Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

randome

(34,845 posts)

1. Of course you can never KNOW who is telling the truth.

Reply to YeahSureRight (Original post)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 06:03 AM

Jun 2013

So you look at evidence. Absent evidence, you look at character, motivations.

So far there is no evidence that the NSA is 'watching our thoughts form as we type' as Snowden says.

So far there is no evidence that the NSA is downloading the Internet on a daily basis as he implied.

But there is evidence that Snowden did not have the access he claimed or he would have furnished us with something to support his claims.

There is evidence that Snowden doesn't understand that 'direct access' most likely means secure FTP servers.

So, weighing all the evidence (or the lack of it), it doesn't seem like much to get upset about.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font]
[hr]

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

27 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

What really is the truth now? [View all] YeahSureRight Jun 2013 OP

Of course you can never KNOW who is telling the truth. randome Jun 2013 #1

You think you know the truth when infact the only truth you know is what tey tell you YeahSureRight Jun 2013 #5

I'm less inclined to believe anything Snowden says. randome Jun 2013 #8

I know WovenGems Jun 2013 #11

What I know is that I used to operate a system that could listen, identify, locate YeahSureRight Jun 2013 #15

Thank you WovenGems Jun 2013 #18

When I left that job 20 years ago they were already starting to work YeahSureRight Jun 2013 #23

Well, we can look at the evidence of course... Pholus Jun 2013 #9

The potential for abuse is always present. randome Jun 2013 #10

The potential for abuse is mitigated if there is a forced disposal of information. Pholus Jun 2013 #13

I don't see storing numbers as 'lifelong surveillance' but yeah, I can see the need for disposal. randome Jun 2013 #17

You're damned by your associates in those "numbers" Pholus Jun 2013 #20

Truth-one side does not want the democratic party to keep the senate. Truth-Ed Markey for Senate graham4anything Jun 2013 #2

Fact: Our nation has codified a privacy ethic known as the fourth amendment. geckosfeet Jun 2013 #3

It really is just a piece of parchment with old faded words written on it now nothing more. YeahSureRight Jun 2013 #6

Then the truth is relative. geckosfeet Jun 2013 #7

Of course it is relative YeahSureRight Jun 2013 #21

Correct on al counts. geckosfeet Jun 2013 #27

Events can not be lied about -- for example if gasoline goes up then we all know KurtNYC Jun 2013 #4

I tend to not trust bought and paid for politicians. The Link Jun 2013 #12

Figure out what the worst is and imagine things are 3.4 times worse than that. el_bryanto Jun 2013 #14

2+2=4 Puzzledtraveller Jun 2013 #16

Truth is like pornography. kentuck Jun 2013 #19

My method for discerning truth - it is the polar opposite of whatever republicans say rurallib Jun 2013 #22

my bet is that the Ron Pauler is lying. n/t Whisp Jun 2013 #24

A sprkly wibbly wobbly thing IN THE MIDDLE of soemthing else. sibelian Jun 2013 #25

You may have hit upon the crux of the matter. Turbineguy Jun 2013 #26