General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhy I am skeptical about Edward Snowden.
To be honest, the first Red Flag for me was that he leaked to Glenn Greenwald, who I always thought had a personal agenda and whose work I always either ignore or take with a grain of salt (usually the former). Because it was written by Greenwald, I also took into consideration that the info released was not necessarily the info that Greenwald received - giving Snowden a little benefit of the doubt. The first I heard of the article was on DU, although unfortunately there was no link associated with the post so I had to Google it to find out anything.
The first thing I found/Googled/downloaded was the leaked FISC order to Verizon.
I don’t know if any of you actually remember the fight with the Bush Administration over their illegal warrant less wiretapping, but this FISC appeared to fall into the resolution that came directly out of that fight.
Then, Snowden claimed that the NSA had “direct access” to the servers and that he, as a NSA analyst, could listen to any conversation he wanted.
But that was directly contradictory to the FISC order that he also supposedly leaked. In the first place, if the NSA had direct access to the servers, they wouldn’t NEED the FISC order. Secondly, the order specifically omitted “content”, which means that he couldn’t, as he claimed, listen to any conversation.
The next day, every company that he claimed the NSA had “direct access” to their servers denied the allegations, also claiming that they had received court orders and complied with them. - but they adamantly denied any “direct access“. To prove such, several of them are now sueing the government to release the exact orders that they received.
Then, several Congressional members verified that they had been briefed on the program in compliance with the 2008 law that so many of us fought for. Yes, some of these were Repukes, but some of them were Dems that I trust such as DiFi and Al Franken.
Shortly after that, he was fired from his contractors job and his actual salary was released - which was substantially less than he claimed. Now we knew that he was capable of lying - or at least capable of exaggeration.
Then I find out from here on DU that he’s a Ron Paul fan. NOW it starts to make sense! He is not a true “whistle-blower” trying to save Civil Liberties and Privacy, but merely wants to destroy anything to do with the government.
Then he releases more “blockbusters”, such as the US spy agencies are spying on Russia. As the former agent on CBS News says, everything that Snowden has released seems more focused on embarrassing the NSA than actually protecting anyone’s rights. This also fits into his Ron Paul aficionado persona.
One good thing I have personally noticed, is that people now are talking about how “nothing is private” and how much people actually reveal on Facebook, Twitter, etc. For instance, I pointed out that people used to use answering machines to see who to rob (Hello, we’re not home right now…) and someone else pointed out that his wife always liked to update their status (We’re at Waffle House right now) - which means “come rob our house” or, as he pointed out, if someone was looking for him they knew exactly where he was.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
cali
(114,904 posts)(oh and do you trust Bernie Sanders and Pat Leahy? They both have a very different take than the odious DiFi and junior Senator Franken)
What Snowden has done is reignited a much needed debate on the ever expanding phenomenon of massive surveillance and all that entails and that's meant things like the ACLU action and Google's announcement today.
this is not about Snowden and as I said days ago, hero or devil's spawn, it doesn't really matter.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)security clearance to a high school dropout like Snowden. That's the scandal everyone seems to overlook. Our military shouldn't be outsourced and neither should our spying.
railsback
(1,881 posts)and needs to be fixed ASAP. Sends chills down my spine knowing ham-hocks like Snowden are playing around in private data.
burnodo
(2,017 posts)It's an attempt to discredit the information he revealed
jazzimov
(1,456 posts)I did discredit his info, which is why I "attacked" (your words) Snowden.
But please go on running around with your hair on fire without actually thinking.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)
BeyondGeography
(39,377 posts)A freaking rookie outsource snatches the Verizon order and they don't even find out about it until he leaks it.
It's really embarrassing, and speaks to colossal waste and ineptitude. Waste, because they can't even police themselves, let alone the world they are accumulating all this data on.
Combine this with Tsarnaev, who was on a terrorism watch list and couldn't even be identified after they had pictures of him bombing the Marathon in his hometown no less, and I don't know why anyone fears the NSA.
Their budget should be cut in half. We have underfunded schools and we're building an empire of excess and incompetence that freaks people out unnecessarily.
randome
(34,845 posts)It doesn't sound like he ever really had anything to do with the 'spy' part of the NSA.
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font]
[hr]
okaawhatever
(9,462 posts)I don't think it's like he only had a ts clearance for three months. That is a whole different animal. Not only would it mean they had recently interviewed and vetted him, it would mean that they didn't have protocols in place for limiting info for those with new clearances.
Clearly something needs to be done about the private contractors, but i'll cut some slack on his time at the place due to the fact that he previously worked at the cia and had held a clearance.
randome
(34,845 posts)[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font]
[hr]
HardTimes99
(2,049 posts)exercised its power of the purse to cut all funding for it. In like manner, your suggestion to cut the budget in half is one way to start to tame Leviathan. I'll be contacting my Rep and two Senators to suggest exactly that: cutting the budgets of the intelligence agencies.
HardTimes99
(2,049 posts)the larger issue is whether we can trust our government to respect our privacy and the NSA leaks are the current manifestation of that trust issue.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)He is most certainly not the only dangerous one involved.
HardTimes99
(2,049 posts)characterization of him, I'd like to expand on my thoughts a little.
I can see this 'trust' issue cuts both ways now and your concern for the outsourcing of intel functions to the private sector is duly noted (and should be overwhelmingly commended and endorsed by this board). That said, when I use the phrase 'trust issue,' I'm referring to an even larger sense that the ordinary citizen can trust his or her government not to violate his or her privacy. For example, when I write that I think taxes should be raised on the top 1% of the population, I need to know that my words are not getting dumped into some secret repository to subsequently be used by a President Palin or Santorum to send me to the camps. If the government has probable cause to think I have committed an offense, fine, let them go before a judge and present their probable cause in specifics. But do not let the government know my location or to whom I speak. Not unless the government has probable cause to believe I have committed an offense snd a member of the judiciary agrees with the government that probable cause exists.
The alternative to this -- where government can collect your metadata even without the slightest indication that you have done anything wrong -- produces a 'chilling effect' upon free expression. I have already decided not to discuss electronically other than in the broadest general terms any counter measures I have taken or may take in the event I conclude the government is not respecting my privacy. And what if writing those words somehow flags some algorithm deep within the turgid bowels of the NSA? Must I now worry that my refusal to discuss my plans itself will be used as evidence against me? I think you can see where this trust issue leads and it's not a pretty sight.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)and I contend THAT is not the end of the issue. Because even when the govt isn't snooping and using that information against you...which is reasonable....but the THING that makes this all possible remains....and even if the U.S. isn't dominating the Internet....which is what this is really about...Control....they are in a power struggle over who controls the Internt.....so power is repesented by access to any computer system in the WHOLE world....and even if the US govt is removed from the equation...the data is still there! Some one else dominates the access to that data....be it another country or a corporation....we have to deal with the data...which will always be valuable.
HardTimes99
(2,049 posts)stays away from personalities and focuses instead on larger issues and ramifications (meta-issues, if you will).
You have definitely got me thinking and if I'm stirred off my lazy duff to thinking, DU will go crazy for it 
My compliments.
harun
(11,348 posts)Your post says it all.
jazzimov
(1,456 posts)Or do you actually HATE intelligent discussion? Is that the way you "appear" to be "intelligent", by merely dismissing any actual intelligent discourse?
I don't think you are intelligent at all. I think you are the exact opposite. Would you care to prove me wrong? I would love an actual intelligent discourse - but from your dismissive post I don't think you are capable of providing such.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)Snowden's motivation's, personality. penchants, girlfriend, location, or any other poo-flinging I've missed, have nothing to do with what he revealed.
harun
(11,348 posts)
Kolesar
(31,182 posts)jazzimov
(1,456 posts)on those items that you say you want to discuss.
So, discuss!
backscatter712
(26,355 posts)dkf
(37,305 posts)When a National Security Agency contractor revealed top-secret details this month on the government's collection of Americans' phone and Internet records, one select group of intelligence veterans breathed a sigh of relief.
Thomas Drake, William Binney and J. Kirk Wiebe belong to a select fraternity: the NSA officials who paved the way.
For years, the three whistle-blowers had told anyone who would listen that the NSA collects huge swaths of communications data from U.S. citizens. They had spent decades in the top ranks of the agency, designing and managing the very data-collection systems they say have been turned against Americans. When they became convinced that fundamental constitutional rights were being violated, they complained first to their superiors, then to federal investigators, congressional oversight committees and, finally, to the news media.
To the intelligence community, the trio are villains who compromised what the government classifies as some of its most secret, crucial and successful initiatives. They have been investigated as criminals and forced to give up careers, reputations and friendships built over a lifetime.
Today, they feel vindicated.
jazzimov
(1,456 posts)testimony until I found out that he retired in 2001.
He knows NOTHING about the current process. Yes, it was WRONG then and I was one of the ones who campaigned against it. But it all changed in 2008. I don't see anything different since the oversight provided in the 2008 laws, and I don't see anything indicating that the Government has violated those laws.
dkf
(37,305 posts)But it hasn't gone through scrutiny because they've blocked it in the FISA court.
However, what group speaks of is the raw sigint that Snowden spoke of, that they are capturing from the fiber optic cables. The meta data from Verizon is on the top of that to make sense of the raw data.
That is why we haven't begun to see the docs behind the real collection of data.
Snowden saw it as a superuser so he knows all this raw data exists.
I'm interested in how you think they "blocked it in the FISA court"? For one thing, that's why we insisted on Congressional oversight. So unless you have some additional information your first statement makes no sense.
As for them tapping into the fiber optic, that is encrypted information. It would be nothing more than gibberish unless they had the encryption key. Which, granted, can be hacked if you have someone smart enough. But, tapping into the fiber optic cables would render the FISC order unnecessary, which was my original argument.
Given all the other untruths that Snowden has given, I sincerely doubt that he was a superuser with the power of root. But even if he was, all he had access to was encrypted data. which, for novices out there, would appear as gibberish.
The FISC order that he leaked directly contradicts all of his claims.
dkf
(37,305 posts)Spygate Leaks Imperil State-Secrets Defense
First it was the President George W. Bush administration and then the President Barack Obama administration, which for years have been arguing in court that the state-secrets privilege shields the government from lawsuits accusing it of siphoning Americans’ electronic communications to the National Security Agency without warrants.
But with the recent Spygate leaks, including one that all calling metadata of Verizon customers is being forwarded to the NSA, the government is hard-pressed to maintain that line with a straight face.
“By contrast, the recent disclosures have greatly undermined the factual and legal basis for the government defendants’ separate and distinct state secrets motion,” the Electronic Frontier Foundation wrote in a recent court filing.
The EFF’s lawsuit, which has had a tortured history through the courts, is based in part on allegations of internal AT&T documents, first published by Wired, that outline a secret room in an AT&T San Francisco office and others which allegedly route internet traffic to the NSA.
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/06/state-secrets-imperiled/
jazzimov
(1,456 posts)But, it still refers to pending legal documents. I think we should wait until those decisions actually go to court.
Although, I'll have to admit going back to my original OP, I don't see anything that Snowden has presented that impacts my feelings on this issue any more than I had previously.
However, I am glad that we are talking about this.
dkf
(37,305 posts)This has gone way beyond Snowden. You won't need to believe anything he said soon because he opened enough cracks for us to do our own discovery.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)railsback
(1,881 posts)Only hero worshipping here. There will be no detractions, even in the absence of facts. Believing the Snowden requires a leap of faith.. like Jesus.
why don't you return to your adoration of all things related to the President and don't forget to continue your mindless apologist crap too, hon.
For the record:
I'm not terribly impressed by Snowden. Unlike you and our flock of faithful devotees, I'm not snared by the cult of personality.
this is a stupid game, but it's easy to outplay your sort.
It would seem you're terribly impressed by yourself to assume such things. Can't argue with that.
jazzimov
(1,456 posts)technique to dismiss arguments that you cannot find arguments against.
Although there may be some truth to the argument that SOME people are victims of the "cult of personality", it is not as brad as many here like to portray it.
Ultimately, it is NOT an argument. Many here simply use it to dismiss arguments that they cannot refute. Unfairly, I would add. It is evidence that you have no other logical argument to present, and that - in essence - you "give up".
In other words - you lose.
treestar
(82,383 posts)The irony of that!
usGovOwesUs3Trillion
(2,022 posts)have you heard the government discredit the authenticity of the top secret documents he released?
have you seen the reaction to his revelations around the world, and by our own gov?
what do you think the whole world and our leaders are reacting to, a scam?
do you think global warming is just a conspiracy, too?
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)usGovOwesUs3Trillion
(2,022 posts)and being published and discussed world wide for a week now.
jazzimov
(1,456 posts)I have seen any except for the FISC order that directly contradicts his statements.
If I have missed others, I would love to see them!
Please produce a link to them!
usGovOwesUs3Trillion
(2,022 posts)jazzimov
(1,456 posts)I cannot accept that PowerPoint because it was created shortly before the "release" and there is been lots of evidence that it is WRONG.
Plus, there is nothing to tie it to the NSA.
If you like, I can create a much more impressive PowerPoint Presentation and claim it came from the NSA. Would you like that?
usGovOwesUs3Trillion
(2,022 posts)If it is fake, why doesn't the government say so?
You can waste your time making whatever fake documents you want, I and the rest of the world could care less, but if you ever come up with authentic, top secret NSA topics, me, and the rest of the world, are listening.
Until then, good night.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)usGovOwesUs3Trillion
(2,022 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)I am still questioning what someone like he is doing anywhere near this information he claims to have is. There is something very peculiar about his background and his clearance. I can connect dots and there is something strange about that and I want to know what that is. He has no business passing a background check....much less a Top Secret one. WHO cleared this guy? I can guarantee they know who that person is....I want to know how that happened. That guy was already a severe liability and a flaw in the system as anyone who works on computer systems will tell you....the humans using them are the weakest link and most dangerous in the information chain. Most people with even a general clearance will tell you it takes a year and everyone in their past going back many years are actually contacted. So how did this guy get through that....and if he had some different method than most....what was that? How did he slip through the cracks....cause that is a weakness that needs to be addressed.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)
usGovOwesUs3Trillion
(2,022 posts)jazzimov
(1,456 posts)First of all, I don't know you would include global warming in this rant unless you were trying to make a personal attack. Global Warming or more correctly Climate Change has nothing to do with this discussion but to answer your question it is REAL. ALL climate scientists agree, and the evidence is over-whelming.
Happy?
As for your other questions:
#1 - What documents? the only one I have seen was the FISC order that directly contradicts many of his original statements, as I pointed out in the OP. If he has released more, I haven't seen them. They might actually change my mind. Can you produce these "other documents" or are they just a figment of deluded imaginations?
#2 - As for the reactions, I mentioned those in my OP. The major services that he named vehemently denied his allegations, and several of them are requesting permission to reveal those secret requests to definitively refute his allegations.
#3 - I see a lot of different international reactions - most of them are considering the possibility that this is a "scam".
As for the "other whistle-blowers", I addressed that up-thread. During the Bush Admin there were a lot of criminal acts. We managed to get that changed in 2008. Any whistle-blowers since 2008 that you would like to quote?
usGovOwesUs3Trillion
(2,022 posts)jazzimov
(1,456 posts)Do you mean "facts"? I know that "facts" and "logic" are hard to deal with sometimes.
usGovOwesUs3Trillion
(2,022 posts)blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)Detract
Misguide
Deceive
Straw man
Sock puppet
Apologist
Cheerleader
Take your pick.
.
.
We're all Germans now.
jazzimov
(1,456 posts)I wonder who perfected that technique?
Hmmmm......
harun
(11,348 posts)jazzimov
(1,456 posts)Yeah, right.
Kolesar
(31,182 posts)Having fun at the Democratic forum, today??
backscatter712
(26,355 posts)The OP is yet more despicable, detestable, disgusting, disgraceful, depraved and dishonorable character assassination.
And shit like the OP's does not belong on DU!
baldguy
(36,649 posts)There's a huge difference between A) criticizing the fed govt to try to make it better & criticizing the Obama Admin to get them to do the right thing, and B) criticizing the fed govt & the Obama Admin to try to eliminate them.
jazzimov
(1,456 posts)okaawhatever
(9,462 posts)
grasswire
(50,130 posts)Not me. Never. Her husband makes money from war.
jazzimov
(1,456 posts)Strange.
Demit
(11,238 posts)baldguy
(36,649 posts)grasswire
(50,130 posts)Implicitly.
baldguy
(36,649 posts)If you're going to make this about personalities, you're got to deal with those personalities who are most vocal in support of Snowden - and all the baggage that goes with them.
grasswire
(50,130 posts)And your premise is very, very flawed.
I am a progressive Democrat. I do not support Dinos, and I most certainly do not support wingnuts.
baldguy
(36,649 posts)grasswire
(50,130 posts)I oppose oppression and deceit. I support the rule of law and the Constitution. I oppose government lying. I support due process and rules of evidence.
And I hate bullies.
baldguy
(36,649 posts)And Glenn Greenwald is the quintessential bully.
grasswire
(50,130 posts)I wait for a trial, with federal rules of evidence and due process.
backscatter712
(26,355 posts)She supported the Iraq War, she supported the PATRIOT Act, she supported SOPA/PIPA, she supports video game censorship, and now she supports the NSA's illegal surveillance.
HardTimes99
(2,049 posts)citizen of the republic without it (imo). That said, Snowden claimed he had the capability to tap into phone call or email. He did not claim (AFAIK) that the practice was widespread, merely that the capability existed. Maybe that's a distinction without a difference and it may be that I have missed some cruical reportage on this story that further clarifies matters.
I do want to put something out for your consideration. During the 1960s, members of the counterculture and anti-war movements regularly complained that they were being spied upon by agencies of the government. Those claims were routinely dismissed with the label of 'paranoia,' 'conspiracy theorist' and so forth. Then, in the mid-70s, a Senate Committee chaired by Sen. Frank Church documented that, indeed, the government had been spying on and infiltrating many of those afore-mentioned protesters. So perhaps you can understand why DUers who know this history would be skeptical of the government. And I would hope you would accord their skepticism the same respect yours so rightly deserves.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)This isn't about Snowden. Snowden doesn't matter. Snowden is irrelevant. What matters is what he revealed, which has been, thus far, confirmed as 100% accurate.
cali
(114,904 posts)
uponit7771
(90,358 posts)...salary.
and really?!
GREENWALD?!
REALLY?!
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)which has been verified as 100% accurate. Whether Snowden as a contractor had direct access is irrelevant; how much he was getting paid is also irrelevant.
randome
(34,845 posts)Did Snowden show any diagrams, Presidential emails, anything to support his claims?
The NSA is watching our thoughts form as we type? Really? What did he show to support that claim?
The only thing he was able to steal were internal NSA office documents. There is nothing to support the claim that he had access to anything other than that.
Even his resume appears to be false.
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font]
[hr]
Safetykitten
(5,162 posts)uponit7771
(90,358 posts)Gothmog
(145,488 posts)Snowden's story does raise some questions for me. I do like the fact that there has been some further oversight hearings due to Snowden's disclosures and hopefully the facts will eventually come out.