When asked about BP's refusal to release the high-resolution footage of the undersea gusher, a highly skeptical Cooper said Coast Guard Admiral Thad Allen told him there had been a problem making a copy of it.
BP's lawyers, worried about liability, wanted to keep public awareness down. But what about Obama's federal overseers? Surely the White House had access to that footage. But feds connived in the deceptions about the extent of the spill. Why?
Clearly, they didn't want to alarm the public, and mess up Democratic electoral chances.
Had spill control efforts worked better and sooner, both BP and the feds would have been able to run interference against major disclosures coming out piecemeal. They would have been able to do a public relations/propaganda mopping up operation to:
# Influence members of Congress
# Have pals in the upper echelons of corporate media get stories spiked and have columnists and commentators attack "wingnuts"
# Run a word-of-mouth propaganda campaign among business executives that too much of the truth would be bad for business, and that it's best to let sleeping dogs lie
# Launch a special commission/whitewash that flogs one or two agencies with a wet noodle
And the White House, not wanting to look remiss, would happily go along with the coverup -- as long as the commission was guaranteed to do a whitewash.
Some of these outcomes may still be in the works. But the point Americans need to wake up to is that the federal government is capable of humongous coverups -- though in this case, the coverup is backfiring.
By the way, oil isn't the only thing leaking. News is getting through federal dikes, despite the Obama-Holder crackdown on news leaks.
A federal appeals court blocked release of New York City police surveillance data concerning protesters at the 2004 Republican National Convention, the New York Times reports.
Civil liberties lawyers wanted the data in order to rebut claims by police that surveillance operations provided a legal basis for detaining people. Many were penned in a Hudson river pier structure until after the convention was over -- despite court orders for their release.
The city later paid millions to settle improper arrest lawsuits.
Christopher T. Dunn, a New York Civil Liberties Union lawyer, said it was a mistake to conflate the department's anti-terrorism efforts with its operation to covertly observe groups involved in public protests at political events.
I passed through the area at the time, and it certainly looked as though police were being used to suppress visible dissent near the GOP site. A man carrying a sign was ordered out of the no-protest zone, even though non-sign-carriers were permitted to pass unmolested. Several pedestrians expressed sympathy for the sign-carrier and disdain for use of police in this way.
A Kuwaiti journalist gives a first-hand account of the flotilla raid. He was not permitted to do his job and his equipment was not returned to him when he was deported.
http://info.ifex.org/View.
Electronic Intifada's wrap-up of the flotilla raid doesn't seem overly propagandistic or unreasonable. According to this report, the 60 journalists were held the longest, apparently so that the Israelis could control the initial reporting.
http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article11324.shtm
Obama ramrod Rahm Emanuel and a host of other bigshots had their Blackberries compromised in a major security breach. Among those on the hit list were a general in charge of the B1 bomber fleet and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, we're told.
Telegraph account:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/7816164/Huge-Apple-iPad-data-breach-in-US.html
Gawker account:
http://gawker.com/5559346/apples-worst-security-breach-114000-ipad-owners-exposed?skyline=true&s=i
Techworld account:
http://blogs.techworld.com/war-on-error/2010/06/atts-ipad-leak---hackers-out-the-early-adopters
A major factor in the proliferation of cyber security breaches is the proliferation of apps and other cyber functions. It's the old traveling salesman problem in disguise. As network nodes increase arithmetically, computational complexity explodes exponentially (though there are methods of curbing this factorial problem as I show elsewhere). So, as cyber/cell networks expand, the opportunities for hidden entries leap immensely.
This is a problem that has vexed many a computer scientist, and it's something we're going to have to learn to live with.
Your cellphone is watching you. CBS News last night aired a feature about the use of malware to activate a cellphone so that it can photograph or video you, listen in to what's going on in the room, and record your text messages on a computer screen.
The malware arrives via a text message or email.
CBS said if your Blackberry is oddly using up too much power, that may be a clue.
I'd guess that any cell phone that has text messaging and-or is internet interactive would be susceptible to such monkey business. Now you have to buy virus protection for your phone... Sheees!
Hence it is unwise to post your cell phone number on the internet. Criminals will be trolling for those numbers. I may, alas, have to take mine down and get a new number.
An Aussie politician is promoting an opt-in version of Labor's proposed internet filter system. Opt-out is also under consideration.
http://www.computerworld.com.
One commentator applauds net safety for children but is worried that if you give the Australian gov't an inch, they'll take a mile.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/
Judith Miller worries about the rise of Islamic extremism in the New York metro region.
http://www.judithmiller.com/
A prison censorship lawsuit has been settled.
http://www.whnt.com/news/sns-
Google favors West pressuring China on censorship via trade concerns, Businesssweek reports. (Yeah, that'll work. Just as the pressure on the Reds to alter their currency policy works...)
http://www.businessweek.com/
Jordan's internet cafe rules opposed.
http://www.ifex.org/jordan/
Pakistan prodded on mistreatment of journalists.
http://www.ifex.org/pakistan/
Indonesian reporter forced into hiding.
http://info.ifex.org/View.
Iran censorship woe targeted.
http://www.ifex.org/iran/2010/
Should gays be permitted to donate blood? Does political correctness drive this issue on the heels of the controversy over open military homosexuality related to this issue? Check AIM's take:
http://www.aim.org/aim-column/the-battle-over-blood/
No comments:
Post a Comment