Obviously, I agree with what Robert is saying.
On the pretended basis of security for all, a sort of madness has taken over and results in security for wrongdoers in the government, NGO’s and banking systems. This is accompanied by an increasing lack of security for the people and warfare against those who tell the truth.
I like this extract: “But the void in this debate is at the very center: at the nature of security. If we put more energy and resources into creating a fair world — building society around common sense, the Golden Rule, universal access to decent education, environmental sustainability, and nonviolent conflict resolution — we’d reap immediate and long-lasting benefits.”
By Robert C. Koehler
COTO Report
What I keep longing to hear, in the hemorrhaging national debate about Edward Snowden, whistleblowing and the NSA, is some acknowledgment of what the word “security” actually means, and what role — if any — the government should play in creating it.
“You can’t have 100 percent security and also have 100 percent privacy.”
A moment of silence, please, for the dying patriarchy. That, of course, was how President Obama explained it to the American public shortly after the spy scandal hit the fan. When did we become “the children” in our relationship with the government, irrelevant to its day-to-day operations, utterly powerless as we stand in its massive, protecting shadow?
View original post 805 more words
