4 ms·

That's the first time I've ever heard that. You got a source for that claim? (I'm not suggesting I've researched it, I just have heard a fair amount about the

by nocman 11y ago

That's the first time I've ever heard that. You got a source for that claim? (I'm not suggesting I've researched it, I just have heard a fair amount about the whole thing, and I've just never heard that he tried "appropriate channels").

striking 11y ago
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2014/03/07/snowden-i-raised-nsa-concerns-internally-over-10-times-before-going-rogue/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2014/03/07... > Edward Snowden said he repeatedly tried to go through official channels to raise concerns about government snooping programs but that his warnings fell on the deaf ears > In testimony to the European Parliament released Friday morning, Snowden wrote that he reported policy or legal issues related to spying programs to more than 10 officials, but as a contractor he had no legal avenue to pursue further whistleblowing ("appropriate channels" was a quote from the previous comment I was replying to)
- thomasahle 11y ago
  NSA eventually confirmed it as well http://www.nbcnews.com/feature/edward-snowden-interview/paper-trail-nsa-releases-email-snowden-sent-agency-officials-n117086 http://www.nbcnews.com/feature/edward-snowden-interview/pape...
  - ikeboy 11y ago
    The screenshot there is not about surveillance. Is there a fuller version somewhere? Also, the article says >The official said that Snowden had asked a question, but had not “raised concerns” about the NSA’s practices.
    - Lawtonfogle 11y ago
      Why are you acting as if there is a difference between asking a question and raising concerns? Going to you boss and saying "I saw X doing Y, is that what should be happening?" is clearly doing both.
      - ikeboy 11y ago
        If he said something along the lines of "I was told X, I'm not sure what it means", that's different from "I was told X, but I believe X to be wrong", or "I was told X, but X is wrong".
    - themartorana 11y ago
      This is some mental gymnastics right here. Also this is coming from the very NSA that got outted. They're not going to give any admission to having given Snowden no other alternative, or they've no leg to stand on.
      - ikeboy 11y ago
        Can you explain how the link above contains evidence that "NSA eventually confirmed it", as it was purported to? If it doesn't, then I am correct in calling it out, no?
        themartorana 11y ago
        To me, the NSA confirming Snowden voiced concerns is confirmation that he didn't decide to just leak documents haphazardly - now, we can conjecture about what NSA response he would have considered to be enough, but he at least voiced concern before taking matters into his own hands. The NSA will never acknowledge that they left him no avenue other than leaking - that would place him squarely as a noble whistleblower, who only went rogue when left no other choice (and, not at all a traitor). Edit: since I can't reply to ikeboy below, I'll do it here - as others have pointed out, it doesn't matter that he leaked more than you think was appropriate, since everyone has a different measure for that. He also gave it to people far more qualified than himself to parse through - their choice to publish is not within his control. I'm sure you would have done differently, but this is what it is - we're better off for his actions, full stop. The rest is background noise.
        ikeboy 11y ago
        Even if he had no choice, he certainly didn't have to leak everything without the time to go over it. As I pointed out elsewhere in this thread, he's leaked stuff that were completely legal, i.e. the US spying on other countries.
        swyman 11y ago
        Quit moving the goalposts
fnordfnordfnord 11y ago
Not only did Snowden attempt to raise alarm, but so have others to little effect. Thomas Drake, and William Binney, for starters who were both much higher up in the NSA than Snowden. Neither had any effect on NSA lawbreaking and Drake in particular suffered quite a bit for his efforts. I think it was fair for Snowden to assume and plan for the worst when tattling on the NSA.

by nocman 11y ago

striking 11y ago

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2014/03/07/snowden-i-raised-nsa-concerns-internally-over-10-times-before-going-rogue/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2014/03/07... > Edward Snowden said he repeatedly tried to go through official channels to raise concerns about government snooping programs but that his warnings fell on the deaf ears > In testimony to the European Parliament released Friday morning, Snowden wrote that he reported policy or legal issues related to spying programs to more than 10 officials, but as a contractor he had no legal avenue to pursue further whistleblowing ("appropriate channels" was a quote from the previous comment I was replying to)

thomasahle 11y ago
NSA eventually confirmed it as well http://www.nbcnews.com/feature/edward-snowden-interview/paper-trail-nsa-releases-email-snowden-sent-agency-officials-n117086 http://www.nbcnews.com/feature/edward-snowden-interview/pape...
- ikeboy 11y ago
  The screenshot there is not about surveillance. Is there a fuller version somewhere? Also, the article says >The official said that Snowden had asked a question, but had not “raised concerns” about the NSA’s practices.
  - Lawtonfogle 11y ago
    Why are you acting as if there is a difference between asking a question and raising concerns? Going to you boss and saying "I saw X doing Y, is that what should be happening?" is clearly doing both.
    - ikeboy 11y ago
      If he said something along the lines of "I was told X, I'm not sure what it means", that's different from "I was told X, but I believe X to be wrong", or "I was told X, but X is wrong".
  - themartorana 11y ago
    This is some mental gymnastics right here. Also this is coming from the very NSA that got outted. They're not going to give any admission to having given Snowden no other alternative, or they've no leg to stand on.
    - ikeboy 11y ago
      Can you explain how the link above contains evidence that "NSA eventually confirmed it", as it was purported to? If it doesn't, then I am correct in calling it out, no?
      - themartorana 11y ago
        To me, the NSA confirming Snowden voiced concerns is confirmation that he didn't decide to just leak documents haphazardly - now, we can conjecture about what NSA response he would have considered to be enough, but he at least voiced concern before taking matters into his own hands. The NSA will never acknowledge that they left him no avenue other than leaking - that would place him squarely as a noble whistleblower, who only went rogue when left no other choice (and, not at all a traitor). Edit: since I can't reply to ikeboy below, I'll do it here - as others have pointed out, it doesn't matter that he leaked more than you think was appropriate, since everyone has a different measure for that. He also gave it to people far more qualified than himself to parse through - their choice to publish is not within his control. I'm sure you would have done differently, but this is what it is - we're better off for his actions, full stop. The rest is background noise.
        ikeboy 11y ago
        Even if he had no choice, he certainly didn't have to leak everything without the time to go over it. As I pointed out elsewhere in this thread, he's leaked stuff that were completely legal, i.e. the US spying on other countries.
        swyman 11y ago
        Quit moving the goalposts

fnordfnordfnord 11y ago

Not only did Snowden attempt to raise alarm, but so have others to little effect. Thomas Drake, and William Binney, for starters who were both much higher up in the NSA than Snowden. Neither had any effect on NSA lawbreaking and Drake in particular suffered quite a bit for his efforts. I think it was fair for Snowden to assume and plan for the worst when tattling on the NSA.