C.I.A. Warning on Snowden in ’09 Said to Slip Through the Cracks
Source: NYT
WASHINGTON Just as Edward J. Snowden was preparing to leave Geneva and a job as a C.I.A. technician in 2009, his supervisor wrote a derogatory report in his personnel file, noting a distinct change in the young mans behavior and work habits, as well as a troubling suspicion.
The C.I.A. suspected that Mr. Snowden was trying to break into classified computer files he was not authorized to access, and decided to send him home, according to two senior American officials.
But the red flags went unheeded. Mr. Snowden left the C.I.A. to become a contractor for the National Security Agency, and four years later he leaked thousands of classified documents. The supervisors cautionary note and the C.I.A.s suspicions were never forwarded to the N.S.A. or its contractors, and surfaced only after federal investigators began combing through Mr. Snowdens record once the documents began spilling out, intelligence and law enforcement officials said.
It slipped through the cracks, one veteran law enforcement official said of the report.
Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/11/us/cia-warning-on-snowden-in-09-said-to-slip-through-the-cracks.html?pagewanted=all
FirstLight
(13,360 posts)Of course the info wasn't given to the NSA, because these agencies never do background work... :eyeroll: sorry, sounds like they could be planting evidence against Snowden already...laying the grundwork for when they get hiom back in the US someday...
DURHAM D
(32,610 posts)karynnj
(59,503 posts)This should have been enough to take away his clearance and to forever deny him clearance again. This would have prevented him from being a source of some of the most damaging leaks to the US government ever. (I KNOW many here think the leaks needed and honor him for leaking, but it is true from an objective point of view that those leaks made US foreign policy far more difficult.)
As to Snowden, what he is accused of then, is what he admits to doing later. The clearest thing is that it means that he intentionally sought clearance JUST to violate every promise he made to get it.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)And build a case against him at the same time.
There is nor reason to believe a thing they say...they are in the business of deception.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Supervisor at CIA did see action in which Snowden did access and steal information with full intention to proceed in the manner of his choosing, wrong, wrong, wrong.
eilen
(4,950 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)And he did not enter into his employment, sign an oath and then intentionally break the oath, you bet, don't believe the lying Snowden.
Lonr
(103 posts)Good thing for us that he did
DallasNE
(7,403 posts)This is the new normal with outside agencies contracted to do the background checks. Their interest is profit rather than security so this is what we end up with.
AverageJoe90
(10,745 posts)Although, one must wonder if certain factions of Intel might have actually helped him get thru.....you know, perhaps, maybe, oh, I dunno, maybe the same guys who lied us into invading Iraq in '03? As in, BushCo? (Yes, Snowden fans, I went there. Deal with it.)
fasttense
(17,301 posts)It was just misplaced back in 2009, and now, when the NSA needs this derogatory information to make Snowden look bad the CIA finds it for them. Because we all know no one in the NSA would have actually looked at Snowden's personnel file when they gave him such a high clearance. Reading and evaluating personnel files that are easily accessed from another government agency in order to hand out security clearances is just too difficult for the NSA.
It just slipped through the cracks...right.