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

PoliticalPothead

(220 posts)

26. Wow, this has to be one of the laziest anti-Greenwald articles I've ever read.

Reply to ProSense (Original post)

Wed Feb 19, 2014, 12:18 AM

Feb 2014

That’s right — they do not know from these stolen documents whether this program was ever actually deployed in the real world.

So what? They're reporting on the existence of this program. I'd rather know about the program, even if it hasn't been used on Americans (yet), than not know about it at all.

IP addresses cannot be “traced back to specific people.” That’s nonsense

This is complete bullshit. IP addresses can absolutely be traced back to specific people, or did you not hear about XKeyscore?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

33 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Yet Another Highly Misleading GCHQ/NSA Article From the Intercept [View all] ProSense Feb 2014 OP

Kick! n/t ProSense Feb 2014 #1

Little Green Footballs is an acceptable source on DU now? LeftyMom Feb 2014 #2

Well, ProSense Feb 2014 #3

That's a pretty lame defense for linking to a RW hate site. LeftyMom Feb 2014 #4

Please, ProSense Feb 2014 #7

So he got a puff peice on his supposed disassociation with the fringe right? LeftyMom Feb 2014 #10

Stop trying to deflect with inaccurate information. n/t ProSense Feb 2014 #12

If you want to embarrass yourself by posting bullshit from dodgy sources, be my guest. LeftyMom Feb 2014 #17

You're mistaken. It's you who continue to "embarrass yourself" ProSense Feb 2014 #19

The site actually was rather rightwing at the height of the Bush era struggle4progress Feb 2014 #18

I know about the site and its evolution. n/t ProSense Feb 2014 #20

Dear Robert Spencer: Yes, I�m Being Paid struggle4progress Feb 2014 #16

Oh, right-- I suppose *you'd* consider it a "moderate" hate site. Marr Feb 2014 #27

No, reformed, like Greenwald claims to be. n/t ProSense Feb 2014 #28

Charles Johnson seems to have had an epiphany, cuz the site has changed in recent years struggle4progress Feb 2014 #11

Yeah, he's tried to position himself as a bit more moderate than the loony right. LeftyMom Feb 2014 #15

Well, that's always a possibility. But it's going on about five years now. struggle4progress Feb 2014 #21

Yeah, fuck the GASbaggers. they don't have to be Cha Feb 2014 #5

"GASbaggers"? WorseBeforeBetter Feb 2014 #13

"GASbaggers" Jamaal510 Feb 2014 #31

.. Cha Feb 2014 #32

People that dont know shit about TCP/IP Should not write articles. I can prove him wrong with one Drew Richards Feb 2014 #6

If you ProSense Feb 2014 #9

Greenwald? hes not a network engineer and besides I take everything that sleeze says with a grain Drew Richards Feb 2014 #14

I agree though, that the technology can decipher the computer OS, programs installed, etc. And most freshwest Feb 2014 #29

+1. nt bemildred Feb 2014 #33

Kick! sheshe2 Feb 2014 #8

Evidently they were the least untruthful possible... Fumesucker Feb 2014 #22

You're comparing Greenwald to Clapper? ProSense Feb 2014 #23

A double standard is better than no standard at all n/t Fumesucker Feb 2014 #24

If you say so. n/t ProSense Feb 2014 #25

Wow, this has to be one of the laziest anti-Greenwald articles I've ever read. PoliticalPothead Feb 2014 #26

This article is factually wrong. NAT overloading typically occurs at the premise DisgustipatedinCA Feb 2014 #30