4 ms·

They also leave out the fact that he had been reprimanded for his actions numerous times, to include being removed from roles and duties because of his negative

They also leave out the fact that he had been reprimanded for his actions numerous times, to include being removed from roles and duties because of his negative actions. The fact that he moved from the CIA back to an NSA supported role without this being disclosed is ridiculous in of itself. Edward had a childish reaction to release documents that had nothing to do with Xkeyscore (of which the media claim as the reason for his release), particularly those of Tailored Access Operations [TAO]. This was the action of a petulant individual lashing out at the system however he felt he could. Don't let it be ignored that he was specifically working in a capacity supporting operations in China.. then fled there before moving on to Russia. No one talks about or acknowledges that Edward was in a support role and not an "Operator" at the agency either. He was pissed because he applied twice and was denied, in part due to his horrible support on operation plans. He wanted to act out and damage the NSA and their mission. The hero worship of Snowden is deplorable. I only wish the american public had a real understanding and grasp of what goes on to keep their "bubble" safe and sound. Edwards actions have had an outsized impact and unfortunately it won't be mad public in a nonclassified space for many years to come, because of further operational impacts. He was 100% a traitor.

dgellow 6y ago
> then fled there before moving on to Russia That’s just a lie. He was in a plane on his way to Ecuador when the US cancelled his passport, resulting in him being blocked in the Russian airport for a while. At some point the situation created such a mess for the airport that Russia accepted to let him enter the country. All of this has been documented at length, and anyone on this forum is likely old enough to remember the events from when they happened live. At no point he wanted to be in Russia. The US forced the situation by canceling his passport mid-flight and putting pressure on any country that would offer their help (my home country did and was publicly pressured for this). In any case, you can forget about the guy, the information he gave demonstrate that the NSA under Obama was committing plenty of illegal surveillance of the US population (and of course other countries, but US citizens don’t seem to care about non-US rights), created a system of hidden courts, and lied about all of it. That should be enough to consider him a whistleblower.
- ganoushoreilly 6y ago
  So you're saying he was never in China? He literally fled to Hong Kong first. So again, what did I state that was a lie? I didn't say he wanted to be there, but he clearly wanted to be in Hong Kong, then move on... and ended up in Russia? Again, what part of this is false? Did you know him? I did, he's a fucking tool. The information leaked was piecemeal. Take the bible, leak random pages and one will say live a joyous life, love each other.. where a different page might tell you to sacrifice your only child. Unless you've been privy to all of the information at the right scale, you've been sold a piece, a piece that paints a narrative. The FISA courts weren't new. You have have to have a secure means to disclose data without risking release in a non classified environment. Obviously this concept is over your head. Even if he was genuine in trying to blow a whistle on one program, that doesn't mean he has a right to do a smash and grab and release un-related materials. He took a spray and pray approach to retaliation and it just so happened he was able to form a "good guy" narrative around one piece of it.
  - adolph 6y ago
    > Did you know him? I did, he's a fucking tool. This reads like you have an indiscrete level of personal animus. Aside from being lazily pejorative, it isn’t very descriptive. Still I’m so glad to know if I just had “all the information at the right scale” this wouldn’t go “over the head” of regular folk like me. Truly you are a federal bodhisattva.
  - adolph 6y ago
    > Take the bible, leak random pages and one will say live a joyous life, love each other.. where a different page might tell you to sacrifice your only child. Unless you've been privy to all of the information at the right scale, you've been sold a piece, a piece that paints a narrative. This line of argument seems more in line with Scientologist’s protection of “Zenu” stories thru cooyright than “the Bible,” which has substantially available to read since Gutenberg. If only the security apparatus was more like Jesus than Mr. Hubbard. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenu https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenu
fleshdaddy 6y ago
What branch did you serve in? You seem really offended at the notion that some Americans are willing to take freedom and privacy over complete security. It’s hard for you to believe but know that many, many people are willing to make that trade off. People have even died for it.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 6y ago
  It's childish to accuse them of being a military shill for posting something you disagree with.
  - fleshdaddy 6y ago
    It’s more so the worship of the military that made me assume they’re part of it. Couple that with referring to everyone as the “American public” and the knowledge they imply they have of classified documents that won’t be made public for some time. Doesn’t seem like a stretch.
adolph 6y ago
Would you say the same of Mark Felt? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Felt https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Felt
- ganoushoreilly 6y ago
  > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Felt https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Felt No I wouldn't. A, I don't have first hand knowledge of the situation, and B, it's a drastically different scenario. I'm not anti-whistleblower. I'm anti retaliation because you were told no.
  - adolph 6y ago
    You are against retaliation on the part of whistleblowers or organizations? It sounds like you are saying that if a person blowing a whistle is “told no” by the organization whose actions bring the whistle forth, that person should just drop the whistle. This doesn’t seem to make sense outside an incredible credulity for the organization’s ability to evaluate their own behavior. Is that a fair summary of your assertion?

dgellow 6y ago

> then fled there before moving on to Russia That’s just a lie. He was in a plane on his way to Ecuador when the US cancelled his passport, resulting in him being blocked in the Russian airport for a while. At some point the situation created such a mess for the airport that Russia accepted to let him enter the country. All of this has been documented at length, and anyone on this forum is likely old enough to remember the events from when they happened live. At no point he wanted to be in Russia. The US forced the situation by canceling his passport mid-flight and putting pressure on any country that would offer their help (my home country did and was publicly pressured for this). In any case, you can forget about the guy, the information he gave demonstrate that the NSA under Obama was committing plenty of illegal surveillance of the US population (and of course other countries, but US citizens don’t seem to care about non-US rights), created a system of hidden courts, and lied about all of it. That should be enough to consider him a whistleblower.

ganoushoreilly 6y ago
So you're saying he was never in China? He literally fled to Hong Kong first. So again, what did I state that was a lie? I didn't say he wanted to be there, but he clearly wanted to be in Hong Kong, then move on... and ended up in Russia? Again, what part of this is false? Did you know him? I did, he's a fucking tool. The information leaked was piecemeal. Take the bible, leak random pages and one will say live a joyous life, love each other.. where a different page might tell you to sacrifice your only child. Unless you've been privy to all of the information at the right scale, you've been sold a piece, a piece that paints a narrative. The FISA courts weren't new. You have have to have a secure means to disclose data without risking release in a non classified environment. Obviously this concept is over your head. Even if he was genuine in trying to blow a whistle on one program, that doesn't mean he has a right to do a smash and grab and release un-related materials. He took a spray and pray approach to retaliation and it just so happened he was able to form a "good guy" narrative around one piece of it.
- adolph 6y ago
  > Did you know him? I did, he's a fucking tool. This reads like you have an indiscrete level of personal animus. Aside from being lazily pejorative, it isn’t very descriptive. Still I’m so glad to know if I just had “all the information at the right scale” this wouldn’t go “over the head” of regular folk like me. Truly you are a federal bodhisattva.
- adolph 6y ago
  > Take the bible, leak random pages and one will say live a joyous life, love each other.. where a different page might tell you to sacrifice your only child. Unless you've been privy to all of the information at the right scale, you've been sold a piece, a piece that paints a narrative. This line of argument seems more in line with Scientologist’s protection of “Zenu” stories thru cooyright than “the Bible,” which has substantially available to read since Gutenberg. If only the security apparatus was more like Jesus than Mr. Hubbard. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenu https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenu

fleshdaddy 6y ago

What branch did you serve in? You seem really offended at the notion that some Americans are willing to take freedom and privacy over complete security. It’s hard for you to believe but know that many, many people are willing to make that trade off. People have even died for it.

2OEH8eoCRo0 6y ago
It's childish to accuse them of being a military shill for posting something you disagree with.
- fleshdaddy 6y ago
  It’s more so the worship of the military that made me assume they’re part of it. Couple that with referring to everyone as the “American public” and the knowledge they imply they have of classified documents that won’t be made public for some time. Doesn’t seem like a stretch.

adolph 6y ago

Would you say the same of Mark Felt? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Felt https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Felt

ganoushoreilly 6y ago
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Felt https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Felt No I wouldn't. A, I don't have first hand knowledge of the situation, and B, it's a drastically different scenario. I'm not anti-whistleblower. I'm anti retaliation because you were told no.
- adolph 6y ago
  You are against retaliation on the part of whistleblowers or organizations? It sounds like you are saying that if a person blowing a whistle is “told no” by the organization whose actions bring the whistle forth, that person should just drop the whistle. This doesn’t seem to make sense outside an incredible credulity for the organization’s ability to evaluate their own behavior. Is that a fair summary of your assertion?