Snowden files 'read by Russia and China'? Guardian Asks for Proof: "5 questions for UK government"
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/14/snowden-files-read-by-russia-and-china-five-questions-for-uk-governmentSnowden files 'read by Russia and China': 5 questions for UK government
The government has an obligation to respond to the Sunday Times report that MI6 has been forced to pull agents out of live operations in hostile countries
The Sunday Times produced what at first sight looked like a startling news story: Russia and China had gained access to the cache of top-secret documents leaked by former NSA contractor turned whistleblower Edward Snowden.
Not only that, but as a result, Britains overseas intelligence agency, the Secret Intelligence Service, better known as MI6, had been forced to pull agents out of live operations in hostile countries.
These are serious allegations and, as such, the government has an obligation to respond openly.
The story is based on sources including senior officials in Downing Street, the Home Office and the security services. The BBC said it had also also been briefed anonymously by a senior government official.
Anonymous sources are an unavoidable part of reporting, but neither Downing Street nor the Home Office should be allowed to hide behind anonymity in this case.
1. Is it true that Russia and China have gained access to Snowdens top-secret documents? If so, where is the evidence?
Which cache of documents is the UK government talking about? Snowden has said he handed tens of thousands of leaked documents over to journalists he met in Hong Kong, and that he has not had them in his possession since. Have Russia and China managed to access documents held by one of the journalists or their companies?
In addition, if agents had to be moved, why? Which Snowden documents allegedly compromised them to the extent they had to be forcibly removed from post?
2. Why have the White House and the US intelligence agencies not raised this?
Snowden is wanted by the US on charges under the Espionage Act. The White House, the US intelligence agencies and especially some members of Congress have been desperate to blacken Snowdens reputation. They have gone through his personal life and failed to come up with a single damaging detail.
If the UK were to have evidence that Russia and China had managed to penetrate his document cache or that agents had been forced to move, London would have shared this with Washington. The White House would have happily briefed this openly, as would any number of Republican and even Democratic members of Congress close to the security services. They would not have stinted. It would have been a full-blown press conference.
CONTINUED AT....
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/14/snowden-files-read-by-russia-and-china-five-questions-for-uk-government
marym625
(17,997 posts)I did earlier and it dropped like a rock
K R
Want to bet they don't get answers?
Wilms
(26,795 posts)Thanks.
Same for cali.
Cali always kicks butt!
KoKo
(84,711 posts)Thanks for posting the exposing/debunking of this! That "somewhat" reputable other news sites picked up Murdoch Rag's reporting is disturbing. I should have scrolled down here before posting. If I had seen I would have kicked your post. I only saw the one in GD.
for the Bad reporting...
from the Guardian:
5. What about the debatable assertions and at least one totally inaccurate point in the Sunday Times piece?
The Sunday Times says Snowden fled to seek protection from Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, after mounting one of the largest leaks in US history. In fact he fled Hong Kong bound for Latin America, via Moscow and Cuba. The US revoked his passport, providing Russia with an excuse to hold him in transit.
The Sunday Times says it is not clear whether Russia and China stole Snowdens data or whether he voluntarily handed over his secret documents in order to remain at liberty in Hong Kong and Moscow. The latter is not possible if, as Snowden says, he gave all the documents to journalists in Hong Kong in June 2013.
The Sunday Times also reports that David Miranda, the boyfriend of Guardian journalist Glenn Greenwald, was seized at Heathrow in 2013 in possession of 58,000 highly-classified intelligence documents after visiting Snowden in Moscow.
This is inaccurate. Miranda had in fact been in Berlin seeing the film-maker Laura Poitras, not in Moscow visiting Snowden. It is not a small point.
The claim about Miranda having been in Moscow first appeared in the Daily Mail in September under the headline An intelligence experts devastating verdict: Leaks by Edward Snowden and the Guardian have put British hostages in even greater peril. It was written by Professor Anthony Glees, the director of the centre for security and intelligence studies at the University of Buckingham, and has never been corrected. Maybe the Sunday Times can do better.
marym625
(17,997 posts)Apparently, "journalists" and the public learned nothing from the Iraq war
I read that earlier. It is shocking It's just mind boggling to me. Absolutely mind boggling
KoKo
(84,711 posts)Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)No conflicts of interest there...
KoKo
(84,711 posts)about the article. He is incredible! Watch it and then post what you think....
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)He'd be walking off the set in 30 seconds...