Then, when all those successful websites from "evil outside of america" will be down, American casinos will start selling online poker for you. It is not a legality issue, but a protectionism issue. The US has been like that for a while, why no do it on the internet too?
So they make it less obvious to the casual observer whilst in the background developing more intrusive strategies. Consumer information aggregation across businesses has the potential to take creepy to the next level. I'm not sure if it is even demonstrably cost effective for a business or whether these people just simply like to spy on everyone.
Would you care for some syrup with all that waffling?
"3. I believe "AGW" and it's "implications" to be unsettled science that is grossly exaggerated."
*YOU* define what "gross exaggeration" of science is, since you made the claim you must know what the criteria is. Then tell me what evidence you personally would need to see to convince you that it's not "grossly exaggerated".
You're the one making the claims, you provide the specific parameters. If I define a framework then after I box you in you'll simply claim that I rigged the definition and "tricked you".
The longer you draw out the thread with waffling and equivocation the less credibility you'll have (and shills don't have much credibility to spare as I'm sure you know)
I already know how the thread will end (a bit boring really) I'm just making sure people see for themselves how baseless/flimsy/unsupported/irrational claims of fraud and exaggerations in the science are.
If I told people that you wouldn't be able to answer a simple question about your own personal opinion they'd have good reason to doubt me. However, if I demonstrate it using actual members of the anti-science crowd, well, they tend to consider their own eyes a pretty reliable source.