Skip to main content

View Diary: New WaPo Snowden Stunner: NSA Docs Detail $52.6 Billion "Black Budget" Summary for Fiscal 2013 (284 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  He overcame all of the security systems (14+ / 0-)

    that are currently in place for tracking user activity and also managed to cover his tracks completely.  They don't know what he took.

    Also, FWIW, the intelligence community was doing backflips to say that Snowden did not actually have the access the claimed to have had after the video he made in HK first came out where he said that he could go anywhere at any time within the system.

    That said, I wouldn't take any deal from the US Government at this point if I were in his situation.  They perceive him to be the enemy and would never trust him to provide them with honest insights even if he were to offer them and mean it.

    •  backflips or not, (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DeadHead, emal, poligirl, frostbite

      I tend to believe Snowden.

      Enemy, yes. Interesting to talk about a deal, or immunity, but it will never happen.

      •  Okay I'll try this again... (10+ / 0-)

        Snowden and the intelligence communities' statements my not be in conflict here and here's why:

        Snowden explained that he could do anything within that system that he wanted to, but he did not say that doing "anything" he wanted was done purely by the book.

        The intelligence agencies insisted that the systems in place would have impeded that kind of access and therefore he was "lying".

        Clearly, the internal security systems did NOT impede his ability to roam throughout the system nor did those systems capture records of his travels.  That means that the intelligence community was unaware of some pretty significant vulnerabilities in their system.

        So, Snowden was being truthful and the NSA was wrong about the integrity of their own internal security safeguards.

        One wonders if he had not made his identity public if they would still be trying to figure out who it was who took the documents - we already know that they find out which ones were taken along with the rest of us when one of the news outlets publishes a new story about what he took.

        •  asdf (0+ / 0-)
          The intelligence agencies insisted that the systems in place would have impeded that kind of access and therefore he was "lying".
          They may insist, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's true. I don't know, of course, but I believe they wanted everyone to think they were hacked, not that Snowden as a contractor was given extraordinary access.

          So we're back to my original comment that I tend, at this point, to believe Snowden. He did not say it was all legal, but he didn't say otherwise. To me it was suggested in his comments that it was access.

          •  For some reason you seem to think that (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Kimbeaux, SixSixSix, gooderservice

            the system would have been more difficult for him to access had he been employed on the same program to work on the same system if he had been a Federal employee which is illogical.

            And not for nothing, given the fact that Federal employee pay scales have been frozen for quite a few years now, the chances that a Federal employee might be inspired to abuse privileges for personal financial gain are increasingly higher than those of their much better compensated and incentivized contractor counterparts.  

            I agree that contractors should be eliminated from our government, but the question of Snowden's access is not the point on which to make that case, imo.

            •  asdf (0+ / 0-)
              For some reason you seem to think that (0+ / 0-)
              the system would have been more difficult for him to access had he been employed on the same program to work on the same system if he had been a Federal employee which is illogical.
              Not sure what you're saying. But, no, I didn't say that. I said they didn't want to admit he had access. What now?
      •  Also, it is notable that Snowden did NOT (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        JVolvo, gooderservice

        say in that video interview something along the lines of, "the NSA systems are so easy to hack", but that's becoming somewhat apparent now primarily because they've done really, really stupid things like detaining Greenwald's boyfriend.  

        That move piqued the interest of a number of investigative journalists who asked the same question that I did when I heard that news which was, "wait? I thought the NSA said they knew what Snowden took?"  Within a week it was confirmed that they still didn't really know what he took.

        •  enemy (0+ / 0-)

          gooderservice, way above, inclusiveheart said that the government perceived Snowden to be the enemy. I was agreeing that the govt. thinks that.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site