Skip to main content

View Diary: Someone (Not Snowden) Is Leaking Surveillance Information To The UK's Independent (168 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Snowden has stated (33+ / 0-)

    all along that he only worked with organizations that would agree to not print details on some of the programs.

    It seems that someone at the Independent was able to gain access to this GC-Wiki. Here is the real wiki page on GC-Wiki which was created today and links back to The Independent article. Who created it I wonder?

    The GC-Wiki was the source for many of the 50,000 documents downloaded by Edward Snowden which resulted in the 2013 mass surveillance disclosures
    Josep Cannon @ cannonfireb.blogspot.com offers this on the subject:
    If Snowden got his documents from that "hidden" site -- and if the Independent got documents from that same site -- then how can the Independent's reporters try to leave readers with the impression that they were helped by Snowden?

    Somehow -- and they won't say how -- the Independent's team of journalists got access (you might call it "independent access") to a site which is supposed to be available to intelligence personnel only.

    I don't see how Snowden even figures into it.

    I also don't see how the Independent would know that Snowden got documents from that site.

    •  "Agree not to print details" (4+ / 0-)

      Why give them access in the first place?  So he leaked sensitive information to his sources on promises that they wouldn't write about it - but they don't have top secret clearance and thus should never ever have seen it.  

      If Snowden is a 4th Amendment Crusader, why steal and leak information to others that had nothing to do with 4th Amendment issues?

      If you're not talking about what billionaire hedgefund bankster Peter G. Peterson is up to you're having the wrong conversations.

      by Jacoby Jonze on Fri Aug 23, 2013 at 06:27:40 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  It doesn't matter (22+ / 0-)

        Once Snowden got hold of it, it was no longer secret.

        The problem is not Snowden.  The problem is a system that allows a Snowden to get such extensive access to secrets that the government claims are dangerous to our safety.

        Another problem is our government CREATING secrets, by engaging in illegal activity in violation of our Constitution, and international agreement,  which, when released, become dangerous to our safety (according to the government) by undermining our alliances and diplomatic relationships, by spying on allies or double-dealing them.   It's not Snowden's fault if our government does that.   Your crime is not my secret to keep. The government needs to have an expectation that, as the old saying goes, THE TRUTH WILL OUT.    Certainly, leverage the time that you can keep the secret, but know that the time is limited.   EXPECT that a Snowden will come along eventually, and PLAN for that.  

        It is not safe or reasonable to expect that secrets can be kept indefinitely in agencies full of hundreds or thousands of employees.

        If the government can't keep us safe under these circumstances, after a leak has occurred, then the government should not have engaged in these risky activities.

        The government has done an excellent job of saying "Snowden, Snowden, Snowden" and convincing everyone that "It's Snowden's Fault".  But, that's not how quality assurance works.   Quality assurance builds in safeguards so that no one person should have the ability to bring down a system.   For instance, I work in an IT department where all credit card data is encrypted, so that even if I have access to it, I can't use it, because I don't have the encryption key.

        The fault lies with our government in creating a system that allowed Snowden such extensive access to data that our government claims is so dangerous to our safety.  

        Snowden, by his very existence, proves his own point.

      •  Snowden's outrage is not limited to 4th amendment (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Jim Riggs, NedSparks

        issues.  He leaked, and GG reported, the UK's spying on Russia at an economic summit.  Why?  That had nothing to do with civil liberties.  Snowden/GG just felt it was "wrong" for the UK to spy on an official from Russia, and so took it upon themselves to set wrong to right.

        So I don't buy the idea that Snowden is a 4th amendment crusader, his agenda is broader.  Or else why leak thousands of documents that even GG says he's reluctant to report?

    •  You might be getting glimpses (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      CroneWit, JVolvo

      of what the intelligence agencies REALLY know. If the Independent knows that Snowden got the information from that specified site, then either they were informed by the intelligence agencies, or, if the Independent DOESN'T know, then the intelligence agencies are planting stories for publication at compliant publishing companies.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site