“‘We managed to survive greater threats in our history . . . than a few disorganized terrorist groups and rogue states without resorting to these sorts of programs. It is not that I do not value intelligence, but that I oppose . . . omniscient, automatic, mass surveillance. . . . That seems to me a greater threat to the institutions of free society than missed intelligence reports, and unworthy of the costs. Analysts (and government in general) aren’t bad guys, and they don’t want to think of themselves as such,’ he replied. But he said they labored under a false premise that ‘if a surveillance program produces information of value, it legitimizes it.'”
Related posts:
HSBC to spend $700m vetting clients
Pakistan’s Musharraf charged over murder of opposition leader Benazir Bhutto
Hundreds fill New York’s Times Square to protest attack against Syria
Pacific Group to Convert 1/3 of Hedge-Fund Assets to Gold
Water rationing, tax and rate hikes add to woes of Puerto Ricans
U.S. denies visa waiver to ex-Nato chief and architect of Iran nuclear deal
The deeper agenda behind Japan's "Abenomics"
Gambling Website’s Bitcoin-Denominated Stock Draws SEC Inquiry
Gov. Christie Blames Regulators He Appointed for Tesla Sales Ban
Portugal Throws Open Europe’s Them-And-Us Austerity Divide
New Zealand: U.S. can extradite Megaupload founder Kim Dotcom
The bogus climate warnings that spurred Pentagon's green spending
U.S. spying still under shadow of Iraq intelligence failures
Throwing children in prison turns out to be a really bad idea
The bionic bunch: Gathering of exoskeleton-wearers walk for charity