Slashdot Mirror
Hillary Clinton: "We Need To Talk Sensibly About Spying"
dryriver writes "The Guardian reports: 'Hillary Clinton has called for a "sensible adult conversation", to be held in a transparent way, about the boundaries of state surveillance highlighted by the leaking of secret NSA files by the whistleblower Edward Snowden. In a boost to Nick Clegg, the British deputy prime minister, who is planning to start conversations within government about the oversight of Britain's intelligence agencies, the former US secretary of state said it would be wrong to shut down a debate. Clinton, who is seen as a frontrunner for the 2016 US presidential election, said at Chatham House in London: "This is a very important question. On the intelligence issue, we are democracies thank goodness, both the US and the UK. We need to have a sensible adult conversation about what is necessary to be done, and how to do it, in a way that is as transparent as it can be, with as much oversight and citizens' understanding as there can be."'"
Just fucking words. From the mouth of a presidential hopeful. I can't think of anything more meaningless.
If I understand what I believe you are trying to imply then I agree.
James Clapper can lie to Congress about the NSA's activities and there are no repercussions.
How about we start with that? If you feel that you have to lie to Congress then either you need to be fired or the program that you're lying about needs to be shut down (or both).
This. Rules and oversight are meaningless if they cannot or will not be enforced. Break the rules and/or lie to congress = go directly to jail. Or should be. The problem is that legislators do no take our privacy seriously at all; they just keep telling us we have nothing to hide. This call for new rules and oversight is just a smoke screen.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
In particular, Hillary Clinton said "we are democracies thank goodness, both the US and the UK". Now, what did she mean with that remark, and would it be similar to the meaning that the common person might assign to it?
From ancient Greek demos + kratos, democracy = rule by the people.
One suspects that what the rulers and would-be rulers mean is closer to autocracy = rule over the people, coupled with the assertion that if the people don't actively resist (via rebellion), then they tacitly accept the whims of their rulers.
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
For the first 36 years of my life I lived in the USSR. It was un-free country, but many of us valued freedom and learned to love it more than the state religion - "Communism" that the government preached. When Bush started his war in Iraq as a retaliation to the 9/11, I noticed that with Patriot Act, "security" in the airports this country started to grow more and more similar to the failed state - Soviet Union. Some features that I believed to be unique trademarks of the totalitarian states sneaked in the everyday life of Americans. There was a government slogan in the USSR - "to catch up with and pass the USA", but now it seems that the USA is trying to catch up with the KGB-ish nature of the USSR. It is sad for me to see that many born-Americans believe that Freedom is given to them by God, by their brave predecessors or just by the Land they are born on. Freedom has to be fought for by every generation all over again, citizens have to prove they deserve it.
I would never vote for Republicans - for me they share much more with Soviets than just the red color, but when Obama (whom I voted for) calls Snowden a "traitor" (instead of a hero), I'm thinking that Putin in his place would do exactly the same. Putin, who's main enemies are Russian citizens.
"Mistakes were made"
meanwhile
Hillary Clinton ordered U.S. diplomats to spy on UN
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1333920/WikiLeaks-Hillary-Clinton-ordered-U-S-diplomats-spy-UN-leaders.html
Who logs in to gdm? Not I, said the duck.
Is it just me, or is "sensible adult conversation" rather condescending? Why is it that when a whistle blower identifies where the law has been violated, rather than a immediate and far reaching criminal investigation to identify and punish those responsible for breaking the law we see excuses and calls for "sensible adult conversation". There is no need for a negotiation. If I were to spy in this manner there would be no discussion; I would be prosecuted, imprisoned and possibly killed.
National Security is a weak cover for the abuse of power and gross violations of the highest law of the land. How can senior people get away with lying to Congress and not get thrown in jail for life? What does it say when people can lie like this, break the highest law, and face no consequences? No. Instead the whistle blowers are facing life in prison.
I didn't believe all the campaign promises of Obama, but to actually be worse than Bush takes some doing. The US is stuffed. Your 'democracy' was sacrificed many years ago; welcome to the Police State. What other country has tortured people for more than ten years - and now can only keep people alive - people who have not been charged much less given a trial - through forced feeding. The US is a grotesque parody of what it once stood for.
Indeed, I find her interest in discourse on the subject frightening because she's the official that ordered spying, including theft of credit card info, on UN officials.
Citation for the curious: Spying on United Nations leaders by United States diplomats
With alternatives like Palin and Romney one is left with little choice.
Third parties. If you vote for evil, you are naive and part of the problem. Try to give someone else a chance, if for no other reason than to send a message.
Da derp dee derp da teedly derpee derpee dum. Rated PG-13.
8 years of Bush thinking he knew what was best for you is largely what got us into this mess.
And Obama is just as much of a thug for continuing these policies and, in certain cases, expanding them.
Da derp dee derp da teedly derpee derpee dum. Rated PG-13.
Agreed. I've always seen myself as a progressive and have voted for Democratic candidates since the 1980s, but after the Obama experience I'm not so sure. There are a few exceptions, but otherwise it's clear to me that both of the two major parties are almost completely corrupt. For instance, do you think things would have been much different under Hillary than under Obama? I don't think so. They're both establishment figures who's real masters are the big corporations -- that's where they get most of the money for their campaigns. But that kind of cash always comes with strings attached.
If we ever want to see this kind of corruption end, our first goal must be to get money out of politics.
If that makes sense to you, I would suggest signing this petition: WOLF-PAC. Launched in October 2011 for the purpose of passing a 28th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that will end corporate personhood* and publicly finance all elections**. Since Congress won't pass such an Amendment on its own, the plan is to instead have the State Legislators propose it via an Article V Convention. At least 34 States need to cooperate for this to work, but already many have reacted with enthusiasm, most notably Texas. If successful, we should see a much more respectable group of politicians emerge within one or two election cycles.
*) The aim is not to end legal personhood for corporations, but natural personhood. The latter became a problem following the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission ruling, which grated some of the rights of natural persons to corporations and makes it easier for them to lend financial support to political campaigns.
**) At the State level, more than half of all political campaigns are already publicly financed in some way, so there's nothing strange about doing the same for political campaigns for federal office.
Exactly. And 3d parties don't even have to win to affect the public debate, they just have to make some kind of decent enough showing to get TwoParty candidates worried. But as long as people keep voting for the New GOP (aka Democrats) or the Old GOP (aka Parody of Itself), nothing that these fetid parties agree on will ever change. And sadly, these parties agree on a lot of really crappy shit, like due process free execution & detention, pervasive surveillance, socializing losses and privatizing profits (Wall St.), Executive branch war making authority, that we actually do need to be policeman of the world, exporting jobs in the name of free trade agreements, prison industrial complex, etc. etc.
Any TwoParty voter who opposes these policies, policies which significantly impact major human rights, cannot in good conscience vote for "either" party because he or she then becomes a de facto supporter of those policies.
And finally, the old "but look at the opposition - you can't let that nut win" argument is just pure BS when "both" parties share about 99.99% of their DNA. What real difference is there between 99.5% batshit crazy and 99.6%? Worse than that, we end up with people like Obama, whose mightiest achievement was taking what was a radical expansion of executive power under the GWB administration, and making it the new normal. That's worse than the alternative where at least one party would pretend to care and fight back a little.
What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
Clinton, who is seen as a frontrunner for the 2016 US presidential election, said at Chatham House in London: "This is a very important question. On the intelligence issue, we are democracies thank goodness, both the US and the UK.
Huh, a democracy, eh? Mind showing me the public vote where consent to the spying program was established? Oh there isn't one? You professional liars just love to trot out "we're a democracy" to shift the blame. Fuck you. It's a Republic. A Democratic Republic. Anyone who's held office while this shit has been going on let it happen. We need to fire congress -- They let the NSA lie to them, knowing full well that shit was a lie. The secret courts even ruled the NSA actions as a violation of the constitution. That means the Armed forces should be storming the NSA server rooms and shutting them down because they swore to protect the Constitution. Game over. We can't trust you. If a you found out a spy was a double agent you wouldn't let them go right back to working for you. Get the fuck out of our government. We're Americans. We can and have fought off forces greater than ours who wished to snuff us out. We didn't need an Orwellian spying agency to do it either. Now we're one of the greatest countries around, and you're saying we have to "Talk Sensibly About Spying"?! Yeah! We do! The sensible thing is to route that shit out. The Flu kills more folks in a year than multiple 9/11's. I'm more scared of my bathtub than a damn terrorist. Cars kill hundreds times more folks every year than 9/11. The sensible thing to do would be to stop wasting our money on shit we don't want, if this were "democracy". Fucking moronic liars. What she means is: "We need to engage full damage control, STAT!" Bite me bitch, you're fired.