News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Colbert turns his funny gun on Snowden in RSA keynote by nailer on Sunday March 02, 2014 @09:10AM (#7329180)
Snowden states he was able to look up information on any citizen, including the President, without any explicit approval or subsequent investigation. What evidence do you have to refute that?
Re:Colbert turns his funny gun on Snowden in RSA keynote by jessedhillon on Sunday March 02, 2014 @10:40AM (#7329449)
That's not the way logic works. Affirmative assertions need to be demonstrated by the person making the claim. It's not encumbent on anyone to disprove Snowden's claims; it's his responsibility to show that they are true.
Re:Colbert turns his funny gun on Snowden in RSA keynote by nailer on Sunday March 02, 2014 @11:45AM (#7329689)
The weird thing is the NSA has never refuted the very specific allegation of Booz's access and the lack of supervision (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/09/edward-snowden-...), merely just repeated that 'oversight exists'. Since we're all discussing a massive series of leaked documents, how do you logically think otherwise?

Let's see what the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) has to say:

http://www.theverge.com/2013/8/23/4651448/nsa-report-reveals...