MAKE PUBLIC ALL GOVERNMENT SECRETS

How long must Obama make the country wait until: the CIA releases its report on interrogation methods; the Justice Department releases its report on how lawyers at the Office of Legal Counsel could have written legal opinions justifying waterboarding; Obama makes public those photos of prisoner abuse; we get Bush and Cheney testimony on taking the U.S. into an unjustified war in Iraq?

Carrie Johnson writes in today's thewashingtonpost.com about the government seeking yet another delay in releasing the CIA report:

"Justice Department lawyers told a federal judge yesterday that the disclosure of a hotly anticipated 2004 report by the CIA inspector general on the Bush administration's interrogation program for terrorism suspects will be delayed until shortly before the July 4 holiday weekend."

Instead of maintaining Bush's policy of keeping everything a secret, when will Obama make the decision to reveal all "state secrets" (a euphemism for facts that embarrass people in government) once and for all?

OBAMA IS A BIG DISAPPOINTMENT, CONTINUES HATED POLICIES OF BUSH/CHENEY

On certain decisions, Barack Obama has been a disappointing continuation of George W. Bush:

1. Obama resurrects the hated military commissions for prisoners at Guantanamo. See William Glaberson's article today on the web page of The New York Times.

2. Obama continues Bush's policies of trying to keep information out of the public's hands by claiming "state secrets."

3. Obama continues the dreadful war in Afghanistan. Just a few days ago, U.S. war planes bombed an Afghan village killing over 150 civilians, many of whom were just children.

4. Obama continues to threaten Britain and the British courts with non-cooperation in the future if a British court releases torture memos about what was done to former Guantanamo inmate Binyam Mohamed. See John Burns' report in today's The New York Times.

5. Obama refuses to release photos of American mistreatment of captives in Iraq and Afghanistan, saying it would threaten "national security."

6. Obama refuses to initiate an investigation of the Bush/Cheney policy of using waterboarding and other forms of torture of suspected terrorists.

OBAMA JUSTICE DEPARTMENT STILL ARGUING "STATE SECRETS"

Dan Froomkin in his White House Watch blog in today's The Washington Post reminds us that Obama's Justice Department has inexplicably maintained the bogus doctrine of "state secrets" to try to quash three cases being brought in federal court against government trampling on the Constitution.

The whole notion of "state secrets" as a defense against individuals claiming tortious and harmful action by the federal government is riddled with bogus legal reasoning. What possible could be so sensitive that it could not be revealed to a federal judge sitting in chambers reviewing a case? The whole concept seems intent in bypassing the federal courts and arrogating to the executive privileges and powers not granted in Article II of the Constitution.

On the basis of "state secrets," the Obama Justice Department wants the courts to deny pleas from Guantanamo internees as well as to dismiss a law suit charging AT&T with violating the Fourth Amendment in enabling phone taps. This state secrets argument is just bull, for which there is no credible legal basis. The courts should maintain their own constitutional duties and disregard the Obama government's self-serving legal arguments that revelation of certain facts will jeopardize national security.

If the Obama Justice Department prevails, every suit initiated against the executive or against the federal government is in jeopardy of failing in the face of an argument in favor of "state secrets." Obama should end this charade now, right now, and allow the federal courts and the public to evaluate the cases on their own merits, instead of relying on the specious line of "state secrets."

OBAMA: STOP FOLLOWING IN BUSH'S STEPS

So far I am not happy with Barack Obama's policies on certain aspects of George W. Bush's "war on terror." My objections have relied on ideas posted by Steven D. Schwinn writing on Constitutional Law Prof Blog here.

First. I object to the whole concept of "state secrets." This is just a convenient euphemism for keeping secrets reports which would cause government and government officials public scorn and ridicule. Courts should not allow a sovereign to escape inspection by the public of government's actions.

Second. I want Obama to order the release of the 17 Uighurs still in custody at Guantanamo. They have never received any fair trial, charges of aiding terrorists have never been proved against them, they have been held illegally against their will for seven years. Obama, release the Uighurs.

Third. I condemn Obama and the U.S. government for continuing to attack villages in western Pakistan by firing missiles from drones into people's homes and villages. Obama seems to have accepted Bush's strategy that killing people by military means will succeed in making the U.S. more safe from terrorism. This is pure bull. All the killing does is to incite anti-American hatred and an unquenchable need for revenge.

Fourth. Stop the U.S. military build-up in Afghanistan. There has never been a successful invasion and occupation of that country since the time of Alexander the Great. History will not change for the Americans. Military force will only succeed in killing both Afghanis and Americans in larger and larger numbers.

WHY DID OBAMA APPROVE ARGUMENT OF "STATE SECRETS"?

Why did the Justice Department under Obama attorney general Eric Holder decide to adopt the scandalous Bush argument that "state secrets" prevent a plaintiff from suing and recovering damages suffered when he was transported and rendered to a third country (Morocco) which then proceeded to torture him?

Yesterday even the judges on the panel of the Ninth Circuit seemed perplexed and surprised by the Obama government move.

There should be hardly any state secrets. If information is embarrassing to the government for what it would show about policy under Bush and Cheney, it should come out and not be hidden under "state secrets." Otherwise the government can get away with anything it likes, no matter how offensive to the rule of law, because it can always conceal its mistakes under "state secrets."