For John, BLUF: Why?
The NSA Whistle Blower Bows in.
Edward Snowden, a 29-year-old former CIA employee, is the source behind the major intelligence leaks of the past week, according to the man who first reported on the the government's surveillance programs last week, the Guardian's Glenn Greenwald.§nbsp; Snowden's identity has been confirmed by The Washington Post.Regards — CliffIn a story posted by the Guardian on Sunday afternoon, Greenwald and two other reports reveal Snowden, who currently works for the consulting firm Booz Allen Hamilton but has contracted for years with the National Security Agency, as the source of his information.
The Guardian reports it is naming Snowden at his own request. Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr. had announced Saturday that the NSA launched a Justice Department investigation into who leaked the information.
5 comments:
Anyone care to explain how Snowden is different than Manning?
Jack
This guy, Mr Snowden, may be emotionally disturbed, a traitor or a true believer in our Constitution and traditions. Too soon to tell.
It is also too soon to shut down public and Congressional inquiries in these areas.
Right now I see no difference between Mr Snowden and Specialist Manning. Mr Snowden came in through the Army.
On the other hand, Mr Rush Limbaugh quoting Mr Julian Assange with approval suggests that tectonic plates may be shifting.
Further, if this is as bad (First and Fourth Amendments) as Mr Snowden suggests, then this is not just a garden variety Administration Scandal and if the President gets out in front of it he can be the hero.
Regards — Cliff
One aspect of this thing that I thought was worth contemplating was the contractor angle.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2013/06/10/intelligence_contractor_lobbying.html
Appelbaum and Lipton focus a bit on the question of of whether the intelligence community's growing reliance on contractors increases the chances of leaks. I think the more interesting issue is how it alters the lobbying dynamic. An established government bureaucracy has, of course, considerable capacity to lobby on behalf of its own interests. That's particularly true when the bureacracy's leadership can claim possession of secret information. But it's also constrained in certain respects. The National Security Agency can't bundle campaign contributions, give money to independent expenditure campaigns, or offer nice paydays to former congressional staffers.
But if you take a few billion dollars worth of intelligence spending and transfer it onto the Booz Allen balance sheet, then political organizing around the cause of higher intelligence spending can avail itself of the tools of private enterprise along with the tools of bureaucratic politics.
Amongst military members, civil servants and contractors, I don't think there is a difference in loyalty to our nation.nbsp; Beside Edward Snowden we can place Bradley Mannng, Spec 4, US Army.
I think the move to contractors was a response to the criticism as to the size of the Federal Government. The explosive growth in urbanization in the DC Area has to be fueled by something and I am thinking it is an ever expanding Federal work force, military, civil servants, and especially contractors.
Yes, contractors can lobby and join trade associations and so on. However, I don't think it is chargeable to the Government, via the contract vehicle. It has to come out of profits, requiring a tradeoff.
Someone sent along this update:
QUOTE
This morning's WTOP (the DC news station) reporting included claims that Snowden wedges pillows around the door of his hotel room to prevent eavesdropping, and only keys into his computer while shielding the keyboard with a red hood.
IF the story, as presented, is accurate, either he's woefully unfamiliar with far more sophisticated surveillance methods (e.g., shining a laser on the window to pick up conversation based on window vibrations--and THAT's an old method multiple decades old), or he's simply the face being presented.
UNQUOTE
There may be more to this story as it evolves.
Regards — Cliff
"I think the move to contractors was a response..."
There's probably something there in the case of intelligence. The move to contractors in the military, however, is also about being able to report less boots in theater.
" It has to come out of profits, requiring a tradeoff."
Yeah, but lobbying money is one of the most dollar efficient uses of capital. If that's true for regular businesses, imagine how true it is for these contractors. Trading some profits for leverage is a profit 'force multiplier'.
I wonder what Eisenhower would say.
Post a Comment