Snowdon is a dummy

The important word there is suspicion of not found to had done so.

An what the hell does a low tech 911 terrorist attack have to do with IT administration or Snowden letting the American people know that they are being spy on using their own tax dollars to do so?

my point is that if the information had made its way down to the Hawaii NSA contractor firm, it is doubtful they would have hired him.

The "what if" games is ridiculous!

Whether or not whistleblower Edward Snowden's decision to reveal details of the U.S. National Security Agency's (NSA) spying on everyday Americans' digital lives was justifiable, it's undeniable that the leak has been a colossal source of embarassment and controversy for the NSA, the U.S. intelligence community, and the U.S. federal government as a whole. In that regard many at the NSA are asking themselves -- "Could we have done to stop the leak?"

I. Edward Snowden's Troubles With the CIA

Well the answer, according to a new report in The New York Times, is that they apparently could have -- and likely quite easily.

The story began in 2006 when Mr. Snowden -- regarded by coworkers as a brilliant IT mind -- was hired by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). By 2008, despite having no technical credentials, he had advanced in his new position earning a "top-secret" security clearance and being stationed at a comfortable U.S. Department of State-affiliated CIA post in Geneva. But things would soon sour between Mr. Snowden and his government employers

The report alleges that in 2009 documents in Edward Snowden's personnel file reveal that his supervisor began to notice a troubling trend in his behavior.

The NYT report states:

In 2009, his supervisor wrote a derogatory report in his personnel file, noting a distinct change in the young man’s behavior and work habits...

While it is unclear what exactly the supervisor’s negative report said, it coincides with a period of Mr. Snowden's life in 2009 when he was a prolific online commenter on government and security issues, complained about civil surveillance and, according to a friend, was suffering "a crisis of conscience."

Mr. Snowden has indicated that he began his intelligence career blissfully naive of the scope of which the government spies on Americans, regularly violating the law and agencies own official policies.

II. From "Hope to Nope"

While he did not officially support the man who would become the 44th President of the United States with his vote, he felt Barack Obama would mark a major policy shift versus President George W. Bush. In his June 2013 interview with The Guardian -- the British newspaper who Mr. Snowden primarily has leaked to -- explains:

You see things that may be disturbing. When you see everything you realize that some of these things are abusive. The awareness of wrong-doing builds up. There was not one morning when I woke up [and decided this is it]. It was a natural process.

A lot of people in 2008 voted for Obama. I did not vote for him. I voted for a third party. But I believed in Obama's promises. I was going to disclose it [but waited because of his election]. He continued with the policies of his predecessor.

After seeing little shift in spying policy -- including rampant violations of American privacy rights -- in President Obama's first year of office, Mr. Snowden had completed an apparent arc from naivety to optimism to bitter cynical realism. In a separate interview with The Guardian, he recalls:

Much of what I saw in Geneva really disillusioned me about how my government functions and what its impact is in the world. I realized that I was part of something that was doing far more harm than good. [President Obama] advanced the very policies that I thought would be reined in. I got hardened.

It appears that Mr. Snowden not only was a disgruntled government employee, he decided to take the first step in actions that could make him a whistleblower, or a criminal, according to your perspective.

Things didn't get very far though.

Reportedly his supervisor found strong evidence that he had been trying to break into systems and files that he did not have access to (top-secret security access, after all, is relatively limited as at most agencies you only have access to the data you're working directly with). Combined with his increasingly standoffish behavior, his supervisor wrote a derogatory report in his personnel file (called a "derog" in federal government jargon) and convinced CIA officials to relieve him from his post and ship him back home to the U.S.

III. CIA Records Never Reached NSA, USIS Gave Him Thumbs Up

The story might have ended there, but a determined Snowden opted to take up a series of positions working as the contractor for the NSA. Shortly after returning to the U.S. he was hired by the U.S. consumer and enterprise hardware OEM Dell. Dell sent him to a post in Japan where he was to assist as an NSA contractor.

At that point things could have been put to rest, if only the NSA were aware of Mr. Snowden's personnel record. But the CIA never passed it along directly to them.

This was not atypical; historically communication between U.S. military intelligence and U.S. intelligence, and even communications between the various branches of the U.S. Director of National Intelligence (as in this case) was dysfunctional at best.

In the wake of heavy criticism and cries for reform after 9/11, it appears that Mr. Snowden's "derog" was filed as a lower level discipline document, as his supervisor warning -- based on telltale digital clues and a gut feeling -- lacked definitive proof that he had actually committed major rule-based infractions. And while USIS -- the private Idylwood, Virginia-based security contractor who evaluated 700,000 checks of potential hires last year -- may have had access to the report, it didn't bother to raise any red flags with the NSA.

It would seem they had plenty of opportunities after Snowden's revelations to support him, but no one came forward.

Demonstration by the masses always has much more impact than one person.
That's been my observation about the world of politics.

I'm confused, probably been on here too long today, what second source?

Some Whisper users monitored even after opting out of geolocation services
Company shares some information with US Department of Defense
User data collated and indefinitely stored in searchable database
Whisper app rewrites terms of service and privacy policy
How the ‘safest place on the internet’ tracks its users
... ... ... ... ... ...

... ... ... ... ... ...