Hillary Clinton Urges Silicon Valley To 'Disrupt' ISIS
HughPickens.com writes: The NYT reports that Hillary Clinton spoke at the Brookings Institution's annual Saban Forum on Sunday and said that the Islamic State had become "the most effective recruiter in the world" and that the only solution is to engage American technology companies in blocking or taking down militants' websites, videos and encrypted communications. "We need to put the great disrupters at work at disrupting ISIS. We need Silicon Valley not to view government as its adversary. We need to challenge our best minds in the private sector and work with our best minds in the public sector to develop solutions that would both keep us safe and protect our privacy," said Clinton. "We should take the concerns of law enforcement and counterterrorism professionals seriously. They have warned that impenetrable encryption may prevent them from accessing terrorist communications and preventing a future attack. On the other hand we know there are legitimate concerns about government intrusion, network security, and creating new vulnerabilities that bad actors can and would exploit."
Why try to be cute? Just say it.
Thirty four characters live here.
bottom line: i'm done with her. she lies and lies even more to cover up those lies. thought she had a chance. no more.
Maybe y'all should stop bombing civilians over there. It doesn't take much to "radicalize" somebody whose family was killed by American bombs.
Surely we can't trust someone who directly profited from the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act, basically wrecking our economy.
Just say no to Billary...
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
America completely withdraws from the Middle East.
That should put an end to the blowback. Though the US has been creating a mess over there for well over 20 years.
Every time a tech company comes out with a new product, the marketing droids refer to it as (yet another) "disruptive technology".
The Internet is a disruptive technology. You could argue the World Wide Web is either part of that same disruptive tech, or you could probably say it is disruptive in its own right. But all the new stuff being built on top of one or both of those things isn't "disruptive" - it's just taking advantage of the disruption that's already well underway.
However back to the matter at hand... Hillary is just once again repeating the mantra "give us back doors in encrypted communications" - she's just trying to phrase it differently. But since I imagine she's aware the tech companies generally employ people who are much smarter than she is, it's apparent the message isn't really for them - it's for the American public at large.
#DeleteChrome
God help us all should that moron get into office.
But when compared against Trump. It's like what options are we left with.
Idiots to the left. Idiots to the right. And no one supporting America's true interest in sight.
We do have a great candidate available who isn't an idiot and supports America's true interests. His name is Bernie. Of course, all the morons on the right don't like him because he believes in "socialism" (though it's really the democratic socialism that Scandinavian and other European countries have, basically what we already have with Social Security and Medicare but on steroids), and many morons on the left don't like him because he's male, not a minority, or not rabidly anti-gun (Gore was rabidly anti-gun: look how that turned out for us).
Her email fiasco already tells us that Hillary Clinton is merely a user of technology, not a developer
And you expect her to know the difference between 'Encryption' and 'Backdoor'??
She's asking how to crack encryption so that only "good guys" can listen in on conversations; she's making it sound like a technical problem when it is a political decision.
"On the other hand we know there are legitimate concerns about government intrusion, network security, and creating new vulnerabilities that bad actors can and would exploit."
You can't have one and not have the other!
"We need Silicon Valley not to view government as its adversary."
You can't brute force the private sector into spending money on compliance and weakening their products in the global market (Chinese contractors would LOVE to buy middleware with NSA backdoors!), and be "friends".
-----------
And more generally, the war on "unbreakable encryption" is just such an unbelievably stupid concept. It's an OBVIOUS power grab for intelligence agencies, and it takes nothing more than common sense to see that you can't ban encryption and mandate backdoors for everything. Encryption has been around for thousands of years and, barring spooky quantum computing tech, open source projects, personal projects, and most importantly *products from countries that don't mandate backdoors* will always be widely available to those who seek encrypted communication. If someone really cares about encryption, they'll still be able to find a solution. It's as dumb as spending years in court trying to block The Pirate Bay, and then WHOOPS they just change the extension.
More importantly, the recent terrorist attacks have been planned by UNENCRYPTED communication. We're talking facebook posts and text messaging!!! I mean *come on*, it's such an obvious power grab that won't make us any safer, like the TSA. It makes me sick to see these mouthpieces for power hungry organizations spout this asinine rhetoric and use these attacks to further their own agendas (like 9/11 was used to invade Iraq). It needs to stop, and the media needs to call them out. At least the major tech companies are pushing back against this. Then again, it's expected, they have billions of dollars of market value hinging on it, and risk being forced to be uncompetitive in broad swaths of security sectors due to these idiotic policies.
The whole thing is a can of worms. It's not like only America is going to get backdoors, that's just an unrealistic elitist view. Hackers get backdoors, corporations get backdoors which will inevitably be abused for profit as personnel changes over time, other intelligence agencies get backdoors, other countries will follow suit and get backdoors (China/Russia/you name it... Skype Saudi Arabia edition! Use it or be banned from the market in our country!) This entire line of policy, frankly, leads to shit, and Solicon Valley is right to consider these people their enemies.
Keep on living in a free world while terrorists claw feebly at our liberty.
Dont join in on the bigotry. Thats what they want. They want us to hate them as much as they hate us. They want us to attack them like they attack us. They want all the decisions of the world decided by violence.
Dont give them what they want.
The code of any major OS is so insecure that the NSA should have no problem hacking into them, and figuring out what the terrorists want. Good job Silicon Valley! Way to disrupt!
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
If you want something in Congress, you have to give concessions first. I say the intelligence community should give concessions before anyone helps them. Particularly, bolstering FISC with an agency that has the clearance and authority to investigate cases and programs of intelligence agencies, and the teeth to publicly expose and prosecute certain projects/actions and those who authorized them. Which projects you ask? The agency can refer one to a branch of FISC, who can hold mock trials for constitutionality, with the agency giving their case that it is unconstitutional or unlawful. If FISC is not unanimous that the project or action is lawful and constitutional, then the project is immediately put on hold pending the case being escalated to SCOTUS.
Furthermore, permanent gag orders related to national security letters and orders need to be replaced with ones that quickly expire. The no-fly list and terrorist watchlist need to be purged and reworked, with a vetting process for removal no more difficult than passing a classified information clearance background check. Policy and law should disallow mandated (or even voluntary cooperation a la PRISM) software backdoors. The agency should inspect domestic internet backbones and switching points to ensure the domestic intelligence community is not tapping them physically. Intel swapping to gain domestic data (e.g. Five Eyes) should be made illegal.
Then, and only then, should we give one fuck about what the intelligence community wants.
Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
bottom line: i'm done with her. she lies and lies even more to cover up those lies. thought she had a chance. no more.
Curiously, she seems to be polling higher than the lead republican candidate (Trump).
Every time she speaks, she mentions how "there should be a tax deduction for $x", where $x is tailored to the audience. There should be a deduction for college tuition, a deduction for caring for elderly parents, an individual deduction for health care costs, and so on.
It would appear she's "buying" votes with tax incentives.
Of course, these are just campaign promises, and she's going to pay for it by raising taxes on the rich. Go figure.
but she is not unique. It is a matter of logical necessity that *all* politicians lie.
First off, the job is most attractive to sociopaths, so liars are already over-represented in the group of candidates.
Second, the liars have an advantage over the honest candidates (the precious few) when campaigning, since the liars can promise that which they know to be impossible, or that which they have no intention of delivering. The liars can also produce stronger attack-ads to discredit their rivals, and can brazenly deny the ones produced against them even if they are true. Also, the liars have no problems forming alliances with special-interest groups who's interests run counter to the voter's agenda, and receiving more financial backing than the honest ones can. So, in general, the liars win.
Third, once in office, the only means of furthering a political agenda is to cooperate with other politicians and special interest groups. The system is designed to make it impossible to operate alone. So, those who are willing to compromise on their principles will have far more political allies. Those who are willing to lie as easily as breathe will have the most political allies, and will absolutely crush any politician that does not do the same.
So, eventually, the honest ones get shut down and shut out, leaving only the liars (and the *best* liars, at that) behind.
They all lie. They always will. Every damn one of them.
How about we do it more directly and stop buy oil from those Saudis that are funding ISIS/Daash and those oil companies that are buying oil from ISIS/Daash.
Blocking a few web pages isn't going to do anywhere near as much in comparison. They need funds more than they need recruits.
Step1 in defeating them is so easy:
Severely punish everyone buying isis oil.
Assesinate them by cia if req'd.
But somehow, the super power with oil addiction is far too sensitive when it comes to oil interests.
Quit that oil addiction and hit the buyers hard.
Maybe put radioactive tracers in the wells, and close down all refinaries where the trace shows up.
Especially if it is a US owned refinary. Bomb it if you must.
Bram Stolk http://stolk.org/tlctc/
So? Who cares?
What's the worst that they can do to us? Or to China? Or to Russia? They're a third-string wannabe that is getting all the media hype because FEAR SELLS.
And it is easy for politicians to look tough by calling for more military action against them.
When that fascist cunt says "we need to put (anyone) to work to (do something)", she's exposing her belief that other people are hers to command. Fuck that noise.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
If she shuts up, she'll get elected. I cling to the hope that she'll keep spewing this kind of bullshit until even her starry-eyed SJW minions start to realize that she's evil.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
If you can listen to Trump for more than 60 seconds without recoiling in disgust and wanting to change the channel then I have bad news for you. That makes you an even bigger douchebag than Trump.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Clowns to the left and jokers to the right sounds like a succinct summary of politics in every English speaking country.
This is easy, do I get anything for it?
Step One: Stop fucking supporting them.
There are good hints that Washington or Langley or Fort Meade or someone else high up in the US is directly or indirectly supporting ISIS. Possibly as a part of some geopolitical games like "let's remove Assad from power and seize his oil" or some such fucked-up shit.
Step Two: Stop fucking supporting their allies.
We know the list - Saudi Arabia, Turkey, various so-called Syrian rebel groups who ally with whoever pays them the most or gave them the most recent blowjob or whatever. Possibly Israeal though that are rumours I'm not sure about. Point is that if if you are fighting them with the one hand, and helping those who help them on the other, you shouldn't be surprised. Turkey is basically backstabbing the anti-ISIS coalition at multiple opportunities, because they don't like the Kurds and have their own plans for the area. Also, Putin is not the first to point out that most of the oil trade ISIS runs despite international embargo is going through Turkey. Saudia Arabia has been such an open supporter of islamic terrorism and jihad philosophy (remember 9/11 and where most of the hijackers were from?) that their oil and strategic alliance with the US is the only reason they've not been invaded long ago.
Step Three: Stop fucking "using the opportunity"
If you want to be serious about fighting ISIS, you need to stop seing them as a good opportunity, a nice pretext, a useful thing to have so you can push through your mass surveilance and pseudo homeland security bullshit.
Step Four: Stop fucking working on the next ISIS
All this messing with other peoples religions and internal politics got us where we are today. Al Qaida came out of the US misguided interaction with the Taliban predecessors in Afghanistan. ISIS is a direct result of the Iraq invasion and Saudi support of Wahabism.
If we bomb ISIS into oblivion but continue to play the same game, we will get the same result, again. And if we extrapolate the trend, the next one will be even more ugly. ISIS is not just a terror state, it's also a mindset, and removing it from the map won't stop it. It's not just in Syria, but over half of Africa as well, for example.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org