“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:
Catalonia Shows the Danger of Disarming Civilians
Lawlessness of the West
Ron Paul: The War on Terror is Creating More Terror
Suddenly, Banks Are Victims In Justice Department's S&P Lawsuit
Egyptian nightmare for Erdogan
Will Europe pay the price for one-sided U.S. financial information demands?
Fast-food worker protests help labor unions, not labor
Bill Bonner: An Important Lesson from Tony Soprano
If NATO Is Obsolete, Stop Feeding It
Ron Paul, Congress Believes: Spy On Thee, But Not Me
Doug Noland: Intimidate Nobody
Killing to Save in Syria: When Liberalism is Lethal
The Minimum Wage Is Cruelest To Those Who Can't Find A Job
Faber's 'Fed Counterfeiting' Remark is Unusual but Not Extreme These Days
Jacob Hornberger: The Big Obstacle to Peace in Korea