* Defense Department
* Department of Energy
* Department of Homeland Security
* Justice Department
* State Department
* Treasury Department
Now, the above mentioned departments directly fall under the purview of the executive branch (through presidential appointment of directors, administrators, or secretaries) whereas independent agencies have a commission or a committee of some kind.
Whether or not this should concern you is up to you, and one thing to note is that the independent agency's commissions have longer appointment terms than the usual four-year presidential terms.
It should also be noted that the CIA is the go-to agency for clandestine operations that involve reconnaissance, espionage, or subversive operations -- both domestically and abroad.
I thought the CIA had limits placed on what they could do within the US?
More importantly though.. what purpose does leaking this serve? It shows nothing illegal, or even questionable. It has nothing to do with the documents leaked previously. I just don't understand why he thought this needed to be leaked.
Maybe it's about taxpayers knowing where their dollars are going? First you show that your government is spying on you, and then you show how much of your own money that costs..?
But in any case, I think it's fine to get these numbers public because it's still taxpayer money. I think it would've been worse of Snowden NOT to release numbers just because they aren't as shocking as they could've been.
Transparency should be about showing you what's there, not about cherry-picking things to form a narrative that distorts what is there.
I support Snowden, but this document is none of those things.
Shouldn't the question of the value of this disclosure be determined on its merits (does its value in furthering democracy outweigh any potential harm), not whether or not it qualifies under some dictionary definition?
Pick whatever definition you want. This document doesn't fit it.
What is "classified" anyways? Some guy sitting somewhere decides that it is "classified". So why can't some other guy decide that it is in the public interest to not classify it?
How it is not illegal?
Similarly what singled out line item in the budget isn't just a "drop in the bucket" when compared to the entirety of the government budget? Just because some program or item doesn't "cost" much compared to everything combined doesn't mean we shouldn't scrutinize spending money on it.
ADD: interest payments is probably large too and more difficult to break into smaller lines... so let's quickly scrutinize that item... "Yeah, we probably should continue to make those payments unless we want everyone to lose trust in the U.S. backed dollar."
No, this should obviously not be classified.
The DIA has models to determine food supplies in China based off of the number of farm tractors and price fluctuations of dog food in the USA. It amazing how accurate they are considering the data points.
Really isn't a question of whether the information is a security risk or not. It is a question of freedom vs security.
It's an intelligence agency. Most of what they do should be classified.
If they just didn't exist we would all be safer and we'd get to keep more money. By falsely leading us into war in Iraq for absolutely nothing, they effectively cost the US over $10^12. The cost of the CIA and other agencies is much higher than their yearly cost. They can't even manage their sys admins, why should we trusting them so much?
Which leads to the current abuses.
"You guys handle 80 percent of the intelligence workload. You're seven times the size of the CIA."
Edit: I realized after I commented that I dropped alphabet soup all over the uninitiated. NCS is the National Clandestine Service, which is the division of the CIA responsible for covert operations. Most people assume the Special Activities Division (SAD) is only the Special Operations Group (SOG). There are no "mercenaries" within SOG, only Specialized Skills Officers, whom are recruited and transfered from other Special Forces branches.
And for Snowden he saw the black hole and everything they are planning he must have seen some very scary stuff, hopefully he wont be the guy in jail or death with a mark on his head "Told you so." and we did not act.
Take for example the fact that all weapons used in the military are designed and built by private contractors. Would you say it's a risk to allow contractors to have full access to weapons data when they are the ones that design and build it?
To speak to the Snowden leaks, in there entirety they now are clearly, far outside the scope of any single user, unless that user was a multi-department head or higher. It is more likely that the leaks are from multiple users now. The story posted yesterday about the access level of the information lends this theory some credibility, although none to the means of access.
Wait, I understand that he was a contractor. But wasn't he previously an NSA employee too. So he basically stayed in the same chair, but just got a bigger pay check. Revolving door and all that. I wouldn't go so far as to call it outsourced, his work was still 'in-house'.
Amazon will be developing it, and probably managing it, but it is not part of the primary Amazon infrastructure so outside of those contracted to work specifically on the CIA system, Amazon employees shouldn't have access.
It was a total failure of the 'compartmentalization' mode of thought, probably by Snowden's own design. He had the somewhat unique authorization to take files off-facility on a thumb drive, then used other clearance-level user information to pull 'juicy to leak' intel.
He was also a sysadmin, so... Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? if you're in charge of user authorities, you're probably in a pretty good position to get into stuff you shouldn't.
I like the quote NBC News  used from their 'former intelligence official' :
The damage, on a scale of 1 to 10, is a 12
 - http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/08/29/20234171-...
EDIT - typo
And if they did not have L/P then the issue is far more concerning in that PKI was compromised.
Human collection work is done by that Yale grad paying some locals for info, putting that info into a product (powerpoint) and sending up the chain where no one ever looks at it again. The information is probably bad because the local just wanted to feed his family and took money to rat on some guy he just doesn't like.
That's why the CIA's budget is huge. All the payouts and bribes. I know couriers grift plenty in the process too.
It does not. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/spy