In an article carried by The Olympian, Jonathan Capehart of The Washington Post rails against Edward Snowden because in his view Snowden did the wrong thing by fleeing the United States and seeking asylum in another country instead of answering the charges that were brought against him.
To make his case, Capehart uses Ellsberg as an example of a whistle-blower who remained in this country after he had leaked the Pentagon Papers.
Yet nowhere in his essay does Capehart ever wonder how Ellsberg feels about Snowden.
If he had, he would have discovered, through an interview that Ellsberg had done on June 14 at the website Salon, Ellsberg’s thoughts on the National Security Agency whistle-blower where he states that: “And I think the current climate is such that if he were in the country, we would have no more chance to hear from him than you or I or anybody has had from Bradley Manning. He’d be in jail, he might be in the same cell in Quantico — at best — as Bradley Manning was for 10 and a half months, in isolation. Or he might be in Guantanamo.”
So despite Capehart’s belief and as Ellsberg rightly infers, it is highly doubtful if Snowden would receive a fair and impartial trial in this hyper-nationalistic country which we live in.