Edward Snowden NSA whistleblower

[No Censorship]

I love it when dolphins and penguins get along. There's hope for the rest of us. I exclude the two part system. I don't see that getting better any time soon.

[StarMountainKid]

So, every phone call we make, every e-mail, every web page we visit is recorded somewhere. I'm wondering what the next step is in government surveillance of its citizens?

In George Orwell's novel "1984", everyone's television is also a video camera, recording what everyone says in the 'privacy' of their own home. In the workplace, everything one does is also carefully recorded.

Everyone must also be careful who they talk to face to face, as anyone may be a government informant. In the novel all this is done for national security reasons.

I think if Mr. Snowden is not extradited back to the U.S.A., eventually he will be taken out by the CIA or one of its minions.

[pallidin]

I love it when dolphins and penguins get along. There's hope for the rest of us. I exclude the two part system. I don't see that getting better any time soon.

Rather touching, isn't it?

[Clarakore]

A few journalists are already questioning Snowden’s motivation for the leaks, as these new stories seem to have little to do with Snowden’s initial claims for why he went public, to protect America’s democracy:

Just as questionable is the timing of the leak. The day before President Obama meets with Russian President Putin in Northern Ireland, Snowden leaks a document showing that the US spied on Russia’s then-President Medvedev. So at worst he’s intentionally helping Putin, and at best he’s woefully ignorant of the real damage he’s causing US national security on the eve of a key summit with a nasty man running a far-more dangerous country than our own.

I went back and read Glenn’s initial story about Snowden – the story in which he revealed Snowden’s name (with Snowden’s permission). And something bothers me about what Snowden told Glenn:

*snip*

“I carefully evaluated every single document I disclosed to ensure that each was legitimately in the public interest,” he said. “There are all sorts of documents that would have made a big impact that I didn’t turn over, because harming people isn’t my goal. Transparency is.”

*snip*

How does revealing that the US spied on Russia further “the public interest” of anyone other than Vladimir Putin?

Remember, Snowden chose to work at the CIA and the NSA – our top two spy agencies. He knew quite well what he was getting into. And the notion that the United States spies on Russia, or that Britain spies on foreign summit delegates, is hardly earth-shattering “oh my god I have to leak this” news. Having said that, evidence of such spying is not usually publicly confirmed either. Nor was it terribly helpful (for us - it was quite helpful for the Russians) for Snowden to detail the manner in which the Brits spied on foreign delegates.

*snip*

I can perhaps accept Snowden’s sincerity for leaking the news that Verizon was providing all of its customer calling data to the NSA, and the details of the PRISM program. But with these additional revelations about the US, Britain, Russia and the Commonwealth, Snowden moves beyond his initial claim of blowing the whistle on the threat the surveillance state poses to the democracy he loves. Our democracy won’t suffer one bit from the US spying on Russia (it might even be helped), or the Brits spying on the Commonwealth.

Snowden’s hero status is starting to suffer from mission-creep. That is, unless Snowden is now trying to argue that domestic spying was not his main concern, but rather, he’s worried about the entire worldwide intelligence apparatus.

And if that’s the case, then Edward Snowden is sounding more and more like the man who joins the Army and then is shocked to find out he’s expected to kill people. Such a man is either crazy, a liar, or a flake.

Which one is Edward Snowden?

http://americablog.com/2013/06/edward-snowden-nsa-russia-medvedev.html

[Clarakore]

A former U.S. Army Special Forces officer and terrorism expert says the disclosure of classified intelligence-gathering programs by a government contractor harms the effort to fight terrorism.

Steven Bucci, a retired Army Special Forces colonel, says American intelligence contractor Edward Snowden is no hero.

"I have a problem with people who swear an oath that they're not going to reveal top secret information and then do so," says Bucci. "So this guy is not a hero. He's a criminal."

*snip*

"I am totally not a fan of individuals deciding that they know better than all three branches of the U.S. government as to what's important and what should be released to the public and what shouldn't," says Bucci, who now serves as director of the Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies at The Heritage Foundation.

Because of Snowden's actions, Bucci believes it is going to be more difficult for the government to track terrorist suspects.

"Because they're going to be much more cautious in their communication," he explains.

"Another potential danger is that because of the backlash on this, because of the timing and the way it was released, our government may make a decision to back way off on these programs, maybe even stop doing them altogether."

Bucci says if that happens, the United States will be considerably less secure than it is with them in place.

http://www.onenewsnow.com/national-security/2013/06/12/nsa-leaker-snowden-no-hero-says-terrorism-expert#.Ub_YWBhZ4rZ

[Clarakore]

Another issue with Snowden is how he claimed that he did this because Obama did not do enough change for Snowden's satisfaction.

Yet Snowden claimed he voted for a third-party in 2008. So what kind of change does a third-party voter really believes is going to happen with a mainstream candidate?

I mean us progressives are satisfied with our president except on foreign policy. Domestically he is doing all he can in the face of obstructionism.

So how many reasons is Snowden going to give us for doing what he did? Because Obama did not change things to his liking? Because intelligence officials lied to Congress? Because he wanted to defend democracy at home? Because he wants to protect the world from being spied on? His newest reason is that the government refused to close Guantanamo... Which one is it?

Snowden cannot keep his story straight.

He then claims the media is more interested in his girlfriend and what he posted online at 17. Keep in mind he was not 17 when he was bragging online about how to get mega dollars without a degree while the rest of the country was in recession with super high unemployment...

[spartan max2]

So, every phone call we make, every e-mail, every web page we visit is recorded somewhere. I'm wondering what the next step is in government surveillance of its citizens?

In George Orwell's novel "1984", everyone's television is also a video camera, recording what everyone says in the 'privacy' of their own home. In the workplace, everything one does is also carefully recorded.

Everyone must also be careful who they talk to face to face, as anyone may be a government informant. In the novel all this is done for national security reasons.

I think if Mr. Snowden is not extradited back to the U.S.A., eventually he will be taken out by the CIA or one of its minions.

Funny you mention this, because one of the concerns ( there are many) us gamers have with the Xbox one is that is can spy on us.

http://www.businessinsider.com/xbox-one-kinect-privacy-issues-2013-5

Here is a link to look close. But basically the Xbox one will always be watching you

[Yamato]

Another issue with Snowden is how he claimed that he did this because Obama did not do enough change for Snowden's satisfaction.

Yet Snowden claimed he voted for a third-party in 2008. So what kind of change does a third-party voter really believes is going to happen with a mainstream candidate?

I mean us progressives are satisfied with our president except on foreign policy. Domestically he is doing all he can in the face of obstructionism.

So how many reasons is Snowden going to give us for doing what he did? Because Obama did not change things to his liking? Because intelligence officials lied to Congress? Because he wanted to defend democracy at home? Because he wants to protect the world from being spied on? His newest reason is that the government refused to close Guantanamo... Which one is it?

Snowden cannot keep his story straight.

He then claims the media is more interested in his girlfriend and what he posted online at 17. Keep in mind he was not 17 when he was bragging online about how to get mega dollars without a degree while the rest of the country was in recession with super high unemployment...

Obama didn't do enough for a lot of peoples' satisfaction. Like what he said he would. Obama promised transparency. Where is it? Snowden gave us transparency. Obama should send him a thank you letter for doing his job for him.

Domestically Obama is a corporate shill spending money we don't have on crap we don't need. If the generations slaving at their jobs were being forced to pay for Obama's spending entitlements right now, he'd have an approval rating worse than Congress. But not only is spending someone else's money in fashion, so is kicking the bills down the road so someone else can pay for them later with interest. Obama's morality, credibility, and career are hanging on how irresponsible he is in administering his policy.

Having multiple reasons for doing something makes doing it that much more important. I can add even more excellent reasons that Snowden hasn't yet.

If people let this information just fall into memory without stopping the government in its tracks that will be a huge mistake. The destruction of the 4th Amendment needs to end. I fear we're way too decadent to demand an end to this abuse of power and fire every bum lawmaker out of office. We're cowed into giving up our liberty for security. Our Founders were not only brilliant for their age, they were prophetic for ours.

[Clarakore]

Snowden threatens the US and says the whole truth will come out if they murder him.

http://www.dnaindia....ovt-murders-him

http://economictimes...ow/20646085.cms

All this tells us is that Snowden either has a human accomplice (who can be found in that case) or an automatic system solution (which can be electronically compromised in that case).

But wow he is now threatening to release the mother of all information if harm comes to him. Blackmailing the American intelligence apparatus is just egotistical. When his day in court happens he will reconsider ever making such boasts during the sentencing phase...

Edited June 18, 2013 by The world needs you

[Yamato]

Snowden threatens the US and says the whole truth will come out if they murder him.

http://www.dnaindia....ovt-murders-him

http://economictimes...ow/20646085.cms

All this tells us is that Snowden either has a human accomplice (who can be found in that case) or an automatic system solution (which can be electronically compromised in that case).

But wow he is now threatening to release the mother of all information if harm comes to him. Blackmailing the American intelligence apparatus is just egotistical. When his day in court happens he will reconsider ever making such boasts during the sentencing phase...

Snowden threatens the US and says the whole truth will come out if they murder him.

Snowden protects the US and says the whole truth will come out even if they murder him.

Blackmailing the American intelligence apparatus is just egotistical.

Looks like an inherent risk of government illegally spying on its own people in the internet age. Maybe the secrecy of these crooks would be preserved if robots did their dirty work instead of humans with a conscience. If ego is what it takes to defend the rule of law, then super-ego.

[StarMountainKid]

This is what appears on my Firefox home page, which is just a blank page. Firefox usually has some generic message there. Firefox must not approve of the NSA either.

[StarMountainKid]

The band Spirit from 1968. Still relevant today.

"Friend of the insane, Straight Arrow is his name

You gotta watch out where you go, and watch out who you know,

Watch what you do because Straight Arrow watches you...

[Babe Ruth]

The best thing for Snowden, if I were him, would be to return to the United States with legal counsel.

He is thus at least somewhat protected, and can make his case in U.S. Federal court.

Where he is at now is a total "no-win" situation for him. Trust me, China hates traitors from anywhere. They will just "play" with him.

Thomas Drake, also formerly of the NSA, tried exactly what you suggest. He ended up indicted and prosecuted.

I'm certain nobody pays you for advice.

[Babe Ruth]

Another issue with Snowden is how he claimed that he did this because Obama did not do enough change for Snowden's satisfaction.

Yet Snowden claimed he voted for a third-party in 2008. So what kind of change does a third-party voter really believes is going to happen with a mainstream candidate?

I mean us progressives are satisfied with our president except on foreign policy. Domestically he is doing all he can in the face of obstructionism.

So how many reasons is Snowden going to give us for doing what he did? Because Obama did not change things to his liking? Because intelligence officials lied to Congress? Because he wanted to defend democracy at home? Because he wants to protect the world from being spied on? His newest reason is that the government refused to close Guantanamo... Which one is it?

Snowden cannot keep his story straight.

He then claims the media is more interested in his girlfriend and what he posted online at 17. Keep in mind he was not 17 when he was bragging online about how to get mega dollars without a degree while the rest of the country was in recession with super high unemployment...

Pure and unadulterated nonsense.

[Clarakore]

Snowden claimed he was going on record to verify authenticity of the leaks. He could have done that here.

Snowden claimed he would not return now because of the way the US government has acted since the release. Had he stayed they would have had a different reaction unless Snowden is claiming he can predict the future too.

Snowden claims he is not a hero and is surprised others are focusing on him. By evading accountability at home he is definitely wanting to be judged by the court of public opinion and is it really a surprise others would scrutinize him?

In the history of unauthorized disclosures of classified information, a voluntary admission of having committed such disclosures is the exception, not the norm. And it confers a degree of dignity on the action. Yet it stops short of a full acceptance of responsibility. That would entail surrendering to authorities and accepting the legal consequences of “subverting the power of government” and carrying out “a fundamentally dangerous thing to democracy.”

There are occasions when breaching restrictions on classified information may be necessary and appropriate, suggested Judge T.S. Ellis, III of the Eastern District of Virginia in a June 2009 sentencing hearing for Lawrence Franklin, who pleaded guilty to disclosing classified information in the “AIPAC” case. But in order to reconcile an unauthorized disclosure with the rule of law, he said, it must be done openly.

“I don’t have a problem with people doing that [disclosing classified information to the press] if they are held accountable for it…,” Judge Ellis said. “One might hope that, for example, someone might have the courage to do something that would break the law if it meant they’re the savior of the country; but then one has to take the consequences, because the rule of law is so important.”

“Simply because you believe that something that’s going on that’s classified should be revealed to the press and to the public, so that the public can know that its government is doing something you think is wrong, that doesn’t justify it. Now, you may want to go ahead and do it, but you have to stand up and take the consequences,” Judge Ellis said then.

http://blogs.fas.org/secrecy/2013/06/snowden-leaks/

[Yamato]

Anyone spending this much effort defending the secrecy of government doesn't understand what the role of government ought to be. The role of government is to protect the privacy of every individual, not the secrecy of government. If government is doing something to its own people that it can't be up front about, then it should be exposed and made transparent. We were told years ago that government was only recording calls overseas and strangely, many believed it. Our government lies to us. Do we really want to try to contest that statement?

The end result of this whistleblower's efforts should be that the American people stand up to these chronic violations of their rights and say enough is enough. A country with no rule of law is in the domain of despots and tinpot dictators, not democratic republics.

[Kowalski]

Anyone spending this much effort defending the secrecy of government doesn't understand what the role of government ought to be. The role of government is to protect the privacy of every individual, not the secrecy of government. If government is doing something to its own people that it can't be up front about, then it should be exposed and made transparent. We were told years ago that government was only recording calls overseas and strangely, many believed it. Our government lies to us. Do we really want to try to contest that statement?

The end result of this whistleblower's efforts should be that the American people stand up to these chronic violations of their rights and say enough is enough. A country with no rule of law is in the domain of despots and tinpot dictators, not democratic republics.

Great post, once again.

Why are people defending this? It just blows my mind.

We have all seen what happens in history, when a government starts to keep files on it's citizens.

Reign of Terror, when Robespierre was in charge, and keeping files on people to make sure they weren't Royalist sympathizers....Stalin's Russia....Hitler's Germany.....I believe the Roman Emperor Tiberius also did, kinda like his own J Edgar Hoover files....Caligula, who became Emperor after Tiberius's death burned a bunch of secret files in a public bonfire, to show he was different from the tyrannical Tiberius, but he secretly had these files copied down by scribes, and kept them himself....

Edited June 18, 2013 by Kowalski

[Clarakore]

Snowden tells Chinese press which Chinese computers we have been hacking and when

The feds are investigating a report that former National Security Agency employee Edward Snowden is turning over classified data to the Chinese, according to The Sunday Times of London.

Snowden, 29, is in Hong Kong and has said he would not jeopardize US interests.

But the South China Morning Post reported he has revealed the IP addresses of mainland-China and Hong Kong computers that the NSA has tried to access.

Snowden is ‘aiding’ China

Original article excerpt from the South China Morning Post (full article in link below):

The detailed records - which cannot be independently verified - show specific dates and the IP addresses of computers in Hong Kong and on the mainland hacked by the National Security Agency over a four-year period.

They also include information indicating whether an attack on a computer was ongoing or had been completed, along with an amount of additional operational information.

The small sample data suggests secret and illegal NSA attacks on Hong Kong computers had a success rate of more than 75 per cent, according to the documents. The information only pertains to attacks on civilian computers with no reference to Chinese military operations, Snowden said.

"I don't know what specific information they were looking for on these machines, only that using technical exploits to gain unauthorised access to civilian machines is a violation of law. It's ethically dubious," Snowden said in the interview on Wednesday.

*snip*

"The primary issue of public importance to Hong Kong and mainland China should be that the NSA is illegally seizing the communications of tens of millions of individuals without any individualised suspicion of wrongdoing," Snowden said. "They simply steal everything so they can search for any topics of interest."

Edward Snowden: Classified US data shows Hong Kong hacking targets

So, China who hacks us, most likely our citizens too, is now being told by Snowden (via their press) that us hacking their citizens is wrong? Does he magically believe China will just stop hacking us?

China can now backtrack and see exactly how it was done and figure out which other of their systems have been hacked then take steps to stop it. In other words while we are still being hacked they will be hacked less in return. Snowden is helping them. The Chinese government will get all this information he is giving to "their press".

Consider the timing and distraction

*snip*

Consider the timing of Snowden’s revelations: They came just after release of a report from the Defense Science Board revealing that Chinese hackers have compromised a long list of weapons systems, including the F-35 fighter plane and the Aegis anti-missile system — and just before President Obama was supposed to give China’s new leader a major dressing-down on Beijing’s cyber-thievery.

Now, thanks to Snowden, the focus has shifted from what the Chinese are doing to what we’ve been doing, from intrusive Chinese hackers to intrusive American cyber spooks.

But is it really likely that the 29-year-old Snowden, a high-school dropout whose girlfriend is a pole dancer, could really be a Chinese spy? Would Beijing really find a way to recruit and use this temperamental loser?

Well, three facts point strongly in that direction.

First, Snowden worked at the NSA station in Oahu, Hawaii, which runs cyberops against both China and North Korea. It’s been a target for Chinese spy services for years; and it wouldn’t have taken them long to learn that the Booz Allen consultant had, by his own admission, lost faith in the work he was doing. He even said so in a 2010 online chat room, which any skilled cybersnoop could trace back to his home IP address.

Second, his choice of asylum in Hong Kong is strange to say the least. In interviews, Snowden claims he chose Hong Kong because its laws will protect his rights. Huh? Unlike Sweden where Wikileaker Julien Assange ran to ground, Hong Kong lives under the thumb of the ultimate Big Brother, Communist China. And Beijing’s abuse of rights — especially cyber-rights — is common knowledge in the tech-savvy circles in which Snowden surely moved.

So if Hong Kong’s laws don’t protect him, who does? The answer is Beijing, which can veto any extradition of Snowden.

Third, Snowden admitted to the South China Morning Post that’s he’s already passed a boatload of information to the Chinese about US cyberspying on their facilities, including the IP addresses of specific computers that have been under attack from our forces.

Tinker tailor Snowden spy

Meanwhile China will pretend to allow Hong Kong to handle this but most of us realize they already made a decision to keep Snowden with the theater of Hong Kong courts as a distraction to their decision.

"America has lots of intellectual property that is worth stealing, China has very little."

China plays victim while diminishing their own aggression toward us

*snip*

In cyber terms, this is akin to Benedict Arnold scheming to betray West Point's defenses to the British, thereby allowing them to seize a key American fortification, splitting the colonies geographically at a critical point during the American Revolution.The political implications are grave. Snowden has given Beijing something it couldn't achieve on its own: moral equivalence. Now, China can portray itself as a victim, besieged by America, and simply trying to defend itself. Snowden's initial leaks on NSA programs also caused substantial political harm, above and beyond the intelligence damage.

*snip*

Economically, cyber warfare is even more one-sided. As economist Irwin Stelzer recently said (paywall):

"America has lots of intellectual property that is worth stealing, China has very little."

By inaccurately elevating Beijing to moral equivalence with Washington, Snowden obscured this critical distinction, giving China political shelter.

*snip*

NSA activities against China do not even arguably violate the privacy of US citizens, which is Snowden's supposedly highminded motive for initially breaking his word, dishonorably and deceitfully. In fact, Snowden's unilateral decision to leak endangers the national security of 300 million other Americans. He didn't ask their views or their permission, and he has no democratic legitimacy whatever.

*snip*

Edward Snowden's leaks are a grave threat to US national security

First the renegade NSA contractor provided the South China Morning Post with details about how the NSA monitors Internet activity in China. The Hong Kong-based newspaper reported: “The detailed records – which cannot be independently verified – show specific dates and the IP addresses of computers in Hong Kong and on the mainland hacked by the National Security Agency over a four-year period. They also include information indicating whether an attack on a computer was ongoing or had been completed, along with an amount of additional operational information.”

This is the kind of sensitive, operational detail that can only aid the Chinese secret police in protecting Chinese computer networks from American hacking–which is designed, in no small part, one suspects, to keep an eye on how the Chinese are penetrating U.S. computer networks. Note that Snowden revealed nothing about extensive Chinese attempts to penetrate American computers or to limit its own citizens’ access to the Internet with suffocating censorship.

*snip*

But Snowden’s revelations could well tip off the Russians or others to holes in their electronic security and thereby make such operations harder in the future. Snowden’s leaks also provide propaganda points for Beijing and Moscow–two illiberal regimes that operate two of the biggest Internet hacking operations in the world. Now they can deflect attention away from their own activities and paint the U.S. as the bad guy when, in fact, Internet operations in the U.S. are among the freest in the world.

These are not the actions of a whistleblower concerned about American liberties. They are the actions of a traitor–now, quite possibly, a defector to China–who is trying to do as much harm as he can to American national security.

Snowden Continues to Discredit Himself

Edited June 19, 2013 by The world needs you

[Frank Merton]

Those on this board defending Snowden are the first to cry "naive" when someone defends the government. Why hypocrisy when the man is so obviously a traitor.

[Babe Ruth]

Great post, once again.

Why are people defending this? It just blows my mind.

We have all seen what happens in history, when a government starts to keep files on it's citizens.

Reign of Terror, when Robespierre was in charge, and keeping files on people to make sure they weren't Royalist sympathizers....Stalin's Russia....Hitler's Germany.....I believe the Roman Emperor Tiberius also did, kinda like his own J Edgar Hoover files....Caligula, who became Emperor after Tiberius's death burned a bunch of secret files in a public bonfire, to show he was different from the tyrannical Tiberius, but he secretly had these files copied down by scribes, and kept them himself....

People who defend the criminal actions of government do so for a variety of reasons, I suppose. As Colbert pointed out last week, they are scared silly. They remain in a perpetual state of fear, seeing a "terrist" behind every tree and around every corner.

Also, I think they do this because they are not in the least familiar with, have never been trained in, constitutional law and principles.

And they actually believe that the government can save them from anything, and they believe in the beneficent nature of government. Statists and authoritarians, might be the best words to describe them.

[Kowalski]

People who defend the criminal actions of government do so for a variety of reasons, I suppose. As Colbert pointed out last week, they are scared silly. They remain in a perpetual state of fear, seeing a "terrist" behind every tree and around every corner.

Also, I think they do this because they are not in the least familiar with, have never been trained in, constitutional law and principles.

And they actually believe that the government can save them from anything, and they believe in the beneficent nature of government. Statists and authoritarians, might be the best words to describe them.

I like what George Washington said about government:

"Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."

Edited June 19, 2013 by Kowalski

[No Censorship]

People who defend the criminal actions of government do so for a variety of reasons, I suppose. As Colbert pointed out last week, they are scared silly. They remain in a perpetual state of fear, seeing a "terrist" behind every tree and around every corner.

Also, I think they do this because they are not in the least familiar with, have never been trained in, constitutional law and principles.

And they actually believe that the government can save them from anything, and they believe in the beneficent nature of government. Statists and authoritarians, might be the best words to describe them.

You have to be extremely gullible and ignorant to buy the official government line on all things. Such people must be blind by choice. That's not to say that some conspiracy theories aren't complete nonsense. It's to say that one would have to be asleep to discount *all* of them.

[Babe Ruth]

You have to be extremely gullible and ignorant to buy the official government line on all things. Such people must be blind by choice. That's not to say that some conspiracy theories aren't complete nonsense. It's to say that one would have to be asleep to discount *all* of them.

I think some people are 'blind' because of cognitive dissonance, and my theory is that such a condition is somehow genetic, and thus completely INvoluntary. They cannot help themselves. I say that because I have 2 brothers so afflicted. The mere idea that the world (government) is not quite as they see it absolutely frightens them.

[No Censorship]

I think some people are 'blind' because of cognitive dissonance, and my theory is that such a condition is somehow genetic, and thus completely INvoluntary. They cannot help themselves. I say that because I have 2 brothers so afflicted. The mere idea that the world (government) is not quite as they see it absolutely frightens them.

They also think that all skeptics share the same backgrounds and beliefs. They turn them into caricatures so that they will deal with just the straw-men, but not the relevancy of the information. It's easy to put all conspiracy theories (or confirmed historical facts, in more extreme cases) in the same "those people" box so that you can reflexively dismiss all disconcerting claims without giving a fair hearing to any of them. In this worldview, Operation Northwoods is placed in the same box with David Icke.

[Frank Merton]

You have to be extremely gullible and ignorant to buy the official government line on all things. Such people must be blind by choice. That's not to say that some conspiracy theories aren't complete nonsense. It's to say that one would have to be asleep to discount *all* of them.

What you say is a truism so true it is glib. It is also applicable to the opposite view people often have, of never buying the generally accepted view.