Bush administrion denies release of 1952 documents

**KafirChobee** · 03-01-2006, 01:52

Yep, the Bushy's have decided that the release of documents from the Eisenhower administratation would be "subversive to our (who in the F' "our" is they don't say) war on terrorism. Say what? we had a war on terror 50 years ago? There was a 9/11 in 1952 (I guess), AND they forgot to tell us about it?

Now, we all know that Bush has brought the term "secrecy' to a new level that some excuse, no one really questions, and that when their actions prove to be against the law no one syas so ... but, sort of bring it to question. Sort of.

This is another of those - heard it once .... looking for the truth - can't find it. Need help with the link. If you will. It is real. they have also determined that most of Reagan's memos are highly secret, as are Bush41's, .... even some of Clinton's (*not much though).

**master of the puppets** · 03-01-2006, 01:57

We can only hope that bush reads and learns from dear old Eisenhower. my one question is to why such articals were concealed for so long, mabey knoledge from the past would give a new and revolutionary view of the present.

**Sasaki Kojiro** · 03-01-2006, 02:08

Is it something that would be used as propaganda by al jazheerah or whoever? If that was the case leave it secret.

**Major Robert Dump** · 03-01-2006, 02:41

One of the first executive orders GWB singed when he came into office was hold on the release of certain presidetnial records that would become public property after X amount of years....i forget the exact number and if it is years or presidiential terms they go by, but basically its why we didnt get to hear the Nixon tapes until the 90s despite them always existing

Anyway, Bush's executive order sealed those and Pre-emptively sealed those of Reagan, George H and Clinton. Not sure which prez the seal started with, Johnson or Carter, i need to hit up the exec order page and be refreshed

**Divinus Arma** · 03-01-2006, 03:19

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

Freedom of information is freedom of criticism, which is essential to democracy. No information, no criticism, no public conciousness, no democracy.

Agreed. And welcome back Moe. I'm not sure if I could even support an extension. 50 years is a pretty long time. What, does he want us to wait 100 years? Wait for all who were alive then to die? Will it be the same for us when I am in my 70s and eighties? Must I too die before Bushy's papers are released?

**Xiahou** · 03-01-2006, 03:58

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

The one truth about the presidency is that, without fail, the power of the executive winds up with a net gain. Yes, there's dips and spikes, but the trend is upwards.

I think future generations may have to deal with presidential records being sealed off entirely, forever, lest the office itself lose face.

I think executive orders have been long abused. There's little the president can't essentially get into law by just signing one- with no congressional input.

**Major Robert Dump** · 03-30-2006, 11:15

Sorry to bump an old topic but I've been looking for a link about this and cant find it on any exec order lists, and considering the importance of that year to a certain Bush relative I would really like to know more about this or even if it it really happened

**Vladimir** · 03-30-2006, 14:33

Wasn't a thread like this which was recently created by Tribesman, spammed and locked because he didn't provide a reference? Does this refer to information on the development of nuclear weapons? This type of information has been banned from the '40's. Too many questions and accusations and no answers.

**Ser Clegane** · 03-30-2006, 14:47

Originally Posted by Vladimir

Wasn't a thread like this which was recently created by Tribesman, spammed and locked because he didn't provide a reference

Correction - it was locked only due to spam not because of the lack of reference (the lack of reference just seemed to be the reason that there was only spam instead of a real discussion)

**KafirChobee** · 04-01-2006, 04:36

Dump, with the present attention span of the "media' (about a day and a half unless michael jackson is involved) - and the adeptness of Carl Rove's connections, it is surprising any of us ever heard about this new paranoia they have acquired. Amazing, being afraid of the near distant past - I mean Bush was like 5 yrs old (I'm almost certain he had nothing to do with the Korean "police action" - then again, he is the spawn of satan ... j/k btw).

**Vladimir** · 04-14-2006, 16:20

Bumpity bump. New info.

Independent historian Matthew M. Aid uncovered the reclassification program last summer when his requests for documents formerly available at the Archives were delayed or denied. In February, the Archives acknowledged that about 9,500 records totaling more than 55,000 pages had been withdrawn and reclassified since 1999. The memo released yesterday says some records "may have been improperly marked as declassified" and their release "would harm the national security interests of the United States by revealing sensitive sources and methods of intelligence collection."

But historians who previously obtained copies of records have said many date to the 1940s and 1950s and pose no conceivable security risk.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...041101475.html