3 ms·
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 a
by 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 agoHow 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 agoWhat is the motive for the CIA to lie?
- alistproducer2 10y agoIs this a serious question?