You're dealing with 'could' and 'what if'.

For example, you state that handing over data about Chilean users may result in them being murdered. I could just as easily argue that if you didn't hand over the data, Chilean users may be murdered. I'm not saying they will be or anything like that, obviously.

Compared to your last point, which is rooted in solid fact (They were both monitored, it did nothing to prevent the attack) and can't be argued with, the other two are a bit.. flimsy.

All I'm saying is if I was arguing against you (Which I'm not), it'd be easy to call you hysterical when you go on about murder and the Chinese.

For clarity, ignored your first point because not US and second point is sound, so I left that out as well :)