Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by BickNowstrom 2135 days ago
Snowden was even willing to burn his future career, as he took a job with Booz Allen Hamilton with the sole purpose of leaking as much information as he could get his hands on.

As an admin at BAH he was using his colleagues' passwords for discovery. He was willing to burn their careers to hack access to more leaks.

So much leaks that he could not vet these all. This was no Ellsberg tasked with copying some confidential papers and reading lies in them. It was wholesale collection of all Snowden could get his hands on.

Then, instead of making his point with his own whistleblower findings, he went to journalists and handed them over all the documents, instantly making them available to intelligence agencies all over the world, burning all NSA/CIA analysts with records in the dump (for instance, everyone who contributed to Intellipedia, which had zero reason to be in a dump meant for whistleblower purposes).

Then instead of facing justice (and there are whistleblower protections for doing the right thing), he cooperated with Wikileaks and fled to China and Russia, causing a permanent PR disaster for US intelligence with his new public speakings, book deals, and social media influencing career.

The reason Snowden's leaks got a lot of attention is that they "proved" (we never got confirmation that they were real) that data on Americans is being collected. We already knew, by law, that the Americans are allowed to fully spy on European civilians. That's how they are able to warn on impending terrorist attacks and improve their buy-in with European countries leadership (or how they are able to perfectly copy Germany-invented motors or Belgium-invented speech-to-text technology before these countries are even building it, because a strong US economy is a matter of national security).

2 comments

>Then instead of facing justice (and there are whistleblower protections for doing the right thing)

I think it was pretty well understood at the time that the Obama administration could not be dependant on upholding whistle blower protections.

Snowden could have exposed this too.
the media was already filled with stories about the obama administration's record number of whistleblower prosecutions in 2013. there was nothing to 'expose'.
> instead of making his point with his own whistleblower findings, he went to journalists and handed them over all the documents

This is literally part of what whistleblowers do.

> instead of facing justice (and there are whistleblower protections for doing the right thing)

Whistleblower protections that didn’t really exist?

> causing a permanent PR disaster for US intelligence

One which they got for callously breaking the law?

> The reason Snowden's leaks got a lot of attention is that they "proved" (we never got confirmation that they were real)

What kind of confirmation do you want? You can’t just put things in quotes and hope to weaken them.

> This is literally part of what whistleblowers do.

No, this is outsourcing your whistleblowing activities to journalists. It is leaking unvetted data in the hope that there is something of public note/damaging to your employer in there (of course there is, top secret and noforn classifications are there for a reason)

> Whistleblower protections that didn’t really exist?

They existed. Just because Snowden did not like his chances with American justice does not mean whistleblower protections do not exist. Obama even pardoned Chelsea Manning (I believe that leak was part of a suicidal life style).

> One which they got for callously breaking the law?

I am not saying the PR disaster is not warranted. I am noting the extend of the PR disaster. I am also adding the soft-ball questions from journalists, and Snowden's meticilously prepared talking points.

> What kind of confirmation do you want? You can’t just put things in quotes and hope to weaken them.

The NSA coming out and saying these documents are real. Thread OP was talking about proof, but proof requires a better standard. Of course, it is highly likely these were real documents, and the Chinese or Russians did not add false documents to muddy it, like they do with their own leaks. I actually added the quotes, not to be pedantic, but to ward against pedantic replies.