Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'national security'.
-
The first thing to consider is that the United States of America is a creature of its written Constitution as amended, U.S. Code enacted by Congress, the Code of Federal Regulations (administrative agency law) and Supreme Court edicts that define from time to time who we are as a flock of luckless obedient sheep to be sheared by glib Ivy League lawyers. On the other hand, the U.S. began and continues today as a common law society that Mark Levin likes to call "the civil society" in which every person is legally equal before the law and competent to sue or be sued, the foundation of privat
- 6 replies
-
- state
- donald trump
-
(and 3 more)
Tagged with:
-
Well, today we have this rather revealing story, "former" KGB/FSB officer, now President of Russia, Vladimir Putin announces that NSA "whistleblower" Edward Snowden can stay in Russia as long as he does not harm our friend, the United States! No, really. Even Putin quickly added that that's a strange comment to be coming from him. Not really. The implications of this decision by Putin to accept Snowden (who apparently has now applied for "asylum" in Russia), and the capitulation of the U.S. government to this development says a lot about all three. Read: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/
- 8 replies
-
- national security
- compromise
-
(and 5 more)
Tagged with:
-
ARI/AOC and TSA, apparently being on vacation in Tibet or somewhere, and making no statement at all on the NSA/PRISM scandal, I turned to CATO Institute's website:. Lo and behold, right there on their opening front page, they speak up about this serious threat to our personal liberties. http://www.cato.org/ Maybe ARI should lure Ellison back from Cato. Post-post-script: Damn! Never presume anything. The CATO pieces are not very encouraging. They seem to be taking a , "Golly gee! Maybe NSA/PRISM is not unconstitutional!"
-
- national security
- privacy
-
(and 2 more)
Tagged with:
-
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324478304578171623040640006.html Article in the Wall Street Journal detailing recent move by the Obama regime to allow vast increase in possible government surveillance of private citizens. Allegedly for "national security" against "terrorism," but clearly could be used for MUCH more intrusive surveillance of any or all U.S. citizens. "Just because you're paranoid (or, not paranoid!) does not mean that they are not out to get you."
- 4 replies
-
- privacy
- national security
-
(and 2 more)
Tagged with: