Reason: Encryption wars ramp up as Apple improves phone security

Motherboard: Cops are confident iPhone hackers have found a workaround to Apple’s new security feature

BoingBoing: Defense contractors already making millions off detention of immigrant children

The Federalist: FBI lawyer told colleagues to go easy on Hillary: ‘She might be our next President’

JAMES BOVARD: A politically weaponized FBI is nothing new, but plenty dangerous

The American Conservative: Real takeaway: The FBI influenced the election of a President

Zero Hedge: US Intelligence developing better storage to hoard your data based on human DNA

WSWS: Deadly siege of Yemeni port of Hodeidah begins with Washington’s aid and approval

Mises: Splitting up California into 3 pieces is long overdue

FEE: Why the intellectual dark web had to go dark

The Free Thought Project: “You’re not going to f—ing film us”: Raging cop spits on, arrests innocent woman for filming

ScienceAlert: We have the best evidence yet that psychedelic drugs can repair broken neural networks

From Chapter 4, Freedom, Reason, and Tradition, of his Constitution of Liberty: 

“The argument for liberty, in the last resort, is indeed an argument for principles and against expediency in collective action, which, as we shall see, is equivalent to saying that only the judge and not the administrator may order coercion. When one of the intellectual leaders of nineteenth-century liberalism, Benjamin Constant, described liberalism as the système de principes, he pointed to the heart of the matter. Not only is liberty a system under which all government action is guided by principles, but it is an ideal that will not be preserved unless it is itself accepted as an overriding principle governing all particular acts of legislation. Where no such fundamental rule is stubbornly adhered to as an ultimate ideal about which there must be no compromise for the sake of material advantages—as an ideal which, even though it may have to be temporarily infringed during a passing emergency, must form the basis of all permanent arrangements—freedom is almost certain to be destroyed by piecemeal encroachments. For in each particular instance it will be possible to promise concrete and tangible advantages as the result of a curtailment of freedom, while the benefits sacrificed will in their nature always be unknown and uncertain. If freedom were not treated as the supreme principle, the fact that the promises which a free society has to offer can always be only chances and not certainties, only opportunities and not definite gifts to particular individuals, would inevitably prove a fatal weakness and lead to its slow erosion.”

The Guardian: Cosmetics chain Lush resumes undercover police poster campaign

The Week: The NSA knew about cell phone surveillance around the White House 6 years ago

Mashable: Apple’s officially making it harder for cops to bust into your iPhone

Reuters: Big Brother facial recognition by police challenged in Britain

The New American: Surveillance State grows with help from state and local accomplices Ed: A few days old, but so important.

Gizmodo: China to make RFID chips mandatory in cars so the government can track citizens on the road

Foreign Policy: In China’s far west, companies cash in on surveillance program that targets Muslims

Techdirt: South Carolina drug war cops routinely serve regular warrants as if they’re no-knock warrants

The Free Thought Project: Video of massive crowd chasing down British police at protest over man arrest for reporting on pedophiles Ed: It is apparently illegal to report on certain court trials of Muslim immigrant pedophile rings in Britain, probably due to the fear of the government not living up to PC standards.

Reason: Domino’s Pizza is fixing the roads of towns across the US, because local governments won’t

The American Conservative: The Saudi-UAE alliance is the most dangerous force in the Middle East today

Telegraph: Only 100 nuclear bombs needed to cause catastrophe around the world Ed: 15,000 currently exist.

The Guardian: ‘Surveillance society’: Has technology at the US-Mexico border gone too far?

New York Times: The US spends billions in defense aid. Is it working?

The Intercept: Law claiming to fight sex trafficking is doing the opposite: making sex work more dangerous