Names of Advisors Cleared To Access ACTA Documents

1 a bee writes "With the White House claiming national security grounds for failing to release ACTA related information, including negotiating documents and even the list of participants, the spotlight is now on just who does have access. Turns out, according to James Love, hundreds of advisers, many of them corporate lobbyists, are considered 'cleared advisers.' The list looks a who's who of captains of industry."

Comments

so much for change...

[ph4s3]

weird how things seem to stay the same

Re:so much for change...

[conureman]

Relax, our Fearless Leaders always do the right thing.

Re:so much for change...

[Nutria]

weird how things seem to stay the same

Nah, it's a zombie movie come to life: Hope and change... hope and change... hope and change... hope and change... hope and change... hope and change... hope and change...

Re:so much for change...

[aurispector]

Corporate control that bypasses government via international treaty. Welcome to the new world order.

Re:so much for change...

[DoofusOfDeath]

weird how things seem to stay the same

I was actually willing to give the administration the benefit of the doubt for a while there. I thought to myself that it must be difficult to negotiate a proposed treaty when the press can print every little revision that occurs during negotiations. So I could kind of see the benefit in keeping a treaty's details secret until it was ready to be proposed to Congress.

But several things have eroded my trust: the apparent inclusion of a anti-rights industry people, the apparent omission of pro-rights people (EFF, etc.), and the "secrets" claim.

This is like the crap Cheney pulled with energy policy and oil industry groups, but it's arguably much worse because it could become an actual treaty.

I was hoping that the "Hope I Can Believe In" would make it to the two-month mark, but apparently not. This leaves me really despirited.

Re:so much for change...

[oneirophrenos]

I began to doubt the whole "change" thing back when Obama started to stack his administration with people from Clinton's and even Bush's administration. I guess change is a relative thing.

Re:so much for change...

[Nursie]

As a jaded cynic I have just this to say -

You voted for one of the Republicans or the Democrats and you expected a change?

Ha!!! Best scam ever!!! You were duped my friend.

Re:so much for change...

[Goffee71]

Being going for ever, may I quote the almost obligatory Blackadder:

Melchett: Ah, yes, the special mission. At ease Blackadder. Now, what I'm about to tell you is absolutely tip-top-secret, is that clear?
Blackadder: It is sir.
Melchett: Now, I've compiled a list of those with security clearance, have you got it Darling?
Darling: Yes sir.
Melchett: Read it please.
Darling: It's top security sir, I think that's all the Captain needs to know.
Melchett: Nonsense! Let's hear the list in full!

Darling: Very well sir. "List of personnel cleared for mission Gainsborough, as dictated by General C. H. Melchett:
You and me, Darling, obviously. Field Marshal Haig, Field Marshal Haig's wife, all Field Marshal Haig's wife's friends, their families, their families' servants, their families' servants' tennis partners, and some chap I bumped into the mess the other day called Bernard."
Melchett: So, it's maximum security, is that clear?
Blackadder: Quite so sir, only myself and the rest of the English speaking world is to know.

Re:so much for change...

[Spacelem]

In Scotland we have proportional representation. This system gives us a government that better represents the views of the people, as the proportion of each party more closely reflects the number of people who voted for them. Even better, we actually have six parties with seats, and many more who stand a chance of gaining a seat.

Proportional representation is not perfect, and it has been accused of resulting in weak governments as the main party is usually small compared to the opposition parties; however, I think it's considerably closer to democracy as the Ancient Greeks saw it, than the choice between two similar parties that tends to exist today. Most importantly, it allows me to vote where my conscience tells me, rather than for the lesser of two evils.

Re:so much for change...

[Anonymous Coward]

In 1998, the UK government devolved ruling power to the Scottish Executive, Jackass.

Re:so much for change...

[mysticgoat]

You might want to hold on to your doubt for a bit longer.

Carmen Suro-Bredie, who signed the letter rejecting the FOIA request, is a hold-over from the Bush Administration. Could be she never got the memo that things have changed. She actually predates Bush: she was chairing hearings about trade agreements in 1992, and apparently has at least 30 years of Federal Civil Service behind her. She has always kept a very low profile: the only biography of her on the web is remarkable for saying very little and providing no dates at all. These are the hallmarks of a career bureaucrat; the kind of person who works hard, not out of any sense of ideals, or for the good of the team, but to assure that their personal situation will be more comfortable next year than it was last year (no matter who is in charge or what the new goals of the organization are).

Now that she has stumbled into the Internet's spotlight, it will be interesting to see if there is any change in her career. Her style doesn't seem to fit well with Obama's approach. OTOH, she has been working the same small patch of ground for more than 16 years, so she might know too much to be easily shown to the door.

The treaty in question has a long way to go before it is ratified. There will be opportunities for Obama to open up the process; let's see if he takes them.

So Obama failed us then ?

[unity100]

all that transparency, all that pro internet attitude, and even declarations of support for net neutrality to the extent of making full definitions of it on his website, getting support and donations through the net and actually succeeding to amass the budget needed to beat mccain through those donations and all that, and ...

so he fails us in the most important thing, at the most important moment, in almost half of those he promised us then ?

It's spelled Democracy

[DrugCheese]

It's pronounced Corporate Oligarchy

Re:National security?

[Timothy Brownawell]

How on earth can something that deals with copyright be considered a matter of national security?

Have you ever seen movies with scary monsters in them? Those monsters are actually real, and the MPAA has threatened to release them near D.C. if the treaty doesn't turn out to their liking.

ACTA is more than copyright

[langelgjm]

As I pointed out the other day, ACTA is about so much more than copyright. This "counterfeiting" treaty will almost certainly include provisions for stricter controls on generic pharmaceuticals, amongst other things.

Just take a look at some of the companies that are represented on that list: Eli Lilly, Merck, Monsanto, Schering-Plough... I guarantee they're not there because of pirated CDs.

Just to clarify, I don't think that changes the fact that the "national security" claim is bogus. It's just further proof of the enormous democratic deficit that exists at the international level.

Re:Bypassing government via international treaty

[Verteiron]

Yes, and the ratification will pass buried deep inside the Save the Children and Orphans act. Anyone who opposes it will be labeled a child and orphan hater. Probably a terrorist and pedophile, too.

Sorry, Monday mornings make me cynical.

This is surprising, how?

[Ralph Spoilsport]

Government exists for the protection and projection of the ruling class. 300 years ago, the ruling class were post feudalist monarchies. Now it's industrial oligarchies.

Democracy provides the illusion of control, permitting people to act in ways that seem to benefit themselves as political actors, and thus permitting the hegemony of capitalist industrialist relations to continue as the modus operandi of civilisation, unabated.

Thankfully geology and nature get to play last, and will make harsh hash of this ponzi scheme called capitalist industrialism.

Obama is no different than Roosevelt. Contrary to right wing bullshit, Roosevelt SAVED the ruling class from self destruction. Obama is attempting the same.

RS

Re:Bypassing government via international treaty

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, Monday mornings make me cynical.

I think you misspelled "realistic".

Re:Bypassing government via international treaty

[dwiget001]

Well, our current Senate will rubber stamp anything, including passing a bill to grant a representative to Washington D.C, in complete violation of the U.S. Constitution (on and on top of that, TARP, Stimulus, Omnibus spending, etc.)

Don't expect the current Senate to do anything that might possibly weaken their power and political contribution base.

For quite some time now, the Congress and Senate have not served the good of the U.S. citizens. And, they have constantly violated their sworn oath to "support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic...."

Next election cycle: Each and every Democrat and Republican currently in office should A) not be re-elected and B) neither of the major parties candidates should be voted into office to replace them, vote "some other party or candidate" into office. The Democrats and Republicans are hell bent on completely destroying this country. Wake up people.

Re:Bypassing government via international treaty

[wealthychef]

Actually, to really understand them, you should give up stories like "The Democrats and Republicans are hell bent on completely destroying this country." What they are really hell bent on is just staying in power. So yes, vote them out of office. But we need a new conversation to replace the old one, or the "new boss will be the same as the old boss," as I believe the old Who song goes.