



U.S. Mass Declassified Documents At Midnight 131
Alchemist253 writes "Advocates of open government have another reason to celebrate New Year 2007: at midnight hundreds of millions of U.S. government documents that were classified more than 25 years ago got automatically declassified. Various agencies have applied for exemptions for specific documents, but nonetheless there should be a release of a number of interesting papers." From the article: "'It is going to take a generation for scholars to go through the material declassified under this process,' said Steven Aftergood, who runs a project on government secrecy for the Federation of American Scientists."
So ... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:So ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
More than 40 years later, people still ask questions, they're not buying the official party line, and its not really a "single issue". It affects the credibility of the FBI, the CIA, the Department of Justice, and government in general.
Re:So ... (Score:4, Insightful)
Answer, no way. That's a really lame single issue. Besides Clinton pretty much did this as part of his policy of more openness in government. And he didn't have an accident or get assassinated.
Why assassinate the man when you can assassinate his character?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Big deal, the only thing the US Intelligence has to hide when it comes to the JFK assassination is its own incompetence (as to how they miserably failed to prevent it as Fidel Castro has survived 638 assassination attempts, part of them which had been directly ordered by JFK and RFK)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Oh wait, we already know that. Oh well.
Re:So ... (Score:4, Funny)
Or do we? I submit that the KGB grew genetically-altered assassins equipped with light-bending camoflauge armor to do the job, while using mind control to set up John Hinckley, Jr. as the fall guy (with the help of communist fifth columnists within the film industry who re-edited Taxi Driver to contain subliminal messages, which also caused the rise of MTV, which is a whole other conspiracy which I do not have the space to cover here), and that they in fact succeeded in killing him, but quickly switched the real, dead Reagan with a insidiously clever android based on alien technology. Did you ever seen Ronald Reagan around any large magnets after the shooting? Didn't think so.
I suggest those of you who can see this memorize this information as quickly as you can, because the government DOES NOT WANT YOU TO KNOW THIS, and this post will surely not remain up for very long. (AND DON'T COPY AND PASTE IT. THEY HAVE CODE EMBEDDED IN YOUR BROWSER THAT SEND EVERYTHING EVERYBODY COPIES AND PASTES DIRECTLY TO THE NSA.) Don't worry about me, I'm posting from behind a proxy server (NOT Tor, which is in fact run by Dutch intelligence), and will be taking the next boat to another continent after I've sent out the signal. See through the lies. Good luck to you.
The Hinckley double (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Possibly my year.
Funny, but... (Score:1, Interesting)
In the world view of far too many, to question anything the government says, or to demand answers of them, is sure proof of being a "conspiracy theory nutjob", unpatriotic, unAmerican, and probably a treasonous Commie.
A huge chunk of the population tell themselves - and others - that the government never lies, it covers nothing up, and has never misbehaved. They ho
Re: (Score:2)
and will be taking the next boat to another continent
Tsk, tsk. Loose Lips Sink Ships [archive.org]. I hope you're on good terms with the Bermuda Triangle's secret masters....
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Hey! That's just as reasonable as most of the other "theories" that have been propounded in the decades since.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
No, Microsoft Bob was like herpes.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
UFOs (Score:2, Insightful)
regarding UFOs. We should expect a lot of revelations on this in the New Year
(Kecksburg to name one...)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
SOMETHING definately crashlanded there, but I suspect that it may have been Soviet.
Either way, I'd like to find out for sure.
LK
psssssssss (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah, but now we'll find out who made his Magic Bullet!
LK
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.buythebullet.com/ [buythebullet.com]
The Magic Bullet can make any pasta sauce, fresh salsa, omlettes, smoothies and even kill the president! All in under 10 seconds! It's the ultimate party machine!
Re: (Score:2)
What's really funny is that if he hadn't thrown his back (he had back problems for decades) with YAEA (Yet Another Extramarital Affair), he wouldn't have been wearing his back brace that day, which prevented him from moving, and wouldn't have been killed.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Hello Dear X-Files brother! I agree!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/1019-21.htm [commondreams.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Makes more sense than the "official" explanation with the "magic bullet".
nothing to see here... (Score:4, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Give and take (Score:5, Insightful)
The only legitimate reason for secrecy is when the disclosure of a document would result in direct and immediate harm to a U.S. national, ally, or key national interest. The classification of documents for "face saving" reasons is harmful and should be stopped. If we as a nation have made mistakes in the past we should be upfront with them to ourselves and move on.
Re: (Score:2)
They don't. Niether do they want war. But they are whipped into a fervor, kept afraid of the enemy, and government can push us to war and cloak their own actions in secrecy because of it.
Re: (Score:2)
But of course, rest assured, all secrets are for your benefit. Now go back to work to pay for that gas bill.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
No shit.
Theres only three things that shouldn't automatically be declassified after 25 years: The names of operatives and assets, and blueprints of weapons and stuff, and intelligence gathering methods, like the fact we have a tap hooked into the closed circuit TV in a certain hotel in London that ambassadors always stay at.
Anything else should be public, and I personally think 25 years is way too damn long. Let's go for five years. This is our country, we are in charge, and we can't make decisions withou
Re: (Score:2)
For instance, I doubt the US will stop trying to undermine the Cuban government and will continue to do so secretly and not-so-secretly, and the documents may never get released (heck, as long as we're at war with anyone, the President can just Edict them to the shredder). Cuban expatriates are considered a key in winning Florida elections and since Florida also has the fourth largest pool of electoral college votes, it's in the best interest of the Presi
Saig anyone? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
We could dub it SAIG, Search for Any Intelligent Governance
And like SETI, if we were ever able to discover Intelligent Governance, the difficulty in communication would make any such discovery pointless. With ET's, the vast distances involved would mean communications turnaround would take longer than the typical lifespan of a person, whereas with IG's, the necessity to use 3000-page memoranda with fine print and unintelligible, acronym-sprinkled jargon would render any discussion meaning-free.
not surprising (Score:5, Funny)
Well, if the government really wanted to keep people busy, I'm sure they could just use an algorithm to randomly generate a few million pages of government-speak, formatted to look important, but containing no information whatsoever. That way, they could mask the few nuggets of truly important information in a mound of nonsense and red herrings.
Wait, that's congress' job. Nevermind.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: GovtSpeak TurboGenerator (Score:1)
It has come to our attention that several morning papers yesterday depicted several incorrect details. These are FALSE. Report Follows:
1. "Saddam was Executed". Saddam Hussein was previously in a position of executive powers in Iraq. Therefore, when the US instituted the Bush Doctrine, he was removed from those executive powers. Therefore, he was De-Executed.
2. "Saddam's Life was taken". Things which are taken are assumed to be in a condition to either return, or sometim
How do they change over? (Score:4, Interesting)
"Secret documents 25 years old or older will lose their classified status without so much as the stroke of a pen"
I'm curious as to how they switch the documents over. 25 years ago it's not like everything was computerized. Are they having people manually sort through classified docs in an "old documents" area, looking and the date, and moving them? I doubt they'd just let historians in to do the sorting.Don't be silly (Score:4, Funny)
It seems likely they won't want to.
I imagine google will do a nice index and we'll know why Kennedy had the CIA assassinate the guy who invented the 100MPG on tapwater carbeurator shortly.
Re: (Score:2)
So, what happens now is that those librarians take into account the criteria of the FOIA act in deciding whether or not to release the documents.
And, of course, the FOIA give ind
NISPOM tells us (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, I can't speak for everybody, but in the industrial part of US classified world, the NISPOM spells it out pretty clearly. One has to mark every classified document with the date of declassification. The "Declassify On" date comes from the Classification Guide delivered with the contract.
The NISPOM (National Industrial Security Program - Operating Manual) is publicly available; Google for it. Contrary to popular belief, classified information is mainly about accountability and trust, not dark rooms and guys in trench coats. Classified information is about letting information *be distributed*, in an accountable fashion. If somebody in a government position is doing something illegal, they probably just won't tell anybody about it. Calling it "classified" would just draw attention to it.
Which is not to say declassifying old, benign information isn't a good thing; it is. It increases public knowledge of our government while decreasing operating overhead. Indeed, it's generally preferred to have the smallest amount of classified information one can. It's a lot cheaper to work with unclassified material. Better to spend the money on men and equipment.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:NISPOM tells us (Score:4, Insightful)
That statement is based on the ridiculously flawed assumption that these actions involve only a single person.
If you want to do something like assasinate a foreign head of state are you going to hop a plane and try to do it yourself, or are you going to collect the right people and develop a plan?
Watergate would be a great example of how totally full of shit this statement is.
The NSA wiretapping program would be another.
The whole point of doing illegal things in government is that you have the resources of the gov't at your disposal. To take advantage of this you need to communicate with your underlings and co-conspirators.
How is the NSA going to set up an illegal wiretapping program if you don't tell them to? How are they going to keep it secret without piles of secret money?
Semantics and illegal antics (Score:2)
theLOUDroom: "That statement is based on the ridiculously flawed assumption that these actions involve only a single person."
Um, no. You'll notice it reads just as well if you assume a group instead of a single person.
The intent of my statement, which you and others seem oblivious to, is that classifying information creates accountability. There's all sorts of rules and regulation
Re: (Score:2)
Except that a group needs to communicate within itself. So yes, you can pronounce the words, but it doesn't make logical sense.
Exactly what classified material did the Watergate scandal involve?
Please read a little more on this subject. [washingtonpost.com] Classified information and "executive priveledge" were key issues in the Watergate debacle.
Speaking of just TSP, you'll remember that there's a not insignificant amount of suppor
Re: (Score:2)
Because that "regulatory bullshit" means that anyone who leaks those orders goes to jail. Maybe they even get executed. You can probably even keep the trial secret too!
then presumably you trust them enough to be able to give them instructions which they are not to keep a record of
This might work for a small, closely knit group of willing participant
Re: (Score:2)
Scrambled Fighter Pilot; "I'm ready to go, permission to fire?"
Cheney; "The order still stands."
>> What was the order? This was on 9/11. We could assume it was to take out an airplane -- but that would only be theory without the documents of a "stand down order."
Here's another; the guest list and the topics for Cheney's Energy Task Force meeting. Kibosh on Kyoto protocols, money spent to deny global warming, more polution, and
Re: (Score:2)
Beacuse then they couldn't send you to jail for publishing the letter (or possibly even execute you).
And if they need money, just bump up the budget (nobody will ask too many questions about that). What's so hard here?
Prison.
Re: (Score:2)
That may work from time to time, but put yourself in the position of somebody who has to do the wiretapping. You know that there will be a shitstorm if people ever find out. Do you destroy the document that proves t
Re: (Score:2)
Not exactly; classifying a program is a great way of getting around those pesky contracting laws.
Re: (Score:1)
This year we've had a look at the timetable of Harold Wilsons resignation, and found out a
Among the secrets, cause of Slashdot's dupes (Score:2, Funny)
Is this new? (Score:1)
Re:Is this new? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
That's completely rediculous, as it violated the laws of physical existence. It is impossible for Bush to do anything that is not evil. Were he to do so, the world would cease to exist (Ref. "Dogma"). Since the world still exists as of my writing this, Bush's actions are therefore evil, and the releasing of the documents has a sinister purpose far beyond most mortals comprehension.
Fortunately for us credulous masses, there are the chosen few who are un
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Only after exempting every piece of paper with the words Bush and Reagan printed upon them.
Re: (Score:2)
So you mean we have to wait 25 years to find out what really happened with the NSA wiretapping?
Re: (Score:2)
http://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/12
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Biggest Personal Bombshell: (Score:4, Funny)
My father is Margaret Thatcher.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah right! (Score:3, Insightful)
And they don't keep stuff buried for national security, or to protect the innocent, or what ever other reason you may think. The one and only reason any government keeps secrets from it's people is because if they were to get out, they would be lynched.
They are only ever going to release the shit that doesn't matter.
Besides, the most foul things perpetrated by governments usually start with "Will no one rid me of this troublesome priest?", or words to that effect.
Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)
Re: (Score:1, Offtopic)
Mod parent as a MORON (Score:1, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1, Offtopic)
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
I bet the law doesn't say that KBR can redact entries from its audit that demonstrated that they overcharged Americans, but they got to do it anyway.
However, shitheads like you just accuse everyone of working with classified material as conspirators.
They must have had help from the inside. I mean, I can't just go into the IRS office and redact my taxable salary if I want to, now can I?
Re: (Score:2)
That's probably the single main thing I've always admired about American government apologists: the amazingly compelling eloquence of their arguments.
Re:Yeah right! Cynics Unite! (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Second, you seem to be saying that there are no national security issues in classified documents. They're all about Roswell or the JFK assassination or thermite bombs in the World Trade Center. Intellectual osmosis demands I move away from these kinds of statements before I get some on me.
Third, you're busy assuming that the American pe
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
I am in favor of declassification of documents that will no longer directly harm our nation or its citizens. My statement was that claiming that everything the government does needs to be open to whoever wants to know it is both absurd, and harmful to America. Let's say we open source the list of our intelligence officers in other nations. Now the
Re: (Score:1)
The one and only reason any government keeps secrets from it's people is because if they were to get out, they would be lynched.
There's no evidence for that, and nothing to go on to support such a claim. The only real claim you could make on classified information with absolutely nothing to go on, is that governments keep secrets because they can. The why is a complete mystery to everyone but the guy with the "Classified" stamp.
Re: (Score:2)
Where? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Where? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
J.C.'s da shit (Score:1)
A Generation? (Score:2)
I find this very unlikely. Not to dismiss the sheer number of documents to sort through, correlate, and summarize, but search isn't exactly a dead field. A significant portion of the smartest people in the world are working on problems which parallel this one.
It'll be years, not tens of years, bef
Re: (Score:1)
How long until Google gets a copy? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
A Generation?? (Score:2, Funny)
Make copies... (Score:2)
conspiracy paranoia (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)