irrespective of wether or not this was accidental or on purpose, I do find the content of the "edges into the light" article quite offensive. The official stan

irrespective of wether or not this was accidental or on purpose, I do find the content of the "edges into the light" article quite offensive. The official stance appears to be "It's OK for us to break the law as long as we do it by accident", which is not just an incredibly weak argument, it's a dangerous precedent. Who defines 'accidental'? It seems to me that if used exactly as intended, PRISM breaks the law. We now have the whole LOVEINT angle, where the incursions were absolutely not accidental, but we're somehow meant to be ok with it because the very fact the the NSA knew about it happening somehow proves that they're on the case. They also feel it is something that the US public does not need to know about. My brain hurts trying do the mental gymnastics required in order to see this whole debacle from the intelligence communities point of view. No matter how I look at it, they're bad people doing bad things and telling us to like it without offering a shred of evidence to justify their actions.