Home | About | Donate

Revealed: Anti-Snowden NSA Watchdog Retaliated Against Whistleblower


Revealed: Anti-Snowden NSA Watchdog Retaliated Against Whistleblower

Nika Knight, staff writer

National Security Agency (NSA) inspector general George Ellard, an outspoken critic of whistleblower Edward Snowden, personally retaliated against another NSA whistleblower, Adam Zagorin reported at the Project on Government Overreach (POGO) on Thursday.

An intelligence community panel earlier this year found that Ellard had retaliated against a whistleblower, Zagorin writes, in a judgment that has still not been made public.


Ellard and all the other authoritarian, yuppie suits deserve nothing less than full recognition of their utter depravity as 'democratic' citizens.
Taking tax dollars to pay themselves very well, they lie while holding their hands over their oh so patriotic hearts. The deep state is nihilistic, sociopathic and narcissistic.
Things are much worse than we can imagine.
Lock them up.


It's also an example of the authoritarian aggression which subverts democracy and the values of human justice to dominate the people.
Conformity is corruption.


....and have most of the bullets.
The rest of us have jobs and families and not much time to deal with their "nihilistic, sociopathic and narcissistic target practice. These social imposter's have literally screwed Mother Pooch to the point where Mama will take us down, probably in our lifetime.
Oh, I forgot, Ellers should just get a couple bitch slaps for good measure while we figure out what to do with traitors.


"Violence begets violence, you know. And you can't kill off all the violent people or all the murderers. We'd have to kill off the government."

  • John Lennon


An eye for an eye will make the whole world blind. Gandhi


"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
* Today, the answer seems, "Nobody."


slow your fingers down.


One of the main reasons I didn't vote for Killary was her stance on Edward Snowden. She views him as a traitor. Bernie views him as a hero. Too bad the Democrats rigged the primary. We could very well have been inaugurating a president who views Snowden as a hero.


It is simple. Free Snowden now and pardon him in full. No more waiting. The time is now. Sign the petition.


I was going to compare it with HR depts., but you got there first . . . :wink:


Bingo. We should share this article with our acquaintances who protest that Snowden "went too far" and should have "done it legally."


I would provide that the excuses are Nationalistic rather than Patriotic, thus providing the cheap entertainment factor for the masses. I like the raw meat analogy.


True. Snowden was correct in his behavior.


What a gross hypocrite Ellard is!


It is even worse when you really look at it. The US government and public are actually complaining, not about the hacking, but about the dissemination of the information learned from the hacking, information that should have been in the hands of the public in order for them to make a reasoned decision at the ballot box! They are actually arguing keeping important information from the public. It is amazingly stupid!


There are many faults with regard to which one might go to an institution for redress and then possibly negotiate. However, if you are in a whistleblower situation, one in which you have serious criminal or humanitarian charges to make, particularly charges for which highly placed individuals may have culpability, you cannot go within the system because the institution and and individuals will defend themselves--illegally if the matter is worth breaking the law, violently if the matter is worth violence. Expect those of value to be resolved with respect to individuals first, institutions second, and you a distant third: they will be violent if they decide that it is worth the risk to them, not to you.

When you begin to go outside of an institution with information and you are caught or suspected, among the first questions that you will be asked is what you have on the company. Particularly, people working within the institution or in the commercial media will ask whether or not you have names or names and places related to persons who have been killed or damages or particularly names of people who have authorized damaging them--or similar, depending on the sort of business with which you have been involved.

This is also the first question asked by reporters working with conventional media sources. That means that if you are a whistleblower involved with anyone at a level to have a relationship with commercial media, going to commercial media with the story is about like going to the HR department--or, I suppose, the PR department. So even if you do manage to contact the NYT or someone similar anonymously, you must expect that your company now knows at least that someone is trying to release some information.

It may be possible to contact individual reporters, as did Edward Snowden with Laura Poitras and Glenn Greenwald, and have them interface with their respective institutions. However, it is apt to continue to become more difficult to contact such people anonymously.

Another point that gets overlooked--if you are a whistleblower, you are probably losing at least your work comrades, and also probably most of your society. This will happen at the same time that you are probably undergoing a large crisis of conscience. You are going to want to talk to people, and talking to people may have just become very seriously dangerous. It may sound unbelievably stupid that you should air some full or partial confession to people whom you cannot trust. but actually, this almost always does happen at some point, regardless of the character of the whistleblower.

Consider what happened and continues to happen to Chelsea Manning for an otherwise small lapse in discretion. It is far better to have somewhere or some way to discharge or seek support that does not involve this sort of risk, and it is far better to know that the event is likely to happen and to plan for it in advance.

After the information gets released, unless you can stay anonymous, you have a limited window of time before you either have enough notoriety that you cannot just be hit or are somewhere fairly safe. Of course, the safety supplied by notoriety is reducing and, again, tied to someone else's damage control calculations.