Obama's Nuclear Summit: Media Not Welcome

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by IntheNet, Apr 13, 2010.

  1. IntheNet macrumors regular

    IntheNet

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    #1
    Surprising frankness from the Post's Dana Milbank on Obama's assault against the First Amendment this week; finally the media starting to report on this!

    Obama's disregard for media reaches new heights at nuclear summit
    By Dana Milbank
    The Washington Post
    Wednesday, April 14, 2010;
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/13/AR2010041303067_pf.html
    World leaders arriving in Washington for President Obama's Nuclear Security Summit must have felt for a moment that they had instead been transported to Soviet-era Moscow. They entered a capital that had become a military encampment, with camo-wearing military police in Humvees and enough Army vehicles to make it look like a May Day parade on New York Avenue, where a bicyclist was killed Monday by a National Guard truck. In the middle of it all was Obama -- occupant of an office once informally known as "leader of the free world" -- putting on a clinic for some of the world's greatest dictators in how to circumvent a free press. The only part of the summit, other than a post-meeting news conference, that was visible to the public was Obama's eight-minute opening statement, which ended with the words: "I'm going to ask that we take a few moments to allow the press to exit before our first session."
     
  2. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #2
    Perhaps they were discussing classified intelligence about Iran and North Korea's nuclear programs that, if we let the entire world hear, might endanger us? There was an opening statement and a news conference for the media :rolleyes: Do you actually think about the right wing talking points you post before posting them?
     
  3. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    #3
    Wow, you really don't think there would be classified information exchanged at a NUCLEAR SUMMIT?

    Seriously man, you're making yourself look more and more foolish by the post.
     
  4. niuniu macrumors 68020

    niuniu

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Location:
    A man of the people. The right sort of people.
    #4
    Well imagine wanting privacy, confidentiality and everyone to focus on the issue at hand instead of wasting energy on how to play the press game.

    I mean, it's only a matter of billions of lives at the end of the day. These summits have a habit of not being overly productive. I'll be glad the day the media get pushed aside and world leaders actually get some work done.

    But I'm sure a lot of people will be disappointed there's no stupid 'Yo, Blair' type nonsense they can create a fanfare over. Stuff 'em.
     
  5. IntheNet thread starter macrumors regular

    IntheNet

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    #5
    Dana Milbank from The Washington Post is hardly the right wing... Also the media free zone contrasts strikingly with that "most open and transparent administration" foolishness we heard earlier...
     
  6. renewed macrumors 68040

    renewed

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Location:
    Bemalte Blumen duften nicht.
    #6
    I actually agree with Obama and you guys on this. The media has its place and there needs to remain some secrecy in the world. This is a matter of national security so let the people appointed figure it out "securely".

    Edit: The results of the Summit should be publicized though.
     
  7. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    #7
    So you think any and all government actions are supposed to be open to the world now? Where is your outrage that our commanders in war zones aren't tweeting the plans to their missions online? :rolleyes:

    Seriously man, critical thinking, not cherrypicking will get you further in life.
     
  8. GfPQqmcRKUvP macrumors 68040

    GfPQqmcRKUvP

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2005
    Location:
    Terminus
    #8
    So because Obama promised more transparency that means he should release all the details of his meetings and accompanying top secret documents?

    If he had allowed press at the summit, ITN, you'd be quick to add how Obama is hastening the demise of the United States by being so unconcerned with secrecy and the classified information the government holds.
     
  9. IntheNet thread starter macrumors regular

    IntheNet

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    #9
    Whose secrets is he keeping Badandy? Ours or theirs?

    Obama Seeks Sweeping Declassification Of Top Secret Documents
    By Shannon Bell
    Wednesday, December 30th, 2009
    http://www.rightpundits.com/?p=5253
    Who needs classified top secret information anyway? Evidently not President Barack Obama; in an effort to in his words “reform the security classification and declassification system”, Obama signed an executive order seeking sweeping declassification of top secret documents. This is apparently the one area that Obama wants to be open and transparent. Obama set a four year deadline for declassifying documents going all the way back to the World War II era, as well as Vietnam and Korean wars. In the process of implementing this executive order, Obama cancelled an order given by George W. Bush that allowed the leader of the intelligence community to veto the declassification of documents so ordered by an interagency panel. In the future agencies who object to certain information being declassified have to now appeal to the President himself. Because of course, who knows more about intelligence information, an intelligence official or Barack Obama?
     
  10. GfPQqmcRKUvP macrumors 68040

    GfPQqmcRKUvP

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2005
    Location:
    Terminus
    #10
    Let me get this straight:

    You are faulting Obama for both declassifying secret information and also for keeping meetings where secret information is being discussed closed to the media...in the same thread.

    OK, gotcha.
     
  11. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #11

    I LOL'd, a lot.
     
  12. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #12
    You betcha.
     
  13. IntheNet thread starter macrumors regular

    IntheNet

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    #13
    Ours...

    Theirs...

    But this point requires thought above and beyond your Obama advocacy...
     
  14. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #14
    It might be "their" secret information they're keeping confidential, but did you ever stop to think that if Iran knows that we know all about their nuclear program, they might take more measures to hide what they're doing and end any further gathering of intelligence we're doing? :rolleyes:
     
  15. GfPQqmcRKUvP macrumors 68040

    GfPQqmcRKUvP

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2005
    Location:
    Terminus
    #15
    You don't think any of our intelligence is being discussed at this nuclear summit?

    Didn't vote for the guy and wouldn't vote for him if given another chance to. It's alright though, I understand you're still a little peeved that you're the RINO and not me. There's a term for you, and it's neocon. You believe in restricting personal liberty and instituting theocracy. Real republicans, however, are socially liberal and fiscally conservative. You've got neither of those right.
     
  16. IntheNet thread starter macrumors regular

    IntheNet

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    #16
    Both of our major allies - Israel or UK - declined to attend. Proliferation of nukes in North Korea and Iran are the primary strategic issues here (neither of which Obama has yet addressed) and this nuke summit requires classified intelligence on our behalf? Are you completely missing the entire strategic agenda?

    Liberal media complain about restricting information access, I post thread on it, and you accuse me of instituting theocracy... OK, gotcha.
     
  17. GfPQqmcRKUvP macrumors 68040

    GfPQqmcRKUvP

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2005
    Location:
    Terminus
  18. mgguy macrumors 6502

    mgguy

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2006
    #18
    Please explain how you see his arguments as being circular.
     
  19. jb1280 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2009
    #19
    ITN, can you give me one good reason why a document from 1956 concerning American policy directed towards a communist regime that no longer exists should still remain classified?

    I also see no reason why Dana Milbanks needs access to the Nuclear summit to write some sort of fluff piece.

    I am also certain that you would be calling the President a traitor for divulging state secrets should the media have been given access.
     
  20. Full of Win macrumors 68030

    Full of Win

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2007
    Location:
    Ask Apple
    #20
    Something has to be up, because the man loves coverage about himself.

    I suspect he wanted to discuss how to disarm the US of all nuclear weapons.
     
  21. GfPQqmcRKUvP macrumors 68040

    GfPQqmcRKUvP

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2005
    Location:
    Terminus
    #21
    Not worth my time to be honest. If that excuse isn't to your liking you can just imagine I didn't say it to begin with. I don't mind.
     
  22. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    #22
    Yup he did. He wants a world without nukes, what a terrible idea! :rolleyes:

    I take it you didn't like Reagan's stance on nukes either?
     
  23. niuniu macrumors 68020

    niuniu

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Location:
    A man of the people. The right sort of people.
    #23
    And all other countries! Sincerely, how amazing would that be.

    It's a bit out of reach for now, but maybe in time, with successive leaders with a similar resolve to Obama, maybe it can happen.
     
  24. GfPQqmcRKUvP macrumors 68040

    GfPQqmcRKUvP

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2005
    Location:
    Terminus
    #24
    Doubtful. There will be groups/nations somewhere in the world who will seek to have power that other nations willingly gave up.
     
  25. Full of Win macrumors 68030

    Full of Win

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2007
    Location:
    Ask Apple
    #25
    If you think that a nuclear weapon free world is a good thing, then I just don't know what to say. Having the ability to destroy an attacking country at a moments notice, is an ability that we cannot give up.
     

Share This Page