◆ SpookStack

Mr. Steven Garfinkel September 1, 1983--'age 3 not only was that my experience in the lengthy delay in the release of the qyata s ongqnd oyg go satdgougad ay? os pasoddo 'aue nenas yugng I pue 'oxem to know and accountability. Nor do I think that the problem of E.O. 12065 was its negative tone or that it was unduly strpngent and inflexible--the standard was the need to justify withholding and the naivete of the assumption that agency officials would confine classification to sensitive national security documents as opposed to documents, whose release might be embarrassing. Nor do I find it convincing that lare quantities of older records were never previously marked as natisnal security information and should be--I guess it depends on your definition of national security and I would venture the opinion that these documents were not/so classified earlier because they were not classifiable. The case in point is the reclassification of the materials at the Marshall Library following publication of ames Bamford's book. hostile but merely skeptical. I had found the Administration's information policy unduly restrictive and have concluded that the intentis not to safeguard legitimate national security information but to control independent research. Let me close by inviting you to continue providing information, and. the rationale for your Office's and the administration's decisions, to the organized historical community. te have an interest in these questions and I would willingly share your.comments and reports with members of our Committee.. We 'do nt'Speak for the profession, but only report to our fellow historians. Because of the interest of historians in this issue, we are interested in. a comprehensive understanding of informatian policy and procedures. Sincerely? Athan Theoharis, Chair Committee on Access b6 b7C