Hacker News Reader

Comment by ftxbro | Hacker News Reader

> "There are only two outcomes from here: either he is lying and this is some big government psy-op, or he is telling the truth."

Nah there are other outcomes: they might be lying and it's not a big government psy-op, or they might be misinformed or deluded or caught up in a hysteria about things that are neither psy-ops nor the things that they say they are.

View on HN

> they might be lying and it's not a big government psy-op

Why would he lie to congress under oath? He would go to jail.

> deluded or caught up in a hysteria about things that are neither psy-ops nor the things that they say they are.

Why would the senators make [this amendment](https://douglasjohnson.ghost.io/senate-intelligence-bill-giv...) to NDAA 2024 just 3 weeks after his allegations went public? The key portions being

> "a comprehensive list of all non-earth origin or exotic unidentified anomalous phenomena material" possessed and to make it available to the AARO director for "assessment, analysis, and inspection."

I'm not trying to explain why he would lie to congress or why senators do things. I was just giving other options that I think are more likely than the dichotomy that you laid out.

If I'm honest your dichotomy reminds me of some evangelists who are like 'either this guy was literally God or so many clergy have been misinformed or lying to an absurdly implausible degree for centuries or millennia, checkmate atheists' I'm not saying you are making that exact argument, but that's how your dichotomy sounds to me.

I understand, and I'm trying to explain how your options don't make sense in the context of the senators' recent actions.

I take offense to your edit. I'm not being a religious zealot saying God has to exist. If you understood anything about the US security clearance system, you would know that everyone has to undergo a rigorous psychological evaluation every 5 years to keep their Top Secret SCI clearance. You can not be unwell and be an intelligence officer at the level of Grusch. The likelihood of him being mentally unfit for that job and lying under oath to congress about these claims is extremely low. Also, If he is intentionally lying, he will go to jail.

All of that plus what the senators have recently done, we have a limited set of options for what could be the case.

I'm not surprised that congress told someone to make a list or that someone might give misinformed testimony to congress. I think those are more likely than aliens or psyop.

Why are you ignoring the fact that the senators have been convinced to add provisions regarding "non-earth origin" technology. That's a significant claim

> "I take offense to your edit. I'm not being a religious zealot saying God has to exist. "

I take offense to your edit that takes offense to my edit. I'm not accusing you of being a religious zealot saying God has to exist. I had even gone out of my way in my post to clarify that, in case you had a hard time understanding analogies. At this point I have to imagine that you understand my point and you are just pretending to think that I am calling you a religious zealot as an excuse to get more offended.

No, I just don’t like being compared to someone believing something blind. If Grusch was alleging that there are undisclosed programs reverse engineering other country technology, it would be taken seriously. But the subject brings stigma and that’s what needs to change. We shouldn’t be afraid to investigate these claims just because they seem incredibly outlandish.

> "You can not be unwell and be an intelligence officer at the level of Grusch."

OK but I think it's more likely that he's mistaken or misinformed or unwell or lying for some other reason, than that it's aliens or a psyop.

Again, why would congress include these provisions in the next NDAA if they didn’t think Grusch’s comments held enough weight?

> everyone has to undergo a rigorous psychological evaluation every 5 years to keep their Top Secret SCI clearance. You can not be unwell and be an intelligence officer at the level of Grusch.

You can, for up to five years.

Assuming that the evaluation actually catches whatever illness you might have.

Are you going to assume the IC Inspector General is unwell too since they referred Grusch’s claims to congress as being both urgent and credible?

I’m not saying anyone is unwell. I was commenting on the two sentences I quoted. They are not consistent with each other: the second does not follow from the first.

You’re not directly saying Grusch is unwell, but you’re certainly insinuating it. And you’re dodging the other facts, like the ICIG deeming the claims as credible and [urgent (50 U.S.C. § 3033(k)(5)(G))](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/3033)

> You can not be unwell and be an intelligence officer at the level of Grusch.

My man, any number of unwell ppl have occupied high level positions. Michael Flynn is nuttier than squirrel shit. F’in lunatic Trump held the very highest office. Point to any of the crazies that are associated with either of those raging assholes and it’s nothing but mental illnesses and outright crazy goals and ideas.

This situation may be a bit different. Trump was president and the clearance system begins and ends with his authority. He dictated Flynn and Kushner receipt Top Secret SCI clearances despite them not being able to pass the background checks.

> Why would he lie to congress under oath? He would go to jail.

This one had me rolling on the floor laughing. Remember when James Clapper lied to Congress about PRISM[1] and there were zero consequences? I'm pretty sure that, in practice, the consequences of lying to Congress are slightly less severe than those for parking illegally. Especially if you have friends in politics.

[1] https://apnews.com/article/business-33a88feb083ea35515de3c73...

I would argue the situation here is different. Clapper used politically adept language to avoid saying what surveillance capabilities the NSA possessed. Here, David Grusch has given specific program names, locations, and people involved with these programs and is alleging these programs have not been properly disclosed to congress for over 80 years. His claims were found credible and urgent by the ICIG which is why he was referred to the congressional intelligence committees. All of that, combined with Rubio saying other whistleblowers have corroborated Grusch's claims make this all the more serious.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com