“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:
Ron Paul, The New Militarism: Who Profits?
A Deal With North Korea: Don’t Blow It This Time
The Truth about Sequestration
When Foreign Liberals Are Generous with American Lives and Money
How The News Media Betrayed Us On Iraq
Oppose War with Syria
Travelers in the VIPR's Nest
You Can't Argue With a Sick Mind ...
Obama's Killer Sense of "Humor"
Severe Disaffection: Seventy-five Percent of US Citizens Don't Trust Government
David Galland: What the Hell Is Wrong with Obama?
7 Things I Am More Concerned About Than a Terrorist Attack
Paul Craig Roberts: Washington Is Driving The World To The Final War
Pepe Escobar: Towards a Snowden endgame
Peter Schiff: Gold Will Have Its Day
