Guest guest Posted January 11, 2002 Report Share Posted January 11, 2002 - http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2002/01/06/ED1\ 25108.DTL - It sure looks like they were turned off! Elaine - John Polifronio Gettingwell Thursday, January 10, 2002 2:34 PM Re: Freedom of information DIED! San Francisco Chronicle Elaine It seems clear to me that the " public radar " machines have been turned off before the information came to them. - " Elaine121 " <Elaine121 <Undisclosed-Recipient:;> Thursday, January 10, 2002 2:26 PM Freedom of information DIED! San Francisco Chronicle > Friends and colleagues: > On October 12th, Attorney General Ashcroft wrote a memo to all federal > agencies urging them to resist any more Freedom of Information Act > requests. Since it was not a press release and not an executive order, it > received no publicity. Given all the other restraints on civil liberties, > it has therefore escaped public notice and slipped beneath the public > radar. But it is vitally important and has not received the kind of front > page exposure or publicity that one might have expected. I stumbled upon > this event and the memo quite by accident, then researched it quite > thoroughly, and have written this editorial to expose what happened. > Please circulate as widely as possible. > With best wishes, Ruth Rosen > > The original article can be found on SFGate.com here: > - > http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2002/01/06 > /ED125108.DTL - > > Sunday, January 6, 2002 (SF Chronicle) > EDITORIALS/On the Public's Right to Know > The day Ashcroft censored Freedom of Information > > THE PRESIDENT DIDN'T ask the networks for television time. The attorney > general didn't hold a press conference. The media didn't report any > dramatic change in governmental policy. As a result, most Americans had > no idea that one of their most precious freedoms disappeared on Oct. 12. > > Yet it happened. > > In a memo that slipped beneath the political radar, U.S. Attorney General > John Ashcroft vigorously urged federal agencies to resist most Freedom > of Information Act requests made by American citizens. > > Passed in 1974 in the wake of the Watergate scandal, the Freedom of > Information Act has been hailed as one of our greatest democratic > reforms. It allows ordinary citizens to hold the government accountable > by requesting and scrutinizing public documents and records. Without it, > journalists, newspapers, historians and watchdog groups would never be > able to keep the government honest. > > It was our post-Watergate reward, the act that allows us to know what our > elected officials do, rather than what they say. It is our national > sunshine law, legislation that forces agencies to disclose their public > records and documents. Yet without fanfare, the attorney general simply > quashed the FOIA. The Department of Justice did not respond to numerous > calls from The Chronicle to comment on the memo. > > So, rather than asking federal officials to pay special attention when > the public's right to know might collide with the government's need to > safeguard our security, Ashcroft instead asked them to consider whether > " institutional, commercial and personal privacy interests could be > implicated by disclosure of the information. " > > > Even more disturbing, he wrote: " When you carefully consider FOIA > requests and decide to withhold records, in whole or in part, you can > be assured that the Department of Justice will defend your decisions unless > they lack a sound legal basis or present an unwarranted risk of adverse > impact on the ability of other agencies to protect other important > records. " Somehow, this memo never surfaced. When coupled with President > Bush's Nov. 1 executive order that allows him to seal all presidential > records since 1980, the effect is positively chilling. > > > In the aftermath of Sept. 11, we have witnessed a flurry of federal > orders designed to beef up the nation's security. Many anti-terrorist > measures have carefully balanced the public's right to know with the > government's responsibility to protect its citizens. > > Who, for example, would argue against taking detailed plans of nuclear > reactors, oil refineries or reservoirs off the Web? No one. Almost all > Americans agree that the nation's security is our highest priority. Yet > half the country is also worried that the government might use the fear > of terrorism as a pretext for protecting officials from public scrutiny. > > Now we know that they have good reason to worry. > For more than a quarter of a century, the Freedom of Information Act has > ratified the public's right to know what the government, its agencies and > its officials have done. It has substituted transparency for secrecy and > we, as a democracy, have benefited from the truths that been extracted > from public records. > > Consider, for example, just a few of the recent revelations -- obtained > through FOIA requests -- that newspapers and nonprofit watchdog groups > have been able to publicize during the last few months: > > -- The Washington-based Environmental Working Group, a nonprofit > organization, has been able to publish lists of recipients who have > received billions of dollars in federal farm subsidies. Their Web site, > - www.ewg.org - has not only embarrassed the agricultural industry, but > also allowed the public to realize that federal money -- intended to > support > small family farmers -- has mostly enhanced the profits of large > agricultural corporations. > > The Charlotte Observer has been able to reveal how the Duke Power Co., > an electric utility, cooked its books so that it avoided exceeding its > profit limits. This creative accounting scheme prevented the utility from > giving lower rates to 2 million customers in North Carolina and South > Carolina. > > USA Today was able to uncover and publicize a widespread pattern of > misconduct among the National Guard's upper echelon that has continued > for more than a decade. Among the abuses documented in public records are > the inflation of troop strength, the misuse of taxpayer money, > > Incidents of sexual harassment and the theft of life-insurance payments > intended > for the widows and children of Guardsmen. > > The National Security Archive, a private Washington-based research > group, has been able to obtain records that document an unpublicized > event in our history. It turns out that in 1975, President Gerald Ford > and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger gave Indonesian strongman Suharto > the green light to invade East Timor, an incursion that left 200,000 people > dead. > > By examining tens of thousands of public records, the Associated Press > has been able to substantiate the long-held African American allegation > that white people -- through threats of violence, even murder -- cheated > them out of their land. In many cases, government officials simply > approved the transfer of property deeds. Valued at tens of million of > dollars, some 24,000 acres of farm and timber lands, once the property > of 406 black families, are now owned by whites or corporations. > > These are but a sample of the revelations made possible by recent FOIA > requests. None of them endanger the national security. It is important > to remember that all classified documents are protected from FOIA requests > and unavailable to the public. Yet these secrets have exposed all kinds > of official skullduggery, some of which even violated the law. True, > such > revelations may disgrace public officials or even result in criminal > charges, but that is the consequence -- or shall we say, the punishment > for violating the public trust. > No one disputes that we must safeguard our national security. All of us > want to protect our nation from further acts of terrorism. But we must > never allow the public's right to know, enshrined in the Freedom of > Information Act, to be suppressed for the sake of official convenience. > Copyright 2002 SF Chronicle > > Ruth Rosen Editorial writer and columnist > San Francisco Chronicle > 901 Mission Street San Francisco, CA 94103 > Phone: 415-536-3093 Fax: 415-543-7708 > rrosen > > > > > Getting well is done one step at a time, day by day, building health > and well being. > > To learn more about the Gettingwell group, > Subscription and list archives are at: > Gettingwell > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.