Well, the author was at work? Her husband was at home?
Ergo, the author didn't have all of the information available when the article was written.
Shall I post a retraction with an equally misinformed slant, or can we agree that the wholesale collection of a great percentage of the electronic communications on Earth is an egregious breach of the public trust?
Note that she has now posted a "retraction" which, impressively, manages not to retract the money claim of her whole story (which is that the government was monitoring her family's Internet searches); no, instead, she's corrected it to (paraphrase) "unbeknownst to us, the government wasn't solely relying on my family's Internet searches".
Yet, in light of the current situation, considering the hyperbole surrounding this issue, I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt, whereas I am much less willing to grant the same amount of forgiveness to the US government.
The track record is not in the government's favor, unless you support the many questionably unconstitutional programs perpetuated by the US government, from seemingly innocuous "hoovering" of electronic communications the world over, to extra-judicial executions of Americans suspected of "terrorism," to endless proxy wars which only serve to enrich a few "vendors" while simultaneously depleting our national resources.
I refuse to adhere to the Bushism "yer either with us, or yer against us..."
It is not so cut & dried. Not so black & white.
It is possible to be anti terrorist while also being anti conflict proliferation.
I refuse to adhere to the Bushism "yer either with us, or yer against us..."
Funny, if anyone expresses skepticism about that anti-government narrative then they are labeled as NSA shills - exactly as in "you are either with us or against us".
Comments
Well, the author was at work? Her husband was at home?
Ergo, the author didn't have all of the information available when the article was written.
Shall I post a retraction with an equally misinformed slant, or can we agree that the wholesale collection of a great percentage of the electronic communications on Earth is an egregious breach of the public trust?
Note that she has now posted a "retraction" which, impressively, manages not to retract the money claim of her whole story (which is that the government was monitoring her family's Internet searches); no, instead, she's corrected it to (paraphrase) "unbeknownst to us, the government wasn't solely relying on my family's Internet searches".
Touché.
Yet, in light of the current situation, considering the hyperbole surrounding this issue, I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt, whereas I am much less willing to grant the same amount of forgiveness to the US government.
The track record is not in the government's favor, unless you support the many questionably unconstitutional programs perpetuated by the US government, from seemingly innocuous "hoovering" of electronic communications the world over, to extra-judicial executions of Americans suspected of "terrorism," to endless proxy wars which only serve to enrich a few "vendors" while simultaneously depleting our national resources.
I refuse to adhere to the Bushism "yer either with us, or yer against us..."
It is not so cut & dried. Not so black & white.
It is possible to be anti terrorist while also being anti conflict proliferation.
Funny, if anyone expresses skepticism about that anti-government narrative then they are labeled as NSA shills - exactly as in "you are either with us or against us".