4 ms·
Please, take the time to read the article. > “In fact, we don’t monitor emails. That’s what kind of assures me is that what the reporting is is not correct. Be
by lukeschlather 13y ago
Please, take the time to read the article.
> “In fact, we don’t monitor emails. That’s what kind of assures me is that what the reporting is is not correct. Because no emails are monitored now,” [Senator] Chambliss said. “They used to be, but that stopped two or three years ago. So I feel confident that there may have been some abuse, but if it was it was pure accidental.”
They've essentially admitted that Greenwald's information is accurate, they're just claiming that Greenwald is late to the party and they've already dealt with the problem in secret.
It's interesting, because if you go back over the testimony I'm very sure that all of the NSA denials will be in the present tense. So it's quite possible that the NSA has not been lying at all, they've just been counting on us to fill in "That has never happened" when all they've said is "we do not [currently] do that."
- manmal 13y agoBut, "two or three years ago" is a strangely broad phrase to use for something as huge as monitoring emails. Why did they not say "that stopped in the middle of 2011" or something like that?
- malandrew 13y agoSnowden left the NSA a few months ago. If the monitoring of emails had truly ceased 2-3 years ago, I would have expected that information to already have been aired since Snowden and the classified material he has is likely to be current enough to corroborate this claim.
- falk 13y agoI did read the article. There's a lot more information to be released. Snowden took thousands of documents that he hand selected. Greenwald has said that there are more NSA programs to be exposed.