SNOWDEN: THE DAMNING TRUTH

Traitor who put lives at risk from terrorists reveals he didn’t even read all the top-secret files he leaked

traitor Edward Snowden has revealed he did not read all the top-secret intelligence documents he leaked – a move which put lives at risk from terrorists.

In a television interview the fugitive squirmed as he admitted only ‘evaluating’ the files stolen from GCHQ and the US National Security Agency.

The former US spy also acknowledged there had been a ‘f***-up’ when newspapers that were handed the classified material failed to redact sensitive details exposing operations against Al Qaeda.

But in an outburst of arrogance, Snowden said such potentially catastrophic blunders were a ‘fundamental’ price of liberty.

The 31-year- old stunned the world in June 2013 – less than a month after the murder of Lee Rigby by Islamic extremists – when he broke cover as the civilian CIA worker who stole classified documents.

He leaked information about attempts by spying agencies including GCHQ and the NSA to view citizens’ private information, claiming internet history, emails, text messages, calls and passwords were harvested.

But security chiefs have warned that secret techniques, revealed by Snowden’s leaks to the Guardian newspaper, have made it easier for terrorists and organised criminals to avoid detection.

Last month, Home Secretary Theresa May attacked the harm done by the traitor – now one of the world’s most wanted men. Terror experts said lives were being lost because he had hampered security

service operations. They warned that extremists had altered their tactics after he leaked details from intelligence agencies – with fatal results.

In Sunday night’s interview with British TV host John Oliver, for US channel HBO, Snowden pointedly avoided saying he had read every document he handed over to journalists.

He would only say: ‘I’ve evaluated all of the documents that are in the archive.’ Pressed, he added: ‘ I do understand what I turned over.’

But he acknowledged ‘ recognising the concern’ over whether he knew enough about the contents of the files or the abilities of reporters to protect classified details.

Snowden admitted there had been a ‘f***-up’ with the way in which some of the information about the NSA and GCHQ, Britain’s intelligence agency, had been released.

Last year, the New York Times published a slide containing the name of the NSA employee who prepared it. The target of the surveillance was also identified as Al Qaeda in Mosul, Iraq.

Snowden said such details should have been removed and, in a feeble attempt to defend his actions, added: ‘In journalism we have to accept that some mistakes will be made. This is a fundamental concept of liberty.’

Unconvinced, Mr Oliver replied: ‘You’re giving documents with information that you know could be harmful which could get out there … We’re not even talking about bad faith, we’re talking about incompetence.’

It is one of the few occasions in which Snowden has been put on the spot over his treachery as he normally speaks only to Left-wing media who have published his leaks.

Lord West, a former First Sea Lord and security minister, said: ‘Since the revelations of the traitor Snowden, terrorist groups have changed how they communicate and talk to each other.

‘His actions have made us all less safe. No doubt people will die who would not have died had he not been so irresponsible.’

Robin Simcox, of the Henry Jackson Society security think-tank, said: ‘This is exactly the danger that those who believe Snowden’s actions were hugely irresponsible – and potentially fatal – warned of.

‘This interview seemed to show how little Snowden had thought about the potentially deadly consequences. Snowden stole a huge amount of sensitive documents and as a result terrorists and other serious criminals have adapted their methods accordingly.’

Snowden handed an estimated 200,000 of the 1.7million stolen classified documents to journalists. In June 2013, he told the Guardian: ‘I carefully evaluated every single document I disclosed to ensure that each was legitimately in the public interest.’

He added: ‘There are all sorts of documents that would have made a big impact that I didn’t turn over, because harming people isn’t my goal.’

A report by the Henry Jackson Society last month revealed terror suspects were using human couriers instead of email and phones following the leaks by Snowden. Daily operations of British spies have been damaged, with Islamic State seizing on the information – making it harder to track down its operatives.

Al Qaeda militants are known to have changed communication methods to avoid detection, and have produced a video advising fellow extremists on the matter.

GCHQ has lost track of some of Britain’s most dangerous criminals because of the way Snowden exposed its operations. Officials had to stop monitoring drug gangs, paedophiles, human traffickers and money launderers.

The agency has also been forced to tone down or abandon surveillance amid fears the tactics are too easy to spot and could force criminals to fall off the radar.

Mrs May told the Commons home affairs committee that the leaks ‘did cause damage’, adding: ‘It has had an impact on the ability of our agencies to do the work they need to do.’

Snowden, who was a computer specialist at an intelligence centre in Hawaii, tricked colleagues into handing over passwords so he could copy files in one of the biggest leaks in US history.

He claims he had to act because the US government’s policies were a ‘threat to democracy’. He fled to Hong Kong, then Russia, where he was granted asylum and now lives in a secret location.

A Guardian spokesman said the newspaper had ‘nothing to add’ in response to Snowden saying he had ‘evaluated’ the documents and whether this had put people at risk.

‘His actions made

us all less safe’

WHEN Edward Snowden leaked secret documents revealing how British and US intelligence agencies monitor personal computers and mobile phones around the world, he became a hero of the Left. The Guardian newspaper – which published the leaks – said the traitor had ‘performed a public service’ by exposing techniques by which an oppressive State invaded the privacy of millions of citizens.

To those charged with defending Britain it was very different. Security chiefs and senior politicians were horrified, saying the breach had risked lives and dealt a body blow to our ability to track terrorists. Sir David Omand, ex-head of GCHQ, described it as ‘the most catastrophic loss to British intelligence ever’. But with supreme arrogance, the Guardian dismissed these concerns, insisting that Snowden and its journalists had vetted all the documents and rejected anything which might endanger life. Snowden said: ‘ I have to screen everything before releasing it.’

Yesterday he was forced to admit this was a lie. Not only did he fail to read documents before handing them over, he also confessed in an interview that his treachery had ‘carried dangers’.

So did he sound the slightest note of regret or contrition? Not a bit of it. With breathtaking complacency he merely said: ‘In journalism some mistakes will be made. This is a fundamental concept of liberty.’ What absolute cant!

The Mail is passionate in its defence of free speech, but this right has to be balanced against public safety and we remain convinced these leaks have seriously weakened Britain’s ability to protect its citizens.

Snowden has made us all less safe and the Guardian, in its self-righteousness, has been his willing accomplice.

In reporting his interview, the Guardian changed its original website headline from ‘Edward Snowden [says] he did not read all leaked NSA material’ to the less damning ‘Snowden pressed on whether he had read all leaked NSA material’.

But such attempts at damage limitation are all too late. Security minister Lord West said yesterday that because of the Snowden revelations, ‘people will die who would not have died’. Those who gave him the platform for his deadly treachery should hang their heads in shame.