reply to roc5955
Re: Who you gonna believe?
said by roc5955:You are correct and I was wrong, I was thinking about them being arrested. I went and checked Wikipedia and was reminded that in fact North and Poindexter were convicted and would have gone to jail, but their convictions were overturned on appeal because of, essentially, government prosecutorial stupidity.
Nobody served time regarding the Iran Contra affair. Look it up. I don't do other people's homework.
So, if you work for me, and you produce a report that turns out to be incorrect, and I convince my enterprise to take significant action based on that report, which by the way everyone else believes too, does that mean I "lied" because we all trusted your report when taking that action? Or does it mean you did a really crappy job and let me down and caused my enterprise significant harm?
Denying that Bush and others lied to Congress, the UN and others to get us into the Iraq debacle will not make it so. You can believe the misinformation, and that's just how crooked governments work.
For a really good and thoughtful analysis from the WashPost, see here.
Um, no, you can't. This is like saying you can prove someone guilty of a crime because they committed a crime like that in the past.
Regarding conspiracies, you can prove a conspiracy by looking at prior behavior, and extrapolating it to the current situation.
You need to read more about Binney. Check the New Yorker article, and the WikiPedia article on TrailBlazer. His deal is that he did not "build the system", he had his own proposal which the agency decided not to fund in favor of a competing proposal, and he wasn't even the chief of his failed proposal, just one of the team. Then he quit and went on a veritable speaking tour running down and throwing charges at the NSA about what they were doing.
As far as whistle blowers, if you read the article in WIRED here, »www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/0···eblower/ you will find this:
So I ask, who are you going to believe, the NSA's "official" spokesperson, or THE GUY WHO BUILT THE FREAKIN' SYSTEM?!?!?!
My opinion is that he is the classic disgruntled techie/scientist type who is pissed that his stupid employer did not support his obviously brilliant concept and went a different direction. But mags like Wired etc. just eat up his rants because they reinforce the narrative they have already programmed in their heads.