Spying?
-
wrote on 8 Jul 2021, 21:48 last edited by
Listen, you partisan, dim-witted bastard...and that's being kind, because you deserve worse, since you are much smarter than you are portraying yourself...This is an on-going problem. Whether it's happening to Trump, Tucker, whoever. You should have enough sense to know, that the pendulum will swing and then an already weaponized NSA will be used against people and things you value.
It's wrong. It needs to stop. Now. People need to go to jail.
If you don't cut the crap tap off right now, it can and will, get worse.
-
wrote on 8 Jul 2021, 22:43 last edited by
OK, some of them are quite likeable.
-
Listen, you partisan, dim-witted bastard...and that's being kind, because you deserve worse, since you are much smarter than you are portraying yourself...This is an on-going problem. Whether it's happening to Trump, Tucker, whoever. You should have enough sense to know, that the pendulum will swing and then an already weaponized NSA will be used against people and things you value.
It's wrong. It needs to stop. Now. People need to go to jail.
If you don't cut the crap tap off right now, it can and will, get worse.
wrote on 9 Jul 2021, 00:49 last edited by jon-nyc 7 Sept 2021, 00:51@jolly lol
Perhaps if you were a bit less ideologically committed you’d recognize the simple fact that anyone who’s job it is to be sensational 5 days a week is going to, shall we say, cut a lot of corners.
Especially when the suits at his network admit it outright in lawsuits brought about by just such corner-cutting.
-
@jolly lol
Perhaps if you were a bit less ideologically committed you’d recognize the simple fact that anyone who’s job it is to be sensational 5 days a week is going to, shall we say, cut a lot of corners.
Especially when the suits at his network admit it outright in lawsuits brought about by just such corner-cutting.
wrote on 9 Jul 2021, 00:59 last edited by@jolly lol
Perhaps if you were a bit less ideologically committed you’d recognize the simple fact that anyone who’s job it is to be sensational 5 days a week is going to, shall we say, cut a lot of corners.
Especially when the suits at his network admit it outright in lawsuits brought about by just such corner-cutting.
Perhaps if you were a little bit less ideologically committed you's admit that the United States government probably intercepted communications of a citizen, and probably illegally revealed his identity.
TuCa might be an asshole (as I commented above), and he might be committed to sensationalism. Neither of those points abrogate his rights as a citizen. His right to privacy is absolute.
Why can't you see that?
Let's play a thought experiment....
JonCYN contacts a Russian citizen for the purpose of getting an interview with a Russian government official.
NSA intercepts his communications. Then, a whistleblower in NSA communicates to JonCYN that NSA has his messages, and quotes them to JonCYN, proving that they know that "Citizen #1" is, indeed, JonCYN.
Put aside the alleged motivations for such unmasking - they are irrelevant, as far as I'm concerned.
You're OK with that process?
-
wrote on 9 Jul 2021, 02:26 last edited by
I wouldn’t.
But I also can’t imagine other reporters wouldn’t pick up on the story even it was TuCa.
It is quite the allegation so it does deserve to be heard.
-
@jolly lol
Perhaps if you were a bit less ideologically committed you’d recognize the simple fact that anyone who’s job it is to be sensational 5 days a week is going to, shall we say, cut a lot of corners.
Especially when the suits at his network admit it outright in lawsuits brought about by just such corner-cutting.
Perhaps if you were a little bit less ideologically committed you's admit that the United States government probably intercepted communications of a citizen, and probably illegally revealed his identity.
TuCa might be an asshole (as I commented above), and he might be committed to sensationalism. Neither of those points abrogate his rights as a citizen. His right to privacy is absolute.
Why can't you see that?
Let's play a thought experiment....
JonCYN contacts a Russian citizen for the purpose of getting an interview with a Russian government official.
NSA intercepts his communications. Then, a whistleblower in NSA communicates to JonCYN that NSA has his messages, and quotes them to JonCYN, proving that they know that "Citizen #1" is, indeed, JonCYN.
Put aside the alleged motivations for such unmasking - they are irrelevant, as far as I'm concerned.
You're OK with that process?
wrote on 9 Jul 2021, 02:36 last edited by@jolly lol
Perhaps if you were a bit less ideologically committed you’d recognize the simple fact that anyone who’s job it is to be sensational 5 days a week is going to, shall we say, cut a lot of corners.
Especially when the suits at his network admit it outright in lawsuits brought about by just such corner-cutting.
Perhaps if you were a little bit less ideologically committed you's admit that the United States government probably intercepted communications of a citizen, and probably illegally revealed his identity.
TuCa might be an asshole (as I commented above), and he might be committed to sensationalism. Neither of those points abrogate his rights as a citizen. His right to privacy is absolute.
Why can't you see that?
Let's play a thought experiment....
JonCYN contacts a Russian citizen for the purpose of getting an interview with a Russian government official.
NSA intercepts his communications. Then, a whistleblower in NSA communicates to JonCYN that NSA has his messages, and quotes them to JonCYN, proving that they know that "Citizen #1" is, indeed, JonCYN.
Put aside the alleged motivations for such unmasking - they are irrelevant, as far as I'm concerned.
You're OK with that process?
Would probably ruin his wife's career and possibly screw over his son getting into that university his dad wanted.
But, what the hell...It doesn't matter, does it?
-
I wouldn’t.
But I also can’t imagine other reporters wouldn’t pick up on the story even it was TuCa.
It is quite the allegation so it does deserve to be heard.
wrote on 9 Jul 2021, 02:37 last edited by Jolly 7 Sept 2021, 02:37 -
wrote on 9 Jul 2021, 03:14 last edited by jon-nyc 7 Sept 2021, 04:18
It just seems like a lot of question begging. Given that (as you agree) he sensationalizes for a living, how can you assume this story is true?
-
wrote on 9 Jul 2021, 10:37 last edited by
Once upon a time, there was a little boy who cried wolf....
-
Once upon a time, there was a little boy who cried wolf....
wrote on 9 Jul 2021, 11:39 last edited by@doctor-phibes said in Spying?:
Once upon a time, there was a little boy who cried wolf....
What, in Carlson's statement is false? I'll grant the "trying to get me fired" is hyperbolic.
Even the NSA doesn't deny what he said, and the Axios article confirms it.
He's a blowhard, but he's not in the wrong here.
Why was his name revealed, and by whom?
But, spying on journalists is in the finest tradition of the US government, just ask James Rosen's mother.
-
wrote on 9 Jul 2021, 11:42 last edited by Doctor Phibes 7 Sept 2021, 11:46
The point about the boy who cried wolf is how many times Tucker has talked about these imminent scandals that never really materialised.
Why believe him this time?
Maybe he's right. It wouldn't particularly surprise me. I'm sure the US intelligence services are a law unto themselves, and politicians from both parties are a bunch of sleazebags, but I don't really know what's happened.
-
The point about the boy who cried wolf is how many times Tucker has talked about these imminent scandals that never really materialised.
Why believe him this time?
Maybe he's right. It wouldn't particularly surprise me. I'm sure the US intelligence services are a law unto themselves, and politicians from both parties are a bunch of sleazebags, but I don't really know what's happened.
wrote on 9 Jul 2021, 11:50 last edited by@doctor-phibes said in Spying?:
The point about the boy who cried wolf is how many times Tucker has talked about these imminent scandals that never really materialised.
I agree.
Why believe him this time?
Because an independent source (Axios) said so and the NSA didn't deny it. The very fact that they issued a statement is very unusual.
but I don't really know what's happened.
Yeah, and that's the problem. Nobody
knowswill admit what happened. -
wrote on 9 Jul 2021, 12:10 last edited by
Quit getting hung up on "who", simply because you don't like the messenger. It's looking more and more like Carlson is right - the NSA read through his emails and then unmasked him.
The email part is understandable and falls within the limits of the law. But the unmasking part does not. This is not the first time this has been done. It seems like it is becoming more prevalent. The law is being weaponized by political entities to destroy private citizens and their families.
This not a partisan issue. Because of the nature of power change in Washington, target lists will change.
Consider this scenario...Biden's economy tanks and stagflation erupts. The Administration is clearly foundering and is viewed as inept as Jimmy Carter's. Then, the same thing happens at the ballot box as happened after Carter's term...Twelve years of GOP administrations. Now, the NSA has been weaponized, so who lands on the new target list?
You might be angry and cry for justice at that point, but then you're just complaining about standard procedures...
-
wrote on 9 Jul 2021, 12:15 last edited by
I don't like the fact that the US intelligence service spies on it's people. I'm not particularly over-excited about this instance, because I honestly think it's been going on for decades.
I realise some of you guys think Joe Biden is a whole new kind of evil, but I personally think that's a load of bollocks.
-
wrote on 9 Jul 2021, 12:16 last edited by
Don't get hung up on the politics.
-
I don't like the fact that the US intelligence service spies on it's people. I'm not particularly over-excited about this instance, because I honestly think it's been going on for decades.
I realise some of you guys think Joe Biden is a whole new kind of evil, but I personally think that's a load of bollocks.
wrote on 9 Jul 2021, 12:20 last edited by@doctor-phibes said in Spying?:
I don't like the fact that the US intelligence service spies on it's people.
Right. So you agree that Carlson was spied upon...or at least "harvested" by spying, is that what you're saying?
I don't think the US is very different in that regard than other countries. Perhaps the difference is that we supposedly have laws that limit the type of surveillance that can be carried out on its citizens. FISA courts should have strict guidelines for this stuff.
Again, the question is who broke the law, if it was broken, indeed? If it wasn't broken, who permitted the work-around by unmasking him?
-
@doctor-phibes said in Spying?:
I don't like the fact that the US intelligence service spies on it's people.
Right. So you agree that Carlson was spied upon...or at least "harvested" by spying, is that what you're saying?
I don't think the US is very different in that regard than other countries. Perhaps the difference is that we supposedly have laws that limit the type of surveillance that can be carried out on its citizens. FISA courts should have strict guidelines for this stuff.
Again, the question is who broke the law, if it was broken, indeed? If it wasn't broken, who permitted the work-around by unmasking him?
wrote on 9 Jul 2021, 12:28 last edited byRight. So you agree that Carlson was spied upon...or at least "harvested" by spying, is that what you're saying?
I honestly don't know. It looks as though they were spying on Russians, and he started to talking to them, so they spied on him.
It seems to me that what is being done now pales into insignificance when compared to the behaviour of J. Edgar Hoover and his ilk, back in the golden age before modern liberalism raised its ugly head and ruined America.
-
Listen, you partisan, dim-witted bastard...and that's being kind, because you deserve worse, since you are much smarter than you are portraying yourself...This is an on-going problem. Whether it's happening to Trump, Tucker, whoever. You should have enough sense to know, that the pendulum will swing and then an already weaponized NSA will be used against people and things you value.
It's wrong. It needs to stop. Now. People need to go to jail.
If you don't cut the crap tap off right now, it can and will, get worse.
wrote on 9 Jul 2021, 12:30 last edited byListen, you partisan, dim-witted bastard...and that's being kind, because you deserve worse, since you are much smarter than you are portraying yourself...This is an on-going problem. Whether it's happening to Trump, Tucker, whoever. You should have enough sense to know, that the pendulum will swing and then an already weaponized NSA will be used against people and things you value.
It's wrong. It needs to stop. Now. People need to go to jail.
If you don't cut the crap tap off right now, it can and will, get worse.
When Snowden broke the news about this happening to other people you completely ignored it. Because he was a traitor. But now that it's (still allegedly) happening to Tucker Carlson all of a sudden the story is "whether it's happening to whoever."
-
Listen, you partisan, dim-witted bastard...and that's being kind, because you deserve worse, since you are much smarter than you are portraying yourself...This is an on-going problem. Whether it's happening to Trump, Tucker, whoever. You should have enough sense to know, that the pendulum will swing and then an already weaponized NSA will be used against people and things you value.
It's wrong. It needs to stop. Now. People need to go to jail.
If you don't cut the crap tap off right now, it can and will, get worse.
When Snowden broke the news about this happening to other people you completely ignored it. Because he was a traitor. But now that it's (still allegedly) happening to Tucker Carlson all of a sudden the story is "whether it's happening to whoever."
wrote on 9 Jul 2021, 12:43 last edited by@aqua-letifer said in Spying?:
Listen, you partisan, dim-witted bastard...and that's being kind, because you deserve worse, since you are much smarter than you are portraying yourself...This is an on-going problem. Whether it's happening to Trump, Tucker, whoever. You should have enough sense to know, that the pendulum will swing and then an already weaponized NSA will be used against people and things you value.
It's wrong. It needs to stop. Now. People need to go to jail.
If you don't cut the crap tap off right now, it can and will, get worse.
When Snowden broke the news about this happening to other people you completely ignored it. Because he was a traitor. But now that it's (still allegedly) happening to Tucker Carlson all of a sudden the story is "whether it's happening to whoever."
Yeah, and did you believe everything about wikileaks when it first hit? I certainly didn't. And what the hell does that have to do with this case?
We're not talking a one-off or sudden disclosure of classified information. We're talking about something that has been proven to happen multiple times. We're talking about a series of events. We're talking normalization of criminal behavior by your government.
-
Right. So you agree that Carlson was spied upon...or at least "harvested" by spying, is that what you're saying?
I honestly don't know. It looks as though they were spying on Russians, and he started to talking to them, so they spied on him.
It seems to me that what is being done now pales into insignificance when compared to the behaviour of J. Edgar Hoover and his ilk, back in the golden age before modern liberalism raised its ugly head and ruined America.
wrote on 9 Jul 2021, 12:57 last edited by@doctor-phibes said in Spying?:
It looks as though they were spying on Russians, and he started to talking to them, so they spied on him.
Not quite. He was trying to arrange an interview with Putin - Chris Wallace got a Pulitzer (I believe) for that. This kind of communication is common by people in the press. NSA will monitor conversations of foreign nationals, but if they include a US citizen, he is to be not identified, unless a specific request is made to "unmask" him. There
isshould be a high bar for that kind of request.Note, the NSA's 'non-denial' specifically said that Carlson was "not a target." They didn't say that they didn't have and read his emails.
And that comes back to my point, who in NSA or elsewhere thought that bar had been reached, and why?