“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:
Patrick Buchanan: America Says ‘No!’ to a Beltway War
Jim Rogers ET NOW Interview - 29 May 2013
Ai Weiwei: NSA surveillance makes the U.S. sound a lot like China
Ron Paul: The Sequester 'Crisis' And What Should Be Done
Ron Paul Interview with Charles Goyette
Global Debt Bomb Continues Ticking Into 2017
U.S. 10 Year Bond Yields in Perspective (1790-Present)
Bill Bonner: This Unexpected Event Will Cut the S&P 500 in Half
Welcome to the Real World
Sequester solved: Sell national parks, stop foreign aid, leave Germany
Paul Craig Roberts: The Revolution From Above
The Oil Patch Will Rise Again
The U.S.-Saudi Starvation Blockade
Why John McCain Wants to Aid Lung-Eating Syrian Terrorists
US Falls Apart, Stock Market Booms?
