Slashdot Mirror


Snowden Says No One Listened To 10 Attempts To Raise Concerns At NSA

As reported by the Washington Post, Edward Snowden denies in no uncertain terms the idea that he failed to go through proper channels to expose what he thought were troubling privacy violations being committed by the NSA, and that he observed as a contractor employed by the agency. The article begins: "[Snowden] said he repeatedly tried to go through official channels to raise concerns about government snooping programs but that his warnings fell on the deaf ears. In testimony to the European Parliament released Friday morning, Snowden wrote that he reported policy or legal issues related to spying programs to more than 10 officials, but as a contractor he had no legal avenue to pursue further whistleblowing." Further, "Elsewhere in his testimony, Snowden described the reaction he received when relating his concerns to co-workers and superiors. The responses, he said, fell into two camps. 'The first were well-meaning but hushed warnings not to "rock the boat," for fear of the sort of retaliation that befell former NSA whistleblowers like Wiebe, Binney, and Drake.' All three of those men, he notes, were subject to intense scrutiny and the threat of criminal prosecution."

12 of 273 comments (clear)

  1. The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by mellon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...the more star systems will slip through your fingers!

    Seriously, if this is true, it's a pretty good illustration of why tin-pot dictators throwing the book and the kitchen sink at whistleblowers are a far more serious security threat than the whistleblowers themselves.

    1. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by Stormwatch · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Whistleblowers are not a problem; they are the solution.

    2. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And where's the justice for the people who ARE the problem?

      Where are the charges of perjury before congress? Of subverting the constitution of the united states? Arguably, of treason, given the massive damage done to the reputation and interests of the US by the actions supported by a few individuals?

      We know that individuals who have done one millionth of what the NSA has done have met harsh punishment at the hands of the law. Where's the punishment here?

      Ah yes, I forgot. Laws only apply to the "little people".

    3. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not everyone is dumb. Some people actually think and do care. He obviously understood the ramifications of what was going on and he reported it. No one cared and the programs still exist. Now he has leaked all this shit and WE ALL UNDERSTAND but not the NSA nor the GOVERNMENT.

      So what's your argument here? Put him in jail because he understood things he was not supposed to understand and then we're all fine? The programs don't really exist?

      Fine, put him in jail, but not before putting thousands if not tens of thousands of others in jail first - the ones who created and the ones who didn't report these systems.

  2. Re:The NSA could not admit wrongdoing. *CAN not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Furthermore, once you've realized this IS NOT the first time the US intelligence agencies have LIED to protect themselves "and the country by extension",
    (Pearl Harbor, USS Maddox, JFK, RFK, USS Liberty, Iran/Contra, 9/11, Iraq, UBL etc etc) and that this "protect the quo, for the nation" attitude has supplanted
    the checks and balances *and truth* that USED to run our country prior to the cold wars of monkey business...

    how do you hold your head up and wave the flag, knowing all that? An honest man can't.

  3. Who should face prosecution? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From the article: "Both Obama and his national security adviser, Susan E. Rice, have said that Snowden should return to the United States and face criminal sanctions for his actions."

    Perhaps the Obama administration could set an example of following US law by appointing a special prosecutor to investigate the legality of the recent revelations? It's always good to practice what you preach!

  4. Re:why wait? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What is it with the constant disbelieving of Snowden?

    Of the things that we now know the truth or falsity of, everything he has said so far has been true, while most of what the NSA has said has been a lie. Learn from experience, people.

  5. Re:Complete load of crap by vux984 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Basically he says that he told his supervisors that, in his opinion, a spy agency shouldn't be spying.

    So if a general decides to annex kansas and a soldier objects you are going to post that he "basically told his supervisors that in his opinion a military organization shouldn't be conducting military operations." and his opinion should be ignored.

    Yeah, good grasp of the situation. The NSA is a spy agency, with specific objectives. Their activities were so far removed from those objects that they are completely unjustifiable, and a collossal waste of effort and money.

  6. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  7. Re:why wait? by Weirsbaski · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think he might have had a few more people on his side if he would have said this from day one.

    Maybe he anticipated how they would try to play the game?

    Snowden: I have docs showing ...
    NSA: no you don't
    Snowden: here they are
    NSA: ok, but you should've worked within the system
    Snowden: I told 10 people in the system
    <--- where we are today
    NSA: no you didn't
    Snowden: here's who I told and when ...
    NSA: ok, but <another attempt to change the focus to Snowden...>

    --

    I am not a sig.
  8. Next time they will listen by skiminki · · Score: 5, Insightful

    and the whistleblower candidate will be properly flagged, monitored, caught in action, and silently jailed before he/she manages to release anything to the public.

  9. Re:Cost effectiveness by gIobaljustin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Perhaps the criticsm of the NSA should focus on the very poor use of resources.

    No. We must focus on the fact that they're infringing upon our freedoms. As soon as you make it about efficacy, you start to seem as if you're saying it would be okay if the programs were effective, and that is simply not true. The US is supposed to be the land of the free and the home of the brave, so freedom should reign above all.

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett