General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsOK, now will you listen?
Last edited Wed Jun 26, 2013, 09:26 AM - Edit history (1)
When the Bradley Manning story started, my question was who gave a 19 year old kid access to the entire collection of secret messages. When the Snowden story started, the first estimate was a thumb drive, now we're hearing that he had four laptops full of data, and that included agents and sources in China/Russia.
OK, so now can somebody tell me how a 29 year old high school drop out working for an outsourced security consulting company got access to what should have been a closely guarded secret accessible only by those who what is euphemistically called need to know? Are you telling me that these security consulting firms are running our agents/sources in foreign countries? Or is that data just available to anyone with a @cia.gov email addy.
Come on guys, don't just get outraged at the idea that he betrayed the nation, think it through.
Just how protected are our secrets if anyone who works for one of the thousand or so companies who are doing anything remotely top secret has the data.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023097999
Edited to correct the age of Snowden. Typo gang, thanks for the catch.
Democracyinkind
(4,015 posts)He is either lying or the whole national security apparatus is one fucking sick joke played on the american populace to fleece them. The only time I have seen evidence of them protecting anything was during the HBGary/Stratfor affair in which it was proven that they willingly enforce and protect their corporate buddies. I'm again starting to think it's all a scam - which was what I originally thought when Bush started most of this.
Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)That the chances of it being lost were the square of the number of people who knew it.
If apparently everyone has access to these secrets, then the square of that number is gigantic. Frankly, what this probably does is allow the Russians/Chinese to use information they got from other sources, and claim that Snowden gave it to them. It protects their sources and means, and Snowden is a great way to claim they figured out what we were doing.
The question remains, is there anyone who works for these contracting companies who doesn't have access? Is the Janitor scrolling through on his lunch break?
Democracyinkind
(4,015 posts)Glitterati
(3,182 posts)Last edited Wed Jun 26, 2013, 08:22 AM - Edit history (1)
Recently, I closed on a house. The mortgage company required I send everything anyone needs to steal my identity via email. EVERYTHING.
On top of that, they required the same items for anyone living in the home - including my daughter's.
And, my deceased husband's.
Credit letters from all my utilities, my car insurance.
Driver's license, birth certificates, social security cards (actual card had to be scanned), death certificates, EVERYTHING.
And, all that is now potentially in the hands of temp employees of these 3rd parties to our conversation.
You don't think I'm worried that next month when my daughter turns 18 she's going to start adulthood with identity theft?????
Yeah, we're so screwed.
midnight
(26,624 posts)You are so right to be concerned.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)Booz, the Booz-laden NSA/CIA, and a revolving-door Administration.
Then filtered through corporate media.
JustAnotherGen
(31,688 posts)In China and Russia. Those people are in danger.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)if everyone and their brother has access to this kind of sensitive data. Oversight of what their own people are doing doesn't seem to be the intelligence apparatus's strong point. That's a humongous problem not just for the American people, but for their own people. You know what they say about too many chef's stirring the pot.
Mustellus
(328 posts)... and they mentioned something called "need to know". To get access to classified information you
(1) must have an appropriate security clearance,
(2) be 'read in' to the program, and sign the non-disclosure agreement, and
(3) have a 'need to know'.
Apparently a two stripper in Afghanistan had a 'need to know' the entire diplomatic correspondence of the United States
KrazyinKS
(291 posts)the guy is a high school dropout and yet he gets a job paying 6 figures. He has access to secret data, although it is obvious he does have a head on his shoulders. I am not afraid of the government, may I should be. It is the arrogance of these guys, the CEO's. I mean look how badly they screwed up, and yet they still have the contract and are still making the big bucks off the taxpayer. Yet they probably all belong to the tea party, and don't want to pay taxes.
randome
(34,845 posts)We are still only taking his word for all of this. He did not have the access to Intelligence Analyst data else he would have provided something to support his claims.
I personally doubt he has detailed agent info, too. He lies when it benefits him. Even his resume is a lie.
I also doubt that contractors of any type have access to detailed agent info. I could be wrong about that, of course.
But so far all that Snowden has demonstrated is that he was able to steal internal NSA office documents. That's troubling in itself but we don't know at this point what he actually has.
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font]
[hr]
justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)why else would the US government be so concerned about his passing on information of agent locations to China/Russia... unless, of course, you think SOS Kerry is lying to make Snowden more of an enemy.
randome
(34,845 posts)And Kerry may not know exactly what Snowden has. It's possible he does have detailed info but it's possible he's still putting out smoke.
Just being in China and 'bragging' about how terrible America is seems like a reason to get Snowden home.
I wonder if Snowden, at last understanding how much trouble he's in, is saying whatever he can to make the U.S. government back off. I doubt that's going to work, though.
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font]
[hr]
justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)There's no way he can walk back what he's done. The only thing he can hope for is to stay a fugitive. Pretty much his life is over as he know's it. I mean, not only does he have the US wanting to put him on trial but, whether he realizes or not, he's allowed himself to become a pawn in the game of international politics.
randome
(34,845 posts)[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font]
[hr]
GeorgeGist
(25,294 posts)You sound like a fool.
randome
(34,845 posts)Don't worry, it will get easier as Snowden does more bone-headed moves like running to Russia.
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font]
[hr]
Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)I remember how many of us on the Left cheered like maniacs when The Dixie Chicks denounced Bush in London. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dixie_chicks#2003.E2.80.9305:_Political_controversy
Which is why I found this line a curious observation. Just being in China and 'bragging' about how terrible America is seems like a reason to get Snowden home.
Were you one of the ones accused of being a RW Troll (They were called Neo Con trolls back then) for denouncing the Dixie Chicks? Or were you supportive of their statement, never mind the venue? Personally, I supported the statement, and even showed my support by buying an album, although honestly, I've never listened to it. Not for political reasons, but because that band doesn't speak to me, personal preference and all that.
My point, the venue doesn't bother me, and I'm surprised that it bothers any Liberal/Progressive member of the Democratic Party.
randome
(34,845 posts)My point is that Snowden is an NSA employee who is making these statements AS an employee of NSA. (Contractor, actually.)
If he doesn't understand how this screws up international diplomacy, he is even more naive than we thought.
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font]
[hr]
Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)Doesn't he have more knowledge of, and therefor a better view of the alleged improprieties? After all, those of us who objected to the WMD argument simply didn't believe it. We had other experts who had no firsthand personal knowledge, but we all just knew something stank about it. Imagine of part of the National Security Council came out and said he knew that Iraq didn't have WMD's, that would be a person in the know, letting the cat out of the bag before hundreds of thousands of deaths had happened.
A person in the "know" who sees something wrong should speak up, and should be supported. Because that is the only way that the Government remains Of, By, and For the People. If we slap National Security on anything and everything, then there is no transparency, and no way to hold Washington accountable.
randome
(34,845 posts)The guy who fixes your printer and sets up email for new employees.
He has never been able to show us evidence of his more outrageous claims such as being able to spy on the President. Even his claim of 'direct access' to the world's Internet providers was roundly refuted by all the companies involved.
And yes, if he had evidence that the NSA is spying on everyone, I would fully support his bringing that to the world's attention no matter how.
But he doesn't. Apparently he never did. All he was able to get his hands on were internal office documents.
I truly don't think he ever had a 'better view' of things. He's been vague about this from the start. For instance, in his video, he kept saying he "saw things" but he has never said what he saw.
He needs to show evidence if he wants me to take him at his word.
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font]
[hr]
BrainDrain
(244 posts)First is Snowden does NOT have 4 laptops full of uber-secret data. That is just bullshit from the same people who want to arrest him and make him disappear.
Second, when I got my clearances I was 19, in the military, and I saw stuff before the president did.
There are literally tens of thousands of people out there who have the ability to see, on a daily basis, super-secret uber-classified material. For their entire careers, which in most cases spans decades and begin when they are either first in the military and then as a civilian or when they come directly out of college. Either way they begin their careers at what some would deem a tender age, late teens or early twenties. If you count all the people who have already retired from the intel community along with those that are still active within it now, that number is probably in the hundreds of thousands.
Out of ALL those people we have 2 that have actively come forward with information that some would consider detrimental to the interests of the government of the US.
In truth, what Manning has done is shed a very bright light on actual war crimes committed by US military personnel. What Snowden has done is shed a very bright light on a surveillance practice that is most definitely in violation of the constitutional rights of nearly every American citizen.
We have folks screaming and yelling that contractors are the problem. They are NOT. They just pay better than the government does, but the difference is only one of who signs their paycheck, Uncle Sam or a CEO, and in most cases it is both.
The hair pulling and chest pounding is all out of proportion to what is actually happening and is meant, IMHO, as a distraction from the real issues at play. It is NOT that we have young people (with or without collage degrees) being granted access to highly classified material.
The real issue is the material itself and what it contains. These people didn't compromise the military capability of the US, or the ability of the US to keep tabs on the world.
They compromised the ability of the US government to hide its crimes, and THAT, at least too many people both in the government and out, is much, much worse.
Glitterati
(3,182 posts)kudos!
bemildred
(90,061 posts)LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)berni_mccoy
(23,018 posts)based on information control standards. These standards should not be a pass/fail once test. They should be required to meet them on a regular basis. If they can't control the information, they should lose all clearances granted until they can comply. There is too much power given to contractors in this country. This is a major point that isn't getting discussed outside of this forum. Thanks for the post.
Jarla
(156 posts)The problem is that they're collecting all of this data and they're not doing enough to protect it.
Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)Then imagine how well they are protecting your emails, browsing history, and phone data. If they can't keep the most closely guarded secrets secret, then why should we believe that there will never be unauthorized access of our personal information they are collecting?
Aerows
(39,961 posts)They can't even secure themselves, how well will they secure your information?
still_one
(91,967 posts)issue though is what you are saying, who was responsible for his clearance, and why are we outsourcing this
Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)Need to know was designed as a filter to make sure that even those with Top Secret Clearances did not have access to all the information in the world. Now, according to the Get him and hang him crowd, he had four laptops full of data, and that included names/covers of spies/sources. So Booz Allen had need to know who those people were? What project was Booz Allen involved in that gave them access to the FISA court orders, the PRISM briefing, the Unbounded Information crap, and the names and covers of our spies/sources? What didn't Booz Allen know?
From what it looks like from here, there is literally nothing that Booz Allen didn't have access to. I can only assume that includes patrol areas of our Nuclear Deterrent Submarines, the Ohio Class Missile Subs. I mean, that's top secret too isn't it? At this point, the list of things that Booz Allen didn't know, and Snowden could not have informed the Chinese/Russians about would appear to be shorter than the list he could have or did tell them about.
Is anyone else getting the feeling that the lunatics are not only running the asylum, but the world? One can only hope that Snowden had time to get some real questions answered. For example, what exactly happened with the Glomar Explorer and the K-129. What happened at Area 51 with the Alien Crash Landing? Who really killed Kennedy? Everything else is alleged to be in those laptops, perhaps now we'll get some information we all really want the answers to.
Doesn't the Government realize how incompetent they are making themselves look by all these claims? By not refuting them immediately, and that wouldn't be hard. All it would take is to say. "No Booz Allen never had access to any intelligence gathering methods used by the Intelligence Agencies in foreign countries." But they're not saying that, so the question is this. Why did Booz Allen have access to all of this stuff, and what other national treasures are you outsourcing?
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)Neoma
(10,039 posts)My husband knew a little too much doing that job. As in, knowing his boss was into beastiality. He had to go through everything that had to be fixed, and depending on what you fix...
Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)What was Booz Allen doing with the information? If we are giving those secrets to every contractor company out there, what are we holding back? What happened to need to know? Why does the company Booz Allen have this information?