RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
read more of todays top articles

Jack Shafer: "There is no way that the new WikiLeaks leaks don't leave Hillary Clinton holding the smoking gun. The time for her departure may come next week or next month, but sooner or later, the weakened and humiliated secretary of state will have to pay."

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gestures as she delivers a statement about WikiLeaks at the State Department in Washington on Monday, 11/29/10. (photo: Yuri Gripas/Reuters)
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gestures as she delivers a statement about WikiLeaks at the State Department in Washington on Monday, 11/29/10. (photo: Yuri Gripas/Reuters)

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

 
+2 # Heartbeatt 2010-11-30 12:06
Yes! I have no respect left for Hillary Clinton. One cannot make her entirely responsible for these policies revealed by Wikileaks, but the fact that she is now, with Netanyahu, attempting to turn the Iran card to suit them is simply disgusting, as is her utter condemnation of our having access to these anti-democratic processes and their abuse of diplomatic channels.
But would Obama install someone who is a much better representative of citizens who do want a more honest and transparent American government?
 
 
+2 # Activista 2010-11-30 14:12
Agree - replace Clintons with Carter
 
 
+6 # Lrobby99 2010-11-30 15:15
Quoting Activista:
Agree - replace Clintons with Carter


You must mean Amy. Jimmy deserves to take it easy, not to take on SecState.
 
 
+7 # Activista 2010-11-30 20:13
Quoting Lrobby99:
Quoting Activista:
Agree - replace Clintons with Carter


You must mean Amy. Jimmy deserves to take it easy, not to take on SecState.

Jimmy Carter is wise and ethical - and people trust him. And not much ego. Almost perfect diplomat - almost too honest for a "modern" diplomat.

Look how much damage to the World Kissinger did - give me almost any World conflict and Henry started it.
 
 
+33 # AML 2010-11-30 12:12
Yes indeedy, another case of American exceptionalism. We're too special for justice. Holder certainly cherry picks his quary.

I hope everyone saw the Democracy Now interview from Oct. 29. Jeremy Scahill and Rick Rowley, back from Afghanistan, give us a true picture of how we're losing it over there. For the White House and the Military to suggest we're making progress is ludicrous.
 
 
+18 # JJ Spoons 2010-11-30 12:29
If Hillary resigns it should be for one reason: so that she can accept the president's nomination to the Supreme Court.
 
 
-3 # Gary1 2010-11-30 13:06
She has cooked her own goose on that nomination.
 
 
+13 # DaveW. 2010-11-30 17:21
So Hilary's been pilloried
Her reputation scorned
Should she resign? That's the line
From our friend David Corn

She did what she was told
That's what politicians do
Why should we be shocked
It's surely nothing new

As for appointment to Supreme court
This should get her in
We all know a prerequisite
Is to lie and then to grin

Hope and change have become strange
Metaphors like broken glass
Aren't we lucky the Republicans
Will take us to our "glorious" past

So glory, glory hallelujah
Amen brother pass the plate
We'll have more lies than dumps have flies
And "Real Folks" can celebrate
 
 
+3 # brenda 2010-11-30 21:12
Great poem. I enjoyed the laugh. Bravo! Encore!
 
 
+6 # DaveW. 2010-11-30 23:44
Brenda, Thanks!

A little cyber spam
From a poetic ham
The lines that I will senda
Are especially for Brenda

Hillary is tough as nails
You have to be, where she sails
The GOP will fret and shriek
But she'll survive the Wikileak

On Capitol hill, that marble shrine
Where people's servants act divine
Dynasty's are built to last
First Bill now "Hill" in D.C. glass

No Kennedy's to cajole or push
Two King George's,named Bush
Let's pray it's a sign of dominion falin'
How many kids has Sarah Palin?
 
 
+1 # brenda 2010-12-01 02:31
:)
 
 
+3 # brenda 2010-12-01 02:54
Off subject, I wrote this in 2004
A Source is a Source ©

A source is a source, of course of course.
They’ll give you the answer that you’ll endorse.
You say there’s a source? “Of course , of course”,
Said the famous C B S.

Now politics is a funny thing,
Both parties will try to insure their course,
They’ll lie, they’ll sneak, they’ll even cheat,
For that Presidential seat.

All the rich people with money to spend, And Corporations too,
Will try to trick both you and me, To get what they want us to do.

continued.... see below
 
 
+1 # brenda 2010-12-01 02:55
continued from above...

The election year is rather dear,
For those who want to be in the black,
The winners get rich and the losers don’t,
It’s a political free for all.

After all, a buck’s a buck, Forget about me and you.
The name of the game is Who’s on top, And every one else gets screwed.

So remember folks, when it’s time to vote,
To pull the right lever, no time to choke,
Don’t listen to lies, stay clear of the smoke,
You might as well take a guess.

There’s probably just a few of you folks,
Who don’t see the fun of political jokes,
If you don’t believe this satirical bliss,
Then listen to this..... " I AM NOT A CROOK "
 
 
+1 # DaveW. 2010-12-01 10:29
Brenda, Bravo to you too! We poets got to stick together! If you don't find a laugh once in a while in all the madness nowadays you might as well check into the asylum. I have a blog site madlibpoet.com. Do you write other poetry? I'd be honored if you'd check my site out and leave some feedback. If you have similar situation I'd love to return favor. Nice job Brenda!
 
 
+1 # brenda 2010-12-01 21:32
Thank you. I'll check out the blog site.
I'm rather fond of the last line that was said on TV by a Republican of yesteryear.
Then there's the meter that brings one back to the long ago "Mister Ed" the talking horse show. Although Nixon usually talked out of the rear end of the horse.
 
 
+3 # Mal 2010-12-01 13:23
Great Stuff Dave! I'm becoming your biggest RSN fan.. Hehehe

When I first saw this missive by Mr. Corn, two previous incidents (quotes, actually) popped into my memory. Remember these two classic gems?:

"Bomb, bomb, bomb. Bomb, Bomb, Iran"
-J. McCain
"...the missles are on their way."
-R. Reagan

Somehow, I doubt that either of the gentlemen above weren't engaged in similar activities, yet they retained their jobs and diplomatic standing around the world.

In fact, as shocking as these remarks might have seemed at the time, they hardly caused a ripple on the international scene.

This is more a case of the King without his clothes in the larger stage. -Media hay made while it's fresh, than quietly swept aside after everyone has made their outraged pontification.

If anything useful can be gleaned from this incident catching our Uncle Sam with his pants down, it is the true size of the little pricks working in his name.
 
 
+16 # maddy 2010-11-30 12:33
I wonder if the GOP has anything to do with wikileaks since thay seem to be very quiet, especially since it was a republican who created some of the most recent mess before Obama??
 
 
+16 # J D MATTHEWS 2010-11-30 12:36
David, I normally watch you on Hardball or Oberman but you are way off on this one. 1st off personal information is passed along every day
and any diplomat that did not do that is ineffective. Fingerprints and Wiretaps I do not believe were ordered from Diplomats! Personal
weaknesses are tools used to negoiate. Yeah it is about Wikileaks
and you are proving it by trying to make Clinton the scapegoat. Why are you not writing about excesses of
forgien Governments turned out by wikileaks.
 
 
+10 # caphillprof 2010-11-30 12:43
If the Salahi's are any indication, Assange should have absolutely no problem attending a White House party.
 
 
+22 # Dorothy Ricotta 2010-11-30 12:46
So what's new ? All Diplomats from all countries do the same thing and they all know it !!!!
No reason for Hillary to resign...she was only doing her job and
a good one at that !!!!
Stop trying to escalate the situation !!!
 
 
+7 # Ralph Averill 2010-11-30 19:57
Agreed! In spades, Dorothy! She is the best Sec. of State in my lifetime. I grow weary of the peanut gallery in both liberal/progres sive and conservative web sites who do nothing but cast down moral judgments on people doing unbelievably difficult jobs, who fail to attain some moral beatitude, that those who so freely judge could not attain in their own simple, meager little lives.
 
 
+2 # Saje Williams 2010-12-03 15:00
So honor and ethics are for the little people? Good to know.
 
 
-7 # FreedomFodder 2010-11-30 12:49
Hillary has made her millions now. Is she really up to the game anymore?
 
 
-5 # NoOneYouKnow 2010-11-30 12:58
Hillary on the Supreme Court? We've already got five corrupt corporatists on the court; why do they need a sixth?
 
 
+35 # Jann 2010-11-30 13:04
Oh, grow up, folks. This is nothing new; I'm sure every administration has done this since they've had the capability to do so. And I'm sure other countries are doing the same thing! If we had done clandestine iris scans or other identity checks on Taliban leaders, we could have prevented the fiasco of the guy who masqueraded as a Taliban leader recently.
If we start calling Hillary Clinton onto the carpet for carrying on the tradition, we've got to line up past politicians for the same "crime." We had a president and vice-president outing one of our own CIA operatives recently. Where was the outcry over that?
 
 
+13 # cmw 2010-11-30 13:29
I think you're right, Jann, this is nothing new, simply exposed with details. I'd like to see the White House accept the caution and quit trying to kill the messengers, likewise Corn, no more scapegoats. If the USA can avert their gaze to an illegal war that killed thousands of our own, shrug your shoulders and understand the new technology -- be more careful next time.
 
 
+3 # Eddy 2010-12-01 03:47
Jann, Yep, your 100% correct regards the outing of Plame and no one doing anything about it.
But, that's the whole point, sadly the U.S. of today has gone down hill to such a low level and U.S. citizens think it's OK and normal, just as your writings display. Sad, sad, sad indeed.
This issue has happened before wikileaks ever saw the light of day, I remember very clearly, the Swedish guy investigating the supposed WMD in Iraq, who was supposed to report back to the U.N. and his reports were grabbed by the U.S. and censored before the U.N. ever saw them, as well, the same individual protested that his phone was being tapped. So clearly, it's been happening for a long time, BUT, this time, there's documentary evidence available to substantiate the fact, in other words, Buddy, caught red handed, Clinton will not, ever, live this one down.
 
 
+24 # Charlotte Moore 2010-11-30 13:04
While we SAY that diplomats are NOT Spies, I'm not sure how naive one has to be in 2010 to actually believe this fairy tale that has probably not been true for centuries. And so this is why Mrs. Clinton should resign? This sounds a lot like the voices that wanted to impeach Bill Clinton for . . . getting caught.
 
 
+4 # arugula 2010-12-01 00:22
What planet did you grow up on? Diplomats have ALWAYS been spies.
 
 
+1 # bl8ant 2010-12-01 06:02
Oh Charlotte, you could not be more wrong. Hilary's involvement in the mess with Honduras was complicit and disgusting...do some research on your own before you make such uninformed comments.
 
 
+15 # B. 2010-11-30 13:11
The constant "Blowback" from CIA black op's is never-ending. We must somehow figure out a way to fufill Pres. Kennedy's dream that got him killed.
Dipiomats should NOT be spies.
 
 
+10 # bjw 2010-11-30 13:11
Diplomats and spooks have always been pretty much the same people. It just that diplomats have official titles and duties to tend to while the spooks take on other disguises. The line has always been blurred and anyone talking to a diplomat has to assume he's also talking to an intelligence gatherer.

I cannot agree with the notion that diplomats have just recently turned into to snoops. When I was abroad decades ago, the CIA operatives were called 'embassy people' by Americans and locals alike. This entire article is based on a false premise.

Hillary Clinton is better prepared for this job and more respected abroad than just about anyone I can think of.

To answer the question: No, Hillary should stay where she us for now. No body who works for the UN or for an embassy should think they are not going to be suspected of being a spy. One starts with the assumption that everyone is a spy and deal with them accordingly. That has always been the rule.
 
 
+6 # Activista 2010-11-30 14:22
"Hillary Clinton is better prepared for this job and more respected abroad than just about anyone I can think of."
where do you live that you know about the "respect".
Hillary (Clinotons)serv e AIPAC/Israel - NOT American people.
Clintons are pushing for bombing Iran - Clintons were pushing for Iraq war - nothing of US interests/benef it
reference:
www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n06/john-mearsheimer/the-israel-lobby
 
 
+3 # bl8ant 2010-12-01 06:07
It's simply mind boggling how badly informed people are about Hilary! I live in Amsterdam and have offices in France and Portugal and across the African continent and no one among my very large community of business associatates and friends, has any respect for the Clintons..espec ially Hilary.
What becomes obvious under the light of this forum is the lack of awareness and information American's have about their own Gov's affaires!!!
 
 
+11 # Virginia 2010-11-30 13:12
It's so very sad to be so powerful and yet so stupid. Don't anyone learn from history?
 
 
+11 # Joan 2010-11-30 13:14
I don't think the buck stops with Hillary. She serves at the pleasure of the president, and it's unlikely he didn't know what was going on.

I also doubt these spy activities are new in this administration. I would be very surprised if spying between us and other countries hadn't been going on for a long time. That doesn't make it honorable, but since when has honor been a factor in political decisions?
 
 
+23 # Cynthia Squires 2010-11-30 13:18
So where was WikiLeaks 2001-2008?
 
 
+1 # christine 2010-12-01 13:04
you mean prior to Bradley Manning's presence as an army intelligence specialist?
 
 
0 # J Cummings 2010-11-30 13:19
Bullshit! No way should she do this.
Why?
Just to give this megalomaniacal bastard and self-appointed messiah of the western world another jump in his self evaluations? Maybe there has been less hurt than expected so far, but just ask who is the big (and maybe the only) gainer. Bibi Netanyahu and his US neo-con crew so eager for yet another war--with Iran.
When that happens, maybe all these self-righteous Wikileak fans will lose some of their current glee. On second thought, they will probably just deny that there was any link between the leaks and the new war.
 
 
+1 # bl8ant 2010-12-01 07:40
it's not a new war, they just get dirtier at the game
 
 
+7 # catherine 2010-11-30 13:28
Another man frightened of a powerful woman - no surprises here!
 
 
+5 # JJ 2010-11-30 14:52
(Yawn) And nothing new in the mindset behind this post, either.
 
 
-3 # bl8ant 2010-12-01 07:54
well I am a woman and I don't see it. I think she is infected with the same disease they all have. In fact women are pretty much responsible for the whole mess... they fell prey to their own base desire natures and fears and forgot how very powerful in a real sense we are,somewhere around the time Patriarchy was born, and in my opinion , based on those fears, have not consciously raised their sons away from violence and away from ignorance, and things like the Inquisition kind of intimidated a few generations...a nd what actually happened

is our technology advanced and evolved much much faster than our biology...and people have not been able to detach from antiquated belief systems like religious dogmas etc...but women have the first possibility to change this...we take each child to our breast first and from that influence we must begin to evolve a new, True human being.

Hilary is just a human being, and with all she has at her advantage , that she abuses power and exploits her authority , is really disgusting, she should be ashamed and I bet she is...somewhere far under her indignation.
 
 
+3 # Roberta sklar 2010-11-30 13:31
Once more we take the opportunity to diss those who work on our behalf. How often will we shoot ourselves in the foot ?

Hillary has done more for us than we can begin to enumerate. But any opportunity to diss Hillary and some of our best thinkers jump to the bait.

Hillary is no more "damaged" now than she was on several other occasions -- throughout Bill Clinton's presidency, She bounces back not because she is teflon, but because she is smart, strategic, works for the good as often as possible in horrific political environment. She is one of our boldest and effective Secretaries of State, as Senator she could not have served NY better. Some wish her 2008 bid for president had succeeded. Folks lets not knock one of our best out of the playing field. PLEASE! This is not American exceptionalism, it is rather an exceptional American woman who we would be wise to respect and support. Be critical? sure ! Knock her out of the ball park? NO. Don't be stupid for 15 seconds of media excitement.
 
 
+8 # Activista 2010-11-30 14:11
"Hillary has done more for Israel than we can begin to enumerate."
Hillary (Clintons) are puppets of AIPAC
Replace Clintons with Carter - the last ethical president
 
 
+6 # Todd Williams 2010-11-30 13:37
This is a molehill into a mountain situation. Everything I've heard over the last few days has led me to laugh, not cry. There is some pretty funny stuff in those leaks. And most rational folks don't seem to be freaked out at all. Hilary seems to be doing a good job. Much ado about nothing!
 
 
+12 # Activista 2010-11-30 14:25
"There is some pretty funny stuff in those leaks"
like torture and killing prisoners in "USrael free" Iraq?
 
 
+4 # duitdon 2010-11-30 14:03
No!!! It's a transparent world. Perhaps "diplos" need to learn honesty and stop with all of the "evil" and inappropriate deals.
Secrets can't exist except between 2 people, sometimes.
Hillary has the potential to be a Statesman if she loosens her grip on her political bent. Secrets pollute, deep rooted ones, always. Remember, Bush had the temerity to let his inane and foolish ideas flow to his ignorant believers. He had to guts to stand by his lies when confronted with truth. His god is with him!
 
 
+1 # bl8ant 2010-12-01 07:58
I am guessin that was sarcastic lol
 
 
-8 # David Knuti 2010-11-30 14:04
The thought that an ego-manic menace like Assage should be allowed to bring down a key figure in the Administration at a time of extreme stress is misguided, even subversive in itself. As for suspicions about the purity of diplomats, they will always be there, half justified, half paranoia.
 
 
+14 # Activista 2010-11-30 14:08
"Joe Lieberman has called on the United States and other governments (Israel) to shut down WikiLeaks"
there could be something bad about his client Israel?
The true terrorists are governments hacking Internet - last free media ..
 
 
+19 # fredboy 2010-11-30 14:20
As Churchill said, "The truth is incontrovertibl e. Panic may resent it, ignorance may deride it, malice may distort it, but there it is."

The truthsharer is always the bitch. Hang the messenger, not the evildoer.

Wikileaks first shared the video of the US helicopter gunship shooting unarmed civilians and media, and US ground forces thereafter driving over one or more of the dead bodies and laughing about it. A child was among those shot, and the US voice even shared a snide remark about that. A mini My Lai, and no one is punished.

Throughout history the truly brave have shared the truth. And repeatedly proven, as one far wiser than I said, that the truth is the true path to actual freedom.
 
 
+3 # DaveW. 2010-11-30 20:05
fredboy, I generally agree with your comments and certainly do on this occasion. However, you gotta find someone other than Churchill to quote. Dude had a lot of blood on his hands,and was quite the racist, especially his early years in Africa. Sorry if this sounds nitpicky. If you knew all the "truths" concerning "Sir" Winston, well, you might think different of him.
 
 
+1 # arugula 2010-12-01 00:33
Yes, but you'd still have to be grateful he was there when he was and was the person he was. It was the right fit for the time and situation. Between him and the royal family in London, they held the nation together with grit and heart and purpose in insane times. I notice that the Brits dropped him {politically} like a hot potato once the war was won because what he had was not appropriate to the aftermath of war... No more hawks, but rebuilding and re grouping nations.
 
 
+3 # Demfatale 2010-12-01 16:15
[quote name="DaveW."]f redboy, I generally agree with your comments and certainly do on this occasion. However, you gotta find someone other than Churchill to quote.

Well, yes, if you look at Churchill's weaknesses only. But as a speaker, a leader, a galvanizer of the public faith when nothing in the reality of WWII fostered anything but despair ... he was brilliant.

On many occasions in my life, I have found one Churchill quote to sum up the situation perfectly. He said:

"After a while, the bombs only bounce the rubble."

Come to think of it, that quote about sums up our national news machine under corporate media. Just bouncing rubble.

The death of the "free press" was the death of all remaining shreds of democracy. Time to start over. This time, without the Original Sin of slavery. Maybe we can get it right this time.

Constitutional Convention, anyone???
 
 
+9 # Ramona 2010-11-30 14:23
The line between information gatherer (AKA spy) and diplomat has been blurred since governments started sending their representatives to other governments. Yes, "diplomacy" (polite social niceties, cultural, business, sports, communication, trade opportunities are exchanged. But so is information gathering. Anyone who believes otherwise is naive.
 
 
+2 # jon 2010-12-01 23:31
so, diplomats ask other diplomats for their credit card numbers, iris scans, biometric prints etc. to their faces do they?

That's alright then, for a moment there I thought they were operating outside of the law.
 
 
+6 # HMM 2010-11-30 14:24
Having Hillary Clinton resign over this issue is absurd. I found these wikileaks to be petty and lacking in substance. What ever happened to true journalism that produced such issues as Watergate and the Pentagon Papers? I see no real smoking guns here other than maybe the Republicans are deliberately feeding this guy this info to create controversy.
 
 
+4 # Cynthia 2010-11-30 15:21
I see no reason for Sec'y Clinton to resign. It's ahistorical, to say the least, to claim "Now that the Clinton State Department has blurred the line ..."
 
 
+5 # Thefolksinger 2010-11-30 15:27
Transparency’s a concept we never will deride,
Excepting when it tries to show what we are trying to hide.
--a verse from my latest folksong for YouTube.
 
 
0 # Sukumar 2010-11-30 15:39
Yawn!!!
 
 
+8 # mymy 2010-11-30 16:08
I think (and now Brezinzki seems to be saying the same thing) the leaks are the OPPOSITE of damaging to Obama; indeed, the timing couldn't have been better as far as China's cooperation with us on N. Korea is concerned; they show the Bush administration as at best horribly inept on Iran, and Obama pulling off the sanctions AND getting to talks that Bush failed at; and they've outed the real reason the Republicans (who are just mouthpieces for big Oil) keep wanting us to bomb Iran: their Saudi masters want it.
 
 
+1 # susan thorne bryant 2010-11-30 16:13
Some people think about an issue and gather additional facts before offering a solution. Others quickly jump to the most radical of actions - without knowing the details of an issue and without much thought about alternatives and results of actions. Some newspaper people do this just to stir up controversy and enlarge readership.
Don't know which catergory our current correspondent falls into, but he doesn't sound too knowledgable to me.
 
 
+3 # Activista 2010-11-30 16:24
New USraeli Diplomacy - assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists is kosher - do not expect too much criticism in Rupert Murdoch media -
And waiting for Clintons to speak on this terrorists actions -

"... That, of course, means Western governments, especially the United States and Israel. These governments use their espionage agencies to gather information about the Iranian nuclear program. There are reports about efforts to damage equipment purchased abroad for the program, to recruit agents from within Iran's nuclear project with access to information, and to lure senior officials associated with the country's nuclear program to defect.

The possibility that Western, or even Israeli, spy agencies are behind the latest assassination is supported by precedent. According to foreign news reports, Israel acted in a similar fashion during the 1960s against German scientists working to develop missiles in Egypt, and during the 1970s against various scientists. These included Egyptians and the Canadian scientist Gerald Bull who worked on Iraq's nuclear and missile projects under Saddam Hussein.
 
 
0 # Vikingskipper 2010-11-30 16:42
Maybe David Corn should resign. Neither Zbig Brzezinski nor Stephen Hadley, both former NSC advisers, think Hillary crossed the line. Someone needs a good a sense of humor as hers in her press conference, reporting that some of her foreign counterparts told her, "Don't worry! You should see what we say about you!" But it is time for Bradley Manning to do time. Maybe Julian, too.
 
 
+1 # jon 2010-12-01 23:53
why should Julian do time?

please explain it to me.
 
 
+9 # Ross 2010-11-30 16:56
Since when has there been a "line" between diplomacy and espionage? David Corn should remove his head from wherever it is that prevents him from seeing what everyone else has known for decades.
 
 
+1 # jon 2010-12-01 23:56
so why not just call the diplomats spies then?

I suppose for the same reasons we don't call the president a puppet of the bankers...
 
 
+8 # TruthBuster 2010-11-30 17:44
Secrecy is very important to our government. It is the only thing that protects them from us.

Julian Assange is a messanger coming to us with news of what is happening behind closed doors (secrecy).

Most countries leaders make decisions based on secret agreements amongst themselves, not representing the citizens of their country.

Everyone should know what is going on.
 
 
-2 # EPGAH 2010-11-30 18:43
That's true, but sometimes the diplomats find out something that is ignored by their higher-ups, such as that Russia is getting too cozy with the Mob, or that Afghanistan's "leader" is just pocketing our Foreign Aid money and probably telling his underlings that it didn't arrive, and redirecting their anger to America instead of his corrupt reign?

I would also not be surprised if some diplomats made deals amongst themselves, without the nations they allegedly represent knowing anything about it!

Now that we "know", though, what are we gonna do about it? Moreover, what's to say that WikiLeaks didn't take out the parts that didn't suit THEIR agenda?
 
 
-3 # EPGAH 2010-11-30 22:21
As much as I hate OMGTHEJEWS conspiracy-theo ries, isn't it odd that the leaked documents don't contain any record of the terrorist countries' distrust/hatred of Israel? Especially Saudi Arabia, whose leaders have been MOST vocal about it!

Like I said, WikiLeaks can "forget" to pass on whatever documents or parts thereof that they don't like!
 
 
+6 # Eric B. Lipps 2010-11-30 18:36
Am I missing something here? How is it that it's Hillary Clinton who's "holding the smoking gun" and who has blurred the line between diplomacy and spying when David Corn acknowledges that this sort of thing went on when Condi Rice was at State? Surely it can't have become offensive only when a Clinton did it.

Secretary Clinton has disappointed me by failing to break with Bush-era practices like these--but the same could be said of President Obama. Yet to point that out is to risk a rhetorical burning at the stake. Apparently it's a lot easier to pound on Clinton than to address her boss's disappointing performance on, say, closing Guantanamo or ending the occupation of Iraq or the war in Afghanistan.
 
 
-3 # heraldmage 2010-11-30 20:00
Unless there is a document where Obama instructs Clinton to turn diplomats to spies we have to assume she did it as part of her lust for power, and one-up-man-ship between military, & CIA.
It's time we became a honorable nation again One whose word can be trusted.
We had lost of most of our credibility in the GW Bush Admin, now Clinton has put the icing on the cake. The USA is neither honorable or trust worthy at home or abroad.
 
 
+3 # Eric B. Lipps 2010-12-01 08:56
Quoting heraldmage:
Unless there is a document where Obama instructs Clinton to turn diplomats to spies we have to assume she did it as part of her lust for power, and one-up-man-ship between military, & CIA.
It's time we became a honorable nation again One whose word can be trusted.
We had lost of most of our credibility in the GW Bush Admin, now Clinton has put the icing on the cake. The USA is neither honorable or trust worthy at home or abroad.


We "have to assume she did it out of her lust for power"? Come on, you can't be serious.

Hillary "did it" because, as David Corn notes, it was already being done by the prior administration- -and this administration, from the top down, has taken its own sweet time distancing itself from Bush-era practices in any way but rhetoric. I say this as someone who voted for Obama hoping for better than this.
 
 
+1 # jon 2010-12-02 00:06
We "have to assume she did it out of her lust for power"? Come on, you can't be serious.

did she not run for president alongside obama?

did we not hear weeks ago that disgruntled democrats were pushing clinton to challenge for the presidency?

lust and power has always been a clinton trait, whether from bill or hillary.
 
 
+4 # geraldom 2010-11-30 19:34
We all pinned our hopes on Barack Obama in the 2008 presidential election based on his promise of real change. The only real chance that he had, if he actually meant business, was when he took over the White House in January of 2009.

I personally lost all hope that he did mean business with his promise of change when he selected all the wrong people for his cabinet, but especially when he selected Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State (SOS). Obama won over Hillary in the Democratic primaries because of Her militant war-like attitude. She sounded more like McCain, and Obama makes her SOS.

Demanding that Obama replace her with someone like Jimmy Carter would be a complete waste of time since her actions and her words are what Obama instructs her to do and say. When she speaks, it's Obama speaking. And, to consider her as a candidate for the U.S. Supreme Court is a joke. Do you want someone who supports Bush's unconstitutiona l Bills like the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, and the FISA Bill, because that's exactly what she's doing working for the Obama administration? Do you really?

Try to understand that we're all screwed.
 
 
+5 # TruthBuster 2010-11-30 22:39
I'am dissappointed in Obama, and both parties. We all need to be more active at our local level. Nothing will change overnight, but we shouldn't do nothing.

Somehow we need to get the big money out of elections. Tax payer funded campaigns and rank voting/instant runoff voting.

Transparency!
 
 
-3 # Vikingskipper 2010-11-30 20:42
Brandon's gonna do time. Is Julian next?
 
 
+6 # Herb Thomas 2010-11-30 23:53
I was a U.S. Foreign Service officer (diplomat). I tried to understand the countries where I served and I wrote reports, much like a foreign correspondent might write for a newspaper, about issues affecting U.S. interests. Some of my activities, such as attending student meetings in Nigeria and buying military books in East Germany, amounted to intelligence collection, but they were overt. I never paid anyone for information. I never collected anyone's fingerprints or DNA. Despite all the claims in this thread that spies and diplomats are the same, that's not quite true. David Corn and Jack Shafer have a point. But as someone noted, these personally intrusive tasks for diplomats started some time ago, probably under George W. Bush; Secretary Clinton didn't invent them. But she and President Obama are guilty of continuing the practices of their predecessors--i n this and many other ways. That's the significance, not that Hillary is stooping to some new low. Oddly, public opinion of the State Department will probably improve: this exposé reveals our diplomats doing gutsy things and learning important stuff-- not in keeping with the cookie-pusher stereotype.
 
 
0 # bl8ant 2010-12-04 11:27
there's an elephant in the room ya know

would you venture an estimate?
 
 
+2 # Babe 2010-12-01 01:46
Oh, come on, now! Everyone knows that diplomats gather all kinds of info about those with whom they come in contact. Look at the Kremlin back in "the days," they were known to plant "bugs" in diplomat's living quarters and even tried to wrangle their minds by sending micro waves through diplomats' office windows. I hardly think that this news is red hot. Of course, Republicans will try to make a big issue of it.
 
 
+1 # jon 2010-12-02 00:21
So, does that make it ok then, knowing that its an old practice?

theres a whole big world outside the US, a lot of countries are talking about this, its not just the US, as the worlds most powerful nation, there is a responsibility on the US to lead the way in world political matters. Asking your diplomats to gather iris data, biometric data and other personal information on foreign officials, is not under the law. Its what distinguishes diplomats from being labelled as Spies. Spies operate outside the law, diplomats are supposed to operate within the law... if they are doing what is essentially what is deemed as "spy work" then should they not be charged appropriately, along with the person that issued the command?
 
 
+10 # giraffe 2010-12-01 02:01
I agree with those who say Hillary ain't the first diplomate - spy. How can anybody with a straight face take these acts as worse than Bush/Cheney (etc) did to our country? Get mad at those who have truly HURT the USA -- our credibility went south with Bush and so did our jobs and so did our economy. GET MAD at the Republicans who have and will kill Democracy - USA
 
 
+6 # Eric B. Lipps 2010-12-01 08:49
Since David Corn acknowledges that the line between diplomats and spies had already been blurred by the Bush Administration when Condoleezza Rice was at State, why is it Hillary Clinton who's "holding the smoking gun" on this iussue? Why did this suddenly become a problem demanding the resignation of the Secretary of State when a Clinton held that position?

Perhaps it's because it's easier to use Hillary as a punching bag than to confront the multiple foreign policy failures of her boss (his steady retreat from his campaign promises on Guantanamo, Iraq and Afghanistan comes to mind right away). Beating up on Clinton draws cheers from the right as well as the left, while criticizing Obama elecits screams of fury from many on the left and--thanks to the President's foot-dragging on breaking away from Bush-era policies--less anger than you'd have expected from the right. But making Clinton a whipping girl for the Obama Administration' s foreign policy abuses and mistakes won't solve anything, especially since we've no guarantee a successor wouldn't do just as she did.
 
 
+2 # jon 2010-12-02 00:29
I agree somewhat with your statement, however, just because a former SOS did it and got away with it, doesn't mean everyone else should...someon e has to be made accountable at some point in time, and right now, hillary is the latest to have committed what is a breach of law and regulations both with US Law and international Law. Lets not be blunt about this, she needs to be held accountable otherwise this kind of behaviour by elected officials will continue for evermore, as long as they see that nothing ever comes of it.

Transparency must be part of democracy. How can you have democracy if you don't know what your elected officials are up to?
 
 
+3 # Reyn 2010-12-01 10:18
I have to disagree with the article. Nothing is being done that has not been done by the diplomatic core of all major nations since time immemorial. Furthermore, it doesn't matter what party is in power in this regard, neither here, or in any other country. I am as liberal as they come (I would be some form of Democratic Socialist in a country where that was a viable option) but I'm not stupid, and I am occasionally appalled at how naive much of the American "Left" is -- it explains things like people not turning out to vote in important elections.

Ultimately ideologic purity, on either side, means nothing - and when actually governing persons begin to believe it does, governments, and nations, fall.

Our purpose as Leftists SHOULD BE to push our agenda, to the exclusion of the Right's agenda, just as theirs is the reverse of that (and yes, it really is). We do not need puity, we need functionality - and yes, I know many of those who read this won't like it.
 
 
+2 # jon 2010-12-02 00:36
So, its a case of they're doing it, so will we?

where's the leadership? Isn't the US supposed to be the leader in this world political arena we find ourselves in?

Why can't we have purity AND functionality? Is it too much to ask for a government who actually try and work for us on our behalf without resorting to underhanded tactics under the notion of "its ok, everyone's doing it"

I guess it is.
 
 
+3 # William Fitzgerald 2010-12-01 16:37
We all know that the decision to spy on people came from the White House and there is likely a memo from Obama giving the go ahead. We also know there is a legal memo from the AG saying it was all lawful. And we know the GOP in the Congress will start the investigation in January.
 
 
0 # Rich Murray 2010-12-03 20:28
Bush Clinton Bush sold us out over their 20 years in office. Bush family corrupt, Clinton followed suit. Now Obama seems impotent to do anything as if he has also sold us out to the establishment. This Hillary is the biggest joke in government today.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN