Get Involved!
2008 Elections
Civil Liberties: Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton
Posted on Thursday March 27, 2008
|
||
|
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton www.hillaryclinton.com
1717 K Street, NW |
|
Read Clinton's full address to the AAI National Leadership Conference
Watch Clinton's full address to the AAI National Leadership Conference
 |
I just want to add something here, because I faced a similar situation when I ran for the Senate in 2000 in New York. And in New York, there are more than the two parties, Democratic and Republican. And one of the parties at that time, the Independence Party, was under the control of people who were anti-Semitic, anti- Israel. And I made it very clear that I did not want their support. I rejected it. I said that it would not be anything I would be comfortable with. And it looked as though I might pay a price for that. But I would not be associated with people who said such inflammatory and untrue charges against either Israel or Jewish people in our country. And, you know, I was willing to take that stand, and, you know, fortunately the people of New York supported me and I won. But at the time, I thought it was more important to stand on principle and to reject the kind of conditions that went with support like that.
February 26, 2008
Transcript, Democratic Presidential Debate, Cleveland, Ohio
Commenting on the peace process
Getting out of Iraq will enable us to play a constructive role in a renewed Middle East peace process that would mean security and normal relations for Israel and the Palestinians. The fundamental elements of a final agreement have been clear since 2000: a Palestinian state in Gaza and the West Bank in return for a declaration that the conflict is over, recognition of Israel's right to exist, guarantees of Israeli security, diplomatic recognition of Israel, and normalization of its relations with Arab states. U.S. diplomacy is critical in helping to resolve this conflict. In addition to facilitating negotiations, we must engage in regional diplomacy to gain Arab support for a Palestinian leadership that is committed to peace and willing to engage in a dialogue with the Israelis. Whether or not the United States makes progress in helping to broker a final agreement, consistent U.S. involvement can lower the level of violence and restore our credibility in the region.
November/December 2007
Essay, “Security & Opportunity for the 21st Century,” Foreign Affairs
Excerpt about the Palestinian-Israeli peace process from Foreign Affairs ‘Campaign 2008’ essay series
Getting out of Iraq will enable us to play a constructive role in a renewed Middle East peace process that would mean security and normal relations for Israel and the Palestinians. The fundamental elements of a final agreement have been clear since 2000: a Palestinian state in Gaza and the West Bank in return for a declaration that the conflict is over, recognition of Israel's right to exist, guarantees of Israeli security, diplomatic recognition of Israel, and normalization of its relations with Arab states. U.S. diplomacy is critical in helping to resolve this conflict. In addition to facilitating negotiations, we must engage in regional diplomacy to gain Arab support for a Palestinian leadership that is committed to peace and willing to engage in a dialogue with the Israelis. Whether or not the United States makes progress in helping to broker a final agreement, consistent U.S. involvement can lower the level of violence and restore our credibility in the region.
November/December 2007 Excerpts from “Security & Opportunity for the 21st Century,” Foreign Affairs
As you step up American diplomatic actions and prepare for a future international meeting on the Arab-Israeli conflict, we believe it is essential that other key players in the Middle East also step up and meet their responsibilities. The success of such a meeting, and ultimately the peace process itself, will depend on the cooperation we receive from the larger Arab world, particularly from those Arab states with close relations with the United States who have not yet signed agreements with Israel. Your ongoing efforts to work with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas are critical, but so is the support these efforts receive from those Arab countries.
We know that in the past, the lack of sufficient support from some of the Arab states have made it difficult to reach earlier agreements. We also know that, for many years, many of these countries have been insisting on greater involvement by the Administration in the Arab-Israeli conflict. Now that you and the Administration are indeed more actively engaged in Middle East diplomacy on an ongoing basis, we also believe that these Arab states should step forward with concrete, positive actions to promote peace and stability in the region.
In particular, you should press friendly Arab countries that have not yet done so, to:
1) Participate in the upcoming international meeting and be a full partner of the United States in advancing regional peace; 2) Take visible, meaningful steps in the financial, diplomatic and political arena to help Palestinian President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayyad govern effectively and meet their obligations to fight terror; 3) Stop support for terrorist groups and cease all anti-Israel and anti-Jewish incitement; 4) Recognize Israel’s right to exist and not use such recognition as a bargaining chip for future Israeli concessions; 5) End the Arab League economic boycott of Israel in all of its forms; and 6) Pressure Hamas to recognize Israel, reject terror and accept prior agreements, and isolate Hamas until it takes such steps.
We are encouraged that you are working hard to advance the cause of peace in the Middle East. The governments of Israel and the Palestinians are also working as best they can towards that goal. However without a sincere commitment from our allies in the Middle East to be partners in this effort, peace in the region will remain elusive.
October 2, 2007 Excerpt, Letter Addressed to Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice
Read Clinton's full address to the AAI National Leadership Conference
Watch Clinton's full address to the AAI National Leadership Conference
 |
I will renew our nation’s commitment to civil rights and civil liberties. I’ve released an agenda to restore and strengthen the civil rights mission of the Department of Justice-- to restore professionalism and remove politics, and to recommit the Department to the fundamental priorities that this Administration has ignored.
We’ll fight discrimination in the workplace; protect the right to vote for every eligible American, and end racial profiling. We must modernize and strengthen the federal hate crimes law because we are all victimized when someone is targeted because of who he or she is or what that person believes.
October 2007
Video Address to Arab American Institute; National Leadership Conference 2007
You know, Tim, I agree with what Joe and Barack have said. As a matter of policy it cannot be American policy period. I met with those same three- and four-star retired generals, and their principal point -- in addition to the values that are so important for our country to exhibit -- is that there is very little evidence that it works.
Now, there are a lot of other things that we need to be doing that I wish we were: better intelligence; making, you know, our country better respected around the world; working to have more allies. But these hypotheticals are very dangerous because they open a great big hole in what should be an attitude that our country and our president takes toward the appropriate treatment of everyone. And I think it's dangerous to go down this path.
September 26, 2007
http://www.cfr.org/publication/14313/
Number one, we do have to go after racial profiling. I’ve supported legislation to try to tackle that.
June 28, 2007
Transcript, Democratic Presidential Debate, Washington, DC
It seems to me that any effort to resolve the legal status of the detainees at Guantanamo must, at this stage, include a discussion of the logic of continuing to keep the facility open. Reports emerged in recent months that one of the first things Defense Secretary Gates did upon taking his post was to urge the Administration to close the detention facility at Guantanamo and to move the detainees to the United States. Earlier this month, Secretary Gates confirmed in testimony to the House Armed Services Committee that he had pressed for the closing of Guantanamo and that, in his view, proceedings at Guantanamo would lack credibility internationally.
Reports also suggest that Secretary Gates was joined by Secretary of State Rice in calling for Guantanamo to close earlier this year. They reportedly argued that the detention center should be moved to make the trials of detainees more credible, and because Guantanamo's continued existence hampered the broader war effort. It is my further understanding that this proposal was reportedly blocked by Attorney General Gonzales and Vice President Cheney for two reasons. First, because they were concerned it would make it harder for them to argue that the detainees have no rights, and second, that it would be a public admission that Guantanamo was a mistake. So here you have a facility that according to reports, the Secretaries of Defense and State argue is harming the war on terror.
State Department and Pentagon officials have elsewhere said, according to reports, that Guantanamo has harmed our relationship with our closest allies and made it more difficult to coordinate efforts in counterterrorism, intelligence and law enforcement.
I think we need to own up to the problem that is Guantanamo, and it goes beyond the very serious questions that have already been considered in this hearing about our treatment of detainees. William Taft IV, who was once the acting Secretary of Defense in the first Bush Administration, and then served as the current President Bush's chief legal advisor at the State Department during his first term, recently testified that it is evident that some detainees have been abused at the facility and that interrogation methods that have been used there have not complied with our international obligations under the Geneva Conventions. He also recommended closing the facility. Guantanamo has become associated, in the eyes of the world, with a discredited administration policy of abuse, secrecy, and contempt for the rule of law.
Rather than keeping us more secure, keeping Guantanamo open is harming our national interests. It compromises our long term military and strategic interests, and it impairs our standing overseas. I have certainly concluded that we should address any security issues on what to do with the remaining detainees, and then close it once and for all.
April 26, 2007
Transcript, Senate Armed Services Committee Hearing
On Giuliani’s comment that Republicans are better with security than are Democrats:
. . .I think that, as a senator from New York, it is something that I've worked on very hard ever since 9/11 to try to convince the administration to do those things that would actually work to make us safer. And I think there's a big disconnect between the rhetoric and the reality.
You know, we haven't secured our borders, our ports, our mass transit systems. You can go across this country and see so much that has not been done. The resources haven't gotten to the front lines where decisions are made in local government the way that they need to, and I think that this administration has consistently tried to hype the fear without delivering on the promise of making America safer. And its foreign policy around the world, as you've heard from all of my colleagues here, has also made the world less stable, which, of course, has a ripple effect with respect to what we're going to face in the future.
So I hope that we can put that myth to rest. It is certainly something I will try to do during that -- the campaign.
April 26, 2007
Transcript, Democratic Presidential Debate, Orangeburg, SC
