Well. I don't think you are a troll. I think you are just way off. So I will respond.
> can we not manage to deal with this one, simple, irritation?
> This is an honest question; I simply do not understand why we're holding out on this one guy, when we've sent in Seal Team Six to give people who have done less in economic damage severe and sudden lead poisoning and then dumped their body uncermoniously in the ocean where it'll never be found.
The world cheers if Seal Team Six caps pirate kidnappers or OBL. However, the world has already decided who the good guy is in Snowden vs. NSA. I suggest you read some publications and polls outside US for a change. It's not hard. You have Internet access.
Even the pressure on Hong Kong and Russia to extradite him cost US reputation, let alone your hare-brained ideas of assassination. Even US cannot wipe away globally popular icons. Not to mention the fact that the Russians have better radars (can't drop in ST6) than Pakistan :-).
I know the economy is tough. You aren't applying for a job at the offices of Peter King or Michelle Bachmann, are you?
> he wants to be a martyr
Whatever gave you that idea? He never said that. Don't let your imagination run wild to support your fevered fantasies. He asked for a pardon.
> What about making him a martyr is so unappealing
The international backlash. A few years ago, I would have also said: The Fifth Amendment.
> this isn't a moral judgment on whether he's right or wrong
Oh, I think you are well past making moral judgments.
> When a hungry bear takes a run at you
On what planet is he a hungry bear? He is not even deciding what articles get published now. The journalists are doing that. Next, you will be calling on capping them too, I guess.
Do you think that if a dissident fled a third world country to US and exposed secret service overreach of his country to NY Times, would you say that the said country ought to cap him too?
> he's done more damage economically than they have
He did? I thought that the "Ha Ha. We can do whatever we want because no one is ever going to find out" attitude that is damaging the economy.
If we find out tomorrow from a Chinese dissident that Beijing has commandeered Huawei gear for espionage, would that be the dissident's fault or Beijing's, for lost sales?
> why aren't we doing our signature move on this guy?
Wow. Just wow.
> but we're all thinking it.
No. I'd say, just a few people like you, at least over here.
> how do you think all those Jews got exterminated? They voted for Hitler. And then they stopped talking. They let the government do whatever it wanted
Who is the Hitler here again? You mean if only Germans rabidly demanded for more assassinations like you, Nazis would not be in power?
Anyway, you parade around with a "Cap Snowden" banner in the real world and lets see how people will speak up... to you anyway.
> The government comes and squishes free speech because it's unpopular... but then here you are, doing the same damn thing.
Ah, the irony. The fascistic lady who calls for extra legal assassination of a non-violent dissident who leaked information to respected journalistic institutions thinks her free speech is in question because she got... oh! the horror... down-modded. Do you even know what free speech is?
Calm down lady. NSA overreached. This is not a subjective opinion. The guy who wrote the patriot act authorizing NSA thinks so. The guy who invented the WWW also thinks so. There are enough US Senators and Congressman who voiced support for him, even though everyone wishes it never needed to come to this in the first place.
Now, as a civilian, I could not care less if US wiretaps diplomats and presidents of other countries. But the point of these leaks is to puncture holes in the argument that the reason we need to tolerate global electronic surveillance apparatus and a domestic Soviet style surveillance state, is to defend us against terrorism. Greenwald and others are demonstrating that it is not the case.