UPDATED: NSA official floats possibility of striking a deal with Edward Snowden

[DonViejo]

Last edited Fri Dec 13, 2013, 10:47 PM - Edit history (2)

Source: AF-P/via Raw Story

By Agence France-Presse
Friday, December 13, 2013 18:30 EST

A National Security Agency official said in an interview released Friday that he would be open to cutting an amnesty deal with intelligence leaker Edward Snowden if he agreed to stop divulging secret documents.

Rick Ledgett, who heads the NSA’s task force investigating the damage from the Snowden leaks, told CBS television’s “60 Minutes” program that some but not all of his colleagues share his view.

“My personal view is, yes, it’s worth having a conversation about” a possible deal, said Ledgett, according to excerpts of the interview due to air Sunday.

But Snowden would have to provide firm assurances that the remaining documents would be secured.

Read more: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/12/13/nsa-official-floats-possibility-of-striking-a-deal-with-edward-snowden/

---

UPDATE

NSA leaders split on giving amnesty to Snowden

By JOHN MILLER - CBS NEWS

December 12, 2013, 7: 29 PM

CBS News learned Thursday that the information National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden has revealed so far is just a fraction of what he has. In fact, he has so much, some think it is worth giving him amnesty to get it back.

Rick Ledgett is the man who was put in charge of the Snowden leak task force by Gen. Keith Alexander, who heads the NSA. The task force's job is to prevent another leak like this one from happening again. They're also trying to figure out how much damage the Snowden leaks have done, and how much damage they could still do.

Snowden, who is believed to still have access to 1.5 million classified documents he has not leaked, has been granted temporary asylum in Moscow, which leaves the U.S. with few options.

JOHN MILLER: He's already said, "If I got amnesty, I would come back." Given the potential damage to national security, what would your thought on making a deal be?

RICK LEDGETT: So, my personal view is, yes, it's worth having a conversation about. I would need assurances that the remainder of the data could be secured, and my bar for those assurances would be very high. It would be more than just an assertion on his part.

MILLER: Is that a unanimous feeling?

LEDGETT: It's not unanimous...


Link: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/nsa-leaders-split-on-giving-amnesty-to-snowden/

WillyT: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024174683

[W T F]

1. Strike a deal with an agency that keeps getting caught in their lies?…….

I'ld trust them just as far as I could spit.

[Thinkingabout]

2. Striking a deal with a proven liar may not turn out well. He took an oath not to reveal information

And went on to steal files and recklessly divulge information he stole.

[RC]

9. No, Snowden took an oath to uphold the Constitution.

And he exposed wrong doing, criminal acts and NSA violation of the Constitution he, Snowden, swore to uphold. The lier in this case is the NSA

[Phlem]

10. Two America's man.

it's sad when crap comes in to reveal this. 2 America's.



-p

[Thinkingabout]

13. He took the oath to the Code of Ethics to NSA not to reveal to sources which did not have

NSA clearance. He was told it would result in espionage charges, did this happen, yes. Snowden lied when he stated he would uphold this oath. Part of our Constitution and other laws can result in charges whether you take the oath or not. Now Snowden has been exposed for breaking the laws of the US and theft.

[RC]

17. No, he did not.

He took this or a similar oath, as does any other Federal employee, as do members of Congress.
Except for a Right leaning web site, I found no indication of a special oath he may have taken for working for the NSA.
It doen't matter anyway, because his oath to uphold and support the Constitution supersedes any other oath he may have taken.

I, ___________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”

You seem to be for Total Information Awareness by our government. Your private communications and your current locations and where you have been, being available 24/7 to various government agencies, just for the asking, or just because that information exists somewhere in bulk, is OK with you? Our Constitution forbids that.

[Thinkingabout]

19. Have you ever worked where there is sensitive information available?

[sendero]

21. If that information is obtained..

.. illegally and against every precept of the founding of my country, well your "sensitive" bullshit comes up a bit short.

[RC]

24. Yes, I signed a piece a paper.

I took no oath. It was understood the oath I took when hired, on defending the Constitution, took precedent over any other oaths.
I will say it again, the oath Snowden took to uphold and protect the Constitution takes precedents over any other oaths he or anyone else may take, when working for the Federal Government. That is the oath he, Edward Snowden, went by.
The NSA is out of control and engaged in Constitutional violating activities. They are a power unto themselves. Manning took the same oath when he joined the military. The people violating their oaths are the ones running the show and those working for NSA that condone and help what the NSA is doing in flagrant violation of the federal laws and Constitution of the United States.

I'll ask again, Why do you think what the NSA is doing just hunky-dory?
Why do you think having our privacy violated 24/7, by any electronic means available, by hired private contractors, working for an agency that is seemly answerable only to itself, not a problem?
Do you not see the paranoia of those in charge? Do you not see the not so little fiefdom that General Keith B. Alexander has carved out for himself? Do you not see a problem with the least untruthful answers to questions from people charged with regulating the NSA?

[Thinkingabout]

29. Did this piece of paper inform you if you revealed sensitive information you espionage charges could

Result? Are you aware if you steal it can result in charges of the theft nature against you? Bottom line Snowden stole files and revealed information, he is charged with Espionage and Theft.

[RC]

31. Please post this oath you say Edward Snowden took.

You seem to know a lot about it. Oh, and don't for get the source link.

[Thinkingabout]

32. Hopefully you will never be in any position where there is sensitive information on any matter. As

For the oath he took as a part of his employment working in the NSA and like other information of operation of the NSA you will not find this information on the internet. Why would you even ask for a link to private information concerning the NSA? BTW, if you have worked in capacities where sensitive information did it ever occur to you why this information might not be in the internet? Good grief, reason this out for yourself.

[RC]

33. Well, for once you are correct.

I will probably never (again) be in any position where there is sensitive information on any matter is to be available to me, as I am retired. I used to work for the Office of the Chief Information Officer, International Technology Service. So I have at least a passing acquaintance with security. And yes I had to have a security clearance. I have a nice clock, to set on the mantel, with an appropriate engraving, in recognition of my many years of service.
You however, are evading the question. How do you know so much about this so called oath Snowden took? Snowden was a contractor, hired by a private company and therefore that "oath" you are talking about, if any, was with the company Snowden worked for and not the NSA. That is why you can't find it on the Internet. The only oath Snowden took, the one that counts, was the standard one given to anyone doing work for the US Government. The one to uphold and protect the Constitution, which can be easily found by googleing..

[Thinkingabout]

35. I perhaps had a different clearance, we had an oath as a part of employment requirement,

It was not an oath to uphold the constitution but one not to share information which may have come our way and a review yearly along with the consequences of charges resulting in sharing that information. BTW, this oath is not on the internet either.

[Phlem]

11. Say's the guy who supports a corrupt system unconditionally with blinders on!

Nice one!



-p

[Warren Stupidity]

12. Plus his girlfriend was a pole dancer!

Aren't you even slightly curious what exactly the gummint is so scared of that they would offer him the get out of jail free card?

[sendero]

22. Exactly..

... there must be something the NSA REALLY REALLY REALLY doesn't want made public. And it's most likely not about a foreign power or national security, it is about THE NSA.

I hope Snowden tells them to fuck off.

[Vox Moi]

26. How about these guys who violated their oath of allegiance?

The Germans who tried to kill Hitler in 1944 had taken an oath.

Suppose you apply for a job at a relocation camp under the condition that you take an oath , in advance, never reveal what you see.
On your first day at work you discover a program of mass murder and you report it.
Liar?

[Bradical79]

27. What did he lie about?

[JackRiddler]

34. "The proven liar" here is the NSA.

And the whole extraconstitutional government of secret agencies that have parasitically attached themselves to this society to suck all the tax money out and impose a surveillance state.

Clapper was lying flat-out to Congress in testimony, just before Snowden started delivering the goods that belong to US - to US. We paid for that shit. The NSA and Co. are ours, the peoples', or else they is enemy.

Fuck the NSA. It has no legitimacy. It is a criminal enterprise. It is everyone's highest duty to expose such organizations if they can. That "oath" was omerta to a mob. John Gotti is higher on the moral action scale than Clapper, Alexander and the other managers of this butcher state.

[Jesus Malverde]

3. "strike" a deal..

[alcibiades_mystery]

4. Pish posh...I think Mr. Snowden will enjoy immensely his new life in Russia

Why would he strike a deal? Surely not to come back to the US? Integrity first for Mr. Snowden, always!

[JackRiddler]

36. Enjoying the pornography of power, are we?

"Ha ha, Mr. Galileo. Why would you renounce your beliefs? What, you don't prefer burning at the stake? Not to come back to those fat meals with aristocrats? Surely not! Integrity first, Mr. Galileo."

You people haven't the remotest idea how you sound. It's like moans of pleasure at expressions of the blank stupid awesome power of the State.

[alcibiades_mystery]

40. Au contraire

It's more like chuckles of amusement at the adolescent pretensions of stupid assholes.

Oh, we all see things different ways, yes? "You people."

[JackRiddler]

41. ROFL Smiley = Loser

[1000words]

5. First, the U.S. has blinked.

Secondly, I strongly suspect Snowden isn't foolish enough to trust these jackals to honor any deal.

[Blue_Tires]

15. Thirdly, the "deal" is almost certainly fraudulent...

The NSA to my knowledge doesn't have the legal power to offer it, and for all the "so-and-so of the year" awards Snowden is racking up, he'd end up looking like nothing more than a hypocrite blackmailer, assuming he was ignorant enough to actually take any offer on the table...

I'm pretty sure this 'deal' is just a ruse to beat the bushes...A smokescreen just to see how the other side will react...

[1000words]

16. Good call ... I agree.

[Poll_Blind]

6. Oh my...

PB

[markpkessinger]

7. It isn't up to the NSA in any case . . .

. . . it would be up to the Department of Justice.

[Thinkingabout]

14. K & R

[MyNameGoesHere]

8. I got all I needed from this little gem

But NSA chief General Keith Alexander rejects the idea of any amnesty for Snowden.

“This is analogous to a hostage-taker taking 50 people hostage, shooting 10 and then say ‘You give me full amnesty and I’ll let the other 40 go,’” Alexander told “60 Minutes.”

Comparing Snowden to someone that has shot (killed?) 10 people, and holding hostages, means Snowden won't survive any deal.

[JackRiddler]

37. Nice analogy, Alexander.

“This is analogous to a hostage-taker taking 50 people hostage, shooting 10 and then say ‘You give me full amnesty and I’ll let the other 40 go,’” Alexander told “60 Minutes.”

Look at the sick, psychopathic criminals we tolerate running the show.

[ucrdem]

18. What could he possibly have left in his pockets

that hasn't already been picked by Xi, Putin, MI5, Greenwald, and probably everybody else with the possible exception of Kim Jong Il?

[truthisfreedom]

20. Here's how that would play out.

1] Snowden agrees to amnesty in exchange for never revealing another secret, also agreeing that he will suffer the consequences if he does reveal any more secrets.

2] Snowden enjoys approximately 6 months of relative freedom in the US, however he is unable to travel outside the country.

3] News surfaces of some rather embarrassing information about the NSA that is attributed to Snowden by an extremely respected reporter working for a major news organization owned by a large military/industrial complex contractor.

4] Snowden is arrested, tried, found guilty, and imprisoned.

5] Shortly thereafter, Snowden is found in his cell hanging from a bed sheet.

It would never happen. Snowden knows his end days will be in Mother Russia. He's back in the USSR... you don't know how lucky you are, boys, back in the USSR.

[Thinkingabout]

30. Leave him in Russia, a good place for a thief and interferres with government operations.

[Psephos]

45. sounds pretty accurate n/t

[dotymed]

23. I hope that

we the people get the opportunity to see what (must be very damaging) the NSA is trying so hard to conceal.

It may help us to regain power over our country.

[Demeter]

25. It's far too late for that

they should have surrendered when the first whistle blew.

No compromise...NSA Delenda est!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carthago_delenda_est

[JackRiddler]

38. Bravo!

[nilesobek]

28. Fear and anxiety

From the NSA? Could it be because they technically broke the law? Could it be, that in the aftermath of 9/11, they spied upon relatively harmless internet hacks and crazies spouting insane drunken crap on the internet? I don't know about Snowden and Greenwald being heroes but I would love to see what the other 99% of the unreleased information is. This is a totally unscientific hunch, without foundation...what if the big deal is just all the spying they did against worthless or harmless, "targets?" Might they be liable in a civilian court? Is it all about civil and financial responsibility?

[Demeter]

39. It could be because they have totally compromised the Internet

as far as any commercial interests, journalistic interests, social interests, political interests, you get the picture.

They have broken the Rule of Law, the Constitution, the Chain of Command.

They became a law unto themselves, against the People AND the State.

And they are going down. Perhaps not under Obama, he may be too compromised. But they will go down.

[JackRiddler]

42. Let's translate this statement, shall we?

In other words, NSA leaders are split over whether they'd like to (A) kidnap and murder Snowden and bury him in a Russian forest so he won't be found (assuming they can't just drone-bomb him in plain sight), or (B) attempt to lure him back to the States so that six months later they can suddenly slam him with charges for some supposed violation of the deal and hole him up for years before an espionage-treason trial in front of a kangaroo arrangement sends him into solitary for life -- and/or arrange for his "suicide" as a result of the tragic mental illness that caused him to do such terrible and stupid things in the first place, thus (in the minds of lovers of authoritarianism everywhere) discrediting all whistleblowers forever and justifying the good and gloriously defensive nature of the U.S. surveillance-control-murder machine.

[ucrdem]

43. My guess is that his parents are making a fuss.

Seriously, what could Snowden possibly have left to reveal that has any national security value whatsoever? And if past is prologue (the powerpoint slides, the Verizon warrant) he never had much to begin with.

[hughee99]

44. Why strike a deal? He didn't have any classified information,

he made it all up... and even if he did, it's old news that's already been revealed... and even if it wasn't there's nothing that shows the NSA didn't anything illegal... and even if there was, you can't trust him because he hates the president... and even if he doesn't he's still a liar and a coward who jeopardized national security.