4 ms·

This was an interesting and early revelation, but it wasn't until the Snowden documents that we understood what this closet really meant. We had no idea the gov

This was an interesting and early revelation, but it wasn't until the Snowden documents that we understood what this closet really meant. We had no idea the government was recording every phone conversation in the u.s., every email, etc... We still had some hope that the rule of law as being followed and that this closet was just a way to make targeted surveillance easier.

cma 11y ago
>some hope that the rule of law as being followed Wasn't it already ruled illegal prior to Snowden and the phone companies had to be retroactively indemnified by congress?
- zymhan 11y ago
  Close, I think that the premise the Bush administration used to obtain this information, "dragnet surveillance", was ruled illegal, which exposed the phone companies to lawsuits. Congress then retroactively indemnified them. EDIT: This is it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_warrantless_surveillance_%282001%E2%80%9307%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_warrantless_surveillance_%...
PopeOfNope 11y ago
> but it wasn't until the Snowden documents that we understood what this closet really meant. > We had no idea the government was recording every phone conversation in the u.s. > We still had some hope that the rule of law as being followed All lies. This was well covered on slashdot when it happened. We all knew exactly what it meant. Snowden's release was iron clad and incontrovertible, which was refreshing, but it also detailed the extent to which private tech companies outside of AT&T were aiding the federal government in their illegal activities. Even the most paranoid nutbag commenting on those old slashdot threads couldn't imagine how bad it was going to get. Reality outpaced the conspiracy theorists.
- brazzledazzle 11y ago
  This is my recollection too. I think everyone held their breath hoping we'd pull away from the edge.

cma 11y ago

>some hope that the rule of law as being followed Wasn't it already ruled illegal prior to Snowden and the phone companies had to be retroactively indemnified by congress?

zymhan 11y ago
Close, I think that the premise the Bush administration used to obtain this information, "dragnet surveillance", was ruled illegal, which exposed the phone companies to lawsuits. Congress then retroactively indemnified them. EDIT: This is it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_warrantless_surveillance_%282001%E2%80%9307%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_warrantless_surveillance_%...

PopeOfNope 11y ago

> but it wasn't until the Snowden documents that we understood what this closet really meant. > We had no idea the government was recording every phone conversation in the u.s. > We still had some hope that the rule of law as being followed All lies. This was well covered on slashdot when it happened. We all knew exactly what it meant. Snowden's release was iron clad and incontrovertible, which was refreshing, but it also detailed the extent to which private tech companies outside of AT&T were aiding the federal government in their illegal activities. Even the most paranoid nutbag commenting on those old slashdot threads couldn't imagine how bad it was going to get. Reality outpaced the conspiracy theorists.

brazzledazzle 11y ago
This is my recollection too. I think everyone held their breath hoping we'd pull away from the edge.