3 ms·

Citing Snowden's documents would involve actually giving me a link. I did not say PRISM was mass wiretapping but it is indeed part of the surveillance suite of

by kakarot 10y ago

Citing Snowden's documents would involve actually giving me a link. I did not say PRISM was mass wiretapping but it is indeed part of the surveillance suite of NSA programs. I did not adequately explain myself in my original post, but I cleared things up afterwards and you are ignoring that completely. You have consistently been framing my arguments in a specific way so that you can attack them in a specific way. I also don't understand why you think that the NSA was not mass wiretapping both of those telco's major junctions. It's a known thing. It's not some fringe conspiracy theory. The Fed has been tapping phone lines since the very beginning. Not all of them sure, but certainly in a dragnet fashion. This has continued with the explosive growth of information networks into the 21st century. I provided links. I do not need to provide any more on that topic. I've honestly never encountered someone before who so earnestly believes as you do that these programs are not widespread or dangerous or grossly overstepping their bounds. It's like denying climate change or something.

lern_too_spel 10y ago
> Citing Snowden's documents would involve actually giving me a link. I gave you a link to a slide diagramming PRISM and a link to the document describing the email envelope program that had shut down. > I did not say PRISM was mass wiretapping but it is indeed part of the surveillance suite of NSA programs. I understand you now concede that PRISM isn't the nefarious new-datacenter-requiring mass data collection you originally claimed it was, that the actual surveillance itself is carried out by the FBI, and that PRISM just enables the NSA to search the FBI's data collected on specific foreigners with a court order. > I also don't understand why you think that the NSA was not mass wiretapping both of those telco's major junctions. It's a known thing. If it's a "known thing," where is the evidence? None of your links claim that the NSA is mass wiretapping the telcos' major junctions. Mass wiretapping Americans would violate the Fourth Amendment (the ACLU successfully sued over phone metadata collection, and collecting voice content would be a much bigger issue), so if you have any evidence at all, present it or be prepared to be labeled a conspiracy theorist.
- kakarot 10y ago
  Here you are again, twisting my words! Amazing. No, I did not say anything like that about PRISM. I said exactly what I said-- that I was not clear enough in my original post, but I clarified myself immediately after in response to you. I wrote that original post in a hurry and did not take the time to read over it like I usually do. And I've already elaborated on how the NSA uses other agencies and businesses as tools for its surveillance, to avoid direct ownership of the information that they can request at any time. Again, STOP twisting my words to serve your narrative. I gave you links, but I will humor you with another: https://www.eff.org/nsa-spying https://www.eff.org/nsa-spying > . . . recently published FISA court order demanding Verizon turn over all customer phone records including who is talking to whom, when and for how long—to the NSA . . . Oh look! FISA being used to demand all of verizon's phone records! All of them! And what are one of the programs that FISA feeds into? Oh yeah, that's right. PRISM. If you do not consider this to be a dragnet surveillance order, you are just lying to yourself. So there is yet another verifiable source highlighting the scope of PRISM. here is the relevant court case: https://www.eff.org/cases/first-unitarian-church-los-angeles-v-nsa https://www.eff.org/cases/first-unitarian-church-los-angeles... Do I need to physically take you to Titanpointe to see it for yourself? Here is a link explaining what that is, I already posted it once but clearly you have not been following through and reading these links. https://theintercept.com/2016/11/16/the-nsas-spy-hub-in-new-york-hidden-in-plain-sight/ https://theintercept.com/2016/11/16/the-nsas-spy-hub-in-new-...
  - lern_too_spel 10y ago
    > FISA being used to demand all of verizon's phone records! All of them! And what are one of the programs that FISA feeds into? Oh yeah, that's right. PRISM This explicitly isn't PRISM, and this isn't ongoing. Moreover, Snowden's documents showed that this data wasn't used for surveillance. The data was anonymized and a system (not PRISM) was built on top of it that could only perform a limited set of graph queries to find associates of known threats to national security. To deanonymize a node, the government would have to request another court order. You have once again demonstrated that you don't know what PRISM is, so is it any wonder that I keep calling you out on it?

by kakarot 10y ago

lern_too_spel 10y ago

> Citing Snowden's documents would involve actually giving me a link. I gave you a link to a slide diagramming PRISM and a link to the document describing the email envelope program that had shut down. > I did not say PRISM was mass wiretapping but it is indeed part of the surveillance suite of NSA programs. I understand you now concede that PRISM isn't the nefarious new-datacenter-requiring mass data collection you originally claimed it was, that the actual surveillance itself is carried out by the FBI, and that PRISM just enables the NSA to search the FBI's data collected on specific foreigners with a court order. > I also don't understand why you think that the NSA was not mass wiretapping both of those telco's major junctions. It's a known thing. If it's a "known thing," where is the evidence? None of your links claim that the NSA is mass wiretapping the telcos' major junctions. Mass wiretapping Americans would violate the Fourth Amendment (the ACLU successfully sued over phone metadata collection, and collecting voice content would be a much bigger issue), so if you have any evidence at all, present it or be prepared to be labeled a conspiracy theorist.

kakarot 10y ago
Here you are again, twisting my words! Amazing. No, I did not say anything like that about PRISM. I said exactly what I said-- that I was not clear enough in my original post, but I clarified myself immediately after in response to you. I wrote that original post in a hurry and did not take the time to read over it like I usually do. And I've already elaborated on how the NSA uses other agencies and businesses as tools for its surveillance, to avoid direct ownership of the information that they can request at any time. Again, STOP twisting my words to serve your narrative. I gave you links, but I will humor you with another: https://www.eff.org/nsa-spying https://www.eff.org/nsa-spying > . . . recently published FISA court order demanding Verizon turn over all customer phone records including who is talking to whom, when and for how long—to the NSA . . . Oh look! FISA being used to demand all of verizon's phone records! All of them! And what are one of the programs that FISA feeds into? Oh yeah, that's right. PRISM. If you do not consider this to be a dragnet surveillance order, you are just lying to yourself. So there is yet another verifiable source highlighting the scope of PRISM. here is the relevant court case: https://www.eff.org/cases/first-unitarian-church-los-angeles-v-nsa https://www.eff.org/cases/first-unitarian-church-los-angeles... Do I need to physically take you to Titanpointe to see it for yourself? Here is a link explaining what that is, I already posted it once but clearly you have not been following through and reading these links. https://theintercept.com/2016/11/16/the-nsas-spy-hub-in-new-york-hidden-in-plain-sight/ https://theintercept.com/2016/11/16/the-nsas-spy-hub-in-new-...
- lern_too_spel 10y ago
  > FISA being used to demand all of verizon's phone records! All of them! And what are one of the programs that FISA feeds into? Oh yeah, that's right. PRISM This explicitly isn't PRISM, and this isn't ongoing. Moreover, Snowden's documents showed that this data wasn't used for surveillance. The data was anonymized and a system (not PRISM) was built on top of it that could only perform a limited set of graph queries to find associates of known threats to national security. To deanonymize a node, the government would have to request another court order. You have once again demonstrated that you don't know what PRISM is, so is it any wonder that I keep calling you out on it?