Ed Edward Snowden - Whistleblower or Criminal?

[jdp]

I'm not sure that the Supreme Court would agree with your interpretation of the 4th Amendment. I believe that it ruled way back in 1979 that the collection of telephone records by the govt. does not violate the 4th Amendment.

The did: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_v._Maryland according to the summary, part of the decision rested on,

"petitioner voluntarily conveyed numerical information to the telephone company." Since the defendant had disclosed the dialed numbers to the telephone company so they could connect his call, he did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the numbers he dialed.

Though I haven't read the full decision, this summary leaves me with a question. Doing my banking (for example), I also disclose to the employees at the bank, tellers ect., details of my deposits or withdraws. Though I doubt that anyone would disagree that a warrant would be needed to see those records. So how would that example differ from the decision in this case?

 

[Democracy Simulator]

So, a 'twerp' and an 'idiot'. Anyone agin him who has got anything of substance to say about what laws he has broken and why he has not acted in the public interest?

 

[madfoot]

So, a 'twerp' and an 'idiot'. Anyone agin him who has got anything of substance to say about what laws he has broken and why he has not acted in the public interest?

It takes a lot of balls to insult someone from over the internet.

Ignore them.

 

[Lowpro]

So, a 'twerp' and an 'idiot'. Anyone agin him who has got anything of substance to say about what laws he has broken and why he has not acted in the public interest?

I don't know WHAT laws he's broken. Was the judge's order protected by a law that makes it illegal to know about it?

As for acting in the public interest he simply hasn't for now. We'll see what happens and whether it benefits or harms the public. For now...it simply hasn't done anything except stoke flames. Either he's going to go out with a bang or a whimper and my bet is on the latter. If anything he'll pass like bad gas within the year.

 

[roger]

How many people here actually believe the government has enough people in it all together to read (even quickly scan) all the emails, twits, facebook massages, and all the other daily written stuff not to mention even minimally screen a fraction of all spoken communications - even passing them through a really fast computerized screening system to pick ones for further examination. I do not believe they have either so I suspect they do not have the ability to go through all of our communications - but I do think if they are not stupid they can go after a good number of the ones that might be worth it for security purposes.

No one thinks that. OTOH, I think they entirely do have the capacity to search the database for, say, fuelair (substitute your legal name, of course), and effectively perform a warrant-less search on you.

 

[roger]

So, a 'twerp' and an 'idiot'. Anyone agin him who has got anything of substance to say about what laws he has broken and why he has not acted in the public interest?

This is what you sign when you get a security clearance: http://www.fas.org/sgp/isoo/new_sf312.pdf

You sign that at the tail end of a lot of training and explanation of just how many years you will spend in prison if you disclose state secrets.

I have not looked at the details of what he has released , but I'm guessing a heck of a lot of what he released falls under that agreement, as the general language in the press runs along the lines of "released top secret information about...". If so, he is guilty of espionage. Have you heard of people like Aldrich Ames? If you perform espionage in the United States you face anywhere from life in prison to the death penalty.

Another thing, you are not to travel to a communist country if you have a security clearance without notifying your security officer first. Fleeing there after releasing state secrets is not exactly going to help his cause.

Whatever you might think of that, the US takes this stuff extremely seriously. His life in the US is over. US intelligence is never, ever, going to let something like this go lightly.

Edited to add: that link specifies the laws in question -

f Sections 641, 793, 794, 798, *952 and 1924, Title 18, United States Code, *the provisions of Section 783(b), Title 50, United States Code, and the provisions of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982.

 

[roger]

duplicate

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

So, a 'twerp' and an 'idiot'. Anyone agin him who has got anything of substance to say about what laws he has broken and why he has not acted in the public interest?

In a brief statement, a spokesman for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence said the intelligence community is “reviewing the damage” the leaks have done. “Any person who has a security clearance knows that he or she has an obligation to protect classified information and abide by the law,” said the spokesman, Shawn Turner.

Do you honestly think this twerp hasn't broken any laws? Do you think the people in the White House and the NSA and sitting around now saying "Gosh diggity darn, this guy outsmarted us and there's nothing we can do about it"?

 

[madfoot]

Do you honestly think this twerp hasn't broken any laws? Do you think the people in the White House and the NSA and sitting around now saying "Gosh diggity darn, this guy outsmarted us and there's nothing we can do about it"?

No one denied that he broke laws. Of course exposing Obama's dirty laundry is illegal.

 

[SezMe]

I don't think I would mind this one going to court.

If it does, so much (all?) of it will be classified. I doubt the public will get a glimpse of much substance at all.

 

[SezMe]

How many people here actually believe the government has enough people in it all together to read (even quickly scan) all the emails, twits, facebook massages, and all the other daily written stuff not to mention even minimally screen a fraction of all spoken communications - even passing them through a really fast computerized screening system to pick ones for further examination. I do not believe they have either so I suspect they do not have the ability to go through all of our communications - but I do think if they are not stupid they can go after a good number of the ones that might be worth it for security purposes.

They don't collect content. They only collect what they're calling "metadata" such as originator and destination phone numbers, duration, etc. Now, I'm not saying they aren't but that's the official story. Officially, they have to get a court order to delve behind this metadata.

No one thinks that. OTOH, I think they entirely do have the capacity to search the database for, say, fuelair (substitute your legal name, of course), and effectively perform a warrant-less search on you.

Again, according to them, they don't even collect names at either end of the conversation. So they couldn't search for fuelair. I surmise, however, if they do get a court order, names will be the first thing they go get.

 

[MinnesotaBrant]

I can't imagine him in prison for saying whats been said on the internet many times,by all the networks etc, in many ways. They even have pictures of all these places on the internet. In other words its not remotely a secret to people who care and the President alluded to that fact. What did the rest of you say. I suppose this was a big secret for some of you. The rest of you are probably salivating at the chance to water-board another Red,Nazi,Towelhead because you are born a predator and that's what you do. Gosh, go polish your guns or something.

Yeah, when I was in China they monitored my internet game playing because it wen't against my stated purpose of being there which was tourist. They indeed stopped by to take pictures in case I might try something funny. On the other had what the guy revealed hardly threatens the US and it is true that Hong Kong doesn't have an extradition treaty so there you go.

 

[madfoot]

I can't imagine him in prison for saying whats been said on the internet many times,by all the networks etc, in many ways. They even have pictures of all these places on the internet. In other words its not remotely a secret to people who care and the President alluded to that fact. What did the rest of you say. I suppose this was a big secret for some of you. The rest of you are probably salivating at the chance to water-board another Red,Nazi,Towelhead because you are born a predator and that's what you do. Gosh, go polish your guns or something.

Yeah, when I was in China they monitored my internet game playing because it wen't against my stated purpose of being there which was tourist. They indeed stopped by to take pictures in case I might try something funny. On the other had what the guy revealed hardly threatens the US and it is true that Hong Kong doesn't have an extradition treaty so there you go.

Most people knew what the NSA does in secret before now, but there was no actual proof before this. By this forum's absurd standards of proof when it comes to casual political discussions, I suspect anyone who speculated about NSA spying apparatuses would have been thrown in with the 9/11 truthers and the FEMA campers.

Personally, I don't get why "skepticism" on this forum manifests itself as blind deference to authority. Randi himself isn't like that, most celebrity skeptics I know of aren't like that.

 

[332nd]

Most people knew what the NSA does in secret before now, but there was no actual proof before this. By this forum's absurd standards of proof when it comes to casual political discussions, I suspect anyone who speculated about NSA spying apparatuses would have been thrown in with the 9/11 truthers and the FEMA campers.

Personally, I don't get why "skepticism" on this forum manifests itself as blind deference to authority. Randi himself isn't like that, most celebrity skeptics I know of aren't like that.

& this forum isn't like that.

 

[Puppycow]

The NSA trusted this guy?

Edward Snowden sounds like a thoughtful, patriotic young man, and I’m sure glad he blew the whistle on the NSA’s surveillance programs. But the more I learned about him this afternoon, the angrier I became. Wait, him? The NSA trusted its most sensitive documents to this guy? And now, after it has just proven itself so inept at handling its own information, the agency still wants us to believe that it can securely hold on to all of our data? Oy vey!

According to the Guardian, Snowden is a 29-year-old high-school dropout who trained for the Army Special Forces before an injury forced him to leave the military. His IT credentials are apparently limited to a few “computer” classes he took at a community college in order to get his high-school equivalency degree—courses that he did not complete. His first job at the NSA was as a security guard. Then, amazingly, he moved up the ranks of the United States’ national security infrastructure: The CIA gave him a job in IT security. He was given diplomatic cover in Geneva. He was hired by Booz Allen Hamilton, the government contractor, which paid him $200,000 a year to work on the NSA’s computer systems.

Let’s note what Snowden is not: He isn’t a seasoned FBI or CIA investigator. He isn’t a State Department analyst. He’s not an attorney with a specialty in national security or privacy law.

Instead, he’s the IT guy, and not a very accomplished, experienced one at that. If Snowden had sent his résumé to any of the tech companies that are providing data to the NSA’s PRISM program, I doubt he’d have even gotten an interview. Yes, he could be a computing savant anyway—many well-known techies dropped out of school. But he was given access way beyond what even a supergeek should have gotten. As he tells the Guardian, the NSA let him see “everything.” He was accorded the NSA’s top security clearance, which allowed him to see and to download the agency’s most sensitive documents. But he didn’t just know about the NSA’s surveillance systems—he says he had the ability to use them. “I, sitting at my desk, certainly had the authorities [sic] to wiretap anyone from you or your accountant to a federal judge to even the president if I had a personal email,” he says in a video interview with the paper.

 

[madfoot]

The NSA trusted this guy?

Edward Snowden sounds like a thoughtful, patriotic young man, and I’m sure glad he blew the whistle on the NSA’s surveillance programs. But the more I learned about him this afternoon, the angrier I became. Wait, him? The NSA trusted its most sensitive documents to this guy? And now, after it has just proven itself so inept at handling its own information, the agency still wants us to believe that it can securely hold on to all of our data? Oy vey!

According to the Guardian, Snowden is a 29-year-old high-school dropout who trained for the Army Special Forces before an injury forced him to leave the military. His IT credentials are apparently limited to a few “computer” classes he took at a community college in order to get his high-school equivalency degree—courses that he did not complete. His first job at the NSA was as a security guard. Then, amazingly, he moved up the ranks of the United States’ national security infrastructure: The CIA gave him a job in IT security. He was given diplomatic cover in Geneva. He was hired by Booz Allen Hamilton, the government contractor, which paid him $200,000 a year to work on the NSA’s computer systems.

Let’s note what Snowden is not: He isn’t a seasoned FBI or CIA investigator. He isn’t a State Department analyst. He’s not an attorney with a specialty in national security or privacy law.

Instead, he’s the IT guy, and not a very accomplished, experienced one at that. If Snowden had sent his résumé to any of the tech companies that are providing data to the NSA’s PRISM program, I doubt he’d have even gotten an interview. Yes, he could be a computing savant anyway—many well-known techies dropped out of school. But he was given access way beyond what even a supergeek should have gotten. As he tells the Guardian, the NSA let him see “everything.” He was accorded the NSA’s top security clearance, which allowed him to see and to download the agency’s most sensitive documents. But he didn’t just know about the NSA’s surveillance systems—he says he had the ability to use them. “I, sitting at my desk, certainly had the authorities [sic] to wiretap anyone from you or your accountant to a federal judge to even the president if I had a personal email,” he says in a video interview with the paper.

Reads like a hitjob.

 

[angrysoba]

Reads like a hitjob.

Maybe, but the point of it is this...

Because Snowden is now in Hong Kong, it’s unclear what the United States can do to him. But watch for officials to tar Snowden—he’ll be called unpatriotic, unprofessional, treasonous, a liar, grandiose, and worse. As in the Bradley Manning case, though, the more badly Snowden is depicted, the more rickety the government’s case for surveillance becomes. After all, they hired him. They gave him unrestricted access to their systems, from court orders to PowerPoint presentations depicting the crown jewels of their surveillance infrastructure.

Even if it is a "hit-job", the people who come out of this looking bad is the US government, because:

a) Why were they employing people this obviously unqualified?

b) Who feels safe about entrusting even more powers to such people as this?

The hitjob is double-edged because the worse their employee looks, the worse the judgment of the employer looks.

 

[Democracy Simulator]

Do you honestly think this twerp hasn't broken any laws? Do you think the people in the White House and the NSA and sitting around now saying "Gosh diggity darn, this guy outsmarted us and there's nothing we can do about it"?

I'm not suggesting he hasn't broken any laws, I just thought it might be more interesting to hear from the authoritarian side what laws they thought he had broken and why they think he hasn't acted in the public interest. Because the ad homs don't really add much to the debate.

 

[Democracy Simulator]

This is what you sign when you get a security clearance: http://www.fas.org/sgp/isoo/new_sf312.pdf

You sign that at the tail end of a lot of training and explanation of just how many years you will spend in prison if you disclose state secrets.

I have not looked at the details of what he has released , but I'm guessing a heck of a lot of what he released falls under that agreement, as the general language in the press runs along the lines of "released top secret information about...". If so, he is guilty of espionage. Have you heard of people like Aldrich Ames? If you perform espionage in the United States you face anywhere from life in prison to the death penalty.

Another thing, you are not to travel to a communist country if you have a security clearance without notifying your security officer first. Fleeing there after releasing state secrets is not exactly going to help his cause.

Whatever you might think of that, the US takes this stuff extremely seriously. His life in the US is over. US intelligence is never, ever, going to let something like this go lightly.

Edited to add: that link specifies the laws in question -

Well, thanks for the information, that gives me a better idea about what he might be charged with, should he end up in custody. Do you think his revelations are in the public interest, especially if it is true that as an analyst he had virtually unlimited access to wiretap someone?

 

[Democracy Simulator]

The NSA trusted this guy?

Well, this article, if it held any weight, would probably suggest that Snowden would have a good whistle-blowing defence for exposing mismanagement .