I have written several times before of how the New Yorker‘s legal correspondent Jeffrey Toobin has revealed himself to be a hack, especially when it comes to whistleblowing (see here, here, and here).
But in his latest piece denouncing Edward Snowden’s NSA revelations, he has surpassed himself. The opening paragraphs contain such a glaring logical howler that one is incredulous that anyone who considers himself to be a serious commentator could write it.
The assassinations of Martin Luther King, Jr., and Robert F. Kennedy led directly to the passage of a historic law, the Gun Control Act of 1968. Does that change your view of the assassinations? Should we be grateful for the deaths of these two men?
Of course not. That’s lunatic logic. But the same reasoning is now being applied to the actions of Edward Snowden. Yes, the thinking goes, Snowden may have violated the law, but the outcome has been so worthwhile. According to Glenn Greenwald, the journalist who was one of the primary vehicles for Snowden’s disclosures, Snowden “is very pleased with the debate that is arising in many countries around the world on Internet privacy and U.S. spying. It is exactly the debate he wanted to inform.”
I was going to deconstruct this piece but Charles P. Pierce of Esquire magazine has done a much better job, showing how it reveals the inner authoritarian that lurks within the liberal psyche.
There is one thing for which we can thank Edward Snowden, International Man Of Luggage. His revelations clearly have delineated, once and for all, the parameters of liberalism’s inner authoritarian. We all have one, that little voice that whispers, “Not all slopes are slippery,” and we take its advice and then, 60 years or so later, we wonder how we all wound up in the ditch.
I am sorry, but I’d forgotten how, at trial, James Earl Ray mounted a defense saying that he’d iced Dr. King in order that the country might have more effective gun control.
The full piece is well worth reading.