The War on the Free Press

This article takes Alberto Gonzales and the Bush Administration to task for gradually reducing the publics access to government documents. Initially the article reports on a recent appearance by Gonzales on ABC's 'This Week.' In that interview Gonzales indicated that reporters may be prosecuted for getting 'their hands on classified information.' The article also looks at Gonzales' role in restricting access to government papers and his view about the Geneva convention and how it applies to enemy prisoners.

---

This certainly would be an interesting court case. Does the public still have the right to read real news or is it ever condemmed to consume pablum disguised as 'Newspeak'? Clearly the rules are being changed as we speak. What will this Brave New America look like with the likes of Gonzales ruling over it?
May 24, 2006, Boston Globe
boston.com

[edit on 1-6-2006 by polanksi]
mod edit to shorten link

[edit on 2-6-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]

Im using events like this in my reason why I dont trust the FBI over the Jefferson raid case. They are making many actions which indicate they want complete power over everything and they want to be at the head. Every step they are taking is one toward restricting people and limiting rights. I think we should be watching every step the FBI takes very carefully. The Federal Police (FBI) seem like perfect canidates as enforcers of a police state.

The link provided does not work.

Sorry about that the new one does. I tried it out.

[edit on 1-6-2006 by polanksi]

boston.com

[edit on 1-6-2006 by polanksi]

[edit on 2-6-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]

I went to file a Freedom of Informaiton Act request not too long ago. Doing it as research for my next novel. The bureaucrat behind the counter wouldn't process it. When asked, he said "I don't my name on this."

Ever since Bush came to office,the flow of information FROM the government to the people has started to dry up. The whole trend is very disturbing. I was having cofee with a group of independent writers a few daysago, and some were openly talking about not following through with certain projects.

Attorney General Gonzalas has established so many new precidents that I'm a little worried for my own sake. If they can restrict the flow of data from their archives, it's only a matter of time 'til they start taking a closer look at what their data miners are dragging in.

Let me ask you this:

Are there any documents that should be categorized as "Classified"?
If so, what measures should be available to protect them from disclosure?

If we tie this in with the "email glitch" that occured earlier today with AOL's services, one can only imagine that something really big is up. The story has been covered by CNN, and I've provided the link below to the full article for everyone's reading pleasure.

I wonder how many more little things like this will be needed to wake the American People up to the reality that they can't say or do anything now that isn't controlled to some severe extent by the government. We cannot even say anything anymore on public streets without fear that someone will sue us for slander. Where did the freedom of expression go? I say it went out the window. Anyway, here's the link.

www.cnn.com...

I also think we need to keep a VERY close eye on the actions of those in power, as they're trying to further remove "We the People" from the proverbial Driver's Seat.

TheBorg

Mildly interesting story, but I have no idea how it ties into the topic at hand. It was a small, relatively short inconvenience caused by human error.

I think the idea is that all of the issues raised in this thread combine to make a larger point.

Exactly Justin. It's a combination of small things that make a bigger picture that's quite scary to look at. Maybe I'm just a conspiratorial nut, and am blinded by my desire for a good mystery. But it's also possible that those that we think are doing these things are in fact doing them, and they know that by our thinking so that we ruin our own credibility. Either way, it sure is fun to think about.

TheBorg

For the Straussian right, the proper role of the media is to be cheerleaders for the state. Think Fox news... the purpose of the media, in their eyes, is to get the people behind the leaders and disseminate propaganda. As long as the "right people" are in charge that is...

When the media starts exposing facts the leadership would rather the population not be aware of, like the NSA domestic spying, Abu Ghraib, etc., in their view the media is being treasonous and "anti-American".



Sure, specific operational plans, capabilities and limitations of weapons systems, the identity of covert sources, all these things legitimately need to be kept secret. Unfortunately more often we see secrecy used to cover up things that might be politically damaging or embarassing to the leadership: IE NSA domestic spying, Abu Ghraib, dragging off Afghan dirt farmers mistaken as terrorists to secret CIA dungeons, etc...

[edit on 6/2/06 by xmotex]

All of these things, put together, combine to create a "force" that compells some of us to speak up. Trouble is, we look at the work through a working class perspective. The people who lead our governments have more money than they can spend. Because they don't actually have to work for a living, they don't have the priorities that the rest of us do.

It's a sympton typical of any nation. When the elites have priorities that are bad for the people they're supposed to represent...eventually, they feel threatened. It's only natural for them to develop a bad attitude. They see us as being ungrateful. They come to think of us as part of the problem. In the end, they lose our trust because they just don't see the point in explaining themselves.

Until a few years ago, I was a part of the establishment. I never suspected that I'd be one of those dissenting voices. If you stop and think about it, many of you can remember that same point in your lives when you weren't thinking like you do now.

Agreed with xomtex. The government should be keeping certain things classified, like weapons systems and such. However, there are obviously things which arnt national security which they are considering needs to be kept classified. So as the article states it, I dont have a problem, its just when it misuses this act that it will be bad.

The trouble is, you won't find any two people who can agree on the definitions of abuse. One man's classified national secret is another man's suppresed 'truth.' I'd like to see more of this fought out in the courts.