Obama Says "More Transparency" - While Gates Says "Except When It Comes To Torture Evidence"

You cannot make this stuff up.

On the one hand, you've got the President, traveling to foreign lands and sounding that all-American call for transparency and open government. On the other hand, you've got the President's Department of Defense fighting for just the opposite - less visibility and blocking open government.

President Obama is visiting China and telling folks there that open communication and freedom of speech is a good thing. Meanwhile, back home in Washington, D.C., his administration is filing Supreme Court motions to block the publication of photos sought under the Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA).

President Obama's remarks at a "town hall" meeting in China, according to an Associated Press report, included a statement that said unfettered access to information "should be available to all people."

(The article also reports the President as saying "We do not seek to impose any system of government on any other nation." I'm wondering how the citizens of Iraq and Afghanistan are reacting to that statement?)http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5isOFwdbq0tsqatW6vJpkDRTI1gMgD9C0GJ400

Unfortunately, unfettered access to information is just what the Defense Department does not want. Thanks to a compliant Congress and President Obama's signature - which passed a law circumventing the FOIA for just this circumstance - Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has barred the release of 21 photos showing American soldiers torturing and humiliating Iraqi detainees.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/11/15/scotus.detainee.photos/index.html

According to press reports, the Obama administration filed a brief with the Supreme Court late Friday supporting Gates' blocking the release of the photos. The American Civil Liberties Union is seeking publication of the photos, and promises to keep working towards that end.

President Obama had initially indicated he would not stop the release of the photos, many taken at the infamous Abu Ghraib prison by soldiers in charge of prisoners. But he later reversed course and supported suppression of the documents.

So Mr. President, which is it? Freedom of information for all citizens is good for the Chinese, but not so much for Americans? How can you urge other countries to practice transparency and open dissemination of information while simultaneously shielding documents proving evidence of government law-breaking from publication at home?

How do these guys stand up on the world stage and say this stuff with a straight face?

ACTA - More Control Over The Internet?

The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement is an international treaty proposing global regulations on internet content, with a specific emphasis on new enforcement mechanisms pertaining to copyrighted materials. This has been a little under the radar for many (including myself), but there are lots of documents available on the web with info.

This is a news flash coming out of the latest round of apparently closed-door negotiations taking place in Seoul, South Korea this week. Was it just the opening salvo when music conglomerates started suing moms and college students for downloading? According to this article from the Electronic Frontier Foundation, it’s the punitive model of “three strikes and you’re out” for copyright infringement - to be enforced by internet providers:
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/11/leaked-acta-internet-provisions-three-strikes-and

EFF filed suit against the government, asking for release of papers/documents pertaining to US participation in ACTA – the Obama Administration cited “national security” concerns as the reason to deny public distribution, the judge ruled in the government’s favor and the lawsuit died:
http://www.eff.org/press/archives/2009/06/17

This May 2008 article from Intellectual Property Watch details some of the criticism of ACTA provisions from other countries:
http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/2008/05/30/embattled-acta-negotiations-next-week-in-geneva-us-sees-signing-this-year/

From the Wiki article on ACTA: “Critics argue ACTA is part of a broader strategy of venue shopping and policy laundering employed by the trade representatives of the US, EC, Japan, and other supporters of rigid intellectual property enforcement. This strategy entails negotiating for terms in international treaties that might prove too politically unpopular to pass in national assemblies.”

"National security" and seeking out ways to circumvent legislators - what a world. I cannot predict how the U.S. Senate might vote on an ACTA treaty as outlined today. But given that august body's history on bowing down to corporate money, rest assured that it will take a concerted public effort to make sure any fairness in analysis is achieved.