Hillary Clinton: "We Need To Talk Sensibly About Spying" 461
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."'"
Words (Score:5, Insightful)
Just fucking words. From the mouth of a presidential hopeful. I can't think of anything more meaningless.
Re:"what is necessary to be done" (Score:5, Insightful)
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).
"Sensible adult conversation?" (Score:1, Insightful)
The name Hillary Clinton does not belong in the same sentence with the phrase "sensible adult conversation."
it's too late for that (Score:5, Insightful)
The level of abuses - both the spying itself, subsequent known abuses of the data, and countless likely unknown abuses - has already done enough damage to the fabric of the ideal of democracy, that an open and straightforward conversation is not enough. When there are very real threats that people will be tortured to preserve government secrecy about this...
It's too late for the straightforward sensible conversation. Heads need to roll. Figuritively or literally. I stopped voting when Obama broke his 1 year GITMO pledge. I thought I would make an exception if Hillary was the only female top spot on one of the two main parties. I think this slashdot troll headline will make me give up on that. It'd be nice to see a non-male president of the U.S. But Hillary Clinton is day by day demonstrably failing to live up to the kind of standard which I would use if I could muster the belief that voting could help this in the same sensible fashion she is after. Things are *messed up*.
Re:"what is necessary to be done" (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:"what is necessary to be done" (Score:5, Insightful)
Whenever a politician says "We need to have a conversation" it means that they want to avoid taking a position on the issue until they know which way the wind is blowing. It is easier to bend when you have no spine.
Re:it's too late for that (Score:4, Insightful)
It'd be nice to see a non-male president of the U.S.
Why do the sexual organs or skin color of the US President matter so much to you?
Re:Such Hubris... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:"what is necessary to be done" (Score:4, Insightful)
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).
I agree that if the director feels he has to lie, then those are appropriate responses. If he actually does lie, meaning he intentionally and knowingly deceives Congress, then he should be prosecuted for perjury.
Re:"what is necessary to be done" (Score:4, Insightful)
> And all of you clueless Obama-loving lberal weenies will still vote for her next election,
With alternatives like Palin and Romney one is left with little choice. One does not have to "love" Obama at all in order to realize just how TRULY BAD the alternatives are.
Obama is in office because of that fact.
I will reprhase that: Obama is in office because neocons refuse to stop drinking their own kool-aid and acknowledge that they are a minority in the electorate.
The nation has always been divided by 2 extremist minorities with a large middle that dislikes both of them.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:"what is necessary to be done" (Score:3, Insightful)
"If I understand what I believe you are trying to imply then I agree."
I agree in principle, but I don't agree with Clinton. Why?
Because SHE is wholly involved in the current web of lies. Remember Benghazi. And ask yourself how she could have announced the death of certain people at the embassy 15 minutes before it happened.
Then ask yourself why, when asked about Benghazi in a Congressional hearing, she sidestepped the questions by throwing up her hands and shouting, "What does it matter NOW?"
I have no problem with a woman President. I have a very BIG problem with Hillary Clinton. I'd vote for the first cockroach as President before I would vote for her.
You can't have one of the liars running the "open discussion" and then pretend that it's really open. You'd just be wasting everybody's time. Or worse.
Re:Words (Score:5, Insightful)
Not just any words. Those are accusations. Clinton accuses us of being hysteric. Whenever a politician demands a "sensible" or "adult" debate, they're trying to discredit their opposition by implying that the debate was not sensible or adult before said politician called the opposition to order.
Re:"what is necessary to be done" (Score:4, Insightful)
Catch up with the USSR (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:"what is necessary to be done" (Score:5, Insightful)
"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 [dailymail.co.uk]
Re:"what is necessary to be done" (Score:4, Insightful)
The nation has always been divided by 2 extremist minorities with a large middle that dislikes both of them.
...but keeps voting for them anyway (even going so far as to defend them now and again).
So why exactly is the big stupid middle not to be reviled just like the extremes? The outcome of all three groups' actions is exactly the same.
Re:"what is necessary to be done" (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:"what is necessary to be done" (Score:2, Insightful)
Where is this extreme left wing minority? If you think that Obama is left wing, all I can say is wow, just wow. In any other western country, Obama would probably be considered moderate right-wing or perhaps centrist.
Re:"what is necessary to be done" (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't care how transparent this is or how much oversight it has; spying on innocent people will never be okay, and neither will spying on people to find out if they're innocent or not.
Re:"what is necessary to be done" (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:"what is necessary to be done" (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Liar. (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:"what is necessary to be done" (Score:3, Insightful)
Whatever his deepest personal inclinations are, President Obama won an election, not a revolution. He has to govern within the existing structure, with another party in opposition, and conform to the existing rules. You would certainly be mistaken to think he isn't shifting things noticeably to the left within that framework. There really isn't any question about the politics of his former "green jobs czar," Van Jones [discoverthenetworks.org], is there? And an interesting comment from his former press secretary, Anita Dunn [youtube.com]. Early on in his campaign, there were a number of reports or interviews of his early supporters, and several of them that I saw had a similar motif in the wall coverings [newsbusters.org]. Move along, nothing to see here, right?
I would also advise you to not make the mistake of thinking that the US does not have a genuine Left. Among others, the Communist Party USA [cpusa.org] would beg to differ with you. Since they have little open support, guess what many of the hard left do when they want to actually hold office? Tone down the rhetoric, declare themselves to be "progressives," and join a more moderate party than they would prefer. Once in office, incrementalism moves them towards their goals.
Re:"what is necessary to be done" (Score:3, Insightful)
Obama centrist in any other western country? Maybe, if you count Israel a western country perhaps. In the UE, he would be considered right wing to very right wing. The republicans would only have counterparts in some of the more obscure fascist parties around here.
Re:"what is necessary to be done" (Score:4, Insightful)
And there it is, you think you're holier, wiser, and more patriotic than George Washington and Benjamin Franklin.
People back then weren't exactly paragons of freedom. While not everyone owned slaves and abused women back then, it wasn't a good time to be living in if you weren't a white man, so forgive me for being unimpressed with some of their activities.
Just what I expected.
I don't expect anything from you. I just reply to you government bootlickers for laughs.
Swear on your life to completely defund the NSA... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:"what is necessary to be done" (Score:4, Insightful)
You seem to be assuming that Obama is also not truly bad. Remember the gun control push at the beginning of this year? Or how about the fact he is just another politician who refuses to stay out of peoples sex lives(yes he has no issues with gays, but he has yet to support polyamory and it is still legal to discriminate against those who like kinky sex). Or how about his attacks on those who embarrass the federal government by blowing the whistle on their lies? Or how about the fact he is in the pocket of Hollywood?
Saying he is better than the ass hat he ran against to win the last to elections and is thusly a okay person is crap reasoning. When the options you are presented with are which day of the week you get beaten on you are not really being presented with a option. The proper choice is to say fuck it and fight back. The beginning of this means voting for none of the above.
Re:"what is necessary to be done" (Score:4, Insightful)
The entire left wing/right wing is a bunch of horse shift false dichotomy when used in any manner outside state v. federal balance of power. It contributes nothing of value to a discussion and only serves to pull at memetic strings that serve to prevent rational discussion.
In general if you are using conservative/liberal/left/right one is saying something that involves completely talking out of ones ass as they are relying on memes instead of reasoning.
Re:"what is necessary to be done" (Score:4, Insightful)
As the AC reply above points out -- of the two main party candidates, neither was a woman.
As far as the third party candidates that year, I looked at them, and didn't like any of them.
Would you expect me to vote for John McCain? Just because he was the Republican candidate, and I have more 'conservative' views than 'liberal' views? Too bad I have less 'liberal' views than McCain did, one year before the campaign. He was the perfect example of RINO. Happy to vote with the Democrats, on issue after issue. Whether he was thinking it would make them like him, or he actually agreed with their goals doesn't matter. Then, when seeking the Republican nomination, suddenly he is a 'staunch conservative'.
McCain was not worthy of my vote, or any conservative's vote. The best thing he did was bring Sarah Palin on board. Yes, she was the best part of that ticket, that's how I look at John McCain. Also, suddenly, his main selling point beyond his new-found conservatism, was that he was a war hero and POW. OK, great, what has he done lately? He's a war hero. But beyond that? He was a POW in Nam. OK, again, great. What about now? He was a POW and war hero. That's what I remember about his campaign.
Now, back to Barack Obama. You notice I said "Part of the reason was his skin color." It wasn't the only issue. It was one of several issues. And it wasn't specifically his skin color that I voted for. I felt that "it was time for America to have a president who didn't grow up white." He could have been a white guy, and still met this criteria. In fact, he is half white, in case everyone has forgotten that. But he did not grow up in typical white neighborhoods. He spent time living in Indonesia, and the rest of his childhood in Hawaii. I've lived in Hawaii. It's a beautiful place, but a "white neighborhood" it is not.
So, when I said "it was time for America to have a president who didn't grow up white," I meant it was time for someone who has other experiences in this world than all of the white candidates would have. It was time for a new perspective. This doesn't simply boil down to skin color, or I would have voted for Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton years ago.