Hacker News Reader

Comment by samstave | Hacker News Reader

But do we really need more info? What will taht accomplish?

As far as I am concerned, this is the 100% solid concrete evidence that Eschelon exists - where for the last 30 years it was a "conspiracy theory" -- yet here it is, verified, in your face and glaring.

Now, what is the next step? What needs to happen is ACTION taken.

There is only one peaceful tool the citizenry has against the government at this point: civil disobedience via a tax holiday.

Nothing will happen unless people do the only thing they can do: refuse to provide funding to the government.

If the government can't even go after the criminal banks -- its laughable to think that anything is going to happen to the intelligence agencies: especially when the government is staffed by both THE BANKS and THE INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES!

View on HN

Actually, the only evidence we have are a few shitty power-point slides, a video, and a Q&A, all provided by ONE person.

I don't think that is really anything to hang a hat on.

Are you ignoring all the "meta-evidence": The smear campaign from people as crazy as Cheney? All the MSM focus to discredit? The actual lying under oath from Clapper against EXACTLY what was revealed by actual NSA documents?

Given that the source is "ONE" person is irrelevant.

Looking at your comment history, I find your judgment to be suspect.

I am not ignoring it at all.

Smear campaigns exist for a lot of people, in a variety of fields, for a variety of reasons. Individuals running for government office seem to always have smear campaigns run against them. I don't really read much into that, I'm curious why that is "strong meta evidence" to you.

As many people focus to lend credence to his story as try to discredit him. Again, run-of-the-mill behavior for something like this. As you can see on sites like this, he has a lot of support.

Someone lied under oath about things that are at best tangential to this story, if they relate at all.

We don't have any real, actual evidence at all, other than the artifacts generated by one guy.

>"Someone lied under oath about things that are at best tangential to this story, if they relate at all."

This comment proves you're either completely delusional, uninformed, shilling or all of the above.

First; "Someone" == https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_R._Clapper

He is the CURRENT HEAD of National Intelligence, directing a PUBLISHED budget of ~$50 BILLION dollars.

The things he lied about are the CORE of this story, not "tangential" -- He specifically stated that the NSA collects "nothing" on US citizens, NOTHING.

Given this statement by you, it is clear you're completely deluded.

> On August 5, 2010, Clapper was confirmed by the Senate in a unanimous vote.[5] Lawmakers approved his nomination after the Senate Intelligence Committee backed him with a 15-0 vote. During his testimony for the position, Director Clapper pledged to advance the DNI's authorities, exert tighter control over programming and budgeting, and provide oversight over the CIA's use of predator drones in Pakistan.

So why is your beef with the NSA/The intelligence gathering effort?

William Binney, Thomas Drake and Kirk Wiebe, who have over 100 years of combined NSA experience between them all seem to be supporting the bulk, if not all of Snowden's claims. -http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/06/16/snowd...

Why do you claim that the evidence is all provided by "ONE person"?

+1 thank you so much for that. I just forwarded that USA Today interview to my family and friends.

Whistle blowers backing whistle blowers. Honestly.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com