5 ms·

A little disappointed to see this behaviour from the American government. Correct me if I am wrong but didn't Obama administration promise full transparency?

olefoo 16y ago
He also promised to take a principled stand against torture and to close Guantanomo, and restore due process; before being elected. Since being elected, none of those things have happened, and he has come out in favour of assassinating US Citizens living abroad without any judicial process whatsoever (The Al-Awliki case). So the failure of Obama to publicly condemn Lieberman's petty campaign of censorship and crude threats against Amazon is not at all surprising.
- m0th87 16y ago
  Wait what? He standardized the Army field manual for interrogation [1] and has been attempting to close Guantanamo [2]. 1: http://articles.cnn.com/2009-01-22/politics/obama.interrogations_1_interrogation-rules-cia-director-michael-hayden-cia-custody?_s=PM:POLITICS http://articles.cnn.com/2009-01-22/politics/obama.interrogat... 2: http://articles.cnn.com/2009-01-22/politics/guantanamo.order_1_detention-guantanamo-bay-torture?_s=PM:POLITICS http://articles.cnn.com/2009-01-22/politics/guantanamo.order...
  - Naga 16y ago
    And then under his administration there was the trial of Omar Khadr. Khadr is a Canadian who was 15 when he was captured in Afghanistan and brought to Guantanamo Bay, tortured and held until this year, when he was sentenced to 40 years in prison, because he apparently killed an American soldier, and because he confessed, even though the confession had been taken under the torture. They convicted a soldier for killing another soldier on the field of combat. And he was a child. These are not progressive measures.
  - CWuestefeld 16y ago
    There is a difference between words and actions.
    - m0th87 16y ago
      Right, which is why they're executive orders :) Guantanamo is in a half-state because Congress invoked NIMBY with the attempts to prosecute detainees in the US. No other country wants to take them in.
  - olefoo 16y ago
    Bush was already under pressure from the Army to return to the previous standards, but Obama has not articulated a clear and government wide "no-torture" policy; nor has he brought the US into compliance with it's obligations under the Geneva Conventions. And "trying to close Guantanamo"? Please. Do or do not, there is no try.
- dolinsky 16y ago
  It's incredible that your fallacious statement has 19 upvotes, while m0th's correction of your fallacies only has 2. http://whatthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com/ http://whatthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com/
  - util 16y ago
    Parody of that site: http://whatinthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com/ http://whatinthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com/
- Tangurena 16y ago
  To be (slightly) fair, the assassination policy was created by the Bush administration and merely carried forwards (like so many Bush administration policies). Although I agree he's done zero to stop torture, and backpedaled on his "promises" to close Gitmo and end the war in Iraq.
gjenkin 16y ago
Yes, disappointing to see this behavior from the government, and also from corporations like Amazon. Perhaps most disappointing though is that much of the MSM coverage is focused on Wikileaks itself and not on the actual content of the cables. The NYT and other media outlets are doing their best to push the substantive issues, but that's not what is being discussed by our so-called leaders and politicians. The cable leaks have highlighted - as if we didn't know it already - how reckless and out of touch many of our foreign officials and diplomats are. To name a few random acts: bargaining with Slovenia to take Guantanamo prisoners in exchange for a visit with President Obama; threatening Germany against investigating the unwarranted kidnapping (is any kidnapping warranted?) of one of its citizens by the CIA; collusion with British officials to illegally stock cluster bombs in the UK. Perhaps if the mainstream media was focused on these issues, we may have a serious public debate about the quality and purpose of our state department and our foreign diplomats ... and maybe even improve them. Now that would be progress. But no, that's just too difficult for the Senator Liebermans of the world to take on. Much easier for these politicians to beat their chests in disgust at Assange's actions. While that may be good for Lieberman in the short term - he gets his bully pulpit - we're all still left with the same crappy state department, and the same foreign officials in the same embassies still making the same out-of-touch recommendations that end up making the world a less safe place for all of us. Where is the leadership? Where is the "change" that was promised two years ago? I want to see a commitment from Obama that he's going to look seriously at the issues raised by the cables, and fix our state department. Not holding my breath though.
- dtf 16y ago
  OVH, one of WikiLeaks' French hosting providers, just had to deal with a similar "request" from the French government. Their response was, "it's not up to politicians or OVH to decide the site's closure". http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/03/wikileaks-france-ban-website http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/03/wikileaks-france... At least somebody has a grasp of the separation of powers.
Benjo 16y ago
Lieberman is not part of the administration. I haven't seen Obama trying to censor this, although he obviously would have prevented it if he could have. By definition he doesn't want classified information leaked.
- neworbit 16y ago
  Um... how is Lieberman not part of the administration?

olefoo 16y ago

He also promised to take a principled stand against torture and to close Guantanomo, and restore due process; before being elected. Since being elected, none of those things have happened, and he has come out in favour of assassinating US Citizens living abroad without any judicial process whatsoever (The Al-Awliki case). So the failure of Obama to publicly condemn Lieberman's petty campaign of censorship and crude threats against Amazon is not at all surprising.

m0th87 16y ago
Wait what? He standardized the Army field manual for interrogation [1] and has been attempting to close Guantanamo [2]. 1: http://articles.cnn.com/2009-01-22/politics/obama.interrogations_1_interrogation-rules-cia-director-michael-hayden-cia-custody?_s=PM:POLITICS http://articles.cnn.com/2009-01-22/politics/obama.interrogat... 2: http://articles.cnn.com/2009-01-22/politics/guantanamo.order_1_detention-guantanamo-bay-torture?_s=PM:POLITICS http://articles.cnn.com/2009-01-22/politics/guantanamo.order...
- Naga 16y ago
  And then under his administration there was the trial of Omar Khadr. Khadr is a Canadian who was 15 when he was captured in Afghanistan and brought to Guantanamo Bay, tortured and held until this year, when he was sentenced to 40 years in prison, because he apparently killed an American soldier, and because he confessed, even though the confession had been taken under the torture. They convicted a soldier for killing another soldier on the field of combat. And he was a child. These are not progressive measures.
- CWuestefeld 16y ago
  There is a difference between words and actions.
  - m0th87 16y ago
    Right, which is why they're executive orders :) Guantanamo is in a half-state because Congress invoked NIMBY with the attempts to prosecute detainees in the US. No other country wants to take them in.
- olefoo 16y ago
  Bush was already under pressure from the Army to return to the previous standards, but Obama has not articulated a clear and government wide "no-torture" policy; nor has he brought the US into compliance with it's obligations under the Geneva Conventions. And "trying to close Guantanamo"? Please. Do or do not, there is no try.
dolinsky 16y ago
It's incredible that your fallacious statement has 19 upvotes, while m0th's correction of your fallacies only has 2. http://whatthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com/ http://whatthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com/
- util 16y ago
  Parody of that site: http://whatinthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com/ http://whatinthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com/
Tangurena 16y ago
To be (slightly) fair, the assassination policy was created by the Bush administration and merely carried forwards (like so many Bush administration policies). Although I agree he's done zero to stop torture, and backpedaled on his "promises" to close Gitmo and end the war in Iraq.

gjenkin 16y ago

Yes, disappointing to see this behavior from the government, and also from corporations like Amazon. Perhaps most disappointing though is that much of the MSM coverage is focused on Wikileaks itself and not on the actual content of the cables. The NYT and other media outlets are doing their best to push the substantive issues, but that's not what is being discussed by our so-called leaders and politicians. The cable leaks have highlighted - as if we didn't know it already - how reckless and out of touch many of our foreign officials and diplomats are. To name a few random acts: bargaining with Slovenia to take Guantanamo prisoners in exchange for a visit with President Obama; threatening Germany against investigating the unwarranted kidnapping (is any kidnapping warranted?) of one of its citizens by the CIA; collusion with British officials to illegally stock cluster bombs in the UK. Perhaps if the mainstream media was focused on these issues, we may have a serious public debate about the quality and purpose of our state department and our foreign diplomats ... and maybe even improve them. Now that would be progress. But no, that's just too difficult for the Senator Liebermans of the world to take on. Much easier for these politicians to beat their chests in disgust at Assange's actions. While that may be good for Lieberman in the short term - he gets his bully pulpit - we're all still left with the same crappy state department, and the same foreign officials in the same embassies still making the same out-of-touch recommendations that end up making the world a less safe place for all of us. Where is the leadership? Where is the "change" that was promised two years ago? I want to see a commitment from Obama that he's going to look seriously at the issues raised by the cables, and fix our state department. Not holding my breath though.

dtf 16y ago
OVH, one of WikiLeaks' French hosting providers, just had to deal with a similar "request" from the French government. Their response was, "it's not up to politicians or OVH to decide the site's closure". http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/03/wikileaks-france-ban-website http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/03/wikileaks-france... At least somebody has a grasp of the separation of powers.

Benjo 16y ago

Lieberman is not part of the administration. I haven't seen Obama trying to censor this, although he obviously would have prevented it if he could have. By definition he doesn't want classified information leaked.

neworbit 16y ago
Um... how is Lieberman not part of the administration?