It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obama blocks list of visitors to White House

page: 2
26
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 12:09 PM
link   
For one,I find it so funny that the only thing the antiobamamites can gripe about is transperency. He didnt' reveal what he ordered for lunch, oh no he is going back on his campaign promise!
Yet he has been far more transparent then any other president.

The fact is, with problems with N. Korea looming, the new election in Iran, the problems between Palestine and Isreal, and the economy, this is what your griping about. The least of my worries is who is visiting the white house.

Fact is, it doesnt' matter. In the information age, where you can connet with people by internet, phone, fax, or whatever, you dont' know who he is talking too, and you shouldnt'. I dont' know who calls, and I dont' know who visits.

And it works both ways, not only could people of questionable intent be visiting, it coudl be people of noble intent. It works both ways. It coudl be MIchael J. Fox on parkinsons research, you don't know. It could be my grandma, either way, you don't know.
Most likely it is to protect the identities of the people and has nothing to do with transparency.




posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 12:12 PM
link   
i bet it would come out that the same boy pedophilla rings that have been in the white house for the past administrations are still there

i reserched some of this awhile back and it was just disgusting, boys taken on "tours" of the white house at 1 and 2 am.

i bet it all still going on

washington is all about dirt on people and blackmail



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 12:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 


Actually yes, they do.
When working in any service related field, whether it's politics, health care or whatever, everyone has the reasonable right to privacy.
Doesn't it say that somewhere in the US Constitution?



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 12:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Matthew Dark
 


The US Supreme Court (if you accept their judgment) says NO.

This isn't about your bedroom, or who you associate with on your own time. This is about the office of the President of the United States of America.

Now if he were King, that would be different.

It has never been "OK" for our Executive, Senatorial, Congressional, or other elected leaders to have secret associations.... Ever.

For those of you still clinging to the tired and tread-worn arguments about 'anti' Obama threads and partisan politics, carry on. It's becoming quaint and amusing to watch people refuse to accept what they see and hear, because of who it is, or what party they claim to belong to this week.



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 12:54 PM
link   
Transparancy you can believe in.


Barry doesn't want people to know who is visiting ... people like this ....

Obama secretly met with Muslim Brotherhood members at the White House



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 12:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 



Yes, just as he has kept all his other records hidden, now what is he hiding?

Honestly, who can go through the process of becoming president of the US and not have some dirt dug up on them,

Something is very wrong.



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 01:08 PM
link   
We already know what is on the list. Rev. Wright. Bilderbergs, Big Pharma, other lobbies.......Oh ya, and his programmers and handlers!

It is silly to restrict access to this list. We all know that he could sneak in whoever he wanted, meet them elsewhere, video conference, or whatever!

There was certainly enough privacy there for Clinton to get some things done. My new fantasy is sex on the Resolute Desk!!!



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 01:09 PM
link   
Transparent Government!



I don't even know what to say anymore. They work effortlessly to expose and rape us of our privacy yet continue to work in the shadows themselves.

We deserve everything we get I guess.

Untill the next secret.



[edit on 16-6-2009 by Tyr Sog]



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 02:29 PM
link   
To be accurate...for anyone that cares..

The appeal of the ruling to include the visitors list in FOIA requests was filed under the Bush administration. claiming it fell under "Presidential Records" rather than Secret Service records.

The Obama administration contends it is reviewing this and has not yet WITHDRAWN the appeal made by the prior Bush Administration.

So they haven't actively moved to block the release...the old Bush administration policy/appeal is still in place.....they haven't actively moved to withdrawl the appeal yet either.

They say they are "reviewing it" ...so they haven't technically said "no"....they just haven't moved to withdrawl the Bush Administrations appeal and policy position.

The apparent claimed concern is that they vet candidates for given posts and the visitor lists will indicate who visited prior to given appointments...thus embarrassing those who were passed up for the job.

Valid concern? Maybe, but that is politics..they should release the list.



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 03:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by nixie_nox
For one,I find it so funny that the only thing the antiobamamites can gripe about is transperency. He didnt' reveal what he ordered for lunch, oh no he is going back on his campaign promise!
Yet he has been far more transparent then any other president.

The fact is, with problems with N. Korea looming, the new election in Iran, the problems between Palestine and Isreal, and the economy, this is what your griping about. The least of my worries is who is visiting the white house.


All you've got to do is read the rest of ATS to know that this is not all that people are "griping" about.


Fact is, it doesnt' matter. In the information age, where you can connet with people by internet, phone, fax, or whatever, you dont' know who he is talking too, and you shouldnt'. I dont' know who calls, and I dont' know who visits.


Except for the fact that it is the LAW that the people can know who is visiting the POTUS because it is the PEOPLE that he's representing - not vice versa.


And it works both ways, not only could people of questionable intent be visiting, it coudl be people of noble intent. It works both ways. It coudl be MIchael J. Fox on parkinsons research, you don't know. It could be my grandma, either way, you don't know.
Most likely it is to protect the identities of the people and has nothing to do with transparency.


Yes, people with good intent also visit the POTUS I am sure of that. But, that does not negate the fact that we have the right to know. Why would one with pure intentions want to protect their identity?

As far the the "interviewing for administration positions" thing, in the article it says that they did not request the reasons for the visits - just a list of names. How could it cause embarrassment to people if no one knows the reason for the visit?



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 03:37 PM
link   
reply to post by maybereal11
 


Yes that is the legal status of this issue. However, they ARE blocking any requests for release of these lists until the legal status is cleared up.. again. That's why I question if we'll ever get any of this information. A judge has ruled twice that it is illegal to withhold this information and twice they have appealed. How many appeals do they get? If they can withhold the lists while appeals are pending and if they can appeal it forever, then we'll never be able to get the lists.



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 09:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by mapsurfer_
I would think it would be really tough to be president with people and press constantly up your arse... Maybe it would remind him how important privacy really is to anyone. Does the public and press really need to who visits the White House? Reminds me of Fringe... remember the newpaper article about Obama moving to new White House? Living in a govt. building probably costs him a ton of personal freedoms.


Im not really sure where to start with your post mapsurfer.

#1. The President of the United States gives up his privacy to the people of this country when he is elected. He is supposed to be the living enbodiment of our great nation, and giving up his life to this comes with the job.

#2. Does the people really need to know who visits the White House?? Are you kidding me? If the people want to know who visits the White House, they have the absolute right to, period. There should be no reason to hide who goes there in the first place, which raises questions of what is being hidden. The White House is your house, and my house. You must be one of those kinds of people who doesnt want to know what our government is doing, as long as you have your TV and IPOD. That way of thinking is what is ruining our country from the inside out.

#3. Living in the White House probably costs Obama a bunch of personal freedoms???? Of course it does!!!! Every President pays that price, and that is the way it should be. For his 4 year term, he is suppose to be of the people, by the people and for the people. His life is given to this Nations people in the service of it, and they all know what it means when they enter into it.

Im glad that everyone in America doesnt feel like you do my friend, we would be even worse off now then we already are.

[edit on 16-6-2009 by treemanx]



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 09:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by killuminati2012

Obama blocks list of visitors to White House


www.msnbc.msn.com

The Obama administration is fighting to block access to names of visitors to the White House, taking up the Bush administration argument that a president doesn't have to reveal who comes calling to influence policy decisions.

Despite President Barack Obama's pledge to introduce a new era of transparency to Washington, and despite two rulings by a federal judge that the records are public, the Secret Service has denied msnbc.com's request for the names of all White House visitors from Jan. 20 to the present. It also denied a narrower request by the nonpartisan watchdog group Citizens for
(visit the link for the full news article)



For the UMPTEENTH time, OBAMA is the Anti-Christ. Wake up people, he's got the masses eating up his lies and bull puckie. He will never deliver the TRUTH, only what you people want to hear.



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 09:38 PM
link   
The list of visitors to the White House is Public Property.

The President does have privacy, no one expects to get video of him in his bedroom.

But knowing who the President consorts with is our right! What if he had Charles Manson there every night? We seriously should know about it.

I know Manson isnt there, it is just a figure of speech.

These guys are idiots though, they could easily doctor it, or like others said have the meetings elsewhere. And still release the watered down list for good measure.

What are they Trying to start a revolt?

[edit on 16-6-2009 by muzzleflash]



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 09:40 PM
link   
Choose an executioner, by selecting one of their own. Prepare the guillotine of greed, and hone its shinning blade.

No respect for men who labor to enslave the people, for benefit of a few.

It’s time to silence two-faced traitors, once and for all.

Step up Barry, you're next, dirtbag.



[edit on 16-6-2009 by seasoul]



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 09:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maxmars

It has never been "OK" for our Executive, Senatorial, Congressional, or other elected leaders to have secret associations.... Ever.


That is just your opinion.
If you were president, and you wanted to invite some friends and/or hookers over for beer pong, you wouldn't want everyone up on your junk getting in your face.
Now, I'm not saying that's what he's doing, but you also have to take into consideration that perhaps he's meeting with operatives who have to maintain a cover.
You remember how outraged you were when the former administration publicly released the name of an undercover CIA agent?
Just take into consideration that no matter how much we pay in taxes, there are some things that the higher ups don't have to tell us.
I can't say I'm thrilled about that prospect one bit, but I understand the need to keep certain things under your hat.
Just because you want to know, doesn't mean you need to know.



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 10:20 PM
link   
What do you expect from a foreign-born, muslim President?

The guy is a liar and should have never been elected.

Oh, wait. That's right. He wasn't elected but selected. He's yet another pawn fulfilling the wishes of the global elite.



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 10:39 PM
link   

Worker and Visitor Entry System (WAVES). This Secret Service database includes information submitted to the Secret Service about individuals who have a planned visit to the White House. This information includes the name of the pass holder submitting the request, the date of the request, the time and location of the planned visit and the nature of the visit or the person to be visited.


Ok so I'm confused. Does the above mean that all "visitors" are public figures AND the regular Joe-Smoe that happens to be there on a regular tour?

If that's true, then I've been a "visitor" before (it was in 2006 and a Make A Wish trip, so it was really cool). If a "visitor" is just a public figure, then I'm all for the names/times/dates etc. being released. If it's the regular people that are just there on a tour, then I see no reason why anyone would need to see those names (I don't know of any value to them).



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 10:48 PM
link   
Transparent as mud, Barry.
Too bad none of his kool aid crowd will remember any of this in 2012, if we are even allow to vote by then.



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 10:50 PM
link   
This doesn't surprise me in the least. We all know he loves to talk out of the side of his mouth. However, he may be residing there at the moment; but it is the American peoples' house.

We pay the freight over there. So if we want to know who he is smoking cigars and drinking expresso with we have that right. The court ruled twice on the motion so he really doesn't have any ground to stand on. One way or another his dinner guests will be known. Now the nature of their meetings he has the right to keep that secret because all he would have to do is make them top-secret.




top topics



 
26
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join