General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsGreenwald: On PRISM, partisanship and propaganda.
"What we learned in there is significantly more than what is out in the media today. . . . I can't speak to what we learned in there, and I don't know if there are other leaks, if there's more information somewhere, if somebody else is going to step up, but I will tell you that I believe it's the tip of the iceberg . . . . I think it's just broader than most people even realize, and I think that's, in one way, what astounded most of us, too."
The Congresswoman is absolutely right: what we have reported thus far is merely "the tip of the iceberg" of what the NSA is doing in spying on Americans and the world. She's also right that when it comes to NSA spying, "there is significantly more than what is out in the media today", and that's exactly what we're working to rectify.
But just consider what she's saying: as a member of Congress, she had no idea how invasive and vast the NSA's surveillance activities are. Sen. Jon Tester, who is a member of the Homeland Security Committee, said the same thing, telling MSNBC about the disclosures that "I don't see how that compromises the security of this country whatsoever" and adding: "quite frankly, it helps people like me become aware of a situation that I wasn't aware of before because I don't sit on that Intelligence Committee."
How can anyone think that it's remotely healthy in a democracy to have the NSA building a massive spying apparatus about which even members of Congress, including Senators on the Homeland Security Committee, are totally ignorant and find "astounding" when they learn of them?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/14/nsa-partisanship-propaganda-prism
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)"How can anyone think that it's remotely healthy in a democracy to have the NSA building a massive spying apparatus about which even members of Congress, including Senators on the Homeland Security Committee, are totally ignorant and find "astounding" when they learn of them? "
...he's still attacking people (a lot of us knew about the program) and spreading misinformation without addressing the discrepancies in his original story?
Glenn Greenwald's 'Epic Botch'?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023012813
Harry Reid: If Lawmakers Didn't Know About NSA Surveillance, It's Their Fault
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022995784
Dem. Senator Merkley Skipped Briefing On NSA Program He Said He Didnt Know About To Go On HARDBALL
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023005285
Report: Yahoo Challenged PRISM In 2008
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023015163
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)ljm2002
(10,751 posts)..."he's still attacking people (a lot of us knew about the program) and spreading misinformation without addressing the discrepancies in his original story"
Who's spreading misinformation here?
Here is an excerpt from the link provided in the OP:
Democratic partisans have raised questions about only one of the stories - the only one that happened to be also published by the Washington Post (and presumably vetted by multiple Post editors and journalists) - in order to claim that an alleged inaccuracy in it means our journalism in general is discredited.
They are wrong. Our story was not inaccurate. The Washington Post revised parts of its article, but its reporter, Bart Gellman, stands by its core claims ("From their workstations anywhere in the world, government employees cleared for PRISM access may 'task' the system and receive results from an Internet company without further interaction with the company's staff" .
The Guardian has not revised any of our articles and, to my knowledge, has no intention to do so. That's because we did not claim that the NSA document alleging direct collection from the servers was true; we reported - accurately - that the NSA document claims that the program allows direct collection from the companies' servers. Before publishing, we went to the internet companies named in the documents and asked about these claims. When they denied it, we purposely presented the story as one of a major discrepancy between what the NSA document claims and what the internet companies claim
So here we see Greenwald directly addressing the challenges to the accuracy of his story. But you come in here and say he is not addressing them. So again I ask: who is spreading misinformation?
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)It was so DU...
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Direct link to my article on this mess...history...not so lovable.
http://www.eastcountymagazine.org/node/13410
I feel like I got laser sights from partisans on my back.
xiamiam
(4,906 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)happy to help.
Sid
KoKo
(84,711 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)Hell Hath No Fury
(16,327 posts)the next installments. Tip of the iceberg, indeed.
FarCenter
(19,429 posts)Is Greenwald getting scooped?
http://www.scmp.com/
Two pan-democratic lawmakers urged US President Barack Obama on Friday to stop all legal action against and consider letting go NSA whistle-blower Edward Snowden who has taken refuge in Hong Kong.
They made the comments at a press conference at which they also made public a letter they have sent to Obama urging him to not allow "national security" claims to justify abuse of state...
Beijing will not exploit Snowden case, says senior foreign policy adviser - 1:12PM
Edward Snowden: Classified US data shows Hong Kong hacking targets - 1:19PM
Asset or liability? Beijing's decision on whistle-blower could seal Snowden's fate - 8:48AM
US leaker Snowden under criminal investigation: FBI - 4:09AM
burnodo
(2,017 posts)what does it have to do with the OP?
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)Karmadillo
(9,253 posts)Catherina
(35,568 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)burnodo
(2,017 posts)all the sudden, Bush's excesses aren't so excessive
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)certain information. So we don't trust elected officials with our intel, but we trust Private For Profit Corporations, thousands of them.
How can a member of Congress represent their constituents effectively when they are keep in the dark about such important issues?
Democracy? We are so far from a democracy right now it makes me want to cry.
Catherina
(35,568 posts)Exactly. Of course that's the whole point. The don't want oversight. They don't want any discussion either.
From Hissyspit's thread New Greenwald Guardian Op/Ed: Edward Snowden's Worst Fear Has Not Been Realised Thankfully
One well-respected-in-Washington national security writer, Slate's centrist Fred Kaplan, has called for Clapper's firing. "It's hard," he wrote, "to have meaningful oversight when an official in charge of the program lies so blatantly in one of the rare open hearings on the subject."
The fallout is not confined to the US. It is global. Reuters this week reported that "German outrage over a US Internet spying program has broken out ahead of a visit by Barack Obama, with ministers demanding the president provide a full explanation when he lands in Berlin next week and one official likening the tactics to those of the East German Stasi."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3018368
"In the past week many have implied that because you have briefed Congress we are complicit," Conyers said. "Can you acknowledge that briefing does not constitute my assent?"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/13/fbi-director-mueller-senate-nsa-live