General Discussion

R. Daneel Olivaw

(12,606 posts)

116. Did you re-read the OP?

Sun Aug 25, 2013, 01:27 AM

Aug 2013

You seem to be going off in a farther tangent.

I didn't offer a Shoulda, Coulda, woulda.

It was a comparative post.

"Bush didn't pay attention to the spy info they had on bin Laden and look how that turned out."

You're right...he tabled that intel, but that is not the query that the OP was asking.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

116 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

If somebody like Edward Snowden had procured files in 2001 that the BushCo NSA was spying [View all] R. Daneel Olivaw Aug 2013 OP

That would be different, of course. MannyGoldstein Aug 2013 #1

They didn't have to produce files. They told us they were spying on us. nt kelliekat44 Aug 2013 #68

Completely different. Apples and oranges. n/t Egalitarian Thug Aug 2013 #72

It is a small, but loud, minority who vehemently dislike Snowden and Greenwald. morningfog Aug 2013 #2

The most truthful, spin free statement I have seen Autumn Aug 2013 #3

It's the same 25-30 people who always rec up each other's posts. We fall for their Bullshit by leveymg Aug 2013 #4

You do realize this op has only 26 people who've rec'd it right? uponit7771 Aug 2013 #25

51 now. RetroLounge Aug 2013 #85

63 now Capt. Obvious Aug 2013 #110

Make me 56 cherokeeprogressive Aug 2013 #92

Good thinking. tblue Aug 2013 #27

I agree. Which is why I skip those posts now. You know it's going to be the same old sabrina 1 Aug 2013 #33

Already put a... prolific one on ignore Scootaloo Aug 2013 #39

Often they kick and rec their own. Savannahmann Aug 2013 #40

That's why most of them are on my ignore list. liberal_at_heart Aug 2013 #73

The reply to rec ratio is indicative. If you are here frequently enough and still have the capacity Egalitarian Thug Aug 2013 #74

Occasionally I think to myself, Quantess Aug 2013 #78

+1, I think I'll join you. /nt Marr Aug 2013 #84

Yes, when the purist left helps vote in the next reThug president who cut his horns and tucked his.. uponit7771 Aug 2013 #22

If they're the "purist left," are you the corrupt left? Scootaloo Aug 2013 #41

This reply was not constructive. I'm pitching in by supporting a congress that is progressive with.. uponit7771 Aug 2013 #97

"The purist left helps vote in the next reThug president who cut his horns" is constructive? Scootaloo Aug 2013 #98

zzzzzzz LondonReign2 Aug 2013 #52

yawn RetroLounge Aug 2013 #86

Maybe we stop picking shitty candidates. NuclearDem Aug 2013 #89

Want my vote Mr DINO? 99Forever Aug 2013 #90

CORRECT Skittles Aug 2013 #30

truth n/t RainDog Aug 2013 #69

I would say the same thing, but this is actually true of hardcore SUPPORTERS of these two idiots. AverageJoe90 Aug 2013 #80

^^^this^^^ nt LaydeeBug Aug 2013 #102

naw--they love the Dems like the Tontons loved Doc, but don't care what the Dems actually PASS or DO MisterP Aug 2013 #5

it seems like DU was pretty happy with Olbermann's reports... grasswire Aug 2013 #6

Heck, Greenwald himself was pretty popular among liberals back then. n/t BlueCheese Aug 2013 #7

Greenwald was and still is btw, very respected on the Left. It was the RIGHT who hated him sabrina 1 Aug 2013 #34

Since it was illegal before 2008, there's a huge difference Recursion Aug 2013 #8

if it's legal, why is it super-secret? nt grasswire Aug 2013 #9

So that the people we're snooping on don't find out how it works? Recursion Aug 2013 #12

WTF kind of question is this?! ...bookmarking no doubt. The amount of dissidence it takes to ask uponit7771 Aug 2013 #23

dissidence? grasswire Aug 2013 #26

Dissidence: "Disagreement, as of opinion or belief; dissent" Celefin Aug 2013 #103

(cognitive) dissonance? Jackpine Radical Aug 2013 #57

That's what he meant, I think. nt AverageJoe90 Aug 2013 #109

Cognitive dissidence :) - nt HardTimes99 Aug 2013 #113

So if it's legal, it's right? progressoid Aug 2013 #15

No, just not illegal and therefore doesn't fall under whistleblower status. If the public COULD have uponit7771 Aug 2013 #24

Neither the OP nor I said anything about whistle-blower status. progressoid Aug 2013 #47

Never said you did say anything about whistleblower uponit7771 Aug 2013 #48

Of course not. Recursion Aug 2013 #31

Sweet Jesus, do you see how lame that argument is? progressoid Aug 2013 #46

Presumably treestar Aug 2013 #62

"the Whistleblower Protection Act" Bwahahahaaa. progressoid Aug 2013 #63

He could have used avenues provided for treestar Aug 2013 #76

I would love to hear about these avenues. progressoid Aug 2013 #77

Lol, you forget that here and all over the Democratic forums, the vote to make legal sabrina 1 Aug 2013 #36

^^^^ Excellent summary of the core problem! Pholus Aug 2013 #45

It's not legal now either Hydra Aug 2013 #49

Maybe prosense can talk some sense into you LondonReign2 Aug 2013 #53

if it was WRONG before 2008, then it's wrong now.. frylock Aug 2013 #65

"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, Egalitarian Thug Aug 2013 #79

Only in your mind. Some of us have values, morality, and principles TheKentuckian Aug 2013 #95

If my aunt had a dick she'd be my uncle Pretzel_Warrior Aug 2013 #10

For all we know she does and is, but that wasn't the question. R. Daneel Olivaw Aug 2013 #11

Everyone knew UKUSA spies on the entire globe. In Wikipedia: DevonRex Aug 2013 #13

And did you know that private individuals can purchase SIGINT setups? DevonRex Aug 2013 #14

Of course you don't define what you mean by spying & you neglect to mention that what bush did WAS KittyWampus Aug 2013 #16

Conversely likewise. Fearless Aug 2013 #17

That's why the ambigious term "spying" is used in the first place. JoePhilly Aug 2013 #54

Bush 2 is the asshole who lied us into a war and enabled this fucking Stasi shit ...now this admin L0oniX Aug 2013 #18

I didn't like it when Obama voted for telecom spying immunity. joshcryer Aug 2013 #19

yeah, should've voted for McKKKlan hunh?! wow.... uponit7771 Aug 2013 #21

Nope. joshcryer Aug 2013 #37

the kind of simplistic response I've come to expect burnodo Aug 2013 #67

Yeah, because that EXACTLY what was said RetroLounge Aug 2013 #111

That was just one of MANY signs that he wasn't what he claimed to be... truebrit71 Aug 2013 #51

FUCK YES!! Especially if the idiot gave the secret evidence to the fuckin Chinese media!!! You're... uponit7771 Aug 2013 #20

I Like Spy Movies otohara Aug 2013 #28

no, which makes them major hypocrites Skittles Aug 2013 #29

Frankly I would welcome being spied on or even attacked by a drone - as long as it was Democratic Douglas Carpenter Aug 2013 #32

Yeah, you're right...dems advocated a war of agression and crashed the economy too... uponit7771 Aug 2013 #35

I bet I was campaigning for Democrats long before you were a gleam Douglas Carpenter Aug 2013 #38

Safe bet. Democracyinkind Aug 2013 #42

Given the general feeling in 2001 this bunch Thinkingabout Aug 2013 #43

kr Norrin Radd Aug 2013 #44

That's completely different, of course. :( Fire Walk With Me Aug 2013 #50

I already got an answer from one them here. Puzzledtraveller Aug 2013 #55

You fail to note the difference between Bush the Younger and Obama -- truedelphi Aug 2013 #66

Please define "spying" using specific details and techniques. JoePhilly Aug 2013 #56

They don't care. Bobbie Jo Aug 2013 #93

Bush's CIA would NEVER have groomed a Snowden to use against Bush. blm Aug 2013 #58

Nailed it. ucrdem Aug 2013 #94

Yep. It really is that simple, but, some refuse to put it all in its proper context. blm Aug 2013 #108

Of course not. City Lights Aug 2013 #59

If it were the same thing, I would not consider it something to get upset about treestar Aug 2013 #60

I read Glenn all the way back at Unclaimed Territory and then at Salon afterwards Fumesucker Aug 2013 #96

So i have to "hate" him in order to disagree with his actions? treestar Aug 2013 #106

I was responding to what you wrote, which was untrue Fumesucker Aug 2013 #107

If it was stolen. one_voice Aug 2013 #61

That's not what he did that was wrong. pnwmom Aug 2013 #64

Please document the information he has given Russia. Thank you. nt Mojorabbit Aug 2013 #71

Haven't you been reading the Guardian? pnwmom Aug 2013 #82

You can't be serious. Mojorabbit Aug 2013 #83

Exactly! What else do we need to say? n/t AverageJoe90 Aug 2013 #81

This thread is a sort of partial Who's Who? Stinky The Clown Aug 2013 #70

No LearningCurve Aug 2013 #75

Nope, they are hypocrites RetroLounge Aug 2013 #87

It is not a hypothetical. It happened and it is in the archives. Coyotl Aug 2013 #88

That would require principles and integrity. 99Forever Aug 2013 #91

But the sixpack the sixpack. R. Daneel Olivaw Aug 2013 #99

Still think that those rightwingers let into the tent will be content to merely "piss out"? Romulox Aug 2013 #100

Apparently that is not their style, and we are paying dearly for it. R. Daneel Olivaw Aug 2013 #101

FBI agent Coleen Rowley, former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds ? Frosty1 Aug 2013 #104

Nope. Hardly. I was aiming more at an exact NSA reveal. R. Daneel Olivaw Aug 2013 #105

Never Liked Greenwald in The Bush Years otohara Aug 2013 #112

Perhaps you need to re-read the OP. R. Daneel Olivaw Aug 2013 #114

Yeah Well, The Glut of Shoulda, Coulda, What If's otohara Aug 2013 #115

Did you re-read the OP? R. Daneel Olivaw Aug 2013 #116