I will go on record as standing with Google and its denials, even if that's an unpopular position right now. Here are a few facts: 1. The New York Times artic

I will go on record as standing with Google and its denials, even if that's an unpopular position right now. Here are a few facts: 1. The New York Times article did not specifically cite PRISM, it only cited FISA, which was already largely known by the public. It is true that this could be because PRISM is allegedly justified under Section 702 of FISA, but they are not the same thing.[1] It would be most appropriate to say that one encompasses the other, but they have two separate protocols, and as of right now, only one was discussed by the Times. 2. Let's say the NYTimes article is about PRISM, and they simply didn't mention that acronym for whatever reason. If that is the case, the information leaked therein also makes it very clear that it is entirely possible for CEOs, chief officers, and other high ranking employees to be completely in the dark about it. The only people allowed to know about the requests for information are those who receive and analyze the requests. That's not a conspiracy theory - it's leaked right along with the rest of the information.[2] Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Page, Dave Drummond, Yonaton Zunger, etc. might literally not know the extent of how far the government reaches in their companies. 3. It is unreasonable and unrealistic to expect the leaders of these named companies to stand together in righteous technological might against The Man. Nothing practical would be achieved by having Mark Zuckerberg or Larry Page penalized for what they said on record, in public against a government agency. Nothing would benefit the American people by having them put on trial or their companies sued for violating national security. The NSA designed a Catch-22 gag order that prevents those involved from even acknowledging the existence of government involvement or letter agencies, let alone detailing specific protocols or history. I've said it before and I'll say it again. Stop getting distracted from the real problem here. The threat to privacy is the NSA. The threat is our government(s). We have the power to fight it if we consolidate our focus with precision. We may feel wronged by the apparent lies of public figures but they had no choice, if they were even in the wrong. We cannot know what pressures were put upon them at this point in time. Lay down your pitchforks and direct your anger and incredulity to your government, who ordered this - the public entity that made this legal and hidden and nearly impossible to speak out against. That is your real enemy. [1]: http://www.theverge.com/2013/6/7/4407782/phone-spying-and-prism-internet-surveillance-whats-the-difference http://www.theverge.com/2013/6/7/4407782/phone-spying-and-pr... [2]: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/08/technology/tech-companies-bristling-concede-to-government-surveillance-efforts.html http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/08/technology/tech-companies-...