3 ms·

Watching so-called "liberals" defending the CIA is really the icing on the cake for the last 8 years. The tribalism in this country transcends principles. As lo

Watching so-called "liberals" defending the CIA is really the icing on the cake for the last 8 years. The tribalism in this country transcends principles. As long as your team is the one winning, it doesn't matter what it does. If your team is losing, no alliance is too strange, no principle is too important to be cast aside in pursuit of destroying the enemy. Do I like Donold Trump? Not a chance. Does my dislike of Trump make me more conducive to believe spies and spooks more than I did before November? Not really.

stinkytaco 10y ago
I think you are creating a strawman. One does not have to approve of the CIA to think that they are correct. Indeed, if one believes the CIA and NSA are adept at collecting intelligence on the American people, it follows that they might also be good at collecting it on Russia. There does not have to be an "alliance" to agree on established facts. Indeed, I would argue that your point that if one disproves of CIA tactics that everything the CIA says or asserts is now somehow in question is probably more "tribalistic" than viewing data and agreeing on facts. That smacks of conspiracy theory. Whether or not this makes any of this true is another story, but tribalism is a bad response.
- alistproducer2 10y ago
  How much one decides to believe a particular statement from organizations that claim never to be able to provide proof is entirely dependent on one's need for that statement to be true. If that statement provides for the destruction of "the other side" people are much more likely to believe it. >everything the CIA says or asserts is now somehow in question The CIA is an agency where everyone is taught to lie. They of course call it something else, tradcecraft, but they are, by profession, liars. A good spy knows to trust no one, especially not other spies.
  - gvd 10y ago
    What is the motive for the CIA to lie?
    - alistproducer2 10y ago
      Is this a serious question?

stinkytaco 10y ago

I think you are creating a strawman. One does not have to approve of the CIA to think that they are correct. Indeed, if one believes the CIA and NSA are adept at collecting intelligence on the American people, it follows that they might also be good at collecting it on Russia. There does not have to be an "alliance" to agree on established facts. Indeed, I would argue that your point that if one disproves of CIA tactics that everything the CIA says or asserts is now somehow in question is probably more "tribalistic" than viewing data and agreeing on facts. That smacks of conspiracy theory. Whether or not this makes any of this true is another story, but tribalism is a bad response.

alistproducer2 10y ago
How much one decides to believe a particular statement from organizations that claim never to be able to provide proof is entirely dependent on one's need for that statement to be true. If that statement provides for the destruction of "the other side" people are much more likely to believe it. >everything the CIA says or asserts is now somehow in question The CIA is an agency where everyone is taught to lie. They of course call it something else, tradcecraft, but they are, by profession, liars. A good spy knows to trust no one, especially not other spies.
- gvd 10y ago
  What is the motive for the CIA to lie?
  - alistproducer2 10y ago
    Is this a serious question?