I think he shoe-horned that in a tad so he could go after Greenwald. Maybe that's not it exactly....more like he had no problem seeing Snowden in that light compared to a)His own past struggles and choices, and b) as a point of convenience for going after GG.

I mean, he painted a very stark picture of what he was up against and the crazy choices he made, but he doesn't seem to be able to escape his personal experience to step back and ask if it makes sense for a whistle-blower to still retain a preservation instinct against an insurmountable foe. Is it fair to think he might want to live on in a state of non-perpetual hell? Sure. Is it fair to think that he did something heroic and that heroes are not required to self-immolate in order to purify their deeds? I think a reasonable argument can be made there. Is it fair to think that he is scared, and that people who do brave things can be scared while they do them? Yeah.

That's why it was hard to tell if it was more of a literary takedown than a rebuke of our attention spans or an insightful history lesson. Extremely compelling writing though.