RayR
  • RayR
  • Herf-A-Holic Topic Starter
5 years ago
I know, I know, the apparachik parrots 🦜 here will say "nothing to see here folks, move on", "just conspiracy theories, don't read this stuff", "can't happen here, this is 'Merica" and "If you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear"...

In Defense of Tucker Carlson
By Andrew P. Napolitano

July 8, 2021

In March 2017, I received a tip from a friend in the intelligence community that the British Government Communications Headquarters, or GCHQ — the United Kingdom’s domestic and foreign spies — had been asked by the CIA to spy on candidate Donald Trump during the 2016 U.S presidential election campaign. He elaborated that Trump’s claim that “someone tapped my wires” was essentially true. The tip was potentially explosive, so I ran it past two other friends in the intelligence community, and they confirmed it.

When I went public with this, all hell broke loose in my professional life. The British spies denied spying on Trump, who by now was the president of the United States. Former Obama administration folks denied asking the Brits to do this and denied that it was done.

I was accused of fabricating this so as to make Trump look good. The prime minister of the U.K. had one of her deputies call my bosses at Fox and demand that I recant what I had said or be fired. Fox asked me to lay low for 10 days, which I did, but Fox backed me when I explained the verifications conducted by my sources.

My source spoke to British agents who confirmed that their colleagues had spied on Trump.

When I went back on air, my colleague Bill Hemmer asked if I stood by my revelations. I told Bill that getting beaten up in the press is the price one occasionally pays for challenging those in power. Two months later, four GCHQ agents told The Guardian newspaper of London that my revelations were true, and my professional life returned to normal.

More...

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2021/07/andrew-p-napolitano/in-defense-of-tucker-carlson/ 




Sham Surveillance Safeguards Vs. Tucker Carlson

Those quick to dismiss the TV host’s concerns that he is being spied on by the NSA should consider the sordid history of illicit surveillance.

JULY 2, 2021|12:01 AM
JAMES BOVARD

Fox News host Tucker Carlson was mocked on social media this week for stating that he had been told that the National Security Agency was reading his private emails and spying on him. The usual suspects called Carlson paranoid, because there are so many checks and balances to assure the feds would never illegally target a vexatious Biden critic. However, on Tuesday, a dissent by Travis LeBlanc, a member of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, revealed that one of the NSA’s most intrusive surveillance engines, XKeyscore, may be violating federal law and Americans’ rights and privacy.

In 2013, Edward Snowden leaked documents proving that XKeyscore was the surveillance state’s incarnation of paranoia. What did it take for the NSA to justify vacuuming up Americans’ emails and internet data? Merely detecting “someone searching the web for suspicious stuff.” The peril of that farcical standard was compounded because, as Snowden explained, NSA surveillance tools enabled him to “wiretap anyone, from you or your accountant, to a federal judge or even the president, if I had a personal email.” Thanks to its all-encompassing standard of “suspicious,” NSA has “assembled on the order of 20 trillion [email and phone] transactions about U.S. citizens with other U.S. citizens,” according to former NSA senior analyst William Binney. Six months after Snowden’s disclosures began, federal judge Richard Leon issued a ruling denouncing the NSA surveillance regime as “almost Orwellian”: “I cannot imagine a more indiscriminate and arbitrary invasion than this systematic and high-tech collection and retention of personal data on virtually every single citizen for purposes of querying and analyzing it without prior judicial approval.”

More...

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/sham-surveillance-safeguards-vs-tucker-carlson/ 

bgz
  • bgz
  • Herf-A-Holic
5 years ago
Fox News Host TuuuuUuckkkKerrrr CarrrrllllsooooN (FNHTC) has the SSG on him just like jOooOoOoneS!
RayR
  • RayR
  • Herf-A-Holic Topic Starter
5 years ago

Fox News Host TuuuuUuckkkKerrrr CarrrrllllsooooN (FNHTC) has the SSG on him just like jOooOoOoneS!

bgz wrote:



That was really informative and thought-provoking Ben, whatever you meant. Thanks#-o
bgz
  • bgz
  • Herf-A-Holic
5 years ago
All good. Just letting you know what your sources are really like.

They're all ssg gangstalk victims.
Speyside
RayR
  • RayR
  • Herf-A-Holic Topic Starter
5 years ago

Even Fox news states Tucker Carlson is entertainment , not news to be believed.

https://www.npr.org/2020/09/29/917747123/you-literally-cant-believe-the-facts-tucker-carlson-tells-you-so-say-fox-s-lawye 

Speyside wrote:



Did you expect the spineless lawyers to say anything else when it comes to controversial topics and opinions?
Carlson is a journalist, so should I view all journalists then as entertainers and nothing they say as believable?
If that's the measure then, whatever the leftist comrades at NPR say must be bunk too by default. Don't ya think?
Stupid people need to be told what to believe because they are incapable of critical thinking skills themselves.
Sunoverbeach
5 years ago
Journalists filled with integrity, honesty, and a burning drive to present the truth to the public? That's a g0dd@mn fairy tale, much like the news itself nowadays. Everyone's got an agenda, both right and left, and they all lean heavily to their chosen side. Yes, all journalists are entertainers. No, none of them should be believed. If you want to hunt for the grains of truth, I recommend using a magnifying glass with a bigass chunk of salt for a lens
fiddler898
5 years ago

Did you expect the spineless lawyers to say anything else when it comes to controversial topics and opinions?
Carlson is a journalist, so should I view all journalists then as entertainers and nothing they say as believable?
If that's the measure then, whatever the leftist comrades at NPR say must be bunk too by default. Don't ya think?
Stupid people need to be told what to believe because they are incapable of critical thinking skills themselves.

RayR wrote:



Isn’t that what TC does? Tell stupid people who watch him what to believe?

Starting with people who habitually employ Nazi equivalencies because they don’t know how to reason.
bgz
  • bgz
  • Herf-A-Holic
5 years ago

Isn’t that what TC does? Tell stupid people who watch him what to believe?

Starting with people who habitually employ Nazi equivalencies because they don’t know how to reason.

fiddler898 wrote:



He's a little slow, a lot racist, and probably has some form of aspd or another.

In otherwords... good luck.
RayR
  • RayR
  • Herf-A-Holic Topic Starter
5 years ago

Isn’t that what TC does? Tell stupid people who watch him what to believe?

Starting with people who habitually employ Nazi equivalencies because they don’t know how to reason.

fiddler898 wrote:



No, you're confused, you've never actually listened to TC or any of his guests for any length of time have you?
Most of the time he just lays out the facts as they occur, gives his opinion, and then you are left to employ your own critical thinking skills. It doesn't always hit the mark but journalism is like that.
It's far different from watching the clowns on CNN or MSNBC who cater to the low IQ crowd who crave being told what to believe.

I don't know who employed the Nazi equivalencies you are talking about, but I've found that if the equivalency is done with devastating accurately and not frivolously, then who do you have to blame for resembling a National Socialist?
fiddler898
5 years ago

No, you're confused, you've never actually listened to TC or any of his guests for any length of time have you?
Most of the time he just lays out the facts as they occur, gives his opinion, and then you are left to employ your own critical thinking skills. It doesn't always hit the mark but journalism is like that.
It's far different from watching the clowns on CNN or MSNBC who cater to the low IQ crowd who crave being told what to believe.

I don't know who employed the Nazi equivalencies you are talking about, but I've found that if the equivalency is done with devastating accurately and not frivolously, then who do you have to blame for resembling a National Socialist?

RayR wrote:



The words "America's Stasi" are yours. But I understand why you can’t remember that. It was so long ago…
Smooth light
5 years ago
urinallist is all they are, Left and Right. If it ain't live and you see it, it's just covered with codswallop.💩🤮🤥... hahaha 🤣
RayR
  • RayR
  • Herf-A-Holic Topic Starter
5 years ago

The words "America's Stasi" are yours. But I understand why you can’t remember that. It was so long ago…

fiddler898 wrote:



I don't take credit for comparing the burgeoning American national security state to the old East German domestic spy bureaucracy. It's been done many times before
Sunoverbeach
5 years ago
So you're just following others and don't have an original thought of your own? Color me shocked.

You also had the other thread titled with a comparison to Nazi Germany. That was even longer though and rememberment be hard
RayR
  • RayR
  • Herf-A-Holic Topic Starter
5 years ago

So you're just following others and don't have an original thought of your own? Color me shocked.

You also had the other thread titled with a comparison to Nazi Germany. That was even longer though and rememberment be hard

Sunoverbeach wrote:



When the comparison is judicious why does anyone have to invent a new one? Just because the analogy gives someone the willies? And it should as some people fool themselves into believing it can't happen in America even when it's happening.

I'll tell you what, I'll let you come up with an original thought as a comparison. You have a lot of authoritarian countries to choose from past and present and even fictional stories.
Sunoverbeach
5 years ago
Why would I need to compare anything? I'm not the one trying to "enlighten" a couple of dozen cigar enthusiasts by way of textual diarrhea. What's the end goal here anyway? Either you're looking for an argument or you really think these pearls of wisdom will create converts to the Cbid Church of Ray? What then? Maybe you have your eyes set on the Nantucket Needlepoint Club

I'm concerned about some of the actions of the current administration. I was concerned about some of the actions of the previous administration, and the one before that, and before that. However, I'm terrified at the increasingly pervasive view of too many damn people that anyone who doesn't think in a like manner as them is an enemy. That chit needs to stop. You got an article with suggestions on how to counteract that type of behavior, then by all means post that fugger.

More immediately, I'm just sick of your tired, repetitive shtick
Dg west deptford
5 years ago
Yo!

How do I get into the Nantucket needlepoint club?


That sounds way funner than this place
Abrignac
5 years ago

Even Fox news states Tucker Carlson is entertainment , not news to be believed.

https://www.npr.org/2020/09/29/917747123/you-literally-cant-believe-the-facts-tucker-carlson-tells-you-so-say-fox-s-lawye 

Speyside wrote:




Thanks a poor source to quote. Check the source within the source and ask yourself why?
Abrignac
5 years ago
Truth has always been stranger than fiction. (rolls eyes and walks off)
Speyside
5 years ago
Not really, as they were directly quoting the lawyers for FOX. But you have to read the article to know that.
Users browsing this topic