Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Veils of Secrecy Lifting in Washington
NEW YORK - As President Barack Obama's Justice Department issued sweeping new guidelines to reverse the secrecy policies of former president George W. Bush, a federal judge ordered the Central Intelligence Agency to produce unedited summaries of some 3,000 documents related to its admitted destruction of 92 videotapes of prisoners being subjected to extremely harsh interrogation techniques.
Attorney General Eric Holder speaks at the National League of Cities conference, Monday, March 16 2009, in Washington. Last week, Attorney General Eric Holder issued comprehensive new FOIA guidelines that direct all executive branch departments and agencies to apply a presumption of openness when administering the FOIA. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta) At the same time, Congress weighed in with proposed new legislation to liberalize the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).
Last week, Attorney General Eric Holder issued comprehensive new FOIA guidelines that direct all executive branch departments and agencies to apply a presumption of openness when administering the FOIA.
The new guidelines, announced in a memo to heads of executive departments and agencies, build on the principles announced by President Obama on his first full day in office when he issued a presidential memorandum on the FOIA that called on agencies to "usher in a new era of open government."
One of the first tests of the Obama administration's new approach came in federal court, where the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) asked a federal judge to order the CIA to produce full and unedited copies of the 3,000 summaries, transcripts, reconstructions and memoranda relating to the interrogation videotapes they destroyed.
When the CIA refused to publicly disclose the list - and the names of witnesses who may have viewed the videotapes - Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein ordered an independent but non-public review of that material next week to determine whether it should be publicly disclosed.
"The government is still needlessly withholding information about these tapes from the public, despite the fact that the CIA's use of torture is well known," said Amrit Singh, staff attorney with the ACLU. "Full disclosure of the CIA's illegal interrogation methods is long overdue and the agency must be held accountable for flouting the rule of law."
Meanwhile, Congress is taking action to end the Bush administration's government-wide efforts to increase the classification of documents to thwart citizens' requests for information under the FOIA.
The House of Representatives approved a measure to end what its sponsor calls pseudo-classification - creation of many new and ambiguous classification terms. According to the bill's sponsor, Representative Steve Driehaus, a Democrat from Ohio, the bill would not only be a boon for the public, but an attempt to promote "a common language within government."
In an editorial, The New York Times noted that "Official use only" has been "slapped wholesale on documents, even though there's no common standard for what that means. The House measure would correct that by having the national archivist prescribe how and what to classify, with particular emphasis on cutting back categories and ending the pro forma withholding of non-sensitive information requested by the public."
Rep. Driehaus says there were 362,000 FOIA requests last year, and almost a third of them still remain to be processed because of over-classification. The bill requires classifiers to be trained for the task and to put their names on what they deem out of bounds, subject to review by the inspectors general of the various departments.
And in the Senate, lawmakers also signaled their intention to improve government transparency. Senators Patrick Leahy, a liberal Vermont Democrat and conservative Texas Republican John Cornyn - frequently legislative adversaries - introduced the "Open FOIA" Act, mandating that government agencies comply swiftly and thoroughly with FOIA requests.
The New York Times editorial charged that "By last count, the federal government employs 107 different categories of restricted information - one off-limits category zanily pronounces, ‘sensitive but unclassified'. This muddle of mislabeling seems designed not to protect legitimate secrets but to empower bureaucrats. The end result has been to greatly blunt the Freedom of Information Act's mandate to let the public in on the business of government, plain and simple."
The new FOIA guidelines issued by Attorney General Holder rescind the guidelines issued in 2001 by President Bush's first attorney general, John Ashcroft.
"By restoring the presumption of disclosure that is at the heart of the Freedom of Information Act, we are making a critical change that will restore the public's ability to access information in a timely manner," Holder said. "The American people have the right to information about their government's activities, and these new guidelines will ensure they are able to obtain that information under principles of openness and transparency."
The new FOIA guidelines address both application of the presumption of disclosure and the effective administration of the FOIA across the government.
As to the presumption of disclosure, the attorney general directs agencies not to withhold records simply because they can technically do so. In his memo, the attorney general encourages agencies to make discretionary disclosures of records and to release records in part whenever they cannot be released in full.
The attorney general also establishes a new standard for the defense of agency decisions to withhold records in response to a FOIA request. Now, the department will defend a denial only if the agency reasonably foresees that disclosure would harm an interest protected by one of the statutory exemptions, or disclosure is prohibited by law.
The Freedom of Information Act, signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1966, allows for the full or partial disclosure of previously unreleased information and documents controlled by the U.S. government.
In December 2007, the ACLU filed a motion to hold the CIA in contempt for its destruction of the tapes in violation of a court order requiring the agency to produce or identify all records requested by the ACLU. That motion is still pending.
The agency's latest submission came in response to an Aug. 20, 2008 court order issued in the context of the contempt motion. That order required the agency to produce "a list of any summaries, transcripts, or memoranda regarding the [destroyed tapes] and of any reconstruction of the records' contents" as well as a list of witnesses who may have viewed the videotapes or retained custody of the videotapes before their destruction.
The CIA will provide these lists to the court for in camera review on Mar. 26.
Earlier this month, the CIA acknowledged it destroyed 92 tapes of interrogations. The tapes, some of which show CIA operatives subjecting suspects to extremely harsh interrogation methods, should have been identified and processed for the ACLU in response to its Freedom of Information Act request demanding information on the treatment and interrogation of detainees in U.S. custody.
The tapes were also withheld from the 9/11 Commission, appointed by former President Bush and Congress, which had formally requested that the CIA hand over transcripts and recordings documenting the interrogation of CIA prisoners.

34 Comments so far
Show All"extremely harsh interrogation methods"
If you can't even say it - torture - yet, you are a long way from beginning to deal with this issue.
Well, this is one of the first good steps the Obama administration has taken, and they should be praised for it if it actually happens.
I would add one thing to the list of documents or information in the hands of the government that has been kept secret. And that is several surveillance tapes of the object that hit the Pentagon on 911.
I'm not a Truther, even though I have read and understand their arguments. But a lot of people are, including my son. If those tapes were released (they're being held as secret "out of respect for the families of those who perished"), they'd go a LONG LONG way toward proving or disproving the Truthers' theories, and we could all know what actually happened at the Pentagon that day aside from what people have said.
It doesn't seem like too much to ask. Everybody in the world has seen the films of those planes crashing into the Twin Towers and there's been no effort to keep them secret. These should be released, unedited, too.
I hadn't heard this before--that the Pentagon 911 tapes were "being held as secret 'out of respect for the families of those who perished'". If that is the official excuse, how ludicrous--just as ludicrous as the explanations given for the twin towers and bldg. 7.
MC
Well, that was the one I remembered because I thought it was so cynical and ludicrous. The other reason I've read was the same old BS "national security" claim. The FBI has the surveillance tapes, dozens of them.
At least let's hold a fund-raiser to buy the Pentagon a new camera --- !!!!
Supposedly FBI confiscated tapes from nearby hotel and other businesses.
In the case of the hotel, evidently the film was run for the employees
before it was confiscated.
"According to all myth, the female - not the male -- gives life"
" federal judge ordered the Central Intelligence Agency to produce unedited summaries of some 3,000 documents related to its admitted destruction of 92 videotapes of prisoners being subjected to extremely harsh interrogation techniques.".....................
3000 documents related to its admitted DESTRUCTION or 92...92 video tapes....huh?...am I the only one who does not understand the numbers here OR why someones ass is not on the line for the destruction of the tapes?
So, now may we ask for and see the 82 some odd tapes of the plane that hit the Pentagon...or are they still a matter of NATIONAL BS SECURITY.
We'll see....we'll see...............
Disband the CIA. You save lots of money, get good will for America out of the basement in foreign countries and maybe a few good people live longer to help with our freedom and humanity.
It's not hard, folks.
… but that would end the " War on Drugs "
And hell, npwr.luv, we wouldn't want to do that now would we? We all know that the phony "war on drugs" is in reality, a war on the poor and poor communities.
While I often disagree with you DaveTheRed, I completely agree with you regarding the War on Drugs. 20 years and 100's of Billions spent, and more people use drugs than ever before. An utter and complete waste!
… but ca$h flow is everything to the banksters,
they might just declare the end of the world, running around NTC like crazy people -- sorry they already did that.
Namaste
Yes, we would be doing ourselves and the world a favor if we disbanded
the CIA and ended the War on Drugs.
The CIA should never have been created -- later former President Harry
Truman described it as a "Gestapo."
We already had a Gestapo centered in the FBI-!
"According to all myth, the female - not the male -- gives life"
As a constant critic of the Obama administration's short tenure in office I would state that this administration should be commended for this stance and several more like it.
While I would not characterize the FOIA as a small thing I would note that we see improvement in many small areas but still await a sea change in some very important things.
Obama's NSC advisor James Jones recently stated in a speech a CFR conference that he takes his orders directly from Dr. Kissinger. HOLY CRAP...THIS WAR CRIMINAL (WHO REPORTS TO ROCKEFELLER AND BRYZINSKI) IS PULLING OBAMAS PUPPET STRINGS!
I sure would like a link to this rather startling statement.
There is an article posted today at Infowars.com, with a link to the Council on Foreign Relations website. It comes from a speech which Jones gave at the 45th Munich Conference on Security Policy in February.
Thanks for this info.
http://www.infowars.com/nsc-advisor-jones-i-take-my-daily-orders-from-dr-kissinger/
I do not understand why I am shocked by this, or by Kissinger speaking to a "new world order" as well. "this isnt just a crisis, its an opportunity"......
I would take with a grain of salt anything read from Infowars.com or prisonplanet.com, as Alex Jones completely lost his marbles after 9/11. I remember him confronting people on the streets of New York City after 9/11, disheveled and histerical, screaming about the End of the World and how everyone everywhere is out to get us. The man is truely certifiable, the Left's equivalent of Glenn Beck.
Don't be a lazy ignorant fool. The quote in question from NSC advisor, James Jones, is printed word for word on the official Council on Foreign Relations website. There is a link on the Infowars site that will take you there, or in order not to sully your eyeballs, a post below by Mike Corbeil goes to the trouble of separating the long url into 3 parts, so you can go directly to the CFR site.
Your other comments show how much you know (don't know) about Alex Jones. Jones "screaming about the End of the World and how everone everywhere is out to get us" is total BS. Jones is pretty specific about who is out to "get us". If you could possibly take the time to listen to his broadcasts or read the variety of articles (from a wide range of sources) on Infowars, you might develop a little more credibility. There was a time when I might have dismissed Alex Jones, too. I don't agree with Jones politically on a number of issues and sometimes he overdramatizes and distracts from his message. He readily admits this, but your exaggerated misinfo doesn't cut it either. Stepping out of the "right/left paradigm" with which the elites manipulate and herd us, is a basic underpinning of Jones' message, and the information and analysis he provides stands with the best. So you say, "The man is truely certifiable, the Left's equivalent of Glenn Beck."?? That's interesting, since Alex Jones describes himself as a paleoconservative. That doesn't seem to matter to a very diverse political and belief spectrum which his audience represents.
It's no secret that people such as Kissinger and Brzezinski advise Barack Obama, and that Kissinger has said that he thinks Obama very likely has the best opportunity to usher in the New World Order. It's also no secret that 911 was an inside job. And who was originally chosen to oversee the investigation of 911?--Why, Henry Kissinger, until he had to scurry and hide when confronted about his Saudi client list by a group of widows of 911 (the Jersey Girls).
I'm getting away from the original point, but I think Alex Jones will be vindicated from the negative attacks such as yours. I remember some of your previous posts, and I don't think you know what you're talking about.
This is a great first step and one positive to our future.
The Bush administration has so many secret programs we may need a decade (or longer) to find all its improprieties. A full revelation of 9/11, knowledge/plans of the Iraq War, and all of Bush's secret torture programs has been overdue for the last 8 years.
One thing the article does not mention, is that in one if not two of the ACLUs cases Obama's J.D. took the exact same obstructionist position as bush's J.D.
Go Obama.
He will do much good. AND fail to do much good. Certainly though Holder's FOIA guidelines are a positive step. As is insisting in his review of Afghan strategy than an exit strategy be elucidated. A decent man at the helm of a Pirate Ship. But with his detractors I agree, BO is still the captain of Ship of War.
I've read every post. My respect to each. Joe.
The corporations have turned the government of the United States into a real joke!
Nothing will change until the corporations have their self proclaimed citizenship revoked.
"Nothing will change until corporations have their 'self proclaimed' citizenship revoked." I would only add or rather make a correction and that is citizenship of corporations is not "self proclaimed" but rather granted by the US government. The State grants them the rights of persons. All the rights granted to citizens under the constitution are granted to these legal fictions known as corporatations be they financial -- banks; economic -- corporations such as Walmart, Exon, etc..., and universities. All of these undemocratic, hiararchically structured institutions (again -- legal fictions) are granted the rights of persons under US law. A major triumph for capitalism.
Supposedly, there is error in the reporting/headline of that verdict
and the courts did not grant "personhood" to corporations.
However, what the corporate-friendly courts may have done, the people
can overturn. Corporations don't breathe. Corporations are without
conscience. Corporations judge every issue according to profit and that
dollar-bill-based-yardstick does violence to nature, animal-life, human life.
Neither capitalism nor its corporations are worth saving.
It is the planet and all of Nature we must protect and it may already be too late.
"According to all myth, the female - not the male -- gives life"
[ _____ N O T __ CORPORATIONS _&_ C O R P O R T I S T S ______ ]
[ _____ I T ' S __ R A P A C I O U S __ C O R P O R A P I S T S _____ ]
Now finally, Lenard Peltier, after 32 years of imprisonment, may get the chance to see the thousands of pages of COINTELPRO information that may lead to his release.
"Harry Mellon March 23rd, 2009 8:01 pm
Obama's NSC advisor James Jones recently stated in a speech a CFR conference that he takes his orders directly from Dr. Kissinger. ..."
To that, Red Rick replied:
"Red Rick March 23rd, 2009 8:07 pm
I sure would like a link to this rather startling statement."
I HADN'T read the subsequent reply by Mister Chips (baked or fried? go for baked!) about the infowars.com article with a link to the CFR page, instead having immediately jumped to doing a Web search using <"James Jones" Kissinger> (minus the <> characters) and this quickly enough showed that there's a page at godlikeproductions... that seemed to be a fitting starter. It was; the first post in the page at that site provides a link to the CFR page, which is the one just below. I split the URL over three lines, but also tested a Web search using the title of the page and this would be easier and quicker for people to do. It was the first link that came up for me when seaching using only the title; but people can copy and paste the url in three parts if they prefer to do this too.
"Remarks by National Security Adviser Jones at 45th Munich Conference on Security Policy
Published February 8, 2009
Speaker:
James L. Jones"
http://www.cfr.org/publication/18515/
remarks_by_national_security_adviser_jones_at_45th_
munich_conference_on_security_policy.html
QUOTE:
U.S. National Security Adviser Jones gave these remarks at the 45th Munich Conference on Security Policy at the Hotel Bayerischer Hof on February 8, 2009.
"Thank you for that wonderful tribute to Henry Kissinger yesterday. Congratulations. As the most recent National Security Advisor of the United States, I take my daily orders from Dr. Kissinger, filtered down through Generaal Brent Scowcroft and Sandy Berger, who is also here. We have a chain of command in the National Security Council that exists today.
END QUOTE
A chain of command in the NSC, today; with Kissinger as C-in-C of the chain, that war criminal and criminal against humanity in other terms? Or, well, just below the C-in-C, who's in the White House presidential office, once in a while, when not out playing golf in Hawaii or whatever, or giving military so warfare helicopter models as gifts to [children] of the British PM, or ..., ya know, anyway? And then who's his C-in-C and therefore the real C-in-C or C's-in-C, anyway? Well, Kissinger's evidently high up the chain anyway.
Now that's a few anyway's isn't it? Anyway, ... I have to take a second out here, needing to push my eyes back into their sockets; they're bulging a little outward, suffering some sudden hyper-outward-extension ... for some reason (known). It's just a little reaction due to sudden chagrin or anger, ah, whatever.
I figured Kissinger was lurking nearby, but didn't realise the creep was quite this close by or at hand.
Well, don't be surprised. I haven't been keeping up much on the recent cries of scandal about the AIG matter, but the following article, while short enough, is strong on this topic and tells readers that it really wasn't worthwhile to waste time worrying about the $163mn or $183mn the Obama administration allocated to AIG bonuses, because this doesn't represent 0.1% of what's really being allocated to AIG's "counterparties", which I believe to understand is only about what AIG owed or owes to others. Obama et al have been working on keeping this latter reality out of public attention; ya know, not wanting to cause a sudden series of heart attacks, etcetera.
You may all have already seen this article, but I'll provide the url anyway, just in case.
"The Real AIG Conspiracy", by Prof. Michael Hudson, Mar 18 2009
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=12784
Seems like we better expect Obama to be up to many secrets; keeping them secret, or under masks (say) of deception, as much as possible anyway.
What other surprises are in store for the public now?
Kissinger should be internationally indicted and [many] would justly want him to stand trial or many trials for his many years of many [extreme] crimes; the man's criminal from A-Z, full range, only he hasn't worn the "hat" of U.S. president or v.p. yet. Well, his criminality is so multi-facted and extreme that there perhaps isn't much difference anyway. Give him 150, 200 or 500 years prison sentence, what's the difference? He wouldn't live long enough to serve a decent portion of the deserved lower number of years anyway. Oh well, it'd just cost taxpayers a lot less money to get rid of him without using the death penalty, then.
It's all nice and dandy that Obama is thinking of legalising marijuana for medical purposes (when it should be totally legally anyway), but this is "smelling" like a way to try to [trick] people into some sort of dumb complacency and hopefully no one will buy into the trickery. The herb should be fully legal, I have no doubts about that; but just because we're for certain [rights] doesn't mean that we should fall asleep at the wheel of life, either. I'd support the legalisation he says he's thinking of providing, or his spokesperson says he is, but without being fooled into believing that this gesture means he's an honest individual.
They know they're drawing a lot of anger from people, many people, including people who supported him for president, so he's trying to deceive people into continuing to support him, trying to cause them to believe that there is some real good about him for or as president; and there might be a little, maybe (?), but it evidently is mostly (if not wholly) shelved for the duration of the presidency. Otoh, it was also shelved during his years as a senator, too. Oh-oh or ah-oh, uh-oh, ... whatever; you'll figure it out.
What's O'bomb'a up to, really?
This is a start. I wonder if the good Congressman from Texas would have been such an advocate for open government 2 years ago.
This is better than a good start if this legislation passes, because at least then it will be enshrined in law.
The next step would be to have a truly independent Attorney General. No point in having laws the executive branch refuses to enforce.
Like for example
Torture
contract bidding
environmental laws
and the big one on everyone's mind at the moment....
anti-trust laws.
"Change you can believe in". What a farce. These guidelines are irrelevant, just what you could expect from Holder, Obusha's consigliere. Instead of lifting the veil, Mr. Holder, why aren't you investigating and prosecuting the crimes of George Bush and Dicky Cheney? Illegal wars, illegal wiretapping, 9/11, Ohio's stolen election in 2004, Cheney's assassination squads, countless crimes, etc?
Because your boss was an accomplice to these crimes as Senator? Because your boss is committing the same crimes now as President?
Excellent post cape_fear!
P.T. Barnum would have made an excellent Chief of Staff for Mr. Obama.
In fact, Barnum would be the only staff required.
In fact, why doesn't Geithner put Barnum's smiling face on the "one born every minute" dollar bill?
Obviously, had any of these 92 tapes ever been seen there would have
been an immediate overturning of secret government. Meanwhile,
Congress seems to have seen some of these tapes -- and did nothing!
I would imagine even the transcripts are something they need to continue
to hide.
Unfortunately, not all Americans understand the damage secret government
and the CIA have done all over the world in our name for more than a
half century!
"According to all myth, the female - not the male -- gives life"