<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>johnyzee</author><text>The most remarkable thing in this case, to me, is the extent to which the press colluded with the intelligence officials. The press is supposed to check and balance, but in this case they walked hand-in-hand with the agencies. The article seems to conclude that the officials are being punished for talking to the press - well yes, they worked with the press to &lt;i&gt;suppress&lt;/i&gt; the story, and successfully.&lt;p&gt;The whistleblower&amp;#x27;s revelations, obviously very serious and substantiated, have effectively been buried. No one in Denmark knows what this case is about, except that these top officials are being prosecuted for vague reasons, and with an undertone that it is all very unfair and probably a bad thing for Denmark.&lt;p&gt;Frankly, this BBC article probably contains more information than you would have from following the case in Danish media over a couple of years. (edit: Guardian, thanks for the correction)</text><parent_chain></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Scandinavian spy drama: An intelligence chief who came under state surveillance</title><url>https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/oct/02/scandinavian-spy-drama-the-intelligence-chief-who-came-under-state-surveillance</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>nmfisher</author><text>I&amp;#x27;m finding this difficult to follow. As far as I can tell:&lt;p&gt;1) Denmark partners with NSA for wiretap (presumably while Findsen&amp;#x2F;Frederiksen are head(s) of the respective agency)&lt;p&gt;2) Whistleblower thinks agency is overstepping its legal bounds in wiretap collection, files complaint and begins internal investigation&lt;p&gt;3) Agency dismisses results of internal investigation, tells whistleblower to drop it. Whistleblower subsequently goes to independent&amp;#x2F;external oversight body for investigation.&lt;p&gt;4) External oversight body publishes conclusion that agency illegally surveilled the entire country.&lt;p&gt;5) Findsen&amp;#x2F;Frederiksen arrested for allegedly disclosing details of the wiretap deal to various people (journalists&amp;#x2F;family&amp;#x2F;friends).&lt;p&gt;I don&amp;#x27;t get it. What&amp;#x27;s the connection between the whistleblower and the &amp;quot;leaks&amp;quot;?  Does the government need a sacrificial lamb for the illegal surveillance but they can&amp;#x27;t prosecute Findsen for that, so they&amp;#x27;re coming up with some alternate charges to placate the public?&lt;p&gt;As an aside, I have no sympathy for a spy boss whinging that he was under surveillance when (assuming what the whistleblower is saying is true), he was fine with putting &lt;i&gt;everybody in the whole country through practically the same thing&lt;/i&gt;.</text><parent_chain></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Scandinavian spy drama: An intelligence chief who came under state surveillance</title><url>https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/oct/02/scandinavian-spy-drama-the-intelligence-chief-who-came-under-state-surveillance</url></story>