Slashdot Mirror


During Sunshine Week, MuckRock Looks At Some of the All-Time Greatest Redactions (muckrock.com)

v3rgEz writes: It's currently Sunshine Week, a chance to celebrate government transparency, or, this year, the lack thereof, as it came out that the Obama administration secretly undermined Congressional FOIA reform despite pledges to be the "most transparent administration in history." Transparency site MuckRock has compiled a list of the all-time most egregious redactions to honor the administration's hard work.

42 comments

  1. Wait until the next group takes office.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You may think this administration was bad in its transparency but it will not hold a candle to the next group that takes office.

    We get the government we deserve..

    (.)-(.)

    1. Re:Wait until the next group takes office.. by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      Especially as there's a pretty good chance the next President will have directly benefited from this administration's lack of transparency, and in fact went to great lengths to violate standing policy in order to be even less transparent while working in the administration.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    2. Re:Wait until the next group takes office.. by mi · · Score: 1

      went to great lengths to violate standing policy in order to be even less transparent while working in the administration

      ... after criticizing Republicans for using non-government e-mails for anything...

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  2. Excessive censorship by ITRambo · · Score: 2

    The federal government has always been far from transparent. These redactions are just an example of how much the situation has worsened. Knowledge is power. They don't want the people to have any of it.

    1. Re:Excessive censorship by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Knowledge is power. They don't want the people to have any of it.

      In all fairness, most people don't want to do the work and thinking required to gain the knowledge with which to hold their share of the power.

      Power (or the illusion of it) they do want; but not if it requires anything more than a Tweet, a Facebook post, or (in my case) an AC rant on Slashdot.

      More power to those few journalists remaining who are willing to do this work for the good of us all. They're the real MVP's.

  3. Obama also started the war on whistleblowers by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 4, Insightful

    To pile on, it's worth mentioning that Obama also started a war on whistleblowers.

    "On his watch, there have been eight prosecutions under the 1917 Espionage Act – more than double those under all previous presidents combined."
    http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/mar/16/whistleblowers-double-standard-obama-david-petraeus-chelsea-manning

    1. Re:Obama also started the war on whistleblowers by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

      LOL, ranchers?

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    2. Re:Obama also started the war on whistleblowers by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 1

      >> LOL, ranchers?

      Didn't you ever wonder what's in a bottle of "Ranch" dressing?

    3. Re:Obama also started the war on whistleblowers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's probably referring to that idiot in Nevada that was grazing his cattle on federal lands for free, and when they showed up to collect the grazing fees, he shouted FREEDOM and got all his friends with guns to come out and turn it into a big thing. Then he made some shockingly racist remarks on camera, and everyone went away.

    4. Re:Obama also started the war on whistleblowers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spoken like someone who doesn't own a ranch and has failed to investigate the details of the situation. Clearly if it's not you then the other guy must be an idiot.

    5. Re:Obama also started the war on whistleblowers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By all means, please enlighten us to the true facts.

    6. Re:Obama also started the war on whistleblowers by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      http://bigthink.com/strange-ma...

      Feel free to read up on it and enlighten yourself.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  4. sunshine week? by rossdee · · Score: 2

    "It's currently Sunshine Week"

    Well here its currently cloudy and later on today theres a good chance of rain, with it turning to a mixture of snow and rain tomorrow morning In the northeast of the state theyre expecting multi inch accumulations.

    It is March after all, and spring doesn't officially start til sunday/

    So who picks these weeks anyway.

  5. Surely, Slashdot Beta is in there... by rmdingler · · Score: 1

    Anyone RTFA?

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

    1. Re:Surely, Slashdot Beta is in there... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, and don't call me Shirley

  6. RE: Request by NEDHead · · Score: 0

    Please be advise

    Regards

  7. transparency is in the eye of the beholder. by nimbius · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For those who still believe the US governments position of freedom and liberty is the sacrosanct advocacy of the altruistic definition of these concepts, Its worth advocating a book by Noam Chomsky called "Manufactured Consent." Our upcoming elections, for example, are while often considered "free" in actuality quite encumbered. A complex system of gerrymandering, voter ID and registration laws, as well as delegate and superdelegate system operate in concert with the electoral college to ensure party endorsed --not popular-- candidated get elected to office. This promotes doctrinal stability adherent to the US definition of "democracy" at the expense of governing by the will of a majority of americans.

    Chelsea Manning, Julian Assange, and Edward Snowden are all immediate examples of Americas stern opposition to the kinds of transparency that more than a dozen other countries in the world --all democratic-- advocate. the Iranian revolution, and subsequent contra scandal as well as the election in iraq during the most recent war are prime examples of the fact that we champion democracy only if and when the elected leader is our preferred candidate.

    The facts remain: The US still maintains a secret torture prison on an island. we have used kidnapping in our wars. we have an entire secret court system to try -- in absentia -- american citizens and sentence them to death by drone strike. We have a drone warfare program that is not up for any public discussion and this fact is tacitly endorsed by all major forms of US media. our law operates with impunity in nearly every soverign nation, so powerful as to force sweden to ground the flight of a diplomat without any discussion by american news or accountability by any politician. We have an entire criminal justice system that by a nearly 3:1 margin incarcerates one race above all others, with no accountable reason for doing so. we have engaged in proxy warfare through state-sponsored terrorism in the Ukrane, Syria, south america, and the middle east all under the transparent doctrine of freedom and democracy.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:transparency is in the eye of the beholder. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We have an entire criminal justice system that by a nearly 3:1 margin incarcerates one race above all others, with no accountable reason for doing so.

      Yeah, it's not like they broke laws or anything. Those darn racist bastards randomly select 4 people an hour to go to jail, 3 of them being black.

    2. Re:transparency is in the eye of the beholder. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you think you live in a free country, strap on your sidearm, go to the airport and fly to Cuba. Tell them you're going strictly for a vacation.

      Once you're there, buy a couple of hundred dollars worth of cigars and rum, pack them into your carry-on luggage and fly back home to enjoy them.

    3. Re:transparency is in the eye of the beholder. by kilfarsnar · · Score: 0

      We have an entire criminal justice system that by a nearly 3:1 margin incarcerates one race above all others, with no accountable reason for doing so.

      Yeah, it's not like they broke laws or anything. Those darn racist bastards randomly select 4 people an hour to go to jail, 3 of them being black.

      Good point! In many cases, they indeed broke no laws.

      I'm just going to go ahead and assume that the term "systemic racism" is not in your lexicon.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    4. Re:transparency is in the eye of the beholder. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It remains to be seen how it all turns out, but the rise of Donald Trump in the Republican primaries puts uncertainty into this statement, "A complex system of gerrymandering, voter ID and registration laws, as well as delegate and superdelegate system operate in concert with the electoral college to ensure party endorsed --not popular-- candidates get elected to office." Trump seems to exemplify the "popular candidate" that the System tries to exclude -- not a glowing example I have to say. Perhaps Sanders is a popular choice counterexample to Trump, but he did get elected -- to the Senate for many years and is a sitting lawmaker.
      Almost all of the issues mentioned in your last paragraph are supported by a majority of American citizens/residents and would likely win any plebiscites concerning their continuation. So it isn't the US government to blame, but your fellow American citizens, we truly do have a government of the people. And look around the world -- nobody else is any better. I'm not claiming any special status for the USA, it's no better than many others, but no worse, either.

    5. Re:transparency is in the eye of the beholder. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      our law operates with impunity in nearly every soverign nation, so powerful as to force sweden to ground the flight of a diplomat without any discussion by american news or accountability by any politician.

      That wasn't just a diplomat, that was the freaking president of a Country!

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evo_Morales_grounding_incident

      I'd love to see the repercussions from a forced landing of AF1...

    6. Re:transparency is in the eye of the beholder. by KGIII · · Score: 1

      You're free to try any of those things. You mistake the terms freedom and liberty, you're not alone. You're free, for instance, to get a plane and pilot and strap up and do that. You're just going to face a whole bunch of consequences.

      I'll try to help you out. This is one of my favorite topics...

      I am free to kill you, I am not at liberty to do so. If you try to physically harm me and there is no other recourse available then I have a right to kill you.

      The words aren't really synonymous. It is essential, for clear communication, to use them properly - more so given the importance of the subjects. You are, in fact, free to (try to) do any of those things you mentioned. You're not at liberty to do so. However, I'm hoping to go to Cuba today or tomorrow (see my journal and a few other posts) but I'm going in the "people-to-people" type of classification. I'm going "for cultural enrichment." (I've been to Cuba twice but was not able to do so and get my US passport stamped without fear or repercussions.)

      Come this fall, you'll be able to go strictly as a tourist. However, you can go now - just say you're going for cultural enrichment. Hell, say you're going to go take pictures for your blog or to show your friends and family. You can pretty much go for any reason you want. We decided to go on Monday, we're almost ready to go now. We're still waiting for approval but I've got some folks working on making it be a bit speedier than most. I've also got means of transport available - though none of them have flown to Cuba before.

      I want to go before the rest of the Americans go there and fuck it up. I enjoyed it last time. I already went and wiped out the local department store out of their stock of USB thumb-drives to bring as gifts. I've only been twice before and that's what they've requested I return with - both times. I'm going to try to bring in about 200 of them. (That was all they had.) It'd kind of suck if I'm not allowed to go but I should be approved - I just don't know how long they'll let me stay and won't know until just prior to when I leave - at least not with any certainty. I can do up to a month before I get back, then I've got to go back up north as I have business to attend to.

      At any rate, the gist of it is that you're free to do the things you mentioned (or at leas try) but that you're not at liberty to do so. It might seem like a trivial difference but it is not. I'd say it's one of the more important distinctions to be made. "Those who would give up essential liberties..." "Give me liberty or..." "Statue of Liberty." Etc..

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    7. Re:transparency is in the eye of the beholder. by Anonymous+Cow+Ward · · Score: 1

      On the contrary - in most cases, they did break laws. Silly laws that were meant to be broken, and aren't always enforced equally, but they did technically break laws. Even accounting for that, however, the black homicide rate is much higher than any other group.

      Part of the disproportionately high black incarceration rate is due to systemic racism (although conviction and sentencing rates are, to my knowledge, not *that* biased - biased, yes, but not nearly enough to explain all of it) and part is actually due to higher crime rates. Why are crime rates higher? I don't know. Feeling like they can't make progress in the current system, disproportionate poverty rates... I'm not sure.

      --
      Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
    8. Re:transparency is in the eye of the beholder. by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      The situation with Cuba is changing. It wasn't long ago that my brother and his wife went and could have wound up in big trouble (I think the trip had something to do with baseball research). It's opening up now, which is great, but public perception hasn't caught up with the change yet.

      There's also a difference between wearing a firearm wherever you want and traveling where you want. There are reasons to restrict handguns that don't apply to restricting travel.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  8. Manufacturing Consent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Yes, much recommended. Here's a link for the lazy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

  9. All-Time Greatest Redactions by nsaspook · · Score: 1
    --
    In GOD we trust, all others we monitor.
    1. Re:All-Time Greatest Redactions by KGIII · · Score: 2

      Your username is apropos, considering the comment and the PDF located at your link. I was greatly amused and it's about what I was expecting. I've seen another, no idea what it actually was about but I actually think the requesting party believed it might have been about aliens (I kid you not), and it was almost entirely blacked out. Needless to say, the redacted document did, as I recollect, made the interested parties all the more certain of the conspiracy to hide alien/government contact, information, knowledge.

      I'm not positive but I seem to recall they requested a document that had something to do with how it would force an acknowledgement of "Area 51" and that the area was not officially confirmed or denied at the time. They were alien hunting types of people - at least that's what my memory is saying. My Google-fu is weak or unable to find a link to either confirm or deny that my memory is valid. (Perhaps there's some sort of alien memory-erasing technology at work? It's cleverly disguised as weed.)

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  10. Re:Obama has turned out to be nothing less than by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But for who? China? The former USSR in absentia? The new lslamic state?

  11. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, not really.

  12. Re:Really? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

    Maybe he was redacted.

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  13. Re:Obama has turned out to be nothing less than by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    But for who? China? The former USSR in absentia? The new lslamic state?

    Those with gold, who make rules.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  14. Re:Obama has turned out to be nothing less than by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes he personally redacted those Amtrak requests. Nothing gets by him!

  15. Clinton: Don't write. It could get subpeonaed! by raymorris · · Score: 1

    Clinton knows how to avoid responding to FOIIA requests. Don't create any documents, don't write anything down , she says.

    In a PBS interview, Jim Lehrer asked her, âoeAre you keeping a diary, you keep good notes of whatâ(TM)s happening?â

    Clinton responded, âoeHeavens no! It could get subpoenaed! I donâ(TM)t write anything down.â

    That solves both problems, criminal subpoenas and public information requests. Of course, sometimes her legal documents just go missing for two years, until an associate is granted immunity before he "finds" his copies.

  16. (b)(3)/26 USC 6103 by Thanshin · · Score: 3, Funny

    (b1)

    (b2) --- (b2)
    These are sobering findings.
    (b3)
    (b2)she said.

    In (b1) sobering finds you.

  17. Seriously? Noam Chomsky? by mi · · Score: 0

    Its worth advocating a book by Noam Chomsky

    No, it is not worth advocating. Mr. Chomsky is a Marxist — a self-admitted follower of a man behind the most murderous school of thought known to humanity so far (Hitler's genocidal form of Fascism is but a distant second).

    The facts remain [...]

    Whatever you can throw at the US government, a Marxist one is guilty of far worse.

    we have engaged in proxy warfare through state-sponsored terrorism in the Ukrane

    You misspelled the name of the country, erroneously put "the" in front of it, and made a wild-ass accusation without any substantiation... A typical Chomsky fan, I suppose...

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    1. Re:Seriously? Noam Chomsky? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Ad hominem much? I don't have a horse in this race, never read any Chomsky, neither Marxist nor John Bircher, but damn you sound stupid.