> How you went from [...] to the idea that I'm claiming these outfits don't conduct targeted surveillance at all

Again, I didn't. You concluded that the lack of evidence of public CA abuse indicates lack of surveillance, full stop, as if that's the only viable way of conducting surveillance. Here's a reminder:

> It is striking that we don't see that. We reliably see people saying "obviously" the Mossad or the NSA are snooping but they haven't shown any evidence that there's tampering

That's a reasonable observation with an unsupported and faulty conclusion. It doesn't even matter whether you meant mass surveillance (preceding context) or targeted surveillance here because the conclusion is bunk either way. I discussed that earlier but you keep glossing over it in favor of these absurd tangents.