General Discussion

marions ghost

(19,841 posts)

126. One of the comments on that Vanity Fair article says this:

Fri Jun 14, 2013, 09:02 PM

Jun 2013

"It seems to me that the "direct access" kerfluffle was unnecessary obfuscation, and that the internet companies were telling the truth that they don't let the FBI/NSA hack directly into their servers. Because such access is unnecessary when you can harvest the metadata "in transit" instead and work from that. So it's good that there seems to be an emerging consensus among real experts (not Greenwald) that it's the tier 1 networks and international switches that are the lynchpin of the intelligence efforts."

In other words, I think it may be correct to see the Vanity Fair article as largely a propaganda piece.

The real truth--and this will be verified IMO--is that there are no legal protections much at all.

I will stick by my original statement--that PRISM can do anything it wants anywhere. The whole Verizon data-mining thing PALES in comparison to the implications of the PRISM system.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

163 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Greenwald's Latest - He is counter punching to great effect! [View all] Vinnie From Indy Jun 2013 OP

Let's see if he can counter-punch his way out of prosecution. MjolnirTime Jun 2013 #1

I guess it be more efficient if we just start nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #3

Now careful timdog44 Jun 2013 #12

Well, this is the reigning attitude. nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #16

I have always enjoyed your posts. Been meaning to say that for a while. Figured now was good. DRoseDARs Jun 2013 #124

Glad it did. nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #125

and many here would cheer that on villager Jun 2013 #35

Yup nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #63

I know what you mean villager Jun 2013 #151

Agree, at least we see who the Authoritarians are Katashi_itto Jun 2013 #154

He won't be prosecuted. cali Jun 2013 #4

I tend to agree. It will never see a courtroom. 99th_Monkey Jun 2013 #92

Sometimes it's hard to get a point out of one sentence but let me try. rhett o rick Jun 2013 #8

Read a few more of this guys posts it is all there HangOnKids Jun 2013 #48

1st Amendment Hydra Jun 2013 #9

Can't we really just boil down the Bill of Rights to this? BlueStreak Jun 2013 #32

Not true. caseymoz Jun 2013 #155

Austerity! LondonReign2 Jun 2013 #33

Nah, we can just do a little modification. dairydog91 Jun 2013 #110

Yeah, the hell with all that "free press" stuff... ljm2002 Jun 2013 #13

Wow... How Un-American Are You ??? WillyT Jun 2013 #15

So, you are in favor of a reporter being criminally prosecuted? I thought SlimJimmy Jun 2013 #20

fascist much? n/t RainDog Jun 2013 #27

Thank you. Opinions such as this are the Shield and Sword of our Party. n/t jtuck004 Jun 2013 #65

You misspelled "persecution". n/t backscatter712 Jun 2013 #118

ThunderDerp WilliamPitt Jun 2013 #130

Beyond ThunderDerp n/t Aerows Jun 2013 #134

There will be no prosecution of Greenwald. Jackpine Radical Jun 2013 #153

So Sanchez likely didn't go to the previous intelligence briefings and she learned something. randome Jun 2013 #2

You are all over the map on this. On one hand you try to assure us that the NSA rhett o rick Jun 2013 #10

The two intelligence subcommittes are kept fully informed. randome Jun 2013 #23

You cant have it both ways. You cant mock Congress with a statement like: rhett o rick Jun 2013 #28

The worst thing is this. Fuddnik Jun 2013 #36

You bring up a great point. We have no idea how much or how little influence the rhett o rick Jun 2013 #42

Congress as represented by the two intelligence subcommittees. randome Jun 2013 #38

I believe they are very limited as to what they can tell Congress. Secrecy and all that, you know. n rhett o rick Jun 2013 #44

You may be right. I'm not sure if there is a better solution. randome Jun 2013 #54

Damn, you got me in a corner. I dont have a better idea. This is going to get very sticky with rhett o rick Jun 2013 #59

You're really dense about this, aren't you Hydra Jun 2013 #40

They're not allowed to talk to me and you about it. randome Jun 2013 #50

So again Hydra Jun 2013 #58

Except that FISC has decided to release that secret ruling. OilemFirchen Jun 2013 #72

Oh, you mean this? Hydra Jun 2013 #91

Shoulda said "would not object to release". OilemFirchen Jun 2013 #94

Yup, and at that point we're screwed Hydra Jun 2013 #99

"Fully informed"....... LOL bvar22 Jun 2013 #43

That was a public, televised hearing. randome Jun 2013 #52

He lied. AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2013 #68

He LIED to a Senator and to America. bvar22 Jun 2013 #81

Lies are to cover up something more serious than lying. HooptieWagon Jun 2013 #96

If you don't have the first clue about WHAT they are "covering up", bvar22 Jun 2013 #113

Your examples are exactly why I think the lies are an attempt to cover up something bigger. HooptieWagon Jun 2013 #114

Oops! My bad. bvar22 Jun 2013 #162

hey mr or mrs body language, me again Monkie Jun 2013 #101

Nope, didn't lie AceWheeler Jun 2013 #157

Nope! He outright LIED, bvar22 Jun 2013 #163

Exactly. timdog44 Jun 2013 #17

Guess his post about ProSense Jun 2013 #5

HUGE K & R !!! - Thank You !!! WillyT Jun 2013 #6

Very courageous with the truth Catherina Jun 2013 #7

Such a tease. OilemFirchen Jun 2013 #77

They loved him when he was going after Bush. And that's why they hate him now, he points out the sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #11

I definitely didn't love Greenwald when he said in his book he agreed with going to war in Iraq stevenleser Jun 2013 #21

That makes no sense. That 2006 book was about the Bush admin and it included scathing criticism. Luminous Animal Jun 2013 #34

I think so, yes. He's overcompensating for initially missing it on Iraq. stevenleser Jun 2013 #39

So, 3 books and millions of words against the Bush Admin are because he is overcompensating. Luminous Animal Jun 2013 #73

Oh snap! Vinnie From Indy Jun 2013 #105

Why, thank you! Luminous Animal Jun 2013 #106

:-) DeSwiss Jun 2013 #140

!! bobduca Jun 2013 #156

I loved him even more for that. Someone who sincerely cared enough about his country to admit to sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #60

The problem here is that timdog44 Jun 2013 #87

Wrong, so completely wrong I do not know where to start. Hillary Clinton knew about the real sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #139

Even though I know you timdog44 Jun 2013 #145

That was a really lovely post, timdog. I made an OP about this and I'll reproduce it below. Luminous Animal Jun 2013 #158

Thank you for that. timdog44 Jun 2013 #159

He supported a narrower ruling. Luminous Animal Jun 2013 #160

I can follow the logic he employs. timdog44 Jun 2013 #161

I didn't like him when he agreed with the CITIZENS UNITED ruling. MADem Jun 2013 #80

And another reason timdog44 Jun 2013 #88

He's always sucked because he's always been willing to lie for a story. MjolnirTime Jun 2013 #26

Sorry he isn't your BFF anymore HangOnKids Jun 2013 #49

Never caught him in a lie and I've been reading him since he started. He has made mistakes sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #53

Do you have some backing, or does this get filed under "Internet Man Makes Baseless Claim"? DisgustipatedinCA Jun 2013 #74

That cracked me up Aerows Jun 2013 #135

Well said. Sadly there are Democrats that yield to the comforting call of authoritarianism and the rhett o rick Jun 2013 #47

They can't be reasoned out of a belief Maedhros Jun 2013 #95

Sometimes reality is tough to swallow. You cant force it. Whistle-blowers shake up those rhett o rick Jun 2013 #97

for the 80th time, Bush did more treestar Jun 2013 #61

So, what? He's not in office anymore and there is still massive surveillance... Luminous Animal Jun 2013 #112

He's ProSense Jun 2013 #64

Well, I agree that neither of them are the story, despite all the efforts to make them the story. sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #69

Good question: marions ghost Jun 2013 #14

I wonder timdog44 Jun 2013 #22

Don't know much about you timdog44 marions ghost Jun 2013 #30

You make me cry. I am an emotional man just like my Dad was. timdog44 Jun 2013 #71

LOL, I'd be better as a speechwriter marions ghost Jun 2013 #104

Sound like I better set up an exploratory timdog44 Jun 2013 #116

I'll tell you exactly what they do. Fuddnik Jun 2013 #55

That is the timdog44 Jun 2013 #78

Spot on. It's obscene, but it is the truth. Laelth Jun 2013 #100

I have a cerebrally challenged Congressman. (I call him Rain Man). Fuddnik Jun 2013 #147

And that timdog44 Jun 2013 #152

It would be nice to know if she'd taken advantage of the 19 previous briefings pnwmom Jun 2013 #18

Christopher Boyce said that Snowden is doomed. Major Hogwash Jun 2013 #19

There are two separate issues for me. pnwmom Jun 2013 #24

I am getting confused. One one hand people are claiming that the spy programs only compile rhett o rick Jun 2013 #51

If you are confused (which I doubt) it's because there's more than one thing going on. pnwmom Jun 2013 #56

PRISM targets anything it wants--foreign or domestic marions ghost Jun 2013 #82

Where does it say that this information is collected in the US without a warrant? pnwmom Jun 2013 #103

You might want to do more research nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #111

The Verizon matter is NOT the same as PRISM. You keep mixing them up. pnwmom Jun 2013 #120

And that makes it better... nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #121

If you're not confused, then you are just wrong. pnwmom Jun 2013 #122

And section 215 is the verizon production order nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #123

One of the comments on that Vanity Fair article says this: marions ghost Jun 2013 #126

Tier one is how echellon also worked nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #133

Excellent article marions ghost Jun 2013 #128

Yeah, they really don't nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #129

That's the impression I'm getting... marions ghost Jun 2013 #136

It could be politics nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #137

yeah marions ghost Jun 2013 #138

Greenwald lives in Brazil and works for a UK paper azurnoir Jun 2013 #25

Maybe not. They have refused requests for extradition before. They Cleita Jun 2013 #29

What are we charging this journalist with again? LondonReign2 Jun 2013 #37

How about being a piss-poor journalist? randome Jun 2013 #41

Well, that might work. If you are an idiot LondonReign2 Jun 2013 #45

Oh you're just mad because he dared to upset your reality bubble. rhett o rick Jun 2013 #98

at this point nothing but there has been speculation azurnoir Jun 2013 #62

Probably nothing. OilemFirchen Jun 2013 #84

That is interesting LondonReign2 Jun 2013 #115

they seem desperate enough to declare war on Brazil carolinayellowdog Jun 2013 #119

Greenwald works for the Guardian US which in incorporated in the US and has offices in NY City. Luminous Animal Jun 2013 #108

K&R woo me with science Jun 2013 #31

How much is it that those in Congress really did not know about it all CanonRay Jun 2013 #46

Well, we could ask 2000 John Conyers nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #86

Excellent article. I bookmarked that. Catherina Jun 2013 #89

What "massive spying apparatus" treestar Jun 2013 #57

This one KurtNYC Jun 2013 #66

that's just a building treestar Jun 2013 #102

Look up the definition of "massive". Fuddnik Jun 2013 #67

Bloomberg article: Myrina Jun 2013 #75

You know, the largest one in the history of the planet, that Obama has expanded. That one. DisgustipatedinCA Jun 2013 #76

What rock are you living under? nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #85

Yottabytes of data sounds massive to anyone not cheering creeping facism. HooptieWagon Jun 2013 #93

We have descended to the absurd. bvar22 Jun 2013 #109

du rec. xchrom Jun 2013 #70

Update to Greenwald's latest cites NYT article on Yahoo challenge to PRISM ProSense Jun 2013 #79

It's my understanding ... Texano78704 Jun 2013 #83

I'm impressed by the way that he promotes his own "heroism" MrScorpio Jun 2013 #90

Sweet baby Jeebus! Vinnie From Indy Jun 2013 #107

You know, I'm not faulting him for his efforts to expose how the government is wrong here MrScorpio Jun 2013 #117

Please, please, tell me you're on twitter... loop204 Jun 2013 #127

Yep, I'm on Twitter alright MrScorpio Jun 2013 #131

Thank you... n/t loop204 Jun 2013 #132

This is better handled by Financial Writers. KoKo Jun 2013 #148

You can't 'un-rotten' an apple. - K&R n/t DeSwiss Jun 2013 #141

k&r avaistheone1 Jun 2013 #142

I don't know who kicked this... ReRe Jun 2013 #143

. blkmusclmachine Jun 2013 #144

Tip of the iceburg davidpdx Jun 2013 #146

And remember both WaPo and Guardian have had staff vett the info. KoKo Jun 2013 #149

I think you may mean "affect" nt gulliver Jun 2013 #150