After all, Berry did the exact same thing that Snowden did: she reported the crimes of a criminal. But in her case, only one criminal (or is it two?). Snowden reported the crimes of thousands of criminals. Shouldn't the "White House" have offered to give Berry a "fair trial" like it offered Snowden? Or, would it have been more similar to have Ariel Castro be the one offering Berry the deal? Why did Castro end up the one sentenced to prison instead of the whistleblower who reported him?
Supporting the prosecution and persecution of Snowden is the moral equivalent of seeking the same treatment for every other crime victim. Because yes, Edward Snowden is also a victim of the crimes he reported, just as Amanda Berry was a victim with the other 2 women who were enslaved alongside her.
So why isn't Ariel Castro- the criminal- offering Amanda Berry- his whistle-blowing victim- a "fair trial", just like the various and sundry spokesvermin of the US Fedgov- the criminals- are offering Edward Snowden- the whistle-blowing victim- a "fair trial"?
Oops. I forgot. The difference is just who the criminal happens to be.
Double standards disgust me, and this is a big one. Victims should never be the ones put through the ringer of the so-called "justice system".
-
And please don't forget.
.
