly is harsh criticism, but necessarily so. Snowden is often portrayed as being a prime example of civil disobedience, but history shows that he is shirking the most important part of that disobedience. It is not about engaging the conversation and trying to change minds, rather than following through with one's actions. Though I do want to point out that the comment in the video was also in juxtaposition (from those who want to vilify him to those who want to sanctify him).
Manning hasn't been released yet and isn't slated to be released until May 17, 2017. On the plus side, Manning was given a dishonorable discharge from the military and that'll follow her for the rest of life.
The Cynical Historian Funny you mention that MLK event, because Socrates fell under that same category. He didn't wanna leave since he had a good run. Plus he respected their laws for many years, so escaping jail time would be seen as him breaking his truths. Also he would of gotten a free lunch if he behaved. Lol
+MattKenobi86 but he got a free drink instead, lol. Socrates is more an example of how democracy fails, rather than any kind of civil disobedience. I can't really think of an ancient example, but then again, the idea was written hundreds of years later
I remember in 1998-99 talking to fellow COMPSCI/IT students about how we knew our government had the money and technology to log all phone calls and internet traffic but we all knew it would never happen since moral people wouldn't let it happen. WE WERE WRONG and it ended up being far worse than even our most wildest imaginations. SNOWDEN is a hero, the very definition! PRISM is still operating as well as dozens of other programs and NOTHING has been done about it!!
Just a small thing, its very possible to "Walk on broken legs" for weeks in military basic training. The term is stress fractures, and you can walk on them for months at a time, and it often happens in the military with new recruits. Though it is far more common in hip fractures. And the jumping from a bunk is actually a common thing. You will have stress fractures, then take an impact hopping out of a rack. Thats why they tell you not to do it.
I hadn't noticed, and you're correct. The typical response is, "Don't call me sir, I work for a living." I was just astonished at Stone's trying to make Snowden into some badass elite, that that slipped through even editing. Just think, Stone is veteran himself too.
Knowing how the story of Snowden is filled with much debatable information and plenty still coming out in modern times I'm not sure if we can do an academic study about it so early in its time frame
In defense of Snowden's pasta cooking skills, I've managed to screw that up. Mostly it's because you leave it too long and you end up with soggy pasta or in one case burnt pasta.
15:51 - Er.. I think it might be _you_ who doesn't understand pasta. I mean, you know you can undercook or overcook pasta, right? It's not even hard to get it wrong. You just need a [DING] sound effect after that sentence and it'd be CinemaSins-worthy forced criticism.
Pasta can be cooked wrong by over boiling or under boiling it. Al dente is preferable and likely what he was referencing when he said ‘I think I got it right this time’.
I entirely disagree with your assertion that Snowden should have gone to jail, for the reasons Snowden (as well as Elsberg) has elucidated. Saying that he should be willing to face a kangaroo court because that'd look better to you and be more "traditional" is ludicrous, to say the least. Being unable to make any legal arguments is precisely why he should face such railroading? Why? So that you, as a self-proclaimed historian, can get something out of it? Elsberg has compared Snowden to himself, and that's good enough for me. And the fact that Russia was the only place that he *could* go, as going to Central America is unfeasible now (as the US's willingness to ground a foreign head of state's plane on the _suspicion alone_ that Snowden was hidden inside demonstrates). Your attempt at evenhandedness in the pursuit of a false neutrality has produced a ridiculous demand that someone who has allegedly committed a crime face unjust and indefinite imprisonment, torture akin to that committed against Chelsea Manning, and possible "suicide" or "death by a previously undiagnosed heart condition." While you may have a problem with people going too far to the left or right, there is also a false centrism in certain circumstances, and this is one of them. When he can make a public interest legal defense and have even the slightest chance of a fair trial, whether he's acquitted or convicted, then he can stand trial by the very criminals he's exposed, as is so often the case in the US.
Dude, I'm an MD, the kinds of fractures the movie describes are stress fractures, in fact, being in the military is a risk factor for those and they effectively walk injured withouth even noticing it since its associated with a very minor pain that is relieved when resting. I see no failure on the part of the film to explain this, since it associates it with the heavy load transported. You lack a basic part of research when talking about something you clearly know nothing about, which is ironic since you complain of this lack of rigor in your video.
Read Snowden's memoir though, he claims he broke his tibia in a training maneuver and hobbled through the rest of the exercise. Then when he woke up the next day he couldn't get out of the barracks. No one is claiming he walked on a broken leg or legs for weeks.
I was a Drill Sergeant for 3 years and I can tell you, references to Rangers and Special Forces is common in almost every cadence, to all Soldiers.... sooooo, yeah, goofed that one guy.
The Cynical Historian, perhaps, but I doubt this was done as intentionally as you imply. saying "the cadence was chosen to make him seem like a badass" is as absurd as saying "they chose to have him wear camouflage clothes to make him look badass" the cadence is so common that it would be odd for the Drill Sergeant to be signing about anything else.
@@steviesteve5198 Everything in the movie is intentional; it's not like people ad-libbed their dialogue, or read from script that resulted from a cat walking across a computer.
@@troodon1096 Hmm... Is it? Now I am not to familiar with the works of Oliver Stone or the script writer for this movie. I have not even seen it. But my experience is that some directors and script writers are very careful with everything they put to screen having intent behind even minute details. But in some cases there is actually no real afterthought put in to it. It can be hard to tell the intent without the actual creators behind it saying so openly. (And sometimes even that gets muddled as they may lie or misremember why they did a certain thing in a movie.)
When I saw this with my dad we both just looked at each other and agreed that it was propaganda. It was our kind of propaganda, we're both commies like stone, but it was propaganda. I feel like even calling it a history movie is a massive stretch.
He didn't walk around on broken legs for weeks even according to his own memoir. He broke his leg out on exercise, managed to get back to barracks and couldn't get up the next morning.
At 4:30 you describe the Pentagon Papers to say they revealed the US covert fighting in Laos and Cambodia, “along with several other scandals”. That’s a pretty tame summary. It’s primary importance was confirming and exposing the deceit over the US war in Vietnam. You even show the body of South Vietnamese President Ngo Dihn Diem who was killed in a US backed coup. (I hope you do a review of the Burns/Novick series “The Vietnam War” which, although fundamentally flawed, does detail the malignant attitudes of US war planners.) At ~6:40, after showing Snowden say he couldn’t get a fair trial, you say he shouldn’t have fled because “by hiding away in Russian Snowden only damn his own story for posterity” which historians (like this video?) ultimately write. Really? Isn’t his concern for his welfare a valid reason? Ultimately posterity will judge his actions by the significance of what he has disclosed, which no one has disputed are real. Snowden’s courage is shown by the fact he is one of a only a few (lookup Russ Tice, Thomas Andrews Drake, Mark Klein, Thomas Tamm) out of thousands to object to the illegal spying operations. A look at the treatment of the other recent whistleblowers, especially Drake, is why Snowden says he can’t get a fair trial. Stone’s film has failings and takes dramatic licence, but these are used to emphasise the character arc of the naive citizen who realises the government spy agencies have become a larger threat than then things it was supposedly their to protects us from. The complaints about the factually inaccuracies in the film are nitpicking when the film gets one big thing correct: Snowden revealed details of the illegal spying. Near the start you mention the disinformation campaign against Daniel Ellsberg, so shouldn’t we assume there one running now against Snowden? I’m inclined to put a question mar over any disparagement of Snowden given to routine character assassination of political opponents of the State. Regarding this video, a quick search shows Forbes magazine found a former co-worker who called him a “genius among geniuses” www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2013/12/16/an-nsa-coworker-remembers-the-real-edward-snowden-a-genius-among-geniuses/. Also the speculation near the end about Snowden continuing to hold documents is given with sinister insinuation. It seems obvious to me that by deleting all his copies he is reasserting that the important story is the government spying and also to try to protect himself from the danger that some other government or organisation might try to extract it from him. Edits: typo. grammar
I've always felt Stone movies are best to be viewed as pure fiction and judged accordingly. Even at that I find them hit or miss just from an entertainment perspective.
You seem biased against Snowden the man not the movie.everyone has bias but you getting mad at him for not throwing his life away seems a bit excessive.
Did nothing wrong? He broke one of the worst laws you could break. There's no denying that, its ILLEGAL to leak classified information you are entrusted with access toLOL. There is nothing "unjust" about the legal system finding him guilty and punishing him for something he not only did but ADMITS to doing, the hangup is that he chose to break the law to expose other law breakers. People consider him a hero because he chose to be a martyr and break the law to expose wrongdoing. That doesn't make him magically innocent of the crimes he still committed to expose it LOL.
@@artemismoonbow2475 Besides the rather poorly executed "1984" reference I dont really get what point you are even trying to make in regards to my comment. I could care less what people think of government surveillance/monitoring because that is an opinion based on individual preferences and ethics. There is no right or wrong, only what the society wants as a collective and what an individual wants. What I care about as was stated before, is the stupidity that people think vigilante justice, serious security violations, and harm to others should be tolerated. The idea that some people think that more people should be like Snowden is a testament to how foolish and uninformed these individuals are. Feel free to have opinions on the espionage act, its part of what helps shift the spectrum on where our nation stands in regards to freedom vs security. But please dont start spouting nonsense like some people do that a man who knew nothing about what he was looking at, proceeded to commit one of the worst crimes possible, and then run from justice rather than own his actions, should be hailed as a hero and role model. *Miss me with that bullshit*
Lightning round #2 is actually becoming a more real possibility as technology furthers. The EU powergrid runs of a node-based system which connects all across central EU. Not to mention BlackEnergy, which was used on the Ukraine powergrid.
I work in the electric sector. It is impossible for the guy next door to shut down an entire net. There is not a single wire connected to the internet. And precisely for that reason many protocols are put in place. It is much easier to just sabotage the grid, i mean physically.
I do not know how historically accurate those movies are, but Stone has made some quite good movies (to watch, at least): Born on the 4th of July, Platoon and Natural Born Killers (which is pure fiction).
So Snowden in the movie is basically a Mary Sue/Gary Stu, funny Also I appreciate the balanced explanation and not making it preachy in regard to the subject at hand, it's important I would agree but I prefer this format
Part 2 in the Lightning Round (with the possibility to control foreign infrastructure) was probably referring to programs like Nitro Zeus - whether those programs were actually developed to a functional level or not may be up for debate, but they were certainly proposed and funded
The broken legs thing... Is stupid bit plausible. When I was twelve I was on a local football team,l when I twisted my right knee during training. I didn't tell anyone about it for fear of losing my spot, so I sucked it up and kept going. It hurt like hell for two weeks, and I continued to practice on it and even played two games before passing out during training. When I passed out my parents took me to the doctor and we were told I'd torn nearly every ligament and tendon around my right knee. It wasn't cool, it wasn't fun, it fucking hurt and the doctor literally hit me upside the head and called me an idiot for hiding it for so long. Mind you, the reason I did this was due to a serious medical issue I'd suffered the previous summer, which took me off the team that year. I was more terrified of losing my spot than I was in fucking up my leg and that alone allowed me to continue going.
Depends on what type of break and where. I thought I had a bad sprain and walked on a fracture for a week. It hurts like hell, but if it's not a major break, you can walk on it. So I wouldnt count that as impossible.
It seems the whole movie can be fixed by the character Snowden begin the movie by saying "This is my story" then the text has an "unreliable narrator" ala Forrest Gump.
Im a strong supporter of Edward Snowden, but I must agree this film was a complete let down, and it’s such a shame too. Shaline Woodly and Joseph Gordon Levit are really talented. Stone is just an incompetent filmmaker.
The Cynical Historian I will say this story deserves a much better director than Oliver Stone. Stone is just so awful! His history may be just a little better than Mel Gibson, who tends to just make stuff up, but Oliver Stone tends to distort and speculate in unhealthy and unhelpful ways.
(11:12) Did I hear that correctly "Missed a perfect score on the AS VAB test by one question." First off its ASVAB (one word), and two I don't think there is a "perfect" score, it is a placement test just for the US Military.
It is possible to get a 100th percentile, but that doesn't mean a perfect score. Some of the questions are intentionally subjective, which means perfection is impossible. So yeah, you are correct
It's also worth pointing out the ASVAB only measures up to roughly a tenth-grade level of knowledge. i got in the 97th percentile by simply reviewing a few equations and units of measure.
I was entertained by this move, but I had no idea how much fiction was in this movie. Seems like they could just change the names and make it a historical movie.
I have read a lot by and about Snowden, trying to decide my take on him. I feel at this time that the truth is not objectively knowable. I'm not talking about the Stone movie at all here. The issue I have with your video is that you talk about how major whistleblowers are traditionally the subjects of disinformation campaigns to undermine their credibility ("he was low-level, he was incompetent, he was a troublemaker, he was a liar, we fired him, he never held that job, there was no such program"), yet you seem to too-easily accept such negative characterizations of Snowden. I'm not arguing that Snowden is truthful or not truthful, because I have no idea. I'm arguing for more cynicism and more acceptance of uncertainty. Pretty much all material available serves one agenda or another. I also don't agree with your contention that not facing unjust prosecution somehow invalidates Snowden's motives/morals. I do understand your (and Thoreau's) point about civil disobedience, but don't attach nearly as much importance to it as either of you do. How far do you take that idea? To make a point, if a government executes unjustly, does the just man belong in the grave?
@@carterdc3576 The reason I ask this question is because if the dynamics were changed up a bit, for I doubt if Snowden were a black guy, I doubt he would get much coverage.
Wait, what did Snowden exaggerate or falsely claim? Everything I've seen traces that to NSA or other government sources and I don't trust them on this matter. There is an anonymous NSA source saying among other things that Snowden created a backup system, but obviously there's the issue of culpability.
The problem with Snowden is that he misrepresents the reality of how the intelligence community operates and how their oversight and laws are implemented. He banks on the average viewer's total ignorance of the IC in order to sell the idea of a nefarious runaway agency with no oversight or consideration for the rights of US citizens, and this is patently false. He also fundamentally misrepresents how the FISA works to make it seem the feds can target whomever they like to any extent they like, which is also false.
@@derek96720 exactly, and that’s why for those of us with any experience or education with respect to the military or intelligence communities: Snowden is a FRAUD. As an Iranian who moved to the US after the mullahs took power, I understand more than anyone just how shady the US government can be. But what Snowden says, what he did, and the reasons why he did it? Nah, that dude is pure scum. All I thought immediately upon hearing his leaks was “Omg how many Americans is this MF going to get killed??”
As you have a thing for Oliver Stone, have you reviewed Born on the Forth of July? I have seen it and did have a few questions, but seeing what you've put here makes me think that BotFJ was a bit sugar coated.
I still am thankful for what Snowden did for our nation's awareness, but under our nation's laws he did commit treason since he was a contractor and isn't provided the whistleblower protections. I disagree with the laws but they are how this country works.
Having been at Basic in Fort Benning. a) yes, they treat you like infantry. Everyone at Fort Benning is infantry. We were told that when we got to AIT or OCS that we will be the elites, because we were trained to be infantry regardless. That Basic at Fort Benning was just like infantry training but shorter. b) I know someone who was woken in the middle of the night by a drill sergeant because he had been entrusted with keys, and the guy fell out of bed (he was in a top bunk) and broke his arm. Guy went on to pass his physical fitness test because he did the necessary number of pushups on a broken arm. (to quote him, “after awhile, the pain just goes away” which is supported by the notion that the brain turns off continuous signals.) Then, there was the guy who during the march for FTX was walking off the road because the drill sergeants ordered everyone off of the pavement, twisted his ankle, and kept marching. He finished the march, got to the FTX field and dug his fox hole, setup his tent, and only came to attention the next day, because he couldn't get his foot into his boot due to such swelling. I fucking washed out of Fort Benning, because I joined with ridiculously bad depression that I had been convinced (due to a 99%ile ASVAB score) would not be an issue. I was underweight and had to _TWICE_ go to MEPS to be weighed the second time me being so full of piss (because I couldn't pee lest weigh loss) and full of shit (lest I lose weight) _AND_ ready to puke (lest I lose weight) and even then, I came up 0.49 pounds under, which they just rounded up because I was trying to get in. Fucking Fort Benning, 2001, before 9/11 was "if any of you have a problem with 'mother fucker' let me know" one guy raised his hand, and the drill sergeant said, "in that case, remind me around you I need to say father fucker." Your fucking grasp of what Fort Benning was like contemporaneous to Snowden's service is a fucking joke to someone who actually spent fucking time there. Shit, yeah. I know ranger and special forces were different things. Didn't fucking stop Fort 'Infantry' Benning from having us talk about them like we're worthy of being a part of both. ' Your video is so full of fail to someone was was contemporaneously at Fort Benning for basic that … I don't know what to say. Except, holy fucking christ, you're talking out of your fucking ass about this particular part. Rock of the Marne, 138th, Delta Platoon 2001.
This churlish comment bugged me enough to reply. You call the video "full of fail," yet you fail to contradict a single thing in it. Furthermore, you speak as though you have some sort of authority on Basic Training, despite washing out. Do not dare to be so ignorant as to think that the person you are replying to has not had a similar experience, or as you say, has no "fucking grasp." Unlike yourself, I actually served 6 years in the army. Funny enough, I have said as much elsewhere on this channel, but as it goes with people who washed out, the less you served, the more boastful you are. Don't be so ignorant as to question an ex-soldier whether he has any experience in the army.
I'm not claiming authority on all Basic Training. I'm claiming real life experience at Fort Benning during the same time period as Snowden. I don't need any more experience than Basic at Fort Benning, because my comments are _exclusive_ to what Basic is like at Fort Benning. Look, I fucking know you have experience in the Army, you've said it plenty before, and it's quite clear. And I take your word on what the actual Army is actually like with hella more cred than I take my own experiences, because everyone was telling me that Basic is a “game” and doesn't actually represent what the Army is really like. However, when someone who was at Basic Training at Fort Benning in 2001 when Snowden was there in 2004, tells you about their actual lived experience there, then you should freaking acknowledge it. People falling off of bunks and breaking shit _happens_ at Fort Benning. People who ignore medical conditions rather than subject themselves to lining up for medical care and subjecting themselves to ridicule by the Drill Sergeants _happens_. And Fort Benning feeding every recruit lies that just because they're there they're good enough for Special Forces, and Ranger school, _happens_. Fort Benning was so full of “Hoowa!” that the General who was in command of the base took his official military photograph in BDUs, because _everyone_ at Fort Benning did that, and it was because “INFANTRY, HOOWA!” All of that said, I will walk back "full of fail"… I had stopped the video at the point where you were misrepresenting Fort Benning, but the rest of the video has good merit. It was a good watch for all the other details, but the lack of understanding you have of what Basic is like at Fort Benning is profound. Fort Benning BCT really was (at the time) that sort of “you're elite just because you're here” hoowa bullshit someone could be on broken legs for a week shit. Because part of the game at Fort Benning was exactly that: you're the most hoowah, because you're here at Fort Benning, and we're infantry, because HOOWAH!
Alright. In the future, you may want to watch the "you don't know" kind of stuff, for you don't always know who you are talking to on the internet. It sets my blood on fire as soon as someone tries to say something along those lines, especially when it comes to military service on my channel. In reply to how Benning was full of Hooah folks, that was no different where I went to basic (Knox in '06). As tankers, they were egging us on about going to airborne school, hilariously singing cadence about "C-130 rolling down the strip...32 tankers on a one-way trip." Obviously, they will always play that game. The difference here is that stuff is meant to be fluff, whereas the movie depicts it as being the goal of Snowden himself. He has claimed as such himself, saying that he was an SF recruit. The movie is using that to bolster his being some sort of elite. The cadence calling is not background in the film, it is used to show his training, and as such, it is narrative. Also, you could completely go without hitting up sick-call for any number of issues, but no one would be walking around on two broken legs for weeks in basic. All the rucking and running would exacerbate broken bones well beyond anyone's tolerance, or capability to stand for that matter. If it was his arms, ribs, or something of the like, that would be believable - but legs are well beyond the realm of believability, as well as outside Snowden's own testimony. Congress called it "shin splints" (they meant it derogatorily, so take that as you like). See the problem is not in saying the army wants to make you feel like a badass, it is in the fact that the movie uses that to make us believe he was one, rather than made to feel like one. Snowden may have said he was a SF recruit, but he was probably just mincing words in terms of explaining himself. Stone on the other hand, took that out of context and tried to make it seem like he was full on going for it only a few weeks in - something that a veteran such as Stone ought to know better than to do.
Uh, summary: yeah, my bad, I was kneejerking, and my subtle evaluation of your critic went off the rails. I also don't have any idea of the nuances of how it were portrayed in the film. But considering Oliver Stone, I'll defer to you. Leave it to him to take something mundane and blow it out of proportion to represent something it wasn't. Now on to the verbose response, which I'm prone to always making… Yeah, the likelihood of outright broken bones is unlikely. Though there were a lot of guys with stress fractures, which were “broken bones” but not _really_ because treatment is just “don't exert yourself for a week”… yeah… so, I can see things getting blown out of proportion on that fare. “Dumbass was ignoring stress fractures for a week“ suddenly becomes “badass was walking on two broken legs for a week!” And I'll admit, I haven't seen the movie, and you have, and I'll grant that you definitely have a better idea of how the matters were treated. I was just immediately struck by the statements that brushed these things off like they were entirely implausible. (Especially, the “fell off his bunk and broke something” as it came off to me as denigrating one of the guys I was with who went on to do real service.) And so, I was driven by a dumb kneejerk response of, “hey! I saw some of this stuff actually happen!” When in reality the argument here is, “dude, this stuff doesn't make him special, it's like… ridiculously mundane stuff no one should really care about…” And, yeah, I feel like crap every time someone asks me if I'm a veteran, because it's like, “ugh, ok, let's get into into explaining the details…” It's way nicer when some survey or something asks if I am a in-some-way privileged veteran, rather than just the blanket: “do you have DD-214?” Garbage. Only time I do get smug is with people who obsessed with the military, but “I had a condition, so I couldn't join.” and I'm just like… dude… _I tried_ at least… saying you had a good reason to not join the military even though you're obsessed with it is stupid, because I had no obsession, and very good reason not to join, and I still did, so those wannabes are hilarious.
So, there are some exaggerations here, in this movie. No doubt, it is "adapted". BUT. Some of the things you claim to know, you can't know. You can't say "this is false", only that "snowden hasn't claimed this, as far as I know".
When the movie claims something about Snowden that he doesn't even claim about himself, it's pretty easy to dismiss. Any claim that can't be backed up by evidence should be dismissed. The person making the claim has the burden of proof, and it's ridiculous to demand someone prove a negative. That's just the basic way logic works. Otherwise I may as well claim there's a dinosaur in my house, and say that you can't refute that claim until you come over and prove otherwise.
It is totally ridiculous to think the CIA would take a tech guy and have him work as a field operative. The two are separate entities and would go through different training and indoctrination, but since the image of the field ops people is someone shady and dishonest they were bound to throw them in the film just to push forward the narrative. Oliver Stone's mantra seems to be "never let the facts get in the way of a good story." In my opinion if you can't use the facts, which sometimes create a good story - at least in my opinion, then don't bother saying what you're making is a true story or even based on one.
The only credence I can give to the broken leg 10:35 is antidotal but hell, it's interesting. Met a great guy in rehab that was in the army and broke his ankle in basic. No worry, they instantly started pumping him with 90+ mg Percocet (no prior tolerance and like 130lb) and he said "I was doped up and still going through basic training, sure I must have slacked but I couldn't be bothered to feel or even remember my broken, fucking, ankle. I was too high and on pure primal auto-pilot to bitch." and there began his unfortunate fall into the pit of opiate addiction and dependency which I wouldn't wish on ANYONE. Much love.
What i find funny about Snowden was how he only revealed stuff when Obama was in office. Granted I am not against the whistle blowing but i still wonder, why did he only reveal stuff that only affected Obama. Where was this when Bush was in office, or out. Considering the hate for Bush, Snowden could have used this to his advantage (reveal stuff about bush) and indirectly threaten obama (i have this on Bush and I got stuff on you to, do the right thing or i will speak out) We know Bush was doing that stuff well in advance, since 9/11 and yet nothing to this day about Bush.
Oliver Stone tends to have a very bombastic nature about his work, especially when it comes to openly questioning the flaws and corruption of contemporary institutions of power with the subtlety of a sledgehammer. Even in films not based on actual history - like NATURAL BORN KILLERS - he tends to go so overboard in his attempts at satire that the excess drowns the message he's trying to convey. Even if it's a good message and it does get across to the audience, there's no denying that there are at least ten other ways you could go about doing it... and then there's Stone's method. I'm not saying that you can't use art to create a justifiable indictment of unjust practices in the real world that DO need to be addressed (especially those topics where you shouldn't try to play it safe to be respectable and/or prestigious, and above all else also not pander to the lowest common denominator), but when you choose to film a particular subject in order to express a certain point of view about how you see the world, you need to exercise self-imposed restraint and strike the right balance between creating a very accurate portrayal of the subject (especially one based on real life) without praising or demonizing it (especially from a childish, oversimplified, black-and-white view of good vs. evil, which should be avoided), and representing what it really stands for without pummeling it into your audience's minds with all the bells and whistles of filmmaking going at full speed. Even Ken Russell's films, for all their excess (and anachronisms), manage to show far more respect and understanding of the subject matter than Stone ever could.
Haha, I'm writing an article about his films and to be honest, your views on his work made me question a lot of work. I do think many of them still hold up as films- though just watched Snowden today and jeez that's bad. Later Stone is much worse than early Stone.
I'd take the fall... Snowden made a big mistake in runnin' away. You run from a broken window, things will turn on ya, if seen through the blind, naked eye.
too be fair i do know a guy who was able to catch a football and continued to play then kept using it for a few days before finally learning it was broken
@24:24 = misspelled Tho*r*eau. Excellent job in educating the layman about major events and historical figures of our times, and we are very appreciative. Keep up the good work! 😊
I love JFK. The Oliver Stone movie, i mean. It is one incredible piece of filmmaking that i have seen over and over. But the evidence against Oswald is staggeringly overwhelming. (Conspiracy theorists: instead of looking for conspiracy, try reading the evidence against your position.) Anyway, that movie is probably the most factually vacant movie that purports to be about truth that was ever made, and it makes me angry that the movie itself is so good.
I was a Stone fan when I was in my youth (think 1990s-early 2000s) just because I loved JFK so so so much. Kevin Costner, Gary Oldman, Tommy Lee Jones, I mean the cast was SO GOOD! Once I got to college and started to grow up a bit, Stone’s appeal eventually went away. But damn, JFK was a helluva film!
Just so you know other trainings(schools), Do go on at fort benning ; especially special schools that basic candidates wouldn't engage in..... Such as OSUT for 11x candidates. And for that reason,im out.
Well first off in the military which he did join he was training to be desk jockey but ended up getting hurt and having an administrative separation early on, not necessarily a terrible thing but not anything like was presented
People act like being a whistleblower and being a traitor are mutually exclusive, yes maybe he revealed some damning things but people likely still died because of the information he revealed. In the long run it's doubtful that anything changed in espionage for the better, they probably just became more careful about getting caught. All he achieved was to feed his own vanity as a 'hero'
Regarding file transfers... the CIA had the files on a monitored cloud system and he was most likely looking for individuals who might have caught him and traced it to his computer. That's the nervous element, I figured most would know that.
Yes, Ellsburg faced charges under the act. And I don't see how Manning's few years in prison has proven anything with regards to Snowden running away. If anything, the commutation of her sentence only goes to show that Snowden's flight was unjustified. Ultimately, to be considered "civil disobedience," one must face the consequences of ones public actions, otherwise you kind of defeat the purpose.
* And I don't see how Manning's few years in prison has proven anything with regards to Snowden running away.* And that's the problem, maybe you should look again.
@@Disthron Let's not forget that she has been subject to numerous attempts to put her back in prison by the current Administration, so even if it was only a few years, she was still facing over 30 for doing the right thing.
Not sure what to make of Snowden to be honest...As the video claims, some call him a Patriot, some say he is a traitor, I am unsure what to make of him. What I do think is, he should go back, face the music, and make some kind of plea deal, Bradley Manning only ended up doing about 7 years, so why should Snowden be treated any different if he went back to the US
The cadence calling and asking wee little joes if they want to be Rangers and Special Forces is often done to be cynical, even after basic. The Army is a very unimaginative place, especially in basic when singing as you walk around Sand Hill is mandetory. Marching cadence is not an accurate way to discover what an organization within the military actually does, it's like a chant before starting a shift a Wal-Mart.
Being a ranger and being special forces are not mutually exclusive. While the majority of rangers are not special forces, 75th rangers are tier one special forces operators.
There is a difference between special forces and special operations. Special forces refers to ODA members whereas special operations includes all members of JSOC.
Vindication! I've been baffled as to how Oliver Stone got and stays successful. The amount of time, money and talent from the cast and crew that go into making his movies just kills me. Fuck I hate his movies
I was with you up untill the "lighting round" where you just said "no" to a buch of things that you would either not know for sure if it was true or you would not be able to find a unbiased source for
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
I was not aware of Chelsea Manning's transition when making this video
9:20 yes, it is common for such calls to be made for motivation. The problem here is that the movie is using it to bolster Snowden's image, as I said in the review. Now stop commenting it.
10:00 that's supposed to say "become" (thx Sgt_Hoagie)
Also, if you think I'm saying Snowden is a hero or traitor: You need to listen more carefully, for you are only revealing your own ignorance.
The Cynical Historian can you do stone’s World Trade Center?
The Cynical Historian Will you do a review of Oliver Stone's JFK
Also currently being in the U.S Army agree 100% with Cynical, none of that shit is true in the Army. O and yeah... call a Drill Sgt "Sir" and watch what happens. you'll get a nice smoke session.
Jesus, you take things way too literally.
Do everyone a favor stop using the word "you",..and when you post a comment like that it sounds like your talking to all your fans, nice job
Nurse here. You absolutely can walk on broken legs, it’s called fractures where the bones retain their form but have been weakened by cracks forming on them usually from stress causing them more likely to break fully or in medical terms become a different kind of fracture like comminuted, oblique, etc...
It sounds extremely painful tho.
We are talking Army basic training though, so it’s not like he fractured his leg and then walked around calmly everywhere. How likely would it be for someone to pull that off in your opinion?
Interesting information, thanks for sharing.
Movie still shit, right?
does pain tolerance has anything to do with if someone can keep walking or not?
You're splitting hairs. Yeah, you can technically walk on broken legs but the point is that he couldn't have because he was in *basic training for the USAF.* There is no way he would have been able to grit his teeth through that excruciating of pain and no one notice.
During my basic training in 1988, our drill sergeants also had us using the phrase "Rangers" and "Special Forces" during cadence calls. It's a motivational technique that is decades old.
I could see that. I was a tanker myself, so rangers and SF were not a goal to be said by the DS, though I did become a scout later. The point here is that Stone is trying to use the cadence to illustrate Snowden as being more than what he was. Snowden has actually claimed to been SF in the past, despite not even making it out of Basic.
I agree that making a hero to be more than he really was in history is annoying. Stone is using a great deal of creative license here but I do think it is important to get the ignorant public that make up most of Umerika to know this story.
It's odd that stone gets the military wrong in this movie...he was an Infantryman in Vietnam and made arguably the best war movie of all time (platoon)
Can you cite where Snowden has claimed to have been SF? Because there are references to him being a candidate, meaning he probably gave it a shot and washed out. I couldn't find anything where he has actually claimed to have been SF or a Ranger.
He claimed to have made it to SFAS but he somehow injured his legs and got medically removed
I'm in favor of what Snowden did. But this movie is embarrassing. Why all the fiction? It doesn't help Snowden's case.
And telling not showing? What is this a B movie?
Many directors, good directors even, have a hard time trying to balance a faithful depiction or re-telling of something historical with making a movie enjoyable.
Totally agree with you. In making much of the movie fictional - and very laughably fictional - it really diminishes what Snowden did for Americans. But I do also agree with the video that Snowden should have returned to the U.S. and make his case.
Keiko Yoshikawa he can't make his case since he is charged with the espionage act
Because Oliver Stone is a propagandist and he is using Snowden to make points that have nothing to do with Snowden himself
Why in favour? His actions probably got people killed, and nothing changed in the long run. If you really feel that the NSA has become ethical just because of wikileaks then you're delusional. Exposing a few crimes didn't even result in people being punished. Snowden just fed his own vanity, that is all
People who live in glass houses should beware of throwing stones...
1) Snowden was NOT "waylaid" in Moscow. Nor was his inability to get a flight out because "his infamy had become too great". The US had cancelled his passport, which meant that when he needed to change planes in Moscow he was unable to do so and was forced to remain in the transit area of Moscow's airport.
2) Snowden was charged under the Espionage Act. This is the same statute which was used to convict people of disloyalty in World War 1 for such "heinous" acts as opposing conscription. A famous example is Schenck v the United States, the case from which comes the infamous line (from Oliver Wendell Holmes) about the First Amendment not protecting those who falsely shout "fire" in a crowded theatre. (Something overturned decades later in Brandenburg v Ohio.) In yet another example (the Berger Case) a conviction under it was used to justify invoking section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment, and thereby deny Berger the seat he had been elected to in the House of Representatives. Berger himself was sentenced to 20 years, and only escaped that fate when the courts overturned his conviction on a technicality.
In short, the thing is an abomination which needs to be repealed.
3) "One did not flee his country". Ellsberg himself has said that Snowden would not get a fair trial under the Espionage Act and has said that Snowden did the right thing by nit waiting around to be convicted..
4) The Henry David Thoreau homily. Thoreau wasn't charged under the Espionage Act (which did not exist in his day). He was charged with failing to pay his taxes and objected because of the way those taxes would be used (namely, to fight the Mexican-American War). He was tried and convicted but spent only a single night in jail--because somebody (probably his aunt) subsequently paid the missing taxes against his wishes.
In short, you use a quote from a guy who spent one night in jail to piously lecture someone more likely to face 20 YEARS in jail. That is simply bizarre!
What you are basically advocating is that Snowden play martyr.
I look forward to you berating Chelsea Manning (also charged under the Espionage Act) for accepting Obama's commutation instead of spending her full 35 year sentence in jail.
5) "I'm not going to be scrambling jets..." Obama's famous remake did not prevent someone in Washington ordering ("ya vole, mine president") or hinting to ("who will rid me of this meddlesome leaker?") America's loyal minions in France, Spain, etc to block Bolivia's president returning home from Russia when there was a chance Snowden might be somewhere onboard.
6) Your nitpick over the Ranger/Special Forces business turns a molehill into a mountain. For you are effectively basing your entire argument on a chant.1 Nowhere else is it suggested that Snowden was doing anything other than normal basic training.
BTW, while the US Rangers are not Special Forces, they both ARE US Army special operations forces.
Stephen thanks for this, I felt something was off after I watched his take on Orson Welles citizen Kane
As someone who walked around on a broken leg for a few weeks during basic training, I'd like to point out that you're wrong about it being impossible.
I broke my left tibia fairly cleanly (transverse fracture, bone stayed mostly in place) near the ankle, and when I went to the doctor, they said I probably had tendonitis. They gave me some codeine and a chit for a week of no PT.
In that time, the bone healed enough that I was able to walk and jog with just minor pain. A week later, I did an obstacle course, and couldn't stand up the next morning. X-rays showed the bone had broken weeks earlier.
Criticism of Snowden for not going to jail is a bit harsh I think. Throwing his life away now isn't going to change anything, people who hate Snowden aren't going to change their minds. Look what happened to Chelsey Manning, despite all the unfair treatment she received, most people simply forgot about her.
Manning did have her sentence commuted though. I think people in general will remain fairly ignorant of these matters, so going to jail for it is not to raise awareness. Rather it is to be an active participant in the system that one wishes to refute. It weakens one's argument if they flee from the consequences. There's a reason why I showed MLK behind bars, because he did it correctly. It most certainly is harsh criticism, but necessarily so. Snowden is often portrayed as being a prime example of civil disobedience, but history shows that he is shirking the most important part of that disobedience. It is not about engaging the conversation and trying to change minds, rather than following through with one's actions. Though I do want to point out that the comment in the video was also in juxtaposition (from those who want to vilify him to those who want to sanctify him).
Manning hasn't been released yet and isn't slated to be released until May 17, 2017. On the plus side, Manning was given a dishonorable discharge from the military and that'll follow her for the rest of life.
TheShadowwarrior80 Manning was also tortured for years.
The Cynical Historian Funny you mention that MLK event, because Socrates fell under that same category. He didn't wanna leave since he had a good run. Plus he respected their laws for many years, so escaping jail time would be seen as him breaking his truths. Also he would of gotten a free lunch if he behaved. Lol
+MattKenobi86 but he got a free drink instead, lol. Socrates is more an example of how democracy fails, rather than any kind of civil disobedience. I can't really think of an ancient example, but then again, the idea was written hundreds of years later
"Everyone seems to have an opinion without having an understanding" that is probably the relevant quote in modern society ever said.
I remember in 1998-99 talking to fellow COMPSCI/IT students about how we knew our government had the money and technology to log all phone calls and internet traffic but we all knew it would never happen since moral people wouldn't let it happen. WE WERE WRONG and it ended up being far worse than even our most wildest imaginations. SNOWDEN is a hero, the very definition!
PRISM is still operating as well as dozens of other programs and NOTHING has been done about it!!
Just a small thing, its very possible to "Walk on broken legs" for weeks in military basic training. The term is stress fractures, and you can walk on them for months at a time, and it often happens in the military with new recruits. Though it is far more common in hip fractures. And the jumping from a bunk is actually a common thing. You will have stress fractures, then take an impact hopping out of a rack. Thats why they tell you not to do it.
I personally believe Snowden should get a pardon, but I appreciate the even-handed way you present this information.
How the heck did you burn cereal?
Gabriel Badwolf Or he's a sim
He obviously hasn't heard of al dente.
Who even cooks cereal?
9:21 I thought Army Drill Sergeants get super offended when they are referred to as sir..They prefer the term "Drill Sergeant"
I hadn't noticed, and you're correct. The typical response is, "Don't call me sir, I work for a living." I was just astonished at Stone's trying to make Snowden into some badass elite, that that slipped through even editing. Just think, Stone is veteran himself too.
Haha yes. Sergeant's work for a living, don't go calling us, whether a drill sergeant or not, SIR.
Knowing how the story of Snowden is filled with much debatable information and plenty still coming out in modern times I'm not sure if we can do an academic study about it so early in its time frame
In defense of Snowden's pasta cooking skills,
I've managed to screw that up.
Mostly it's because you leave it too long and you end up with soggy pasta or in one case burnt pasta.
15:51 - Er.. I think it might be _you_ who doesn't understand pasta. I mean, you know you can undercook or overcook pasta, right? It's not even hard to get it wrong. You just need a [DING] sound effect after that sentence and it'd be CinemaSins-worthy forced criticism.
Pasta can be cooked wrong by over boiling or under boiling it. Al dente is preferable and likely what he was referencing when he said ‘I think I got it right this time’.
I entirely disagree with your assertion that Snowden should have gone to jail, for the reasons Snowden (as well as Elsberg) has elucidated. Saying that he should be willing to face a kangaroo court because that'd look better to you and be more "traditional" is ludicrous, to say the least. Being unable to make any legal arguments is precisely why he should face such railroading? Why? So that you, as a self-proclaimed historian, can get something out of it? Elsberg has compared Snowden to himself, and that's good enough for me. And the fact that Russia was the only place that he *could* go, as going to Central America is unfeasible now (as the US's willingness to ground a foreign head of state's plane on the _suspicion alone_ that Snowden was hidden inside demonstrates).
Your attempt at evenhandedness in the pursuit of a false neutrality has produced a ridiculous demand that someone who has allegedly committed a crime face unjust and indefinite imprisonment, torture akin to that committed against Chelsea Manning, and possible "suicide" or "death by a previously undiagnosed heart condition."
While you may have a problem with people going too far to the left or right, there is also a false centrism in certain circumstances, and this is one of them. When he can make a public interest legal defense and have even the slightest chance of a fair trial, whether he's acquitted or convicted, then he can stand trial by the very criminals he's exposed, as is so often the case in the US.
Alaric Holmes I think you're confusing the United States justice department with Russia's in terms of political severity and ruthlessness.
5179anonymous
>leaks the nsa spying on its own countrymen
>traitor
Keep blabbing you redcoat
I'm a little hesitant to ask this, but here it goes... what would happen if Snowden were a black man committing the leaking?
CosmoShidan he'd be dead, no country would accept him. Not even joking on this one
Dude, I'm an MD, the kinds of fractures the movie describes are stress fractures, in fact, being in the military is a risk factor for those and they effectively walk injured withouth even noticing it since its associated with a very minor pain that is relieved when resting. I see no failure on the part of the film to explain this, since it associates it with the heavy load transported. You lack a basic part of research when talking about something you clearly know nothing about, which is ironic since you complain of this lack of rigor in your video.
Read Snowden's memoir though, he claims he broke his tibia in a training maneuver and hobbled through the rest of the exercise. Then when he woke up the next day he couldn't get out of the barracks.
No one is claiming he walked on a broken leg or legs for weeks.
@@rogerhill9559 That just means that both stone and cynical hasn't done proper research.
I I've had stress fractures turn to true fractures in basic. They're very painful and take a long time to heal
I was a Drill Sergeant for 3 years and I can tell you, references to Rangers and Special Forces is common in almost every cadence, to all Soldiers.... sooooo, yeah, goofed that one guy.
+Jerry Cronan it's not that the cadence is common, it's the usage in the film to present Snowden as a badass
The Cynical Historian, perhaps, but I doubt this was done as intentionally as you imply. saying "the cadence was chosen to make him seem like a badass" is as absurd as saying "they chose to have him wear camouflage clothes to make him look badass" the cadence is so common that it would be odd for the Drill Sergeant to be signing about anything else.
I agree that is the narrative of the film in general, but in this particular instance it is not. C'mon Dude, trust your technical adviser over here.
@@steviesteve5198 Everything in the movie is intentional; it's not like people ad-libbed their dialogue, or read from script that resulted from a cat walking across a computer.
@@troodon1096 Hmm... Is it? Now I am not to familiar with the works of Oliver Stone or the script writer for this movie. I have not even seen it. But my experience is that some directors and script writers are very careful with everything they put to screen having intent behind even minute details. But in some cases there is actually no real afterthought put in to it. It can be hard to tell the intent without the actual creators behind it saying so openly. (And sometimes even that gets muddled as they may lie or misremember why they did a certain thing in a movie.)
When I saw this with my dad we both just looked at each other and agreed that it was propaganda. It was our kind of propaganda, we're both commies like stone, but it was propaganda. I feel like even calling it a history movie is a massive stretch.
He didn't walk around on broken legs for weeks even according to his own memoir. He broke his leg out on exercise, managed to get back to barracks and couldn't get up the next morning.
How is Stone a Commie?
At 4:30 you describe the Pentagon Papers to say they revealed the US covert fighting in Laos and Cambodia, “along with several other scandals”. That’s a pretty tame summary. It’s primary importance was confirming and exposing the deceit over the US war in Vietnam. You even show the body of South Vietnamese President Ngo Dihn Diem who was killed in a US backed coup. (I hope you do a review of the Burns/Novick series “The Vietnam War” which, although fundamentally flawed, does detail the malignant attitudes of US war planners.)
At ~6:40, after showing Snowden say he couldn’t get a fair trial, you say he shouldn’t have fled because “by hiding away in Russian Snowden only damn his own story for posterity” which historians (like this video?) ultimately write. Really? Isn’t his concern for his welfare a valid reason? Ultimately posterity will judge his actions by the significance of what he has disclosed, which no one has disputed are real.
Snowden’s courage is shown by the fact he is one of a only a few (lookup Russ Tice, Thomas Andrews Drake, Mark Klein, Thomas Tamm) out of thousands to object to the illegal spying operations. A look at the treatment of the other recent whistleblowers, especially Drake, is why Snowden says he can’t get a fair trial.
Stone’s film has failings and takes dramatic licence, but these are used to emphasise the character arc of the naive citizen who realises the government spy agencies have become a larger threat than then things it was supposedly their to protects us from. The complaints about the factually inaccuracies in the film are nitpicking when the film gets one big thing correct: Snowden revealed details of the illegal spying.
Near the start you mention the disinformation campaign against Daniel Ellsberg, so shouldn’t we assume there one running now against Snowden? I’m inclined to put a question mar over any disparagement of Snowden given to routine character assassination of political opponents of the State. Regarding this video, a quick search shows Forbes magazine found a former co-worker who called him a “genius among geniuses” www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2013/12/16/an-nsa-coworker-remembers-the-real-edward-snowden-a-genius-among-geniuses/. Also the speculation near the end about Snowden continuing to hold documents is given with sinister insinuation. It seems obvious to me that by deleting all his copies he is reasserting that the important story is the government spying and also to try to protect himself from the danger that some other government or organisation might try to extract it from him.
Edits: typo. grammar
They probably got "broken legs" mixed up with stress fractures. Happens a lot. Especially desk type people in boot camp.
I've always felt Stone movies are best to be viewed as pure fiction and judged accordingly. Even at that I find them hit or miss just from an entertainment perspective.
Can I just say the pentagon papers are a great primary source when you’re writing a paper on Vietnam?
You seem biased against Snowden the man not the movie.everyone has bias but you getting mad at him for not throwing his life away seems a bit excessive.
Films aside, how do you feel about Oliver Stone's book The Untold History of the United States?
Why should he go to jail for doing nothing wrong? That's bullshit. That is not only tolerating but accepting an unjust system.
Did nothing wrong? He broke one of the worst laws you could break. There's no denying that, its ILLEGAL to leak classified information you are entrusted with access toLOL. There is nothing "unjust" about the legal system finding him guilty and punishing him for something he not only did but ADMITS to doing, the hangup is that he chose to break the law to expose other law breakers. People consider him a hero because he chose to be a martyr and break the law to expose wrongdoing. That doesn't make him magically innocent of the crimes he still committed to expose it LOL.
@@artemismoonbow2475 Besides the rather poorly executed "1984" reference I dont really get what point you are even trying to make in regards to my comment. I could care less what people think of government surveillance/monitoring because that is an opinion based on individual preferences and ethics. There is no right or wrong, only what the society wants as a collective and what an individual wants.
What I care about as was stated before, is the stupidity that people think vigilante justice, serious security violations, and harm to others should be tolerated. The idea that some people think that more people should be like Snowden is a testament to how foolish and uninformed these individuals are.
Feel free to have opinions on the espionage act, its part of what helps shift the spectrum on where our nation stands in regards to freedom vs security. But please dont start spouting nonsense like some people do that a man who knew nothing about what he was looking at, proceeded to commit one of the worst crimes possible, and then run from justice rather than own his actions, should be hailed as a hero and role model. *Miss me with that bullshit*
Lightning round #2 is actually becoming a more real possibility as technology furthers. The EU powergrid runs of a node-based system which connects all across central EU. Not to mention BlackEnergy, which was used on the Ukraine powergrid.
I work in the electric sector. It is impossible for the guy next door to shut down an entire net. There is not a single wire connected to the internet. And precisely for that reason many protocols are put in place. It is much easier to just sabotage the grid, i mean physically.
LOL!! JGL's portrayal is so spot on that it's almost parody-like funny.
I do not know how historically accurate those movies are, but Stone has made some quite good movies (to watch, at least): Born on the 4th of July, Platoon and Natural Born Killers (which is pure fiction).
So Snowden in the movie is basically a Mary Sue/Gary Stu, funny
Also I appreciate the balanced explanation and not making it preachy in regard to the subject at hand, it's important I would agree but I prefer this format
Part 2 in the Lightning Round (with the possibility to control foreign infrastructure) was probably referring to programs like Nitro Zeus - whether those programs were actually developed to a functional level or not may be up for debate, but they were certainly proposed and funded
Why wouldn't people just watch Citizenfour
Yup. Citizenfour is much better.
the quality of your videos have increase a lot recently
thanks a lot! I keep trying.
The Cynical Historian Keep going and you'll surpass 50,000 subs before you know it.
*Chelsea Manning
I'm in favour of what snowden did, but this movie, I agree is biased and horribly subjective, movies should not be made like this.
The broken legs thing... Is stupid bit plausible. When I was twelve I was on a local football team,l when I twisted my right knee during training. I didn't tell anyone about it for fear of losing my spot, so I sucked it up and kept going. It hurt like hell for two weeks, and I continued to practice on it and even played two games before passing out during training. When I passed out my parents took me to the doctor and we were told I'd torn nearly every ligament and tendon around my right knee. It wasn't cool, it wasn't fun, it fucking hurt and the doctor literally hit me upside the head and called me an idiot for hiding it for so long. Mind you, the reason I did this was due to a serious medical issue I'd suffered the previous summer, which took me off the team that year. I was more terrified of losing my spot than I was in fucking up my leg and that alone allowed me to continue going.
Joseph Gordon Levitts did nail Snowden’s accident.
how ironic that our citizenry are willingly giving up its privacy.
Is one of the news reporters played by the same actor who plays Benjamin Franklin in the "John Adams" miniseries?
He does not need to come back. He's sacrificed plenty.
Depends on what type of break and where. I thought I had a bad sprain and walked on a fracture for a week. It hurts like hell, but if it's not a major break, you can walk on it. So I wouldnt count that as impossible.
5:30 Spelling Mistake. "Henry David Thoreau"
damn...missed the _R._
It seems the whole movie can be fixed by the character Snowden begin the movie by saying "This is my story" then the text has an "unreliable narrator" ala Forrest Gump.
Im a strong supporter of Edward Snowden, but I must agree this film was a complete let down, and it’s such a shame too. Shaline Woodly and Joseph Gordon Levit are really talented. Stone is just an incompetent filmmaker.
I seem to have made this episode into a Rorschach test. I'm curious: What do you think my view of Snowden is?
The Cynical Historian I actually made this comment when I was only part way through the review.
The Cynical Historian I will say this story deserves a much better director than Oliver Stone. Stone is just so awful! His history may be just a little better than Mel Gibson, who tends to just make stuff up, but Oliver Stone tends to distort and speculate in unhealthy and unhelpful ways.
(11:12) Did I hear that correctly "Missed a perfect score on the AS VAB test by one question." First off its ASVAB (one word), and two I don't think there is a "perfect" score, it is a placement test just for the US Military.
It is possible to get a 100th percentile, but that doesn't mean a perfect score. Some of the questions are intentionally subjective, which means perfection is impossible. So yeah, you are correct
It's also worth pointing out the ASVAB only measures up to roughly a tenth-grade level of knowledge. i got in the 97th percentile by simply reviewing a few equations and units of measure.
*WAIT-A-FUCKING-MINUTE!!!!* THAT'S JOHN OLIVER!!!!! JOHN OLIVER INTERVIEWED SNOWDEN!!! AS A GUIATARIST, I HAVE TO SAY *THAT'S SO METAL!!!!!!!*
Cypher IS NOT interested in holding your hand.
The real Question here is: How did you manage to burn _cereal?_
How
I don't know...lets gather the NASA scientist
I was entertained by this move, but I had no idea how much fiction was in this movie. Seems like they could just change the names and make it a historical movie.
I have read a lot by and about Snowden, trying to decide my take on him. I feel at this time that the truth is not objectively knowable. I'm not talking about the Stone movie at all here.
The issue I have with your video is that you talk about how major whistleblowers are traditionally the subjects of disinformation campaigns to undermine their credibility ("he was low-level, he was incompetent, he was a troublemaker, he was a liar, we fired him, he never held that job, there was no such program"), yet you seem to too-easily accept such negative characterizations of Snowden.
I'm not arguing that Snowden is truthful or not truthful, because I have no idea. I'm arguing for more cynicism and more acceptance of uncertainty. Pretty much all material available serves one agenda or another.
I also don't agree with your contention that not facing unjust prosecution somehow invalidates Snowden's motives/morals. I do understand your (and Thoreau's) point about civil disobedience, but don't attach nearly as much importance to it as either of you do. How far do you take that idea? To make a point, if a government executes unjustly, does the just man belong in the grave?
What if Snowden weren't a privileged white man and was a black man running from state authorities? Would his morals be validated more or less so?
CosmoShidan race has nothing to do with this.
@@carterdc3576 The reason I ask this question is because if the dynamics were changed up a bit, for I doubt if Snowden were a black guy, I doubt he would get much coverage.
id love to see you tackle Stone's Untold History.
i second this..
Agreed! But that would be a huge and timeintensive undertaking..
Man that thing is utter BS, but too much to handle here. It'd end up being an hour and a half review. Phew - too much
Fair enough, but could you pleeeeease at least tell us how much of it, is utter bs? more than 50%
I couldn't make it past the 5 minute mark, and that was before I knew it was Oliver Stone.
Wait, what did Snowden exaggerate or falsely claim? Everything I've seen traces that to NSA or other government sources and I don't trust them on this matter. There is an anonymous NSA source saying among other things that Snowden created a backup system, but obviously there's the issue of culpability.
The problem with Snowden is that he misrepresents the reality of how the intelligence community operates and how their oversight and laws are implemented. He banks on the average viewer's total ignorance of the IC in order to sell the idea of a nefarious runaway agency with no oversight or consideration for the rights of US citizens, and this is patently false. He also fundamentally misrepresents how the FISA works to make it seem the feds can target whomever they like to any extent they like, which is also false.
@@derek96720 exactly, and that’s why for those of us with any experience or education with respect to the military or intelligence communities: Snowden is a FRAUD.
As an Iranian who moved to the US after the mullahs took power, I understand more than anyone just how shady the US government can be. But what Snowden says, what he did, and the reasons why he did it? Nah, that dude is pure scum. All I thought immediately upon hearing his leaks was “Omg how many Americans is this MF going to get killed??”
As you have a thing for Oliver Stone, have you reviewed Born on the Forth of July? I have seen it and did have a few questions, but seeing what you've put here makes me think that BotFJ was a bit sugar coated.
I still am thankful for what Snowden did for our nation's awareness, but under our nation's laws he did commit treason since he was a contractor and isn't provided the whistleblower protections. I disagree with the laws but they are how this country works.
Having been at Basic in Fort Benning. a) yes, they treat you like infantry. Everyone at Fort Benning is infantry. We were told that when we got to AIT or OCS that we will be the elites, because we were trained to be infantry regardless. That Basic at Fort Benning was just like infantry training but shorter.
b) I know someone who was woken in the middle of the night by a drill sergeant because he had been entrusted with keys, and the guy fell out of bed (he was in a top bunk) and broke his arm. Guy went on to pass his physical fitness test because he did the necessary number of pushups on a broken arm. (to quote him, “after awhile, the pain just goes away” which is supported by the notion that the brain turns off continuous signals.)
Then, there was the guy who during the march for FTX was walking off the road because the drill sergeants ordered everyone off of the pavement, twisted his ankle, and kept marching. He finished the march, got to the FTX field and dug his fox hole, setup his tent, and only came to attention the next day, because he couldn't get his foot into his boot due to such swelling.
I fucking washed out of Fort Benning, because I joined with ridiculously bad depression that I had been convinced (due to a 99%ile ASVAB score) would not be an issue. I was underweight and had to _TWICE_ go to MEPS to be weighed the second time me being so full of piss (because I couldn't pee lest weigh loss) and full of shit (lest I lose weight) _AND_ ready to puke (lest I lose weight) and even then, I came up 0.49 pounds under, which they just rounded up because I was trying to get in.
Fucking Fort Benning, 2001, before 9/11 was "if any of you have a problem with 'mother fucker' let me know" one guy raised his hand, and the drill sergeant said, "in that case, remind me around you I need to say father fucker."
Your fucking grasp of what Fort Benning was like contemporaneous to Snowden's service is a fucking joke to someone who actually spent fucking time there. Shit, yeah. I know ranger and special forces were different things. Didn't fucking stop Fort 'Infantry' Benning from having us talk about them like we're worthy of being a part of both.
'
Your video is so full of fail to someone was was contemporaneously at Fort Benning for basic that … I don't know what to say. Except, holy fucking christ, you're talking out of your fucking ass about this particular part.
Rock of the Marne, 138th, Delta Platoon 2001.
This churlish comment bugged me enough to reply. You call the video "full of fail," yet you fail to contradict a single thing in it. Furthermore, you speak as though you have some sort of authority on Basic Training, despite washing out. Do not dare to be so ignorant as to think that the person you are replying to has not had a similar experience, or as you say, has no "fucking grasp." Unlike yourself, I actually served 6 years in the army. Funny enough, I have said as much elsewhere on this channel, but as it goes with people who washed out, the less you served, the more boastful you are. Don't be so ignorant as to question an ex-soldier whether he has any experience in the army.
I'm not claiming authority on all Basic Training. I'm claiming real life experience at Fort Benning during the same time period as Snowden. I don't need any more experience than Basic at Fort Benning, because my comments are _exclusive_ to what Basic is like at Fort Benning.
Look, I fucking know you have experience in the Army, you've said it plenty before, and it's quite clear. And I take your word on what the actual Army is actually like with hella more cred than I take my own experiences, because everyone was telling me that Basic is a “game” and doesn't actually represent what the Army is really like.
However, when someone who was at Basic Training at Fort Benning in 2001 when Snowden was there in 2004, tells you about their actual lived experience there, then you should freaking acknowledge it. People falling off of bunks and breaking shit _happens_ at Fort Benning. People who ignore medical conditions rather than subject themselves to lining up for medical care and subjecting themselves to ridicule by the Drill Sergeants _happens_. And Fort Benning feeding every recruit lies that just because they're there they're good enough for Special Forces, and Ranger school, _happens_.
Fort Benning was so full of “Hoowa!” that the General who was in command of the base took his official military photograph in BDUs, because _everyone_ at Fort Benning did that, and it was because “INFANTRY, HOOWA!”
All of that said, I will walk back "full of fail"… I had stopped the video at the point where you were misrepresenting Fort Benning, but the rest of the video has good merit. It was a good watch for all the other details, but the lack of understanding you have of what Basic is like at Fort Benning is profound.
Fort Benning BCT really was (at the time) that sort of “you're elite just because you're here” hoowa bullshit someone could be on broken legs for a week shit. Because part of the game at Fort Benning was exactly that: you're the most hoowah, because you're here at Fort Benning, and we're infantry, because HOOWAH!
Alright. In the future, you may want to watch the "you don't know" kind of stuff, for you don't always know who you are talking to on the internet. It sets my blood on fire as soon as someone tries to say something along those lines, especially when it comes to military service on my channel.
In reply to how Benning was full of Hooah folks, that was no different where I went to basic (Knox in '06). As tankers, they were egging us on about going to airborne school, hilariously singing cadence about "C-130 rolling down the strip...32 tankers on a one-way trip." Obviously, they will always play that game.
The difference here is that stuff is meant to be fluff, whereas the movie depicts it as being the goal of Snowden himself. He has claimed as such himself, saying that he was an SF recruit. The movie is using that to bolster his being some sort of elite. The cadence calling is not background in the film, it is used to show his training, and as such, it is narrative.
Also, you could completely go without hitting up sick-call for any number of issues, but no one would be walking around on two broken legs for weeks in basic. All the rucking and running would exacerbate broken bones well beyond anyone's tolerance, or capability to stand for that matter. If it was his arms, ribs, or something of the like, that would be believable - but legs are well beyond the realm of believability, as well as outside Snowden's own testimony. Congress called it "shin splints" (they meant it derogatorily, so take that as you like).
See the problem is not in saying the army wants to make you feel like a badass, it is in the fact that the movie uses that to make us believe he was one, rather than made to feel like one. Snowden may have said he was a SF recruit, but he was probably just mincing words in terms of explaining himself. Stone on the other hand, took that out of context and tried to make it seem like he was full on going for it only a few weeks in - something that a veteran such as Stone ought to know better than to do.
Uh, summary: yeah, my bad, I was kneejerking, and my subtle evaluation of your critic went off the rails. I also don't have any idea of the nuances of how it were portrayed in the film. But considering Oliver Stone, I'll defer to you. Leave it to him to take something mundane and blow it out of proportion to represent something it wasn't.
Now on to the verbose response, which I'm prone to always making…
Yeah, the likelihood of outright broken bones is unlikely. Though there were a lot of guys with stress fractures, which were “broken bones” but not _really_ because treatment is just “don't exert yourself for a week”… yeah… so, I can see things getting blown out of proportion on that fare. “Dumbass was ignoring stress fractures for a week“ suddenly becomes “badass was walking on two broken legs for a week!”
And I'll admit, I haven't seen the movie, and you have, and I'll grant that you definitely have a better idea of how the matters were treated. I was just immediately struck by the statements that brushed these things off like they were entirely implausible. (Especially, the “fell off his bunk and broke something” as it came off to me as denigrating one of the guys I was with who went on to do real service.) And so, I was driven by a dumb kneejerk response of, “hey! I saw some of this stuff actually happen!” When in reality the argument here is, “dude, this stuff doesn't make him special, it's like… ridiculously mundane stuff no one should really care about…”
And, yeah, I feel like crap every time someone asks me if I'm a veteran, because it's like, “ugh, ok, let's get into into explaining the details…” It's way nicer when some survey or something asks if I am a in-some-way privileged veteran, rather than just the blanket: “do you have DD-214?” Garbage.
Only time I do get smug is with people who obsessed with the military, but “I had a condition, so I couldn't join.” and I'm just like… dude… _I tried_ at least… saying you had a good reason to not join the military even though you're obsessed with it is stupid, because I had no obsession, and very good reason not to join, and I still did, so those wannabes are hilarious.
Oh, addendum: I've like binge watched almost all of this series, because it's awesome, and you're awesome.
So, there are some exaggerations here, in this movie. No doubt, it is "adapted".
BUT.
Some of the things you claim to know, you can't know. You can't say "this is false", only that "snowden hasn't claimed this, as far as I know".
When the movie claims something about Snowden that he doesn't even claim about himself, it's pretty easy to dismiss. Any claim that can't be backed up by evidence should be dismissed. The person making the claim has the burden of proof, and it's ridiculous to demand someone prove a negative. That's just the basic way logic works. Otherwise I may as well claim there's a dinosaur in my house, and say that you can't refute that claim until you come over and prove otherwise.
Why if this video has been demonetized am I still having to watch commercials?
Snowden and Maning are heroes
So Oliver Stone was interviewed by RT. I did not know this.
Wilson and his silly espionage act
It is totally ridiculous to think the CIA would take a tech guy and have him work as a field operative. The two are separate entities and would go through different training and indoctrination, but since the image of the field ops people is someone shady and dishonest they were bound to throw them in the film just to push forward the narrative. Oliver Stone's mantra seems to be "never let the facts get in the way of a good story." In my opinion if you can't use the facts, which sometimes create a good story - at least in my opinion, then don't bother saying what you're making is a true story or even based on one.
15:10 Window?
xcopy [source] [destination] && echo [Alt+Num 7]
The only credence I can give to the broken leg 10:35 is antidotal but hell, it's interesting. Met a great guy in rehab that was in the army and broke his ankle in basic. No worry, they instantly started pumping him with 90+ mg Percocet (no prior tolerance and like 130lb) and he said "I was doped up and still going through basic training, sure I must have slacked but I couldn't be bothered to feel or even remember my broken, fucking, ankle. I was too high and on pure primal auto-pilot to bitch." and there began his unfortunate fall into the pit of opiate addiction and dependency which I wouldn't wish on ANYONE. Much love.
Just got a snowden add wow what a coincidence.
10:00 Hey Battle, *you mispelt "BECOME" at the latter-end of your caption "to become SF/Special Forces",* mmmkday?
surprisingly, you're the first to point that out. thanks
What i find funny about Snowden was how he only revealed stuff when Obama was in office.
Granted I am not against the whistle blowing but i still wonder, why did he only reveal stuff that only affected Obama.
Where was this when Bush was in office, or out.
Considering the hate for Bush, Snowden could have used this to his advantage (reveal stuff about bush) and indirectly threaten obama (i have this on Bush and I got stuff on you to, do the right thing or i will speak out)
We know Bush was doing that stuff well in advance, since 9/11 and yet nothing to this day about Bush.
Oliver Stone tends to have a very bombastic nature about his work, especially when it comes to openly questioning the flaws and corruption of contemporary institutions of power with the subtlety of a sledgehammer. Even in films not based on actual history - like NATURAL BORN KILLERS - he tends to go so overboard in his attempts at satire that the excess drowns the message he's trying to convey. Even if it's a good message and it does get across to the audience, there's no denying that there are at least ten other ways you could go about doing it... and then there's Stone's method.
I'm not saying that you can't use art to create a justifiable indictment of unjust practices in the real world that DO need to be addressed (especially those topics where you shouldn't try to play it safe to be respectable and/or prestigious, and above all else also not pander to the lowest common denominator), but when you choose to film a particular subject in order to express a certain point of view about how you see the world, you need to exercise self-imposed restraint and strike the right balance between creating a very accurate portrayal of the subject (especially one based on real life) without praising or demonizing it (especially from a childish, oversimplified, black-and-white view of good vs. evil, which should be avoided), and representing what it really stands for without pummeling it into your audience's minds with all the bells and whistles of filmmaking going at full speed. Even Ken Russell's films, for all their excess (and anachronisms), manage to show far more respect and understanding of the subject matter than Stone ever could.
Hey Cypher, have you ever watched one of Stone's documentaries?
about 5 minutes of them, before going "NOPE!"
Haha, I'm writing an article about his films and to be honest, your views on his work made me question a lot of work. I do think many of them still hold up as films- though just watched Snowden today and jeez that's bad. Later Stone is much worse than early Stone.
I'd take the fall... Snowden made a big mistake in runnin' away. You run from a broken window, things will turn on ya, if seen through the blind, naked eye.
Did you ask how you cook pasta wrong? There's a couple ways... Undercooking, and over cooking. Unless you like mushy pasta or like crunchy pasta.
too be fair i do know a guy who was able to catch a football and continued to play then kept using it for a few days before finally learning it was broken
@24:24 = misspelled Tho*r*eau.
Excellent job in educating the layman about major events and historical figures of our times, and we are very appreciative.
Keep up the good work! 😊
I love JFK. The Oliver Stone movie, i mean. It is one incredible piece of filmmaking that i have seen over and over. But the evidence against Oswald is staggeringly overwhelming. (Conspiracy theorists: instead of looking for conspiracy, try reading the evidence against your position.) Anyway, that movie is probably the most factually vacant movie that purports to be about truth that was ever made, and it makes me angry that the movie itself is so good.
I was a Stone fan when I was in my youth (think 1990s-early 2000s) just because I loved JFK so so so much. Kevin Costner, Gary Oldman, Tommy Lee Jones, I mean the cast was SO GOOD! Once I got to college and started to grow up a bit, Stone’s appeal eventually went away. But damn, JFK was a helluva film!
bless you for putting Roy Orbison(?) in here
4:55 oh wow "we gotta get that sonofabitch". Damn.
Just so you know other trainings(schools),
Do go on at fort benning ;
especially special schools that basic candidates wouldn't engage in..... Such as OSUT for 11x candidates.
And for that reason,im out.
Well first off in the military which he did join he was training to be desk jockey but ended up getting hurt and having an administrative separation early on, not necessarily a terrible thing but not anything like was presented
how the hell is his enter key directly under the backspace???? where is the backslash??
17:12 Wait, is that Lakieth Stanfield?
People act like being a whistleblower and being a traitor are mutually exclusive, yes maybe he revealed some damning things but people likely still died because of the information he revealed. In the long run it's doubtful that anything changed in espionage for the better, they probably just became more careful about getting caught. All he achieved was to feed his own vanity as a 'hero'
I think Oliver Stone deserves more of your attention. I'd like to see you do more episodes on his movies. Maybe you could some how explore his psyche.
About the walking on broken legs thing there are hockey players that play on broken ankles and with collapsed lungs so anything is possible
How much money do I have to donate to get an analysis of the untold history of US?
Why do you want to torture me!?
There is a slot on patreon, but that is such a difficult thing to watch.
Regarding file transfers... the CIA had the files on a monitored cloud system and he was most likely looking for individuals who might have caught him and traced it to his computer. That's the nervous element, I figured most would know that.
Was Elsburg facing the espionage act? Was Didn't the treatment of Manning pretty much prove Snowden right?
Yes, Ellsburg faced charges under the act. And I don't see how Manning's few years in prison has proven anything with regards to Snowden running away. If anything, the commutation of her sentence only goes to show that Snowden's flight was unjustified. Ultimately, to be considered "civil disobedience," one must face the consequences of ones public actions, otherwise you kind of defeat the purpose.
* And I don't see how Manning's few years in prison has proven anything with regards to Snowden running away.*
And that's the problem, maybe you should look again.
@@Disthron Let's not forget that she has been subject to numerous attempts to put her back in prison by the current Administration, so even if it was only a few years, she was still facing over 30 for doing the right thing.
Would love it if you critiqued Michael Moore movies or "The Fifth Estate" since it's a similar story around Jullian Assange instead of Snowden.
Gods and Generals | Based on a true story?
Not sure what to make of Snowden to be honest...As the video claims, some call him a Patriot, some say he is a traitor, I am unsure what to make of him.
What I do think is, he should go back, face the music, and make some kind of plea deal, Bradley Manning only ended up doing about 7 years, so why should Snowden be treated any different if he went back to the US
The cadence calling and asking wee little joes if they want to be Rangers and Special Forces is often done to be cynical, even after basic. The Army is a very unimaginative place, especially in basic when singing as you walk around Sand Hill is mandetory. Marching cadence is not an accurate way to discover what an organization within the military actually does, it's like a chant before starting a shift a Wal-Mart.
That moment when you're watching this and get an add featuring Snowden that comes up halfway through XD
Snowden is a hero, end of story.
Snowden's a blabbering nut sack. End of story.
GumgumDookuin who is also a hero,even better in my opinion.
my grandma said if you think Snowden if bad then you're a libreal
Snowden is a liberal
Change my mind.
Linkara links all bad comic books to Countdown. You probably want to link all bad historical movies to Woodrow Wilson
Being a ranger and being special forces are not mutually exclusive. While the majority of rangers are not special forces, 75th rangers are tier one special forces operators.
There is a difference between special forces and special operations. Special forces refers to ODA members whereas special operations includes all members of JSOC.
Just because he is on Fox news doesn't make him political.
Vindication! I've been baffled as to how Oliver Stone got and stays successful. The amount of time, money and talent from the cast and crew that go into making his movies just kills me. Fuck I hate his movies
I was with you up untill the "lighting round" where you just said "no" to a buch of things that you would either not know for sure if it was true or you would not be able to find a unbiased source for
All those things he said no to are either refuted by known facts or basic logic.