As others and I have commented periodically, yours is an impeccable--perhaps unique?--'record' in these parts, concerning an always even-handed er, 'framing' of issues
(especially the root-ones, those whose outcome affects n other huge sub-issues.) ie Should anyone ever impugn your trustworthiness? I'd simply recite my idiot-mantra:
..well, now we know about you; what about Bach?

I replied to those 3 sane, informative links; declaring crap-shoot.. that l o n g year ago.
I could not then rebut the clarity and evident-correctness of their observations, as culminated (in synopsis) in the larger Questions: Whom? would-you ... be willing to trust? Trust!..??
But my answer would remain, as to the highest-levels at which "we TRUST: a One known personally over n-years":
Nobody. And certainly not a collection-of-bodies.

Usually we aren't forced to assign such a meta-human Character to actual persons; most of us realize that we are indeed-All fallible. within our jelloware mix of factoids, theories and emtional responses to all that mix. There are divorces after n-years, betrayals after n-minutes or years, etc. So proffering Absolute-Trust is a denial of knowledge of inner-human monkey-minds, everywhere.

Sane as are your rebuttals to the hysterical, as each event adds to previous: they do not satisfy. How could they, as "Reason-itself is seen to be, increasingly, thrown to wolves"
in countless events we are all privy to. Americans, for the first time IME are being subject to the depravity, crassness/greed: characteristic of many leaders whom 'we' have supported all-along: in our ceaseless construction of pure-materiaistic Empire.

It's a year later.. I suspect that all those people who began from a moderately-open mind from the get-go: when we Knew we didn't know-enough yet to Judge, have refined their opinions re NSA via all which has transpired (maybe you have, too?) We won't 'settle' this demi-issue re. a guy named Snowden, in any near-next, I wot. But the Issue which is really to be faced is: what 1984, Brave New World etc. also attempted to limn: (and is rendered into doggerel by the sanctimonious pronouncements of the Kristols and loonies everywhere.)

I cut some slack for any immediate fulminations of Snowden. or any trivial personal exaggerations: who amongst us could summarily-flee/a so-necessary adjunct--and remain a paragon of wise pronouncements? I submit that we have heard from several since.. in close proximity to him--who agree in his sincerity and his aims--then, as subsequently.
(If he's a 'traitor', via its entirely slippery definitions: he has lots of company in the dis-USA, including moi,)

Maybe it's as simple as: How much Control by Authority? [-figures? -robot-computers? -dogma of all origins?] am *I* willing to accept, while still believing I can live a life something like that limned in the US Declaration of Independence et. seq.?? ..or a hundred other metaphors we each generate in moments of stress.

When I hear a bell which promises some next intrusion into my choices?--Pavlov got it right--I salivate.
Finally: Alex, for just one--has experienced moment-by-moment, the effects of premeditated propagandized strife, as most now alive in the dis-US today.. have only read casually about.
We are all neophytes in deciding next.. how to approach the lessening-of the demolitions we see now, regularly.
I'm sure that we both much prefer that this shall be done by more Words than by The Usual.

Happy post-July 4th: nobody's been assassinated here, lately! :-) {whew}



Ed:oTpy