US Declassifications Delayed. Infrastructure Classification to follow?

kiwimate writes "This article discusses an executive order issued yesterday which delays the release of millions of historical documents until the end of 2006. Apparently, the relevant agencies need more time to study the affected papers, even though it only affects papers more than 25 years old. Evidently a quarter of a century is not a sufficiently lengthy review period. For a slightly different version of the same story, see here." For further news on the classification of "critical infrastructure" see Declan's story. In related news.. Phybersyko writes "Declan McCallagh at cnet.com(website) reports (story)that "President George W. Bush has signed an executive order that explicitly gives the government the power to classify information about critical infrastructures such as the Internet." Do we chalk this up to the cost of "freedom" or are we repeating the same mistakes the Catholics made in the Middle Ages (keep em' ignorant and our rule is secured)...."

Comments

Reagan administration vs. Iraq?

[Malc]

Is this to bury information about the actions of the current administration's people that they carried out when they worked for the Reagan administration?

CNET article a bit misleading

[extrarice]

The linked CNET article has a bit of a misleading title.
The title and by-line states: "Bush order covers Internet secrets" and "President Bush has signed an executive order that explicitly gives the government the power to classify information about critical infrastructures such as the Internet."

But the last paragraph states:
"Steven Aftergood, an analyst at the Federation of American Scientists who tracks government secrecy, says the change in definitions "creates an opening that could be exploited in the future, but in practice the previous policy would have permitted much of the same thing."

Meaning that the previous act (signed into law by President Clinton in '95) would have allowed the same thing as President Bush's re-do of the act.

Unfortunately, most people won't read the entire article to see what the real information is.

PR reasons, NOT national security

[freejung]

Considering that the data in question is 25 years old and that we are at a critical juncture in the current administration's PR strategy, it seems clear that this blatant stalling tactic was undertaken for reasons of PR rather than national security.

In the past, the declassification of historical documents about American security activities has been damaging to the public perceptions of security agencies (mostly because it reveals them for the unscrupulous bastards they are, or at least were), and this is a time when the US government can hardly afford to risk further losses in public opinion.

They don't want you to know about this stuff because they are afraid you won't like it. It's that simple.

Re:This is very good

[Zalgon 26 McGee]

Yes, god forbid that government be open and transparent to its citizens. After all, in a democracy, who's really supposed to be in charge - the People???