Slashdot Mirror
Snowden Is Lying, Say House Intelligence Committee Leaders
cold fjord writes "There are new developments in the ongoing controversy engulfing the NSA as a result of the Snowden leaks. From The Hill: 'Emerging from a hearing with NSA Director Gen. Keith Alexander, Reps. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.), chairman of the Intelligence Committee, and Dutch Ruppersberger (Md.), the senior Democrat on the panel, said Edward Snowden simply wasn't in the position to access the content of the communications gathered under National Security Agency programs, as he's claimed. "He was lying," Rogers said. "He clearly has over-inflated his position, he has over-inflated his access and he's even over-inflated what the actual technology of the programs would allow one to do. It's impossible for him to do what he was saying he could do." ... "He's done tremendous damage to the country where he was born and raised and educated," Ruppersberger said. ... "It was clear that he attempted to go places that he was not authorized to go, which should raise questions for everyone," Rogers added.'"
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has also told the E.U. justice commissioner that media reports surrounding PRISM are wrong: "The contention it [PRISM] is not subject to any internal or external oversights is simply not correct. It's subject to an extensive oversight regime from executive, legislative and judicial branches and Congress is made aware of these activities. The courts are aware as we need to get a court order. ... We can't target anyone unless appropriate documented foreign intelligence purpose for the prevention of terrorism or hostile cyber activities." Meanwhile, Bloomberg has gone live with a report (based on unidentified sources, so take it with a grain of salt) saying that private sector cooperation with snooping government agencies extends far beyond the ones listed in the PRISM report. "Thousands of technology, finance and manufacturing companies are working closely with U.S. national security agencies, providing sensitive information and in return receiving benefits that include access to classified intelligence, four people familiar with the process said." Whatever PRISM turns out to be, the NY Times is reporting that at least Yahoo, and probably other tech companies as well, tried to fight participation in it. Other reports suggest Twitter refused to participate, though there's been no official confirmation.
I instantly believe you. It's not as if it's the government's fault that people are so distrusting of it or anything; it couldn't be!
Check UIDs. I'm COLD FJORD(826450). User COID FJORD(2949869) has impersonated me. Don't confuse us if he trolls you.
*snicker*
A random internet stranger that claims to know more than the rest of us, or the Government institutions that we know will not hesitate to lie, cheat, steal, swindle, and torture to get their own way. Decisions decisions...
... are confirming what Snowden says. I'm certain someone is lying, though.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/14/nsa-partisanship-propaganda-prism
He's lying, or he's the worst traitor in the history of the United States. It can't be both. If he's lying, then he didn't reveal any highly classified state secrets.
Typical gub'mint response. Talking out of both sides of their asses at the same time.
Of Course the Senator knows all about the computers at the contractors to the NSA and what they can do,
while the guy who used to be a sysadmin there knows nothing about it.
Uh huh.
Because we all know that Senators know everything about technology.
- "History shows again and again how nature points out the folly of men" -- Blue Oyster Cult, 'Godzilla'
This is the same, tired refrain. He couldn't possibly do what he claims because it would have to be "approved". Apparently "spy" computers have a small troll that leaps from the machine waving the constitution and wailing in disapproval if ever anyone tries to do something that's not "approved". Clearly it's a feature that works well to prevent abuse. I want one.
Do I trust (a) the people who supposedly work "for" me yet refuse to explain what work they perform, or do I trust (b) the guy who claims to expose what work they perform?
In other words, do I trust the people who have already (repeatedly and continuously) proven their lack of respect for me, or do I trust the guy who hasn't yet had a chance to prove his respect (or lack of) for me?
This is a tough one.
Holder says he was lying?! Eric Holder? The attorney general whose office is responsible for Too Big To Jail? Who will not prosecute bankers. Who oversaw the Fast and Furious debacle? Who hounded Aaron Swartz to his death?
Now I know Snowden was telling the truth.
May the Maths Be with you!
They have a budget of $4 billion for General Keiths commercial spying. At $100 per TB (overestimate), 10% of their budget is 2GB per person on the internet per year.
Think of all the data they can keep in 2GB and you see that Keith is lying. No different than when he pretended they didn't collect info on Americans.
"is not subject to any internal or external oversights is simply not correct."
We don't care if Bob the spooks approved John the spooks spying on our emails, fuck off. The US Constitution apples and the EU privacy law, and anything else you do is treason.
"The courts are aware as we need to get a court order."
And the court orders say "give everything to NSA for 3 months" and is signed by 1 judge in secret. Fuck off.
"saying that private sector cooperation with snooping government agencies extends far beyond the ones listed in the PRISM report."
You leaked the SWIFT data, so you've been giving the NSA financial data too, including presumably all the IRS stuff, bank data and all.
"Whatever PRISM turns out to be, the NY Times is reporting that at least Yahoo, and probably other tech companies as well, tried to fight participation in it. "
Good for them, Snowden risked his future freedom to leak that, you guys shut up and gave them the data.
Secret laws and secret judgements run by the military have no place in a democracy. So you're not a democracy. And judging by the fear we see in European politicians, neither is Europe. We all work for the military now. Try not to get shot by the fucking liars.
The reality of PRISM is that if the program described exists at all, trying to claim what Holder and Rogers are about oversight does not change the fundamental constitutional problems associated with the programs they are running. You'll notice that there are no credible denials here, just declarations that Snowden is exaggerating and assertions that the existence of oversight on how the data is accessed and used is somehow justification for the data collection in the first place. If the program exists at all, it's either without a warrant or under the exact kind of general warrant the Fourth Amendment was written to prevent.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
I just don't know who to believe.
A techie who believes what he says enough to basically call out the most secretive, nastiest intelligence agencies of one of the most powerful countries in the world
or
a pack of politicians.
Oh, man, it's difficult. Maybe I should just flip a coin?
Log in or piss off.
but how is he doing serious damage then.
and how come they're admitting to prism just with their next breath, but saying that they have it under control because some judge, some senator and some chief at nsa reads a report now and then? "We can't target anyone unless appropriate documented foreign intelligence purpose for the prevention of terrorism or hostile cyber activities." too bad that includes fucking everything nowadays.
I'm really skeptical that the system has a security system so that it just can't be accessed without that documentation. how would that even work? the court would give one time passes to the executive branch?
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Why are we even talking about this still?! Didn't you hear? Syria used chemical weapons and crossed the line Obama told them not to cross! Quick lets talk about Syria! They've got it coming now!
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
The *last* entity I'm going to give any credibility to is the one with the worst track record with civil liberties, money laundering, bank bailouts, misuse of power, outstanding privacy issues (Hello AT&T from room 641A), corruption, bribery, cronyism, etc.
Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
If Snowden lied, then he didn't commit a crime by leaking classified information.
So, Mr. Rogers (hehehe), why do we currently have a worldwide manhunt - Including calling in favors from our 51st-state lapdogs - For someone who didn't commit a crime?
You'll forgive me, of course, for presuming you as completely full of shit and trying to salvage your precious unconstitutional spying campaign.
It's always parsed wording. Kinda like Apple said it was unaware of the government's Prism program. Now, of course they were aware they were piping private info out to the Feds. They just didn't know the program name.
I also love the irony here. So, Snowden devastated US intelligence with this leak, but he's completely wrong and lying and exaggerating about what he knows?
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
If the media is wrong, release the evidence and prove it.
The world is a stage, but the play is badly cast.
[Wyden]"Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?"
[James Clapper]"No, sir."
[Wyden]"It does not?"
[Clapper:]"Not wittingly. There are cases where they could, inadvertently perhaps, collect -- but not wittingly."
There have been too many lies and half truths for me to believe anything that the NSA, Obama administration, or upper congressional committees have to say on the matter.
are useless if you need to blow the whistle on the persons making up the laws who argue _in a secret court_ that their actions are lawful because of *secret reasons*.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Everyone from the President on down basically spent the last week saying "yeah, we're doing this, but we're doing it to protect Teh Freedums".
And now they're suddenly not doing it? Pull the other one!
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
The government's denials appear to follow a pattern of avoiding the question of machine gathering of raw intelligence products, and just focusing on the humans sifting through them. People are concerned about the former (raw data), whereas the denials seem to be focused on the manual human aspect, which of course misses the big point. I suspect this is partly related to people not understanding how computers and data storage/archival work.
Best example of this: Still waiting for Hayden to go to jail for lying under oath to a congressional committee, when he claimed that intelligence wasn't being collected on millions of Americans, then had to walk it back later, and claim that he was just talking about people preparing actionable reports. There's no question in my mind that all that data trawled from the internets is still sitting there waiting to be queried at the snap of a bureaucrat's fingers.
This is like the US Gov't version of the Chinese astroturfers, I bet.
Iran is in the news today for their Presidential election, which reminded me of an interesting parallel.
Iran has a nuclear program. Critics insist they're trying to build nuclear bombs. Iran insists it's for nuclear energy. But take their word on it because they won't let inspectors anywhere near it.
Which brings us to the NSA and surveillance state. What information are the collecting? What are they doing with it? They won't tell you because it's secret. And anyone who leaks information is a liar. But trust them, they won't do anything illegal or unconstitutional. And you know that because they said so.
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
That's not true at all. That's like saying that enforcing sexual harassment laws is just sort of a guideline. Sure, if enough people ignored it, it may go unreported for awhile, but the reality is that most people find that sort of behavior disgusting and would report it, even if the target of the abuse didn't.
All processes are based upon the fundamental need to have humans there to know the rules and enforce them. Collusion to break the rules will cause problems, it is true. That does not mean that there is no one who will step forward to deal with it.
There is some idea that anyone who works for these agencies has had their brain and conscience wiped. Of course, despite the fact that he broke the law, Snowden's misguided actions show that there are certainly people in the NSA who think about these sorts of things. There are many people who join agencies like this who are doing it because they want to protect fellow citizens, and not for some sort of power trip.
It is clear that when power is available like this, there will be unscrupulous people who are attracted to it, but that doesn't mean that the organization is Always Evil.
a pack of politicians with some of the historically lowest levels of public regard and trust in the history of their nation, though to be incompetent or crooks by 9 out of 10 individuals.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
Report after report has come out from non-mainstream news sources such was Wired or CNet citing sources with similar stories, like the guy (Mark Klein I think) working for AT&T who discovered the secret room in SF with the NARUS box siphoning off all the Internet traffic to the NSA. Also several ex-NSA employees like William Binney have blown similar whistles.
Fuck the lies, and wake up. People are tired of the unjustified mission creep that has lead to such horrible violations of our rights. So your paycheck depends on violating your fellow citizens' Constitutional rights? How does that feel? Ever think about honoring your oath to uphold the Constitution? There are plenty of private-sector jobs that pay well enough and don't require violating anyone's rights.
besides his boss and himself.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
If he was able to hack into Prism, that's a worse controversy for the US government. Not a better one.
We will see senior officials repeatedly make the claims that 1) Snowden is lying, 2) Snowden is mentally unbalanced, and 3) Snowden has ulterior motives (greed/ideology - take your pick) for what he says. Of course, there is no way we can ever personally corroborate anything that Snowden or the senior officials says so we have to decide who to believe...and Snowden is more creditable. Here's why. First, he contacted the Guardian news organization and provided documentation for what he claims long in advance of publication. Second, there is no dispute that he was employed as a highly-paid intelligence analyst with a high security clearance which means that his background, mental health, and credit were thoroughly investigated by the FBI over a long period of time. Third, Snowden has correctly identified numerous secret activities that no one (other than those close to them) were aware of such as PRISM. Obviously, the government loves these programs because access to such a huge amount of personal information represents enormous power. But...power in the United States rightfully rests in the hands of its citizens. Most of us would prefer to take our chances with the terrorists but would prefer that the government officials stay out of our emails, cell phone conversations, and internet searches unless we are actual suspects in a real investigation with a fixed objective and timetable. The damage that the terrorists do will be far, far less than the damage that an omnipotent 'big brother' style of government monitoring would do. Any elected official that cannot recognize that should be removed from office via the ballot box at the next election.
There's been plenty of information about the NSA's program for more than TEN years. U.S. Citizens, however, trusted that their government was doing the right thing when the NSA was constructing its electronic dragnet because it was right after 9/11. People are also too busy living their lives to get involved until it's often too late and the damage has been done. NYT article from 2002: http://www.nytimes.com/2002/11/09/politics/09COMP.html
In one of the links of above there is a nice hint:
Microsoft Corp. (MSFT), the world’s largest software company, provides intelligence agencies with information about bugs in its popular software before it publicly releases a fix, according to two people familiar with the process. That information can be used to protect government computers and to access the computers of terrorists or military foes.
That seem to mean that they are actively holding the fix of 0day bugs, waiting for the "government" (or the people that have access to that information) make a successful exploit and use it, before releasing a patch.
if it's all lies, then he hasn't revealed any secrets.
if he hasn't reviealed any secrets, then he hasn't committed treason.
let see if the US governments actions match their words.
do they try to arrest him for not revealing secrets?
I question first why the program is hidden at all. Those who spy on people to catch "terrorists" are quite fond of saying "if you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide", implying that if you want to "hide" things, you are doing something wrong.
So why, then, is the surveillance program so secret?
Life is changing. I realize that our standards are going to have to change, to tolerate increase recording and scrutiny simply because there is no way to stop it. But it should be a two-way street - we need, and deserve, more transparency from the government now than ever before.
Civilization is built upon balances of power - revolution, war, even most crime, are all caused by imbalances of power. Balances between nations brought us through the Cold War relatively undamaged. Balances between branches of government prevent coups. And, most importantly, a balance between the citizens and the government is essential - on one hand, a government with too much power will oppress its people, on the other, a government with no power cannot maintain order.
Power takes many forms. Military power. Economic power. Media power. And one that is only now being recognized - information power. That is where we have a new imbalance of power. It used to be that we had relatively little insight to what the government was doing, but they had relatively little information on us, and what they had was disconnected and incomplete. Now, they have comprehensive, connected databases, and are pushing towards even more surveillance of us. But, perversely, we are granted less and less insight into what they're doing.
You want to spy on us, record every email and phone call we make? Fine - but in return, I want every email sent to or from an elected official's or a government employee's account, I want cameras placed on every police officer broadcasting in the open 24/7 with felony penalties for tampering with it or disabling it, and I want a complete report of every cent spent by any city, county, state or federal agency.
After all, if you are doing nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide, now, do you?
There is some idea that anyone who works for these agencies has had their brain and conscience wiped.
Well considering that it is common knowledge that they do this in basic training for regular, lowly soldiers with no access to classified information, it isn't much of a stretch they would do the same for the intelligence agencies (which also happen to recruit form the armed services). Keep in mind, from the army's (and I daresay the government's) perspective, a good soldier is not one who does what is right, unquestionably, it is one who follows orders, unquestionably.
The courts are aware as we need to get a court order.
The FISA court is secret and accountable to nobody, and it's not like we didn't hear about this before as "Total Information Awareness."
TIA got shouted down publicly, but I'm not betting it ever went away. Black budgets and all that.
Even if Snowden is lying and that he exaggerated his authority, the evidence to the contrary of what the politicians are saying is pretty much overwhelming, taken as a big picture.
--
BMO
one man flees to a country where extradition is a questionable practice. He then calmly and rationally divulges a horrific clandestine project to secretly spy on americans, which is then rigorously clarified and refuted by intelligence agencies as being metadata, foreign in nature only, and regulated by a kangaroo court. he promptly goes off-grid and refuses to return.
or
liar-liar pants-on-fire goes to hong kong and lies about friendly government project that the director of the NSA was caught lying about, but which is super patriotic and safe for everyone based on testamony from people who cant talk about it so why doesnt he just come home so we dont have to send him a dron...er...a ticket home....
this is the saddest attempt at damage control ive ever seen. then again, it came from the house of representatives so we're most certainly trying our best in this case to keep government contractors related to the project from pulling their dollary-doo's out of our states.
Good people go to bed earlier.
This would have way more credibility if the NSA director had something like "We don't do this" or "That is incomplete" or "This guy is full of it", when the news first broke. But he has said that these types of surveillance has helped deter attacks.
but spying on innocent people is absolutely outlandish.
Spying on innocent people is immoral. What I meant was that the idea of them spying on people in the name of preventing terrorism is not outlandish.
After all, if I am innocent, then you have no logical reason to spy on me.
Paranoia. Power. The fact that you might do something in the future. There are plenty of reasons for people to spy on you, but none of them justify the spying.
Check UIDs. I'm COLD FJORD(826450). User COID FJORD(2949869) has impersonated me. Don't confuse us if he trolls you.
So, I should believe people that have been caught lying in public?
"We don't collect data on millions of citizens. Don't be ridiculous!"
[later] "Um, well it depends on your definition of 'data'... and 'collect'... and, uhhh, 'citizens'..."
That is because he provided HARD EVIDENCE. Power-point slides that explain the scope of the program. He didn't just release all of this stuff on his word. The slides clearly show what is currently existing within the scope of the system and what is forecast for the future. We don't have to believe him. He delivered the proof.
the slides themselves on their own would have been just slides.
but - after high level officials tried to do damage control, they're no longer just some slides - they're actual presentations about what the USA government is doing. which gets us to the point that the government didn't even think that authorizing all that was bad or questionable.
it's the governmental response which provided the proof that they were not just some college boys joke slides.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Spying on guilty people is not outlandish, but spying on innocent people is absolutely outlandish. After all, if I am innocent, then you have no logical reason to spy on me.
But you're not supposed to mind because you have nothing to hide!
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
This is exactly why most (all?) of the founding fathers where against political parties; and so their fears have come to pass.
Hell, Jefferson was against even allowing corporations! I suppose this is one reason why he is now willfully ignored by the right wing.
the idiot at the Post Office who takes his lunch when there are 30 people in line.
Cut the guy a break. If he waited till there was no one in line, he wouldn't eat till the day was over.
Blame the managers for not hiring enough people, but leave the front desk man alone.
Reps. Mike Rogers please resign. You've put your organization (the gov) ahead of the best interests of the people.
It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
Anyone else get 2003-era deja vu with regards to allegations of chemical weapons justifying military intervention (currently they say they'll _just_ provide weapons, but enforcing a no-flight zone still seems to be on the table).
How can a "lie" cause "tremendous damage to the country'?
If it were a lie, the NSA would have given the default "We can neither confirm nor deny" answer. The fact that it has upset so many people is pretty clear indication that he is nearly (if not entirely) spot-on. Calling this a "lie" is spin.
US government spying on American citizens was (re)confirmed in the American consciences in 2002 when the AT&T sysAdim broke the news that AT&T was cooperating with the NSA (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/foreign-affairs-defense/what-an-nsa-domestic-spying-operation-looks-like/). As far as the US citizenry goes... this is old news.
I'm not buying the "damage" to the US thing. If 80% of Americans already believe that the government is spying on them, then why is it even a secret that Verizon was asked to continue the process? What exactly is damaged?
What's damaged is not that Terrorist may now change their MO. It's that the American People might get upset. It will bring more scrutiny to the process. That's not damage to the US - it's damage to the spy operation. And those two things should be weighed independently.
-CF
After all, if I am innocent, then you have no logical reason to spy on me.
Perhaps you are innocent, but match a behavior profile just enough that they monitor you. What does the profile consist of? That's the beauty of secret programs - we don't know. For all we know, it gets modified to suit a purpose as needed.
As I understand all the crap, the excuse it "we're gathering data on everyone but we're not looking at it without a warrant." That seems like exactly the sort of weaseling around the constitution that the government has been getting away with for years, and will continue getting away with as long as people are scared witless of minor threats.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
One of the most humorous things I keep hearing is that he was just a lowly so-and-so, he wouldn't have that kind of access. Who exactly do these people think is actually running their systems. For a system of this scale there are going to be hundreds of servers if not more and databases of epic proportions. They have to employ a small army of SA's and DBA's running all of that crap. Then you have all kinds of other folks that'll be performing other functions like security checks and such that will need access. I wouldn't be surprised if each of the servers in this system are accessible at the root level by at least 50 people or more whom these big wigs wouldn't even consider as having access. I've worked in places where I helped monitor dozens of different systems and not a one of them would likely have ever thought to list me as someone with 100% unfettered access to their data. Sometimes I think that these people live in a completely different reality than the rest of us, they seriously have no idea of the technicalities involved in the everyday running of their lives and pet projects.
Unless this NSA thing really starts to get out of hand. There's nothing to distract the sheeple like live 24 hours coverage of USA military might on Fox.
IMO he should request political asylum to People's Republic of China, i believe he has already helped them with crucial information and should be granted protection there, since being in Hong Kong he could easily reach the proper authorities. Staying in HK might be a little dangerous, better to move inland.
Julian Assange made a terrible mistake, traveling to a place friendly to US, he is now living under siege, as the UK doesn't care about other countries right to concede asylum.
But if Snowden being in HK went straight to Beijing authorities to request asylum, i see no reason they wouldn't consider it. And yes, he would live a normal Chinese life, with America becoming his enemy forever or until revolution takes place there.
Lets cite a precedent: Ex-CIA agent Phillip Agee defected to Cuba, he is still there, living peacefully and nicely, you can see him talking in many documentaries. Key point being, the country must not bend to US will.
If you are like Bradley Maning, you should not open your mouth until you are already in a safe place, and of course not expect to go back home ever; be ready to restart a new life elsewhere instead of being taken for a life sentence in prison.
The US gov. is becoming desperate, as their foreign policy had become so dirty people working inside is getting so disgusted they have started to leak information, and more will do it, but please do it properly, do not let them get you.
Artix
Your Linux, your init.
The idiot at the Post Office is REQUIRED to take his lunch at a particular time and he'll do so and take an extra 30 minutes break because he's unionized. If his boss told him to be productive and wait a half hour extra take his lunch, the entire postal service will go on strike and they'll have to renegotiate the hourly wage contract and 6 weeks paid vacation time and unlimited paid personal days.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
The Federal Government has been taken over by and is being run by world class criminals at every level.
FTFY
"What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
There are three distinct possibilities:
1. Snowden is correct
2. Snowden honestly misinterpreted a far more innocuous -- but still quite possibly overstepping of constitutional bounds -- intel-gathering operation as a panopticon
3. Snowden is lying for e-fame
The sad conclusion that I'm forced to make is that I don't have enough data to rule out any one of these possibilities, although my personal belief is that number two is closest by a hair to being correct. Snowden sounds exactly like the type of kid who might fabricate or embellish the truth in order to get the Reddit userbase to hoist him up on their shoulders and triumphantly dump Gatorade on his head. But that doesn't mean he *did* fabricate or embellish.
N4st0r, trixx0r h0bb1tz0rz! Th3y st0l3 0ur pr3c10uzz!
... wait, let me start over. What I really meant to say was:
Dear Shitbags,
You might have noticed that your latest approval rating is 10%. This is a good example of why that has come to pass. When you repeatedly, emphatically state that every request for information goes through a judge, a sane individual does not assume that a single request consists of THREE TRILLION FUCKING PIECES OF DATA COVERING THE ENTIRE FUCKING US POPULATION.
You are cretins. I would feel more comfortable if Snowden was on the intelligence committee than any single one of you idiots.
Support microSD: in a post 9/11 world, it is unwise to carry your data on media that you cannot comfortably swallow.
Every single school day I pledged my allegiance to my country, every single time I did that I really believed in my country
That one has a;ways been a red flag to me. Forced loyalty oaths for children don't quite jibe with the values the country is supposed to be founded on. Now, I know the Supreme Court has found (on multiple occasions) that it's unconstitutional for the pledge of allegiance to be mandatory, so someone could claim it's not forced. Of course, that's ignoring how it got to the Supreme Court in the first place.
Should I still pay my taxes?
Yes, pay your taxes. Governments are big and complex and it's pretty much guaranteed that some of your tax money will be spent in ways that you will disagree with or that are outright illegal and detrimental to you, but most is still spent on basic government services you rely on. It's a mixed bag. You can't just opt out of civilization altogether. Instead, you have to do everything you can to stay aware of how your tax money is being spent and raise your voice when there's a problem.
The government spending billions to pointlessly spy illegally on its own citizens is a prime example of the kind kind of problem I'm talking about.
Seriously, if you trust secret government actions, based on secret policies, under the supervision of secret courts, which make secret interpretations of the law, then you have a terrible grasp of history. .
They're known as Star chambers
Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
And we are unionised, and the unions and the employers make many times common cause against the government... Well, here in Socialist Hell employer's are interested in making money and working efficiently instead of playing badass libertarian anti-everything jihadist. Maybe it's partly because 60% of Dutch are atheists? Just saying.
But hey, this is socialist hell were we have to suffer extreme poverty and a 3,5% of unemployment, elderly are being forced to suicide and we have a brothel in every corner plus a weed plantation on every roof... and Belgian beer!!! Yes, it sounds horrible I know. The socialist government forces us to drink Belgian beer instead of marvels such as Buttweiser (because only people who enjoy real dog pee are safe from Socialism!).
-- 29A the number of the Beast