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: I don't understand this Snowden "controversy" [View all]TheKentuckian
(26,314 posts)48. What in the world do they need 1,700 when just one covers everyone on a carrier
and that communicates with a carrier. At that pace, something closer to 100 might about cover not only every person but every form of electronic communication.
The nets are huge, Joe. You're rhetorically conflating our previous understanding of a warrant with all encompassing dragnets. Under the present paradigm, 1,700 will catch virtually everyone several times so there is no need for millions of warrants as they are probably on information overload as it is.
I think your "defense" is contextually pointless. Media consolidation is a reality, it doesn't take too many shots to catch it all when you can just say "everyone on Time-Warner", "everyone on AT&T", and so on.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
81 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
They don't believe they are stealing it because the Corporations believe they own that data not you!
VanillaRhapsody
Jun 2013
#77
LoL. The Obama Adm BROUGHT the charges in 2010. They didn't reduce the charges
kenny blankenship
Jun 2013
#33
He provided evidence and Greenwald made no such claim. The NSA did and Greenwald
Luminous Animal
Jun 2013
#41
Evidence published in the Guardian. The NSA documents claimed that they had direct access.
Luminous Animal
Jun 2013
#44
The PowerPoint presentations may have been simply a marketing tool of some sort.
randome
Jun 2013
#49
He went to the tech companies & reported their rebuttals. His report did what it was supposed to do
Luminous Animal
Jun 2013
#63
He could have made those Powerpoint Presentations himself for all we know...
VanillaRhapsody
Jun 2013
#65
Doesn't matter if it was "old news". If it was classified, he broke the law.
KittyWampus
Jun 2013
#9
would you argue that law breakers like dr. king are not worthy of being deemed a role model?
frylock
Jun 2013
#34
What in the world do they need 1,700 when just one covers everyone on a carrier
TheKentuckian
Jun 2013
#48
Because the authoritarians don't want us to talk about Google for Tyrants.
backscatter712
Jun 2013
#29
So should anyone who works for NSA just decide their oath to keep Top Secrets Top Secret....is just
VanillaRhapsody
Jun 2013
#70
Keeping mountains of secrets about just about everything is one of the symptoms of a police state.
backscatter712
Jun 2013
#79
This guy broke the law....and then he ran and hid in China where he exposed what he knows to them.
VanillaRhapsody
Jun 2013
#80
I think we 'knew' about it in an abstract way, now it's like a brick in the face.
Avalux
Jun 2013
#43
Republicans with the help of the media are pushing this now with the hope of winning in 2014
Rosa Luxemburg
Jun 2013
#58