I think we have a House to put in order first.
Clinton Urges Countries Not to Restrict Internet
31–40 of 42 posts
Re: Clinton Urges Countries Not to Restrict Internet
#32She added: “There isn’t an economic Internet and a social Internet and a political Internet. There’s just the Internet.”
She should have said, "It's the Internet, stupid."
Re: Clinton Urges Countries Not to Restrict Internet
#33This from a woman whose husband signed the DMCA into law.
Re: Clinton Urges Countries Not to Restrict Internet
#34It's ridiculous that there is no mention of SOPA or her thoughts on it in this article. Why would the NYT not mention it either?
I wish I could be there when the penny drops. Your face is going to be awesome.
Re: Clinton Urges Countries Not to Restrict Internet
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be fair, it's not so different from the way we operate in every other situation. e.g. championing free and fair elections and decrying other people's failures while passing a seemingly endless stream of poll-tax-esque disenfranchisement legislation here at home, in the name of combating voter fraud problems we've never actually seen manifest. or decrying the "crony capitalism" of Taiwan and then China, while regul…
or lionizing protesters in Libya, Egypt, Tunisia, etc as freedom fighters while marginalizing domestic protesters as quasi-criminal homeless hippies.
Well, that's what they are...
Re: Clinton Urges Countries Not to Restrict Internet
#36Oh the hypocrisy. http://www.salon.com/2011/12/09/hillary_clinton_and_internet...
Yes. The hypocrisy has me questioning her authenticity. Has she had a change of heart or is she just playing a game to increase popularity and gain votes?
She made this exact same speech before wikileaks (January 2010) [1]. She's making this exact same speech after wikileaks. The hymn sheet doesn't change. [2] By standing up and demanding that other countries behave morally she suggests that we make this demand because we do. Do you think Pinochet did not stand and make these same speeches? Or Hu Jintao? Or Saddam Hussein? Or Thatcher? Or Assad?
Are you imagining she would stand up and tell the truth? Have you been paying attention? If you were to ask her, would she say that flying military aircraft into our airspace would be an act of war, even as we fly ours into Iran's? The list is endless.
This is all theater.
[1] http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/01/21/internet_fr...
[2] http://orwell.ru/library/essays/nationalism/english/e_nat
Re: Clinton Urges Countries Not to Restrict Internet
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
3. Infiltrate regulatory agency. It's sad, but members of an industry are usually the most qualified people to be in a regulatory agency for that industry. Their expertise makes them good for the job, but the conflict of interest is easy to see. The solution is not.
4. Lobby for self-serving, anti-competitive regulations.
and the saddest thing of all is that this four step plan has worked so effectively for US corporations.
Re: Clinton Urges Countries Not to Restrict Internet
#38"THE HAGUE — Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and other international leaders urged countries and private businesses on Thursday to fight increasing efforts to restrict access to the Internet by repressive governments and even some democratic ones. "
Some democratic ones.... like the United States and Australia, right?
Re: Clinton Urges Countries Not to Restrict Internet
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be fair, it's not so different from the way we operate in every other situation. e.g. championing free and fair elections and decrying other people's failures while passing a seemingly endless stream of poll-tax-esque disenfranchisement legislation here at home, in the name of combating voter fraud problems we've never actually seen manifest. or decrying the "crony capitalism" of Taiwan and then China, while regul…
You forgot torture, executing people with out trial, executing minors and the mentally retarded, holding political prisoners, and using the military against the populace.
I hope you do not exclude the US from these. You know...
* Torture -> Guantanamo and other similar (worse) bases all over the world
* executing people with out trial -> police officers firing at will or over-using tazers to drunk people until they die (not to mention that carrying a gun is legal for civilians too).
* executing minors and the mentally retarded -> no health care for poor people who can't afford it, maybe they should be executed
* using the military against the populace -> firing chemicals, flash grenades and plastic bullets at OWS protesters
* holding political prisoners -> or just capturing them on behalf of their government and then just handing them over