Re: The Spy Factory
Dogs. Not my intent to throw a rock. But the inference from your post was that the NSA is a standup agency. Although I am certain that there are many fine men and women at NSA, like any agency, corporation, or group in general, a culture of groupthink develops. That’s immutable observation of human nature. We can’t even argue the human nature aspect as the agency is not run by a human. It’s run by a politician. An unelected beaurocrat. OK, I’m done with being "cute" to break the ice. Let me be frank. It’s not my intent to throw rocks, engage in battle, or broadside you. But what the NSA has done is admitted and documented. And I spent a lot of personal energy on this issue. So please try to understand how demoralizing it can be to read a post that attacks a position that is well substantiated with facts, not opinion. Facts. The case is in the court system now. The Obama adminstration and justice have carried the pail and are fighting the 4th amendment claims and the liabilities of AT&T et. al. It’s not imgagined, overblown, cooked up.
I do not wish ill will with you. But it was a real kick in the groin to read your post, complete with the insinuation that the NSA case was somehow a tin-hat concoction. If I inferred incorrectly, then you have my acknowledgement of my error and my apology. If I did not, then I will stand firm on this issue in strong disagreement.
The "lizard crap" drives me absolutely bananas too. Although it is a red herring for one to claim "freedom of speech" (this is a private site with a SPECIFIC agenda) I think it’s important to let other’s know that many of us find such claims to be well, absurd. I’ve always believed that truth, when presented unfiltered, beats BS. People will see people such as yourself and I using logic, reason, and evidence to defeat the concept of a cabel of Iguanas taking over the world. Not because it merely "sounds absurd" but because it is such an absurdly easy claim to defeat. Sunshine sanitize, right?
Now, as to other claims, some I entertain. That’s a key word. I entertain. That means "on the fence because of prima facie evidence to the claim". One example is that of the Federal Reserve being a private banking cartel. Not the first time in history that it has happened. Not the last either.
The question, the ONLY relevant question then is: "Is the argument of the Federal Reserve being an abusive cartel with a hidden agenda germaine to this forum"? Or really, just insert any other argument that we might agree, disagree or question. That’s not only a fair question, but one that NEEDS to be championed. If the answer is NO, then it has no place here. If the answer is Yes, then it should be discussed.
I hope that you don’t feel ill as a result of this disagreement. It’s not my intent. And if you think, which I do not believe that you think, that somehow I have lost any respect for you out of a disagreement then let me put it this way. If that were my modus operandi in life then I’d have no friends. LOL
The litmus test, IMHO should be "Is this topic germaine to the Three E’s"? If it is then we should not only tolerate the topic, but welcome it. Right?
I do not have issues with those that served. My two best friends are ex-NAVY (Never Again Volunteer Yourself. LOL) and a very close friend being a MARINE reservist (My Ass Rides In Navy Equipment). I myself tried to get a 6 year hitch with the Air Force out of HS but they tossed me because I flunked the medical. So for the record I have no issues with men and women that serve, save those that act unconsciable in the line of duty. But, we should follow the "no broad brush" rule. However, you will see me, if it is germaine, take strong issue at time with the Pentagon and senior military leadership. If and when I do, then please do not take offense to it. It’s not directed at you or any of the rank and file. Why? Because I’ll bet that while serving, you probably never attended any of the Pentagon Rank & File TownHalls on military policy. Just a hunch.