Discussion
  • Read More
    Cam/ronAdam Weinstein
    6/15/15 1:27pm

    Where was the proof? Reporter Tom Harper appeared on CNN last night to explain: “Well, uh, I don’t know, to be honest with you.”

    He could have just told CNN that a friend of a friend told him or he read the claim by a commenter on Reddit.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Gary-XCam/ron
      6/15/15 1:51pm

      “Uh, I found it through a black hole?”

      The entire CNN press room stares at Harper, mouths agape, unable to believe the absurdity of the statement. Don Lemon, however, steps forward.

      “Now, hold on a second. I’ve heard of this. Maybe we should hear this one out.”

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      evoCSGary-X
      6/15/15 2:41pm

      Mr. Lemon goes on-

      “Now, when you got these files, did you, by chance, see a large commercial airliner somewhere in there?”

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    TRUMP DELENDUS EST (fka Chatham Harrison)Adam Weinstein
    6/15/15 1:33pm

    Someone gets to go to Remedial Journalism 002:

    On the other hand, speaking hypothetically, I wouldn’t be at all surprised if those files have been accessed by the Russians and the Chinese. As far as the Russians would see it, that’s fair payment for taking him in and protecting him from US prosecution. As far as the Chinese would see it, Russia owes them indefinitely for saving the Russian economy from the Ukraine war and US/EU sanctions. If the US government did not treat the entirety of the Snowden files as thoroughly compromised from the moment he took them, they’re not taking their security seriously, anyway.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      hilikusopusTRUMP DELENDUS EST (fka Chatham Harrison)
      6/15/15 1:55pm

      How would the Russians have accessed information that Snowden handed to journalists in Hong Kong?

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      KinglyCitrusTRUMP DELENDUS EST (fka Chatham Harrison)
      6/15/15 2:01pm

      There’s a couple of reasons why that’s extremely unlikely.

      1. The documents he took—numbering in the tens of thousands, not the “millions” as the government has claimed—simply did not contain the names or locations of spies. This has been verified by the journalists who have access to the full archive. Generally, that sort of information isn’t even written down. There have been numerous high-profile, state-sponsored hacks of U.S. government networks over the years. Our spy agencies understand the risks involved.

      2. Before he left Hong Kong, Snowden says he “destroyed” all the files on the computers and storage devices in his possession. Given his obvious, widely-reported technical expertise, I’m inclined to believe him when he says the files would not have been recoverable. He actually said there was a “zero percent chance” the files could be recovered, which tells me he probably used some sort of file shredding program to overwrite them. Snowden has said several times that he did this specifically to avoid the possibility of being pressured by any group to give up his passcode.

      3. Even if they were merely encrypted, I highly doubt that they could simply be “cracked” by anyone. In Citizenfour, there’s a lengthy discussion between Snowden and Greenwald about password security. The man clearly understands how to create a strong passcode, and given that he was using Linux, the encryption was likely AES 128 or 256 via dm-crypt. The combination of those two things would make recovery with current technology essentially impossible.

      There is no “magic spell” that provides a way through strong encryption, even if the cracker has a large amount of computing power. The notion that the Chinese and the Russians independently broke his encryption is ludicrous, and as others have pointed out, conflicts with other statements by these anonymous “officials” that he willingly turned the files over.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    BaggyTrousers3Adam Weinstein
    6/15/15 1:55pm

    I think we’re all missing the real headline in this story.

    CNN asked some relevant questions.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      j4x_BaggyTrousers3
      6/15/15 3:12pm

      True, that was a rare example of journalism, especially over at CNN.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      MikeATXBaggyTrousers3
      6/15/15 3:27pm

      +1,000

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Eric LimerAdam Weinstein
    6/15/15 3:22pm
    GIF

    O.O

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      The Noble RenardAdam Weinstein
      6/15/15 1:32pm

      When asked by CNN whether or not MI6’s dick tasted good, Tom Harper responded “I’m afraid to disappoint you, we just don’t know…”

      Reply
      <
      • Read More
        GrayMattersAdam Weinstein
        6/15/15 1:52pm

        Most embarrassing for the young “reporter” (and it’s really a tough choice): having to describe secrets whispered to you by officials who won’t let you name them as the “official position of the British government.” This was like watching a hostage video.

        Reply
        <
        • Read More
          Classicblanca FilmGrayMatters
          6/16/15 3:27am

          I think he blinked out SOS in Morse code in there somewhere.

          Reply
          <
      • Read More
        Smut KaleidoscopeAdam Weinstein
        6/15/15 1:47pm

        “We just publish what we believe to be the position of the British government at the moment.”

        Is the functional equivalent of “We are a state-controlled publication.”

        Reply
        <
        • Read More
          robertogreenAdam Weinstein
          6/15/15 10:06pm

          as usual, CNN does a terrible job. CNN ALWAYS DOES A TERRIBLE JOB. here’s the question i would have forced my “view from nowhere” anchor to ask: Tom, given your story reinforces a narrative, that Snowden is an evil bad man who didn’t understand the gravity of his malfeasance. why do you think giving anonymous gov’t sources a forum to attack someone they perceive as an enemy is worthy of a major headline in your paper? do you have anything from anyone that backs up your claims? you say you have spent months working this story: in those months, have you turned up any hard evidence? why do you make claims such as these without Showing Your WOrk (per Chatham Harrison below)? does the sunday times, owned as it is by Rupert Murdoch, have a particular position on Snowden’s leaks? May i quote to you an editorial by your Editorial board from last year in which your bosses asserted snowden was a traitor? do you think that your bosses saying they feel this way publicly may have swayed your reporting?

          BUT CNFUCKINGN WILL NEVER ASK ANY USEFUL HARD QUESTIONS. kill it. kill it dead.

          Reply
          <
          • Read More
            secretagentmanAdam Weinstein
            6/15/15 2:17pm

            Howell: So essentially you’re reporting what the government is saying, but as far as the evidence to substantiate it, you’re not really able to explain that at this point, right?’

            Harper: Well, Judith Miller said that was ok.

            Reply
            <
            • Read More
              Sean BrodyAdam Weinstein
              6/15/15 1:42pm

              Can we just point out that The Sunday Times is owned by the same man that owns Fox News?

              Reply
              <