Administration Made Secret Agreement to Hide Reclassification Program from Public
Administration Made Secret Agreement to Hide Reclassification Program from Public
In February, the New York Times revealed that “thousands of declassified documents had been reclassified by executive branch agencies and removed from public access in questionable circumstances.” The Federation of American Scientists called the reclassification efforts “a threat to the integrity of the entire national security classification and declassification program,” and warned they would reduce the National Archives to a “mere repository of officially-sanctioned history.”
Now, thanks to the National Security Archive (a nonprofit based at George Washington University), we know how the reclassification scheme came about:
The National Archives and Records Administration secretly agreed to a covert effort, led by the Air Force, the CIA, and other still-hidden intelligence entities, to remove open-shelf archival records and reclassify them while disguising the results so that researchers would not complain, according to a previously secret Memorandum of Understanding (MOU).
As part of the secret agreement, the National Archives “agreed that the existence of the program was to be kept secret as long as possible” and that “the withdrawal sheets indicating the removal of documents would conceal any reference to the program and ‘any reason for the withholding of documents.’” Read more about the secret agreement HERE.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
70 Responses to “Administration Made Secret Agreement to Hide Reclassification Program from Public”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Look Dad, I Got Him!
April 11th, 2006 at 5:15 pm"The documents in this case were removed from public access in 1997, near the beginning of the ongoing reclassification process that has undermined the integrity of the National Archives."
Not so sure if the radical right wing aggenda tag works for this one if it started under clinton
April 11th, 2006 at 5:15 pmThe most important piece of information in this reclassification effort is that it goes against the Freedom of Information Act.
Guess who was one of the biggest supporters of FOIA.
Donald Rumsfeld.
NPR.org
March 31, 2006
Freedom of Information Act Losing Its Power
April 11th, 2006 at 5:16 pm
Darn, I was hoping they "blacked out" the text the wrong way again -- no such luck.
April 11th, 2006 at 5:18 pmSmoking gun #100+. Enough of this sh*t, arrest these criminals.
April 11th, 2006 at 5:21 pm2
It was Rove in his time travel machine, Duh
April 11th, 2006 at 5:22 pmUnited States Department of Defense.
News Transcript
April 22, 2004
Secretary Rumsfeld Remarks to the Newspaper Association of America/American Society of Newspaper Editors
April 11th, 2006 at 5:23 pm
"Not so sure if the radical right wing aggenda tag works for this one if it started under clinton Comment by squishypoop"
How do you figure. It doesn't say this was driven by the PRESIDENCY, it says it was driven by the CIA and Military and others - most of whom are largely lead by 'CONservatives' as Reichwingers OFTEN point out.
Those stupid non-sequitors you've become famous for just keep coming don't they slow boy.
April 11th, 2006 at 5:27 pm#2 Perhaps you're right, and it disappoints me to learn that this started under President Clinton because I would like to know what he had in mind. But I am also sure of two things: There is more to this than simply that it started under Clinton. And under President Bush, the reclassification of documents has accelerated tremendously. I know that he's already classified more materials than previous presidents.
Whatever President Bush's motives are for classifying so much information, you can bet your last dollar it's not to keep them out of enemy hands so much as it is to keep them out of American hands. A great deal of what he has had classified does not relate to national security, and national security is the only legal reason to classify something.
President Bush is not working in your best interests, and he does not want you to ever learn the truth.
April 11th, 2006 at 5:28 pmThis partly explains why the EIGHTEEN TONS OF HUSSEIN'S GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTS IN OUR NATIONAL ARCHIEVE aren't in use in his trial.
Can't have all those chemical and biological weapons' receipts turn up.
April 11th, 2006 at 5:34 pm"it disappoints me to learn that this started under President Clinton because I would like to know what he had in mind."
What he had in mind was not getting assassinated by the rightwing conspiracy that has now seized the country through vote-fraud, assassination, anthrax, lies, treason, corruption, and jingoism.
*Please make a note of it.*
Normal presidents RARELY control as much as you would think. At least Clinton knew how to tie his own shoes.
April 11th, 2006 at 5:38 pmWe can only hope that one the "part time congress" returns to work that they will get serious about representing the interstes of Americans.... PS: I'm not betting on it happening!
April 11th, 2006 at 5:45 pmNext the repubs will 'Classify' the Constitution!
April 11th, 2006 at 5:52 pmThis is another example of why all of us--the left and right -should resist every effort to water down the Bill of Rights, conduct government in secrecy, attack an independent judiciary etc. I personally fear my government much more than bands of terrorists who have the capability of pulling off occasional spectacular attacks, but are not listening to my phone calls without a warrant, plotting to enrich my neighbors at my expense or making sure that the fix is in if I have to seek relief from the courts. Why isn't the country behind Feingold? Why are we reluctant to damn Clinton if he had a hand in this reclassification scheme? We have had terrible leaders before and survived although off hand I do believe Dumbya is the worst. If we do not remain vigilant against goverment tyranny, however, I fear that the darkness will fall, and the sun may never again shine on this fair land. And it is just as likely to be someone from the left as someone from the right who presides over the final sunset of freedom.
April 11th, 2006 at 5:53 pmThe last line of the linked story says that Raytheon was sending 20 people in to do the reclassificaion. Where would the contract have come from for that? I know they're a big Air Force contractor,but reclassification? Not enough bureaucrats in the National Archives already?
April 11th, 2006 at 5:56 pmthe most secret administration EVER! history will be sorely pressed to find any references to blame the bushpigs on the end of the world. WWIII is just around the corner! irans ruling elite thinks much like bush. they could care less if nuclear war starts with them. like the american christian fundies, who think jesus is waiting for them in some far out heaven! the iranians hope to find 72 virgins "on the other side". all of these people are freaking crazy fucks that scare the shit out of me!
April 11th, 2006 at 6:00 pmNot so sure if the radical right wing aggenda tag works for this one if it started under clinton
Comment by squegeeboo — April 11, 2006 @ 5:15 pm
I personally don't care to tag any issue with any particular label.
What is worrisome -and maybe you missed it- is that restricting access to information, and closing themselves to scrutiny, is exactly how the worst regimes in the world re-write history to make it fit their narrative.
That Clinton started it is bad. That nobody cared enough to correct a sorry state of things is even worse.
April 11th, 2006 at 6:03 pm#2 Excuse me, squeegeboo, but where do you get that this started under Clinton? The only reference I could see to 1997 was that the author L. Douglas Keeney went to the Archives in 2005 and couldn't find a document he had originally obtained in 1997, "because it is no longer there. It is among the thousands of government documents that have been reclassified and withdrawn from public access."
April 11th, 2006 at 6:22 pm[...] more @ secret-agreement-to-hide-reclassification-program-from-public/Â from (thinkprogress.org) [...]
April 11th, 2006 at 6:27 pmFor the life of me I cannot see anything newsworthy in this. It is just more fever swamp paranoia.
Government secrets are not bad, per se; to the contrary, they often are quite necessary. The notion that government must be completely transparent at all times, at all levels, and in all circumstances, is not even worthy of serious discussion.
Governments are especially likely to be diligent in keeping secrets during wartime, and quite properly so. The presumption in such cases should be that the government is protecting us, not plotting against us.
In any event, there is nothing in this post that reveals any wrongful conduct. Get a life, Nico.
April 11th, 2006 at 6:52 pmExcuse me, squeegeboo, but where do you get that this started under Clinton?
Comment by Amy — April 11, 2006 @ 6:22 pm
From here:
The documents in this case were removed from public access in 1997, near the beginning of the ongoing reclassification process that has undermined the integrity of the National Archives.
And here:
The reclassification activities at NARA began at the end of the Clinton administration. So far, more than 55,000 pages of declassified documents, dating back to the World War II era, have been removed from the open files.
But hey, even the proverbial broken clock is right twice a day....
April 11th, 2006 at 7:01 pm"For the life of me I cannot see anything newsworthy in this. It is just more fever swamp paranoia. Blue State Redneck"
yeah, your paranoia of liberals is pretty much fever swamp paranoia. Most americans want good government and government transparence. But to a NAZI like yourself, I can understand why you'd find that threatening.
And your advice for others to 'get a life' is ironic coming from a Reichwing Nazi troll that has nothing better to do with their life than hang out on a PROGRESSIVE blog. You and your fellow trolls are all poster (boys) for get a life.
April 11th, 2006 at 7:03 pmI pledge allegence to the government of the Secret State of America, and to the Elite for which it stands, one nation under surveillance, with liberty and justice for those that can afford it.
And while we are at it, change the flag to 2 neutral stripes, black & white, and put a single star in the middle, half white on black and half black on white.
Clearly, this Republic, (formerly of, by and for the people), has NO TRANSPARENCY! It is too bad the sheeple, previously known as citizens, don't care what their "representatives" do.
April 11th, 2006 at 7:12 pm14
This is another example of why all of us–the left and right -should resist every effort to water down the Bill of Rights
it is just as likely to be someone from the left as someone from the right who presides over the final sunset of freedom.
Why are we reluctant to damn Clinton if he had a hand in this reclassification scheme?
If we do not remain vigilant against goverment tyranny, however, I fear that the darkness will fall, and the sun may never again shine on this fair land.
April 11th, 2006 at 7:18 pmHere Here, A poster after my own heart (Watch Ryan though he will start on ya now :)
For the life of me I cannot see anything newsworthy in this. It is just more fever swamp paranoia.
Comment by Blue State Red — April 11, 2006 @ 6:52 pm
I guess the concerns expressed by the Federation of American Scientists is also borne out of "fever swamp paranoia".
Governments are especially likely to be diligent in keeping secrets during wartime, and quite properly so.
You really should follow the links and read before you post a comment.
Some of the documents are almost 50 years old:
Quite a few of the papers seem to have been reclassified only because they're embarrassing. For instance, one document reveals that, in the fall of 1950, the CIA predicted the Chinese would not intervene in the Korean War; 12 days later, they did. (Classifying, much less reclassifying documents for this purpose, if that was in fact the reason, is not just stupid but illegal. Federal law states: "No information … shall be classified in order to … prevent embarrassment of a person, organization, or agency.")
Reclassifying information that was previously publicly available and/or can still be purchased over the Internet makes no sense and is also -as the excerpt points out- potentially illegal.
The presumption in such cases should be that the government is protecting us, not plotting against us.
In whose interest is it to reclassify documents that had been made publicly available almost 30 years ago? And please don't tell me AlQaeda might find something new information in documents that are 50 years old.
In any event, there is nothing in this post that reveals any wrongful conduct. Get a life, Nico.
That's only because you are too lazy to follow the links and inform yourself. Too bad for you complex issues cannot be reduced to 5-second sound bites.
April 11th, 2006 at 7:25 pmHey dumb fvck. This shit ain't secret. It is being reclassified. The story is that stuff that has already been read and posted on the Internet and printed in newspapers and discussed out loud, because it was declassified, has been reclassified.
Do you think before you post worthless garbage?
April 11th, 2006 at 7:29 pmRyan Neat: I happened to read this page after a while of not readin TP threads. Glad to see you're still in there giving the fascists hell with both barrels. It's lonely work sometimes, but All too uncommon. You're doing the dirty work for many lurkers who wish they could write what you do. And whacking down the fascist weeds that spring up whenever cracks are left untended. Keep up the good work!
April 11th, 2006 at 7:42 pm#8 Ryan:
"How do you figure. It doesn’t say this was driven by the PRESIDENCY, it says it was driven by the CIA and Military and others - most of whom are largely lead by ‘CONservatives’ as Reichwingers OFTEN point out."
Think Progress claims this is being done by executive branch agencies, the top of the executive branch is the president, so anything that happens under it can be placed at his feet. Especially decisions made by top people that he has the power to appoint, or dismiss. Suprisingly enough this seems to be a view you support, given your views on blackwell owning diebold
"And even if he didn’t, who picked the investment directors - Blackwell? In the end, it’s Blackwell’s fault for choosing people who were either unqualified (remember mike brown), and/or not ensuring that they were sufficiently competent and directed to ensure no conflict occurred."
Which is from your post, #34 on this thread: http://thinkprogress.org/2006/04/04/blackwell-owned-diebold-stock/#comments
So for you to claim that exective branch offices, but not the president are at fault seems to fly in the face of your previous logic. Care to clarify, I'm sure I'm missing some subtle nuiance that allows you to jump through any logic hoops needed to always blame republicans.
#17 Gregor
April 11th, 2006 at 7:48 pm"What is worrisome -and maybe you missed it- is that restricting access to information, and closing themselves to scrutiny, is exactly how the worst regimes in the world re-write history to make it fit their narrative."
I can see the point being made, just wanted to point out that Bush didn't start it before everyone started in on him for that, and it's not scary that Clinton started it, it's scary that any president would start, or continue, it.
squegeeboo,
Wrong. The title of the thread is:
That means that TP is saying the administration is trying to hide the program. It doesn't say anything about when or where the program started. You interjected the Clinton bullshit.
April 11th, 2006 at 7:56 pm"Think Progress claims this is being done by executive branch agencies, the top of the executive branch is the president, so anything that happens under it can be placed at his feet. squishypoop"
Absolutely - but if individuals did this without his knowledge, then it wouldn't be his fault, even if it was his responsibility.
"Especially decisions made by top people that he has the power to appoint, or dismiss. Suprisingly enough this seems to be a view you support, given your views on blackwell owning diebold squishypoop"
Yeah, I can see how you wouldn't think a conflict of interest was a big deal, and an irresponsible act for a Secretary of State... Then again, Nazis like you have never trusted elections or 'government'. Just remember, that nothing is free, especially the free market.
"So for you to claim that exective branch offices, but not the president are at fault seems to fly in the face of your previous logic. Care to clarify, I’m sure I’m missing some subtle nuiance that allows you to jump through any logic hoops needed to always blame republicans. squishypoop"
Yes, why don't you qualify as well. Because you clearly want to blame Clinton, yet you resist blaming bush for the NUMEROUS failures of his staff. Funny you'd accuse others of the EXACT hypocrisy you practice - or maybe it's just PATHETIC as opposed to funny.
And now for the point itself. If Clinton was aware of this reclassification, and if he had any involvement in it, or if he SHOULD have had involvement but didn't then it's his fault. Period. If however he was unaware of this because the 'planners' who subsequently went after Iraq were prepping for war - or other such acts, then that branch is certainly his responsibility, but the act is not his fault. Just as I blame bush for RETAINING the system. These small government CONservatives have been the most secretive and big government administration in history. They're in power, and what they HAVE IN PLACE is the most relevant discussion of the moment for america - but then again you seem to live in some alternate reality other than this country.
"I can see the point being made, just wanted to point out that Bush didn’t start it before everyone started in on him for that, and it’s not scary that Clinton started it, it’s scary that any president would start, or continue, it. Comment by squishypoop"
Yes it's scarey that it started in the Clinton adminstration PERIOD, whether Clinton know about it or not. It's scarey, sad, and WRONG. Whoever did it - PERIOD!
April 11th, 2006 at 8:02 pmThanks Matthew, I try. It's like beating a petrified tree stump with this moronic trolls though. They're so retarded that turning them to dust is the only option they leave. To find a troll even capable of a reasoned argument is rare, and one that can do it more than for a rare random case is almost non-existent.
But I'm glad you appreciate what I do :)
April 11th, 2006 at 8:04 pmSpudge, perhaps you can't read wait TP wrote:
In February, the New York Times revealed that “thousands of declassified documents had been reclassified by executive branch agencies and removed from public access in questionable circumstances.†The Federation of American Scientists called the reclassification efforts “a threat to the integrity of the entire national security classification and declassification program,†and warned they would reduce the National Archives to a “mere repository of officially-sanctioned history.â€
Seems like they did say executive branch agencies.
Ryan: "If however he was unaware of this because the ‘planners’ who subsequently went after Iraq were prepping for war - or other such acts, then that branch is certainly his responsibility, but the act is not his fault."
Also Ryan:"it’s Blackwell’s fault for choosing people who were either unqualified (remember mike brown), and/or not ensuring that they were sufficiently competent and directed to ensure no conflict occurred."
I'll admit to hypocracy if you will.
April 11th, 2006 at 8:22 pm"I’ll admit to hypocracy if you will. Comment by squishypoop"
The difference is that you ARE a hypocrite, and I'll explain why.
The difference is that Blackwell specifically hired the people to manage a blind trust for him - whereas Clinton inherited most of the leadership of the CIA and the Army. The question is whether those people HID information from the Clinton appointees or whether they were involved. If a Clinton appointee was involved in this, then it would most certainly be Clinton's fault for those appointments.
As I said before, I'm all for saying that if Clinton or I'll even go so far as his appointees were involved in this - then yes, he was wrong for either their appointments or especially if he knew.
You've always been a little stupid, and incapable of processing the subtle - why am I surprised you're just as STUPID as usual on this point. Maybe because you're a hypocrite?
April 11th, 2006 at 8:30 pmMaybe you can't see that what you posted to rebuff me is TP quoting the New York Times.
April 11th, 2006 at 8:41 pmClinton has the power to dismiss as well as appoint many of those positions. By deciding to keep people like that under him, as opposed to appointing other people, makes him just as much to blame.
Did Blackwell choose the person to manage his fund, or did the company appoint some one for him? Judging from your earlier qoute â€it’s Blackwell’s fault for choosing people who were either unqualified (remember mike brown), and/or not ensuring that they were sufficiently competent and directed to ensure no conflict occurred.†Your not sure either. Yet without knowing if he was appointed to him, or if Blackwell choose him you instantly blame Blackwell for the actions. Seems like were both hypocrites, the only difference being I can at least see it.
April 11th, 2006 at 8:52 pm"Clinton has the power to dismiss as well as appoint many of those positions. By deciding to keep people like that under him, as opposed to appointing other people, makes him just as much to blame. squishypoop"
Many members of the federal government are in fact career employees and not political appointees. What you suggest isn't even possible - but then again, you've never been very attached to reality have you?
Oversight is critical - and as was pointed out this occurred at the end of the Clinton administration, and has only come to the public eye recently. I do find it disturbing that it happened under Clinton's watch, PERIOD. As I said before, this may not have been Clinton's fault, but he most certainly was the party in the end that was responsible for this.
But the difference between Clinton, is that if he'd known he probably would have put a stop to this - something you can be sure Reichwingers like you WON'T do.
And if you want to know Clinton's views on the FOIA, then go here:
http://www.lectlaw.com/files/fia06.htm
Or maybe this:
"Did Blackwell choose the person to manage his fund, or did the company appoint some one for him? Judging from your earlier qoute â€it’s Blackwell’s fault for choosing people who were either unqualified (remember mike brown), and/or not ensuring that they were sufficiently competent and directed to ensure no conflict occurred.†Your not sure either. squishypoop"
Yeah, I'm sure he's SUCH a rich person that he needs to hire a giant bureaucratic organization with nameless and faceless people to ensure he didn't violate laws. Yeah right. Your premise is RETARDED, much like you are.
Much of the tasks of the FOIA are delegated, and when Clinton signs an order are you saying you believe it's his fault if immoral agents of the reichwing intelligence services (we both know they were and still are behind this) commit a crime without his knowledge? Do you believe that the torture by US troops are bush's fault? Because he appears to have done very little to stop then after their discovery, compared to Clinton who stood up hard FOR FOIA.
You're just a moron and a jackass, and you've proven it once again.
April 11th, 2006 at 9:21 pmRyan "and as was pointed out this occurred at the end of the Clinton administration"
Sure, the last 4 years are the end, but there also half, any chance for context?
The people on this website had no problem blaming Bush for Doyle, even though he's a low ranking deputy press securtary, and I still haven't seen his political party, yet every post who claims one for him makes him Republican, so I have no problem blaming Clinton for not cleaning house on this one. Whats good for the goose is good for the gander.
"But the difference between Clinton, is that if he’d known he probably would have put a stop to this"
Prove he had no knowledge of this, even a qoute from him isnt good enough, espicially when we can all see the things Bush claimed to have no knowledge of, yet later on is found to have at least known, if not have been in it knee deep. And we have him lying under oath, so his word counts for nothing.
"The 1995 Order was so successful in promoting declassification that, during the first six years after this Order was issued," And how many of them were reclassified, even still under Clintons watch? I could even state that maybe this program started because Clinton opened the system to much, so the agencies under him had to start reclassifing information for legitimate national security reasons. Can't prove it, but it sounds good, which seems to be the basis for your arguments in this thread.
April 11th, 2006 at 9:41 pmThe Bush Regime becomes more like Orwell's 1984 every day > now they are trying to hide historical documents as classified?! The head of the CIA, Porter Goss, must resign his position and go to prison for the rest of his damn life! This is outrageous and putrid!
April 11th, 2006 at 10:30 pmApril 11th, 2006 at 11:36 pm
2006 50 red states mawaaaaaaaa! The Velvet Tongue
April 11th, 2006 at 11:39 pm40
2006 50 red states mawaaaaaaaa! The Velvet Tongue
SHHHhhhhhh, We wern't going to tell them till after the elections. Think of the fun mass amounts of Liberals lying in the fetal position, rocking back and forth chanting baBABABAbababaBABABA.
April 11th, 2006 at 11:54 pmWell, gee, you know, everything changed after 9/11.
In fact, Bush got the bright idea, along with his pals Cheney, Rumsfeld and Gonzales, to convert our freedom-loving democracy into a Communist-styled police state...for our own protection, of course.
You don't believe this?
Then what are the secret, illegal wiretapping programs that Alberto Gonzales is conducting without any oversight of our elected representatives beyond a few, carefully-selected partisan pals?
What public documents have been reclassified as classified and are no longer available to freedom-loving U.S. citizens?
The Bush administration just isn't corrupt, they're also proto-Communists...with the same control-freak mindset and world-domination agenda of any other Communists.
So, it's interesting to read all the Communi....ummm, Bush administration apologists here posting their defenses of the most corrupt administration our country has ever had.
April 12th, 2006 at 12:20 am"The people on this website had no problem blaming Bush for Doyle, even though he’s a low ranking deputy press securtary, and I still haven’t seen his political party, yet every post who claims one for him makes him Republican, so I have no problem blaming Clinton for not cleaning house on this one. Whats good for the goose is good for the gander. squishypoop"
While you play 'one up' like a spoiled little boy, rome burns. Doyle was the FOURTH official arrested for this. And in your Pre-911 thinking you seem devoid of the concept that DHS officials should ALL be vetted. How can we expect to have people protect us from terrorists, when they've shown they can't even do a proper security checks for SEX OFFENDERS.
And as for Doyle's political party, he's not a civil servant, he was hired by this administration. You can be 99% sure he's republican, last time I checked the Republicans didn't hire democrats to do their press work. And you can't be stupid enough to claim they would.
"Prove he had no knowledge of this, even a qoute from him isnt good enough, espicially when we can all see the things Bush claimed to have no knowledge of, yet later on is found to have at least known, if not have been in it knee deep. And we have him lying under oath, so his word counts for nothing. squishypoop"
Prove he DID, in America, we're innocent until proven guilty, right? Compare that to Bush that we now know LIED about the Iraq/Plame attacks. Sorry, but Clinton has repeatedly been shown to be a decent and upstanding fellow, especially when compared to Bush. The big difference with Bush is that we have LOTS of proof that he lied intentionally - and it's nice of you to finally admit it. The only LIE we have on clinton is where he says he didn't have 'sex', and by the definitions of the grand jury he was truthful. Compare that to Bush who appears to be a lie a minute.
"I could even state that maybe this program started because Clinton opened the system to much, so the agencies under him had to start reclassifing information for legitimate national security reasons. Can’t prove it, but it sounds good, which seems to be the basis for your arguments in this thread. Comment by squishypoop"
Yeah it sounds exactly how a Nazi like you would react. Use good government as an excuse to have bad government, and completely ignore the commander in chief's orders and requests for responsible government. Kind of like how you guys want to spend to bankruptcy to ensure the country can't afford social welfare programs. It's exactly the sort of thing I would expect from an inept and foolish reichwinger. Thanks for sharing the psychotic reasoning that makes people commit crimes, and betray america's trust. You've shown yourself well.
You're all sick stupid men, and you get the government you deserve (karma) - too bad you bring those of us who don't along with you. I don't want to ride out the swirlie you aholes are creating.
April 12th, 2006 at 12:40 am"SHHHhhhhhh, We wern’t going to tell them till after the elections. Think of the fun mass amounts of Liberals lying in the fetal position, rocking back and forth chanting baBABABAbababaBABABA. Comment by Tundra "
For someone who claims to not be a republican, you're remarkably consistent these days about carrying water for them, largely criticizing only democrats, and 'identifying' quite too easily with them such as this. You sound like a republican who just doesn't want to be 'labeled' to me. I've met lots of guys like you - too bad you don't have the courage to be honest about it to yourself and others.
April 12th, 2006 at 12:44 amyou’re remarkably consistent these days about carrying water for them,
Let's just ignore all the posts I don't comment on because I agree with them. You have pretty much stated that the Progressive way is the only way. There is no room for any disagreement. I've seen posters that normally agree disent once and they get your full rath. You pull out the stupid cards, the uneducated, NASCAR watching. Sorry if I don't fully follow everything you believe in. Perhaps people have been to other places and have had different experiences in life.
largely criticizing only democrats
LOL, I hate all politicians. You just brush over the negative Repub ones and charge the Dem ones. You argue those so yes the post continues. That's OK, on the Rightwing sites I am called a moonbat more times than I can count. They are as uncompromising as you. But hey it works for me.
identifying’ quite too easily with them such as this
It was humor, I forgot how real you take this and will refrain from insulting you with that.
I’ve met lots of guys like you
I doubt it.
too bad you don’t have the courage
April 12th, 2006 at 1:34 amI'm glad those psychology courses paid off. You can judge my courage level by a couple weeks worth of blog posting.
"Let’s just ignore all the posts I don’t comment on because I agree with them. You have pretty much stated that the Progressive way is the only way. There is no room for any disagreement. Tundra"
Can you explain why you feel the need to largely post when you disagree with progressives, but not when you disagree with the trolls?
"There is no room for any disagreement. I’ve seen posters that normally agree disent once and they get your full rath. Tundra"
There's plenty of room for disagreement. We've had lots of disagreements, and I've spared you much 'wrath'. Perhaps you haven't noticed? The reason is because when you disagree with a well reasoned and conscientious post I think that deserves respect. That's now what you did on this thread that got my 'wrath'.
"You pull out the stupid cards, the uneducated, NASCAR watching. Sorry if I don’t fully follow everything you believe in. Perhaps people have been to other places and have had different experiences in life. Tundra"
I would hope so. Often what people 'believe in' isn't so important is what they can 'back up'. Unfortunately many hold blind beliefs to the detriment of all of those around them. And many times (especially with your REPUBICAN friends) they wish to FORCE everyone to live with those beliefs - and interestingly enough this is an area where I think we 'might' have common ground.
"LOL, I hate all politicians. You just brush over the negative Repub ones and charge the Dem ones. Tundra"
All men are politicians, because politics is the very act of living with and negotiating with others. For you to hate all politicians is just for you to hate yourself. When your wife (assuming here) ask if she looks fat in an unflattering dress, do you give her a political answer, or the truth? Case closed.
And the problem I have is that I hear you criticize republicans so rarely - maybe I just missed the posts? And if not, do you refuse to criticize Democratic politicians when you pose as a 'moonbat'? Or do you treat us specially?
"It was humor, I forgot how real you take this and will refrain from insulting you with that. Tundra"
I realized it was 'humor', but largely your humor comes of 'slanted' - and I have worked (as you might be able to tell) to give you breathing room. I've even publically stated that I don't think you're the average troll.
" I’ve met lots of guys like you
I doubt it. Tundra"
You'd be surprised...
"I’m glad those psychology courses paid off. You can judge my courage level by a couple weeks worth of blog posting. Tundra"
In this matter - yes. A man who can't stand up to his wife, might kill another with their bear hands. Does he lack courage, because he can't show it in all instances of his life? You oversimplify what you think/believe I know of or understand of Courage. Men often do brave things because they have a lack of courage somewhere in their lives. It's the nature of the human soul, and it's 'common' for people to be dishonest to themselves about it. For instance, it takes courage to trust a politician, knowing he might let you down. But it takes courage to admit you were wrong, when he fails you.
After 9/11 Bush had my support (despite me knowing he was a witless goon), because I trusted that in light of such a national tragedy he would put aside his petty and stupid reichwing tendencies and do the right things. I was part of that 90% of America that said round up the UN and go get Bin Laden in Afghanistan. And then the wheels ran off the cart as is typical of republican mis-leadership, and I realized that my trust had been misplaced as I hoped it wouldn't be.
Republicans want to rule, but it's clear they have neither the competence or skills to do so - PERIOD.
April 12th, 2006 at 2:11 amRyan Neat > I think Karl Rove has decided to hire troll teasers for TP like Tundra! Someone who claims to be independent, but so very much in bed with the fascist Bush Regime! She readily agreed with velvet tongue troll, so maybe they are a team on here now?
April 12th, 2006 at 2:17 amJay,
Perhaps. But I hope not. Tundra shows a more active mind than the ridiculous and retarded trolls that usually come here. He has a soul, but I don't think he always has the courage to listen to it. The paranoia fear of the government is typical of the 'alaska types', no matter where they live. Think ruby ridge, but with a functional intellect.
I'm not quite ready to trash Tundra just yet - but today did take me closer I have to admit.
April 12th, 2006 at 3:03 amYou need to know your history, but you also need to fight for it. If you get something from the national archives, photocopy it. Keep a copy of it, and keep that copy in your own archives, freely available to anybody who wants to see it. When the government secretly reclassifies it, and comes after you, you can just as easily point out the secrecy of the reclassification, release copies and ask why the document was reclassified. Private libraries and archives are the only defense you have against the editing of your country's history.
April 12th, 2006 at 4:34 amWasn't Rummy one of the FOIA's biggest fans 40 years ago when he was in Congress? Talk about irony.
In Wag the Camel, Maureen Dowd starts off by quoting Blake and it only gets better.
April 12th, 2006 at 7:31 amThat’s OK, on the Rightwing sites I am called a moonbat more times than I can count.
Comment by Tundra — April 12, 2006 @ 1:34 am
Now that's just rich ;)
By the way - are you from Alaska?
April 12th, 2006 at 7:38 amRepublicans want to rule, but it’s clear they have neither the competence or skills to do so - PERIOD.
Comment by Ryan Neat — April 12, 2006 @ 2:11 am
You know Ryan, I think there's something to that for all people who want to be 'elected officials' in our country. Regardless of party affliation.
My last boyfriend was a liberal who had future inspirations toward politics. There were traits about him that, inspite of his desire to do good for the public he would serve, were still egotistical and although it was slight, he had a control freakish tendancy to want to be in charge. Not just the normal Alpha Male, but the Alpha who needed the power no matter what the sacrifice. There's something about politics in our country that attract a lot of people who want to control - no matter how well intended. I'm starting to wonder if there's a gene (nature) or if these people are a product of their environment (nuture) as so many of us are.
I'm not saying 'all', as I don't think it's all this way, but after you are close to someone of that mindset, I think you begin to notice patterns in others. And even Bill Clinton, as well intentioned as he was, still needed that power. And to some degree it did corrupt his principals.
April 12th, 2006 at 7:51 amIt is taking Americans an extrordinary amount of time to figure out that their country has been taken over in a coup by Bush and his Power Block Cronies.
April 12th, 2006 at 8:38 amIt is taking Americans an extrordinary amount of time to figure out that their country has been taken over in a coup by Bush and his Power Block Cronies.
April 12th, 2006 at 8:38 am#43 # 52 good morning, i see today brings the false IDOL worship of Bill Clinton out. It must be spring time in liberal land. On a personal note I think Bill was a great guy. Knew him very well in ARK. days. But to say Bill only lie was about sex is a little off the wall. I agree with # 52 that all politicians of both sides are corrupt in principals, but Bill was far from good intentioned. His only itention was for power and greed. this I know because I was there for his earlier campaigns. He personally soured me to beleive any politician. But hey he was allways a great guy to hang out with when his wife wasnt around.
April 12th, 2006 at 8:39 amWill somebody read the story at the National Archives website. This seems to be the most important part---long, I'm sorry, but quoting:
The Genesis of the Document Reclassification Program
The beginnings of this classified multi-agency historical document reclassification program can be traced back almost eleven years to April 17, 1995, when President Bill Clinton signed Executive Order 12958 Classified National Security Information. The central provision of E.O. 12958 was the requirement that U.S. government agencies declassify all of their historical records that were 25 years old or older by the end of 1999, except for those documents that fell within certain specified exempt categories of records, such as documents relating to intelligence sources and methods, cryptology, or war plans still in effect. (Note 1)
This declassified intelligence estimate, written only 12 days before Chinese forces crossed into North Korea, said that Chinese intervention in the Korean War was "not probable in 1950." The document was reclassified in October 2001 despite the fact that the intelligence failure is well known and has been written about extensively.
Some U.S. Government agencies moved rapidly to comply with the terms of E.O. 12958. The State Department and Department of Energy (DOE) were notable in this regard, moving quickly to begin declassifying many of their older historical records. In 1997, the Moynihan Commission on Government Secrecy specifically commended the State Department for aggressively declassifying historical documents on U.S. foreign policy and making them available to the public as part of its acclaimed Foreign Relations of the United States (FRUS) series of publications. Energy Secretary Hazel O'Leary declassified historical nuclear weapons stockpile figures and other formerly classified information, such as 1.6 million pages of historical records on human radiation experiments. This was an enormous advance in transparency, especially because Secretary O'Leary worked closely with the Russian government in prompting their release of information on the entire series of nuclear tests undertaken by the Soviet Union under strict secrecy during the Cold War. Secretary O'Leary's 'Openness Initiative' was strenuously resisted by the Defense Department. Both State and DOE also aggressively moved to dramatically reduce their backlogs of FOIA requests. (Note 2)
But by 1999, however, there had been a sea-change within the Clinton administration concerning security classification issues. A controversy over Chinese nuclear espionage, epitomized by the 1998-1999 Wen Ho Lee spy scandal, led to a number of investigations into DOE security practices, and Hazel O'Leary's successor as Energy Secretary, Bill Richardson, tightened the agency's security and halted the Department's document declassification program. (Note 3) Moreover, security officials at DOE had become concerned that the implementation of EO 12958 had led to the inadvertent release in State Department and other agency records at NARA of "unmarked" restricted and formerly restricted data on nuclear weapons. In the fall of 1998, Congress formally authorized the Department of Energy to remove from public document repositories any and all sensitive nuclear weapons design-related information pursuant to Section 3161 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999, entitled "Protection Against Inadvertent Release of Restricted Data and Formerly Restricted Data." This legal provision is better known as the Kyl-Lott Amendment, named after its two principal sponsors, which was signed into law on October 17, 1998 by President Bill Clinton. (Note 4) (For a skeptical look at the Kyl-Lott process see "DOE Puts Declassification Into Reverse," by George Lardner Jr., The Washington Post, 19 May 2001.)
According to press reports from this time period, the Defense Department and the U.S. intelligence community were also strenuously resisting implementing the provisions of E.O. 12958, with Defense Department and CIA officials making no secret of the fact that they were pressing for a general rollback of the mandatory declassification provisions of E.O. 12958. These agencies used a range of tactics, including delay. For example, at the request of the Department of Defense, E.O. 12958 was amended in November 1999 to extend the automatic declassification deadline another 18 months until the end of October 2001.
By the fall of 1999, the CIA and the rest of the U.S. intelligence community had become increasingly intransigent in terms of their willingness to declassify documents concerning past covert action operations needed for inclusion in the State Department's Foreign Relations of the United States (FRUS) series. In April 1998, a State Department advisory committee comprised of outside historians and chaired by Dr. Warren F. Kimball wrote a letter to then-Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright warning that the official record of U.S. foreign policy was in danger of becoming "an official lie" because of the CIA's continuing refusal to declassify documents for the FRUS series. (Note 5) More than a year later, the relationship between the State Department and the CIA had further deteriorated. According to comments made before in September 1999 by the then-head of the State Department's History Office, William Z. Slany: "What has become apparent and obvious is the Agency's unwillingness to acknowledge amounts of money, liaison relationships, and relationships with organizations, information that any 'reasonable person' would believe should be declassified. The process has revealed the bare bones of the CIA's intransigence." (Note 6)
The battle between the State Department and the U.S. intelligence community over the declassification of historical records came to a head in the fall of 1999, when shortly after the Kyl-Lott Amendment took effect, six U.S. government agencies, including the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the Department of Defense, all three of the military services, and the Department of Justice, wrote a letter to NARA stating that it was the shared belief of all of the agencies signing the letter that a number of State Department documents at the National Archives had been inadvertently declassified when they had been released by the State Department, in some cases ten years before. According to NARA officials, the agencies stated that four specific groups of State Department intelligence records, or Lot Files, totaling 55 records boxes had been improperly declassified in that the initial declassification review did not take into account their "equity" in the classified information contained in the documents. (Note 7)
In 1999, NARA officials withdrew from the public shelves at the National Archive's main College Park, Maryland archival facility all 55 boxes comprising the four "INR Lot Files." According to information provided by NARA, all 55 boxes were once again reviewed by security teams belonging to 13 government agencies between 1999 and 2000, resulting in approximately 1,400 documents totaling 9,750 pages being reclassified and withdrawn from public circulation. The 55 boxes of State Department records were not, however, returned to the open shelves at College Park. Instead, they were retained in the classified storage area on the sixth floor of the College Park facility. The fact that these 55 boxes of State Department records had been withdrawn from the public shelves was not discovered until the author submitted a request to review these records in November and December 2005.
Outside historians who were members of the State Department's Advisory Committee on Historical Diplomatic Documentation vehemently objected to the reclassification of historical documents long residing on the public shelves at NARA, but to no avail. According to the transcript of a December 17, 2001 meeting of the Advisory Committee on Historical Diplomatic Documentation, committee chair Dr. Warren F. Kimball: "... strongly and repeatedly expressed his concern over the reclassification of material that was already in the public domain." (Note 8)
Trying to Put the Toothpaste Back in the Tube:
Expanding the Document Reclassification Program in 2001
Apparently, at some point after the Bush administration took office in 2001, the expanded group of U.S. government agencies engaged in the security review of the State Department INR records, now demanded the right to go through all other records held at NARA's College Park facility. The central contention of the multi-agency group was that the same widespread inadvertent declassification of documents that they had discovered in the four State Department Lot Files in 1999-2000 almost certainly had occurred in virtually every other declassified record group at the National Archives containing defense, foreign affairs, and/or intelligence-related documentary materials. At the heart of their argument was the claim that because of a lack of "equity recognition" by the original declassification review teams, in some cases going as far back as the 1970s and 1980s, many additional cases of inadvertent release of classified information had occurred. As a result, the government agencies in question told NARA that they intended to re-review all national security document holdings then sitting on the open shelves of the National Archives in order to find and remove any other documents containing classified information that might also have been inadvertently disclosed.
NARA, which has no classification authority, and as such, no control whatsoever over the records it is a custodian of, had no choice but to comply with the demand of the government agencies. According to NARA officials, a classified interagency Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) lays out the underlying nature and purpose of the historical document reclassification program, and governs the conduct of the reclassification effort at the National Archives. Presumably, NARA is a party and/or signatory to this classified MOU. NARA officials have refused to provide any details concerning the contents of the MOU, citing the fact that it is secret. The National Security Archive has a pending FOIA request for the MOU.
April 12th, 2006 at 8:55 am[...] ThinkProgress [...]
April 12th, 2006 at 9:16 amA government that wants to keep everything it does secret is a sick government! If there is NO corruption, and NO back room dirty dealing, then there is NO reason to cover anything up!
April 12th, 2006 at 10:48 amThe very fact that documents are classified to begin with is to keep information from the people
and NOT to prevent foreign enemies from getting secret information! Foreign spies dig up whatever they need regardless, so the whole classification genre is bullcrap! Take for example the "Pentagon Papers" that Daniel Ellsberg leaked out to the press > the so-called classified stuff was our government keeping secret the Vietnam War was really for profits for the "Military Industrial Complex"! The Bush Regime wants to hide similar documents that show the Iraq War is totally for profits as well! The US government must be forced to be transparent and stop hiding real facts from the people! We have a right to know what dirt they do in our name!
#43 # 52 good morning, i see today brings the false IDOL worship of Bill Clinton out.
Comment by Andrew T. — April 12, 2006 @ 8:39 am
You're awfully presumptive. I am not a Bill Clinton fan. Never said I was. You shouldn't infer. you're not good at it.
April 12th, 2006 at 10:53 amCareful, unbelievable, any diversion from the the STRICT "party line" touted by the "progressively sanctimonious" RYanne Goebbels is bitingly (are your shots up to date?) "dispatched". Watching him eat "one of his own" is a frightful sight - what was the name of that last prog Ryan sent to the "time-out corner"? Hmmm... As I recall, the argument descended to his usual sandbox name -calling: "reichwingers", "traitors", "moron", "retard" (a little un-PC??).
Until later.....
April 12th, 2006 at 11:12 amComplete and utter bullshit.
mighty aphrodite, you have comepletely lost it and nobody here believes your bullshit.
The great thing about being progressive is that there is no STRICT party line and you know that. We don't all agree 100% of the time, but we can spot a troll a mile away.
April 12th, 2006 at 11:41 amSuppose, for the crime of maintaining a secret, you could be drug to the town square and drawn and quartered. I think a program like that, strictly adhered to, would solve most social problems outside of bird flu.
April 12th, 2006 at 11:48 amCareful, unbelievable, any diversion from the the STRICT “party line†touted by the “progressively sanctimonious†RYanne Goebbels is bitingly (are your shots up to date?) “dispatched
Can't you borrow some new material? This is beyond old, it is seriously pathetic. Stop trying to be funny. You aren't. It just comes across as incoherent babble.
Until later…..
Comment by mighty aphrodite — April 12, 2006 @ 11:12 am
Dear God I hope not.
April 12th, 2006 at 11:57 amThis discourse shares a major fallacy with those resisting reform, and excusing diabolically-delivered harm upon our country. That major fallcy is that a system, agency, institution, or governmental entity was so cumbersome in their operations that they couldn't behave lawfully and competently: which, in evading responsibility, evades the question of individual corruption, exactly as done by saying, "The Devil made me do it." In point of fact, manipulation of information and disinformation campaigns, using all kinds of media, have been tools of corrupt individuals acting under color of authortity, at even the "lowest" agency levels, within our own country, and in systematic use against our own citizens. This unlawful conduct is performed by multiple individuals, as individuals, and it is individuals that need purging from their official perches if any meaningful reform is to be effected. No reform of institutions is possible if this misconduct is attributed to "the system", or "the institution" ---Which is exactly what the perpetrators understand. So they will say, for example, that the CIA and FBI were one hand not knowing what the other was doing, etc. Attributions of individuals' misconduct to institutions is of itself disinformation is cowardly, dishonest and evasive, which, like the government entities being criticized, joins to purpose of evading reforms..
April 12th, 2006 at 12:29 pmThe reason, it would seem, to re-classfy documents, is the lying bastards have alot to hide, Better get it off the shelfs, where it was available to the public, before the shit EEALLY hits the fan...Maybe" His Incompentence, His Fruadulenty,Emperior Dmbys" and to a lesser extent, "Ric-o-shay Rick" Cheney and other high admin. types want to delay any legal actions against them. These records could be re-clasified for 30 years (or more) By that time, most of these bastards will be dead, (and so will a lot of us), with that lenght of time, it won't matter, and they'll never have to pay for the crimes they committed "for the American people" AND on TOP oF THAT, they keep it SECRET from the American people that they re-classified previously un-classified records that were available to the public These people are pathetic !!
Gene Campbell
April 12th, 2006 at 8:05 pmCentral Florida
Gene,
April 12th, 2006 at 8:52 pm95% of the information that is being reclassified is freely available on the WEB from countries that, frankly, do not give a damn.
"Careful, unbelievable, any diversion from the the STRICT “party line†touted by the “progressively sanctimonious†RYanne Goebbels is bitingly (are your shots up to date?) “dispatchedâ€. mighty Nazi"
Ironic coming from a Nazi b!tch like yourself who can't even get a 'timeline' for their own personna to add up. Propaganda and whacking people for not towing the Bush party line is your specialty 'miss bightie'.
And those aren't 'shots', they're 'adjectives', something you must have skipped over in that 'private' education your mother wasted her money on. What was it, joe's bait, tackle and school for lonely young girls? I bet you learned lots of valuable skills there suited to your mental capacity. After all, who's a bigger HO to bush than you are?
"Watching him eat “one of his own†is a frightful sight - what was the name of that last prog Ryan sent to the “time-out cornerâ€? Hmmm… As I recall, the argument descended to his usual sandbox name -calling: “reichwingersâ€, “traitorsâ€, “moronâ€, “retard†(a little un-PC??).
Until later….. Comment by mighty Glib"
Ah, we're back to 'glib', the common symptom of sociopaths who 'think' they're being funny. Straightjackets surely come in extra large, you should go get fitted for one.
If you can't recall the case, are you sure it's real? After all, you have a habit of posting claims that never pan out - much like Bush and the WMDs. As for PC, you're the QUEEN of that. After all, what's more PC than republicans constantly WHINING about the opinions of the left wing getting airtime - and how it hurts their feelings - wah, wah...
There's never been a bigger bunch of PC crybabies than you and the rest of your christianReich. Which religious holiday is there a war on today - oh that's right the pagan rights of Easter...
April 12th, 2006 at 9:15 pm"I’m not saying ‘all’, as I don’t think it’s all this way, but after you are close to someone of that mindset, I think you begin to notice patterns in others. And even Bill Clinton, as well intentioned as he was, still needed that power. And to some degree it did corrupt his principals. Comment by unbelievable "
I agree with you. Clinton like many (wo)men who drift to politics definitely was looking for some power in his life. It's kind of like owning the 'one ring' for those who saw lord of the rings. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. The difference I can see historically, is that once they have power the reichwingers in particular are just crappy at legislating. And that has as much to do with the agenda that they start with as anything.
Some of the biggest aholes I've ever met have been in the Green party - yet once again we're talking about the 'extreme' again aren't we?
April 12th, 2006 at 9:19 pmI agree with you. Clinton like many (wo)men who drift to politics definitely was looking for some power in his life. It’s kind of like owning the ‘one ring’ for those who saw lord of the rings. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
It's not something I personally understand wanting, so I can't say that I can sympathize. Though, like most obsessions, they drive us rather than we drive them. And when something is in control of your life, especially something absent, it's easy to see how it can go out of control in a hurry.
The difference I can see historically, is that once they have power the reichwingers in particular are just crappy at legislating. And that has as much to do with the agenda that they start with as anything.
I think it's extremists on either side of the fence - the neo-cons and neo-liberals who want to force their theories and rules on others aside from all reason and reality. Anyone who thinks they can solve all the problems on his or her own has lost touch with humanity. And once that connection is gone, it's easy to see people as demographics to control rather than individuals with Constitutional Rights.
Of course I think a large part of the problem is too many people. When you have a limited number of resources and a population that is competing for them, you have to decide who gets and who does not. And in that tug o' war, it's the people who get the short end of the stick.
Some of the biggest aholes I’ve ever met have been in the Green party - yet once again we’re talking about the ‘extreme’ again aren’t we?
Comment by Ryan Neat — April 12, 2006 @ 9:19 pm
Yeah, you know, I think so. I always go back to that philosophy of 'All things in moderation'. Though there are always exceptions, it is generally the most sage approach that I've come across.
April 13th, 2006 at 7:11 am[...] Think Progress Administration Made Secret Agreement to Hide Administration Made Secret Agreement to Hide Reclassification Program from Public And to some degree it did corrupt his principals. Comment by unbelievable April 12, 2006 @ 7:51 am [...]
April 24th, 2006 at 6:45 pm