I have several friends who have a very different view, and think this guy is more of a Philip Agee, someone who has changed sides, and should be considered at worst a traitor and at best a self-righteous little jerk.... Leaving the country is not what a pure act of civil disobedience would entail. In addition, I find his choice of refuge, Hong Kong, a bit odd. It looks more like a defection than civil disobedience. It is possible that this guy will turn out to be more Guy Burgess than Daniel Ellsberg.I don't see why knowing exactly what you're doing elevates you over the mixed-up goofball. How do we decide which of these characters to smile upon and which to contemn?
१० जून, २०१३
"Manning's act was that of a goofball anarchist. Snowden's, by contrast, seems to have been one of civil disobedience."
"That is, he seems to have known exactly what he was doing. Snowden does seem to have some elements of Manning, a mixed-up kid, but on balance seems to me to be more of an Ellsberg -- that is, a disillusioned insider who was appalled by what he saw and made a choice to disclose the existence of certain government programs," writes Thomas E. Ricks at Foreign Policy.
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
७० टिप्पण्या:
Civil disobedience, except he appears to be unwilling to accept the consequences.
We need to know a lot more before we judge "goofballs" and "traitors."
Ellsberg's revelations were far less disturbing than McMaster's book, Dereliction of Duty. It was a matter of timing.
Someday we may know the details of this NSA matter if the USA still exists.
I learned a new word just now: contemn. Additionally, its use in this context very clever, Professor!
condemn: express strong disapproval of
contemn: view with contempt; despise
The MLKing style civil disobedient would accept jail, but given the sentence Snowden faces, I'm not inclined to be a pedant in this instance.
As someone who believes that information is owned by the people who paid for it and that claims of government need for secrecy, being by their nature a betrayal of the American people, need a high standard, far far higher than the one currently in force, I am at a minimum sympathetic to Snowden.
I learned a new word just now: contemn. Additionally, its use in this context is very clever, Professor!
We place a high value on intentions.
There was a lot of good things that came out of the Mongols butchering of 50 million people throughout Eurasia in the 13th century, the opening of new trade routes, the meeting of cultures. Those good things weren't their intentions of course.
What will be the results of all this? Will the NSA be de-funded and the PRISM program be dismantled? I tend to think it's doubtful unless the outrage reaches a fever pitch.
There's no need to rush to judgement, not as much as the need to rush to publication.
" How do we decide which of these characters to smile upon and which to contemn?"
There are lots of ways:
Who has the better pants crease?
Who's running a war on women?
Anybody got minority status?
Who's clean and articulate?
Anybody keeps his chicks in a binder?
etc...
Perhaps all the listening, tracking or whatever surveillance Snowden did created a justified paranoia as to facing the consequences of his civil disobedience. Being "disappeared" doesn't only happen in the movies.
Will the NSA be de-funded and the PRISM program be dismantled?
No, but if the pitch gets feverish enough, it might become necessary to rename them.
I'm with Ed Morrissey on this. Why didn’t Snowden give Paul PRISM instead of $500?
We wouldn't be comparing Edward Snowden with Bradley Manning if he had.
"The Snowden Identity"
How do we decide which of these characters to smile upon and which to contemn?
Is this a test?
Are we getting graded or can I coast the rest of this non-scandal scandal.
Ha!
Good one bags...
How does a private contractor get this type of security clearance?
How does a private get this type of security clearance?
This guy reminds me of a computer systems administrator I used to work with. An real ahole if you got on his wrong side.
He was a trekkie and I mean super trekkie, he had all kinds of star trek shit in his cubicle.
He had a kind of super righteous personality. Anything that was not company approved he would warn you about and if you didn't take it out of the computer he would find ways to ratchet it up until you did... that was the corporate policy... we were not allowed to keep personal stuff on company computers.
This guy seems to have gotten the notion that its the boss that has something in the computer that according to him and his higher authoritative manual, doesn't belong in the computers.
He was in charge of keeping the bugs out and then he seems to have woken up to the idea - OMG the NSA is the super bug.
@Roux,
How does a private contractor get this type of security clearance?
The work at NSA is probably done at least 50/50 by contractors now, if not more.
A contractor gets the clearance the same way a federal employee does: they run a background investigation on him/her & if the individual comes out clean, he/she obtains the clearance.
Why would you think that a federal employee would be any more honest than a contractor? Judging from the dust-up at IRS, I don't see anything to support that judgement.
Roux: "How does a private contractor get this type of security clearance?"
The private contractors are the ones who actually build everything.
Or did you think that, unlike what the lefties say about the private sector that the government "Did build that"?!
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/06/silicon-valley-doesnt-just-help-the-surveillance-state-it-built-it/276700/
Manning is a traitor and should be shot.
It's less clear to me with Snowden, because I'm not sure what the significance of what he revealed was. The phone records thing that everyone is up in arms about just seems like an extension of Echelon, which was disclosed under Clinton. And we knew that under Bush II it had already been expanded to include cellphones. So that part doesn't seem all that new, although you can obviously sex it up to make it sound new. If NSA is gathering the substantive content of emails and Skype calls and other such communications and logging all of that, that sounds new and horrible. But it also sounds useful. The fact that he went to the media rather than reporting it to Congress (as far as we are aware at present), inclines me towards the belief that he too is a traitor and should hang for it.
If, on the other hand, he thought there was clearly illegal conduct by the NSA, reported it to the appropriate Congressional oversight groups, and was dissatisfied with their handling of the matter, then I feel less strongly that he should pay with his life. Some milder sentence -- imprisonment for a term of years -- would then suffice.
I wonder about this guy. He goes to Hong Kong because he says it is more free than here...but then again Hong Kong has its own surveillance programs. They can bug phones, read emails etc. There is just something strange about a guy who believes in freedom running to the Communist Chinese. I think I would have been more likely to take him at his word if he had been a whistleblower and stayed here...or if he had gone somewhere like Switzerland. Maybe they bug phones too. Hell if I know.
That's where I fall away, when he fled the country. Whistle blowers don't generally do that.
I'd hardly call Manning a goofball. It trivializes what his motives were. He was and is a petulant crybaby who wanted to get back at the world.
As for Snowden, the jury's going to have to stay out until events unfold a little more. He says was disillusioned, but that may be a media ploy.
Ann Althouse said...
I have several friends who have a very different view, and think this guy is more of a Philip Agee, someone who has changed sides, and should be considered at worst a traitor and at best a self-righteous little jerk.... Leaving the country is not what a pure act of civil disobedience would entail. In addition, I find his choice of refuge, Hong Kong, a bit odd. It looks more like a defection than civil disobedience. It is possible that this guy will turn out to be more Guy Burgess than Daniel Ellsberg.
He doesn't come across like Agee, who couldn't wait to make the country look as bad as possible and the Burgess angle looks a little dicey. He was part of a homosexual clique that indulged in Communism (or vice versa).
You don't stop off in Hong Kong and then say you want to go to Iceland if your real destiny's Peking. You straight to Peking.
IF we would have hung Manning a year ago, Snowden might of had second thoughts.
I wonder about this guy. He goes to Hong Kong because he says it is more free than here...but then again Hong Kong has its own surveillance programs. They can bug phones, read emails etc. There is just something strange about a guy who believes in freedom running to the Communist Chinese. I think I would have been more likely to take him at his word if he had been a whistleblower and stayed here...or if he had gone somewhere like Switzerland. Maybe they bug phones too. Hell if I know.
For knowing the means of pursuit of his makers, this guy really chose the wrong place to station himself when seeking asylum from Iceland. One might want to BE in Iceland.
IF we would have hung Manning a year ago, Snowden might of had second thoughts.
Wouldn't this just accelerate defections?
I think Manning's leaks had names and addresses in them.
As I understand it, Snowden's is just that these programs exist, are begging to be abused, and have no oversight to speak of; just "Trust us, of course we would not dream of spying on you without a court order."
("But we own the courts! Heh, heh, heh!")
And Obama says he is glad we are now having this discussion?
gerry said...
I learned a new word just now: contemn. Additionally, its use in this context very clever, Professor!
I must agree, haven't heard (read, actually) "contemn" is 50 years.
SteveR said...
How does a private get this type of security clearance?
From what I've read (and our vets can shoot me down if I have it wrong), a lot more responsibility is given to enlisted men these days.
Usually sergeants, I grant you, but the days officers ran everything are long gone.
Regarding the choice of Hong Kong, the plotting is interesting. He forces a comparison between the U.S. & China, creating the irony of a freedom-fighter semi-sheltered by the totalitarian regime over the land of freedom he fears, which wins him time to stoke a global furor over Internet privacy, timing additional disclosures & personal encounters rather than being seized in his homeland & muffled.
If he had this access, then Obama hacks had it too. And what do Obama hacks do with power? Abuse it.
This is why it would be better to have a strong 2nd Amendment, universal concealed carry, and secure borders with profiling of Muslim Immigrants, if we even let them come. We would have less crime, less terrorism and much, much less risk of tyranny.
For exposing clear 4th Amendment violations, he is a hero. Manning on the other hand, did it out of liberal gay angst and got people killed by releasing actionable intelligence.
Ricks nails it. This guy is the Agee of this generation.
Martinkh said...
If he had this access, then Obama hacks had it too. And what do Obama hacks do with power? Abuse it.
I think you just broke the code.
Manning is a traitor because his deeds have probably gotten Americans on the ground killed. Snowden's outing of the NSA Prism program only highlighted what we suspected and only has come to light. We don't believe that it has resulted in the deaths of any Americans. Instead the outrage that our government has been spying on us in such a wholesale way is the problem. Is he a hero or a villain? I haven't made up my mind yet. However, the fact that I and any other American that gives a shit seems to carry some weight in his favor.
Hong Kong is China. Did everyone forget that it's part of the PRC now?
"Contemn" was just the right word there. I wasn't trying to be weird (or unusually educational).
I was looking for the opposite of "smile upon."
The components of the NSA's computers are made in China. You think the PRC is not, and has not been, following developments here with great interest right along?
He doesn't appear guilty of treason, since he doesn't appear to be interested in helping the enemy.
His actions do help Al Qaeda, but that's not sufficient grounds for the "treason" label. E.g., everyone who votes to end the war in Afghanistan is helping Al Qaeda, but that doesn't make THAT treason either.
Hard to believe a bumbler as young as he is a REAL spy
You clearly aren't very familiar with the CIA's historical track record. :)
Re: Revenant:
His actions do help Al Qaeda, but that's not sufficient grounds for the "treason" label. E.g., everyone who votes to end the war in Afghanistan is helping Al Qaeda, but that doesn't make THAT treason either.
That's a fair point. And an NSA contractor isn't quite the same as a soldier in uniform, I suppose. Very well. I change my opinion. He does not deserve to hang.
On one hand we have a man who knowingly and intentionally broke the country's laws about breaching national security.
On the other hand we have a man who released secret information we as citizens have every right to know, that our government is and has been secretly recording, maintaining, and data-mining all our phone calls, emails, and other online transactions.
What to do, what to do.
Way beyond Manning. Way beyond Ellsberg too.
I said it first. Spy.
Manning was a twerp who jus t released whatever.
This guynseemsmto have a valid point to what he's released.
But surely, he was a hacker at one time, no?
SteveR said...
How does a private get this type of security clearance?
6/10/13, 3:27 PM
The investigation for a TS/SCI clearance goes back ten years and is fairly thorough, but rank is not a big factor. E3s and E4s were typically running the NSAnet and SOSAnet overseas. I guarantee they are reading transcripts of phone calls of Americans from every carrier. The only thing that slowed us down were translators. That isn't a problem for Obama since his enemies speak English.
"How do we decide which of these characters to smile upon and which to contemn?"
Manning released information on overseas operations that got people in dangerous places killed.
Ellsberg released information on people who were spying on their own citizens and abusing the information for political purposes.
But remember some of us get obamaphones and free care for our woman parts so as long as the goodies keep coming in Hilary and Obama can do no wrong.
leslyn said...
he doesn't appear to be interested in helping the enemy." If you mean, he's self-interested, I can agree with that.
But I believe he was also fully aware that the leak could/would lend aid and comfort to the enemy.
He's talking about domestic spying, not necessarily the same thing using the same methods.
I know these are the talking points coming out of Troll Central in a frantic attempt to discredit the guy, but it's an awfully big leap into thin air.
For right now.
He also says he has/had access to the names and stations of agents all over the world.
Hell, he's saying he could have surveilled Choom's emails, his clearances were that high (too bad he didn't, if true).
Fact is, he hasn't blown any of said agents yet.
Most traitors/spys are civilians out of the security agencies.
I wouldn't put money on that, were I you.
MayBee said...
But surely, he was a hacker at one time, no?
Could we define "hacker"?
Achilles said...
Ellsberg released information on people who were spying on their own citizens and abusing the information for political purposes.
No, Ellsberg released info on how we got into 'Nam and encouraged the boys in Hanoi to keep fighting.
The bastard should have been shot years ago.
I love watching the lefties turn on this guy!
Palladian said...
I love watching the lefties turn on this guy!
Oh please. They would eat their own children if it meant preserving the concocted fantasy realities they've created for themselves and go blue in the face telling everyone else how real they are.
No, Manning is evidence of why we should consider someone's sexual orientation when granting a security clearance.
leslyn said...
Fact is, he hasn't blown any of said agents yet.
True, as far as we know, and I suspect he doesn't have that much information to trade. Hell, ed, you just as good as admitted his security clearances couldn't be as good as he said they were.
No, I said, "he's saying he could have surveilled Choom's emails, his clearances were that high (too bad he didn't, if true"; if it's true, I wish he had hacked Choom's emails.
We might get a little truth.
No, Manning is evidence of why we should consider someone's sexual orientation when granting a security clearance.
I bet your "special" relationship with that horse put the kibosh on security clearances for you, kemosabe!
I agree with you, Ann, about Edward Snowden. As Iowahawk said, it is possible to be disgusted with domestic surveillance and still be horrified (forget what word he used) at Snowden.
Snowden does seem unbearably self-righteous, and obscenely willing to harm the United States.
However, he should be so lucky as to be Guy Burgess. At least Burgess was said to be funny and charming, even if he was a thoroughgoing traitor.
But I believe he was also fully aware that the leak could/would lend aid and comfort to the enemy.
Probably, but that doesn't matter:
"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort."
You can't just ignore the "adhering to their Enemies" clause. That's the ACTUAL treason! The "aid and comfort" are just something which must accompany the "adhering" before it can be treason.
Thus, you can openly sympathize with Al Qaeda and say "I hope they win the war" or even "I hope they blow up a few more skyscrapers", and that's not treason. You can do something which helps Al Qaeda, like "casting a vote against the war in Afghanistan" or "refusing to volunteer for service in the US military", and that's not treason either. You have to be deliberately trying to help the enemy in order to be a traitor.
It is also worth noting that the language refers to "enemies of the United States", not "enemies of the current US government". If the current US government is engaged in illegal activity against the people of the United States, arguably the government itself is the enemy and the traitors would be the people who help it. :)
The bastard should have been shot years ago.
"Embarrassing American politicians" is not, happily, a capital crime in America. :)
Characterizing Snowden's action is a distraction from the real story. The federal government is spying on its own citizens on a massive scale in secret. This is a massive invasion of our privacy and is a potential violation of our civil rights on an unprecedented scale.
"Manning is a traitor because his deeds have probably gotten Americans on the ground killed"
Not so far as is known or claimed. In fact, there's no information to support that anyone has been harmed as a result of Manning's leaks.
Which is more than we can say of America's war against the world. In the notorious video shot from the helicopter that was part of the materials Manning released, we see Americans murdering innocent people on the ground, as the soldiers in the copter laugh and express eagerness to open fire.
Something I have not seen commented on, is that this is the internet we are talking about, and it does not matter where in the world you are located. Even your "landline" telephone calls probably go on the 'net once it leaves town.
And the Russians and Chinese undoubtedly heard about all this as soon as it was started here, and have busily been building their own installations to do the same as what the NSA is doing.
It will be like years ago when the USGS would not release aerial photographs because of "national security," so whoever wanted them for whatever purpose just asked the Soviet embassy, and they said, "Sure, no problema! Be happy to oblige!"
This is an observation and not a judgment. Sometimes the payoff is not money but fame......In the future we should let all matters of national security be decided by high school dropouts under the age of thirty. The idea of having elected officials, judges, and security analysts decide such matters is a recipe for disaster.
I'm thinking that we should appoint a trumvirate of Manning, Snowden, and Glenwald to pass on security classifications. Nothing is secret until those guys say it is secret.
The idea of having elected officials, judges, and security analysts decide such matters is a recipe for disaster.
You could make a case that elected officials can be trusted, although it may be challenging to keep a straight face while doing so. You could also argue that judges can be trusted, although since they have to rely on what the people asking for the warrant tell them there's a definite "garbage in, garbage out" problem.
But... "security analysts"? Deferring to security analysts on questions of how much power security analysts should have is roughly as intelligent as buying a used car by handing a blank check to the salesman and saying "just pick me out a good one".
The likes of Snowden and Manning cannot be trusted with American security.
The only people who can be trusted with American security are the men and women who paid Snowden and Manning to handle American security. :)
In the notorious video shot from the helicopter that was part of the materials Manning released, we see Americans murdering innocent people on the ground, as the soldiers in the copter laugh and express eagerness to open fire.
While the video is horrifying in retrospect, the voices of the soldiers clearly indicate they truly thought they were shooting at insurgents, not civilians.
My Lai it ain't.
As was said in the article quoted for this thread, whistleblowers (true civil disobedience) tend to stay home.
Saying "whistleblowers (true civil disobedience)" is bizarre, since whistleblowing and civil disobedience have nothing to do with one another.
It is, in any event, silly to criticize Snowden for not voluntarily going to prison for years.
A US citizen can enter Hong Kong without a visa. To enter mainland China, he would have had to apply through a Chinese consulate in the US and wait for approval.
Being in Hong Kong then gives him the option of safely applying to China for refuge.
For all those who condemn Snowdon's actions:
I take it that you are not interested in whether the NSA is monitoring your internet activities
AND you resent being informed about such matters.
As long as the threat of a terror attack means the threat that the party in power could be voted out, it will be considered an "existential threat" to the US.
"While the video is horrifying in retrospect, the voices of the soldiers clearly indicate they truly thought they were shooting at insurgents, not civilians.
"My Lai it ain't."
Hmmm...yeah. Residents of the town (in a land in which we are the foreign invaders) walking openly in the street doing nothing to conceal themselves and up to no apparent harm are automatically perceived by the invading forces (us) as "insurgents," and thus are prime targets to be murdered.
There's a problem, right there.
Subsequently, they fire on others who have come to rescue the wounded. This, in itself, is monstrous. Then, when they discover the van they fired on contains children, someone says, "It's their fault for bringing children to a battle." Of course, it wasn't a fucking battle and no one was firing weapons...except us, when we slaughtered them from on high.
Comparisons to My Lai aside, it was certainly an act of premeditated murder.
edutcher said ...
Reference "How does a private [like Manning] get this type of security clearance?"
From what I've read ... a lot more responsibility is given to enlisted men these days.
Perhaps, but I've be away from it for a while now. However, rank is isn't the issue, the issue, as I've said here multiple times, is "Roles & Permissions" ... criteria that are concerned with need-to-know and a person's performance "role" within an organization.
A security clearance of what ever level, Secret, Top Secret, etc., does NOT provide access to anything. "Roles & Permissions" criteria are what provide access...only one of multiple criteria is possession of an appropriate level clearance. "Roles & Permissions" are normally very compartmentalized.
The problem today is that, in possibly an inadvertent commercial shortcut, "Roles & Permissions" get conflated by office of performance rather than individual need to know....a form of blanket access for everyone in an office. Like, if you work in a 4 star general's office you might very well have the same access as the 4 star general.
This weakness may be due to OMB Circular A-76 required examinations of "commercial activities" ... where IT and ITE provision and management have been determined to be "non-governmental" and therefore contracted out for the most part, with minimal governmental oversight day to day.
One thing for certain is that PFC Manning and IT Tech Snowden some how seem to have acquired access equivalent to a general staff "G2" [intelligence & security] officer with virtually no criteria for such access being met.
And here we are.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा