View Full Version : Gen Clapper Testimony to Congress 10 Mar 11

03-11-2011, 12:32 AM
Taking a break from the debate on Warden's article, Noticed this today on the news:

Intelligence chief James Clapper causes a stir with remarks on Moammar Kadafi and threats to U.S.

Gen Clapper (Director of National Intelligence) was testifying to the Senate Armed Services Committee today. He was asked who the biggest threat to the US was - and answered China and Russia (sounds like he meant from a capabilities standpoint). He also said he expects Qaddafi to hang on based on better capabilities.

The administration is already walking back his comments:


Sen. Lindsay Graham has called for Clapper's resignation... interesting stuff.



Backwards Observer
03-11-2011, 03:19 AM
There are those in the Asia-Pacific region who are convinced, or perhaps have convinced themselves, that the sometimes apparent US "incoherence" is actually a highly advanced and, uh, vigorous form of inscrutability.

Compares to: Wayang Kulit - Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wayang)

Ken White
03-11-2011, 04:58 AM
Nah, we're just dumb and clumsy... :D

Backwards Observer
03-11-2011, 05:33 AM
Nah, we're just dumb and clumsy... :D

And the Chinese are predominantly lazy daydreamers, also overly sentimental. The coming mystifications of the 'Changlosphere' can only be imagined.

Ken White
03-11-2011, 06:37 AM
I've had fair success with good meals -- but they have to be really good...;)

The new US Ambassador to the Middle Kingdom will perhaps speed the misstification... :D

Backwards Observer
03-11-2011, 07:30 AM
Red Dong 2: The Return of the Son of China's Emergence as a Superpower! The Middle Kingdom meets The Middle Finger!!:)

Uh, I'm gonna skedaddle now...

Possibly of interest:

Another reason Chinese leaders give boring speeches is because they can. Giving interesting speeches - by the standards of Western speechmaking at any rate - has little upside and much potential downside: people might quote them out of context or misinterpret them, or the leader might mis-speak in an effort at extemporaneous rhetorical flourish, with various consequences that might be used against him in internal political power struggles. Also, rousing, inspirational speeches just don't fit with the Chinese style of political leadership. In Chinese culture, if you're already powerful, you don't want to act like there is a need to win anybody over. If you act like you care what people think of your speeches, you're admitting weakness. You leave it to loyal henchmen like Sha to say provocative things on your behalf, but avoid stooping to verbal sparring yourself. It also runs directly against Chinese culture for a powerful person to admit to being powerful or talk about being powerful. It's what you do, not what you say that counts.

Thomas Friedman gets the middle finger in the Middle Kingdom - Rebecca MacKinnon - Sept 9, 2007 (http://rconversation.blogs.com/rconversation/2007/09/thomas-friedman.html)


Q & A With Rebecca MacKinnon: Internet in China - The New Yorker - Feb 22, 2011 (http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/evanosnos/2011/02/internet-in-china.html)


Rebecca MacKinnon is a former CNN journalist who headed the CNN bureaus in Beijing and later in Tokyo, before leaving television to become a blogger and co-founder of Global Voices Online. She is on the Board of Directors of the Global Network Initiative and the Committee to Protect Journalists, and is currently with the New America Foundation as a Bernard L. Schwartz fellow.

Rebecca MacKinnon - Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebecca_MacKinnon)

03-11-2011, 04:16 PM
John Pike, and analyst with Globalsecurity.org, said Clapper was doing what intelligence officials should do: give the best intelligence available. Sometimes that’s politically inconvenient, Pike said.

“I don’t need a director of national intelligence to tell me what I want to hear,” Pike said. “I know what I want to hear.”


Why *sputter* they're even hamstringing our movies!

Joseph scoffs at conspiracy theories that the U.S. government blocked the release after one of China’s leading state-run newspapers ran two editorials criticizing the remake for demonizing that country. The back-to-back opinions were published in the Beijing-based Global Times on the heels of a visit by U.S. Secretary of State Hilary Clinton.

The concern overseas led to conspiracy theories that the movie’s release was pushed back or halted for political reasons, but Joseph said, “The delay is very much a result of the MGM bankruptcy. They are holding back other films too. It looks like once this deal and bankruptcy finalize they will look for a partner to distribute the films they have had on hold, including Red Dawn.”


See here, Mister Chinaman, John Milius will not be trifled with!

Backwards Observer
03-11-2011, 05:52 PM
Egotism is not a good quality. It's not something to be admired or even tolerated. It wouldn't be tolerated in a field commander and it shouldn't be tolerated in a movie director.
John Milius

brainyquote.com - John Milius (http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/j/john_milius.html)

03-17-2011, 06:56 PM
*Ahem* Speaking of Running Dog Lackies of Beijing....

Without Beijing even uttering a critical word, MGM is changing the villains in its 'Red Dawn' remake from Chinese to North Korean. It's all about maintaining access to the Asian superpower's lucrative box office.


08-25-2011, 08:42 AM
During a panel, Thomas Friedman, author of The World is Flat, accused China of being a “free-loader” while the US carried the heavy load of being a “global guardian”. I really love the term “global guardian”; what does it mean? Does it mean that the US is protecting the globe from an attack by Mars? Or Jupiter? Does it mean that Beijing is keeping this a secret from the rest of the world so that it won’t have to publicly acknowledge this enormous debt to Washington DC?