So this story can't possibly be true. The Snowden-Bot is incapable of harming a human being or, through inaction, allowing a human being to be harmed.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Treat your body like a machine. Your mind like a castle.[/center][/font][hr]

Didn't lead directly to that breach?

No that couldn't happen cause Snowden only released bad stuff we do right? Trouble is he didn't even know what was in the data he stole.

that China or Russia would admit to decrypting the data if they had - just not standard intelligence protocol.

Now our intelligence agencies that have been hacked before fucking up massively? There's precedence for that.

that if they decrypted that information they would inform MI-6 of it? Or are the intelligence agencies just blowing smoke to deflect from the fact that they committed some really huge mistakes lately?

But cant see how they could be spying on the Chinese government effectively enough to figure out they had been able to access the documents?

Seems like a total disconnect to me.

but I don't think I'm the one making it.

You *DO* realize that they obtained highly personal data about every person that has filed for security clearance (and relatives) and you that is *less* serious than Snowden releasing redacted information on NSA spying programs? Seriously?

Have mercy.

They have blamed him for everything from the kitchen sink being gone.

Have mercy indeed.

codes, links, source names, etc. from 2 years ago, it still is the intelligence community's own damn fault.

as if they are saying "hey this is Russia letting you guys know where here". What is the evidence here?

I agree with you that he's caused huge damage to US intelligence efforts. I don't think he was actively aiding foreign powers, but I do think he's breathlessly niave. I don't think he's at all the hero many want him to be. There are very bad people in the world and they are certainly not all in the US government.

and did what he thought was right taking huge risks in doing so when the vast majority of people would close their mouths to keep their careers which a lot of people in the NSA were afraid of especially after the Thomas Drake situation (he leaked unclassified documents to a Baltimore Sun reporter).

His IQ is very high and considering the circumstances, he isn't locked up on an Epionage Act conviction but no doubt there are bad people in the world but the bad people in the world is who the USA is taking their side. Take for example why is the USA intercepting all the data communication in Barbados? This was done with the DEA exposing them as a spy agency proving Chavez correct when he kicked them in 2005 saying they're spies. Countries with a drug trafficking problem don't see the harm in bringing in an agency supposedly focused on drugs, show up and spy. DEA protected a Contras financier and huge international drug trafficker but the much bigger DEA informant was also the mastermind behind the Mumbai bombings and was a huge international drug trafficker. Then the US wasn't cooperative with the biggest known nuclear materials black market dealer connected with the Pakistan ISI (very bad people there) and from what I last heard he is involved in politics in Pakistan. Don't know what the plan was behind that, I think Egypt turned him down and so did Saddam Hussein suspicious if it was a US sting operation. There is a need just to know WTF is going on and the harm to "intelligence efforts" could be like harming a serial killer's efforts. Different but it is a matter of statistics & about money rather than some sick sadistic desires.

If this is true they probably cracked them to figure out what our plans are and it is so obvious we have plans targeting those countries or any country that is inconvenient. Anything at all would likely result in a defense strategy.

The report comes from the BBC which you may not know but they have a history of biased, misleading, or false reporting. Its not really independent of British government -- their Scottish referendum coverage was a very transparent example of this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC_controversies

Worst traitor in American history.

… Imagine connecting a whistle blowing to the act of treason. What a jingoistic ignorance on the subject of citizenry.

The balance of power between the citizenry and the government (by your definition) is proving you prefer the role of the citizen who is ruled, as opposed to one who is the electorate. How sad...

If someone who witnessed the level of government over-reach decides to commit an act of public disobedience by handing over in a responsible way what is safe to have handled by fourth estate… then YOU have problem with that!

Imagine that!

I have a problem with YOUR being the ruled citizen rather than being the electorate. Nothing to see here, citizens… just keep showing up at the polls and ride along with whom we feel will represent your interests. You can't SEE information, you cant be WORRIED that your information is being seen, and you CERTAINLY can't fight back the continual watering down of constitutional rights.

What a disgusting state of mind THAT is!

Don't like someone pointing out that loss of liberty? Then, perhaps you should just join others who see no evil, hear no evil and speak no evil. The rest of us will continue to strike the balance of what is is to be an American citizen.

It is an entirely different thing to do a data dump and release all of it.

I suggest you catch up on what this man did before assuming. Have you truly been following the Snowden events?

http://fullmovieflix.com/film-citizen-four-movie/

That would be funny if it wasn't so sad.

What could be more unbiased, more no-holds-barred, more downright truthy than a film directed by Linda Poitras and starring Glenn Greenwald - the two "dinsinterested" parties who have made Snowden into their personal cash cow?

If you like comedy, you'll LOVE "Citizen Four". It's full of intriguing dialogue, like "I'm being followed." "Really?" "Yes." "Oh."

Of course, there is never any follow-up actually proving - or even any facts that vaguely hint at proving - such cloak-and-dagger hijinks actually took place. But for the faithful, no actual facts are necessary. Just saying so on-screen is sufficient.

The fact that anyone would direct you to this film as being the "real story" behind Snowden's actions speaks for itself.

I wonder what you must think of the movie documentary, Inconvenient Truth.

I guess it depends on how inconvenient it appears, eh?

I don't know why you'd go with something Mr. Snowden was "believed" to have done via bbc.com over what was documented by the first contact of such documentation.

What is sad is what you would rather believe over actual documentation. If thinking hurts, then take two aspirin and talk to me after what you seen documented in front of you reaches your grey matter.

What is sad is when people run to what they'd rather believe over doing their homework… That's what's sad.

But you wouldn't want to be bothered with that, would you?

Too bad. Go listen to the NSA. You may as well make it a mutual circle jerk.

Since you don't seem to be able to produce anything else.

Apparently you want me to read every titled AP, Rueters, USA Today and journalist for your reading pleasure because you didn't?

You want all the CNN feeds, too? As this news happened, by the way, this too is in that academy award winning documentary.

I have to cut and past this on your behalf of what problem of yours? Meanwhile, you can't watch something I have provided for you?

That would be fine. I have already linked to several saying he stole over a million documents.

Surely you can come up with one since you claimed it was well documented .

So far the best you can come up with is ...it was in the movie!

Pretty weak .

And no I won't take Snowdens word for it.

… and understand that documentary film makers are quite accurate, especially when you compare them to the MSM articles or talking head journalists.

In coming up with the most important documentary of 2015 on this very subject, imbedded with all those other links within the film, the best I've come up with is actually the best source of what happened. It's not a movie of what one person thinks.

But, you don't even know what's in it. That's either insane or mentally devoid of thought… probably both.

Its hard to describe but it would be quite a major assumption to say meeting this unknown person in a hotel room in Hong Kong was like "hey, lets script this entire thing and I'll walk through the door again". There was a reporter with Greenwald who could be fairly competent journalist himself but needed his direction asking what he should do or put down for this and Greenwald's advice was the right advice.

There was a moment where he took Greenwald's computer was like how open or unsecure it is. Put a blanket over his head something about facial recognition through the computer or something he was concerned about facial recognition through the computer which caused a WTF reaction from Greenwald and something about "at-this-point I don't think anything can surprise me anymore". Later there were fire alarms going off which caused paranoia from Snowden then Greenwald gets up and looks out the window. Meeting the diplomatic was very interesting, taking him somewhere to file an asylum claim or where was unaware. Greenwald was probably more concerned with the scoop and national profile but seemed to go off Snowden's direction like when he wanted to put his name out there. He figured he would be caught eventually and phone calls to his girlfriend (where she left her in the dark leaving a not saying he's out on work which wasn't unusual and curiousity over construction trucks on the street of his house asking "I wonder what they're looking for&quot It was way too natural plus I don't assume bad motives plus he concern was the story becoming about him rather than the documents knowing the media has an obsession over personalities while Greenwald was offering recommendations on what narrative to go with. There is a reason he selected Greenwald and Laura Poitras for the encrypted messages. They shared his values, I mean you don't just go to anybody.

Laura Poitras did much more than just cover the Snowden encounter unfiltered through the press narrative.

As far as the story, I'll say it is remarkable how fast they got an unclassified document through an FOIA request though I'm sure they didn't argue "state secrets" or any of the Ashcroft precedents (first used on Sibel Edmonds) but the numbers are probably somewhat realistic. My personal problem is the volume meaning too much to dig through to find the dirt and if you happen to take British files that just means even more dirt. US-Britain foreign policy has a very multinational first direction. Britain also has a "war on whistleblowers" which they even used on someone who released info that Bush expressed a desire to bomb Al-Jazeera (they were already bombed twice in two different countries) but Tony Blair and Colin Powell talked him out of it don't know how exactly because they went above and beyond to block the memo but still released statements the guy is full of shit but not letting him prove he is full of shit.

Like the 1.7 million claim from DoD talking points. Who has morals & ethics Snowden, Poitras, Greenwald or the defense contractors? They are so many proven lies that Snowden himself proves.

One final point. It would be unusual if there wasn't a discrediting campaign like it scared the hell out of me when a Clinton cable ordered the spying of UN diplomats including collecting their DNA like I don't even what to imagine why they want that. The only thing the Enemy State got wrong, which I still don't understand why they killed the Congressman as he was what? 1 vote? And people gave a shit so it was "rogue" unit and Larry King telling the pro spying advocate "you have no right to come into my home".

Former NSA Chief Was Worried About “Enemy Of The State” Reputation

In the past week, details on two of the most closely guarded and controversial federal surveillance programs have been brought into the light of day and has turned the public perception of the shadowy National Security Agency into a potentially menacing and out of control organization.

And it’s not for the first time.

The 1998 Will Smith and Gene Hackman film Enemy of the State portrayed a rogue agency attempting to kill Smith’s character, a lawyer who they believe possesses information that would embarrass the agency.

“The government’s been in bed with the entire telecommunications business since the ’40s,” Gene Hackman’s character, a retired NSA official, tells Smith. “They have infected everything. They can get into your bank statements, computer files, e- mail, listen to your phone calls.”

Former NSA Director Gen. Michael Hayden was promoted to head the agency as the movie came out, and was deeply worried about the public perception it created, James Risen reported in his 2006 book State of War: The Secret History of the C.I.A. and the Bush Administration. Hayden, who went on to become the director of the CIA under President George W. Bush, “was appalled” by the NSA’s portrayal, and responded with a full-fledged PR campaign. The agency’s very existence was long a state secret.

“I made the judgment that we couldn’t survive with the popular impression of this agency being formed by the last Will Smith movie,” he told CNN in a segment pulling back the curtain on the agency.

“It has to be somewhat a secretive agency, and right in the middle of a political culture that just trusts two things most of all: power and secrecy,” he continued. “That’s a challenge for us, and that’s why, frankly, we’re trying to explain what it is we do for America, how it is we follow the law. Could there be abuses? Of course. Would there be? I am looking you and the American people in the eye and saying: there are not.”

http://swampland.time.com/2013/06/07/former-nsa-chief-was-worried-about-enemy-of-the-state-reputation/

Looking people into the eye doesn't impress me, a sociopath will look you in the eye but it is interesting what is concerned about but yet goes forward with programs to prove the movie was trying to warn us. The non-fiction book "The Puzzle Palace" was an inspiration for the film on a premise of someone taken down electronically.

The entire previous administration lied about us into war, committed war crimes and legalized torture and you think the guy who helped reveal the crimes is the traitor?

Big multinational corporations have been enriching China at the expense of the United States, leading China to become an increasing threat to the U.S.. The Koch Brothers, one of the biggest forces behind the Republican Party, are sons of Fred Koch, who got rich on doing business with the enemy, the Soviet Union.

To be clear US foreign policy from the 20th century to today has always been multinational greed. Banks & oil and gas mostly, that was our Latin America, Africa, or Asia was getting rid of the populists who want to do things like kick BP out and improve the quality of life for the people so we ally with the right-wing militias or "freedom fighters". Make up some BS excuse and go in there and fight for the wrong side.

I'm far from a fan of the USSR but my bigger problems with them had to do with their domestic policies but this troubles far more though probably couldn't be considered a "traitor" for it though not so much India (economic ally of China and Russia)

In 2008, Koch Industries discovered that the French affiliate Koch-Glitsch had violated bribery laws allegedly securing contracts in Algeria, Egypt, India, Morocco, Nigeria and Saudi Arabia after an investigation by Ethics Compliance officer, Egorova-Farines.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koch_Industries

Saudi Arabia is who I'd consider the worst government in the world and people getting rich to spread Wahabbism. Britain too taking the wrong side of Ottoman-Wahabbi war though we didn't start taking the wrong side until the 20th century. Britain was ahead of us. In Yemen USSR was there on the right side of the Yemen 60s-90s civil war, USA was neutral in the 90s but Saudi Arabia sure the hell wasn't (They hate communists too because they're practically libertarians as far as business is concerned).

and a dubious report that China and Russia have decrypted the files, while ignoring this and cheering on our intelligence agencies.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141116684

Not a damn thing that Snowden released could possibly come close to this epic fuck up.

... and adversarial country about an issues that was raised before he released information.

Snowden let us know the depth of surveillance

Snowden is a drop in the bucket compared to that, and that was the intelligence agencies themselves committing a huge fuck up.

this came out today. Hmmm.

No coincidences here.

So it is entirely possible that the snowden leaks lead directly to the breach.

from government officials. Calling them "hostile nations" is so laughable absurd but what I'd consider projection. Just as a gentle suggestion, I'd be careful to believing what government officials say without evidence supporting their claims. Could you imagine if JFK agreed to "Operation Northwoods". I can't wait 40 years down the road so the truth becomes more clearer.

Justice Department employees were fooled into downloading malicious software 182 times, a total dwarfed by malware downloads that occurred 370 times at the significantly larger Department of Defense, another wing of government with significant cybersecurity equities and responsibilities. Additionally, a September 2014 report from the cybersecurity firm McAfee Labs noted that such so-called “phishing” attacks are increasing in sophistication.

The prospect of unreported or undetected network breaches means the actual picture of federal cyber vulnerability is likely even more dire than the reported statistics.

“Information-sharing agencies already exist. We’ve identified 20. Nobody knows how cybersecurity works but they’ve all decided that information-sharing is the answer. You’ve got to wonder if that’s really more about surveillance than about actual cybersecurity, since it doesn’t appear to be working,” Dourado said.

Patrick Eddington of the libertarian Cato Institute added: “The notion that the federal government should get still more personal information from Americans as part of a misguided, centralized legislative response to cyber incidents is insane. That approach puts Americans at more, not less, risk of having their personal information compromised.”

James Lewis, a cybersecurity expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, noted that private banks spend lavishly on security and still get hacked.

“The ‘government’ doesn’t do any worse than companies, and in some ways they do better. US law splits the responsibility – civilian agencies are protected by DHS, national security agencies are protected by NSA. The Chinese succeeded against DHS, but not NSA,” Lewis said. Authorities suspect but have not demonstrated Chinese culpability for the newest attack.

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jun/05/us-government-opm-hack-data-collection-powers

If they were tricked into downloading the malware it is different than the latest Shamon style hacks or any hacks really where there is a message or something but it is usually a red herring pointing the finger at the easy target.

Hey, hows cuz nobody's upset an at about this?

and how the truth was gradually rolled out. Can't get much worse.

And yet, here we are in the midst of primary rage and throwing the very citizens under the bus who wish all to have fair rules to do WELL.

Well, this shit is just crazy today. I've had so much reality, and I need some down time. Perhaps I'll just take a break and fight this another day.

Be well, B_j!

like a loop of an endless train wreck. I'm so glad Bernie is now part of the equation.

Not that the hack occurred but already knowing who did the hack especially during TPP negotiations which is obvious about China. Professional hackers are very skilled at covering their tracks, attribution is incredibly difficult usually a mistake or an informant. I wouldn't blame China if they did hack considering our hostile nature and the NSA has been hacking them, including civilian infrastructure such as a University but I doubt they already know who did the hack so there is something suspicious about them pointing the finger here. A government official speaking to the BBC is certainly dubious because how did they know China or Russia cracked whatever, if true outing themselves as spying on them

US government responds to latest hack: give us more power over data collection

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jun/05/us-government-opm-hack-data-collection-powers

You are my new favorite DUer

This story is just another to, as you said, cover up another massive fuck up.

China hacked us cuz... Snowden! Right

Does anyone believe that any of the big wigs in the various intelligence agencies would *ever* take responsibility for their own mistakes?

Let's ask Chelsea Manning, why don't we?

None whatever.

"Even if it's half true"?

You sound cautious, as if anonymous claims should be taken with a grain of salt. Good approach.

Says it will be "fun" debunking it. Expect a piece in The Intercept very soon, warning the usual suspects that just because anonymous intelligence officials say something it is not necessarily true.

https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/609912455419011072

And this is the only place reporting it. Even the BBC pick up of it is not saying it is accurate

Biased Broadcasting Corporation is probably an accurate name for them.

The BBC article might as well be on du quoting the other one.

Shameful

Snowden averred he didn't have a copy on his computer. Did they hack one of the newspapers?

Would Ellsberg have been a traitor for leaking the Pentagon Papers?

I don't think NSA surveillance could have been challenged in the way that it has without Snowden's actions. He's a hero.

Also the bag of dirty tricks the government pulled out in pursuing Snowden underscored why he had to do things the way he did and will probably promote future "careful" leaking and whistleblowing instead of any "going through channels". The whole affair was glorious theater in corrupt internal politics exposed for all the world to see.

It's a game. Wasn't Snowden

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026830786

Snowald haphazardly shelled the files out to...

You do realize unless this story is proven 100% false, Snowden's bullshit WBer defense just went up in smoke, right?

You do realize that unless this is proven 100% true, you've got nothing.

We've all been through this before. Lies upon lies told through anonymous sources to bolster the security state in order to turn us into cowards.

@ggreenwald: If you're someone who believes anonymously voiced self-serving govt claims, you're dumb. If you're a journalist who prints it, you're worse. https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/609912148022702082

must be absolutely pissing his pants...Great to see he has no response other than his requisite "liar liar pants on fire" retort like a grade-schooler...By that definition, Seymour Hersh must be the worst journo in the world...Yeah, THAT Seymour Hersh who Greenwald has bent over backwards in defending...


Thanks for posting that for me, since Greenwald bitched out on me some time ago and blocked me on Twitter...Needless to say; I'll be having the last laugh before this is over -- If it's the last thing I ever do.

Welcome to the site, btw

In that tweet. Did you expect an article immediately?

and I have no doubt the whole cabal had a conference call and will be publishing their spin pieces within the next 48 hours...And of course none of them will fully and directly address the assertions from the Sunday times...

Greenwald (The Pulitzer winning guy who insisted the dragnet was illegal, and it was) says it "will be fun writing about it" calling it unverified and unsourced.

https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/609913146837483520

And Greenwald didn't 'win' any fucking Pulitzer, he was a member of an extensive team that won it which included both the Guardian and the Washington Post...That's like a punter single-handedly taking credit for a Super Bowl win...

Don't tell me you joined DU tonight just to shill for the Snowald Cabal, marching orders in hand... I guess you're part of the multi-prong damage-control PR offensive?

So how many more of you are out working late tonight? I counted at least a dozen of you on twitter...

The NSA Apologists said it was legal.

And it was declared illegal l NY 3 Obama-appointed judges innthe 2nd Circuit.
And it died in Congress.

Guess who won?

But you know squat about security that you can credibly comment on.

Regardless, the assumption from the get-go was that China and Russia had the data, as that is the only safe assumption to make, so this changes nothing.

Whatever the merits of this story, at least Greenwald is still an unprincipled juvenile dimwitted hack.

I like consistency.

for compromising US security. If he stuck to metadata/telephony he'd be fine. He didn't.

http://www.darkreading.com/richard-clarke-snowden-should-be-in-prison/v/d-id/1127882

Which, of course, everyone that has ever watched how these "government finally admits wrongdoing" situations go knows that is pretty much *always* the case.

Massive, massive failure, and these idiots want to retain even more data on US citizens? They can't even be trusted to take care of their own.

was available to the private for profit corporation where Snowden worked.

Booz Allen Hamilton

This isn't any worse than the Kim Philby spying and defection to the USSR and we survived that just fine.

Ah yes I love the smell of steaming hypocritical bullshit in the morning.

How credible is that organization?

Have fun, Mr. Snowden!

How's the baseball coverage over there?