A Quote by Jeff Van Drew

Our national security requires us to be strong and fearless, but not at the cost of personal privacy. — © Jeff Van Drew
Our national security requires us to be strong and fearless, but not at the cost of personal privacy.
[A new all-encompassing national identification system] contradicts some of our most sacrosanct American principles of personal liberty and expectations of privacy and is far in excess of what is needed to provide us with the security and protections we all want.
The stakes in the encryption debate are high, with significant consequences for personal privacy, the U.S. private sector, and our national security.
National security is a really big problem for journalists, because no journalist worth his salt wants to endanger the national security, but the law talks about anyone who endangers the security of the United States is going to go to jail. So, here you are, especially in the Pentagon. Some guy tells you something. He says that's a national security matter. Well, you're supposed to tremble and get scared and it never, almost never means the security of the national government. More likely to mean the security or the personal happiness of the guy who is telling you something.
Liberty requires security without intrusion, security plus privacy.
We have a media that goes along with the government by parroting phrases intended to provoke a certain emotional response - for example, "national security." Everyone says "national security" to the point that we now must use the term "national security." But it is not national security that they're concerned with; it is state security. And that's a key distinction.
We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.
With existing technology, we can enforce airport security without sacrificing our personal privacy.
I reserve the right to survey the national political landscape for candidates at all levels who reflect a proper understanding of our national security, economic security, and family security - the ideals of social conservation, the heart and strength of our country.
Remember, it is the president's constitutional duty to provide a strong national defense. Don't insert politics into national security. Listen to your ground commanders. They know better than anyone what our military's needs are. Have somebody strong at home who can provide you with needed support 'off the battle field.'
I'm not interested in embarrassing the United States. We as a nation need to foster a broader understanding of national security, and when in the name of national security the US government both overtly and covertly aligns itself with the apartheid state and against heroic freedom fighters for racial justice ... Not only in 1962 but also keeping in mind that Mandela was on the US terror watch list until 2008, that kind of myopic understanding of national security has devastating consequences.
I hope President [Hamid] Karzai understands that our national security interests don't depend entirely on his decision there whether to allow a recount. Obviously the legitimacy of that government is an important component of it. My point is it shouldn't be the lynch pin for us deciding whether we're going to protect our national security interests in that region.
Those who devise better methods of utilizing manpower, tools, machinery, materials and facilities are making real contributions toward our national security. Today, these ideas are a form of insurance for our national security; tomorrow, this same progressive thinking is insurance for our individual security-it is, in effect, job insurance.
It is not patriotic to commit young Americans to war unless our national security clearly requires it.
The No. 1 issue with women in this country is jobs, and the No. 2 issue is our national security. So, economic security, national security and retirement security.
The 'Scowcroft Model' recognizes - and embraces - the unique but necessarily modest place the National Security Council and the national security adviser occupy in the American national security architecture.
For me, privacy and security are really important. We think about it in terms of both: You can't have privacy without security.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!