So aside from this video, what concrete proof do you have to make your wildly biased claim that he may be an NSA asset? I love your dripping tone of "I'm not saying he's an asset, but seriously, look at that guilt on his face. Again, not directly saying, but look at him." Maybe you're an NSA asset. You may very well be.
Let's keep personal attacks down and talk about the issue at hand rather than go for character assassination.
There wasn't any personal attacks or character assassination, he or she was just stating what his or her interpretation of their reactions was.
I actually thought the same. I kept thinking the whole point of the clip would be that they would see their own names and how they had been recruited. I, too, thought 'tasked' meant bribed/coerced.
... that's not character assassination, that's just like my opinion, man.
That is an interesting and chilling read of what is happening. I think in this case the gp post was playing off the colloquial meaning of the trade-craft word "task".
In intelligence communities of different countries they use jargon to mean specific things (just like lawyer like to use Latin words). Except in this case it is usually English words that have specified (overloaded) meaning that might or might not retain a relation to the colloquial meaning.
But if we accept the translation and explanation from the video. Then "tasking" meaning to target specifically (focus on on detail so to speak). That is what I got from it.
Let's keep personal attacks down and talk about the issue at hand rather than go for character assassination.