<blockquote>'..Hoppe revealed the essential characteristic of socialism to be its basis of institutionalized aggression against or interference with property rights..'
- Jesés Huerta de Soto,
Socialism, Economic Calculation and Entrepreneurship, page 106</blockquote>
'..the concept of civil liberties necessarily limits government power, which is why those who run governments regularly look for ways (“crises”) to ignore them.'<blockquote>'Civil liberties are typically thought to include freedom of speech, press, religion, and assembly; freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures; and certain other rights related to criminal law enforcement, such as the rights to habeas corpus, against self-incrimination, to a jury trial, and so on. This translates into prohibitions against violations of privacy, censorship, a state church, forced confessions, Star Chambers, and the like. Thus, the concept of civil liberties necessarily limits government power, which is why those who run governments regularly look for ways (“crises”) to ignore them.'
- On Power.org,
Civil Liberties</blockquote>
'..It’s time to call the N.S.A.’s mass surveillance programs what they are: criminal.'<blockquote>' It didn’t help that Congressional watchdogs — with a few exceptions, like Senator Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky — have accepted the White House’s claims of legality. The leaders of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, and Saxby Chambliss, Republican of Georgia, have called the surveillance legal. So have liberal-leaning commentators like Hendrik Hertzberg and David Ignatius.
This view is wrong — and not only, or even mainly, because of the privacy issues raised by the American Civil Liberties Union and other critics. The two programs violate both the letter and the spirit of federal law.
..
We may never know all the details of the mass surveillance programs, but we know this: The administration has justified them through abuse of language, intentional evasion of statutory protections, secret, unreviewable investigative procedures and constitutional arguments that make a mockery of the government’s professed concern with protecting Americans’ privacy. It’s time to call the N.S.A.’s mass surveillance programs what they are: criminal.'
- Jennifer Stisa Granich and Christopher Jon Sprigman, <a href="[
www.nytimes.com] Criminal N.S.A.</a> June 27, 2013</blockquote>
Context '..suggesting that there is a war on the press is less hyperbole than simple math.' - David Carr (New York Times)<blockquote>
'..the checks and balances that frame American democracy and civil liberties failed.'Spying Out of Control: NSA Bugs EU Offices, Gathers Routine Info On US Citizens; Is NSA Surveillance Legal? Constitutional? June 30, 2013
WSJ: Lack of Civil Liberties Breeds Terrorism'In digital era, privacy must be a priority.'</blockquote>