Yesterday, there was a potentially temporary though still quite significant victory for those who believe in open government and transparency: as Jane Hamsher first reported, House leaders and the White House were forced to remove the Graham-Lieberman photo suppression amendment from the war supplemental spending bill, because widespread opposition to that amendment among progressive House Democrats was jeopardizing passage of the spending bill. Readers here and those of various blogs who bombarded House members with opposition calls on Friday obviously played an important role in forcing the withdrawal of this pernicious amendment. Successes of this sort are rare enough that -- even if fleeting -- they warrant some celebration.More here.
Thursday, June 11, 2009
The war on transparency
Glenn Greenwald for Salon.com describes the removal of the Graham-Lieberman photo suppression amendment from the war supplemental spending bill as "a potentially temporary though still quite significant victory." The amendment is "nothing but a pure manifestation of the Bush mentality," he wrote. Without the amendment, war crimes photos are likely to be released. Supporting the suppression of information that might increase anti-American sentiment implies that "we should conceal or even outright lie about all the bad things we do that might reflect poorly on us." The Washington Post reports that the Obama administration is also urging the federal court to keep concealed all evidence relating to CIA's destruction of interrogation videotapes.