US Reclassifies Many Documents in Secret Review

[AGBF]

At one point in my life I planned to become an historian. Although my career path took a different turn, I still have a visceral negative reaction to this kind of tampering with documents, especially old documents that cannot possibly bear on national security!

US Reclassifies Many Documents in Secret Review

 

[AGBF]

Here is an excerpt from the article.

"In a seven-year-old secret program at the National Archives, intelligence agencies have been removing from public access thousands of historical documents that were available for years, including some already published by the State Department and others photocopied years ago by private historians.

The restoration of classified status to more than 55,000 previously declassified pages began in 1999, when the Central Intelligence Agency and five other agencies objected to what they saw as a hasty release of sensitive information after a 1995 declassification order signed by President Bill Clinton. It accelerated after the Bush administration took office and especially after the 2001 terrorist attacks, according to archives records.

But because the reclassification program is itself shrouded in secrecy — governed by a still-classified memorandum that prohibits the National Archives even from saying which agencies are involved — it continued virtually without outside notice until December. That was when an intelligence historian, Matthew M. Aid, noticed that dozens of documents he had copied years ago had been withdrawn from the archives'' open shelves.

Mr. Aid was struck by what seemed to him the innocuous contents of the documents — mostly decades-old State Department reports from the Korean War and the early cold war. He found that eight reclassified documents had been previously published in the State Department''s history series, ''Foreign Relations of the United States.''

''The stuff they pulled should never have been removed,'' he said. ''Some of it is mundane, and some of it is outright ridiculous.''"

 

[Momoftwo]

If the Intel Agencies feel they were declassified hastily or wrongly, that is their responsibility. Not the historians. I guarantee there is more to this story than what the historian is reporting. There are also laws governing when things can be declassified. I'm also not sure how the historian is qualified to judge whether something is secret or not. There are written guidelines that have to be followed.

Also, is it considered being "done in secret" because it's not on the front page of the Washington Post? Agencies and companies do things everyday that are not reported in the media because to them it's just daily business. This guy is whining because he doesn't like it not because the intel agencies are outside their bounds.

 

[AGBF]

Date: 2/21/2006 5:59:43 AM
Author: Momoftwo
If the Intel Agencies feel they were declassified hastily or wrongly, that is their responsibility. Not the historians.

No. It is the responsibility of all American citizens. We have to watch what our government is doing, not accept that all that is done has to be right.

I guarantee there is more to this story than what the historian is reporting. There are also laws governing when things can be declassified. I'm also not sure how the historian is qualified to judge whether something is secret or not. There are written guidelines that have to be followed.


Also, is it considered being 'done in secret' because it's not on the front page of the Washington Post? Agencies and companies do things everyday that are not reported in the media because to them it's just daily business. This guy is whining because he doesn't like it not because the intel agencies are outside their bounds.

Strictly by coincidence I recently met a man who used to work, then retired from, an intelligence agency. He is now back with them on a contract basis. He is an historian. His "job" (which seems to me more like a treat!) is currently to look at old OSS documents and see which ones can be declassified for scholars to use for research.

I believe that all classified documents made available to researchers undergo this process. All the ones that were declassified and are being reclassified have to have undergone this scrutiny already.

The historian quoted above, far from whining, was pointing out the absurdity of reclassifying a document after its contents have already been made public and been PUBLISHED in secondary sources!

 

[Momoftwo]

The documents belong to the US Government so the US Government can do what they need to. I have some experience in this field and am very sensitive to this issue. The article made it clear that the changes made by Clinton''s administration were seen as too lenient by the intel community. The documents do not belong to this historian so he really has no say what is done with them. They will in all probability be returned unclassified at some point when they are past the date set by law depending on the topic. This is not permanent, just a revisiting of what was done to ensure it was done properly. You can''t throw a rock in the DC area without hitting someone who does or has worked in intel.

 

[rubydick]

Date: 2/21/2006 5:22:42 PM
Author: Momoftwo
The documents belong to the US Government so the US Government can do what they need to. I have some experience in this field and am very sensitive to this issue. The article made it clear that the changes made by Clinton''s administration were seen as too lenient by the intel community. The documents do not belong to this historian so he really has no say what is done with them. They will in all probability be returned unclassified at some point when they are past the date set by law depending on the topic. This is not permanent, just a revisiting of what was done to ensure it was done properly. You can''t throw a rock in the DC area without hitting someone who does or has worked in intel.

Allow me to disagree. As citizens of this nation, let me state the obvious. The documents do not belong to the US Government. The documents belong to each and every one of us. Duh! They are ours.

 

[Momoftwo]

Date: 2/21/2006 10:48:40 PM
Author: Richard Hughes

Date: 2/21/2006 5:22:42 PM
Author: Momoftwo
The documents belong to the US Government so the US Government can do what they need to. I have some experience in this field and am very sensitive to this issue. The article made it clear that the changes made by Clinton''s administration were seen as too lenient by the intel community. The documents do not belong to this historian so he really has no say what is done with them. They will in all probability be returned unclassified at some point when they are past the date set by law depending on the topic. This is not permanent, just a revisiting of what was done to ensure it was done properly. You can''t throw a rock in the DC area without hitting someone who does or has worked in intel.

Allow me to disagree. As citizens of this nation, let me state the obvious. The documents do not belong to the US Government. The documents belong to each and every one of us. Duh! They are ours.

Let me state the obvious, I''m talking about possession of the original documents. I daresay they are property of the US Government. The point is they are under the protection and possession/custody of the US Government. I have just completed a survey at work (as part of my job) pertaining to records management of documents created by the US Government in the course of business done by our agency. The originals belong to the US Government and it is up to the agencies based on Federal law to decide what is kept classified, what is released to the public and what is destroyed. You or I as individual citizens do not have that right of "ownership" under the law. That is where the difference lies. As such, the historian has no say in what is done with classification as it is not his responsibility. Just because he''s making noise does not mean he knows what he''s talking about when it comes to this topic. He''s a historian,not a security or intel specialist.

 

[AGBF]

Date: 2/22/2006 6:15:25 AM
Author: Momoftwo
As such, the historian has no say in what is done with classification as it is not his responsibility. Just because he's making noise does not mean he knows what he's talking about when it comes to this topic. He's a historian,not a security or intel specialist.

We all know that historians (except those employed by the CIA, etcetera) have no say in what is done with documents...unless they make themselves heard by the rest of the American people, that is. That (allowing historians and others) to tell the American people what is really being done in their names by various clandestine, law-breaking organizations is why freedom of the press is so important in our democracy.

You would like the "intel specialist" of the CIA to decide everything done with records in the United States.... "Intel specialists" serve at our (the people's) pleasure since we elect the people who hire them.

Not all laws and regulations are right, never mind just and lawful. I submit that "intel specialists" should not have unlimited power to protect American citizens from the truth of the past.

I am glad that he Bill of Rights granted freedom of speech and of the press. And that the Constitution provided checks and balances! Had the Constitution not done so, there might be just one branch: the Executive. With no checks and balances we would all have to trust the President and the people he appoints (like the CIA Director) to do the right thing. Now, however, we do not have to trust the President or the Director of the CIA to make the right decisions.

[Edited so as not to contain any personal "attacks".]

 

[partgypsy]

C''mon AGBF, If our government decides it''s not in our best interests to know some information, I''m sure they are only doing it for our own good. Afterall, what we don''t know can''t hurt us, and too much information, would only confuse us. I''m sure that''s why Bush junior extended the length of presidental priviledge so that presidental records are kept sealed for much longer, probably till after his father''s death because heck, it just might tell a complicated and messy story, and we wouldn''t want that.

 

[AGBF]

Date: 2/22/2006 3:04:24 PM
Author: part gypsy
C'mon AGBF, If our government decides it's not in our best interests to know some information, I'm sure they are only doing it for our own good.

I am sure you are right and we all know that curiosity killed the cat. If I turn up missing (along with Storm and Richard), look into whether the CIA did it. Please get the news out, too. I am hoping that many people will write books about the conspiracy.

Deb

 

[Momoftwo]

Date: 2/22/2006 3:04:24 PM
Author: part gypsy
C'mon AGBF, If our government decides it's not in our best interests to know some information, I'm sure they are only doing it for our own good. Afterall, what we don't know can't hurt us, and too much information, would only confuse us. I'm sure that's why Bush junior extended the length of presidental priviledge so that presidental records are kept sealed for much longer, probably till after his father's death because heck, it just might tell a complicated and messy story, and we wouldn't want that.

If you read the article the reexamination of the documents started in 1999, during Bill Clinton's Administration. So your statement about President Bush doesn't make any sense.

AGBF, the documents originally came from the agencies that are reexamining them. There are records management laws on the books and requirements with deadlines for all documents to be reviewed for declassification, storage or destruction. I know of what I speak. The CIA is not grabbing random documents and classifying them. Each Intel agency (and there are more than 1) are reviewing and reexaming their documents that were hastily declassified. This is not about a rogue group coming and grabbing whatever they can find. I don't think you understand what is actually occurring. This "historian" is leaving out key information to make his tale sound good and newsworthy. And as I also said, which you chose to ignore, a lot, if not most will be returned after it has been ensured that they were declassified PROPERLY. This is Federal Law we're talking about. And unless this historian is a security specialist, he doens't have any clue what should or shouldn't be classified or looked at.

 

[colormyworld]

Of course we know the present admin. would never leave unfavorable info out of an equation, as in ___________ You fill in the blank.

 

[AGBF]

Date: 2/22/2006 6:55:07 PM
Author: Momoftwo
And unless this historian is a security specialist, he doens't have any clue what should or shouldn't be classified or looked at.

Why must he be a "security specialist" (i.e. some guy vetted by the government and then sworn to secrecy to insure he says nothing critical of the government) to "know" what should be classified and what shouldn't be?

Do you think a trained historian's opinion counts for nothing when it comes to deciding what should be public and what shouldn't be?

I don't think it is accurate that "unless this historian is a security specialist, he doesn't have any clue what should or shouldn't be classified...." I think it is more accurate to say that "unless this historian is a security specialist, he doesn't have a clue what the government still wants to hide"!!!


Deb

 

[AGBF]

Date: 2/22/2006 7:14:49 AM
Author: AGBF

Date: 2/22/2006 6:15:25 AM

Author: Momoftwo

As such, the historian has no say in what is done with classification as it is not his responsibility. Just because he's making noise does not mean he knows what he's talking about when it comes to this topic. He's a historian,not a security or intel specialist.

We all know that historians (except those employed by the CIA, etcetera) have no say in what is done with documents...unless they make themselves heard by the rest of the American people, that is.

Guess what? When the press told the American people what was going on behind closed doors, things changed.

"After complaints from historians, the National Archives directed intelligence agencies on Thursday to stop removing previously declassified historical documents from public access and urged them to return to the shelves as quickly as possible many of the records they had already pulled.

Allen Weinstein, the nation's chief archivist, announced what he called a 'moratorium' on reclassification of documents until an audit can be completed to determine which records should be secret.

A group of historians recently found that decades-old documents that they had photocopied years ago and that appeared to have little sensitivity had disappeared from the open files. They learned that in a program operated in secrecy since 1999, intelligence and security agencies had removed more than 55,000 pages that agency officials believed had been wrongly declassified.

Mr. Weinstein, who became archivist of the United States a year ago, said he knew 'precious little' about the seven-year-old reclassification program before it was disclosed in The New York Times on Feb. 21.

He said he did not want to prejudge the results of the audit being conducted by the archives' Information Security Oversight Office, which oversees classification. But he said the archives' goal was to make sure that government records that could safely be released were available. The audit was ordered by J. William Leonard, head of the oversight office, after he met with historians on Jan. 27.

'The idea is to let people get on with their research and not reclassify documents unless it's absolutely necessary,' said Mr. Weinstein, who in the mid-1970's successfully sued the Federal Bureau of Investigation to obtain records he used for his book about Alger Hiss, the State Department official found to be a Soviet spy."


<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/03/politics/03archives.html?ei=5094&en=b9932bb452d6188e&hp=&ex=1141448400&partner=homepage&pagewanted=print'>Archivist Urges U.S. to Reopen Classified Files