Richard Clarke is one of the four White House panelists on NSA spying, and the former top counter-terror czar in the Clinton and Bush administrations.
Clarke has previously said that mass surveillance isn’t needed to keep us safe. And see this.
As Tech Target reports:
Revelations about NSA monitoring activities over the last year show the potential for a police state mechanism, according to the former U.S. cybersecurity czar, but there is still time to avoid the dire consequences.
“[T]hey have created, with the growth of technologies, the potential for a police state.”
“Once you give up your rights, you can never get them back. Once you turn on that police state, you can never turn it off.”
More
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
This article must have been written by police or the NSA themselves!
ReplyDeleteIt is wishful thinking propaganda!
The point being, we are already in a totalitarian police state!
The NSA is filtering information that is given to local law enforcement for them to act. That is the very definition of a police state. A Government spying apparatus usurping the Constitution and violating the rights of it's citizens.
The wishful thinking part is: "you can never turn it off".
The math is simple, there are maybe 2 million police in a country of 315 million. Armed Constitutional citizens OUTNUMBER police by an overwhelming margin. Understand?
They can have camera's in your living room and every street corner, park, office building, bathroom and toilet for that matter but when the people get fed up with the cop killings and violations of personal freedoms and the attitude of cops, forget it. They will suffer the consequences and it won't be pretty. Game over for the outnumbered scumbag LEO and no one will be around to monitor the illegal camera's anymore.
No more sitting naked in front of your computers people.
ReplyDeletewe're already under a police state. are you awake? hmmmmm.
ReplyDeleteJust for the record, I did not write the comment at 8:29. Mine would have been more specific. And insulting.
ReplyDelete