“The Cuban embargo demonstrated one of the core principles of the national-security state: that the end, which was the preservation of ‘national security,’ justified whatever means were necessary to achieve it. If national security required the government to inflict great suffering on the Cuban people, then that’s just what would have to be done. Nothing could be permitted to stand in the way of protecting national security, whatever that term meant. What mattered was that the national-security establishment — i.e., the military and the CIA — knew what national security meant and had the ultimate responsibility for protecting it.”
http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd1205a.asp
Related posts:
Jeffrey Tucker: The Freedom of Rose Wilder Lane
2.7 Million Children Under the Age of 18 Have a Parent in Prison or Jail
The Trick to Suppressing Revolution: Keeping Debt/Tax Serfdom Bearable
Judge Napolitano: Is the FISA Court constitutional?
Why Does Monsanto Always Win?
Wendy McElroy: The Competitive Provision of Security
The Overcriminalization of America: Are We All Criminals Now?
Bill Bonner: What Is the Point of Government?
Austrian Detroit?
Obamacare and the New Soviet Man
David Stockman on his Book and the Bailouts
Bootleggers and Baptists
The Biggest Interest-Rate Turn in 37 Years
Government of the People, by the People, for the People. NOT.
After the Storm