• Chozo@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      21
      ·
      10 months ago

      It’s been a minute since I’ve refreshed myself on the Snowden story, and I don’t have time to go deep into that rabbit hole again, but if memory serves I believe he released non-redacted documents that exposed the positions/identities of deployed US assets, and some who were operating undercover had their identities blown.

      • JoeKrogan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        68
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        He gave it to specific journalists with proven track records who concluded that the published info was in the public interest while running it by the government and redacting confidential identifying data.

        You can’t get more responsible than that.

      • snooggums@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        39
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        You remember the government claiming it, but as far as I know they never released any actual statements that his leaks killed anyone.

        https://www.vice.com/en/article/438jmw/official-reports-on-the-damage-caused-by-edward-snowdens-leaks-are-totally-redacted

        https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSL2N1BR287/

        Both of these are pretty typical of all the articles I have seen, which is the government claiming he did great harm, but no actual examples of getting anyone killed.

        • Chozo@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          Yeah, that sound about right. I don’t remember it ever being confirmed what, if anything, was actually compromised by the leaks. But I doubt that we’d ever get specific details on something like that from the government, anyway.

          Though I imagine that a lot of ongoing operations at the time probably had to be cancelled prematurely, the consequences of which might never really be known.

          • circuitfarmer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            10 months ago

            Though I imagine that a lot of ongoing operations at the time probably had to be cancelled prematurely, the consequences of which might never really be known.

            This is the fear that is always instilled in people whenever the government takes an L. I’m not saying it’s a false statement, but it’s also unsubstantiated.

        • Guido Mancipioni@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          16
          ·
          10 months ago

          That’s because they were spies. Spies aren’t typically talked about. SOME of the programs he detailed in those releases were within the scope of what he was trying to expose, but many were not. He dumped THOUSANDS of documents related to humint sources that absolutely got people killed, burned other active contacts / projects and cost years worth of work. There was a huge shuffle of personnel after those leaks as intelligence agencies TRIED to get their people out, but there were a great number who couldn’t get out. Andrew Bustamante speaks about this, at some length, to just name the most well known talking head.

          The majority of what he exposed had nothing to do with domestic surveillance programs, and the way he exposed that information was WILDLY irresponsible.

          Yes, the illegal surveillance he exposed was a big deal, but again, was done in a really shitty way that compromised active investigations. He neglected to do anything through proper channels, and instead betrayed his country rather than try to fix the problems through whistle blower channels where he would have actually had legal and tangible protections. Dude was an actual shit bag and a Russian asset.

          • Alto@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            He neglected to do anything through proper channels, and instead betrayed his country rather than try to fix the problems through whistle blower channels where he would have actually had legal and tangible protections.

            I’m not going to pretend he wasn’t reckless as fuck but don’t pretend for even a moment that “going through the proper channels” would have gotten him anything that even halfway resembled a fair trial.

          • n3m37h@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            He neglected to do anything through proper channels, and instead betrayed his country rather than try to fix the problems through whistle blower channels where he would have actually had legal and tangible protections.

            See Thomas A Drake