Slashdot Mirror
Could Snowden Have Been Stopped In 2009?
Hugh Pickens DOT Com writes "The NYT reports that when Edward Snowden was working as a CIA technician in Geneva in 2009, his supervisor wrote a derogatory report in his personnel file, noting a distinct change in the young man's behavior and work habits, as well as a troubling suspicion that Snowden was trying to break into classified computer files to which he was not authorized to have access. But the red flags went unheeded and Snowden left the CIA to become a contractor for the NSA so that four years later he could leak thousands of classified documents. In hindsight, officials say, the report by Snowden's supervisor and the agency's suspicions might have been the first serious warnings of the disclosures to come, and the biggest missed opportunity to review Snowden's top-secret clearance or at least put his future work at the NSA under much greater scrutiny. Had Booz Allen or the NSA seen Snowden's CIA file before hiring him, it almost certainly would have affected his employment says Dashiell Bennett. 'The weakness of the system was if derogatory information came in, he could still keep his security clearance and move to another job, and the information wasn't passed on,' says a Republican lawmaker who has been briefed on Snowden's activities. It's difficult to tell what would have happened had NSA supervisors been made aware of the warning the CIA issued Snowden in what is called a 'derog' in federal personnel policy parlance."
While we are playing what-ifs... could George Bush have been stopped in 2001? I mean if we didn't have him in first place, we quite likely would not have had Snowden later. Root cause analysis cannot be stopped half-way.
I would expect these agencies to produce "evidence" that denigrates his position, and I would not at first glance accept it.
Do you take Snowden at his word? Snowden to newspaper: I took contractor job to gather evidence
That means he took the job under false pretenses, he both lied to get the job, and continued lying while he was working. He certainly wouldn't have gotten the job if he had told them he wanted it to steal secrets, would he? Nor would he have been granted the access he was given if he had told them he wanted to steal secrets.
And who was speaking for Snowden in Russia?
Russian attorney Anatoly Kucherena — who also happens to be the head of public council for the Federal Security Service (FSB)* — has announced that Edward Snowden may leave the Moscow airport on Wednesday. -- ...Russian Intelligence Speaks For Edward Snowden
Snowden had his birthday party at the Russian embassy in Hong Kong and made arrangements with them for his trip to Russia. This connection was lied about at multiple levels, and multiple times. Why?
I'm sure he'll enjoy his new homeland.
So, I think the answer to your question (What is really going on? ) is pretty clear, but not one you or most people here will accept.
*Federal Security Service (FSB) took the place of the old KGB - Committee for State Security, the Soviet secret police that was responsible for keeping the Soviet Communist Party in power.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
Is the date on the report questioning Snowden's loyalties the same as the date the material was actually entered into the electronic records? I can think of several strong reasons why the CIA might want to do some rewriting of its own history here. And certainly they have the expertise to do a good of that. In fact it would be routine for them to alter history: that is how you give a mole a credible back story.
The CIA is not just a spy agency. They are also the USA Bureau of Missinformation And Dysinformation.
Will