All of your "arguments" so far have been nothing but "you have no idea what you're talking about" and "you know nothing". Why not contribute some facts and rational arguments to the discussion?
What is the expectation here? The commenter has absolutely no idea what they are talking about. The arguments are being made are clearly without any understanding of how any intelligence agency operates, and absolute ignorance of the NSA's mandate, much less any actual data about its activities.
It's like reading a post by someone bitching about the modern Hollywood blockbuster culture by citing Superman's plot arc in the new Avengers movie, except that somehow it isn't a trolling attempt. What sort of attention does that blatant misconception and willful ignorance deserve?
Sure it's shallow and ill considered, but it's also a not uncommon view among a large part of the population. While a pro NSA voice is not common here, providing lucid counter arguments would allow all of us to view the augments and maybe learn how best to counter these types of assertions in other venues.
You crossed into incivility repeatedly in this flamewar, and here you cross into outright bannable offense. Could you please not do this when commenting here? If someone else is completely wrong, and you react like this, all you do is make them seem more credible, and discredit what you know.
What would work much better is to wait until you can comment neutrally, and then comment neutrally with information we can all learn from.
