Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: NSA Bombshell Story Falling Apart Under Scrutiny; Key Facts Turning Out to Be Inaccurate [View all]bvar22
(39,909 posts)105. What facts are those, emulatorloo?
I went to the site the OP linked to,
and found this:
Despite the 13 bullet points of speculation, interpretation, innuendo, and just plain Name Calling,
only one bullet point was wasted in a failed attempt to provide documentation for the hyped up claim in the article's title,
and here it is from Bullet Point #5:
"On Twitter, Greenwald defended his reporting by reiterating that the NSA said within the PRISM document that there has been collection directly from the servers of these US service providers: Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook
But this [font size=3]could[/font] mean that the data was drawn from the servers, vetted and handed over to the NSA per Googles stated process of legal vetting. And [font size=3]if[/font] the data was made available, [font size=3]its possible[/font] that the tech companies posted it on a server for the NSA analysts to download, just as you [font size=3]might[/font] download a file from work or a friend via Dropbox or an FTP server. Regardless, [font size=3]it seems[/font] as if Greenwalds entire story hinges on a semantic interpretation of the PRISM language. And his mistake was to leap from collection directly from servers to direct access.
"Could", "if", "it might", It's possible", and "it seems" does NOT make a very strong case for anyone with a capacity for critical thought,
and can hardly be called "facts".
The bloggers speculations about what "could" be hardly justifies a title of :
"NSA Bombshell Story Falling Apart Under Scrutiny; Key Facts Turning Out to Be Inaccurate"
Seizing on the minute parsing of the phrase "direct access",
is FAR from a debunking,
or even a valid rebuttal of what we have learned so far.
This is a desperate attempt to Poison the Whole Well by grasping at anything that may possibly be a minor point of disagreement in the meaning of a phrase.,
like a Clinton parsing the meaning of the word "is".
So, perhaps your comprehension is better than mine.
Suppose you go to the linked article,
and list all those "facts" for those of us who failed to find any that could justify the Headline.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
164 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
NSA Bombshell Story Falling Apart Under Scrutiny; Key Facts Turning Out to Be Inaccurate [View all]
babylonsister
Jun 2013
OP
There are other laughable speculations from the Internet Blog called The Daily Banter..
bvar22
Jun 2013
#85
Boy, almost everyone here is lucky the alien and sedition act is not still in the Constitution!
xtraxritical
Jun 2013
#128
Adopting the hated Alien and Sedition Acts was, of course, a reason why Jefferson replaced Adams.
AnotherMcIntosh
Jun 2013
#152
Except Scahill, Greenwald, Chomsky, Hedges and the rest of the ratpack, repeatedly.
ucrdem
Jun 2013
#153
"Obama pushed the Cheney agenda far beyond what a President McCain or a President Romney would have
ucrdem
Jun 2013
#157
Well the President says it was a 'leak' that shouldn't have happened. So is he unaware that
sabrina 1
Jun 2013
#6
The new meme is the 4th doesn't apply to electronic records of our phones and emails
Dragonfli
Jun 2013
#17
The applicability of the fourth amendment to the online space is complicated. Here's a good article
cascadiance
Jun 2013
#101
Actually, he claims no hero status for himself but reserves that for the whistle-blower.
Luminous Animal
Jun 2013
#22
That don't seem any more angry than any other of his Tweets since he started Tweeting.
Hissyspit
Jun 2013
#119
That was the last day we thought anyone was actually going to do something about it.
Octafish
Jun 2013
#37
NOW: not a big deal... BEFORE: they don't have the capability, old news, Obama haters
usGovOwesUs3Trillion
Jun 2013
#23
It's sloppy. Once you research the history of this issue, you get a different picture.
stevenleser
Jun 2013
#129
He was sloppy to the point of altering the meaning of these issues completely
stevenleser
Jun 2013
#131
Every thing you say is true, afaik. It's legal. It's old. There's nominal oversight.
Laelth
Jun 2013
#133
If you repeal FISA, warrantless wiretapping becomes legal. We can fix or replace it with something
stevenleser
Jun 2013
#134
"NSA Bombshell Story Falling Apart Under Scrutiny". Don't they all eventually?
Tarheel_Dem
Jun 2013
#42
"the unforgivable exploitation of fear in the days after 9/11" and "unnecessary searches and
indepat
Jun 2013
#69
The screen name, the attitude, and the conservative views bring to mind Tom "the Hammer" Delay
Dragonfli
Jun 2013
#125
sorry, you can have that place and the Old Elm Tree. Ill stick to DEMOCRATIC Underground.
MjolnirTime
Jun 2013
#144
You have supported every third way conservative feeler Your idol has put out!
Dragonfli
Jun 2013
#146
Just because journalism is dead doesnt mean our govment isnt spying on us.
rhett o rick
Jun 2013
#76
Well Sister, We Will Have To Agree To Disagree - Many Of Us No Longer Trust Obama Or This Government
cantbeserious
Jun 2013
#93
Either AQ is "on its heels" and "only a shell of its former self", as we've been told by Obama...
cherokeeprogressive
Jun 2013
#110
This is just another hit piece to make people think it is totally acceptable for the government
GoneFishin
Jun 2013
#117