In my reading it wasn't the main motif, it was a way to kill in the way that nobody would even question who did it, while not having to publicly claim responsibility.

Yeah, I suppose being poisoned is worse. Talk about a rock and a hard place though.

Well, no, but then again, he wouldn't even have to know. The system is quite extended. If someone, say a Hastings guy, makes too many waves, he could, say, die in a car crash.

Or if some Garry Webb guy discovers something too bad, somebody can make some calls, and have 13 reporters investigating him (a fellow journalist) instead of his claims. And if they eventually prove to be true, 10 years later, and are even admitted by officials, who cares then?

Yes, there is corruption in Russia (not that it doesn't happen in every country, it's just than in Russia it's old style as opposed to the modern western style (from Enron to Maddof to trillion dollars bailouts for golden boys). Actually it's more or less the same in Italy, not nobody gives a damn about Italy, because the mob are good with foreign interests, and the US is not competing with Italy for resources anyway.

What's important is that he didn't sell the Russian assets to foreign interests and fuck his own people, like the much beloved to the West Yeltsin did. Foreign interests that would like to be able to grab Russian resources and do as they please in the country have sponsored many a BS campaigns against him, from the classic old "Voice of America" style to modern "NGO" style, to blowing out of proportion BS political opponents that get 1/5 of the votes, if that. Like covering US elections by focusing on some third party fringe candidate.

But that's for the Russians. For everybody else, the even more important thing is: Russia doesn't mess with other countries outside their neighbourhood.

But Putin is nowhere near as rosy as you portray him. Being a nationalist who pines for the days of Stalin may play well in a Russia leery of Western democracy after getting tag teamed by Russia and the US during and after the collapse of the USSR and enduring the poverty and famine that ensued, but it doesn't make you good. Co-opting the Russian Orthodox church into a neo-czarist Church of Putin is hardly the mark of a good leader, either. Nor, for that matter, does murdering people who speak against you.

>Russia doesn't mess with other countries outside their neighbourhood.

Tell that to Georgia. Tell that to the people being murdered and oppressed in Russian client states like Syria and Iran, or Libya before them.

I agree -- but he's still a better choice than the current alternatives. You have to be pragmatic with these things.

>Being a nationalist who pines for the days of Stalin may play well in a Russia leery of Western democracy after getting tag teamed by Russia and the US during and after the collapse of the USSR and enduring the poverty and famine that ensued, but it doesn't make you good. Co-opting the Russian Orthodox church into a neo-czarist Church of Putin is hardly the mark of a good leader, either. Nor, for that matter, does murdering people who speak against you.

Well, it seems the Czarist theme plays well with the Russian population. As some kind of departure from USSR imagery and re-emergence of a "great Russia". And most of them are into the Russian Orthodox church, so that also plays into it. There's also cronyism. But all those are details in the grand scheme of things.

The important is the existence of Russia as an independent and sovereign country, that can protest it's immediate interests and provide a future for it's people -- instead of becoming a destabilized neo-colony.

Russia has a lot of resources and opportunities, and there are a lot of foreign interests that spend a lot of money in order to get their big payback by getting someone malleable like Yeltsin comes into power. Russians have no say whatsoever in the US elections, for example. But tons of political opponents blown out of proportion to serious players by western media, sponsored "NGOs", pro-western think tanks and groups, and "voice of America" type media blather on whenever there are Russian elections, to get some pro-western (interests) guy in power. Putin, whatever BS he is, is also a "fuck you" to those attempts.

>Tell that to Georgia.

Well, that's why I said "outside their neighbourhood". And those people are not exactly role models either.

>Tell that to the people being murdered and oppressed in Russian client states like Syria and Iran, or Libya before them.

I'd tell them, but then again, they'd tell me that their people much preferred the previous situation (in Libya and Syria) than rampant islamists killing everyone, chaos, civil war and massacre). As for Iran, they'd probably tell me that they like it as it is, and they'd be even better if somebody hadn't toppled their legitimate democratic leader to install his lackey, the shah.

Putin does pretend to be lots of other things:

http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/2011/09/vladimir-putin-ac...

And he reportedly stole a superbowl ring in 2005:

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/eye-on-football/22429359/p...

On a some-what-related note, I wonder if this is going to be a rerun of the Wikileaks state department cables, where a Guardian reporter 'unknowingly' gave away the password to the encrypted 'insurance' cache. I still wonder whether that whole thing wasn't track 2 diplomacy masquerading as espionage theater.

Later, WaPo ran some more slides, showing more codenames and data collection info (such as NUCLEON's phone call content collection). This, too, has a redaction box on it which was confirmed as _redacted by the paper_.

These journalists are not trying to jam their dick in the beehive - they're just doing their job of running this story. They're not in the business of publishing classified data for the sake of publishing classified data.

The goal here is to give you the relevant data and a bit of context/narrative supported by appropriate facts, not just to pastebin a bunch of files up on the web— though in the case of these Snowden leaks, the net effect would be very close to the same.

http://rt.com/news/assange-snowden-revelations-continue-459/

and also (vie Reuters) http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/07/01/snowden-rus...

So it appears that Greenwald and Snowden are saying two different things.