3 ms·
As Joshua Foust points out, Snowden gave some info to Der Spiegel that they chose not to publish which seems to conflict with some of the "no harm" statements h
by brown9-2 13y ago
As Joshua Foust points out, Snowden gave some info to Der Spiegel that they chose not to publish which seems to conflict with some of the "no harm" statements here:
SPIEGEL has decided not to publish details it has seen about secret operations that could endanger the lives of NSA workers. Nor is it publishing the related internal code words. However, this does not apply to information about the general surveillance of communications. They don’t endanger any human lives — they simply describe a system whose dimensions go beyond the imaginable.
http://joshuafoust.com/dangerously-naive-or-a-liar/ http://joshuafoust.com/dangerously-naive-or-a-liar/
The Guardian and Washington Post also decided to not publish the majority of the Prism slides for similar national security reasons, even though Snowden's initial push was to have them all published (and almost immediately after receipt by the Guardian and WaPo).
- DigitalJack 13y agoHe has asked the journalists to be rigorous in weighing the decision to publish what he gives them. I don't have a citation but it's in some of greenwalds recent posts.
- brown9-2 13y agoThat would seem to conflict with his statement that I have not provided any information that would harm our people - agent or not - and I have no intention to do so. If Der Spiegel (or the Guardian, or the Washington Post) was less rigorous, then information could have been published that harmed "our people" or intelligence agents. He is positioning himself as having carefully reviewed everything he has given out, but if he has given info to some media sources who themselves have been "rigorous" enough and realized the danger of publishing some of it, then the statement in this letter cannot also be true.