Furtiveness in government, redux

[unixronin]

I am given to understand that our Glorious Leader has declared that ACTA, the so-called "Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement" (which I understand, from the little thus far leaked about it, is as much an organized attack upon fair-use rights worldwide as it is anything to do with product counterfeiting), is so important that it is critical that the details remain secret until it is passed, lest the public resist its passage.  (Now, let me see ... what else have we heard this about recently?)

I personally propose as a matter of principle, that any time a publicly elected legislator or executive asserts that any treaty or legislation must remain secret until passed lest the public resist its passage, then that legislator needs to either cease forthwith to support it, resign his or her office, or abandon any further pretense of being in office to serve the public good.

(The latter should be promptly followed, one would hope, by impeachment.)

Comments

[perspicuity.livejournal.com]

ACTA may also allow them to change gun laws and bypass the constitution from what i've read?

as well, our fearless leader is advocating CIA assassinations of *americans*, and various antics without requiring any court orders or rule of law. just his say so, in direct 180 degree contradiction to his earlier statement on such things.

so. i'm sure we could make a laundry list of sins...

#

[lebo-superman.livejournal.com]

This particular "leader" actually has given up any pretense of being in office to serve . . . anything except his own agenda. He has said, on camera, that he' rather be a "very effective" one-term president than a two-term president. That means he KNOWS his policies are going to guarantee he isn't re-elected, but he's going after them anyhow.

[docstrange.livejournal.com]

"Very effective" could rather readily mean "very effective at sewing up the country's political power indefinitely."

[polaris93.livejournal.com]

Well, the gloves are definitely off.

[randwolf.livejournal.com]

EFF coverage (http://www.eff.org/issues/acta).

ACTA was classified for claimed reasons of national security under Bush II, and the Obama administration is maintaining the classification, which means that there is little to be done under current US law--the EFF had to drop (http://www.eff.org/press/archives/2009/06/17) their suit.

ACTA is part of a series of pro-corporate trade agreements. These have been on-going since Bush I & NAFTA, at least. The agreements get ever more onerous and ever more secret. Both Republican and Democratic conservatives have been supporting them for at least two decades.

It appears that the DFHs were right again. I support free trade, but secret agreements have little to do with freedom.

[unixronin.livejournal.com]

I support free trade, but secret agreements have little to do with freedom.

Precisely. The obvious question becomes "What are you hiding?" The argument that a copyright agreement can be vital to national security is prima facie absurd. Both Democratic and Republican administrations have taken to playing the national security card any time they don't want to admit to something.

[rain-manpnw.livejournal.com]

Yes, I agree that it is wrong for Obama to continue the policies of the previous administration and argue that secrecy is needed in the ACTA negotiations.

[unixronin.livejournal.com]

Particularly after promising "historic openness".

[lwj2.livejournal.com]

Next, the Star Chamber ...

[randwolf.livejournal.com]

Latest (http://www.boingboing.net/2010/04/12/america-blackmails-t.html) at Boing Boing. Headline: "America blackmails the world on ACTA transparency".

[unixronin.livejournal.com]

*sigh* Politics, politicians. "What's in it for me?"