Government contractor Booz Allen Hamilton (BAH) has become caught up in the revelations about...

Government contractor Booz Allen Hamilton (BAH) has become caught up in the revelations about the National Security Agency's surveillance programs after one of its (soon to be former?) employees, Edward Snowden, came forward as the source of the leaks. Booz Allen has said in securities filings that leaks could hurt its business - the firm generated 98% of its $5.76B in revenue in the last fiscal year from the government, with 23% coming from intelligence work.

From other sites
Comments (14)
  • Boxed Merlot
    , contributor
    Comments (1600) | Send Message
    I'd like to think their announcement of this man's actions being unethical is a sick joke. To think a "non-government" agency has been hired by a US government entity to perform these kinds of tasks and obtain this kind of information is reprehensible to say the least.


    The likelihood of a citizen of the US to be the victim of a "terrorist" anywhere on earth is less than 1 in 20 million in a given year. I'd take my chances with those odds than an out of control government any day.


    As has been mentioned elsewhere, the wheels have come off, we're shooting sparks off the rims at this point.
    10 Jun 2013, 02:37 AM Reply Like
  • Boxed Merlot
    , contributor
    Comments (1600) | Send Message
    "I realised that I was part of something that was doing far more harm than good... The NSA routinely lies in response to Congressional inquiries about scope of surveillance in America. The NSA is intent on making every conversation and every form of behaviour in the world known to them.... What they're doing poses an existential threat to democracy."


    "Booz Allen can confirm that Edward Snowden, 29, has been an employee of our firm for less than 3 months, assigned to a team in Hawaii.


    News reports that this individual has claimed to have leaked classified information are shocking, and if accurate, this action represents a grave violation of the code of conduct and core values of our firm.


    We will work closely with our clients and authorities in their investigation of this matter."


    Too bad they wouldn't listen to Edward when he tried to tell them of his reservations as Janet asked. Somehow I tend to think the administrations desire for "whistleblowers" to come forward was an empty statement at best.
    10 Jun 2013, 03:10 AM Reply Like
  • rjstilling
    , contributor
    Comments (11) | Send Message
    I'm not sure that taking Mr. Snowden's explanations for what he has done as the straight, unbiased skinny on this matter is the smartest way to examine the whole matter. Nor does the fact that Mr. Snowden claims that the NSA "poses an existential threat to democracy" mean it actually is an existential threat to democracy. And let's not forget that Snowden also worked for the CIA, so we need to ask ourselves whose lives in that government agency he will be putting at risk next.


    Right now it looks to me that the NSA he describes is essentially a group of hard working civil servants doing what they are supposed to do in a dangerous and high tech world--gather information. I suggest waiting for a fuller emergence of (a) actual facts and (b) multiple points of view before falling into a state of hero-worship of this somewhat dubious individual.


    It might also be a good time to short BAH.
    10 Jun 2013, 03:42 AM Reply Like
  • Boxed Merlot
    , contributor
    Comments (1600) | Send Message
    suggest waiting for a fuller emergence of (a) actual facts and (b) multiple points of view before falling into a state of hero-worship of this somewhat dubious individual...


    I'll go along with that. I wonder how the "dubious" assessment can be assigned this quickly into the process. Those wishing to call the ethics of this individual into question are free to compare them with their own if presented with the same opportunities, background and training.


    I'm left to wonder about the kind of traits they ferret out of the individuals they seek for these "sensitive" tasks if desiring to do right is outweighed by baggage they can use to keep an otherwise "free" individual from applying their right to exercise traditional "American values".


    It's been several days since his interview and I'm more concerned with the rehashing of his employers recent repeated public congressional denials of claims they engaged in the activities he claims to have performed on their behalf.


    Who exactly is on record for the more serious misconduct?
    10 Jun 2013, 09:07 AM Reply Like
  • User 353732
    , contributor
    Comments (5166) | Send Message
    Bad for the man of conviction and for a season bad for his employer but surely good for the vestiges of the American Republic and the last flickers of liberty and truth.
    No doubt the US Soviet will prevail but not before there is resistance.
    10 Jun 2013, 05:37 AM Reply Like
  • August9
    , contributor
    Comments (23) | Send Message
    Shouldn't we be infiltrating Islam and not our fellow Americans?
    10 Jun 2013, 06:31 AM Reply Like
  • Tim McAleenan Jr.
    , contributor
    Comments (1999) | Send Message
    I wish the overwhelming majority of Americans still treasured the Fourth Amendment and the rest of the Constitution.


    We give up so much in the pursuit of security. I cringe like hell every time I see a TV interview with an American citizen saying "I always figured they were spying on me anyway" or "as long as it keeps us safe."


    Blood was spilled and people died so that we could have our constitutional rights. The Fourth Amendment doesn't even ban searches and seizures. All it says is that you have to prove it to a judge that you have probable cause. How hard is that???


    I wish there were more gunslingers like Patrick Henry around with the "live free or die" mentality. Our Constitution is the single most important variable in explaining American exceptionalism, and I hate what we do to it in the name of "national security."


    Benjamin Franklin was right. If we give up our liberty for temporary safety, we deserve neither.
    10 Jun 2013, 08:15 AM Reply Like
  • wigit5
    , contributor
    Comments (4365) | Send Message
    That Benjamin... good guy to have around.
    10 Jun 2013, 09:12 AM Reply Like
  • ConservativeOutperformer
    , contributor
    Comments (746) | Send Message
    There have been a number of instances over the past few years where a significant amount of lives have been saved due to programs just like this. There will probably be a considerable number of lives saved over the next few years due to programs just like this. Most importantly, none of the general public, except the people working on the program, has any idea what is happening. All of the people on TV talking about it are idiots, literally. If they were on TV speaking intelligently about the programs at the NSA they wouldn't be heard from again afterwards. Repeat, the most important thing to be said about all of this is that no one has any idea what is really happening. Even the 'whistleblower' is not qualified to be speaking on the subject. You're looking at a guy with access to information that is far beyond what even he can comprehend (he barely got his GED)......


    For anyone to pretend to understand what is going on, and then comment on why it's bad, why our constitutional rights are being violated, why things should be different, etc etc.... It doesn't display much in the way of intellectual honesty. I can assure you that whenever the NSA does anything 'questionable' there are lawyers there to advise them of what is legal under something like 'The Patriot Act' and what is not.


    The moral of the story is, no one will ever know the truth about 'Prism'. It has a certain classification level for a reason. Make no mistake, this is very sensitive information. If everyone knew about it, the entire purpose for creating the program in the first place would be shot..... People like Bradley Manning and Mr. Snowden are not heroes. They are lower level employees with access to important information that it turns out they should have never had access to.


    If people want to be outraged, they should be outraged at what the law says. And, what it said 10 years ago....... This isn't new................
    10 Jun 2013, 09:29 AM Reply Like
  • mp0125
    , contributor
    Comments (16) | Send Message
    Why all the fuss about the news that the government is watching our email, phone use, and internet use? This started with Bush and continued with Obama and we and the world knew about it. Is this suddenly an issue due to politics or am I missing something?
    10 Jun 2013, 02:07 PM Reply Like
  • wigit5
    , contributor
    Comments (4365) | Send Message
    I think this is more or less the slap in the face waking the average person in the US up to the fact that our supposed privacy is being violated in varying degrees
    10 Jun 2013, 02:15 PM Reply Like
  • positivethoughts
    , contributor
    Comments (2065) | Send Message
    The government is the biggest security threat to your life and liberty.


    $80 Billion dollars, stolen from the average American? How many lives in hospitals could be saved with this money?
    10 Jun 2013, 10:29 PM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (4441) | Send Message
    At current medical billing averages, about 3.7 lives, roughly.
    10 Jun 2013, 10:52 PM Reply Like
  • rjstilling
    , contributor
    Comments (11) | Send Message
    Much over-reaction here. There is no evidence in Snowden's "revelations" that either the information gathered in the NSA's phone meta-data program or PRISM's internet searches have been abused or caused harm to any US citizen. All phone metadata is currently available to law enforcement from the local to the national levels in this country if an appropriate judge signs off on probable cause. Snowden has presented no evidence yet that the NSA has not operated by the same principles, as presented in its mission statement.


    As for PRISM, much of its data base is drawn from commercial corporations like Google, Yahoo, and Facebook that many of us both invest in and use for both profit and pleasure. It seems quite hypocritical (particularly on a stock trading site) to try to manufacture a "presumption of privacy" for information voluntarily made public by tens of millions of social media and search users and then sold to advertisers and marketers for a handsome profit.


    As for email privacy, that is also legally accessible with probable cause for both criminal and civil court cases--and all sorts of other inquiries. So, again, I say that as long as terror groups recruit, instruct, and communicate over the internet, the US Government in pursuit of its legitimate responsibilities must have effective access to information on the net in order to effectively fulfill those responsibilities. Of course, if Snowden has evidence that the NSA has abused its capabilities to harm innocent US citizens, he should make it public. But the simple fact that this information gathering unit has substantial capabilities does not make it guilty of anything.
    12 Jun 2013, 12:56 AM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Screener: Search and filter by asset class, strategy, theme, performance, yield, and much more
ETF Performance: View ETF performance across key asset classes and investing themes
ETF Investing Guide: Learn how to build and manage a well-diversified, low cost ETF portfolio
ETF Selector: An explanation of how to select and use ETFs