6 ms·

Where I have a hard time with the "Snowden as hero" storyline is my nagging suspicion that he make very clear and deliberate attempts to place himself in a posi

by Nrsolis 13y ago

Where I have a hard time with the "Snowden as hero" storyline is my nagging suspicion that he make very clear and deliberate attempts to place himself in a position to have access to these materials for the express purpose of stealing them. He was essentially fired from the employ of the CIA only to find another position at NSA. Apparently the CIA got wise to his attempts and shut him off. The NSA wasn't so lucky. None of this detracts from the disclosures of NSA overreach. But we would be foolish to discount the possibility that all of this is a huge smokescreen for a concerted and consistent attempt to weaken or expose US intelligence operations. The fact that an impingement of our sources and methods helps our adversaries cannot be understated.

tptacek 13y ago
Yes. Since it probably needs to be said: several (not all) of the Snowden disclosures were important, valuable, and necessary: the Verizon metadata, BULLRUN.
- drharris 13y ago
  It's all very important and necessary. Only the sheep-like are ok with a government that operates in secret against its own citizens. They have pitted themselves in an information war against their own citizenry. Like corporations amass patents, our only weapon to defend ourselves is as much information as we can gather about them.
  - tptacek 13y ago
    No, that's not necessarily true. For instance, the "spymall catalog" contained no revelations about NSA abuses against Americans, only details of intelligence tradecraft.
    - Zigurd 13y ago
      That's only true if we are truly far past the days of COINTELPRO.
      - tptacek 13y ago
        Indeed, it's also only true if NSA isn't concealing the existence of the Groom Lake aliens who have taken over the USG.
        Zigurd 13y ago
        You really think that COINTELPRO-type ops are are likely as space aliens? Or is that just gratuitous condecension?
intslack 13y ago
>He was essentially fired from the employ of the CIA No, he was not: "The C.I.A did not file any report on Snowden indicating that it suspected he was trying to break into classified computer files to which he did not have authorized access while he was employed at the C.I.A., nor was he returned home from an overseas assignment because of such concerns," Todd Ebitz, an agency spokesman, said in the statement. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/12/us/cia-disputes-early-suspicions-on-snowden.html http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/12/us/cia-disputes-early-susp...
- Nrsolis 13y ago
  Did you read that article? I did when it was first published. Are we really at the point where we take the word of an "agency spokesman" and not the sourcing of the journalists who quoted two unnamed sources to verify the story?
  - intslack 13y ago
    Yes, I did read the article. Here is Snowden's account: >Mr. Snowden said that in 2008 and 2009, he was working in Geneva as a telecommunications information systems officer [...] He began pushing for a promotion, but got into what he termed a “petty e-mail spat” in which he questioned a senior manager’s judgment. >Several months later, he was writing his annual self-evaluation when he discovered flaws in the software of the C.I.A.’s personnel Web applications. He warned his supervisor, but his boss advised him to drop the matter. After a technical team also brushed him off, his boss finally agreed to allow him to test the system to prove that it was flawed. >He did so by adding some code and text “in a nonmalicious manner” to his evaluation document that showed that the vulnerability existed, he said. His immediate supervisor signed off on it and sent it through the system, but a more senior manager — the man Mr. Snowden had challenged earlier — was furious and filed a critical comment in Mr. Snowden’s personnel file. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/18/world/snowden-says-he-took-no-secret-files-to-russia.html?pagewanted=2 http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/18/world/snowden-says-he-took...
    - Nrsolis 13y ago
fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
>Apparently the CIA got wise to his attempts and shut him off. Maybe the CIA sent him. It happened in the USSR (that intelligence services NKVD, KGB, GRU, etc, competed fiercely with each other). >The NSA wasn't so lucky. Good. >But we would be foolish to discount the possibility that all of this is a huge smokescreen for a concerted and consistent attempt to weaken or expose US intelligence operations. I agree. You make a good case for having a clearly defined separation of intelligence services, and lots of checks. >The fact that an impingement of our sources and methods helps our adversaries cannot be understated. It can be overstated, and it has been. Also, what adversaries?
epsylon 13y ago
> this is a huge smokescreen for a concerted and consistent attempt to weaken or expose US intelligence operations. The fact that an impingement of our sources and methods helps our adversaries cannot be understated. How so? And which adversaries?
talmand 13y ago
If you wish to accuse a spy agency of spying on its own citizens, you must have proof. To obtain proof you must make very clear and deliberate attempts to steal them so that you may present them as evidence. I seem to recall not too long ago anyone claiming that the NSA had massive spying programs aimed at American citizens would be laughed off as tinfoil paranoid conspiracy theorists because our government would never do such a thing. Without his proof that you point out he stole, would anyone have taken him seriously? There's several examples of people doing the very same thing that were later held up as heroes, except in their cases they stole documents from a corporation that were guilty of illegal abuses. Why should Snowden be any different? Because he stole government documents?

by Nrsolis 13y ago

tptacek 13y ago

Yes. Since it probably needs to be said: several (not all) of the Snowden disclosures were important, valuable, and necessary: the Verizon metadata, BULLRUN.

drharris 13y ago
It's all very important and necessary. Only the sheep-like are ok with a government that operates in secret against its own citizens. They have pitted themselves in an information war against their own citizenry. Like corporations amass patents, our only weapon to defend ourselves is as much information as we can gather about them.
- tptacek 13y ago
  No, that's not necessarily true. For instance, the "spymall catalog" contained no revelations about NSA abuses against Americans, only details of intelligence tradecraft.
  - Zigurd 13y ago
    That's only true if we are truly far past the days of COINTELPRO.
    - tptacek 13y ago
      Indeed, it's also only true if NSA isn't concealing the existence of the Groom Lake aliens who have taken over the USG.
      - Zigurd 13y ago
        You really think that COINTELPRO-type ops are are likely as space aliens? Or is that just gratuitous condecension?

intslack 13y ago

>He was essentially fired from the employ of the CIA No, he was not: "The C.I.A did not file any report on Snowden indicating that it suspected he was trying to break into classified computer files to which he did not have authorized access while he was employed at the C.I.A., nor was he returned home from an overseas assignment because of such concerns," Todd Ebitz, an agency spokesman, said in the statement. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/12/us/cia-disputes-early-suspicions-on-snowden.html http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/12/us/cia-disputes-early-susp...

Nrsolis 13y ago
Did you read that article? I did when it was first published. Are we really at the point where we take the word of an "agency spokesman" and not the sourcing of the journalists who quoted two unnamed sources to verify the story?
- intslack 13y ago
  Yes, I did read the article. Here is Snowden's account: >Mr. Snowden said that in 2008 and 2009, he was working in Geneva as a telecommunications information systems officer [...] He began pushing for a promotion, but got into what he termed a “petty e-mail spat” in which he questioned a senior manager’s judgment. >Several months later, he was writing his annual self-evaluation when he discovered flaws in the software of the C.I.A.’s personnel Web applications. He warned his supervisor, but his boss advised him to drop the matter. After a technical team also brushed him off, his boss finally agreed to allow him to test the system to prove that it was flawed. >He did so by adding some code and text “in a nonmalicious manner” to his evaluation document that showed that the vulnerability existed, he said. His immediate supervisor signed off on it and sent it through the system, but a more senior manager — the man Mr. Snowden had challenged earlier — was furious and filed a critical comment in Mr. Snowden’s personnel file. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/18/world/snowden-says-he-took-no-secret-files-to-russia.html?pagewanted=2 http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/18/world/snowden-says-he-took...
  - Nrsolis 13y ago

fnordfnordfnord 13y ago

>Apparently the CIA got wise to his attempts and shut him off. Maybe the CIA sent him. It happened in the USSR (that intelligence services NKVD, KGB, GRU, etc, competed fiercely with each other). >The NSA wasn't so lucky. Good. >But we would be foolish to discount the possibility that all of this is a huge smokescreen for a concerted and consistent attempt to weaken or expose US intelligence operations. I agree. You make a good case for having a clearly defined separation of intelligence services, and lots of checks. >The fact that an impingement of our sources and methods helps our adversaries cannot be understated. It can be overstated, and it has been. Also, what adversaries?

epsylon 13y ago

> this is a huge smokescreen for a concerted and consistent attempt to weaken or expose US intelligence operations. The fact that an impingement of our sources and methods helps our adversaries cannot be understated. How so? And which adversaries?

talmand 13y ago

If you wish to accuse a spy agency of spying on its own citizens, you must have proof. To obtain proof you must make very clear and deliberate attempts to steal them so that you may present them as evidence. I seem to recall not too long ago anyone claiming that the NSA had massive spying programs aimed at American citizens would be laughed off as tinfoil paranoid conspiracy theorists because our government would never do such a thing. Without his proof that you point out he stole, would anyone have taken him seriously? There's several examples of people doing the very same thing that were later held up as heroes, except in their cases they stole documents from a corporation that were guilty of illegal abuses. Why should Snowden be any different? Because he stole government documents?