On 2022-03-16 1:04 p.m., Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote:
> The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote in
> news:0e743hp5vp3im3hrfu31inmt8uu9qot5da@4ax.com:
>
>> On Mon, 14 Mar 2022 09:58:39 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
>> Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> But Ukraine is *certainly* winning the propaganda war, and Putin
>>> has been batshit crazy and dangerous for decades.
>>>
>> Very true - and is there any doubt at all that NATO would be in
>> there with bells if Putin didn't have nukes and Ukraine didn't?
>
> Quite a bit of doubt, actually, since many NATO members are notable
> for their cowardice and incompetent leadership.

Says the coward hiding behind is killfile.

On 16/03/2022 12.30, The Horny Goat wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Mar 2022 16:05:28 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
> <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>
>> However, if what you want to do is to suppress protest, then,
>> for example, stirring up public hysteria against Black Lives
>> Matter on the basis that they're making it more difficult for the
>> police to fight crime, and so they're clearly working for Moscow
>> to destroy America... is just the thing. It worked fine and dandy
>> during the McCarthy era.
>
> There's one helluva difference between saying BLM is weakening America
> and saying they're on the Soviet\\\\\\\Russian payroll....
>
> Which WAS what Wisconsin Joe was alleging back in the day.

"Tail-gunner Joe", if you please.

--
Michael F. Stemper
No animals were harmed in the composition of this message.

On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 11:15:06 PM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 5:21:24 PM UTC-6, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote:
> > Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in
> > news:918d7709-c058-48b9...@googlegroups.com:
> > > On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 2:43:19 PM UTC-6, Jibini Kula
> > > Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote:
> > >
> > >> Petey isn't interested in facts, only in his violent revenge
> > >> fantasies. Like most lefties.
> > >
> > > It's good to hear that I have a lot of company.
> > >
> > Sadly, you do.
> Speaking of violent revenge fantasies, I was using Google to look
> up a model for the future fate of a post-Putin Russia, if the West
> had to exert itself to bring that about.
>
> I had thought that perhaps the Morgenthau Plan was a fiction cooked
> up by Nazi propagandists... but I was disappointed to learn otherwise.

It is mentioned in Churchill's history of the second world war. He did not
approve.

Nor would he approve of your ... ideas.

William Hyde

On 3/16/2022 3:40 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Mar 2022 10:37:10 -0700, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>
> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 14 Mar 2022 13:55:52 -0400, J. Clarke
>> <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> So you're saying that someone who is acting on behalf of a foreign
>>> government due to blackmail should be considered a criminal due to
>>> failure to register as a foreign agent?
>>>
>>> That's blaming the victim, and playing into the foreign government's
>>> hands.
>>
>> If a US citizen being blackmailed goes ahead and does what the
>> blackmailer wants without seeking protection from the authorities for
>> himself and/or loved ones what would YOU call it?
>>
>> What would you call it if the blackmail was of a politician being told
>> that those pictures of him and the 'honey trap' in his last trip to
>> Moscow would be published? Not everybody is as forthright as that
>> Canadian diplomat in the 1950s who when so confronted asked to order
>> more copies to show his buddies back home.
>
> This is the same logic that says that homosexuality should be outlawed
> because homosexuals present a security risk because they can be
> blakmailed because homosexuality is illegal.
>
> You don't punish the victim. You punish the victimizer.

That is not the rule of any political battles that I have seen in my
life. Always, always, always punish the victim.

Lynn

J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote in
news:doi43hpdrah65ci2iku1ujeu2gg14p9nn8@4ax.com:

> On Wed, 16 Mar 2022 10:37:10 -0700, The Horny Goat
> <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 14 Mar 2022 13:55:52 -0400, J. Clarke
>><jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>So you're saying that someone who is acting on behalf of a
>>>foreign government due to blackmail should be considered a
>>>criminal due to failure to register as a foreign agent?
>>>
>>>That's blaming the victim, and playing into the foreign
>>>government's hands.
>>
>>If a US citizen being blackmailed goes ahead and does what the
>>blackmailer wants without seeking protection from the
>>authorities for himself and/or loved ones what would YOU call
>>it?
>>
>>What would you call it if the blackmail was of a politician
>>being told that those pictures of him and the 'honey trap' in
>>his last trip to Moscow would be published? Not everybody is as
>>forthright as that Canadian diplomat in the 1950s who when so
>>confronted asked to order more copies to show his buddies back
>>home.
>
> This is the same logic that says that homosexuality should be
> outlawed because homosexuals present a security risk because
> they can be blakmailed because homosexuality is illegal.
>
> You don't punish the victim. You punish the victimizer.
>
That generally requires the cooperation of the victim, however,
which generally has serious consequences.

The question isn't should we punish the blackmailer so much as are
we willing to not punish the victim to do so? Particularly since
sometimes, the crimes the victim is being blackmailed over are more
serious than the blackmail.

Expecting people to report blackmail when they, the victim, will go
to prison, or have their family or career destroyed, isn't very
realisitic.

--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote in
news:t0tjqd$7e8$1@dont-email.me:

> On 3/16/2022 3:40 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>> On Wed, 16 Mar 2022 10:37:10 -0700, The Horny Goat
>> <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 14 Mar 2022 13:55:52 -0400, J. Clarke
>>> <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> So you're saying that someone who is acting on behalf of a
>>>> foreign government due to blackmail should be considered a
>>>> criminal due to failure to register as a foreign agent?
>>>>
>>>> That's blaming the victim, and playing into the foreign
>>>> government's hands.
>>>
>>> If a US citizen being blackmailed goes ahead and does what the
>>> blackmailer wants without seeking protection from the
>>> authorities for himself and/or loved ones what would YOU call
>>> it?
>>>
>>> What would you call it if the blackmail was of a politician
>>> being told that those pictures of him and the 'honey trap' in
>>> his last trip to Moscow would be published? Not everybody is
>>> as forthright as that Canadian diplomat in the 1950s who when
>>> so confronted asked to order more copies to show his buddies
>>> back home.
>>
>> This is the same logic that says that homosexuality should be
>> outlawed because homosexuals present a security risk because
>> they can be blakmailed because homosexuality is illegal.
>>
>> You don't punish the victim. You punish the victimizer.
>
> That is not the rule of any political battles that I have seen
> in my life. Always, always, always punish the victim.
>
Unless they are non-caucasian, and not straight men, who *can't* be
victims of anything, and therefore must be punished at all times.

--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

William Hyde <wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote in
news:47651a6f-ab82-44f1-92ad-ea7fb06cee18n@googlegroups.com:

> On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 11:15:06 PM UTC-4, Quadibloc
> wrote:
>> On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 5:21:24 PM UTC-6, Jibini Kula
>> Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote:
>> > Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in
>> > news:918d7709-c058-48b9...@googlegroups.com:
>> > > On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 2:43:19 PM UTC-6, Jibini Kula
>> > > Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> Petey isn't interested in facts, only in his violent
>> > >> revenge fantasies. Like most lefties.
>> > >
>> > > It's good to hear that I have a lot of company.
>> > >
>> > Sadly, you do.
>> Speaking of violent revenge fantasies, I was using Google to
>> look up a model for the future fate of a post-Putin Russia, if
>> the West had to exert itself to bring that about.
>>
>> I had thought that perhaps the Morgenthau Plan was a fiction
>> cooked up by Nazi propagandists... but I was disappointed to
>> learn otherwise.
>
>
> It is mentioned in Churchill's history of the second world war.
> He did not approve.
>
> Nor would he approve of your ... ideas.
>
I think the term you're looking for is "modest proposal."

--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

On 2022-03-16 2:40 p.m., J. Clarke wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Mar 2022 10:37:10 -0700, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>
> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 14 Mar 2022 13:55:52 -0400, J. Clarke
>> <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> So you're saying that someone who is acting on behalf of a foreign
>>> government due to blackmail should be considered a criminal due to
>>> failure to register as a foreign agent?
>>>
>>> That's blaming the victim, and playing into the foreign government's
>>> hands.
>>
>> If a US citizen being blackmailed goes ahead and does what the
>> blackmailer wants without seeking protection from the authorities for
>> himself and/or loved ones what would YOU call it?
>>
>> What would you call it if the blackmail was of a politician being told
>> that those pictures of him and the 'honey trap' in his last trip to
>> Moscow would be published? Not everybody is as forthright as that
>> Canadian diplomat in the 1950s who when so confronted asked to order
>> more copies to show his buddies back home.
>
> This is the same logic that says that homosexuality should be outlawed
> because homosexuals present a security risk because they can be
> blakmailed because homosexuality is illegal.
>
> You don't punish the victim. You punish the victimizer.

A person who commits a crime to cover up something they don't want known
is not just a victim. And needless to say, you can't actually punish a
foreign government for it's espionage activities.

On Wednesday, 16 March 2022 at 17:27:42 UTC, The Horny Goat wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Mar 2022 09:58:39 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
> <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >But Ukraine is *certainly* winning the propaganda war, and Putin has
> >been batshit crazy and dangerous for decades.
> >
> Very true - and is there any doubt at all that NATO would be in there
> with bells if Putin didn't have nukes and Ukraine didn't?

NATO is an alliance whose function is to defend NATO.

And you can't join NATO to get help with an existing
war / occupation.

> Fact is there were western promises made to Ukraine when she gave up
> her nukes - to what extent have these been honored?

On Thursday, March 17, 2022 at 1:03:47 AM UTC-6, David Johnston wrote:
> And needless to say, you can't actually punish a
> foreign government for it's espionage activities.

Why, *certainly* you can do so, unless that foreign country
has nukes. Engaging in or promoting criminal activities on
one's territory can be taken as an act of war.

Admittedly, the foreign countries we were thinking about
do have nukes, so this is really only a technical correction.

John Savard

On Thursday, March 17, 2022 at 3:23:41 AM UTC-6, Robert Carnegie wrote:
> On Wednesday, 16 March 2022 at 17:27:42 UTC, The Horny Goat wrote:
> > On Mon, 14 Mar 2022 09:58:39 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
> > <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >But Ukraine is *certainly* winning the propaganda war, and Putin has
> > >been batshit crazy and dangerous for decades.
> > >
> > Very true - and is there any doubt at all that NATO would be in there
> > with bells if Putin didn't have nukes and Ukraine didn't?
> NATO is an alliance whose function is to defend NATO.
>
> And you can't join NATO to get help with an existing
> war / occupation.

And, of course, if Putin didn't have nukes and Ukraine _did_...

Ukraine wouldn't even _need_ any help.

But then Putin wouldn't be _that_ stupid.

John Savard

Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in
news:6996bb15-963c-45e5-a1c6-071164f690d3n@googlegroups.com:

> But then Putin wouldn't be _that_ stupid.
>
That is not entirely clear any more.

--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

On 2022-03-17 7:40 a.m., Quadibloc wrote:
> On Thursday, March 17, 2022 at 1:03:47 AM UTC-6, David Johnston wrote:
>> And needless to say, you can't actually punish a
>> foreign government for it's espionage activities.
>
> Why, *certainly* you can do so, unless that foreign country
> has nukes. Engaging in or promoting criminal activities on
> one's territory can be taken as an act of war.

If you are a hypocrite.

>
> Admittedly, the foreign countries we were thinking about
> do have nukes, so this is really only a technical correction.
>
> John Savard

On 2022-03-17 10:16 a.m., Paul S Person wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Mar 2022 01:03:41 -0600, David Johnston
> <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2022-03-16 2:40 p.m., J. Clarke wrote:
>>> On Wed, 16 Mar 2022 10:37:10 -0700, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 14 Mar 2022 13:55:52 -0400, J. Clarke
>>>> <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> So you're saying that someone who is acting on behalf of a foreign
>>>>> government due to blackmail should be considered a criminal due to
>>>>> failure to register as a foreign agent?
>>>>>
>>>>> That's blaming the victim, and playing into the foreign government's
>>>>> hands.
>>>>
>>>> If a US citizen being blackmailed goes ahead and does what the
>>>> blackmailer wants without seeking protection from the authorities for
>>>> himself and/or loved ones what would YOU call it?
>>>>
>>>> What would you call it if the blackmail was of a politician being told
>>>> that those pictures of him and the 'honey trap' in his last trip to
>>>> Moscow would be published? Not everybody is as forthright as that
>>>> Canadian diplomat in the 1950s who when so confronted asked to order
>>>> more copies to show his buddies back home.
>>>
>>> This is the same logic that says that homosexuality should be outlawed
>>> because homosexuals present a security risk because they can be
>>> blakmailed because homosexuality is illegal.
>>>
>>> You don't punish the victim. You punish the victimizer.
>>
>> A person who commits a crime to cover up something they don't want known
>> is not just a victim. And needless to say, you can't actually punish a
>> foreign government for it's espionage activities.
>
> We aren't asking Putin's agents to commit a crime.
>
> Only to register as Putin's agents.
>
> And only if required to by law.

<sigh> The crime in question is being a unregistered agent of a foreign
power.

On Thursday, March 17, 2022 at 11:31:44 AM UTC-6, David Johnston wrote:

> If you are a hypocrite.

What is hypocritical about the principle that the
police are allowed to spy on criminals (democratic
nations may spy on tyrants) but for criminals to
spy on the police is another crime?

Tyrants, after all, are liable to commit acts of
aggression. By definition, if a democratic nation
decides one fine day to liberate the people of a
tyranny, it's regime change, not aggression.

Well, I suppose that _could_ look like hypocrisy
to a naive individual. But if one has sufficiently
vivid memories of, say, World War II, the Soviet
invasions of Hungary and Czechoslovakia, the
attempt by surrounding Arab nations to drive
Israel into the sea shortly after it was created,
the North Korean invasion of South Korea... it
won't seem one bit hypocritical.

Plus vivid memories of the revelations of Igor
Gouzenko and the Soviet atom bomb tests.

Given *that* mindset, the notions that...

- tyranny should not exist, because tyrants are
madmen who are going to invade your
country if you don't care what they're doing
to their own people

- all countries should be democracies

- but if somehow the people are so bigoted
that they would democratically elect a leader
who would wage war against a democratic ally
of ours, clearly they're untutored savages who
require a period of colonial tutelage prior to being
granted self-government

instead of seeming hypocritical, paternalistic,
or even racist... are just common sense on the
part of free men who want to survive in peace.

So I can admit that there's sort of a problem,
but I really don't think there's an alternative.

The world would be a quieter place - and much
better off - with total and absolute Western
hegemony. Where Russia, China, and every other
place on Earth has a government the United
States and Canada and Britain and Australia
benignly smile upon and thoroughly approve of.

So France and Spain are either partitioned, or
at the least they adopt a minority languages
policy similar to Canada's towards French...

So Brazil becomes a model of exemplary
conduct towards its indigenous people and
wise stewardship of the Amazon region...

India is partitioned further, peacefully this time,
so that Sikhs are no longer a target of violence
and discrimination, and "communal violence"
against other minorities becomes utterly
nonexistent...

and thus, our newspapers are filled with positive
headlines of heartwarming human interest
stories or of technological progress, for there are
no more wars or rumors of wars, just people
living their lives in peace and doing what they
should, under the watchful eye of the enlightened
nations of the OECD. (Of course, that will require
_crime_ as well as war to be wiped out, but the
cost savings from the elimination of war should
free up the resources to seriously address the chief
root cause of crime, economic inequality. If one
has the following three things: full equality for
minorities, a booming economy, and ferocious
punishments for those who still commit crimes of
aggression, then given that the first two things give
the disadvantaged opportunities to do well through
honest work, the crime problem ought to diminish,
shouldn't it?)

So that I will not need to pick up a newspaper
again, and see a story in it with which I am
compelled to declare that I am not amused.

John Savard

On Thursday, March 17, 2022 at 10:22:28 AM UTC-6, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Mar 2022 16:43:49 -0400, J. Clarke
> <jclarke...@gmail.com> wrote:

> >I really wish people would read these alleged "promises" before
> >spouting off. The only "promise" was to whine to the UN Security
> >Council.

> Where, it should be noted, Putin has a veto.

Ah, but although the permanent members of the Security
Council do have veto powers, *these do not extend to any
resolution which concerns that member directly*.

Which means it's the *Chinese* veto we have to worry
about.

John Savard

On 2022-03-17 3:19 p.m., Quadibloc wrote:
> On Thursday, March 17, 2022 at 11:31:44 AM UTC-6, David Johnston wrote:
>
>> If you are a hypocrite.
>
> What is hypocritical about the principle that the
> police are allowed to spy on criminals (democratic
> nations may spy on tyrants) but for criminals to
> spy on the police is another crime?

You...do know that democratic nations don't just spy on the
dictatorships, right?

On Thursday, March 17, 2022 at 6:44:00 PM UTC-6, David Johnston wrote:

> You...do know that democratic nations don't just spy on the
> dictatorships, right?

On some occasions, the United States has taken exception to what
it termed espionage activity against it on the part of Israel. So I'm
not really advocating a change in U.S. policy.

John Savard

On 2022-03-17 6:56 p.m., Quadibloc wrote:
> On Thursday, March 17, 2022 at 6:44:00 PM UTC-6, David Johnston wrote:
>
>> You...do know that democratic nations don't just spy on the
>> dictatorships, right?
>
> On some occasions, the United States has taken exception to what
> it termed espionage activity against it on the part of Israel. So I'm
> not really advocating a change in U.S. policy.

Yes, I know you aren't advocating for an end to hypocrisy.

On Thursday, March 17, 2022 at 1:32:38 PM UTC-4, David Johnston wrote:
> On 2022-03-17 10:16 a.m., Paul S Person wrote:
> > On Thu, 17 Mar 2022 01:03:41 -0600, David Johnston
> > <davidjo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 2022-03-16 2:40 p.m., J. Clarke wrote:
> >>> On Wed, 16 Mar 2022 10:37:10 -0700, The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On Mon, 14 Mar 2022 13:55:52 -0400, J. Clarke
> >>>> <jclarke...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> So you're saying that someone who is acting on behalf of a foreign
> >>>>> government due to blackmail should be considered a criminal due to
> >>>>> failure to register as a foreign agent?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> That's blaming the victim, and playing into the foreign government's
> >>>>> hands.
> >>>>
> >>>> If a US citizen being blackmailed goes ahead and does what the
> >>>> blackmailer wants without seeking protection from the authorities for
> >>>> himself and/or loved ones what would YOU call it?
> >>>>
> >>>> What would you call it if the blackmail was of a politician being told
> >>>> that those pictures of him and the 'honey trap' in his last trip to
> >>>> Moscow would be published? Not everybody is as forthright as that
> >>>> Canadian diplomat in the 1950s who when so confronted asked to order
> >>>> more copies to show his buddies back home.
> >>>
> >>> This is the same logic that says that homosexuality should be outlawed
> >>> because homosexuals present a security risk because they can be
> >>> blakmailed because homosexuality is illegal.
> >>>
> >>> You don't punish the victim. You punish the victimizer.
> >>
> >> A person who commits a crime to cover up something they don't want known
> >> is not just a victim. And needless to say, you can't actually punish a
> >> foreign government for it's espionage activities.
> >
> > We aren't asking Putin's agents to commit a crime.
> >
> > Only to register as Putin's agents.
> >
> > And only if required to by law.
> <sigh> The crime in question is being a unregistered agent of a foreign
> power.

I know I'm the guy that raised the idea the Tucker should register.

However, the reality is that being sympathetic to Russia isn't a crime,
and neither is being a liar. Short some evidence that he's
taking orders from Moscow, or getting some quid pro quo, he's not
an agent, merely a fellow traveler and useful idiot.

Useful to the extent that clips of his Fox show are regularly aired on
Russian State TV.

Pt

On Thursday, March 17, 2022 at 8:44:00 PM UTC-4, David Johnston wrote:
> On 2022-03-17 3:19 p.m., Quadibloc wrote:
> > On Thursday, March 17, 2022 at 11:31:44 AM UTC-6, David Johnston wrote:
> >
> >> If you are a hypocrite.
> >
> > What is hypocritical about the principle that the
> > police are allowed to spy on criminals (democratic
> > nations may spy on tyrants) but for criminals to
> > spy on the police is another crime?
> You...do know that democratic nations don't just spy on the
> dictatorships, right?

Unless I'm missing the <sarcasm> marks, 'Oh you sweet
summer child."

Pt

On Thursday, March 17, 2022 at 9:34:33 PM UTC-6, pete...@gmail.com wrote:

> I know I'm the guy that raised the idea the Tucker should register.
>
> However, the reality is that being sympathetic to Russia isn't a crime,
> and neither is being a liar. Short some evidence that he's
> taking orders from Moscow, or getting some quid pro quo, he's not
> an agent, merely a fellow traveler and useful idiot.
>
> Useful to the extent that clips of his Fox show are regularly aired on
> Russian State TV.

Yes, although this has only started recently.

Of course, though, the clips they show are carefully selected, so
they don't get a balanced figure of the place Tucker Carlson
occupies among American journalists.

John Savard

On 3/17/2022 5:43 PM, David Johnston wrote:
> On 2022-03-17 3:19 p.m., Quadibloc wrote:
>> On Thursday, March 17, 2022 at 11:31:44 AM UTC-6, David Johnston wrote:
>>
>>> If you are a hypocrite.
>>
>> What is hypocritical about the principle that the
>> police are allowed to spy on criminals (democratic
>> nations may spy on tyrants) but for criminals to
>> spy on the police is another crime?
>
> You...do know that democratic nations don't just spy on the
> dictatorships, right?

You are arguing with someone who lives an undetermined number of
universes away from ours.

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> schrieb:
> On Thursday, March 17, 2022 at 6:44:00 PM UTC-6, David Johnston wrote:
>
>> You...do know that democratic nations don't just spy on the
>> dictatorships, right?
>
> On some occasions, the United States has taken exception to what
> it termed espionage activity against it on the part of Israel.

Not only that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Parliamentary_Committee_investigation_of_the_NSA_spying_scandal

At the time, Obama was widely, if somewhat inaccurately, quoted
as saying "Yes, we scan".

Paul S Person <psperson1@ix.netcom.invalid> wrote in
news:n7b93hdvilgt6ruuhgd7qpt6gk3prhi2h0@4ax.com:

> On Thu, 17 Mar 2022 09:03:43 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
> Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in
>>news:6996bb15-963c-45e5-a1c6-071164f690d3n@googlegroups.com:
>>
>>> But then Putin wouldn't be _that_ stupid.
>>>
>>That is not entirely clear any more.
>
> He's making noises like Stalin did about anyone who disagrees
> with him.

When he's conherent enough to tell exactly what he's saying.
>
> The question may then be, have the Russians as a whole learned
> /anything/ from the past?

Time will tell.

One of the billionarie oligarchs in London was whining about all his
assets being frozen, and having to live on paltry few thousand a
week. The sanctions will work, eventually, if they're done right and
kept in place long enough, because Putin can't survive the wrath of
his billionaire oligarch supporters.

--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB