>>14762812 pb
considering the WW2 draft post on /pol/, i wonder how reliable VAERS data would be in accurately determining if adverse effects in red states are significantly worse than blue states. so much disinfo out there tho…
exemptions for certain private jets.
what's the deal with vernon jones?
plant?
>>14763838 me
or just dirty opportunist?
cause of the demo candidates, they thought he was the most competitive. even with the cheating, it's usually just a thumb on the scale. they went harder than they wanted to cause they had to.
got into an argument with BIL over Covid.
he gets all his info from the news.
one time i almost cracked him.
'do you really think i read some random claim on the internet and just believe it like some retard? you think that's how my brain works?'
it's basically the only board on kun to be accurate
key word u missed was 'just'
do anons know the difference between collecting and datamining as it relates to the gov?
-
they only consider it collecting it it's being actively listened to or recorded to be analyzed in short order.
-
it's collecting if they run a search query on the mined data.
so when they say they aren't actively blanket collecting from americans, by their definitions, they're not lying.
i know, but like i said, according to their definitions, it's not collecting unless someone runs a query and listens/reads/sees it.
when i was a kid (rotary phones), it was common folklore that saying the word 'bomb' on a call would get one officially wiretapped and looked into. i asked myself, if they aren't already listening, how do they know someone said 'bomb'.
then they made the word 'bomb' a common slang term and voila…
i would only add that if they bought a house near someone, it's not just one and surveillance isn't their primary objective.
not necessarily a terrorist, but a subject of interest.
elaborate. they're church goers, but the mainstream type.
basically. they play semantics to find a legal loophole
kek