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: Snowden basically admits the "direct access" claim was bullshit. [View all]MADem
(135,425 posts)34. If we want to talk about agendas, you showed up just in time to
talk about THIS issue. You've been here just over a week, and what's been your focus?
You're not talking about congressional races or kittens, or tax codes--your posts have been All Snowden, All The Time for the last nine days. Google is anyone's friend, and all sixty some odd of your posts are available for all of us to view.
So maybe you need that mirror for yourself, because you plainly are a Dish It Out, Can't Take It kind of individual. The fact that you had the brass to call out the OP when your singular purpose here, since you joined the site on 7 Jun, has been to lead the Snowden Cheerleading Brigade, is the definition of irony.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
183 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
I agree with the post in it's entiriety...the OP seems to have a very specific axe to grind...
truebrit71
Jun 2013
#17
History sure is something--you might want to stop laughing and get up off the floor.
MADem
Jun 2013
#123
south america? where the US loved to support dictators and overthrow democracies
Monkie
Jun 2013
#145
Start a thread on this topic somewhere else and I'll be happy to play in your sandbox.
MADem
Jun 2013
#151
I would imagine it's no less, no no more fair a question to ask why one may defend
LanternWaste
Jun 2013
#73
Epic Smackdown! Thank you. You definitely cracked the poster's mirror, and his irony meter.
Tarheel_Dem
Jun 2013
#52
Did you not start this entire thing by questioning the interests of another poster?
Marr
Jun 2013
#142
I see link and quote from Pro and none from you, whom am I to believe? Regards
uponit7771
Jun 2013
#26
You're getting off to a fine start, insulting another DUer for asking a reasonable question.
MADem
Jun 2013
#44
This is not ABOUT "agreeing with the OP" and if you read the points I was making
MADem
Jun 2013
#138
The OP is a she, and I wouldn't have a problem if someone posted a response entitled
MADem
Jun 2013
#161
I am not interested in yet another explication of how mean other people were in this thread
Demit
Jun 2013
#162
Well, if that is true, the place to point it out is in the thread in question--not
MADem
Jun 2013
#127
More Lies. They are not backing away from their initial claims at all
usGovOwesUs3Trillion
Jun 2013
#13
The should, there's NOTHING showing dedicated or even VPN connection to these company
uponit7771
Jun 2013
#28
False, there's no network engineer from the NSA making these claims other than him
uponit7771
Jun 2013
#37
AT&T is not google, I'm talking about his claim that they have DIRECT ACCESS to google ....
uponit7771
Jun 2013
#57
False, he posted a powerpoint that makes a claim...I'm asking the HOW on the claim now....
uponit7771
Jun 2013
#79
FYI: just because it's a PowerPoint doesn't make it not TOP SECRET Document
usGovOwesUs3Trillion
Jun 2013
#83
I don't care if it's ultrasecret, the issue is the content...the PP didn't show HOW the NSA had
uponit7771
Jun 2013
#88
note how prosense selectively quotes, and knows no shame, makes the pigs in 1984 look honest
Monkie
Jun 2013
#32
You fail to mention the leftover whistle blowers from the Bush admin, your last sentence was spin
uponit7771
Jun 2013
#49
if that is true and you can prove it i will gladly retract and apologise for that small detail
Monkie
Jun 2013
#58
No, fuck that come correct...you're telling me that the OP is BS and then place BS in a post about
uponit7771
Jun 2013
#70
so 2 of the 6 were bush hold overs if i read the article correctly, so my minor point still stands.
Monkie
Jun 2013
#85
Doesn't make different if it was one, the statement makes it seem like Obama is being a heavy
uponit7771
Jun 2013
#90
you dont think, but it is proven the quotes are selective, and not just in this case.
Monkie
Jun 2013
#113
Yep, they collect all information, every key stroke, and they can investigate every means of
Thinkingabout
Jun 2013
#48
Hey, that has been revealed by some of his fans. They seem to think this is for freedom, uses
Thinkingabout
Jun 2013
#172
Not for the sophists it wouldn't because now we have TOP SECRET Documents
usGovOwesUs3Trillion
Jun 2013
#155
None of those people are going to respond to you in any way that approaches
Romulus Quirinus
Jun 2013
#158
+1, I don't see any dedicated lines switches etc....not even dedicated VPN connections to
uponit7771
Jun 2013
#23
********THANK YOU PROSENSE*********** Snowden is making a claim and has shown NO PROOF
uponit7771
Jun 2013
#35
He changed what he was talking about. He now says 'direct access' means the phone metadata.
randome
Jun 2013
#66
Just a tiny one. Internet, encrypted text files, it's all the same to a computer 'genius'.
randome
Jun 2013
#103
No proof of dedicated connecton, B2b or even VPN connection beyond googles DMZ to a back end
uponit7771
Jun 2013
#76
Getting ahead of the "Obama will defend NSA in the coming days" story HuffPo had up, I see
MotherPetrie
Jun 2013
#55
"Look at the shiny object here while the Govt vacuums up all your data from fiber optic cables"
dkf
Jun 2013
#78
If you took those FISA judges and moved them enmasse to the Supreme Court this place would erupt
dkf
Jun 2013
#150
Indirect access vs. direct access is a fake difference. All access is indirect or direct
limpyhobbler
Jun 2013
#112