proof of censoring decisions they don't like under natsec
Sunder
sunder at sunder.net
Sun Aug 29 09:28:56 PDT 2004
http://www.thememoryhole.org/feds/justice_redaction.htm
>>> Anybody who has read many official documents.including those making
headlines in the last year or more.has seen plenty of redactions (those
portions that are blacked out or otherwise made unreadable). This, we're
told, is for legitimate reasons, such as "national security" or
"protecting intelligence sources and methods." But now we have absolute,
incontrovertible proof that the government also censors completely
innocuous material simply because they don't like it.
The Justice Department tipped its hand in its ongoing legal war with the
ACLU over the Patriot Act. Because the matter is so sensitive, the Justice
Dept is allowed to black out those passages in the ACLU's court filings
that it feels should not be publicly released.
Ostensibly, they would use their powers of censorship only to remove
material that truly could jeopardize US operations. But in reality, what
did they do? They blacked out a quotation from a Supreme Court decision:
"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government
attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect 'domestic
security.' Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security
interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes
apparent."
The mind reels at such a blatant abuse of power (and at the sheer chutzpah
of using national security as an excuse to censor a quotation about using
national security as an excuse to stifle dissent).
It's hard to imagine a more public, open document than a decision written
by the Supreme Court. It is incontestably public property: widely
reprinted online and on paper; poured over by generations of judges,
attorneys, prosecutors, and law students; quoted for centuries to come in
court cases and political essays.
Yet the Justice Department had the incomprehensible arrogance and gall to
strip this quotation from a court document, as if it represented a grave
threat to the republic. Luckily, the court slapped down this redaction and
several others. If it hadn't, we would've been left with the impression
that this was a legitimate redaction, that whatever was underneath the
thick black ink was something so incredibly sensitive and damaging that it
must be kept from our eyes.
Now we know the truth. Think about this the next time you see a black mark
on a public document.
----------------------Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos---------------------------
+ ^ + :"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. /|\
\|/ :They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country /\|/\
<--*-->:and our people, and neither do we." -G. W. Bush, 2004.08.05 \/|\/
/|\ : \|/
+ v + : War is Peace, freedom is slavery, Bush is President.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
More information about the Testlist
mailing list