Blogger Claims Toddlers Killed More People Than Terrorists In The USA This Year
2.4 Million Customers Leave The Five Biggest Banks In The UK

Q And A With NSA Surveillance Whistleblower

If you haven't read it, this morning the Guardian UK newspaper website featured a question-and-answer session with the NSA surveillance whistleblower, Edward Snowden. Some highlights are below. I found the whole exchange highly informative.

About rumored charges of treason reported in some media outlets, Snowden replied in the Q&A session:

"... I did not reveal any US operations against legitimate military targets. I pointed out where the NSA has hacked civilian infrastructure such as universities, hospitals, and private businesses because it is dangerous. These nakedly, aggressively criminal acts are wrong no matter the target. Not only that, when NSA makes a technical mistake during an exploitation operation, critical systems crash..."

About why he released the information when he did:

"Obama's campaign promises and election gave me faith that he would lead us toward fixing the problems he outlined in his quest for votes. Many Americans felt similarly. Unfortunately, shortly after assuming power, he closed the door on investigating systemic violations of law, deepened and expanded several abusive programs, and refused to spend the political capital to end the kind of human rights violations like we see in Guantanamo, where men still sit without charge."

About the responses by Google and Facebook:

"Their denials went through several revisions as it become more and more clear they were misleading and included identical, specific language across companies. As a result of these disclosures and the clout of these companies, we're finally beginning to see more transparency and better details about these programs for the first time since their inception. They are legally compelled to comply and maintain their silence in regard to specifics of the [PRISM] program..."

About the news media and replies by U.S. officials:

"... US officials also provide misleading or directly false assertions about the value of these programs, as they did just recently with the Zazi case, which court documents clearly show was not unveiled by PRISM. Journalists should ask a specific question: since these programs began operation shortly after September 11th, how many terrorist attacks were prevented SOLELY by information derived from this suspicion-less surveillance that could not be gained via any other source?"

About whistleblowers and the U.S. government's responses:

"... Binney, Drake, Kiriakou, and Manning are all examples of how overly-harsh responses to public-interest whistle-blowing only escalate the scale, scope, and skill involved in future disclosures. Citizens with a conscience are not going to ignore wrong-doing simply because they'll be destroyed for it: the conscience forbids it. Instead, these draconian responses simply build better whistleblowers. If the Obama administration responds with an even harsher hand against me, they can be assured that they'll soon find themselves facing an equally harsh public response."

If you want to learn more, search Twitter with the hashtag #AskSnowden.


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

The comments to this entry are closed.