Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, move, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, protect, rollback, Administrators, template
293,647
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 13:
Line 13: +
Talk:Barack Obama Controversies (view source)
Revision as of 14:04, March 24, 2017
, 14:04, March 24, 2017→British surveillance
::::::Indeed. There are two possibilities here. (1) They did it on their own out of concern for national security based on Trump's statements about NATO and known Russian contacts between people close to Trump. Having secured an intelligence product, they passed it along to their American counterparts who responded, "Please keep us apprised" (all totally legal). (2) As a disinterested 3rd party in a reciprocal favor agreement to skirt domestic law, controversy, and politics, as the US was in the Diana Spencer case. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''CIA v Trump updated score'':CIA 3, Trump 2]]</sup> 21:12, 21 March 2017 (EDT)
::::::Indeed. There are two possibilities here. (1) They did it on their own out of concern for national security based on Trump's statements about NATO and known Russian contacts between people close to Trump. Having secured an intelligence product, they passed it along to their American counterparts who responded, "Please keep us apprised" (all totally legal). (2) As a disinterested 3rd party in a reciprocal favor agreement to skirt domestic law, controversy, and politics, as the US was in the Diana Spencer case. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''CIA v Trump updated score'':CIA 3, Trump 2]]</sup> 21:12, 21 March 2017 (EDT)
::::::*Fox needs British approval to buy a satellite service, which is probably why they caved.[https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/a-conservative-news-crack-up-things-just-got-real-for-some-partisan-personalities/2017/03/23/87641024-0f42-11e7-9d5a-a83e627dc120_story.html] That the British put the screws on Fox shows that there is an intelligence relationship that was endangered by Napolitano's relevations. Otherwise, why would they care? [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 05:31, 24 March 2017 (EDT)
::::::*Fox needs British approval to buy a satellite service, which is probably why they caved.[https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/a-conservative-news-crack-up-things-just-got-real-for-some-partisan-personalities/2017/03/23/87641024-0f42-11e7-9d5a-a83e627dc120_story.html] That the British put the screws on Fox shows that there is an intelligence relationship that was endangered by Napolitano's relevations. Otherwise, why would they care? [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 05:31, 24 March 2017 (EDT)
:::::::Yes, open discussion of this program, which is ''intended'' to circumvent and violate a citizens civil rights on both sides of the Atlantic, and is the ''only'' reason it exists, can threaten a news gathering organization's ongoing relationship with government agencies whom they really are dependent on for their bread and butter-information and news. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''CIA v Trump updated score'':CIA 3, Trump 2]]</sup> 10:04, 24 March 2017 (EDT)