First Amendment Suspended in Gulf Oil Crisis?

[Anonymous]

The BP/Government Police State?

http://www.salon.com/news/louisiana_oil_spill/index.html?story=/opinion/greenwald/2010/07/05/bp

OK -- I have been hearing and reading about how BP didn't want journalists and photographers nosing around, and I understand that local officials might not either -- but is the Coast Guard and DHS involved in preventing journalists from having access to the oil spill and clean up, too? I am really having a hard time believing that. What the heck is going on? Obama RAN on transparency.

[jsteele]

Yes, just add this to the list of disappointments with Obama. For someone who is supposed to be a raging socialist, he is awful subservient to corporate interests.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:Yes, just add this to the list of disappointments with Obama. For someone who is supposed to be a raging socialist, he is awful subservient to corporate interests.

Nicely done, Jeff. It's a challenge to respond to the wing-nut attacks on Obama without being painted into the corner of appearing to defend his faults.

[Anonymous]

Unfortunately this is nothing new, for Obama specifically or our government in general. Three states already have laws prohibiting the filming of police officers, with many more protecting officers who confiscate cameras and/or arrest folks despite the absence of such a law. We've seen a politician get physical with some students (who were admittedly a bit douchey) for filming and asking questions without any repercussions beyond an "I'm sorry". Other folks have been arrested and had their cameras confiscated for filming elected officials going in/coming out of governmental buildings. We are frighteningly trending toward a more authoritarian state, and not just on the national level (I think Obama's support of this is fueled more by protecting particular interest groups than a specific ideology towards more control), but particularly on the local level where lots of politicians simply want to keep Americans as much in the dark as possible. Very, very scary.

And mind you, I was a huge Obama supporter who is generally derided as some sort of "liberal wing nut" on these pages, but even I can see the problems here.

For more thoughts on this, check out Radley Balko's blog: www.theagitator.com

[Anonymous]

The federal government really does seem to be intertwined with BP in the respose.

http://www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com/go/doc/2931/541571

A Unified Command has been established to manage response operations to the April 20, 2010 “Deepwater Horizon” incident. A Unified Command links the organizations responding to an incident and provides a forum for those organizations to make consensus decisions. This site is maintained by the Unified Command’s Joint Information Center (JIC), which provides the public with reliable, timely information about the response.

I get that the National Incident Commander, is Admiral Thad Allen.

But all the other groups listed here as being part of the Deep Water Horizon Response (who are described as "working in consensus) are either federal government groups, or BP and Transocean. Why are private companies such as BP and Transocean working together, in consensus, with the federal government?

And, the Unified Command has a JOINT information center. Does that mean BP gets to jointly decide what information is let out?

[Anonymous]

Well, this is better anyhow -- a new website for the Unified Command does not list BP as one of the members.

http://www.restorethegulf.gov/about.shtm