Per SPIEGEL: Snowden showed Spiegel documents that could endanger NSA lives.

[pnwmom]

It was Spiegel's choice -- not Snowden's -- not to publish this information.

That sounds like the basis of a treason charge to me. And yet some people here keep arguing that Snowden hasn't done anything harmful to the US or its security. I don't understand.

This is an entirely separate issue from Snowden whistle-blowing about internal US surveillance, which doesn't put US lives or security at risk. Outing NSA agents does.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/secret-documents-nsa-targeted-germany-and-eu-buildings-a-908609.html


The whole episode is a fiasco for the NSA which, in contrast to the CIA, has long been able to conduct its spying without drawing much public attention. Snowden has done "irreversible and significant damage" to US national security, Alexander told ABC a week ago. Snowden's NSA documents contain more than one or two scandals. They are a kind of digital snapshot of the world's most powerful intelligence agency's work over a period of around a decade. SPIEGEL has seen and reviewed a series of documents from the archive.

SNIP

SPIEGEL has decided not to publish details it has seen about secret operations that could endanger the lives of NSA workers.

[BenzoDia]

1. Dangerous information that now has an increased chance of falling into the wrong hands.

smh

[pnwmom]

3. Yes. Spiegel chose not to publish it but someone else could. Or another government

could get its hands on it.

[allin99]

19. agree, although i don't know how much other information...

news agents have. I can see it being safe in maybe nyt hands (well, safe except for the pro-govt spin they'd put on the info), but not safe in these guys hands. How hard would it be to take it from them. Not very imo.

[Luminous Animal]

2. Snowden has said from the beginning that he will trust

news organizations and journalists to practice editorial restraint. So far, all have including the Washington Post and The Guardian.

[pnwmom]

4. I don't trust the Chinese newspaper, which is under state control. Just because

they didn't publish the information doesn't mean they haven't made us of it, or won't in the future.

[malaise]

18. State control of control by the 1%

Can you tell me the difference?

[riqster]

28. The 1% will use information for monetary gain

And the state will use it to increase their power.

Similar motives and actions, just using a different "currency".

[BenzoDia]

5. And if someone hacks into a journalist's e-mail or phone to get at that data?

Then it's out there even if the intentions of the journalist are just.

[AllINeedIsCoffee]

11. The stupid "let the chips fall where they may" fucks don't care.

A few government employees dead would make them happy.

[allin99]

23. the gov't would be wise to pay them both a visit...

course, they're in a bind there, cuz they have to send their cia equivilant from those countries gov't.

[allin99]

9. If he thinks greenwald can be trusted he's nuts...

as was illustrated by greenwald's novice behavior in however passive (but not really) comments this weekend.

Which means he HAS put the u.s. and nsa employees in danger. During most of this time i've supported Snowden, but he had no business just releasing everything.

What makes him think no one can get to greenwald? Do we trust greenwald with those kind of secrets? please. I would trust snowden more than greenwald, and that's saying a lot.

[brush]

13. Sorry, but who is Snowden to be playing God?

He seems to have anointed himself as the one to send down information to mere mortals to let the "responsible, editorially restrained" ones decide what to do with it.

He did a service to the country in making known what has been going on with the NSA for quite some time (legally, I might add), but all the rest of it, coughing up classified info to newspapers and foreign countries, NO WAY.

[allin99]

20. hmmm. that's true.

[leveymg]

6. NSA_doesn't_run_human_intel_or_covert_agents._It_only_has_liaison_officers_w/_allied_services.

Last edited Mon Jul 15, 2013, 02:57 PM - Edit history (1)

both U.S. agencies and foreign. The joint-collection relationship with foreign intelligence services is described in the excerpt below. It is in fact the CIA that runs networks of foreign agents (HUMINT) in countries around the world, while the NSA provides technical assistance through a little-known agency, the Special Collections Service (SCS), which is described in my post downthread.

The NSA and foreign intel services collect each others mail, so to speak, an arrangement that goes back decades to the ECHELON "Five Eyes" system:

But the new aspect of the revelations isn't that countries are trying to spy on each other, eavesdropping on ministers and conducting economic espionage. What is most important about the documents is that they reveal the possibility of the absolute surveillance of a country's people and foreign citizens without any kind of effective controls or supervision. Among the intelligence agencies in the Western world, there appears to be a division of duties and at times extensive cooperation. And it appears that the principle that foreign intelligence agencies do not monitor the citizens of their own country, or that they only do so on the basis of individual court decisions, is obsolete in this world of globalized communication and surveillance. Britain's GCHQ intelligence agency can spy on anyone but British nationals, the NSA can conduct surveillance on anyone but Americans, and Germany's BND foreign intelligence agency can spy on anyone but Germans. That's how a matrix is created of boundless surveillance in which each partner aids in a division of roles.

The documents show that, in this situation, the services did what is not only obvious, but also anchored in German law: They exchanged information. And they worked together extensively. That applies to the British and the Americans, but also to the BND, which assists the NSA in its Internet surveillance.

[pnwmom]

15. Speigel says it has seen information that could endanger NSA lives. n/t

[1-Old-Man]

31. Then Speigel is lieing, the OP you responded to is correct

The NSA does not have spies on the ground, that is not the business it is in, The NSA is and electronic spying operation, they tap into the original source. It is the main difference between the CIA and the NSA. The NSA has no needs for 'boots on the ground', all it needs is antennas, be they on, below, or above the ground.

I know that people do not give this any thought, in fact I am well aware that most of the people in the country didn't even know the NSA existed until recently, but the reason the NSA does't have spies is that they can rarely give credible information. Virtually everything a spy reports is hearsay. Simply put a spy's information is to some degree always unreliable. That is why the NSA is different. Intercepted information, coming from the original source, is always reliable.

Think of the difference this way: If I tell you my son went out last night and had a good time you might believe me or you might not but you know for sure that anything I tell you about the evening he had was just my version and is sure to be wrong on many points. On the other hand if you were to tap my son's phone and listen to him tell a friend of his what he did last night you could trust, to the extent you trusted him to tell the truth, what he said to be what actually happened.

This is why the NSA doesn't use spies and its why the Speigel revelation makes no sense.

[pnwmom]

33. Snowden has also said he had access to US assets around the world.

If Speigel is lying, then so is Snowden.

[Democracyinkind]

46. The notion that there is a "NOC"-list is ridiculous.

The source doesn't matter - the claim that there is some sort of centralized file with all US intel operatives is ridiculous.

Of course, if Snowden has any such info and is giving it out he belongs in jail (except for maybe some very unlikely exceptions).

[pnwmom]

48. I hope that Snowden is lying about this. n/t

[1-Old-Man]

47. You clearly do not understand

The greatest danger NSA employees face is electrocution, not retribution from offended nations.

It is simply not necessary for the NSA to have people in the countries they take information from. There is no one person on the ground somewhere that if eliminated (killed by the offended nation) would make any difference at all in stopping the flow of information.

Look, if the CIA has a spy in the halls of power of some other nation and that person is found out then the offended nation might kill that person and end the spying for a time. But if the CIA has a satellite in space that is able to intercept all of the offended countries communications then who are they going to kill to disable the program? Answer: No one.

The CIA has spies on the ground all around the world and they are all in constant danger. The NSA has teams of analysts and the world's largest and most sophisticated computers, all situated in safe areas (all around the world in friendly nations and also co-located with our military forces). Other than the aforementioned threat of electrocution the greatest danger NSA employees face is the drive home from work.

[leveymg]

61. The NSA and CIA do jointly operate a clandestine service, the Special Collections Service (SCS) see

below. NSA is attached to US Embassies, and there still are occasions that US intel actually does have small units installing bugs, but you are right, most intercepts are from afar. It's the CIA that actually runs the HUMINT side of these foreign intercepts and collections operations, and it is CIA that Snowden worked for most of his career.

[snappyturtle]

55. Thank you......great points if only folks would jump off the treason/traitor

merry-go-round and think.

[leveymg]

54. No more so than if the identities of any other U.S. military officers or contractors were revealed.

Last edited Mon Jul 15, 2013, 03:06 PM - Edit history (2)

There are thousands of NSA employees around the world, and the vast majority of them are no more vulnerable than any other USG officials serving overseas. They're technicians and managers, not clandestine agents whose covers might be blown. There are a relatively small number of NOCs assigned diplomatic cover. NSA and CIA jointly run the Special Collections Service (SCS), which is discussed elsewhere in this thread.

[hobbit709]

7. Here we go again

How many different ways can you post about "treason"?

[treestar]

8. Treason has to involve and "enemy"

However it does seem that the little SOB could end up harming someone and our country.

[pnwmom]

14. We have enemies in al Queda, last I heard. n/t

[treestar]

16. Wouldn't he have to specifically meet with them and hand information to them?

And in front of two witnesses?

In the legal sense it is not treason. But in the non-legal sense it is. He's clearly not interested in what bad things happen to his country. This makes it clear he was not doing it "for our good" as originally claimed.

[jmowreader]

21. He's "handed it over" to any malefactor with four quarters

Spies like Aldrich Ames and Jonathan Pollard sold their information to foreign intelligence services. Snowden is giving what he has to newspapers...and I fear he's going to continue to do so until he finds one that will publish it.

Now we have to ask who he's working for.

[pnwmom]

29. Why should he? If he makes it available to them, that should be enough, IMO. n/t

[leveymg]

56. This is overblown. CIA runs agent networks abroad. NSA and CIA jointly operate

Last edited Mon Jul 15, 2013, 02:51 PM - Edit history (2)

the Special Collections Service (SCS):

The SCS was established to overcome a problem in that the NSA typically intercepts communications "passively" from its various intercept facilities throughout the world, yet the increasing sophistication of foreign communications equipment renders passive interception futile and instead requires direct access to the communications equipment. The CIA, meanwhile, has access to agents specializing in clandestine operations and thus is more able to gain access to foreign communication equipment, yet lacks the NSA's expertise in communications eavesdropping. Hence, the SCS was born, combining the communications intelligence capabilities of the NSA with the covert action capabilities of the CIA in order to facilitate access to sophisticated foreign communications systems.[1][8][9]

The SCS employs exotic covert listening device technologies to bug foreign embassies, communications centers, computer facilities, fiber-optic networks, and government installations.[1][2] The U.S. government has never officially acknowledged its existence, and little is known about the technologies and techniques it employes.[1] The sole inside account of SCS comes from a Canadian, Mike Frost, whose 1994 book Spyworld (ISBN 978-0385254946) revealed that the program was known to insiders at the time as "College Park."[10] As of 2008, the SCS is reported to target for recruitment key foreign communications personnel such as database managers, systems administrators, and information technology specialists. (Wike)[11]

Please see my comment above.

[AllINeedIsCoffee]

10. This asshole needs the needle. nt

[randome]

25. Ummmm...no.

I think the reason Greenwald is running off at the mouth lately is because he sees that he's no longer the center of attention.

I'm most curious about how Greenwald and Snowden concocted this scheme of theirs.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[shawn703]

12. He gets a pass on this because of domestic surveillance

Or something. It's really bizarre how far some of these apologists go to defend their hero.

[rusty fender]

17. Good!

The entire NSA needs to go away.

[AllINeedIsCoffee]

22. Anyone advocating for the deaths of NSA agents SHOULD be under surveillance. nt

[allin99]

24. maybe you should report him.

[rusty fender]

26. It's a bogus claim that NSA agents are in danger, physically

They all need to lose their jobs. And anyone who wants our Democracy to survive should be threatening the Stasi-like agents at the NSA. I wish that I could make them all quake with fear.

You, otoh, want to lick their boots.

[pnwmom]

32. On what basis do you think Speigel is making a bogus claim?

Have you seen the documents they claim to have reviewed? How do you know their claims are bogus?

[rusty fender]

40. See Post #31

I'll bet you $million that the only danger to NSA agents is from their bellies exploding as they stuff themselves full of junk food while spying on us from their computers.

[randome]

34. Licking the NSA's boots is just as unpleasant as licking Snowden's, I would think.

If I have a choice between licking the NSA's boots and Snowden's, I will...still not lick anyone's boots.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[Spider Jerusalem]

27. Treason?

[randome]

30. Words have dictionary meanings. But many also have colloquial meanings.

On DU, 'treason' is understood to mean betraying one's country. And that is what Snowden is doing. Making outrageous claims without evidence and giving away national security secrets to other countries.

We can let the judge at Snowden's trial worry about the dictionary meaning of the word. We have our own understanding of what it means.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[Spider Jerusalem]

39. The OP is talking about charges of treason.

As in, in a court.

Treason is defined by the Constitution. Very narrowly. You may dislike what Snowden is doing. However, it is not treason, by the definition given in the Constitution (and the only one which matters in a legal sense). And I think that it's a bit presumptious of you to say what the common understanding on DU is (particularly since there seems to be some difference of opinion regarding Mr Snowden and his actions).

[morningfog]

35. Maybe the NSA should quit playing deadly games.

[pnwmom]

36. Sure, when the rest of the world does.

Until then I think they need to stay on the field.

[morningfog]

37. I also don't believe the claim. It is bullshit.

Just like was shown in Mannings case. A lot of hyperbole bullshit about the danger he cause, when in trial it was conceded to be baseless bullshit. This is propaganda fear mongering. It isn't the release that endangers anyone. It is the actions themselves that are the cause of danger.

[allin99]

38. but it was snowden's press guy who made the claim, so...

it can't just be put on all the propogandists.

[morningfog]

41. Okay, I still don't buy it.

[Vinnie From Indy]

42. I find all this effort at demonizing Snowden a bit amusing

You rant and rave about Snowden POSSIBLY endangering American lives and nary a one of you seems to remember GW Bush & Dick Cheney's crimes against humanity. These guys have actually been responsible for tens of thousands of deaths all over the world. If you people were genuinely so interested in the safety of Americans and calling people to account, why are there no daily threads calling for Bush and Cheney to be arrested and tried for treason or war crimes? Are you truly interested in calling "criminals" to account or not?

[pnwmom]

43. Who elected Snowden? I must have missed that. n/t

[GliderGuider]

44. Who elected the folks at NSA? I missed that part too... nt

[pnwmom]

49. They were hired by law to work for a government made up of appointed and elected officials.

Snowden was a self-appointed hacker and leaker.

[GliderGuider]

51. Well, that's civil disobedience for you.

If the government and its lawfully appointed bureaucrats are not behaving appropriately I want to know about it. If that takes an Ed Snowden, so be it. The fact that there were no trustworthy official channels to get this information out, and it took a Snowden to do it means that his actions were desperately needed.

[marions ghost]

57. good point

[pnwmom]

62. Not leaking our international spying activities to the world.

That's not whistle-blowing or civil disobedience; it's criminal espionage.

[GliderGuider]

63. Well, since you put it that way

I guess I have no problem with "criminal counterespionage" in this case either. (It would be "counterespionage" in this case - gotta remember who the spies are, right?)

My point stands. I believe in governments being held to account by their subjects (sorry, "citizens&quot . If there are no effective channels for accountability, then using outside channels is justified. Perhaps not justified according to the government in question, but oh well.

[frylock]

52. snowden was also hired..

"...by law to work for a government made up of appointed and elected officials."

[Scurrilous]

45. K & R

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

50. What about the next 2 paragraphs of the article?

The facts, which are now a part of the public record thanks to Snowden, disprove the White House's line of defense up until now, which has been that the surveillance is necessary to prevent terrorist attacks, as President Barack Obama said during his recent visit to Berlin. NSA chief Alexander has sought to justify himself by saying that the NSA has prevented 10 terrorist attacks in the United States alone. Globally, he says that 50 terrorist plots have been foiled with the NSA's help. That may be true, but it is difficult to verify and at best only part of the truth.

Research in Berlin, Brussels and Washington, as well as the documents that have been reviewed by the journalists at this publication, reveal how overreaching the US surveillance has been.

[Eric J in MN]

53. We should be ignorant of the names of government workers...

...because what if someone gets so mad he kills them?

[Democracyinkind]

58. I would want to note that the part you quoted is, IMHO about the least interesting.

I have already contributed to that part further up in the thread. I do want to add this indepedently, though:

Everybody should read all three parts of the article. They dispute many of the "nothing to see here" talking points thrown around DU regularly.

[mike_c]

59. too bad-- they should out the spying bastards into cold hard daylight....

eom

[ProSense]

60. Then Greenwald

jumped in to create the headline for the week. Actually, two headlines: the "worst nightmare" and the one from the quote he's using to try to cover his ass:

"Snowden has enough information to cause more damage to the U.S. government in a minute alone than anyone else has ever had in the history of the United States."

Carl Bernstein: Greenwald 'out of line' (updated)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023261520

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023261520#post9