Why Snowden's Resume Actually Is Important!

[sabrina 1]

If the stories are correct about Snowden's resume, we should be even more concerned about our 'Intelligence' community and the standards required of those entrusted with our Rights and Security.

Do they really hire people and give them access to such sensitive information without knowing anything about their backgrounds?

Us Fears Snowden Will Defect to China

When Edward Snowden revealed himself to be the source of the NSA leaks in an interview with The Guardian Sunday, he briefly described how he went from a high school dropout to a man entrusted with some of the nation's most closely guarded secrets. An investigation by ABC News pieced together the many parts that he left out.

After Snowden quit high school, he earned his GED and then undertook a self-designed college education through a patchwork of classes at community, for-profit and online schools.

To those who are using his resume to discredit HIM, they need to ask themselves who hired him?

Jeremy Bash, former CIA and Pentagon Chief of Staff, told ABC News today that the possibility of Snowden defecting to China, or even cooperating with Chinese officials, is a top concern for U.S. officials.

"He could do tremendous damage," Bash said during an interview for the ABC News/Yahoo Power Players series. "I think if a foreign government learned everything that was in Edward Snowden's brain, they would have a good window into the way we collect signals intelligence… He had access to highly classified information."

Really? I am sure those who are raising the issue of his resume must now be very concerned about this massive surveillance program we are supposed to 'trust' our government with.

It certainly isn't his fault if they didn't care about his resume, is it? 'Everything that is in Snowden's brain' could give people a window into all our secrets'. Really?

How many other twenty somethings are running around with our personal data 'in their brains' and how many of them are likely to use it on a personal level to satisfy a personal grudge of some kind?

And yet, those outraged over his resume, are totally trusting with placing the protection of our Rights and Security in the hands of THOSE WHO HIRED HIM??

Does that make any sense?

I don't care much about his resume, I oppose Bush's policies period. There would be no Snowden without Bush's policies.

But if his resume is your concern, have you even asked yourself why he was hired with such a resume and how many others there are that our leaders know so little about but are trusting with your personal information and security?

It is dangerous to allow any Government to have this kind of power.

Let's hope Snowden isn't petty and vindictive as they gave him access to all that personal information.


Editing to include the Rude Pundit's take on Snowden's Detractors:

See, if Snowden is a misfit toy crossed with Rain Man, how the fuck did he get such a high security clearance? If he was such a loose cannon-in-waiting, why didn't the intelligence apparatus see that in him and not give him the ability to deal with Top Secret material? How good is an intelligence organization that can't successfully vet its workers? And if we can't trust them to read the tea leaves on the people who are being asked to read the tea leaves, how the fuck can we trust them to sift through our metadata or web histories?

Lol, he beat me to it!

H/T to DU's Meegbear. You can read the rest of the Rude One's opinion here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3016093

[dkf]

1. Why does his GED say anything about his views?

If anything he is too idealistic and too intelligent to let this be.

[sabrina 1]

2. Well, he's not the point. Those who used his resume to try to discredit him apparently don't care

about allowing those who hired him, to monitor all their personal behavior. It makes no sense. It is not Snowden they are discrediting, it is the people they want US to trust with a massive surveillance program of the American people.

[dkf]

3. Think of how fast that area is expanding. They have to hire whoever is out there.

[sabrina 1]

4. Congress has abdicated its duty by handing it all over to Private For Profit 'Security' Corps

who have no obligation to do anything other than make a profit. And they have, billions of dollars in contracts. How much of it is outsourced to foreign workers? Do we even know?

But those who are directing their hatred at Snowden, actually trust those who hired him. Lol, they are not making any sense, are they?

[dkf]

13. I bet a LOT of people with this expertise are foreign born.

Moreover probably over represented with Chinese! As an Asian Amer. I find this pretty funny.

[sabrina 1]

38. I wouldn't be surprised. Which would prove beyond a doubt that none of this has anything to

do with our security. It's all about money and I would be surprised if they haven't outsourced our 'security' considering the main goal of these mega corporations is MONEY.

Maybe that's why there is all the outrage, they are afraid we are going to find out just what they have been up to regarding who gets to see this 'top secret' information.

[Downwinder]

5. In the past, the FBI went out and checked a security applicant's

bona fides. You could not get a clearance out of a cereal box. Perhaps that has changed. If so they deserve what they get.

[sabrina 1]

7. Well, back then I don't think it was all Privatized as it is now. It's all about money.

Our 'rights and security' are now in the hands of huge, multi billion dollar Corporations, like Booz Allen, Snowden's last employer.

Our current Director of Intelligence is also a former employee of Booz Allen. He's a Bush pal, Booz Allen is populated with Bush people.

Are they outsourcing our Intel to increase profits? Would Clapper, Dir of Intel, have a slight conflict of interest maybe? His former employers need Security Contracts to stay in business. He has access to Congress and influence over their decisions.

And this is what we are being asked to trust with violations of our 4th Amendment rights.

Thanks, but I wouldn't trust a Bush Corporation with my worst enemy.

[nadinbrzezinski]

18. To be fair

The privatization started in Nam, KBR

It accelerated under Clnton, and went exponential under little boots.

This is bipartisan

[sabrina 1]

25. True, but under Bush it went out of control.

There should never be any profits allowed when a country goes to war. War should only be fought when the country is directly threatened.

Once money enters the picture, you know there will be corruption.

[HipChick]

17. They still do..they will schedule visits to follow up

[NightWatcher]

23. I used to work for a contractor that conducted background checks

and granted security clearances.

I've read where people with security clearances say they were done by government agents. I was employed as a full time employee for a govt contractor. I did not work for the government. I possessed credentials that had my name, picture, and said ________ government agency. I appeared to anyone presented with my creds to be a federal agent.

Some backgrounds were done sloppily and in haste to ensure that output numbers stayed within contract specs.

[atreides1]

28. Nope

My wife has to go through a security investigation every 5 years...she's retired USAF and worked intel.

[randome]

6. On this I think we can all agree.

Learning how Snowden reached his position should prove enlightening.

However, it appears he didn't have the access he claims or he would have shown us some sort of evidence instead of simply internal NSA documents. He shouldn't have even had access to that much, though.

Either Booz Allen dropped the ball or the NSA did, or both. But it appears even his army recruiter was hoodwinked by him. Even his friend who described him on Lawrence O'Donnell as an "IT genius". From the claims he's made, it doesn't appear that rings true, either.

So it should be very interesting to reconstruct his past and learn how he landed at NSA.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[sabrina 1]

9. Well, his friend is not entrusted with our 4th Amendment rights or a huge surveillance program on

the American people, which we are told is 'for our own good'.

I'm a little nervous about Private Security Corporations populated with Bush pals having our 4th Amendment rights in their hands.

Are they outsourcing this work, they are all about profits after all. To China maybe? Snowden's detractors don't seem concerned that he did not hire himself. They still trust those who did hire him, and considering what they think of him, with our 4th Amendment rights. That is insane.

[randome]

14. But...but...private enterprise is ALWAYS more efficient and less bureaucratic!

Which is the biggest lie of all, repeated by those who have never worked in a corporate environment.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[LeftInTX]

30. Speaking of outsourcing:

In 2012, Snowden worked for outsourcing pioneer, Dell. (In Hawaii)
His experience at Dell is being kept quiet. I have no idea whether he did NSA contracting work at Dell or not.

Snowden had apparently only worked at Booz-Allen for a very short time. He went for orientation in Maryland in March and then only worked for a few weeks in Hawaii before he told them he needed to take time off for epilepsy.

Maybe he obtained access to the Chinese while he was working at Dell?

[sabrina 1]

32. Or maybe Dell wasn't involved in any spying, that he noticed. But you're right, not much is

being said about that.

[Cali_Democrat]

10. Yup. n/t

[DevonRex]

8. I actually think we may have a mole or 2 higher up in CIA who hired him

and did his background investigation. Or had his background investigation scrubbed. I think China may have been planned all along.

So there is cause for concern. Just not what you think.

[sabrina 1]

11. Well if moles can so easily go unnoticed in our government, why on earth would we trust our

Constitutional rights to that same government, or any government? Why would we be insane enough to support a massive surveillance program on the AMERICAN people? Why are those efforts not directed at actual, potential THREATS to this country?

You all better hope he is what he says he is, an American who cares about his country. Because if you all are right, many heads are going to, and should, roll.

[DevonRex]

24. They've always been there. This one is pretty interesting, though.

This could actually be the first case of a corporate/foreign operation. Think about this. All the corporations moving to China for low wages and no union protections for the workers. And China is also manipulating currency and a whole lot of other stuff to hurt the rest of the world economy.

There is a big reason other governments are hacking over there. There's a big reason corporations don't want the world to know exactly what they're doing over there, what agreements they've reached, etc. And the conditions in which they operate, with which no company can compete at home.

Most of what goes on regarding China is FININT. Financial intelligence. They want it to stop so they can continue undercutting every country that tries to provide living wages, health care, etc, without sweat shops. China is trying to have it both ways. They say they're communist but they're sure as hell benefiting from vulture capitalism, which knows no loyalty to any nation by the way. Romney ring a bell?

[sabrina 1]

26. Well, if the US really doesn't like the slave labor in China, that is easily fixed. Congress

needs to pass laws requiring that any US Corporation operating abroad are held to the same labor standards, including wages, they would be if they remained here. A few people have tried to get this done but there weren't many sponsors for such bills. Not even from Democrats.

And if they do not comply with US standards, they should be penalized. Also there should be no tax breaks or subsidies for Corps that take their businesses elsewhere, especially if they are contributing to the horrible labor practices of those countries.

We are complicit, we reward these Corporations. We applaud 'capitalism' and more and more everything, including our wars and even torture and 'security' is all about money.

[DevonRex]

27. Hell, they couldn't pass gas if they had to vote first.

[sabrina 1]

29. Well then there is no point in claiming we are any better than the Chinese when it comes to profit

making over human rights. I'm sure there are people in China who would like to change things also, but the majority of their leaders won't let them either.

We can start by no longer supporting phony Democrats who vote with Republicans and excusing it by saying they 'are better than a Republican'. No, they are not, they are worse as they give credibility to anti democratic policies that we would slam if only Republicans were doing it.

[bvar22]

12. Does that make any sense?

"And yet, those outraged over his resume, are totally trusting with placing the protection of our Rights and Security in the hands of THOSE WHO HIRED HIM?? "

Does that make any sense?

No it doesn't,
but "making sense" isn't a requirement for those desperately trying to discredit the messenger,
even those who claim to be members of the "Reality Based Community"
or those who claim to be pro-sense.

[flamingdem]

15. No. I think people realize there are huge problems with outsourcing security

as well as many other aspects of the story.

What is objected to is something you'll have to work harder to glean I guess.

[sabrina 1]

22. Well, let's say he turns out to be a Chinese spy, how does that make you feel about

placing your personal, private date in the hands of those who hired him? How many others with 'agendas' might they have hired?

People can't have it both ways. The FFs were very wise to protect the people from government intrusion into their private lives without 'probable cause' sworn by oath, before even obtaining a warrant. They understood the weaknesses in human nature.

I am blown away by the willingness of some here to hand over their Rights in exchange for promises of 'safety'. We can NEVER be safe, but we can be free.

The defenders of the Surveillance Program better hope that Snowden is actually an American who cares about his country and NOT what they are accusing him of. Because if he is, there will be hell to pay that the Government who wants us to trust them with our rights, could be so incredibly incompetent and cavalier with the information they have gathered on the American people.

[sabrina 1]

39. Lol, I always laugh when I see that old talking point, 'reality based community'. It was used

Liberals by some of the most despicable Third Wayers back during the time when we were asking for Bush to be prosecuted. They thought they were fooling people, but they were so transparent, operatives mostly which was suspected, and later verified when they couldn't hide it anymore.

It does help to identify possible infiltrators to the Dem Party though. I don't know why they latched on to that silly phrase, guess they thought it sounded 'smart' or something. But it always brings back memories of those times when actual Democrats were trying to stop Bush and his policies from destroying this country and they for some reason, were attempting to protect him from impeachment.

[chimpymustgo]

41. Thank you sabrina 1 for your passion, your MEMORY and your sense of justice. Please keep fighting.

There are many who refuse to fold - and "trust" others with our Constitutional rights.

[geek tragedy]

16. This guy was an obvious security risk (Ron Paul supporter working for Big Brother, hello?)

and that he was granted access via thumb drive should get people fired.

[ProSense]

19. I think we can all agree

"Why Snowden's Resume Actually Is Important!"

...that Snowden is a liar, and apparently it's becoming harder to defend him. Has anyone considered that he may have hacked into the system?

NSA Director Says Leaker’s Wiretapping Ability Claims Are ‘False’
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023007548

Report: Snowden Stored Documents On Thumb Drive
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023010060

Greenwald: Edward Snowden's worst fear has not been realised – thankfully (cites polls)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023016898

[sabrina 1]

40. The more likely it may be that he is all that his detractors are claiming, the more egregious it is

for anyone to support handing over our rights to those who employed him. If they are that incompetent in their hiring practices to employ people to whom they will give access to such sensitive material, it will raise even more questions about what they are doing.. To think that anyone that incompetent, we are told, should be trusted to protect our rights is beyond words.

It will be better for those who disagree with what he did if he turns out to be what he claims, an American who became a whistle blower when he saw wrong doing by the government. At least we would know our government isn't hiring spies, while telling us we should just trust them with our Constitutional rights.

[BrotherIvan]

20. This post blows away the authoritarian argument

It's not about Snowden.

It's not about Greenwald.

It's not about Obama.

It's about the kind of world in which we choose to live.

It's about Democracy and representative government that serves its people for the good of the people.

It's about hundreds of millions of people's privacy and fundamental rights and the small piece of paper called The Constitution that is so important it still is the ultimate authority in the (once) most powerful nation in the world.

I, for one, will not STFU about it while that is trashed.


Thanks for an excellent post!

[Cleita]

21. This is why our government shouldn't be outsourced the way it's being

done today. It used to be, to be a government contractor, there had to be tough review of the companies before they were even considered. There had to be many bids submitted before a contract was given and afterwards a lot of oversight. Now it seems, if you know Senator SoandSo and he puts your company forward you get the contract with all kinds of freedom to hire whomever you want with little oversight over who gets clearance. Welcome to the post Bush results of trying to privatize everything. Something like this is not like making airplane parts. It's intelligence and shouldn't even be given to a private contractor.

So this is the result and maybe the silver lining is that it will blow the lid off of the whole procedure and expose it for the get rich on taxpayer's money scheme that it is.

[sabrina 1]

37. It's way past time to have a thorough review of what has been a far too secret

part of our government. I hope that is what happens because every so often it takes a whistle blower risking everything to try to warn us about how out of control it is getting. But not overly hopeful to be honest. We've become something that was not intended because we have been lazy, all of us.

[Electric Monk]

31. There would be no Snowden controvery without *Bush's policies. Yes, that's it in a nutshell. nt

[LeftInTX]

33. Excellent post:

I agree the massive surveillance program is too large. And I agree privatization of it is a major concern and probably led to them cutting corners with Snowden.

In the past, we've had top CIA intelligence analysts become counter spies for foreign govts. These type met the very rigorous qualifications. Their reasons have usually been the financial pay offs by the foreign country, for example Robert Hanssen.

Daniel Ellsberg worked for a private contractor too, however, there was no evidence that any corners were cut by the Rand Corporation. Ellsberg possessed all the appropriate excellent credentials and was highly qualified. Ellsberg is an example of a private contractor employee who care passionately about Americans and did the right thing.

But I do agree with this specific case that too much hiring for surveillance programs, privatization and cutting corners are a factor.

(Sorry if I'm a bit off topic discussing previous cases. Just kind of throwing them in there for a bit of reference. )

[sabrina 1]

35. Not off topic at all. You make very good points. Personally, until I see evidence to the contrary

I take Ellsberg's view on Snowden, that he saw wrong doing and tried to do something about it. Ellsberg tweeted that 'he is the person we have waited for for 40 years'.

I was however addressing those who have thrown everything they can think of at Snowden before we know anything about him, in an attempt to distract from the main issue. And pointing out that smearing him as a Chinese spy or whatever, doesn't help their case at all, on the contrary.

We need to get the money out of politics, but it may be too late, I hope not but privatizing our security and the enormous amounts of money going to these 'contractors' makes it inevitable that there will be corruption and greed and incompetence. Thanks for your comment.

[xchrom]

34. Du rec. Nt

[WillyT]

36. K & R !!!

[FarCenter]

42. Spy agencies, especially codebreakers, have always hired idiot savants of various kinds

They need people who are extraordinarily talented at specific things, and they will hire them in spite of the individuals being relatively abnormal in other aspects of their lives, such as academic achievement.

[sabrina 1]

43. And then they have access to all this sensitive information. That's one good reason why

those defending this program are so wrong. To hand over the people's Constitutional rights to a system that is so flawed, with people whose ethics and competence (see Clapper and his former security corporation) are so questionable, is simply insane.

And those using Snowden to defend these policies have actually done the opposite. They have emphasized the need to end these Bush policies as soon as possible.