Snowden claimed PRISM lets the NSA read any American’s emails and chats. Greenwald believed him because he didn’t know any better. It turned out not to be the case. Instead, the US government could request real-time copies via Section 702 orders (used for data for specific accounts belonging to non-Americans outside the US) that would be ingested by the FBI’s existing wiretap integration for requesting data for Americans under court ordered surveillance, and PRISM was just the data ingestion system that integrated with the FBI for that non-American data. It’s clearly shown in the slides, but neither Snowden nor Greenwald had enough smarts to Google the word, “DITU” on the slide and came up with wild conspiracies involving NSA computers running in Google’s data centers requesting any data they liked.
The only illegal domestic surveillance program in the entirety of the leaks was a system that collected phone metadata about who called whom when for how long. The leaks showed that it could only be queried in a very particular way. Snowden thought the NSA could listen in on any American’s phone calls and read any American’s email, but nothing of the sort showed up in his leaks.
Why should he trust US whistleblower laws? Because they work. The guy who leaked Trump’s call to Zelensky asking him to investigate Hunter Biden was protected by whistleblower laws to the point that you don’t even know his name. After he filed a whistleblower complaint and the investigation began, multiple other witnesses came forward. None of them have been prosecuted, and this was even under Trump, who is unafraid to file meritless lawsuits. If Snowden just blew the whistle on the single illegal program in his leaks, he would be in the U.S. earning royalties from his book deal.
Do not support Snowden’s claim that the NSA could read any American’s emails or listen to any American’s phone calls. Greenwald (through Snowden’s insistence) thought that DITU was an NSA computer inside American Internet companies. That’s the source of the misconception.
The article itself is a misreporting of this WaPo article that said half of the communications contained references to American residents. This makes sense of course, because the foreign accounts being surveilled were thought to have national security importance for the U.S.
And the ones who knew what they were talking about disparaged Greenwald’s reporting that was based solely on Snowden’s ignorance. The first newspaper to get the story right was the New York Times. Then CNET’s Declan McCullough repeatedly called Greenwald out on his poor reporting. ZDNet quite reasonably asked why neither Greenwald nor his editor bothered to consult a subject matter expert. The tech blogosphere ripped it apart at the time, to the point that Greenwald kept responding in an unhinged way to open source tech celebrities on Twitter. But you didn’t need to be in tech at the time to understand this. This got picked up in mainstream news summary sites like The Week.
That’s because it was Bolivia, and each country has a right to police its own airspace. France, Spain, Portugal, and Italy can choose which planes they allow to fly over their countries, and that is their right under international law. The US didn’t unlawfully down a plane over a European country’s airspace.
This is a conspiracy theory that isn’t supported by any documents at all, especially nothing in Snowden’s documents. This agreement started as BRUSA, which was a no-spy agreement, which Germany requested access to after the Germans and the Americans had been caught spying on each other in the early 2000s. This no-spy provision is alluded to in the WaPo article I linked to above: “At one level, the NSA shows scrupulous care in protecting the privacy of U.S. nationals and, by policy, those of its four closest intelligence allies — Britain, Australia, Canada and New Zealand.”