
“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:
A Commissarina Rises: Wendy J. Olson's Reign of Terror
Top Terrorism Experts Say that Mass Spying Doesn’t Work to Prevent Terrorism
Why The U.S. Job Market Remains Terribly Bleak
Bill Bonner: Middle Class? What Middle Class?
Rebuilding Mogadishu with Local Knowledge
Meet “The People’s Court”
A New "Global Standard" Takes Shape
Rahm Emanuel's Gun Free Zones
Last Hurrah of the Interventionists?
Who Owns Congress? The NSA or the FED?
How the US government inadvertently created Wikileaks
Don’t Call the Cops If You’re Autistic, Deaf, Mentally Ill, Disabled or Old
You Might Not Read This Because It Says the World Is Getting Better
Ron Paul: A Republic, Not a Democracy
Andrew J. Bacevich: A Letter to Paul Wolfowitz