- Joined
- Dec 20, 2009
- Messages
- 75,699
- Reaction score
- 39,983
- Location
- USofA
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
He's (well, was) working for Booz Allen Hamilton.
There are substantial premiums for war zone or hardship service, and if he's an independent contractor (vice working for a company) he loses half in taxes.eace
War zone or hardship deployments?eace
Not for federal compensation calculations. Probably a cost of living bump, but that would not be that much.eace
Not for federal compensation calculations. Probably a cost of living bump, but that would not be that much.eace
His skill set is not uncommon. Basically a system administrator.eace
He's not paid by the GS schedule, he's a contractor.
What relevant field did you work in? I've known multiple people who have gone overseas for more than you are talking about, including to Hawaii. Hell, our old IMO was useless, and she was banking 140-150 in Hawaii.
CIA nearly 34 years, 18 overseas. Retired as SIS-5. Now VP of a small contracting/consulting company.eace
CIA nearly 34 years, 18 overseas. Retired as SIS-5. Now VP of a small contracting/consulting company.eace
Small firm vs Booz Allen.. hmm..
We've beaten them a couple of times.eace
And he is out. The man who revealed this **** storm. A hero and a great man that was not afraid to tell the truth and reveal something he thought was wrong. Whistle blowing is not a crime! [/FONT][/COLOR]
“I can assure you the phone number tracking of non-criminal, non-terrorist suspects was not discussed [at the administration's classified briefings],” said [Congressman Aaron] Schock. “Most members have stopped going to their classified briefings because they rarely tell us anything we don’t already know in the news. It really has become a charade.”
"By the way,” [Senator Jeff] Merkley continued. “When I sought information [on the phone surveillance program], the only information I got was that, yes there is a program sweeping up broad amounts of data through the records act. This second thing, which we just learned about, called PRISM, I had no idea about.”
The only lawmakers who knew about PRISM were bound by oaths of office to hold their tongues.
The source had instructed his media contacts to come to Hong Kong, visit a particular out-of-the-way corner of a certain hotel, and ask — loudly — for directions to another part of the hotel. If all seemed well, the source would walk past holding a Rubik’s Cube.
So three people — Glenn Greenwald, a civil-liberties writer who recently moved his blog to The Guardian; Laura Poitras, a documentary filmmaker who specializes in surveillance; and Ewen MacAskill, a Guardian reporter — flew from New York to Hong Kong about 12 days ago. They followed the directions. A man with a Rubik’s Cube appeared.
It was Edward J. Snowden, who looked even younger than his 29 years — an appearance, Mr. Greenwald recalled in an interview from Hong Kong on Monday, that shocked him because he had been expecting, given the classified surveillance programs the man had access to, someone far more senior. Mr. Snowden has now turned over archives of “thousands” of documents, according to Mr. Greenwald, and “dozens” are newsworthy.
:shrug: As I've said, the programs make me uncomfortable, and I am understanding of the argument that the potential for abuse outweighs the benefit gained; though I think we should be willing to accurately describe the benefit gained as "fewer successful attacks against Americans".
But realistically, everything you do that is electronic and transmitted goes into a database and is stored, and is nigh on impossible to fully erase. If someone with the resources of the US IC wants that data, they are going to be able to get it out of that database - your only real defeat mechanism is encryption, and that will only protect content (which isn't being widely collected anyway - again, that we know of).
You know that part in the cop show where the lawyer asks the guy on the witness stand
"And so Mr Smith, you say you had no contact with the deceased on the night of the murder?"
"Mr Smith: That is correct"
"Lawyer: But isn't it true, Mr Smith, that the record shows that your cell phone made three calls to the victims' cell phone that night, and that all three resulted in conversations?"
[Dramatic Music Plays][Jury Gasps][Guilty Looking Guy Who Was Really Innocent Whom Matlock Just Saved Looks Relieved]
Well.....what record did you think they were referring to all these years? All that stuff is stored, and available to the government if they have a warrant. Which, they did.
not lately. As I've been saying, the possibility for good is as immense here as the possibility for abuse. If we as a people want to say that we think the latter outweighs the former, tthen that's fine. But we need to honestly admit that we are making a relative rather than an absolute judgement - there isn't an option where we retain only the power that can do good while losing only the power that can do evil.
In his dealings with the media, Edward Snowden played his hand like a pro.
Snowden, 29, was looking to disclose top-secret information about the National Security Agency’s surveillance programs to the world — and to do so he arranged a powerful one-two combination punch with the press that provided both mainstream credibility (Barton Gellman and The Washington Post) and someone who shared his ideological inclinations (Glenn Greenwald), according to media observers and whistleblower experts.
As more and more agenda-driven outlets, reporters and bloggers hit the media scene, leakers such as Snowden find themselves with a wealth of potential options to get their information out. It’s a seismic shift from the old media landscape, when would-be leakers had only one clear path to ensuring widespread attention for their stories: a successful pitch to a handful of national newspapers or TV networks.
But the traditional national security media heavyweights — led by The New York Times and The Washington Post — still have outsize influence on stories about intelligence gathering and potential overreach by the government.
So at the end of the day, experts told POLITICO, Snowden found a way to pull off what was in effect the perfect leak. He established parallel tracks with the MSM — The Washington Post and The Guardian — and also found a member of the media who was sympathetic to his cause. Snowden’s material was given widespread exposure and credibility in the traditional press and at the same time had the hand of a friendly journalist on the wheel for at least part of the ride.
The difference is that the data was stored by the phone company, not the government, and the government had to have reasonable suspicion and obtain a warrant to obtain it.
The other new wrinkle is that now the data can be analyzed by computers to establish patterns of phone usage and law enforcement notified solely because of suspicious patterns. That is appropriate when their is preexisting suspicion, but not something that should be done randomly or to everybody.
the dropout is no dummy, manipulates the msm like a master
The perfect leak - Mackenzie Weinger - POLITICO.com
the lady goes on at length:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/11/u...r-story.html?smid=tw-nytmedia&seid=auto&_r=3&
Yup. All that seems to have happened is the expansion of rights to the data base - nothing new was collected. And (as has been pointed out) the government did indeed have a warrant, just as it takes further oversight to dive deep into the actual content of an American citizen.
Um.... yeah? Do you have indications that law enforcement was called in to visit random people or everybody because of pattern analysis programs?
We have now established that he lied about his salary: $122K/year vice the $200K/year he claimed. It also looks increasingly likely that he lied about his permitted accesses and his claimed freedom of action. It also appears that he was in touch with the reporter even before he took the BAH job. What we have here is a wannabe. He's a serial failure who decided to try to be the second coming of Julian Assange.
After taxes probably not. But as a SIGINTer in Hawaii that's not implausible.
What we have here is our government run amok. Good evening 2m...
Hawaii, expensive as hell.
Good evening, AP.:2wave:
I'll just go with the DNI's public statement.
"As our nation faces the most diverse set of threats I've seen in my 50 years in intelligence, the unauthorized disclosure of two important surveillance programs has inflicted potentially long-lasting and irreversible harm to our ability to identify and respond to those threats. As news coverage of these unauthorized disclosures continues, we need to press on with our mission and not let these disclosures distract us from our intelligence efforts.
"The articles published in conjunction with these leaks contain numerous inaccuracies, both in describing the purpose of our efforts and in the way they characterize the work that we do. They omit key information regarding how these classified intelligence collection programs are used to prevent terrorist attacks and the numerous safeguards Congress, the FISA Court and the Intelligence Community have put in place to protect privacy and civil liberties." :2usflag:
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?