@tqbf who knows about the facts but the conversation they started is vitally important, IMO
@tqbf this is where I'd say YES. But I'm not sure if you actually agree there was enough evidence NSA crimes pre-Snowden
-
-
@bascule Unfortunately, he teamed up with a fabulist to disclose them, and publicized foreign ops. -
@tqbf and I don't care and that's a distraction from the NSA's wrongdoings -
@bascule Then the original question you asked that started this discussion was profoundly disingenuous and also super annoying. Feel bad. -
@tqbf I guess I'm making a moral judgment: Is [evil revealed] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [evil in revealing]? If so, latter is justified -
@bascule Why aren’t you mad at Snowden for releasing distracting data that wasn’t in the public interest? -
@tqbf because two other people tried to "do it right" (ish?) and failed in attracting a critical mass of public attention -
@bascule Huh? So it’s OK to lie, because… wait. I don’t follow that at all. What exactly are you trying to say? -
@tqbf I guess I am trying to say there's a gigantic fucking elephant in the room and you're spending a lot of time talking about the mouse - 5 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
@bascule I think there was a lot of evidence pre-Snowden, but that Snowden disclosures of e.g. Vzn metadata were galvanizing. - End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.