“What Barack Obama, Mike Rogers, Peter King, and their ilk mean when they tell us that ‘we’ need to find the right balance between security and privacy is that they will dictate to us what the alleged balance will be. We will have no real say in the matter, and they can be counted on to find the balance on the ‘security’ side of the spectrum as suits their interests. Of course, our rulers can’t really set things to the security side of the spectrum because the game is rigged. When we give up privacy — or, rather, when our rulers take it — we don’t get security in return; we get a more intrusive state, which means we get more insecurity.”
Related posts:
Government Should Stop Its Own Violence First
Lance Armstrong and Kim Dotcom ... Guilty Until Proven Innocent?
Hero Joseph Nacchio Is Released from Jail
Oil Demand Is Not Declining
Why Turkey Was Planning a False Flag Operation in Syria
How “Your” Government Works
Chinese Women Aren’t Taking Buffett’s Advice on Gold
James Bovard: Facebook/Russia farce shows lawmaker deviousness, demagoguery
David Galland: What the Hell Is Wrong with Obama?
Robert Mueller's forgotten surveillance crime spree
NSA scandal separates liberty lovers from poseurs
NEW Spying Scandal -- Is This One the Last Straw?
Post-Cyprus Blues: Confusion and an Erosion of Faith
New Mexico Police Fire Into Minivan Filled With Children
Understanding Gold Market Dynamics
