Tag: big brother

When you trade your freedom for security…you get neither.  The government’s primary job is to keep us free.  However, when you trade freedom for security, the government will always end up protecting itself.  President Trump is a threat to the machine.  Judge Napolitano explains… Napolitano: We have spying everywhere, all the time Feb. 23, 2017 – 2:51 – Judge Napolitano’s Chambers: Judge Andrew Napolitano explains why America’s spies now have more power than the United States president Tom woods speaks with Phil Giraldi, a former counter-terrorism expert and military intelligence officer of the CIA and the Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest. Is this all just “tin foil hat” stuff? Tom Woods Show Ep. 857: Trump and the Deep State

Well…Judge for yourself.  From: http://www.activistpost.com/2015/08/windows-10-can-collect-your-data-for.html Windows 10 Can Collect Your Data For Gov’t Agencies – What to Do By Heather Callaghan Windows 10 OS – the ultimate Big Brother? Of the 14+ million people who have recently installed Microsoft’s new Windows 10, there haven’t been many complaints until now. The system is said to run more efficiently, but apparently someone only recently read the tome of a service agreement. Let’s just say that Windows 10 goes above and beyond good service and makes sure that you are being a good citizen. Who is the one really getting the upgrade, here? Continue to site

I guess private property isn’t really private after-all.  This is the epitome of BIG BROTHER!!!  This stems from another drug case, which along with “terrorism” cases seem to take our constitutional protections and throw them out the window. Federal Judge OKs Installation of Surveillance Cameras Without a Warrant On October 29, a federal district court judge ruled that police can enter onto privately owned property and install secret surveillance cameras without a warrant. The judge did set forth a few guidelines that must be followed before such activity would be permissible, but the fact that such a scenario is accepted as constitutional by a federal judge is a serious setback for privacy and for the Fourth Amendment. The Fourth Amendment guarantees: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. link to full article