Spying?
-
Now, that said, the surveillance of press under the previous administrations is different (I think) from the NSA harvesting emails.
Or is it?Direct surveillance of journalists seems more invasive than mass hoovering of citizen communications through the NSA's security apparatus.
But the existence of the mass harvesting is more egregious.
Now, that said, the surveillance of press under the previous administrations is different (I think) from the NSA harvesting emails.
Or is it?Direct surveillance of journalists seems more invasive than mass hoovering of citizen communications through the NSA's security apparatus.
But the existence of the mass harvesting is more egregious.
lol "hoovering", I like it.
-
@doctor-phibes said in Spying?:
And to be h0nest, as a non-citizen I care less about the distinction between American and everybody else than most people here appear to. You're not that special.
Because the laws of a country which apply to its citizens should apply to everyone in the country...such as voting, etc?
What rights do UK citizens have that are not applicable to US citizens?
NHS? Can I get "free healthcare" in the UK if I break a leg or need a colon resection? Something tells me I can't.
So, don't give me the "special" stuff. Every country on the planet affords "special" benefits to its citizens. And...every country on the planet affords "special" rights to its citizens.
Want that "special" benefit?
Take the test, pass the test, take the oath.
I have no wish to take the test, and I don't mind not voting. Them's the rules.
I'm not that keen on the idea that I can be spied on due to an accident of birth. Not sure what the rules are, there, or whose rules they are for that matter.
@doctor-phibes said in Spying?:
I have no wish to take the test, and I don't mind not voting. Them's the rules.
So, you have no desire to be "special," because "them's the rules."
-
@doctor-phibes said in Spying?:
I have no wish to take the test, and I don't mind not voting. Them's the rules.
So, you have no desire to be "special," because "them's the rules."
@doctor-phibes said in Spying?:
I have no wish to take the test, and I don't mind not voting. Them's the rules.
So, you have no desire to be "special," because "them's the rules."
I'm special enough already.
-
@doctor-phibes said in Spying?:
I have no wish to take the test, and I don't mind not voting. Them's the rules.
So, you have no desire to be "special," because "them's the rules."
I'm special enough already.
@doctor-phibes said in Spying?:
@doctor-phibes said in Spying?:
I have no wish to take the test, and I don't mind not voting. Them's the rules.
So, you have no desire to be "special," because "them's the rules."
I'm special enough already.
Short bus doesn't count...
“Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”
Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton
-
Only 32 percent of Americans can name all 3 branches of government. Only 57% know that Thomas Jefferson was the main author of the Declaration of Independence.
Being an asshole or a blowhard doesn't remove your rights and protections.
Neither does being an ignoranus.
(that wasn't a typo)
@george-k I was addressing Jolly's assertion that if we can't agree on this, it's over. If, as is likely, a sufficiency of Americans don't even know what NSA is, we're hardly in shape to agree (or disagree) on anything having to do with the NSA. It's far more likely to be "over" over much more elementary issues.
And we're not there yet by a long shot.
-
@doctor-phibes said in Spying?:
@doctor-phibes said in Spying?:
I have no wish to take the test, and I don't mind not voting. Them's the rules.
So, you have no desire to be "special," because "them's the rules."
I'm special enough already.
Short bus doesn't count...
@doctor-phibes said in Spying?:
@doctor-phibes said in Spying?:
I have no wish to take the test, and I don't mind not voting. Them's the rules.
So, you have no desire to be "special," because "them's the rules."
I'm special enough already.
Short bus doesn't count...
My goal is to put the colon back into the colony.
-
@doctor-phibes said in Spying?:
Those annotations look a little like Glenn Beck's infamous chalk-board.
Agreed.
Now, show me where they're wrong.
@doctor-phibes said in Spying?:
Those annotations look a little like Glenn Beck's infamous chalk-board.
Agreed.
Now, show me where they're wrong.
It's up to them to back up their own silly claims, not the other person to disprove them. Argument Construction 101.
-
All interesting convo but until Fox gets on board
They gave him millions of dollars worth of air time to tell the story
I believe that is a lot like being on board
So they are turning down a massive scoop for some other news source? So many leaps of faith one has to take to get there.
-
As George would say, it's all about the Benjamins.
-
Isn’t there a way to interview the whistleblower to see what actions should be taken next? I know Congress has a history of fishing expeditions and man did we witness that for the past four years especially but it doesn’t make fishing expeditions right. There should be a threshold and it seems to me the whistleblower holds all the relevant cards right now.
Also a news organization who has actually seen Tucker’s emails would be helpful.
-
So reporters are trying to validate Carlson’s claims and provide interesting new details that would be relevant.
Carlson is holding his cards close to what he is alleging. He’s got a humdinger of a case if he has the smoking gun. No one has seen it yet.
-
a shred of evidence
He has a shred of evidence
I maybe be missing his evidence. As far as I can tell he says a whistleblower told him but I haven’t seen any corroborating evidence. What am I missing? He didn’t share any emails, he didn’t have anyone else talk to the whistleblower, right?
Do you really just get to make an allegation? I’ve been fighting that with TDS for 5 years now.
-
a shred of evidence
He has a shred of evidence
I maybe be missing his evidence. As far as I can tell he says a whistleblower told him but I haven’t seen any corroborating evidence. What am I missing? He didn’t share any emails, he didn’t have anyone else talk to the whistleblower, right?
Do you really just get to make an allegation? I’ve been fighting that with TDS for 5 years now.
a shred of evidence
He has a shred of evidence
I maybe be missing his evidence. As far as I can tell he says a whistleblower told him but I haven’t seen any corroborating evidence. What am I missing? He didn’t share any emails, he didn’t have anyone else talk to the whistleblower, right?
Do you really just get to make an allegation? I’ve been fighting that with TDS for 5 years now.
What is Mr Paul's motivation? Political tribalism?
When we saw the investigations into Cavanaugh, that was clearly tribalism. What about Mr Paul?
-
The NSA was eager to respond when this story first broke, with their non-denial denial. "Mr Carlson has never been an intelligence target". Will they be as eager to respond to Mr Paul's four questions? If not, why not? I bet they will not answer those questions, at least not without an investigation.
Of course, recent history shows us, as Mr Paul notes, that it is far, far from an "implausible conspiracy theory" that the NSA might employ people with security clearance and political axes to grind, and without the requisite honor as human beings to not grind those axes.
When pop culture welcomes such tribal righteousness with open arms, who can blame them? They are only human, operating as humans always have, and always will. That's why they need to be held in check. I respect Mr Paul's attempt to do so.
-
The NSA was eager to respond when this story first broke, with their non-denial denial. "Mr Carlson has never been an intelligence target". Will they be as eager to respond to Mr Paul's four questions? If not, why not? I bet they will not answer those questions, at least not without an investigation.
Of course, recent history shows us, as Mr Paul notes, that it is far, far from an "implausible conspiracy theory" that the NSA might employ people with security clearance and political axes to grind, and without the requisite honor as human beings to not grind those axes.
When pop culture welcomes such tribal righteousness with open arms, who can blame them? They are only human, operating as humans always have, and always will. That's why they need to be held in check. I respect Mr Paul's attempt to do so.
The NSA was eager to respond when this story first broke, with their non-denial denial. "Mr Carlson has never been an intelligence target". Will they be as eager to respond to Mr Paul's four questions? If not, why not? I bet they will not answer those questions, at least not without an investigation.
Of course, recent history shows us, as Mr Paul notes, that it is far, far from an "implausible conspiracy theory" that the NSA might employ people with security clearance and political axes to grind, and without the requisite honor as human beings to not grind those axes.
When pop culture welcomes such tribal righteousness with open arms, who can blame them? They are only human, operating as humans always have, and always will. That's why they need to be held in check. I respect Mr Paul's attempt to do so.
So every fishing expedition must be responded to?
This thread is full of wordy words….and no evidence.
Let me repeat…NO evidence. He said he/she said. Seriously. Kafkaesque to demand so much with no evidence to be followed up on.
