Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Lets be clear about Bernie vs Hillary [View all]OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)154. The Hillary Clinton group bans people
for pointing out the similarity between Hillary Clinton and Condi Rice.
Rice authorized National Security Agency to spy on UN Security Council in run-up to war, former officials say
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/After_domestic_spying_reports_U.S._spying_1227.html
Two former NSA officials familiar with the agency's campaign to spy on U.N. members say then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice authorized the plan at the request of President Bush, who wanted to know how delegates were going to vote. Rice did not immediately return a call for comment.
The former officials said Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld also participated in discussions about the plan, which involved "stepping up" efforts to eavesdrop on diplomats.
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/After_domestic_spying_reports_U.S._spying_1227.html
Two former NSA officials familiar with the agency's campaign to spy on U.N. members say then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice authorized the plan at the request of President Bush, who wanted to know how delegates were going to vote. Rice did not immediately return a call for comment.
The former officials said Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld also participated in discussions about the plan, which involved "stepping up" efforts to eavesdrop on diplomats.
Hillary Gets Wiki-Served
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/hillary_gets_wiki-served_20101130?ln
Hillary Clinton should cut out the whining about what the Obama administration derides as stolen cables and confront the unpleasant truths they reveal about the contradictions of U.S. foreign policy and her own troubling performance. As with the earlier batch of WikiLeaks, in this latest release the corruption of our partners in Iraq and Afghanistan stands in full relief, and the net effect of nearly a decade of warfare is recognized as a strengthening of Irans influence throughout the region.
~snip~
Instead of disparaging the motives of the leakers, Hillary Clinton should offer a forthright explanation of why she continued the practice of Condoleezza Rice, her predecessor as secretary of state, of using American diplomats to spy on their colleagues working at the United Nations. Why did she issue a specific directive ordering U.S. diplomats to collect biometric information on U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and many of his colleagues?
As the respected British newspaper The Guardian, which obtained the WikiLeaks cables, said in summarizing the matter: A classified directive which appears to blur the line between diplomacy and spying was issued to US diplomats under Hillary Clintons name in July 2009, demanding forensic technical details about the communications system used by top UN officials, including passwords and personal encryption keys used in private and commercial networks for official communications.
The Guardian pointed out that the Clinton directive violates the language of the original U.N. convention, which reads: The premises of the United Nations shall be inviolable. The spying effort derived from concern that U.N. rapporteurs might unearth embarrassing details about the U.S. treatment of prisoners in Guantánamo as well as in Iraq and Afghanistan. One of the directives demanded biographic and biometric information on Dr. Margaret Chan, the director of the World Health Organization, as well as details of her personality and management style. Maybe shes hiding bin Laden in her U.N. office.
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/hillary_gets_wiki-served_20101130?ln
Hillary Clinton should cut out the whining about what the Obama administration derides as stolen cables and confront the unpleasant truths they reveal about the contradictions of U.S. foreign policy and her own troubling performance. As with the earlier batch of WikiLeaks, in this latest release the corruption of our partners in Iraq and Afghanistan stands in full relief, and the net effect of nearly a decade of warfare is recognized as a strengthening of Irans influence throughout the region.
~snip~
Instead of disparaging the motives of the leakers, Hillary Clinton should offer a forthright explanation of why she continued the practice of Condoleezza Rice, her predecessor as secretary of state, of using American diplomats to spy on their colleagues working at the United Nations. Why did she issue a specific directive ordering U.S. diplomats to collect biometric information on U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and many of his colleagues?
As the respected British newspaper The Guardian, which obtained the WikiLeaks cables, said in summarizing the matter: A classified directive which appears to blur the line between diplomacy and spying was issued to US diplomats under Hillary Clintons name in July 2009, demanding forensic technical details about the communications system used by top UN officials, including passwords and personal encryption keys used in private and commercial networks for official communications.
The Guardian pointed out that the Clinton directive violates the language of the original U.N. convention, which reads: The premises of the United Nations shall be inviolable. The spying effort derived from concern that U.N. rapporteurs might unearth embarrassing details about the U.S. treatment of prisoners in Guantánamo as well as in Iraq and Afghanistan. One of the directives demanded biographic and biometric information on Dr. Margaret Chan, the director of the World Health Organization, as well as details of her personality and management style. Maybe shes hiding bin Laden in her U.N. office.
US diplomats spied on UN leadership
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cables-spying-un
A classified directive which appears to blur the line between diplomacy and spying was issued to US diplomats under Hillary Clinton's name in July 2009, demanding forensic technical details about the communications systems used by top UN officials, including passwords and personal encryption keys used in private and commercial networks for official communications.
It called for detailed biometric information "on key UN officials, to include undersecretaries, heads of specialised agencies and their chief advisers, top SYG [secretary general] aides, heads of peace operations and political field missions, including force commanders" as well as intelligence on Ban's "management and decision-making style and his influence on the secretariat". A parallel intelligence directive sent to diplomats in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi said biometric data included DNA, fingerprints and iris scans.
Washington also wanted credit card numbers, email addresses, phone, fax and pager numbers and even frequent-flyer account numbers for UN figures and "biographic and biometric information on UN Security Council permanent representatives".
~snip~
The UN has previously asserted that bugging the secretary general is illegal, citing the 1946 UN convention on privileges and immunities which states: "The premises of the United Nations shall be inviolable. The property and assets of the United Nations, wherever located and by whomsoever held, shall be immune from search, requisition, confiscation, expropriation and any other form of interference, whether by executive, administrative, judicial or legislative action".
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cables-spying-un
A classified directive which appears to blur the line between diplomacy and spying was issued to US diplomats under Hillary Clinton's name in July 2009, demanding forensic technical details about the communications systems used by top UN officials, including passwords and personal encryption keys used in private and commercial networks for official communications.
It called for detailed biometric information "on key UN officials, to include undersecretaries, heads of specialised agencies and their chief advisers, top SYG [secretary general] aides, heads of peace operations and political field missions, including force commanders" as well as intelligence on Ban's "management and decision-making style and his influence on the secretariat". A parallel intelligence directive sent to diplomats in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi said biometric data included DNA, fingerprints and iris scans.
Washington also wanted credit card numbers, email addresses, phone, fax and pager numbers and even frequent-flyer account numbers for UN figures and "biographic and biometric information on UN Security Council permanent representatives".
~snip~
The UN has previously asserted that bugging the secretary general is illegal, citing the 1946 UN convention on privileges and immunities which states: "The premises of the United Nations shall be inviolable. The property and assets of the United Nations, wherever located and by whomsoever held, shall be immune from search, requisition, confiscation, expropriation and any other form of interference, whether by executive, administrative, judicial or legislative action".
Factbox: Main revelations of WikiLeaks diplomatic cables
http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/11/30/us-wikileaks-details-idUSTRE6AT1I720101130?pageNumber=3
ARGENTINA
-- U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton questioned the mental health of Argentina's President Cristina Fernandez, asking U.S. diplomats to investigate whether she was on medication.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/11/30/us-wikileaks-details-idUSTRE6AT1I720101130?pageNumber=3
ARGENTINA
-- U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton questioned the mental health of Argentina's President Cristina Fernandez, asking U.S. diplomats to investigate whether she was on medication.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
412 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I supported Gore and now I support Sanders. Sanders is the only one of either Party who has not
Dustlawyer
Jul 2015
#172
Gore didn't run as team player, that hurt him: Hillary is running as a team player
lewebley3
Jul 2015
#313
Wow, so you think debates are a waste of time and money? That there should be no choice?
DebJ
Jul 2015
#324
You just don't want them to be seen next to each other for comparison.............. n/t
DebJ
Jul 2015
#394
Hillary never side stepped any questions; She dosen't dance to Sanders tune!
lewebley3
Jul 2015
#399
Thanks Mother of Four. Actually, I have a lot of stray small bits of time on my hands
DebJ
Jul 2015
#410
Sorry, to much is on the line: Sanders is not helping the Dem's fight the GOP
lewebley3
Jul 2015
#406
Got anything to back that up with? This Sanders 'person' and every one of those I knew
sabrina 1
Jul 2015
#283
"Sanders people are into themselves"....what in the world does that mean, in English?
DebJ
Jul 2015
#382
I've been quite pleased with the responses to my posts on O'Malley. You keep on
FSogol
Jul 2015
#377
"a declaration of an intention or determination to inflict punishment in retaliation for...
Nitram
Jul 2015
#287
Threats. Followed by mockery? Here is why some are upset by your OP. Follow the White Rabbit:
Fred Sanders
Jul 2015
#276
Yeah, it is very sad. Sometimes it feels like I am reading Drudge or Briebart or Freepville
FSogol
Jul 2015
#277
"You just can't face that fact most Dem and lib's don't support his candidacy"
concreteblue
Jul 2015
#104
"It is just advice to let you know that if you mess with Bernie, we take it personal."
sufrommich
Jul 2015
#174
Am I to understand that challenging the assumption of his electability is disrespectful?
brooklynite
Jul 2015
#5
The OP did not even come close to suggesting that. You know what disrespectful means.
rhett o rick
Jul 2015
#185
Think about 50% of American children living in poverty if the Republicans win...
brooklynite
Jul 2015
#190
I am so glad our founders were more brave than you. Take a chance on freedom and liberty. nm
rhett o rick
Jul 2015
#226
So you rationalize that 22% is ok. I am going for reducing that number, not justifying why it's ok.
rhett o rick
Jul 2015
#225
You are making some rather far-fetched and patronizing assumptions aboutt Clinton supporters.
Nitram
Jul 2015
#257
Wow. Since the poster doesn't define "electability", I had to assume as to what they meant.
rhett o rick
Jul 2015
#274
My assumption was a legitimate assumption as I've many times that Sen Sanders
rhett o rick
Jul 2015
#281
It was a personal assumption, no matter how you try to defend it. Why not just ask?
Nitram
Jul 2015
#282
I doubt that anyone here has ever said that Clinton has "not a liberal bone in her body".
rhett o rick
Jul 2015
#289
Comparing her to a republican or criticism of her is not allowed in our room.
hrmjustin
Jul 2015
#155
I didn't criticise her or compare her to a Republican, yet I got blocked....
Violet_Crumble
Jul 2015
#267
Skinner's not a host of the group who blocked me because of a personal grudge. You are
Violet_Crumble
Jul 2015
#340
I will. Just wanted other DUers to know they can be blocked for petty personal reasons...
Violet_Crumble
Jul 2015
#342
What groups that yr supportive of the SOP of have you been blocked from because someone hates you?
Violet_Crumble
Jul 2015
#344
So you think it's fair for anyone to be blocked because a host hates them?
Violet_Crumble
Jul 2015
#346
You are putting me in the position of publicly calling out a host of another group
hrmjustin
Jul 2015
#347
Look, from what i read just before you were banned you got into it with several HRC supporters in
hrmjustin
Jul 2015
#349
That wasn't right before I was blocked and had nothing to do with hillary
Violet_Crumble
Jul 2015
#355
On that, I agree....I was banned from the Sanders group because I responded to a post...
George II
Jul 2015
#116
Yeah that might be good, because I replied on a thread that was in the HRC 'safe haven' room and was
PatrickforO
Jul 2015
#192
I can see having separate forums for like-minded people where their ideas and thoughts...
George II
Jul 2015
#196
That's as offensive as people mistakenly claiming that Sanders is a "Communist" - I know it's...
George II
Jul 2015
#115
And THAT is what we've had to put up with on this site - all this "corporatist" candidate crap....
George II
Jul 2015
#113
We shouldn't have to put up with it anywhere on DEMOCRATIC Underground........
George II
Jul 2015
#120
If the criticism is based on fact. So tell me your criticism that is based on fact. nm
rhett o rick
Jul 2015
#227
So your saying that if Bernie wins that centrist Democrats won't support him?
blackspade
Jul 2015
#322
Bernie has not been through the grinder: He sat in a small state doing nothing for years
lewebley3
Jul 2015
#20
They have been fair game on everything, The Clinton's have with stood all of it!
lewebley3
Jul 2015
#77
Very nice, but how about answering the question - are they both running or just Hillary?
tularetom
Jul 2015
#86
"He could never be in charge of Defense, it just won't been safe." We're not safe now, in fact
grahamhgreen
Jul 2015
#165
You really want to hang bank deregulation, welfare reform, NAFTA and anti-drug laws around her neck?
jeff47
Jul 2015
#200
The Clinton's administration was one of the most successfully economies the US has ever had!
lewebley3
Jul 2015
#303
Again the Clinton's were successful:Dont visit the Bushes mistakes on Hillary
lewebley3
Jul 2015
#385
I don't know who "us" is, but Hillary Clinton is certainly NOT a "Plan B" for many DUers.
George II
Jul 2015
#21
Thru the grinder in Vermont means they were out of Cherry Garcia & he had to buy Funky Monkey
FSogol
Jul 2015
#35
I'll take a chance. Hillary is no risk. She isn't a risk because we can be reasonably assured
Ed Suspicious
Jul 2015
#33
What Bernie says doesn't matter: What Hillary and Obama says does they in are working politics
lewebley3
Jul 2015
#298
the house will only change if the Presidential candidate successfully nationalizes......
virtualobserver
Jul 2015
#37
The number of people who trust her is significantly dropping, her favorability is dropping...
Kalidurga
Jul 2015
#71
Getting to pick Scalia's and Kennedy's replacements on the SCOTUS is meaningful
Gothmog
Jul 2015
#177
Could it be argued that we have "30+ years" of seeing candidates like Bernie lose and
Renew Deal
Jul 2015
#58
Hillary has been through the grinder. Bernie hasn't been the target of the Right like she has. That
Metric System
Jul 2015
#112
Just watch what you say, RobertEarl. You'll be alerted on for the slightest fucking thing.
Enthusiast
Jul 2015
#136
I find it totally disrespectful how some on DU talk about him. He is and has been a
glinda
Jul 2015
#149
I agree, but I also find it totally disrespectful how some on DU talk about Hillary
randys1
Jul 2015
#152
What is exacting disrespectful? Many here doubt that Sanders is viable in the general election
Gothmog
Jul 2015
#175
I disagree-we are in the primary process and we need to select the best possible candidate
Gothmog
Jul 2015
#261
How Presidential Candidates Are Pushing Past Campaign Finance Boundaries This Time
Gothmog
Jul 2015
#397
This is disgusting! You should be ashamed of yourself! I know Bernie would be!!!
66 dmhlt
Jul 2015
#182
I'm mad as hell, and I'm not gonna take it anymore! That's what we need. Bern Baby Bern! n/t
brewens
Jul 2015
#202
Is disagreeing with Bernie on any issue the same as disrespecting Bernie?
Progressive dog
Jul 2015
#213
If Hillary and Bill sincerely tried to change the system (Citizens United for example), it
JDPriestly
Jul 2015
#235
And we are tired of 3rd Way "Democrats" who are more like Republicans than true Democrats!
emsimon33
Jul 2015
#239
Okay, reading through this thread, I'm a tad horrified to read that groups here at DU actually
senz
Jul 2015
#241
Of course she does. It's a stupid stance. It doesn't sell. Except to Bernie supporters.
Darb
Jul 2015
#265
You do know that Sanders has already proposed a small tax on Wall Street trade?
ieoeja
Jul 2015
#290
When we put together our O'M group on DU, we acknowledged that at the end of the day,
FSogol
Jul 2015
#339
Just an observation: Any OP which starts out "Let's be clear...." is probably not going to go well.
yellowcanine
Jul 2015
#299