And from reading some books discussing Andreessen & his past ventures I wouldn't have thought he'd have considered Snowden anything other than a +ve force in the information world.
Perhaps Andreessen has interests in companies that were hoping to help governments spy on their charges?
Or maybe he just happens to believe what he says? Maybe he believes that the sensitive information that Snowden released is damaging the security of the US?
I personally think Snowden was a traitor. He released way more information than was necessary to accomplish his goal; The information he released has almost certainly put lives in jeopardy; AND he fled to Russia which is essentially a totalitarian state where his presence, if not aiding in a material way, is aiding Russia in a PR capacity. If you haven't noticed, Russia is turning out to be, if not a geopolitical foe, and outright enemy of the United States.
Why have we got to jump to questioning people's motivations every time they stray from the party line? ...As if there is only one acceptable opinion to hold on everything.
The only comment he made were to blame Snowden and brush off the massive surveillance and obstruction of civil liberties without a word. So rather than consider the problem that created Snowden he only blames the messenger. I can't think of a single character from the past year, be they pro or con, that commented on the topic in a more pathetic way.
