A Quote by Julius and Ethel Rosenberg

There was a possibility I could have been under surveillance. — © Julius and Ethel Rosenberg
There was a possibility I could have been under surveillance.
Closed Circuit' came out of a general anxiety about surveillance. Government surveillance and private surveillance.
Possibility was not a bag or box that could be closed and sealed, it was a vast open chute which received everything, everything; one could not choose or direct or destroy the powerful flow of possibility.
If all you had was academic ability, you wouldn't have been able to get out of bed this morning. In fact, there wouldn't have been a bad to get out of. No one could have made one. You could have written about possibility of one, but not have constructed it.
I'd rather never have been married than been divorced a few times. Not that there's anything wrong with divorce, but I don't think I could do it if that was a possibility.
Executive branch rules require sensitive classified information to be discussed in specialized facilities that are designed to guard against the possibility that officials are being targeted for surveillance outside of the workplace.
The concept of surveillance is ingrained in our beings. God was the original surveillance camera.
The issue I brought forward most clearly was that of mass surveillance, not of surveillance in general.
Martin Luther King was a victim of surveillance, and had great solidarity with victims of surveillance.
Liberty is the possibility of doubting, the possibility of making a mistake, the possibility of searching and experimenting, the possibility of saying No to any authority - literary, artistic, philosophic, religious, social and even political.
I think mass surveillance is a bad idea because a surveillance society is one in which people understand that they are constantly monitored.
I am pleased though that there's a possibility of a diplomatic solution [in Syria]. I remain somewhat skeptical, but I am pleased that it's a possibility and I think people like myself who've been arguing for delaying this bombing, have allowed this diplomatic possibility to occur.
What is the society we wish to protect? Is it the society of complete surveillance for the commonwealth? Is this the wealth we seek to have in common - optimal security at the cost of maximal surveillance?
There seems to be a strong possibility that international humanitarian law has been violated, in a manner that could amount to war crimes.
We have to call mass surveillance mass surveillance. We can't let governments around the world redefine, and sort of weasel their way out of it by saying this is bulk collection.
The internet is like a surround system, a landscape at its most benign, a closed system of surveillance and self-surveillance at its more sinister. Something we can no longer imagine an outside of.
There was never a shred, never a hint, never a possibility - not a remote, not a million-, not a billion-to-one possibility - I could have planted anything. Nor would I have a reason to.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!