thespins

The government isn't interested in keeping you safe. They're interested in keeping their interests safe. Your privacy rights are just collateral damage in the war on anything that challenges their power structure.

crazy_eyes

Stay the fuck out of my business and I will take care of mine and my loved ones safety, thank you very much

kawaiikate

Obongo is at it again :/

iamrage

From an old YouTube comment: "Benjamin Franklin is spinning in his grave so fast over Obama's bullshit, we could put a magnet on his body and copper coils around him and power the whole fucking nation on him alone."

craschnet

Why yes, we want a goverment that looks for every fucking loophole to blatantly violate the spirit of the bill of rights to have unfeathered access to our personal lives.

Womb_Raider

We need to sacrifice Obama for our safety, more like.

RedditIsPropaganda23

Barry the Bummer.

RedLeader

Sorry, if we have to give up privacy for safety, then I'm prepared to sacrifice any and all conveniences that would make the world think loss of privacy is a necessity. If my smartphone is a liability, then I don't want it. Ban smartphones. I want privacy.

greycloud

i'm willing to sacrifice the privacy of the FBI in order to be protected from them.

1Sorry_SOB

Translation: Americans need to sacrifice privacy so the government feels safe.

forgetmyname

how else will you stop Supreme Leader Clinton from conquering the galaxy?

Antiseed117

Yea sure Mr O. Let's see that book of secrets while we're disclosing everything.

green_man

Obama (the most transparent president ever) can begin by actually being transparent. He can release all of his private communications to the world and then disband the secret service. If it's good enough for me it should be good enough for him. Fuck this asshole.

Nollog

I would disagree with him. There can be a common ground.

Pepper-theDoctor

I have to disagree. Techies (referring to the smartest ones) are pretty volatile like many extraordinarily intelligent people. You see guys who can easily understand complex logic problems and write incredible code who think that ability passes to other subjects. Yes, many are vehemently opposed to spying on them but, at the same time, may think they know best and may come to the conclusion that they should be spying on the idiot masses. Especially with the right nudge from the right person. Lets call the PotUS that person in this case.

Look at the top engineers in this country - they all work at google, facebook, MS, etc - the most intrusive companies in the world.

kyprioth

Exactly.

ExLibris

Wow.. I voted for the man, and this pisses me right off. Especially starting off the gate by comparing it to the TSA, and being wrong on several counts:

We don't 'accept' the TSA, we had them rammed down our throats. They're nothing more than a very costly security theater and have been from the start. The new scanners they got are worse than the old metal detectors in many ways, and for all the hassle, aggravation and pain they cause the average traveller, they have caught precisely ZERO terrorists.

Actually, it's likely an apt analogy for his forced phone unlocking. It's a method that's a pain in everyone's ass, tramples on the rights of american citizens, and will do nothing to catch actual terrorists.

elgindelta

Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759 US author, diplomat, inventor, physicist, politician, & printer (1706 - 1790)

forgetmyname

they should print this on the $100 bills.

aileron_ron

Fuck his black ass lives matter.

degenerate7

So retarded amounts of job security and a guaranteed pension?

2drunk

Don't forget the free hookers and coke.

Edit: free as in paid by your local tax payer

jaceame

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

~Benjamin Franklin

ExLibris

To be fair, that quote was concerning a dispute within PA between the governor and the legislature regarding the levying of taxes, not of accepting the risk of danger that comes with freedom.

However, that being said, I believe that the popular modern interpretation is an important belief nonetheless, and is one that is consistent with American ideals. Freedom comes with a cost, and yes, part of that cost is that other citizens can abuse that freedom to do things that are dangerous to others.

There can never be a guarantee of safety that is ironclad. We can already see how the system fails many of its citizens, giving up more of our rights for increased security by the system is just going to lead to those failures becoming greater in number and consequence.

This country was founded on the idea that we have inalienable rights. We should never give them away, and we should never sit calmly while they are infringed upon by others.

goatsandbros

Ben Franklin might have had an issue with this.

Jeez

Obama just needs to go

TimberWolfAlpha

even when he does, the deep state surveillance apparatus isn't going anywhere.

ThisIsntMe123

I feel bad using a tragedy in this way, but:

Of course giving up privacy is good, it stopped those attacks in Paris! I mean, good thing they were using unencrypted communication! Oh, you mean it was sent clear text, yet it did no good?

zeus250bc

Because they aren't looking for terrorist. They are looking for racist, xenophobes and anti-Semites to put in prison.

kyprioth

I mean, the country is slowly legalizing pot, so they need another excuse to fill prisons for cheap forced labour.

oddmon

In a word...no. To be perfectly clear...Oh FUCK no.

Also, if there were any remaining illusions that O is nothing short of a total sell-out, this statement should completely dispel them.

ilikeskittles

Was going to say simply "No" as well.

felpz

Isn't that what you all said before the Patriot Act was passed?