Nope, it's neither loaded nor paranoid, it's simply a conclusion from your justification that "no one knows what it takes to keep people safe". Either you believe that noone knows, but those people who decide in secret, in which case a secret police killing citizens should also be fine with you if they decide that that's what's needed, or you don't actually believe that justification yourself and do think that the public does actually have something meaningful to say on the topic, in which case you would at least have to justify why that would not apply to mass surveillance.

Now, if your stance is that spying on my private life (not being a US citizen, and not being a public/political/military figure either) by your government is something you like to support, then you are an asshole, in particular if you are at the same time telling me we are "friends". I mean, I hope you do see the difference between keeping tabs on foreign military and mass-surveilling the population of allies?

Two words: Brandon Mayfield. Mis-identified by the FBI as being related to the Madrid train bombings. The Spanish police told the FBI his fingerprint didn't match. The Feds used National Security Letters to search his house and computer and plant bugs. And, finding NO evidence he ever traveled to Spain, deduced he was a master terrorist, capable of travelling under false papers. Locked up for weeks in solitary - under a fake name - as a material witness. Oh yes, it can happen here!