3 ms·

Well, from the looks of it Snowden was asking a procedural question, not outlying any concerns. He also received a response. I have to wonder if you actually re

Well, from the looks of it Snowden was asking a procedural question, not outlying any concerns. He also received a response. I have to wonder if you actually read the email.

CapitalistCartr 12y ago
You've missed the point. If that's all there is, why lie about it. Their lying is becoming obsessive. They have no credibility to believe that there are no more Snowdon emails. The content of this one email isn't relevant.
- jonnybgood 12y ago
  What was the lie exactly? Snowden asked the General Counsel a procedural question. As far as we know, Snowden never brought any legal concerns to superiors or otherwise concerning the classified programs of the NSA. And in that regard, the NSA may not be lying. Simply put, if the NSA did not receive concerns from Snowden on the legality of the classified programs, then the NSA is not lying.
  - CapitalistCartr 12y ago
    Again, the content of the email they produced isn't the point. That they spent much of a year denying any such emails existed is. Also, you're assuming their statement that this is the only email is true. By now, everthing they say, imply, or don't say must be suspect.
ChrisAntaki 12y ago
> The NSA’s new discovery of written contact between me and its lawyers - after more than a year of denying any such contact existed - raises serious concerns. ^ Something Snowden says, at the beginning of the article.
- mpyne 12y ago
  It's something Snowden claims, but I don't see the justification for it if you actually read Snowden's email. Snowden says his one (instead of multiple emails as he previously claimed) disproved this NSA claim: "after extensive investigation, including interviews with his former NSA supervisors and co-workers, we have not found any evidence to support Mr. Snowden’s contention that he brought these matters to anyone’s attention." But his one email made no such suggestion as bringing any legal matter whatsoever to anyone's attention. It asked whether an E.O. was really at the same level of statute law (it is, it is only the scope of effect that is different). Snowden's email didn't even suggest he had any complaints to make about NSA interpretation of law. If anything it reminded me more of the arguments made by "Freeman on the Land". Snowden claims that other emails do exist though, with actual substantive complaints. But I'm not sure what to believe, if he actually seems to think this email of his represented a formal complaint, then who knows what was actually in his claimed email to the SID Office of Compliance? He also doesn't mention who he sent his email regarding his EO 12333 question to. Was it this very email? Does he expect legal counsel to read minds too? And either way, his complaint was that the activity conducted under EO 12333 was "indefensible", not "illegal". But I don't know of any major organizations (private corporations or public agencies) that would deliberately take a harder route to undertake an activity they were authorized to do.
  - ChrisAntaki 12y ago
    First, there was a complete denial, and now magically, an email manifests. That's the point you seem to be missing.
    - mpyne 12y ago
      There was no complete denial. Does anyone really believe the NSA said "We promise we have never received a single email from Edward Snowden"? He'd probably have to send dozens of emails every day in the normal course of his duties. The NSA did put out a complete denial that he has raised an actual issue with the agency's conduct of their intelligence programs, and this email doesn't contradict that line one bit. There may be such emails out there (Snowden claims there's at least one), but this isn't one of them. I mean, otherwise NSA wouldn't have released it.

Well, from the looks of it Snowden was asking a procedural question, not outlying any concerns. He also received a response. I have to wonder if you actually read the email.

CapitalistCartr 12y ago

You've missed the point. If that's all there is, why lie about it. Their lying is becoming obsessive. They have no credibility to believe that there are no more Snowdon emails. The content of this one email isn't relevant.

jonnybgood 12y ago
What was the lie exactly? Snowden asked the General Counsel a procedural question. As far as we know, Snowden never brought any legal concerns to superiors or otherwise concerning the classified programs of the NSA. And in that regard, the NSA may not be lying. Simply put, if the NSA did not receive concerns from Snowden on the legality of the classified programs, then the NSA is not lying.
- CapitalistCartr 12y ago
  Again, the content of the email they produced isn't the point. That they spent much of a year denying any such emails existed is. Also, you're assuming their statement that this is the only email is true. By now, everthing they say, imply, or don't say must be suspect.

ChrisAntaki 12y ago

> The NSA’s new discovery of written contact between me and its lawyers - after more than a year of denying any such contact existed - raises serious concerns. ^ Something Snowden says, at the beginning of the article.

mpyne 12y ago
It's something Snowden claims, but I don't see the justification for it if you actually read Snowden's email. Snowden says his one (instead of multiple emails as he previously claimed) disproved this NSA claim: "after extensive investigation, including interviews with his former NSA supervisors and co-workers, we have not found any evidence to support Mr. Snowden’s contention that he brought these matters to anyone’s attention." But his one email made no such suggestion as bringing any legal matter whatsoever to anyone's attention. It asked whether an E.O. was really at the same level of statute law (it is, it is only the scope of effect that is different). Snowden's email didn't even suggest he had any complaints to make about NSA interpretation of law. If anything it reminded me more of the arguments made by "Freeman on the Land". Snowden claims that other emails do exist though, with actual substantive complaints. But I'm not sure what to believe, if he actually seems to think this email of his represented a formal complaint, then who knows what was actually in his claimed email to the SID Office of Compliance? He also doesn't mention who he sent his email regarding his EO 12333 question to. Was it this very email? Does he expect legal counsel to read minds too? And either way, his complaint was that the activity conducted under EO 12333 was "indefensible", not "illegal". But I don't know of any major organizations (private corporations or public agencies) that would deliberately take a harder route to undertake an activity they were authorized to do.
- ChrisAntaki 12y ago
  First, there was a complete denial, and now magically, an email manifests. That's the point you seem to be missing.
  - mpyne 12y ago
    There was no complete denial. Does anyone really believe the NSA said "We promise we have never received a single email from Edward Snowden"? He'd probably have to send dozens of emails every day in the normal course of his duties. The NSA did put out a complete denial that he has raised an actual issue with the agency's conduct of their intelligence programs, and this email doesn't contradict that line one bit. There may be such emails out there (Snowden claims there's at least one), but this isn't one of them. I mean, otherwise NSA wouldn't have released it.