In a commentary on the diminished hope of President Obama’s second term, Cathleen Carroll, executive editor of Associated Press, said Monday that Obama should not use ‘National Security’ to conceal transparency.
Once upon time, journalists expected more of the president.
“Obama made clear on his first day in office in 2009 that his emphasis would be on transparency, and he vowed that all questions about the workings of government should be expected to yield answers,” Carroll told a media conference in the United Arab Emirates.
“Today President Obama’s record on transparency might be considered mixed,” Carroll went on. “While it is easier to get some information from some parts of the U.S. government, in others, simple questions get stuck in the gears and are never answered,” Carroll said adding that other requests for information from his administration and governments around the world are denied for national security reasons.”
Exhibit A: More than 1,100 CIA records related to the assassination of President Kennedy--and every one of them is denied for reasons of “national security”
Exhibit B: Obama’s disclosure policy too weak to force disclosure of 1944 memo. (Jan. 16, 2014)
The primary obstacle the public is facing in obtaining an early release of any of the withheld JFK records is the news media has given the public the impression all will be released in 2017. This was stated repeatedly in the 50th anniversary TV propaganda onslaught last November. Go back over some of the 50th TV coverage recorded & posted on YouTube & it’s very noticeable. Each time it was stated equates to the message of ‘no early release’. Thus, in some minds, President Obama is under no pressure to release anything earlier than 2017 nor is he stepping on his transparency promises. He’s off the hook. This is a major obstacle for an early release. I’m not holding my breath on this subject; the persons holding the records in secrecy don’t care about the public being cheated out of its history. Bullies are like that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIEp9U3b4NI
Matthew Lee of the AP went at this with Marie Harf in October – questioning the actual transparency vs. the promises of transparency.
“Well, I think we can use whatever definition of ‘transparent’ we want,” Marie Harf.
Compliments of Lewis Carroll:
“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”
“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”
“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master—that’s all.”
Marie Harf is in Humpty Dumpty’s camp.