So assuming Snowden "borrowed" the slide from the NSA and he didn't get owned, the slide is _REAL_.
Having in mind Snowden likely have large pile of slides, if he got owned, likely all/the majority of them would likely be fake. Is this plausible? And did you missed the us-natsec trolling about the eu appearing to trust Snowden's slides (though sometimes they can't prove it)? On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 08:22:37AM -0400, Michael Best wrote: > No but as I and others have noted, he didn't look at all of the materials > he handed over to journalists and couldn't possibly be expected to remember > all the ones he did see well enough to possibly be able to ID this one as > altered or forged. He was only able to argue against the other documents > because he had never been in touch with the outlet releasing them, contrary > to their apparent belief. > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 8:19 AM, Georgi Guninski <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 07:50:14AM -0400, Michael Best wrote: > > > As I think I said in the other thread, less specific charges that require > > > more specific proof and almost never leveled before a trial is set, > > because > > > it forces the issue to be tried in the court of public opinion, where a > > lot > > > of information can't be released lest it spoil an investigation or > > > potential trial. There's also the fact that there'd be little to gain at > > > this point by alleging that the slides are fake since there would be few > > > people to believe it, > > > > > > "NSA hasn't said it's fake" doesn't seem like a strong argument - > > > especially for a non-NSA slide. And again - *Snowden himself* has accused > > > outlets of releasing slides attributed to him that *he says he did not > > > provide*. > > > > > Likely the NSA would distribute fake slides just to discredit Snowden. > > > > Does Snowden deny the authencity of this slide? > > > > This slide appeared in _too many_ news AFAICT to get unnoticed. > >
