.@20committee is entirely correct: 850,000 people did *not* have access to the information Snowden leaked. http://20committee.com/2013/11/17/the-guardian-really-needs-to-stop-lying/ …
@DaveedGR Actually, only the opinion one does, I think, but it's not presented as news. The Rusbridger does tho. @20committee
-
-
@emptywheel@20committee Both do. Blog: "Info which could endanger lives was shared with 850,000 individuals, one of whom was Snowden." -
@DaveedGR That's the basic def of TS information: Grave danger. That's not a reference to the docs, at all.@20committee -
@emptywheel@20committee No. Read it in context. Second paragraph: "They all knew what GCHQ & its close partner, the NSA, have been up to." -
@DaveedGR Right. And that's PRECISELY the same claim NSA defenders make that Congress knew. Of course they didn't know it all.@20committee
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@emptywheel@20committee Jenkins: "850,000 American officials and contractors are thought to have access to this material." -
@DaveedGR Your vindication is that an opinion column says it?@20committee is on FAR stronger ground w/Rusbridger's letter. -
@emptywheel@20committee I provided five links between two tweets, all of which make the same factual claim. -
@DaveedGR 2 I think are partly stretches, 2 I absolutely agree with, one is not "news." But I agree it has been said.@20committee -
@emptywheel@20committee Agreement! And now I return to work. -
@DaveedGR Now if only@20committee will fix the clear errors in his post, so it isn't as erroneous as the Guardian pieces he criticizes...
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@emptywheel@20committee Where the previous paragraphs shows that "this material" is a reference to the Snowden docs.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.