Hacker News Reader

Comment by mistrial9 | Hacker News Reader

right - and the US has also always had people who were committed to the opposite. Its a big place with a lot of people.

View on HN

Completely disingenuous. This is about the US intelligence apparatus being used against domestic dissidents.

Saying "well yeah but there are also domestic dissidents" misses the point entirely

well as a USA citizen, from multiple generations of supporting a plurality of views, it is distressing to see the worst behavior of police and FBI, commented upon as if "that is the way the USA is!" .. and strictly from a word-meaning point of view "disingenuous" means I am trying to deceive or knowingly making false statements, which is not the case at all.. we are likely to agree on several points here.. hard to make comments that do not have enough disclaimers, on these large topics

I mean, if our FBI and police have consistently behaved a certain way than that is literally "the way it is the USA".

When it comes to issues of life and death or liberty, we should use the worse case as the measure. For example: oh this medical intervention kills people 15% of the time. No matter what that can never be understated.

That absolutely is the way the United States is, time and time again. That fact that many of us people aren't malicious doesn't change that.

> this is about the US intelligence apparatus being used against domestic dissidents

This article is about local police surveillance. Not the U.S. intelligence apparatus.

The FBI is/was involved as were the fusion centers which were originally setup as part of a joint taskforce to combat terrorism. The fusion centers were developed to integrate US intelligence with local policing.

NYPD, a "local" city police department, has a huge terrorism counterintelligence department, one that surveils internationally and duplicates a lot of the federal intelligence infrastructure.

And even has its own "black site" in NE Manhattan.

Do u have any proof to substantiate that in the upper echelons of power? For example a document or memo being critical of government overreach. Maybe some one being critical of cointelpro or prism

Further, ur comment is a false equivalency. The guy you are responding is is obviously referring to groups of people in power positions. And you seem to respond with the group the general populace

Would that be enough? I show you one document from a position of power within the government criticizing government overreach, you would then accept OPs position? Or would you just ask for another one, and then another one, and then another one?

Well one would be a start. Let's try that first. I know ur being rhetorical, but from an equivalent seat of power too pls

I'm not interested in doing your research for you, especially without any clear indication that it will have any effect on your viewpoints.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com