Slashdot Mirror


Kerry Says US Is On the "Right Side of History" When It Comes To Online Freedom

An anonymous reader writes "Addressing the audience at the Freedom Online Coalition Conference, Secretary of State John Kerry defended NSA snooping actions saying: 'Let me be clear – as in the physical space, cyber security cannot come at the expense of cyber privacy. And we all know this is a difficult challenge. But I am serious when I tell you that we are committed to discussing it in an absolutely inclusive and transparent manner, both at home and abroad. As President Obama has made clear, just because we can do something doesn't mean that we should do it. And that's why he ordered a thorough review of all our signals intelligence practices. And that's why he then, after examining it and debating it and openly engaging in a conversation about it, which is unlike most countries on the planet, he announced a set of concrete and meaningful reforms, including on electronic surveillance, in a world where we know there are terrorists and others who are seeking to do injury to all of us. And finally, transparency – the principles governing such activities need to be understood so that free people can debate them and play their part in shaping these choices. And we believe these principles can positively help us to distinguish the legitimate practices of states governed by the rule of law from the legitimate practices of states that actually use surveillance to repress their people. And while I expect you to hold the United States to the standards that I've outlined, I also hope that you won't let the world forget the places where those who hold their government to standards go to jail rather than win prizes.' He added: 'This debate is about two very different visions: one vision that respects freedom and another that denies it. All of you at the Freedom Online Coalition are on the right side of this debate, and now we need to make sure that all of us together wind up on the right side of history."

27 of 261 comments (clear)

  1. Sure, I guess I agree by robinsonne · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If by "right side" he means leaning towards totalitarianism and increasingly corporatist/fascist views towards online freedoms, then ok, I guess I can agree.

    1. Re:Sure, I guess I agree by Z00L00K · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I would say that the US used to be, but the last decades have turned over to the dark side.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    2. Re:Sure, I guess I agree by Mitreya · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If by "right side" he means leaning towards totalitarianism and increasingly corporatist/fascist views towards online freedoms

      He says so right there:

      He added: 'This debate is about two very different visions: one vision that respects freedom and another that denies it.

      I just don't know what makes him think that the current administration is on the "respect freedom" side of things.

    3. Re:Sure, I guess I agree by MisterSquid · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If by "right side" he means leaning towards totalitarianism and increasingly corporatist/fascist views towards online freedoms, then ok, I guess I can agree.

      The right side? What a bunch of horseshit. The summary quotes Kerry as saying

      And we believe these principles can positively help us to distinguish the legitimate practices of states governed by the rule of law from the legitimate practices of states that actually use surveillance to repress their people. And while I expect you to hold the United States to the standards that I've outlined, I also hope that you won't let the world forget the places where those who hold their government to standards go to jail rather than win prizes.

      Which I'm might be a typo ("the legitimate practices of states that actually use surveillance to repress their people") but would be unsurprised to find out he actually said that, Freudian slip and all that.

      What really infuriates me is the hypocrisy and the lies. Who is "win[ning] prizes" for holding the US government to standards? Snowden had to flee his country to seek asylum in RUSSIA for crying out loud.

      The whole thing stinks and they (Kerry, Obama) have the gall to lie to our faces that they are going to do something about it.

      I'm so angry I could spit.

      --
      blog
    4. Re:Sure, I guess I agree by LWATCDR · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Right side of history is Obama's administration's catch phrase.
      Of course he also said that Romney was on the "wrong side of history" about Russia being a threat.

      Translation.
      Right side of history == people that agree with the Obama administration.
      Wrong side of history == people that do not agree with the Obama administration.

      Just what we need is a president with a catch phrase.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    5. Re:Sure, I guess I agree by fustakrakich · · Score: 4, Insightful

      History. The US has always been at war.

      Kerry justifies his bullshit with the standard, "The other guy is worse, so STFU".

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    6. Re:Sure, I guess I agree by Rigel47 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I just don't know what makes him think that the current administration is on the "respect freedom" side of things.

      It's not. But he's a politician and part of a Government that excels at saying one thing and doing another. All this bullshit talk about "transparency" is laughable. The only reason we are having this "talk" is because of Edward Snowden.

      Nevermind, of course, that any reasonable reading of the Constitution makes much of the NSA's activities illegal. But no, that's not important. What's important is that we're talking, having "conversations," in a "transparent" manner. Meanwhile the NSA's vacuums are running full tilt and the FISA rubber-stamp machine is printing "Approved" on anything that comes near it.

  2. History... by GameboyRMH · · Score: 5, Insightful

    History is written by the victors - not necessarily the good guys.

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  3. So lets be Open about it. by delt0r · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As far as i can tell, if there was no Snowden there wouldn't be any discussion at all.

    --
    If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
    1. Re:So lets be Open about it. by dmbasso · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Exactly. This hypocrisy really pisses me off:

      I also hope that you won't let the world forget the places where those who hold their government to standards go to jail rather than win prizes.

      So please stop being a hypocrite and free Ms. Manning, give her a medal for her bravery.

      --
      `echo $[0x853204FA81]|tr 0-9 ionbsdeaml`@gmail.com
    2. Re:So lets be Open about it. by Goaway · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Let's just conveniently forget that Snowden tried to do things the "correct" way, and nothing happened.

  4. Irony by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 5, Informative

    From TFS:

    "I also hope that you won't let the world forget the places where those who hold their government to standards go to jail rather than win prizes"

    So, Snowden isn't due for jail-time if he were to return to the USA, Mr. Kerry?

    And why has the Obama administration brought charges against more whistleblowers than all other administrations combined? (Six by Obama, three by all previous administrations combined)

    --

    "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  5. doublespeak by VMaN · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Let me be clear – as in the physical space, cyber security cannot come at the expense of cyber privacy."

    But that is precisely what is going on.

    1. Re:doublespeak by CanHasDIY · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Let me be clear – as in the physical space, cyber security cannot come at the expense of cyber privacy."

      But that is precisely what is going on.

      Since Obama came on the scene, I've learned that when a politician prefaces a statement with, "let me be clear," chances are good that he's going to be anything but.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    2. Re:doublespeak by CanHasDIY · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well, this isn't something Obama invented...

      Perhaps not, but he has latched onto it as his personal catch phrase.

      Just like how Bush Sr didn't come up with the phrase, "no new taxes," but when I hear that phrase he immediately springs to mind... or rather, Dana Carvey's dead-on impression of him.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  6. Re:If Might Makes Right by Stargoat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Since the US, by controlling in the Internet, more or less is capable of re-writing any history that is less than praising of its methods, I suppose the US is on the right side of history. They can write the history, after all.

    --
    Hoist Number One and Number Six.
  7. ahem by Major+Blud · · Score: 4, Insightful
    "And that's why he ordered a thorough review of all our signals intelligence practices after they were leaked to the world."

    FTFY.

    --
    If you post as Anonymous Coward, don't expect a reply.
  8. Arrogant, incompetent boob by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    John Kerry in 1971 Doonesbury comics

    Some things never change

  9. Thomas Jefferson said.... by ToasterTester · · Score: 5, Informative

    "Does the government fear us? Or do we fear the government? When the people fear the government, tyranny has found victory. The federal government is our servant, not our master!"

    1. Re:Thomas Jefferson said.... by tom229 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Sadly, I don't think the government has feared the people in quite some time. Even worse, I've noticed an increasing trend of this generation looking towards the government as a sort of surrogate parent to take care of them in their adult lives. We have big brother, because we've asked for it.

      --
      If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
  10. Aren't you supposed to be on the left? by jandrese · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes, I agree that this administration is on the right side of history, but this is very annoying to people who elected them to be on the left! It's pretty annoying when the only two realistic candidates are the right and far right candidates.

    --

    I read the internet for the articles.
  11. Re:If Might Makes Right by Jason+Levine · · Score: 4, Funny

    Since the US, by controlling in the Internet, more or less is capable of re-writing any history that is less than praising of its methods, I suppose the US is on the right side of history. They can write the history, after all.

    He was just misquoted. He meant the US is on the "write" side of history. As in the US is going to write the history and paint it as completely wonderful.

    "In the dark times, national security was hampered by not knowing what every citizen was doing at all times. Roadblocks such as warrants prevented our wonderful security organizations from looking up information on anyone at anytime. This meant that threats could come from anywhere at any time. Those tasked with protecting our security wept over such horrible restrictions. Thankfully, the restrictions were removed and our wonderful security overseers can now look up information on anyone at any time for any reason without having to deal with trivial minutiae like court-issued warrants, probable cause, or fact-based evidence linking the person to a crime. This means we live in the most secure times imaginable. Just ask anyone (who doesn't want to be dragged off in the middle of the night for speaking out against the security agencies)."

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  12. He never said it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I just don't know what makes him think that the current administration is on the "respect freedom" side of things.

    At no point he said explicitly this administration is on the freedom side. 1st rules of politics : make the reader read something he thinks he might read but in reality do not say anything. Reader are probably all assuming *what* the right side is. The funny things is, kerry at no point really explicitly said it.

  13. Sum up by tom229 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So, if I can sum up his entire speech in a sentence:

    "Hey, we're not as evil as a lot of other countries out there! PS. Turrirrists"

    --
    If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
  14. Ya. No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I believe I speak for the entirety of humanity when I say, "No John. Fuck off, you puppet."

  15. Liar or Fool? by Bob9113 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "And while I expect you to hold the United States to the standards that I've outlined, I also hope that you won't let the world forget the places where those who hold their government to standards go to jail rather than win prizes." - Kerry

    Does he live in such a powerful echo chamber / reality distortion field that he actually believes what he is saying, or does he have such disdain for the citizens that he is comfortable saying the opposite of what is true, to try to squeeze out a few extra votes from those who don't know any better?

    The reply to my letter to the FCC regarding Net Neutrality opened with, "Dear Consumer,", and was purportedly from Tom Wheeler. That's what I am? Not a citizen, but a consumer -- a wallet on legs, to be pried open to get at the sweet, delicious money inside? Equal access to communications doesn't matter, as long as the video entertainment circuses gets a fast lane to keep us numb and the subscription cash flowing. To Kerry perhaps it is the same; I am just a vote, to be manipulated in whatever way necessary to serve the greater good. I wonder if both of them open letters to their spouses, "Dear Vagina." The sad truth is I've had the fortune to know some powerful people, and I wouldn't put that last beyond them were they more candid, and less possessed of glib and alluring insincerity. Perhaps the most telling thing is when a reply that opens, "Dear Consumer" shows that they no longer even grasp what the charade is meant to portray.

    We are not the consumers, nor the electorate. We are The People. The government is Ours. I tremble to consider the road between here and their understanding of that.

  16. Re:Bingo by zugmeister · · Score: 4, Informative

    Citation needed.

    Well, I had to get to page two of a google search on "Walmart Makes Stores Close" before I started coming to articles with numbers from sources I'd heard about, but here you'll find this quote:
    "A study published in 2008 in the Journal of Urban Economics examined about 3,000 Walmart store openings nationally and found that each store caused a net decline of about 150 jobs (as competing retailers downsized and closed) and lowered total wages paid to retail workers.".

    This article was interesting to read but for those averse to clicking the link:
    "But the closer a store was to the Walmart location, the greater the likelihood it would close. Persky and his colleagues found that for every mile closer to the Walmart, 6 percent more stores closed. Close in around the store's location, between 35 and 60 percent of stores closed.
    And depending on the type of business, the impact of a Walmart moving in can be much worse. Persky says that the per-mile closure rate increase for drugstores is almost 20 percent. For home furnishings, it's about 15 percent. For hardware stores, it's about 18 percent per mile. For toys, it's more than 25 percent per mile.".

    Really, that's all the time I'm willing to invest in refuting the idea that somehow WalMart fosters a diverse / thriving / healthy business ecosystem.