The Guardian reveals at Snowden's request.
"I have no intention of hiding who I am because I know I have done nothing wrong," he said.... In a note accompanying the first set of documents he provided, he wrote: "I understand that I will be made to suffer for my actions," but "I will be satisfied if the federation of secret law, unequal pardon and irresistible executive powers that rule the world that I love are revealed even for an instant."...
He has had "a very comfortable life" that included a salary of roughly $200,000, a girlfriend with whom he shared a home in Hawaii, a stable career, and a family he loves. "I'm willing to sacrifice all of that because I can't in good conscience allow the US government to destroy privacy, internet freedom and basic liberties for people around the world with this massive surveillance machine they're secretly building."...
He relocated to a hotel in Hong Kong on May 20th, where he worries about being spied on:
He lines the door of his hotel room with pillows to prevent eavesdropping. He puts a large red hood over his head and laptop when entering his passwords to prevent any hidden cameras from detecting them....
He described how he once viewed the internet as "the most important invention in all of human history". As an adolescent, he spent days at a time "speaking to people with all sorts of views that I would never have encountered on my own".
But he believed that the value of the internet, along with basic privacy, is being rapidly destroyed by ubiquitous surveillance. "I don't see myself as a hero," he said, "because what I'm doing is self-interested: I don't want to live in a world where there's no privacy and therefore no room for intellectual exploration and creativity."
ADDED: I suspect that he — and those in media whom he worked with — timed this to shape opinion about Bradley Manning, whose trial began this past week.
Posts
81 comments:
Well, Well! The plot thickens!
Hmm
I would have been more comfortable had it been someone who worked the programs rather than just has peripheral knowledge.
Stii, probably safest to do this, to come out.
What's the difference between this guy and Bradley Manning?
His account is very ominous.
See the Washington Times article.
What's the difference between this guy and Bradley Manning?
He has a girlfriend.
Bradley Manning divulged specific information naming agents and locals cooperating with the US that, in some cases, directly led to their deaths. This guy just divulged (so far) the general information about surveillance without outing any agents or informants.
The programs that everybody is making such a fuss about have been known for a number of years - see ECHELON.
True, press is so lacking in any kind of engineering that they had to have it spelled out for them.
(the other kev)
Oh, good, a martyr. Looks like Greenwald's source is as fond of empty, grand-sounding words as he is.
Althouse linkscoops Drudge, Insty, and almost the entire online world. I smell a Webby.
I am always suspect of "whistle-blowers" who willingly reveal their identity. I've been one. You just do not DO that. It is not about you. When you make it about you, too, the bullshit odor wafts out...your credibility should decline precipitously the moment you service yourself with publicity. I call bullshit.
Things that may be true:
1. Well, if you put it that way...
2. You know, I never thought of that...
3. That 15 minutes of fame thing is getting out of hand...
4. That lesbian heckler? Amateur...
5. The unpublished note to the girlfriend said... "We'll always have Paris".
Heh. When I saw that briefing I thought to myself that the reality of the program was probably classified far higher than TS/SI. So I expected to find out, as we have, that what we know is just a fraction of the matter. We have a small shiney object; what should concern us about the way it works is still unknown.
"I am always suspect of "whistle-blowers" who willingly reveal their identity. I've been one. You just do not DO that. It is not about you. When you make it about you, too, the bullshit odor wafts out...your credibility should decline precipitously the moment you service yourself with publicity. I call bullshit."
If true, he's playing a very high stakes game so best to get his personal info out there so reprisal will be more difficult.
Bitter fruit of the loss of public and private virtue.
Loss of virtue by those that institute, fund, and authorize such programs.
Loss of virtue by those that promised to keep them secret as a condition of their employment.
I know many men who have been killed and maimed defending our country. I'm unimpressed when someone merely risks their job or career. So why is that so much harder to do?
That being said, if the laws of this nation are being subverted, then we must know about it.
It's probably a good choice. Being in the public eye is this guy's best chance of avoiding any tragic accidents in the near future, or being held for what might naively seem a curiously long time on a traffic/tax/parole/morals charge...
That makes it seem likely this was always Step 2, but one hopes for his sake he's got Step 3 in progress, which is getting himself under the aegis of a sovereign that doesn't see 100% eye to eye with the United States. The Chinese are the obvious candidate, given where he is, but there are probably a number of others. The Israelis actually strike me as one of the better choices.
And if you're going to reveal secrets, you'd better do it openly so that the people can judge whether you were a patriot or a traitor.
As for whistle-blowers:
I have a lot less respect for a person that signed on to a questionable program that was already underway, with certainly some sense of what he was signing onto,
than a person long-time employed that saw the government cross the line and then stepped forward.
Well no one denied the veracity of what he leaked. He has done it. it is out there and that is that.
Honestly, does anyone by now, and even long before this came out, really believe that they can be anonymous on the internet?
I mean, who cares? What worries me, and should worry others, is that they will not stop at using this power against terrorists. They will use it agains their political opponents.
Does anyone believe anymore that the IRS thing was just the actions of a few rogue employees in a far off Cincinatti office/
With 88 agents directed from DC?
Quayle said...
As for whistle-blowers:
I have a lot less respect for a person that signed on to a questionable program that was already underway, with certainly some sense of what he was signing onto,
than a person long-time employed that saw the government cross the line and then stepped forward.
If he was there for 4 years, he probably falls into the second slot.
A salary of $200,000 a year? Shoot, these guys are well paid.
Dude. There are way easier ways to break up with your girlfriend, ok?
At the NSA office in Hawaii where he was working, he copied the last set of documents he intended to disclose.
Okay, just how in the hell did that happen? How did this copy files out of a secure facility.
I've been in secure facilities, which shall remain nameless, and no writable media was let in or out. Guards searched all bags. The PC's had any writable devices like USBs & DVD-RW disabled (which is easy to do with products like this). The secure network has either no link to the outside internet or one that's firewalled and logged within an inch of its life.
Either that NSA facility in Hawaii went all tropical loosey-goosey or Snowden had very highly placed help (like e.g. a Congressional staffer who received the briefing).
NSA at Fort Meade is off of RT 32 in MD. About 3 miles east of it on MD Rt 32 is Snowden Parkway, so that name will be sticking in everyone's memory for some time to come.
Who gives out these clearances? Holy crow. That a mere PFC like Manning had the access that he had is astounding. And then this dweeb? Are they saying he's a high school dropout? Damn. I don't care how fucking brilliant he is: It's never a good idea to give a kid the keys to the Ferrari. This guy is an own goal against NSA and CIA.
Being open about it is very smart. He's now a public figure, and I doubt if he will be disappeared now. Certainly, they'll go after him like Assange.
Iceland? How quaint. Not gonna happen.
Having said that? Good on him for having the martyr complex cojones to reveal all this stuff.
Ooops, Snowden Pkwy is West, not East of Fort Meade.
Oh, and Gene, that 200k is not unusual. They want to keep those guys happy & golden-handcuffed.
Traitor, or patriot. I cannot judge, but I do know he's going to need to change his name.
Yeah, going to Israel is probably a good idea, but it may be too late.
@Chef Mojo,
You want to know why guys like Snowden get jobs like this: because when you're a stay at home layabout boy, you're easy to check-out for a security clearance.
If you're some young, well-traveled, well connected, young Einstein, it'll cost over 100k and maybe a year to clear you. And there's a good chance they'll have to wash you out because of your "suspicious" contacts.
He should be arrested, charged with treason, and shot. See 18 USC § 2381.
The great irony will be the hordes of lefties that regularly use gmail being outraged at the invasion of their privacy.
Govt secrecies under the guise of national security to cover up incompetence, malfeasance, malice, attacks on political enemies are worse than whatever leakers can do to the country.
If someone had leaked about how insecure Benghazi was and let to the consulate's close down, then ambassador Stevens and the three other Americans would still be among the living, a hapless scapegoat would not be in jail.
What is the difference between what NSA has been doing to root out "terrorist" threats and Mao's actions to root out reactionaries?
Bet Snowden comes forward now to avoid some inexplicable fatal accidents.
Sam Hall, Why give it a different name if it's ECHELON? PRISM is more invasive targeting domestic calls.
He may seem a whistle-blower, but he broke just a few laws. He certainly didn't pass his information to Congress for the oversight.
I'm curious to see what the AG does with this information.
As for the President, he could quit blaming Bush and show the leadership he promised during his campaigns. It seems the principles he ran on expired at his inauguration.
"What's the difference between this guy and Bradley Manning?"
This guy like girls and Manning likes guys. Other than that, they're both heroes.
GED. Washed out of special forces training (broke both legs). Did IT in Germany. Didn't like how recruiting was done. Hired for IT as a contractor.
200k at 29? No. There is no special skill set here that merits that kind of salary.
He may only be lying about his salary but he is not sounding credible.
This tone of a spiritual journey ending in enlightenment sounds so infantile only modern journalist could believe it. Why when he trained in special forces his co-trainees were gung-ho about fight :(
"Bradley Manning divulged specific information naming agents and locals cooperating with the US that, in some cases, directly led to their deaths."
There has been no statement by the government that Manning's revelations resulted in harm to anyone.
Robert Cook said...
"There has been no statement by the government that Manning's revelations resulted in harm to anyone."
Irrelevant. The potential for harm was created, and if Manning and this new one are not dealt with to the most severe extent permitted by law, it will encourage others to make similar leaks that further invite harm. Our national security was compromised by those leaks, and they should be dealt with.
"He should be arrested, charged with treason, and shot. See 18 USC § 2381."
Ah, I see the resident (out and proud) fascist is present.
$200,000 per year as a 29 year old contractor. And we wonder why the country is going broke.
"The great irony will be the hordes of lefties that regularly use gmail being outraged at the invasion of their privacy."
Where's the irony? "Lefties," so-called, are the first and most ardent in decrying governmental abuse of power and violation of our civil liberties.
Robert Cook said...
"Where's the irony? "Lefties," so-called, are the first and most ardent in decrying governmental abuse of power and violation of our civil liberties."
No they aren't. One requires a correct understanding of the legitimate use of power to decry the abuse of power, which is why the left confuses abuse of power with violations of constitutional rights.
He should be arrested, charged with treason, and shot. See 18 USC § 2381.
You left out his constitutional Miranda warning...
Lets not go half-cocked.
"Irrelevant. The potential for harm was created...."
It's entirely relevant to the unverified assertion that Manning's revelations have resulted in deaths. So far as we know, no one has been harmed as a result of Manning's actions.
And we know the truth has been served.
Sam Hall, If it's like ECHELON, and by now everyone and his dogs and cats have already known about Echelon, then what harm have the leaks done to the country?
The leaks never detailed how PRISM works, never disclosed anything but to remind the sleep walking Americans that Big Govt. is getting too big, the little people are getting littler.
Bet this would not have happened under Bush: leftists like Google would fight Bush tooth and nail and cry bloody murder instead of giving Big Govt a key to their data.
Robert Cook said...
"[Simon said that he] should be arrested, charged with treason, and shot. See 18 USC § 2381. Ah, I see the resident (out and proud) fascist is present."
It's comments like this make us think that you are as ignorant of the basic political lexicon as the people who thought that having an office of faith-based initiatives was "theocracy." The Anglo-American tradition has regarded treason as a crime punishable by death for centuries longer than there has been any such thing as fascism, and there can be scant doubt that the act of supplying state secrets to the enemy is treason. If this view makes me a fascist, I am in good company, for Richard I, George Washington, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and Winston Churchill would all agree.
Confirming a whole bunch of stuff I've been saying for a while about the US not being serious. If this guys story is true whoever supervised him and all the security people at the installation where he worked need to get busted back to permanent latrine orderly. In Pt Barrow Alaska.
Robert Cook said...
"It's entirely relevant to the unverified assertion that Manning's revelations have resulted in deaths."
Ah, I understand: It's entirely relevant to an assertion that is irrelevant. Which makes it, well, irrelevant.
"Bet this would not have happened under Bush: leftists like Google would fight Bush tooth and nail and cry bloody murder instead of giving Big Govt a key to their data."
Of course this was happening under Bush. To the degree possible with extant technology, we can assume with fair probability of being correct that such activity has been on the ascendant for many years, crossing multiple administrations.
"...the act of supplying state secrets to the enemy is treason."
Providing information to the citizenry about the government's violation of our privacy and 4th Amendment rights is treason? Are we, the people the "enemy?"
On May 20, he boarded a flight to Hong Kong, where he has remained ever since. He chose the city because "they have a spirited commitment to free speech and the right of political dissent", and because he believed that it was one of the few places in the world that both could and would resist the dictates of the US government.
Yeah, a bastion of free speech that's under the control of China. The guy is a dope.
"He may seem a whistle-blower, but he broke just a few laws. He certainly didn't pass his information to Congress for the oversight."
After watching Feinstein this morning on ABC, I am sure he knows what would have happened to his info if he went to Congress.
"Ah, I understand: It's entirely relevant to an assertion that is irrelevant."
It's relevant to an assertion that is false but which the author presented as true, and which many here and many American citizens who are ill-informed about Manning may believe to be true.
Do you not agree that untrue or unverified statements made in the course of discussion about any topic should be identified as untrue or unverified in order to mitigate incorrect understanding of the facts?
Or do you prefer discussions that assume as true information this is not known to be true, or is known to be false?
I'm still calling bullshit on Snowden's story and some of his "revelations." First, he didn't whistle blow to congress or any agency with the power to effect change. He went to the press. That make him a self serving punk in my eyes.
I am also wary of his access, given the rules for "roles & permissions" in database(s) management. This is the NSA, not some Army outpost in BFE like Manning's station. Of course, they could have been ignored, just like Manning's were...and on top of that, compartmentalization of intelligence (need to know) is compromised too, and if within the NSA, ... then virtually nothing we have or do or think is secret from anyone anywhere.
If this is all true, we're totally douched out ... that it is even possible that a relatively low level analyst had such overall access is astounding...and clearly somebody in oversight screwed the pooch. They need to hang too.
I am only slightly relieved by the childish, amateurish, Power-Point crap and his prompt revelation of his identity. I expect a book sooner than later.
This guy has had a recent onset of epilepsy. Is there are chance that these dramatic acts are the result of altered mental status rather than sublime idealism?.....His story is picture perfect. Maybe it's true, but it trips a few bs detectors.....There's a lot of grandiosity in Bradley Manning's make up. He's like Jane Fonda who wanted to become more important than the Vietnam war. The Islamic terrorists will grind on no matter what counter measures we take. If some terrorist escapes the dragnet because of Manning or this guy, it will be a bad thing. They shouldn't be allowed to decide what's secret and what's not....Didn't we choose Bush and later Obama to decide what's secret and what's not. Who elected them? They're like the IRS people who get to choose what's charitable and what's not.
Providing information to the citizenry about the government's violation of our privacy and 4th Amendment rights is treason? Are we, the people the "enemy?"
I'll go with Cookie on this.
But, seeing that he's stated that he's willing to accept the consequences of his actions, if Snowden gets a blindfold and a cigarette, well... That's how the cookie crumbles.
"If this guys story is true whoever supervised him and all the security people at the installation where he worked need to get busted back to permanent latrine orderly. In Pt Barrow Alaska."
If it is true? The President has confirmed the massive digital dragnet revealed by Snowden has been and is taking place. He promised us it's harmless, don't you know.
As for "busting" those responsible back to "permanent latrine orderly," how about prosecuting them for abuse of power? How about impeachment proceedings?
Of course...as Bush and his cadre were never prosecuted for their crimes, (including warrantless wiretapping of Americans and torture, both of which they admitted to), Obama and his cadre are not likely to be prosecuted either.
"They shouldn't be allowed to decide what's secret and what's not....Didn't we choose Bush and later Obama to decide what's secret and what's not."
In other words, we should just "trust them," right?
Wrong.
I don't get the Snowden hate here.
The biggest threat to the security of a constitutional republic I've felt this week is finding out just how far the gov has gone in establishing a surveillance state--and how readily this administration will abuse "confidential" info.
I'm w/ Beck, Cook, and Ellsberg on this.
Be alert for pig shit falling from the sky.
Obama is like Nixon tag, damn it!
When you're researching your book, Obama the Ex-Boyfriend you're going to try to find all this impeachment-worthy stuff, and you're going to be like, where is it? Where is it?
You're going to be saying "Where are the Snowdens of yesteryear?" like that guy in Catch-22.
One aspect of this that I haven't seen anyone pay enough attention to is this: We citizens constantly provide confidential information to the Government on the understanding that the Government will protect that information. If the Government can't even protect highly sensitive national security information, how can I trust the Government not to leak my personal information?
This is definitely the kind of thing people should know about. After all, government make companies disclose their privacy policies to us.
They should be open about their policies. THat shouldn't be hard or dangerous.
Edward, my man, you are so screwed! But thank you for standing up for what America is supposed to stand for. America needs more patriots like you and fewer fascists... I'm not naming names there, because we all know who they are.
I am highly amused with the idea that Manning and/or Snowden are comparable to Daniel Ellsberg. Two low rank punks versus an FSO-1 who also was one of the authors of the papers themselves.
I feel sorry that Daniel Ellsberg seems to think of Snowden as a hero that he's "waited for for 40 years."
There is no comparison. But, we're all entitled to our opinions.
And I'm not talking about anyone in this thread, but the people in our government who have forgotten that they are not our masters.
There have been many abuses of Presidential power in our nation's history. That's not to say that PFCs cannot also abuse their power, or that actors like John Wilkes Booth should be allowed to define the limits of presidential authority.......Can Cook tell us who should decide what's secret and what's not? Whatever prejudices or bad judgment that lodges with our current security apparatus, it is an apparatus that has been set in place by a freely elected government....We have seen in the past how the press has ignored or suppressed stories not in keeping with their idea of how things ought to be. It is foolish to think that they are responsive to some higher morality than government officials.
If the Rosenbergs had published the secrets of the atom bomb in The Guardian would they have escaped electrocution?
If they didn't put John Walker Lindh or Major Hassan up for treason, no way is this guy going up for treason.
Ted Kennedy and his secret contact offering to help the Soviets against Reagan pretty much killed treason for the rest of us.
Blogger luagha said...
If they didn't put John Walker Lindh or Major Hassan up for treason, no way is this guy going up for treason.
Ted Kennedy and his secret contact offering to help the Soviets against Reagan pretty much killed treason for the rest of us.
6/9/13, 5:58 PM
___________________________________
I thought I was the only one who remembered The Lyin of the Senate's magnum opus.
Either get a bigger bottle or a smaller genie.
Chappaquidick was a Test. Under Water, Will They Forget to name Names?
Watching cnn break the story was hilarious.
The moderator had two experts on top secret classification and was feeding them the line that US security was damaged. But the looked like their families had been killed and mumbled some odd theories showing they had no idea what was going on.
The CNN guy kept trying , but could not make the. Whistle blower look bad.
Robert Cook said...
"Providing information to the citizenry about the government's violation of our privacy and 4th Amendment rights is treason? Are we, the people the enemy?"
The government isn't violating your privacy and your fourth amendment rights, so that question is purely hypothetical, but either way, one is forced to wonder whether you can truly be so naive that the enemy does not learn that which is made available in the western media? Really?
What government fears most is a honest man who can't be bullied and who is willing to DIE for his country, even if it's his own government that kills him.
I am sure Obama is scared spitless of what awful deeds he has done might see the light of day.
Paul said...
"What government fears most is a honest man who can't be bullied and who is willing to DIE for his country, even if it's his own government that kills him."
A government that is sufficiently tyrannical to justify that man's fear does not fear that man at all. That government simply kills that man—no trials, no charges, he just winds up dead.
Providing information to the citizenry about the government's violation of our privacy and 4th Amendment rights is treason? Are we, the people the "enemy?"
Listen to Hayden again. If your'e number does not come up in hte search then nothing will happen to you. So don't get involved in terrorist activity and you're in the clear.
Sam Hall wrote
The programs that everybody is making such a fuss about have been known for a number of years - see ECHELON.
True, press is so lacking in any kind of engineering that they had to have it spelled out for them.
If congress knows about it and has since the days of Clinton, how exactly is revealing this whistle blowing?
Lars Palenta wrote:
If the Rosenbergs had published the secrets of the atom bomb in The Guardian would they have escaped electrocution?
For the libertarians and retarded libs they are probaly heroes. One things for sure, govt was the problem and any hand to try to ferret out the Rosenbergs, I'm sure was FASCISM.
traditional guy wrote:
The CNN guy kept trying , but could not make the. Whistle blower look bad.
His own words make him look bad. He looks like a drama queen queen.
Chip S wrote:
The biggest threat to the security of a constitutional republic I've felt this week is finding out just how far the gov has gone in establishing a surveillance state--and how readily this administration will abuse "confidential" info.
I'm w/ Beck, Cook, and Ellsberg on this.
Were you against Bush when he started the expanded NSA program? If so, then is it really a surprise where you are now?
"The government isn't violating your privacy and your fourth amendment rights, so that question is purely hypothetical, but either way, one is forced to wonder whether you can truly be so naive that the enemy does not learn that which is made available in the western media? Really?"
Hey, Simon...didn't you hear? There's a guy named Snowden who has revealed the govt. is hoovering up information about all our electronic communications!
Now...who is this "enemy" you speak of? How could "they" harm us by learning that our government is spying on...us?
Robert Cook said...
"[Simon had said,] 'The government isn't violating your privacy and your fourth amendment rights, so that question is purely hypothetical…' Hey, Simon...didn't you hear? There's a guy named Snowden who has revealed the govt. is hoovering up information about all our electronic communications!"
I'm going to try this again, and I'll speak slowly: The government isn't violating your privacy and your fourth amendment rights. Got it? The program that you are referring to does no such thing. It obtains, legally, from third-party service providers, business records that show the services they have rendered to their customers. You have no privacy interest in those records. You have no fourth amendment rights relating to those records. Got it now?
Post a Comment