NSA admits listening to U.S. phone calls without warrants

Re:NSA admits listening to U.S. phone calls without warrants by vidarh on Sunday June 16, 2013 @04:10AM (#5887830)

Greenwald's statement here about the Prism program is explaining what the NSA document claims. This is clear from context. If it is false, it is false in the same way as a book reviews that recaps events in a novel is false.

And unless I've missed some major revelation, it "appears to be false" on the basis of press releases from companies with an interest in not being caught with their pants down.

Forgive me for not being so willing to jump to conclusions about which claims to believe.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:NSA admits listening to U.S. phone calls without warrants by mpyne on Sunday June 16, 2013 @11:23AM (#5888724)

It's false in that it's technically inaccurate, even given nothing but the slides.

E.g. "direct and unilateral access". Unilateral means exactly that only one party needs to decide, the reality is that it is bilateral access (both parties must agree).

So that's at least one thing Greenwald managed to screw up in his "book review" of a single slide. The question is whether blame lies with Greenwald alone, or if Snowden mislead him into that by stupidity or malice.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:NSA admits listening to U.S. phone calls without warrants by vidarh on Monday June 17, 2013 @07:48AM (#5892612)

> the reality is that it is bilateral access (both parties must agree).

How do you know this on the basis of the slides alone?

[ Parent | on HN ]