http://www.truthout.com/11.03A.Bush.Order.htm
November 2, 2001
Critics Blast Bush Order on Papers
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Filed at 7:56 a.m. ET
WASHINGTON (AP) -- One historian calls it a "disaster
for history," but the White House insists a new
executive order issued by President Bush balances the
public's right to see the records of past presidents
with a need to protect national security.
Advocates for the release of government documents say
the executive order violates the spirit of the 1978
Presidential Records Act and will usher in a new era
of secrecy for papers left behind by America's chief
executives.
The White House says the order simply sets up a
procedure for implementing the act and gives former
presidents more authority to claim executive privilege
to withhold certain papers. Absent "compelling"
circumstances, the incumbent president will agree with
a former president's decision to disclose or withhold
documents, the White House says.
Bruce Craig, director of the National Coordinating
Committee for the Promotion of History, claims the
order is "blatantly unlawful top to bottom." He
predicted a quick legal challenge to the order, which
probably will come up at a hearing Tuesday by a House
Government Reform subcommittee. The hearing was
scheduled for last month but was canceled in the
aftermath of the Sept. 11 terror attacks.
Craig said that under the order, if a former president
says certain papers are privileged, they will remain
secret even if the sitting president disagrees.
Conversely, if a sitting president says certain papers
from a past administration are privileged, they will
remain under wraps even if the former president
disagrees.
"In the interest of keeping historical papers closed,
the incumbent president can trump the wishes of a
former president," says Craig, who claims the order is
"a disaster for history."
In a letter, Bruce Lindsey, lawyer for the William J.
Clinton Foundation, said the former president objects
to Bush's executive order because laws already exist
to restrict disclosure of sensitive documents, The
Washington Post reported Friday.
The act affects the presidential papers of Clinton,
Bush's father, George H.W. Bush, and Ronald Reagan. It
also applies to vice presidential papers, including
those of former President Bush.
Reagan's papers are the first governed by the
Presidential Records Act, which followed Watergate and
Richard Nixon's attempts to hold on to his papers and
tape recordings. The act made presidential records the
property of government, not ex-presidents.
Some 68,000 pages of Reagan's White House records,
including vice presidential papers from the elder
Bush, were supposed to have been opened under the law
in January, 12 years after Reagan left office. The
White House delayed the release three times to review
constitutional and legal questions, and Thursday's
executive order resulted.
White House counsel Alberto Gonzales defended Bush's
executive order but did not say when the Reagan papers
would be opened to the public.
White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said the order
provides a "safety valve" for a current
administration. A former president, out of office for
12 years, might not recognize national security
implications of releasing certain documents, he said.
Fleischer emphasized that "except in very compelling
cases, if a former president were to say `That
(document) should go out,' this administration would
say, "It should go out."
Moreover, any claims of executive privilege, including
those involving military, diplomatic or national
security secrets, legal work or advice, presidential
communications or the deliberative processes of the
president and his advisers, can be appealed in court,
Gonzales said.
"It will not be driven by politics or what looks good.
It will driven by what is allowed under the
Constitution," Gonzales said.
Steven Aftergood, director of the Federation of
American Scientists' government secrecy project,
thinks the order will make it harder for the public to
gain access to historically valuable presidential
papers because both the former president and the
incumbent must consent to disclosure.
A private citizen will have little luck trying to
persuade a court to overturn a claim of executive
privilege, he said. "When Joe Blow goes into court to
overturn it, he's probably going to lose," Aftergood
said.
Some historians, including American University
historian Anna Nelson, have suspected the Bush White
House is worried about what the Reagan papers might
reveal about officials now working for President Bush
who also worked for Reagan. Among them are Secretary
of State Colin Powell, Budget Director Mitch Daniels
Jr. and White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card.
Gonzales says that is not the reason.
"There may in fact be embarrassing documents," he
said, but that would not be considered a legitimate
reason to withhold something.
Other historians suggest the White House is taking
advantage of heightened public interest in national
security after the terror attacks on New York and
Washington. Craig speculated that the Bush White House
might be worried the war on terrorism may generate
documents it would rather not see exposed down the
road.
"Everybody is in agreement that materials that can be
used by terrorists to threaten national security
should be closed up," Craig said. "There already are
existing laws and exemptions that keep that kind of
stuff closed up.
"This is about confidential information --
communication between a president and top people --
that they would simply prefer notto be released to the
public."
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Filed at 7:56 a.m. ET
WASHINGTON (AP) -- One historian calls it a "disaster
for history," but the White House insists a new
executive order issued by President Bush balances the
public's right to see the records of past presidents
with a need to protect national security.
Advocates for the release of government documents say
the executive order violates the spirit of the 1978
Presidential Records Act and will usher in a new era
of secrecy for papers left behind by America's chief
executives.
The White House says the order simply sets up a
procedure for implementing the act and gives former
presidents more authority to claim executive privilege
to withhold certain papers. Absent "compelling"
circumstances, the incumbent president will agree with
a former president's decision to disclose or withhold
documents, the White House says.
Bruce Craig, director of the National Coordinating
Committee for the Promotion of History, claims the
order is "blatantly unlawful top to bottom." He
predicted a quick legal challenge to the order, which
probably will come up at a hearing Tuesday by a House
Government Reform subcommittee. The hearing was
scheduled for last month but was canceled in the
aftermath of the Sept. 11 terror attacks.
Craig said that under the order, if a former president
says certain papers are privileged, they will remain
secret even if the sitting president disagrees.
Conversely, if a sitting president says certain papers
from a past administration are privileged, they will
remain under wraps even if the former president
disagrees.
"In the interest of keeping historical papers closed,
the incumbent president can trump the wishes of a
former president," says Craig, who claims the order is
"a disaster for history."
In a letter, Bruce Lindsey, lawyer for the William J.
Clinton Foundation, said the former president objects
to Bush's executive order because laws already exist
to restrict disclosure of sensitive documents, The
Washington Post reported Friday.
The act affects the presidential papers of Clinton,
Bush's father, George H.W. Bush, and Ronald Reagan. It
also applies to vice presidential papers, including
those of former President Bush.
Reagan's papers are the first governed by the
Presidential Records Act, which followed Watergate and
Richard Nixon's attempts to hold on to his papers and
tape recordings. The act made presidential records the
property of government, not ex-presidents.
Some 68,000 pages of Reagan's White House records,
including vice presidential papers from the elder
Bush, were supposed to have been opened under the law
in January, 12 years after Reagan left office. The
White House delayed the release three times to review
constitutional and legal questions, and Thursday's
executive order resulted.
White House counsel Alberto Gonzales defended Bush's
executive order but did not say when the Reagan papers
would be opened to the public.
White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said the order
provides a "safety valve" for a current
administration. A former president, out of office for
12 years, might not recognize national security
implications of releasing certain documents, he said.
Fleischer emphasized that "except in very compelling
cases, if a former president were to say `That
(document) should go out,' this administration would
say, "It should go out."
Moreover, any claims of executive privilege, including
those involving military, diplomatic or national
security secrets, legal work or advice, presidential
communications or the deliberative processes of the
president and his advisers, can be appealed in court,
Gonzales said.
"It will not be driven by politics or what looks good.
It will driven by what is allowed under the
Constitution," Gonzales said.
Steven Aftergood, director of the Federation of
American Scientists' government secrecy project,
thinks the order will make it harder for the public to
gain access to historically valuable presidential
papers because both the former president and the
incumbent must consent to disclosure.
A private citizen will have little luck trying to
persuade a court to overturn a claim of executive
privilege, he said. "When Joe Blow goes into court to
overturn it, he's probably going to lose," Aftergood
said.
Some historians, including American University
historian Anna Nelson, have suspected the Bush White
House is worried about what the Reagan papers might
reveal about officials now working for President Bush
who also worked for Reagan. Among them are Secretary
of State Colin Powell, Budget Director Mitch Daniels
Jr. and White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card.
Gonzales says that is not the reason.
"There may in fact be embarrassing documents," he
said, but that would not be considered a legitimate
reason to withhold something.
Other historians suggest the White House is taking
advantage of heightened public interest in national
security after the terror attacks on New York and
Washington. Craig speculated that the Bush White House
might be worried the war on terrorism may generate
documents it would rather not see exposed down the
road.
"Everybody is in agreement that materials that can be
used by terrorists to threaten national security
should be closed up," Craig said. "There already are
existing laws and exemptions that keep that kind of
stuff closed up.
"This is about confidential information --
communication between a president and top people --
that they would simply prefer notto be released to the
public."
=====
http://diypages.dhs.org/adri/earth.html
http://educate-yourself.org/currentnews.html
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/agentsmiley/message/2
http://www.hyperworx.com/~joanna/kabul.jpg
http://www.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=82758&group=webcast
http://educate-yourself.org/nwonewsindex.html
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find a job, post your resume.
http://careers.yahoo.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.ctrl.org
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds
are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are sordid matters and
'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis-directions and outright frauds�is
used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout
the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always
suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust
denial and nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
Om
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
