[packetslave]

Please provide a source for your "fact" that Google "gave NSA direct access to their systems"

As opposed to the multiple vehement denials of that "fact" from Google's executive officers (see David Drummond's interview in The Guardian, for example)

[workhere-io]

Here's a Snowden video in which he explains it (scroll to the bottom of the article): http://politiken.dk/udland/ECE2108923/usas-spioner-overvaage...

[thrownaway2424]

There's Snowden flapping his lips, yes. No argument there. The problem is he's wrong and has presented no compelling evidence at all.

The other problem is your worldview is not falsifiable. Everything Snowden says is true to you and everything Google says is false because Snowden said they would lie about it.

[piggity]

I guess the main issue is that the timeline of events has gone like this:

Snowden/Guardian: NSA is doing X Govt/NSA: We are not doing X Snowden/Guardian: Here are some slide/proof Govt/NSA: Ok we are doing X, but it's for your own good.

Rinse and repeat each fortnight.

So each denial means less and less, and tips believability towards Snowden even where the proof is inconclusive in some cases.

[workhere-io]

The problem is he's wrong and has presented no compelling evidence at all.

The Guardian and every other major news outlet seemed to think his evidence was compelling.

[saraid216]

The Guardian and every other major news outlet seemed to think his evidence was worth publishing. This is the same media circus we decry for unfounded false controversies and double-dealing, such as over the recent US government shutdown.

Not sure what makes you think that journalists are a legitimate authority to make appeals to.