News Archives: Latest

News Archives

comments powered by Disqus

More Comments:

Melvin William William - 11/12/2008

The war of 1812 was fought in 1812-1815 between the united states of america and the british empire. While the British naval blockade of the u.s. coast was a success, the land warfare was a draw.
nova scotia drug rehab

Bruce Ramsey - 5/27/2008

It's Wayne Allyn Root, A-L-L-Y-N.

Alberto Guidobaldi - 4/30/2008

Mr. Merril forgot that in 15 century in Genoa a son of a weaver probably did not speak italian at all (like Dante Alighieri did) but the GENOESE dialect. This dialect is more similar to french, spanish an portuguese language than italian. And, you know what? Peaple do not write in genoese at all because they don't know haw. Maybe he learned to read and write in spanish lather for that reason.
Think about.
Alberto from Genoa.

John W Williams - 4/4/2008

Ironic or serendipitous that I was thinking about this very subject in the historical head games I play while driving to/from work. And now I have a place to share my thoughts. Thank you. I am not a historian, nor play one on TV. But am keenly aware that maybe 80-90% of American citizens do not have History or Psychology lessons beyond high school, if any Psychology at all. That's why I beseech thee to answer the following questions with backed up research... and then publish:

Of course you will have to determine valid criteria and there will always be an argument pro/con, but here goes:

1. What are/were Osama Bin Laden's goals in attacking America?
2. Did he achieve them?
3. What are/were George Bush's goals in his foreign policy?
4. Did he achieve them?

Here is the grand daddy of them all:

Did Osama Bin Laden Defeat George Bush? In other words, historically speaking, did George Bush give Osama Bin Laden what Osama wanted?

Back these questions up with objective fact and rationale please and publish them for the world to see.

I would love to do my own analysis, but am too emotionally involved to not taint it.. We desperately need the unbiased truth AND from that point forward unity through constant reminders of the wrong paths' of our past, if only a majority of America's eyes could be opened to such beyond their quick fix Fox or CNN new hits and Wii game consoles.


james baldwin - 9/18/2007

i agree that everyone has to be more circumspect. i have my father's log book and he claims to have shot down rommel. there are a number of press reports as well. the fact is that there were a number of squadrons in the air at the same time (my father was leading 609/198 typhoon squadron)and a number of german staff cars in the area so one has to keep an open mind

robert o'connor - 9/14/2007

People have forgotten about decietfullness. His first election was tainted by miscount of votes that just happened to be in the only state that his brother was the govenor. He still proceeded to bully his way into the white house proclaiming himself as the winner. He never resolved 9/11 to this day, but soldiers and people still die in Afganistan. Saddan Husain and Iraq speak for4 itself. Another fuck up. He ahs never kept any promise to ensure the safety of Amereicans to this day. He and Cheney should go down in history as the worst ever. I am a veteran of post vietnam and several friends that served in vietnam,where the fighting ocurred and they state that both bush and cheney are pussies. I agree. They also are thieves, liars and murderers and should be brought up on those charges and put in prison fot the rest of their lives. And treated exaclty like the prisoners at Gitmo.

KLM KLM KLM - 4/16/2007

This is a scary world when you dedicate a decade of your life to the study of something only to encounter someone else who attempts to step in and assert that you are wrong and she is right. It is as if a doctor is told that in spite of all her years of study, the woman who took high school anatomy knows better the conditions of a patients health. For the professors listed above, it is their JOB to investigate history - as it is a doctors to investigate the heart. Any true academic and lover of unbiased knowledge knows this.

In addition, the professors listed do not need to present alternate information to call Malkin's account into question. She needs to verify her claims! When a student turns in a paper and there are inaccuracies, the teacher does not have to present the proper form the paper should take. It is up to the student who wants to learn to go home and figure out what went wrong. Malkin needs to go home and figure out what went wrong... unless, as I am starting to believe after a few hours reading up on this poor child, she does not care to seek knowledge if it does not fit her preexisting ideas.

And finally, all who believe in the true creation of new information and perspectives on history know that peer review is not only crucial, it is what ensures you do not make a fool of yourself when claiming to write a historical document. Even professors who have been teaching for decades still send their manuscripts out to every person in their field for advice, criticism and enhancement! If you do not, you can guarantee inaccuracy.

Gus diZerega - 9/8/2006


Gus diZerega - 9/8/2006


HNN - 8/5/2006

#1 Juan Cole: Sistani Threatens US over Israeli War on Lebanon

#2 Immanuel Wallerstein: What Can Israel Achieve?

#3 Timothy Garton Ash: Middle East War: Made in Europe

#4 Joseph A. McCartin: Rememberi! ng the day the strike died, 25 years ago

#5 Victor Davis Hanson: The Brink of Madness

#6 Jonathan Zimmerman: What would Lincoln do? -- Trading our liberties for

#7 Walter Dellinger et al: Untangling the Debate on Signing Statements

#8 John Keegan: It's Not Another World War One

#9 Neve Gordon: Academic Freedom after September 11

#10 Evan Thomas and Andrew Romano: How American Myths (like 9-11) Are Made

Irfan Khawaja - 8/4/2006

I don't understand why R. Stanton Hales is apologizing on behalf of the College. He didn't invite Makhlouf, and the College wasn't responsible for what Makhlouf said. Hales should have condemned Makhlouf and left it to the responsible parties to apologize. (Likewise, it's inappropriate for the ADL to expect an apology from the College. A condemnation, yes, but not an apology. The apology should come from Makhlouf and his host.)

I hesitate to criticize Shull on the basis of a newspaper report, but if the report is accurate, his evasions are pretty pathetic. If he isn't "into blame," he might explain why he's "into" a speaker who is himself "into" the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, not exactly a blame-free document. And as for the event's being "teachable," I'd think the most obvious thing to "teach" is just how offensive the whole episode is.

HNN - 7/9/2006

#1 Stephen Kinzer: Interviewed About American Imperialism

#2 Daniel Pipes: The Vatican Confronts Islam

#3 Josiah Bunting III: How do our leaders shape up to the Founders?

#4 Sidney Blumenthal: The imperial presidency crushed

#5 Theodore L. Gatchel: Democrats' 'metrics' -- Who decides that a war is

#6 Stephen Cohen: The New American Cold War

#7 Mary Beth Norton: History Under Construction in Florida

#8 Nathan Newman: Ulysses Grant: ...Our Greatest President?

#9 Christopher Reed: Japan's Foreign Minister Taro Aso refuses to
acknowledge his family firm's use of PoWs as forced labour

#10 Paul Rogat Loeb: Joe Lieberman's Loyalties

William Andrew Frame - 7/1/2006

It is at least gratifying that the majority of historians, who I regard as highly intellectual, agree with my own views of our current presidential disaster. For my part, I never voted for him, and I have even began to vote against the Republican Party because of him (and Reagan, too). My own view lies with those historians who see him as our “worst ever’, in that no other president has ever so rampantly or callously, lied to the American people. Even more obscene is his political use of the ultra-conservative side of the free press (i.e. Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Fox Network, et al), who began lying for him during the presidential elections, and, for whatever reasons (probably financial), have continued to lie for him. It is disgraceful in that they refer to themselves as “newsmen”, and that many Americans believe them, and G.W. by inference. G.W. has made political hay by repeating their diatribes, despite overwhelming fact to the contrary. Here’s another observation: Ronald Reagan led us into near economic disaster with his plan later referred to as “trickle-down” economy, which led to record unemployment, double-digit inflation, and record national debt. Bush, on the other hand, has single-handedly led us into the same pitfall, but with no remorse and talented only in the way he can lie about it. Thank you for giving me another venue in which to rant.

Thomas cripps - 5/22/2006


BC Bud - 4/14/2006

It really raises my hackles when I see an American accusing Canadians of rewriting history for our own advantage. The United States leads the field in this particular area. Let's look at a few examples. My favourite one is where the Americans invade Canada in 1812 to "Liberate" us from British oppression despite the fact the population didn't want to be liberated. Of course there is the infamous and fictious "Gulf on Tonkin Incident" which got America into the Vietnam War. Let us not forget the truckload of lies that Bush and Cheney used to start the war in Iraq. These same tactics, it seems, are being considered again as Bush/Cheney prepare their "October Surprise" for America and bomb Iran.
Some America have trouble with Canadians laying rightful claim to their military heritage. This probably comes from the standard American view point that the USA won the war while the rest of the Allies were just along for the ride. Viewing Canadians as a bunch of peace loving wimps is a way of reinforcing this point of view.
As to the particular points this fellow makes let us examine them. Roy Brown's flight report states "...dived on pure red tri-plane which was firing at Lieut. May. I got a long burst into him and he went down vertical and was observed to crash by Lieut. Merrersh and Lieut. May. I fired on two more, but did not get them." As is evident, Roy Brown never claimed to have shot down von Richtofen and while he did believe personally that he had killed von Richtofen he never tried to capitalize on his fame. In fact, Brown was one of the few people to see von Richtofen's corpse before his funeral and recalled being nauseated by the sight and feeling an intense sense of remorse for the fate of this young, handsome flyer.
Because the events surrounding Brown's combat were confirmed by three other Allied pilots in the vicinity, and for propaganda reasons, the RFC awarded the kill to Roy Brown and he was awarded the Distinguished Service Cross. However, the Aussies were also congratulated by High Command for their actions.
But, as for Canadians re-writing history for our own benefit let me quote from Canadian Airmen and the First World War (The Official History of the Royal Canadian Air Force Vol.1) by S.F. Wise, first published by the University of Toronto Press in 1980.
On page 515 he writes; "...and more recent research and analysis has confirmed beyond a reasonable doubt that one or the other of the machine-gunners on the ground fired the actual bullet the killed Richtofen".
Moving on to Louis Riel. As to Canadians ignoring the fact that Louis Riel was an American citizen. Riel was born in Manitoba and was head of the provisional government that negotiated Manitoba's entry into Confederation. When Manitoba joined Confederation Riel would automatically have become a Canadian citizen. However, because of his role in the murder of Thomas Scott in the Red River Rebellion of 1870, Riel was exiled from Canada.
In fact, while living in exile in Montana he was elected three times in absentia to the Canadian Parliament. It's true that Riel eventually became an American citizen, even running for public office as a Republican (Some claim he engaged in voter fraud, which just goes to show that Republicans never change).
However, only a year after becoming an American citizen he returned to Saskatchewan to lead the Metis revolt and the rest is history.
Now, why on earth should Canadians be attacked for not recognizing Louis Riel as a Canadian. As previously stated, Riel was a Canadian citizen up unitl last year or two of his life. The fact that he was even granted American citizenship in the first place is a joke considering he was a convicted murderer on the run. And that this murderer was elected to the position of sheriff is even harder to stomach.
To say Louis Riel was an American is only technically right. He only went to the United States because he was running from the law and he left to return to Canada as soon as the opportunity presented itself. He had zero impact on American history, but a huge impact on Canada's.
So, remember my hypocritical American neighbour, do your homework first and remember; people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

HNN - 4/2/2006

#1 David Ronfeldt: The end of history or the resumption of tribalism?

#2 Jacob Weisberg: Kevin Phillips is wrong about everything. Why is he taken so seriously?

#3 Sidney Blumenthal: Bush is the most blinkered and rigid president since Depression-denying Herbert Hoover

#4 Francis Fukuyama & Adam Garfinkle: Promote democracy and prevent terrorism--but don't conflate the two

#5 Daniel Pipes: Israel Shuns Victory

#6 Martin Kramer: Power will not moder! ate Hamas

#7 Harvey Sicherman: The flaws in the noisome paper about the Israel Lobby

#8 Damon Linker: The Christianizing of America

#9 US Navy Captain Ouimette: When WWIII Started ... 1979

#10 Michael Schwartz: Does the Media Have It Right on the War?

Gregory Scot Pierce - 3/14/2006

I believe that P-47 pilot Lt. Ralph Jenkins story is creditable as well. He states that on 17 June 1944 he strafed a German staff car that was flying command flags in the St. Lo area. As Ralph told me the story he explained that after strafing the car he came around for a second pass and the vehicle was in the ditch and bodies were laying about it.

Roger Kolb - 1/8/2006

Dear Historians' Committee for Fairness and Interested Parties:

I have two questions and an observation.
Is your ire aroused only when a heresy is published by a member of this country's political right? I have a history degree from a fine university, the University of Wisconsin, and I have been reading history since I graduated 36 years ago. I can state without the slightest fear of successful contradiction that the average history/political science book or lecture by Noam Chomsky is as accurate as history as "Mary Poppins" is as a biography of Sylvia Plath. Has the Historians' Committee for Fairness blasted Chomsky, too? Should his books also be peer-reviewed?
My second question is simply to ask where I can find a rebuttal to the assertions made by Malkin in her book?
End of questions; now to my observation.
I don't know what Malkin has said during her TV and radio interviews. But I don't recall her saying in her book that decoded MAGIC messages were the main reason FDR ordered the evacuation of our West Coast Japanese. In her book she presents a variety of disturbing information, all of which FDR was aware of. To me the most compelling was that local ethnic Japanese had already fought on the side of the emperor during the Japanese invasions of Hong Kong, the Philippines, and elsewhere, and that Canada and Mexico had ordered the evacuation of their own ethnic Japanese before we did.
Be that as it may, I am keeping an open mind and I would like to read the Committee's rebuttal to Malkin and find out where it stands on Chomsky. Many thanks.
Roger Kolb

HNN - 10/28/2005

HNN Editor's Note: To read a critique of this email, which makes mistaken statements, click here.

****** Subject: FW: make sure you read the last 2 entries

GEORGE WASHINGTON was the first President to write to a synagogue.
In 1790 he addressed separate letters to the Touro Synagogue in
Newport, RI, to Mikveh Israel Congregation in Savannah, GA, and a joint
letter to Congregation Beth Shalom, Richmond, VA, Mikveh Israel
Philadelphia, Beth Elohim, Charleston, S. C., and Shearith Israel,
New York. His letters are an eloquent expression and hope for
religious harmony and endure as indelible statements of the most
fundamental tenets of American democracy.

THOMAS JEFFERSON was the first President to appoint a Jew to a
Federal post. In 1801 he named Reuben Etting of Baltimore as US
Marshall for Maryland.

JAMES MADISON was the first President to appoint a Jew to a
diplomatic post. He sent Mordecai M. Noah to Tunis from 1813 to

MARTIN VAN BUREN was the first President to order an American
consul to intervene on behalf of Jews abroad. In 1840 he instructed the
U.S. consul in Alexandria, Egypt to use his good offices to protect the
Jews of Damascus who were under attack because of a false blood
ritual accusation.

JOHN TYLER was the first President to nominate a U.S. consul to
Palestine. Warder Cresson, a Quaker convert to Judaism who
established a pioneer Zionist colony, received the appointment in

FRANKLIN PIERCE was the first and probably the only President whose
name appears on the charter of a synagogue. Pierce signed the Act
of Congress in 1857 that amended the laws of the District of Columbia
to enable the incorporation of the city's first synagogue, the
Washington Hebrew Congregation.

ABRAHAM LINCOLN was the first President to make it possible for
rabbis to serve as military chaplains. He did this by signing the
1862 Act of Congress which changed the law that had previously
barred all but Christian clergymen from the chaplaincy. Lincoln was also
the first, and happily the only President who was called upon to revoke
an official act of anti-Semitism by the U.S. government. It was
Lincoln who cancelled General Ulysses S Grant's "Order No. 11"
expelling all Jews from Tennessee from the district controlled by
his armies during the Civil War. Grant always denied personal
responsibility for this act attributing it to his subordinate.

ULYSSES S. GRANT was the first President to attend a synagogue
service while in office. When Adas Israel Congregation in
Washington D.C. was dedicated in
1874, Grant and all members of his Cabinet were present.

RUTHERFORD B. HAYES was the first President to designate a Jewish
ambassador for the stated purpose of fighting anti-Semitism. In
1870, he named Benjamin Peixotto Consul-General to Rumania. Hays
also was the first President to assure a civil service employee her
right to work for the Federal government and yet observe the Sabbath. He
ordered the employment of a Jewish woman who had been denied a
position in the Department of the Interior because of her refusal
to work on Saturday.

THEODORE ROOSEVELT was the first President to appoint a Jew to a
presidential cabinet. In 1906 he named Oscar S. Straus Secretary of
Commerce and Labor. Theodore Roosevelt was also the first President
to contribute his own funds to a Jewish cause. In 1919, when he
received the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts while President to
settle the Russo-Japanese War Roosevelt contributed part of his
prize to the National Jewish Welfare Board

WILLIAM HOWARD TAFT was the first President to attend a Seder while
in office. In 1912, when he visited Providence, RI, he participated
in the family Seder of Colonel Harry Cutler, first president of the
National Jewish Welfare Board, in the Cutler home on Glenham

WOODROW WILSON was the first President to nominate a Jew, Louis
Dembitz Brandeis, to the United States Supreme Court. Standing firm
against great pressure to withdraw the nomination, Wilson insisted
that he knew no one better qualified by judicial temperament as
well as legal and social understanding, confirmation was finally voted
by the Senate on June 1, 1916. Wilson was also the first President to
publicly endorse a national Jewish philanthropic campaign. In a
letter to Jacob Schiff, on November 22, 1917, Wilson called for
wide support of the United Jewish Relief Campaign which was raising
funds for European War relief.

WARREN HARDING was the first President to sign a Joint
Congressional Resolution endorsing the Balfour Declaration and the Palestine
Mandate supporting the establishment in Palestine of a national
Jewish home for the Jewish people. The resolution was signed
September 22, 1922.

CALVIN COOLIDGE was the first President to participate in the
dedication of a Jewish community institution that was not a house
of worship. On May 3, 1925, he helped dedicate the cornerstone of the
Washington, D.C. Jewish Community center.

FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT was the first President to be given a Torah
as a gift. He received a miniature Torah from Young Israel and another
that had been rescued from a burning synagogue in Czechoslovakia.
Both are now in the Roosevelt Memorial Library in Hyde Park. The
Roosevelt administration's failure to expand the existing refuge
quota system, ensured that large numbers of Jews would ultimately
become some of the Holocaust's six million victims. Fifty-six years
after Roosevelt's death, the arguments continue over Roosevelt's
response to the Holocaust.

HARRY S. TRUMAN, on May 14, 1948, just eleven minutes after
proclamation of independence, was the first head of a government to
announce to the press that "the United States recognizes the
provisional government as the de facto authority of the new state
of Israel." Truman was also the first U.S President to receive a
president of Israel at the White House, Chaim Weizman, in 1948 and
an Ambassador from Israel , Eliahu Elat in 1948. With Israel
staggering under the burdens of mass immigration in 1951-1952, President
Truman obtained from Congress close to $140 million in loans and grants.

DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER was the first President to participate in a
coast-to-coast TV program sponsored by a Jewish organization. It
was a network show in 1954 celebrating the 300th anniversary of the
American Jewish community. On this occasion he said that it was one
of the enduring satisfactions of his life that he was privileged to
lead the forces of the free world which finally crushed the brutal
regime in Germany, freeing the remnant of Jews for a new life and
hope in Israel.

JOHN F. KENNEDY named two Jews to his cabinet - Abraham Ribicoff as
Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, and Arthur Goldberg as
Secretary of Labor. Kennedy was the only President for whom a
national Jewish Award was named. The annual peace award of the
Synagogue Council of America was re-named the John F. Kennedy Peace
Award after his assassination in 1963

JIMMY CARTER in a number of impassioned speeches, stated his
concern for human rights and stressed the right of Russian Jews to
emigrate He is credited with being the person responsible for the Camp David

GEORGE H.W. BUSH in 1985 as Vice President had played a personal
role in "Operation Joshua," the airlift which brought 10,000 Jews out of
Ethiopia directly to resettlement in Israel. Then, again in 1991,
when Bush was President, American help played a critical role in
"Operation Solomon", the escape of 14,000 more Ethiopian Jews. Most
dramatically, Bush got to the U.N. to revoke its 1975 "Zionism is
Racism" resolution.

Consider the last two officeholders:

BILL CLINTON appointed more Jews to his cabinet than all of the
previous presidents combined and put Ruth Bader Ginsburg and
Stephen Breyer, both 1st appointed to the federal bench by Jimmy Carter, on
the Supreme Court.

GEORGE W. BUSH is the first president since Herbert Hoover who has
no Jews in his cabinet at all and has appointed no Jews to the Federal

HNN - 10/28/2005

#1 What Turned Brent Scowcroft Against the War in Iraq

#2 Thomas G. Schelling: The Nuclear Taboo

#3 Victor Davis Hanson: What Bush Needs to Do Now

#4 Carolyn Eisenberg: What History Will Say About the Iraq War

#5 Joshua Zeitz: The Plame Game

#6 Fritz Stern: Lessons from Germany About Democracy

#7 Chris Bray: so I'm reading the Iraqi constitution...

#8 Robert Samuelson: It's Not Your Dad's Oil Story

#9 Anna Quindlan: We've Been Here Before (Iraq/Vietnam)

#10 David J. Garrow: History Almost Passed Parks By

Jeff Cabell - 8/26/2005

With all the crap that W. has pulled in office, especially his dishonesty in regards to the WMD question and possible violations of the Geneva Convention in the treatment of the "detainees" and the contracts being awarded to companies close to the administration, is it possible that there exists the legal grounds to begin impeachment proceedings against him? If this country is subjected to 3 more years of George W. Bush, he may go down in history as the 43rd and Final president of the United States.

The Dixie Chicks once said they were ashamed he was from Texas. Well, I'm ashamed he's from this country.

HNN - 8/20/2005

By Robert S. McElvaine

Mr. McElvaine teaches history at Millsaps College. He is the author of EVE'S SEED: BIOLOGY, THE SEXES AND THE COURSE OF HISTORY (McGraw-Hill).

Although his approval ratings have slipped somewhat in recent weeks, President George W. Bush still enjoys the overall support of nearly half of the American people. He does not, however, fare nearly so well among professional historians.

A recent informal, unscientific survey of historians conducted at my suggestion by George Mason University’s History News Network found that eight in ten historians responding rate the current presidency an overall failure.

Of 415 historians who expressed a view of President Bush’s administration to this point as a success or failure, 338 classified it as a failure and 77 as a success. (Moreover, it seems likely that at least eight of those who said it is a success were being sarcastic, since seven said Bush’s presidency is only the best since Clinton’s and one named Millard Fillmore.) Twelve percent of all the historians who responded rate the current presidency the worst in all of American history, not too far behind the 19 percent who see it at this point as an overall success.

Among the cautions that must be raised about the survey is just what “success” means. Some of the historians rightly pointed out that it would be hard to argue that the Bush presidency has not so far been a political success—or, for that matter that President Bush has not been remarkably successful in achieving his objectives in Congress. But those meanings of success are by no means incompatible with the assessment that the Bush presidency is a disaster. “His presidency has been remarkably successful,” one historian declared, “in its pursuit of disastrous policies.” “I think the Bush administration has been quite successful in achieving its political objectives,” another commented, “which makes it a disaster for us.”

Additionally, it is, of course, as one respondent rightly noted, “way too early to make a valid comparison (we need another 50 years).” And such an informal survey is plainly not scientifically reliable. Yet the results are so overwhelming and so different from the perceptions of the general public that an attempt to explain and assess their reactions merits our attention. It may be, as one pro-Bush historian said in his or her written response to the poll, “I suspect that this poll will tell us nothing about President Bush’s performance vis-à-vis his peer group, but may confirm what we already know about the current crop of history professors.” The liberal-left proclivities of much of the academic world are well documented, and some observers will dismiss the findings as the mere rantings of a disaffected professoriate. “If historians were the only voters,” another pro-Bush historian noted, “Mr. Gore would have carried 50 states.” It is plain that many liberal academics have the same visceral reaction against the second President Bush that many conservatives did against his immediate predecessor.

Yet it seems clear that a similar survey taken during the presidency of Bush’s father would not have yielded results nearly as condemnatory. And, for all the distaste liberal historians had for Ronald Reagan, relatively few would have rated his administration as worse than that of Richard Nixon. Yet today 57 percent of all the historians who participated in the survey (and 70 percent of those who see the Bush presidency as a failure) either name someone prior to Nixon or say that Bush’s presidency is the worst ever, meaning that they rate it as worse than the two presidencies in the past half century that liberals have most loved to hate, those of Nixon and Reagan. One who made the comparison with Nixon explicit wrote, “Indeed, Bush puts Nixon into a more favorable light. He has trashed the image and reputation of the United States throughout the world; he has offended many of our previously close allies; he has burdened future generations with incredible debt; he has created an unnecessary war to further his domestic political objectives; he has suborned the civil rights of our citizens; he has destroyed previous environmental efforts by government in favor of his coterie of exploiters; he has surrounded himself with a cabal ideological adventurers . . . .”

Why should the views of historians on the current president matter?

I do not share the view of another respondent that “until we have gained access to the archival record of this president, we [historians] are no better at evaluating it than any other voter.” Academic historians, no matter their ideological bias, have some expertise in assessing what makes for a successful or unsuccessful presidency; we have a long-term perspective in which to view the actions of a current chief executive. Accordingly, the depth of the negative assessment that so many historians make of George W. Bush is something of which the public should be aware. Their comments make clear that such historians would readily agree with conclusion that then-Democratic presidential hopeful Richard Gephardt pronounced a few months ago: the presidency of George W. Bush is “a miserable failure.”

The past presidencies most commonly linked with the current administration include all of those that are usually rated as the worst in the nation’s history: Nixon, Harding, Hoover, Buchanan, Coolidge, Andrew Johnson, Grant, and McKinley. The only president who appeared prominently on both the favorable and unfavorable lists was Ronald Reagan. Forty-seven historians said Bush is the best president since Reagan, while 38 said he is the worst since Reagan. Almost all of the historians who rate the Bush presidency a success are Reagan admirers. Indeed, no other president (leaving aside the presumably mostly tongue-in-cheek mentions of Clinton) was named by more than four of the historians who took a favorable view of the current presidency.

Ronald Reagan clearly has become the sort of polarizing figure that Franklin Roosevelt was for an earlier generation—or, perhaps a better way to understand the phenomenon is that Reagan has become the personification of the pole opposite to Roosevelt. That polarization is evident in historians’ evaluations of George W. Bush’s presidency. “If one believes Bush is a ‘good’ president (or great),” one poll respondent noted, he or she “would necessarily also believe Reagan to be a pretty good president.” They also tend to despise Roosevelt. “There is no indication,” one historian said of Bush, “that he has advisors who are closet communist traitors as FDR had. Based on his record to date, history is likely to judge him as one of America’s greatest presidents, in the tradition of Washington and Lincoln.”

The thought that anyone could rate the incumbent president with Washington and Lincoln is enough to induce apoplexy in a substantial majority of historians. Among the many offenses they enumerate in their indictment of Bush is that he is, as one of them put it, “well on his way to destroying the entire (and entirely successful) structures of international cooperation and regulated, humane capitalism and social welfare that have been built up since the early 1930s.” “Bush is now in a position,” Another historian said, “to ‘roll back the New Deal,’ guided by Tom DeLay.”

Several charges against the Bush administration arose repeatedly in the comments of historians who responded to the survey. Among them were: the doctrine of pre-emptive war, crony capitalism/being “completely in bed with certain corporate interests,” bankruptcy/fiscal irresponsibility, military adventurism, trampling of civil liberties, and anti-environmental policies.


The reasons stated by some of the historians for their choice of the presidency that they believe Bush’s to be the worst since are worth repeating. The following are representative examples for each of the presidents named most frequently:

REAGAN: “I think the presidency of George W. Bush has been generally a failure and I consider his presidency so far to have been the most disastrous since that of Ronald Reagan--because of the unconscionable military aggression and spending (especially the Iraq War), the damage done to the welfare of the poor while the corporate rich get richer, and the backwards religious fundamentalism permeating this administration. I strongly disliked and distrusted Reagan and think that George W. is even worse.”

NIXON: “Actually, I think [Bush’s] presidency may exceed the disaster that was Nixon. He has systematically lied to the American public about almost every policy that his administration promotes.” Bush uses “doublespeak” to “dress up policies that condone or aid attacks by polluters and exploiters of the environment . . . with names like the ‘Forest Restoration Act’ (which encourages the cutting down of forests).”

HOOVER: “I would say GW is our worst president since Herbert Hoover. He is moving to bankrupt the federal government on the eve of the retirement of the baby boom generation, and he has brought America’s reputation in the world to its lowest point in the entire history of the United States.”

COOLIDGE: “I think his presidency has been an unmitigated disaster for the environment, for international relations, for health care, and for working Americans. He’s on a par with Coolidge!”

HARDING: “Oil, money and politics again combine in ways not flattering to the integrity of the office. Both men also have a tendency to mangle the English language yet get their points across to ordinary Americans. [Yet] the comparison does Harding something of a disservice.”

McKINLEY: “Bush is perhaps the first president [since McKinley] to be entirely in the ‘hip pocket’ of big business, engage in major external conquest for reasons other than national security, AND be the puppet of his political handler. McKinley had Mark Hanna; Bush has Karl Rove. No wonder McKinley is Rove’s favorite historical president (precedent?).”

GRANT: “He ranks with U.S. Grant as the worst. His oil interests and Cheney’s corporate Haliburton contracts smack of the same corruption found under Grant.”

“While Grant did serve in the army (more than once), Bush went AWOL from the National Guard. That means that Grant is automatically more honest than Bush, since Grant did not send people into places that he himself consciously avoided. . . . Grant did not attempt to invade another country without a declaration of war; Bush thinks that his powers in this respect are unlimited.”

ANDREW JOHNSON: “I consider his presidency so far to have been the most disastrous since that of Andrew Johnson. It has been a sellout of fundamental democratic (and Republican) principles. There are many examples, but the most recent would be his successful efforts to insert provisions in spending bills which directly controvert measures voted down by both houses of Congress.”

BUCHANAN: “Buchanan can be said to have made the Civil War inevitable or to have made the war last longer by his pusillanimity or, possibly, treason.” “Buchanan allowed a war to evolve, but that war addressed a real set of national issues. Mr. Bush started a war . . . for what reason?”


EVER: The second most common response from historians, trailing only Nixon, was that the current presidency is the worst in American history. A few examples will serve to provide the flavor of such condemnations. “Although previous presidents have led the nation into ill-advised wars, no predecessor managed to turn America into an unprovoked aggressor. No predecessor so thoroughly managed to confirm the impressions of those who already hated America. No predecessor so effectively convinced such a wide range of world opinion that America is an imperialist threat to world peace. I don 't think that you can do much worse than that.”

“Bush is horrendous; there is no comparison with previous presidents, most of whom have been bad.”

“He is blatantly a puppet for corporate interests, who care only about their own greed and have no sense of civic responsibility or community service. He lies, constantly and often, seemingly without control, and he lied about his invasion into a sovereign country, again for corporate interests; many people have died and been maimed, and that has been lied about too. He grandstands and mugs in a shameful manner, befitting a snake oil salesman, not a statesman. He does not think, process, or speak well, and is emotionally immature due to, among other things, his lack of recovery from substance abuse. The term is "dry drunk". He is an abject embarrassment/pariah overseas; the rest of the world hates him . . . . . He is, by far, the most irresponsible, unethical, inexcusable occupant of our formerly highest office in the land that there has ever been.”

“George W. Bush's presidency is the pernicious enemy of American freedom, compassion, and community; of world peace; and of life itself as it has evolved for millennia on large sections of the planet. The worst president ever? Let history judge him.”

“This president is unique in his failures.”

And then there was this split ballot, comparing the George W. Bush presidencies failures in distinct areas. The George W. Bush presidency is the worst since:

“In terms of economic damage, Reagan.

In terms of imperialism, T Roosevelt.

In terms of dishonesty in government, Nixon.

In terms of affable incompetence, Harding.

In terms of corruption, Grant.

In terms of general lassitude and cluelessness, Coolidge.

In terms of personal dishonesty, Clinton.

In terms of religious arrogance, Wilson.”


My own answer to the question was based on astonishment that so many people still support a president who has:

  • Presided over the loss of approximately three million American jobs in his first two-and-a-half years in office, the worst record since Herbert Hoover.
  • Overseen an economy in which the stock market suffered its worst decline in the first two years of any administration since Hoover’s.
  • Taken, in the wake of the terrorist attacks two years ago, the greatest worldwide outpouring of goodwill the United States has enjoyed at least since World War II and squandered it by insisting on pursuing a foolish go-it-almost-alone invasion of Iraq, thereby transforming almost universal support for the United States into worldwide condemnation. (One historian made this point particularly well: “After inadvertently gaining the sympathies of the world 's citizens when terrorists attacked New York and Washington, Bush has deliberately turned the country into the most hated in the world by a policy of breaking all major international agreements, declaring it our right to invade any country that we wish, proving that he’ll manipulate facts to justify anything he wishes to do, and bull-headedly charging into a quagmire.”)
  • Misled (to use the most charitable word and interpretation) the American public about weapons of mass destruction and supposed ties to Al Qaeda in Iraq and so into a war that has plainly (and entirely predictably) made us less secure, caused a boom in the recruitment of terrorists, is killing American military personnel needlessly, and is threatening to suck up all our available military forces and be a bottomless pit for the money of American taxpayers for years to come.
  • Failed to follow through in Afghanistan, where the Taliban and Al Qaeda are regrouping, once more increasing the threat to our people.
  • Insulted and ridiculed other nations and international organizations and now has to go, hat in hand, to those nations and organizations begging for their assistance.
  • Completely miscalculated or failed to plan for the personnel and monetary needs in Iraq after the war, so that he sought and obtained an $87 billion appropriation for Iraq, a sizable chunk of which is going, without competitive bidding to Haliburton, the company formerly headed by his vice president.
  • Inherited an annual federal budget surplus of $230 billion and transformed it into a $500+ billion deficit in less than three years. This negative turnaround of three-quarters of a trillion dollars is totally without precedent in our history. The ballooning deficit for fiscal 2004 is rapidly approaching twice the dollar size of the previous record deficit, $290 billion, set in 1992, the last year of the administration of President Bush’s father and, at almost 5 percent of GDP, is closing in on the percentage record set by Ronald Reagan in 1986.
  • Cut taxes three times, sharply reducing the burden on the rich, reclassified money obtained through stock ownership as more deserving than money earned through work. The idea that dividend income should not be taxed—what might accurately be termed the unearned income tax credit—can be stated succinctly: “If you had to work for your money, we’ll tax it; if you didn’t have to work for it, you can keep it all.”
  • Severely curtailed the very American freedoms that our military people are supposed to be fighting to defend. (“The Patriot Act,” one of the historians noted, “is the worst since the Alien and Sedition Acts under John Adams.”)
  • Called upon American armed service people, including Reserve forces, to sacrifice for ever-lengthening tours of duty in a hostile and dangerous environment while he rewards the rich at home with lower taxes and legislative giveaways and gives lucrative no-bid contracts to American corporations linked with the administration.
  • Given an opportunity to begin to change the consumption-oriented values of the nation after September 11, 2001, when people were prepared to make a sacrifice for the common good, called instead of Americans to ‘sacrifice’ by going out and buying things.
  • Proclaimed himself to be a conservative while maintaining that big government should be able to run roughshod over the Bill of Rights, and that the government must have all sorts of secrets from the people, but the people can be allowed no privacy from the government. (As one of the historians said, “this is not a conservative administration; it is a reckless and arrogant one, beholden to a mix of right-wing ideologues, neo-con fanatics, and social Darwinian elitists.”)

My assessment is that George W. Bush’s record on running up debt to burden our children is the worst since Ronald Reagan; his record on government surveillance of citizens is the worst since Richard Nixon; his record on foreign-military policy has gotten us into the worst foreign mess we’ve been in since Lyndon Johnson sank us into Vietnam; his economic record is the worst since Herbert Hoover; his record of tax favoritism for the rich is the worst since Calvin Coolidge; his record of trampling on civil liberties is the worst since Woodrow Wilson. How far back in our history would we need to go to find a presidency as disastrous for this country as that of George W. Bush has been thus far? My own vote went to the administration of James Buchanan, who warmed the president’s chair while the union disintegrated in 1860-61.

Who has been the biggest beneficiary of the horrible terrorism that struck our nation in September of 2001? The answer to that question should be obvious to anyone who considers where the popularity ratings and reelection prospects of a president with the record outlined above would be had he not been able to wrap himself in the flag, take advantage of the American people’s patriotism, and make himself synonymous with “the United States of America” for the past two years.

That abuse of the patriotism and trust of the American people is even worse than everything else this president has done and that fact alone might be sufficient to explain the depth of the hostility with which so many historians view George W. Bush. Contrary to the conservative stereotype of academics as anti-American, the reasons that many historians cited for seeing the Bush presidency as a disaster revolve around their perception that he is undermining traditional American practices and values. As one patriotic historian put it, “I think his presidency has been the worst disaster to hit the United States and is bringing our beloved country to financial, economic, and social disaster.”

Some voters may judge such assessments to be wrong, but they are assessments informed by historical knowledge and the electorate ought to have them available to take into consideration during this election year.

HNN - 8/18/2005

NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE (Vol. 11, #31; 18 AUGUST 2005)
by Bruce Craig (editor) rbcraig@historycoalition.org
Website at http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch

7. BITS AND BITES: "Overclassification" Hearing Transcript; NARA Issues
Proposed Rule on Declassification; New England History Challenge; Cultural
Landscape Studies

Editor's Note: Having returned from weeks of wanderings in the far North,
the editor again sits at his worn swivel chair -- with this issue we resume
our regular schedule of weekly postings of the WASHINGTON UPDATE.

Just prior to beginning their traditional Congressional summer recess, on
29 July 2005 the Senate passed legislation (S. 1389), the USA Patriot
Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005. The bill had been placed on
the unanimous consent calendar for action by the Senate leadership. With
no debate, no amendments, and no roll call vote members of the Senate were
free to vote their conscience without having to justify their individual
positions to constituents.

As passed, the Senate bill makes several changes to the USA Patriot Act
that had been sought by the library community and other proponents of
government openness. In general, the Senate bill adds many new safeguards
thus providing for enhanced privacy protection for library users.

According to the American Library Association (ALA) -- a professional
organization that has spearheaded opposition to several sections in the
Patriot Act for years -- the vote "was a surprise" as it came just one week
after the Senate Judiciary Committee passed their version of the bill out
of committee. Few expected Senate action prior to the recess. The House
passed its version of the re-authorization (H.R. 3199) on 21 July. It
renews 14 of the 16 controversial provisions set to expire at the end of
this year and extends several others for another ten years. The Senate
passed version extends wiretap and library/bookstore provisions for only
four years.

Particularly offensive to librarians were certain provisions in Section 215
that affected safeguards for library user/reader privacy. These provisions
had been in place since the enactment of the law back in 2001 and for some
time librarians had been seeking changes. In particular, the library
community wanted to make it tougher for the government to search library
records without specific judicial sanctioning.

Neither the House nor Senate re-authorizations totally do away with Section
215, but they do differ in terms of the sunset provision for Section 215:
the House bill extends it to the year 2015 while the Senate version
establishes a much shorter period -- to 2009. According to the ALA, the
shorter sunset period "is preferable because it will cause more oversight
by Congress."

The House legislation empowers the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to
obtain library records relating to anyone whenever they are deemed
"relevant" to a counter-terrorism or counter-espionage investigation. The
Senate bill requires the FBI to give facts showing reason to believe that
the records sought are "relevant to" counter terrorism or
counter-intelligence investigation. It also requires that items sought
must "pertain to" a foreign power, an agent of a foreign power, or person
in contact with a suspected agent, or are "relevant to" the activities of a
suspected agent who is the subject of an investigation.

The Senate version also mandates that the court established under
provisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) must assess
investigatory factual particulars (i.e., not just rubber-stamp them) and
also requires that records or other things be described to a court with
"sufficient particularity" to allow suspects to be identified. According
to the ALA, this helps in "reducing the danger that the FBI will engage in
fishing expeditions in library or bookstore records." Finally, the Senate
bill improves the agency reporting requirements.

Both the Senate and House versions empower a recipient of a National
Security Letter to challenge the request in a U.S. District Court and both
bills allow a challenge to a gag order in a U.S. District Court.

The House and Senate measures must now be reconciled in conference
committee. The conference is expected to take place shortly after the
Congress reconvenes as the Patriot Act's most controversial sections will
expire at the end of this year.

In a recent letter to leaders of major National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA) stakeholders, Archivist of the United States Allan
Weinstein set in motion an effort to update its 10-year Strategic
Plan. According to Weinstein, "This new Strategic Plan will articulate
NARA's overall strategic goals and objectives....the President, Congress
and our stakeholders use this plan to measure our progress and hold us
accountable." An optimistic Weinstein hopes to see the new Strategic Plan
issued by 29 September 2006.

In keeping with his consultive management stye, the Archivist of the United
States issued the call to its various constituencies and invited them to
"participate by sharing thoughts and ideas" centering on four key
questions: 1) What have you liked about the services and products NARA
provides?; 2) What would you like to see strengthened in the services and
products NARA provides?; 3) In what initiatives should NARA invest over
the next 10 years that will help meet your needs?; 4) How can you help us
serve you better?

Thoughts on the new strategic plan may be submitted to NARA through the end
of August via mail or via e-mail at: vision@nara.gov . The input from the
stakeholder community will be reviewed this fall and published in a
preliminary draft of the Strategic Plan in Spring 2006, at which time NARA
will again "invite additional stakeholder input."

While NARA expects that it will not be possible to incorporate every idea
from every stakeholder, Weinstein pledged "to do our best to develop a plan
that recognizes the many varied interests, which NARA serves."

On 18 July, the White House submitted to the Senate the nomination of Bruce
Cole for another four-year term as Chair of the National Endowment for the
Humanities. Cole's current term, which began in 2001, expires at the end
of 2005. However, assuming Cole is reconfirmed two of his top aides -- his
current deputy, Lynn Munson and his Senior Counselor and Congressional
affairs officer, Cherie Harder -- won't be there to assist him. Harder is
leaving to become one of six policy advisors to Senate Majority Leader Bill
Frist (R-TN). At this writing, Munson has not landed a job, though NEH
insiders report she has "several irons in the fire." Tom Mallon, a former
member of the of the NEH Council who was recently appointed by Cole as
Director of the Preservation Programs division has been named "Acting
Deputy Chair."

Cole responded to the White House announcement regrading his nomination
with the following statement: "I am honored to be nominated by President
George W. Bush to serve a second term as Chairman of the NEH. If confirmed,
I will continue to vigorously uphold the highest standards of humanities
scholarship, while ensuring that more Americans are served by the important
work of the Endowment. I am grateful for the support of the President."

Cole is expected to be reconfirmed when the Senate Committee on Health,
Education, Labor and Pensions led by Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY) and Ranking
Member Edward Kennedy (D-MA) considers the nomination; the full Senate must
also act on the nomination.

The Public Interest Declassification Board (PIDB) will receive its first
allocation of funds next fiscal year provided the FY 2006 Defense
Appropriations Act (House Rept. 109-119) becomes law. The PIDB is an
advisory group that focuses attention on government classification and
declassification policy. It was established by law five years ago, but has
yet to meet.

According to the House report language, "The [House Appropriations]
Committee directs that from amounts available in Operation and Maintenance,
Defense-Wide, $1,000,000 shall be available for the Public Interest
Declassification Board." According to Secrecy News, a newsletter of the
Federation of American Scientists, "approval of the funding would mark an
end to an embarrassing impasse in which the Board has been unable to meet
even though most of its members have now been named by the Bush White House
and Congressional leaders."

The board is not empowered to enact structural changes to the
classification system, nor does it have any independent declassification
authority. It is strictly an advisory body. Nevertheless, it provides an
official venue to air concerns over classification and declassification
policies. For a copy of the law creating the PIDB and to access links to
additional articles about the PIDB go to:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2005/pida.html .

On 3 August 2005 the National Security Archives, along with several other
secrecy organizations -- including the Project on Government Secrecy of the
Federation of American Scientists, the Electronic Privacy Information
Center, and the National Whistleblower Coalition -- filed a "friend of the
court" (amicus curiae) brief in a lawsuit challenging the FBI's authority
to issue National Security Letters (NSLs) without any judicial oversight
and under a blanket gag order that prohibits the recipient from speaking
with anyone about the NSL. The brief argues that secrecy does not always
serve the goal of protecting national security, a conclusion that numerous
investigations into the September 11 attacks on the United States also

The amicus brief was filed with the United States Court of Appeals for the
Second Circuit. That appeals court is reviewing a lower court decision in
the case "John Doe, American Civil Liberties Union and American Civil
Liberties Union Foundation v. John Ashcroft et al" in which the court held
that the NSL authority violated the First and Fourth Amendments to the U.S.

The brief notes that there has been an upsurge in secrecy over the last
four years and that military and intelligence officials ranging from
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld to the now Director of the CIA Porter
Goss all admit that a significant amount of the secrecy is
unnecessary. The brief argues that the judiciary must provide a meaningful
review of government claims for secrecy.

In the case of the NSL authority, the brief points out the particular
dangers associated with a permanent and categorical ban on speech by
recipients of NSLs and demonstrates the terrible impact that the rule has
on government accountability.

Additional information about the lawsuit, including links to the amicus
brief and the original lower court ruling may be found at the NSA webpage
at: http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB160/index/htm .

On 4 August 2005, after over 140 years, the state of North Carolina public
archives took possession of it's copy of the Bill of Rights - the very
document that was used to convince state officials to vote to ratify the US
Constitution some 210 years ago. The action of a federal court may have
put to end a bitter legal battle over "possession" of the contested
document that pitted state archives officials against a manuscript
collector and dealer, though it probably did not resolve the still
outstanding issue of "ownership" of it.

The document has a curious provenance. It was deposited in the state
capitol but stolen from there near the end of the American Civil War, in
1865, by one of Union General William Tecumseh Sherman's soldiers in the
Fifth Ohio Cavalry regiment. The soldier sold it to a collector for $5 a
couple of years later. The collector in turn tried to sell the document
back to the state in 1897 and again in 1925, but the state took a
principled stand (arguing it was illegally taken from the state) and
declined to act on the "sale" offer.

The provenance of the document becomes murky in the early 20th century
though it is known that in the 1990's two Connecticut collectors bought it
for $200,000. They, in turn, approached the National Constitution Center
in Philadelphia with the goal of selling it to the new museum. Museum
officials alerted the governors of Pennsylvania and North Carolina, the
later of which appealed to the federal government to step in and reclaim
the document for the state. In 2003, it was repossessed by the FBI during a
sting operation in Philadelphia. Since then the contested document,
believed to be valued at $30 million, has been held in federal custody, its
future unclear.

On 4 August 2005, however, Federal Judge Terrence Boyle issued a nine-page
ruling ordering that the North Carolina copy of the Bill of Rights "be
immediately delivered" to the state, which it was. In a hastily
put-together ceremony, under armed guard, the document was ushered into the
North Carolina archives building for conservation.

While one of the dealers vows to continue his effort to reclaim what he
argues is his "property" (the collector has appealed the federal district
court decision to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals; at least three other
related federal and state court filings have been made based on various
technical motions), for the time being the document once again is in the
state's possession.

The transfer from U.S. custody to state vaults is viewed as a major victory
for state archives officials. "For the bill to be returned to the very
building it was stolen from right at the end of a bloody civil war has
tested not only the meaning of the Constitution, but also honors George
Washington's wishes and Abraham Lincoln's wishes as well," says U.S.
Attorney Frank Whitney.

According to Deputy Secretary for Archives and History Jeff Crow, "We are
extremely grateful for all the work the governor of North Carolina, the
U.S. Attorney, and Attorney General's office did to return this priceless
document to the people of North Carolina."

Item #1 -- "Overclassification" Hearing Transcript: The record of a lively
and interesting March 2005 hearing held by a House Government Reform
Subcommittee entitled "Overclassification and Pseudo-Classification" that
was reported on in this publication some months back (see "House Holds
Hearing on "Overclassification" in NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE; Vol. 11, #9; 4
March 2005) has just been published. For the transcript, tap into:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2005/030205overclass.html .

Item #2 -- NARA Issues Proposed Rule on Declassification: On 12 August the
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) published a proposed
rule modifying its regulations relating to the declassification of national
security information in records transferred to NARA's legal custody. The
proposed rule incorporates changes resulting from amendments to Executive
Order 12958, "Classified National Security Information" and include
establishing procedures for the automatic declassification of records in
NARA's legal custody and revising requirements for reclassification of
information to meet the provisions of E.O. 12958. The Federal Register
notice presents a useful series of questions and answers regarding
classification and declassification policy. Howver, there is little room
for useful comment on the proposed policy as it largely implements mandated
aspects of the E.O. Nevertheless, the proposed rule is available at:
. Comments are due by 11 October 2005 and may be sent through
www.regulations.gov or comments@nara.gov .

Item #3 -- New England History Challenge: The Concord Review has announced
a History Challenge for students in all 686 of the public high schools in
New England. High school students in every grade are encouraged to write
history research papers of between 3,000 and 5,000 words that will be
submitted for judging in January 2007. Eleven of the finest high school
history research papers will be selected by a panel of distinguished
judges, and published in a 20th anniversary special issue of The Concord
Review in June of 2007. These authors and their teachers will also be
honored at a colloquium in June 2007 in Boston. Each author will receive a
check for $2,500 and their High School History Club will receive a check
for $2,500 or, if there is not yet a History Club chapter at their school,
the check will go to the history department. Papers written in the spring
semester of 2006 and in the fall semester of 2007 will be eligible for this
challenge. History research papers may be written for a history class or
may be done as an independent study under a teacher's guidance. This
project in New England is the first regional effort of its kind, and if the
response is strong, it will be continue in New England in each of the years
to come. For additional information, contact Will Fitzhugh at:
http://www.tcr.org; fitzhugh@tcr.org .

Item #4 -- Cultural Landscape Studies: The National Park Service's Park
Historic Structures and Cultural Landscapes Program has added two titles to
its Landscape Lines technical information series. Historic Trails and
Historic Roads offer historical contexts, interpretations of cultural
landscape terminology, and approaches to documentation, analysis, and
treatment. Order the new issues ($19 for both - Stock Number
024-005-01224-9) or the original A Guide to Cultural Landscape Reports and
all 16 Landscape Lines ($64 - Stock Number 024-005-01220-6) online from the
Government Printing Office at:

Who We Are:
The National Coalition for History is a non-profit educational organization
that provides leadership in history-related advocacy; it serves as the
profession's national voice in the promotion of history and archives, and
acts as a clearinghouse of news and information of interest to
history-related professionals. Membership in the history coalition is open
to organizations that share our concern for history and archives. For
information on how your history/archive organization can become a member,
visit our website at http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch/ and click on the "Join
the Coalition" web link.

Individuals are invited to help support the NCH by sending a donation
directly to the NCH at 400 A Street S.E. Washington D.C. 20003, or, by
making an on-line donation at
http://www.conservenow.org/detail.asp?ORGID=2032&;memflag=true . All
contributions are tax deductible.

Subscribe Today!
We invite you to subscribe to this FREE weekly newsletter! You are also
encouraged to redistribute the NCH Washington Updates to colleagues,
friends, teachers, students and others who are interested in history and
archives issues. A complete backfile of these reports is maintained by
H-Net on the NCH's recently updated web page at
http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch .

To subscribe to the "NCH Washington Update," send an e-mail message to
listserv@h-net.msu.edu with the following text in the body of the message
(and only this text) SUBSCRIBE H-NCH firstname lastname, institution. To
unsubscribe, send an e-mail message to listserv@h-net.msu.edu according to
the following model SIGNOFF H-NCH.

You can accomplish the same tasks by tapping into the web interface at
http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/lists/subscribe.cgi and at the "network" prompt,
scroll down and select H-NCH; enter your name and affiliation and "submit".

Murray B - 8/17/2005

Here is a anonymous joke that I have found:

>What are historians really like?

> Question: How do monkeys settle a disagreement?
> Answer: They fling turds at each >other until exhaustion and the last >one standing wins. The outcome is >never determined by the merit of an >argument but by pungency, volume, and >density of the turds as well as the >accuracy by which they are thrown.

>Question: How do historians settle a disagreement?

>Answer: Exactly the same way! Except >their turds are circular reasoning, >non-sequiturs, and arguments ad >hominem.

>Except for slight differences in the >ammunition, historians cannot be >distinguished from monkeys and, >therefore, ARE monkeys.

It is just too funny and thanks to the HCF for making it even more so. Now if Michelle Malkin is admittedly not a historian then why are these turds being slung?

HNN - 6/17/2005

NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE (Vol. 11, #27; 16 June 2005) by Bruce Craig (editor) rbcraig@historycoalition.org NATIONAL COALITION FOR HISTORY (NCH) Website at http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch

Workshop Announcement; IMLS Report on Museums/Library Collaboration 7. ARTICLES OF INTEREST: "Federal Workers Win Job Contests" (Washington Post)

1. HOUSE APPROPRIATORS ACT ON EDUCATION BILL -- "TEACHING AMERICAN HISTORY" GRANTS TAKE $69 MILLION HIT The House Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee, which has jurisdiction over education and library programs, has issued recommendations for FY-2006 and it doesn't bode well for the Education Department's "Teaching American History" (TAH) initiative.

The subcommittee's recommendation included a cut of $69.040 million for the TAH program thus funding the program at only $50 million. The president had urged $119.040 million for the TAH initiative, the same amount that the program was funded at in FY-2005. If the funding level recommended by the House stands and is embraced by the Senate (not very likely considering the program's prime sponsor is Senator Robert C. Byrd (D-WV) who is the Ranking member of the Senate Appropriations Committee), the net effect will be tighter competition for hundreds of excellent teacher education programs that are supported with funds channeled by the Education Department to local education agencies (LEA's). Nevertheless, representatives of member organizations of the National Coalition for History (NCH) will be meeting with Congressional appropriators this week to determine what if any action is needed by the history community to ensure the continuation of the flow of federal dollars into the initiative.

In other related actions, the subcommittee recommended an overall funding level of $249,640,000, a 4 percent increase, for the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS). For the museum side of the program, there is
$35.99 million of which $1 million is for the support of programs associated with the African American History and Culture Act. The subcommittee also recommended that the Library Services and Technology Act
(LSTA) receive $212.650 million, an increase of $6.699 million over last year, but $8.675 million below President Bush's budget request. Within that total is $165.5 million for Grants to State Library Agencies, $24 million for Librarians for the 21st Century program, $12.5 million for National Leadership Grants for libraries, and $3.5 million for Improving Library Service to Native Americans.

The subcommittee's recommendations now head to the full House Appropriations Committee for consideration.

2. HOUSE APPROPRIATIONS SUBCOMMITTEE GIVES NEW LIFE TO NHPRC On 15 June 2005, the House Transportation, Treasury and Housing and Urban Development, the Judiciary, District of Columbia Appropriations subcommittee reported out its recommendations for NARA and the NHPRC. Although the House subcommittee did not make its totals for the National Archives and Records Administration as a whole public (official numbers are generally not released until the full appropriations committee acts on the recommendations), it did publicly announce a figure for the NHPRC -- $7.5 million of which $5.5 million is for grants and $2 million is for program administration. Complete totals for NARA will only be available on 21 June when the full committee announces its budget recommendations.

While this news about the House subcommittee recommendation is a step in the right direction, there is still much that needs to be done to ensure that the full House acts positively on the appropriation's subcommittee recommendations. For example, during the subcommittee mark-up, the committee chair did not permit any amendments. That means that when the full appropriations committee meets to consider the Treasury/Transportation bill next Tuesday, in theory, any member of the full committee could target the NHPRC funds and use it as an "offset" to fund some other project out of the Treasury/Transportation bill. The NHPRC also could become a target for an offset on the House floor as well -- at this point we just don't know.

Consequently, NHPRC supporters are urged to continue to send expressions of support for the NHPRC funding to all members of the House Appropriations Committee. (The list of the members of the full House Appropriations Committee can be accessed by tapping into:
and ten click on the "Member List" key at the top of the
webpage.) Constituents of any member listed on the above webpage, are particularly urged to call their representative and request that they support the subcommittee recommendation of $7.5 million for the NHPRC when the full committee meets on Tuesday.

On 13 June 2005 the U.S. Senate approved a resolution (S. Res. 39) "apologizing to the victims of lynching and the descendants of those victims for the failure of the Senate to enact anti-lynching legislation." This is the first time the upper chamber has apologized for the American nation's treatment of principally African Americans but also other ethnic minorities who were victims of lynchings going back as far as
105 years. "Lynching," states the resolution, is "the ultimate expression of racism in the United States following Reconstruction...[and with the enactment of this legislation this body] remembers the history of lynching, to ensure that these tragedies will be neither forgotten nor repeated."

Between the years 1882 and 1968 over 4,700 people were lynched throughout this country in all states but four, but most frequently in the deep south. Over the past 65 years, seven presidents asked Congress to outlaw lynching. Congress responded to various request by introducing more than 200 anti-lynching bills. On three occasions, the House passed legislation but every time, southern legislators in the Senate opposed the measures -- often arguing that "states rights" were being infringed. Consequently, they filibustered the bills thus ending any hope of passing legislation.

The resolution was introduced by Senators Mary Landrieu (D-LA) and George Allen (R-VA) and was co-sponsored by 80 of the Senate's 100 members. Notably missing from the list of co-sponsors were the Republican senators Trent Lott and Thad Cochran from Mississippi -- the state that reported the most lynchings. According to a statement issued to the National Coalition for History by Senator Cochran's press representative, Cochran did not agree to the measure as, "I don't feel I should apologize for the passage or the failure to pass any legislation by the U.S. Senate, but I deplore and regret that lynchings occurred and that those committing them were not punished." By contrast, in his remarks on the floor of the Senate, Senator John Kerry (D-MA) stated, "I am personally struck even at this significant moment, by the undeniable and inescapable reality that there aren't 100 senators and co-sponsors."

According to spokesperson in Senator Allen's office, "lynching is a thing of the past" and therefore today there is no pressing need for the introduction of legislation making lynching a federal crime. In reality, the 1968 Civil Rights Act includes a provision for "federal intervention"
in the case of lynching should it ever be necessary thus negating the need for federal legislation; in addition, many states have enacted anti-lynching legislation at the state level.

Following three hours of debate on the apology, the moment when the resolution passage lacked any drama: few senators were on the floor, there was no roll call and no accounting for each vote. Nevertheless, for the 200 descendants and family friends of lynching victims that were invited to Washington to witness the historic event, it was an experience they soon will not forget.

4. HISTORIANS MEET WITH NPS OFFICIALS ON CHIEF HISTORIAN VACANCY Over the last couple of weeks, representatives of the historical profession including the American Historical Association, the National Coalition for History, and the Organization of American Historians have met with National Park Service Associate Director Janet Matthews to discuss the soon to be vacant position of Chief Historian of the National Park Service.

After ten years in the position, the present Chief Historian, Dwight Pitcaithley, is set to retire at the end of June. When Dr. Pitcaithley made his retirement plans known to bureau officials months ago, there was some concern within the bureau and the broader historical community, that due to budgetary constraints, his position would not be filled for months or perhaps years as has been the case with other key Cultural Resource Division slots; the Chief Ethnologist and Chief of the HABS/HARE divisions, for example, have been vacant for two years and only now are about to be filled.

In meetings with Dr. Matthews, history profession representatives have been assured that filling the Chief Historian vacancy "is a high priority," that a "national search" reaching into "all sources" (i.e. in other words qualified federal employees and non-federal positions will be able to
compete) is soon to be initiated, and that there is every hope that the position will be filled early in the new fiscal year.

During his decade-long tenure as NPS Chief Historian Dwight Pitcaithley has had a profound impact in bringing the National Park Service into closer coordination and cooperation with the academic history community. One of Pitcaithley's crowning achievements was the implementation of a cooperative agreement between the NPS and the Organization of American Historians. The agreement enables the NPS to host visits from top historians in academia to key historical parks who then provide expert advice on park interpretive, educational, and resource management operations. Pitcaithley was also instrumental in raising the level of NPS historical interpretation throughout the service so that it more accurately reflects contemporary scholarship. Though he will be missed and we are sorry to see him go, the Policy Board of the National Coalition for History wish Dwight the best in all his future endeavors.

5. REPORT: ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON THE RECORDS OF CONGRESS On 13 June 2004, the Advisory Committee on the Records of Congress met in the U.S. Capitol building, Committee Chair Jeff Trandahl (Clerk of the House), presiding. This was the first meeting of the Advisory Committee with both the new Archivist of the United States, Allen Weinstein, and the new Historian of the House, Robert Remini, in attendance.

After welcoming comments by Trandahl and Emily Reynolds (Secretary of the
Senate) and after the introduction of new committee member, Nevada State Archivist Guy Rocha, (appointed by the Senate Democratic leadership), Weinstein gave his report in which he summarized recent National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) programmatic activities.

Following his brief but comprehensive report, the committee was briefed on the status of the new Capitol visitor's center. The 500,000 square-foot underground facility, expected to meet the needs of some 4 million visitors a year, is now over half completed. The committee provided comments on the proposed exhibitry that will fill 16,500 square feet of the new center. It was evident from the comments and feedback provided by Weinstein, Remini, and by Senate historian Richard Baker that history is now well represented on the commission.

The committee was briefed on the recent activities of the Association of Centers for the Study of Congress, an relatively new independent alliance of organizations and institutions which promote the study of the U.S.
Congress (view their webpage at: http://www.congresscenters.org ). During the third annual meeting of the centers held last May some fifty-six registrants met and established a framework for a viable association by making committee assignments to: establish a dues structure, register as a
501-(c)-3 organization, and create a working group for the preparation of a National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) grant.

Alan C. Lowe, Executive Director of the Howard H. Baker Jr. Center for Public Policy at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville made a report on the highly successful four and a half day long "Institute on the Teaching of Congress" in which teachers heard from over 27 speakers on a wide range of Congress-related topics. They ultimately created seven lessons plans for use in secondary schools.

Following a NARA briefing on the "Congressional Web Harvest" project which aims to capture for historical documentary purposes the websites of federal agencies and Congress, Trandahl announced that the process had begun for preparing the fourth report of the advisory committee that, by law, is to be issued every five years.

Richard Hunt, Director of the NARA Center for Legislative Archives concluded the meeting with a brief progress report on his Center's activities. His report included details on the processing of the recently transferred records of the Congressionally sanctioned 9/11 Commission records. Hunt stated staffing of the project continues to present a challenge, that a page-by-page review had begun, that 16,000 documents have been processed, and that screening guidelines for other records were being crafted based on the initial review of documents. NARA's goal is to make the commission records available to researchers by June 2009.

Item #1 -- Bush P-2/P-5 Confidential Records Release: The George Bush Presidential Library has released the fourth batch of Bush Presidential Records formerly withheld under Presidential Records Act restrictions P-2/P-5. This release includes materials associated with the White House Appointments and Scheduling Office, the Chief of Staff's Office, the White House Press Office and the files of various speech writers. A complete list of the documents in the 4th release (as well as previous releases) can be found at http://bushlibrary.tamu.edu/research/releaseddocuments.html
. Copies of the open documents opened in this release are available for review immediately. For questions or additional information please contact Supervisory Archivist Robert Holzweiss at robert.holzweiss@nara.gov or by telephone at (979) 691-4074.

Item # 2 -- NEH "Landmarks" Workshop Announcement: The Division of Education Programs of the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) seeks applications for "Landmarks of American History and Culture" Workshops for School Teachers and Landmarks of American History and Culture Workshops for Community College Faculty scheduled to take place in the summer of 2006.
These grant opportunities are part of the "We the People" initiative, which is designed to enhance the teaching, study, and understanding of American history and culture. Landmarks of American History and Culture workshops bring groups of K-12 teachers or community college faculty together for intensive, one-week, residence-based workshops at or near significant American sites. Eligible applicants include museums, libraries, cultural and learned societies, state humanities councils, colleges and universities, schools and school districts. Collaborative programs are encouraged. The deadline for applications is 10 August 2005. For details about the program, some sample projects, and application guidelines, go to http://www.neh.gov/grants/guidelines/landmarks.html (Workshops for School
Teachers) or to
http://www.neh.gov/grants/guidelines/landmarkscc.html (Workshops for Community College Faculty). Current Landmarks of American History and Culture Workshops for School Teachers are described at http://www.neh.gov/projects/landmarks-school.html and current Landmarks of American History and Culture Workshops for Community College Faculty are described at http://www.neh.gov/projects/landmarks-college.html .

Item #3 -- IMLS Report on Museums/Library Collaboration: The Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) has released a report on how museums and libraries bolster K-12 education and lifeling learning in communities across the nation. The report, "Charting the Landscape, Mapping New Paths:
Museums, Libraries, and K-12 Learning" is based on a workshop held in 2004 in which over 70 participants examined K-12 collaborations among their organizations. Three key findings include the need to "redefine education as a lifetime endeavor"; to "understand the changing nature of professional roles"; and to "move beyond anecdotal evidence to show what works." The report also details how policy-makers, museum and library professionals and educators should take to support such a view of society. For the report, tap into: http://www.imls.gov/pubs/pdf/Charting_the_Landscape.pdf or write imlsinfo@imls.gov and request a hard-copy of the report.

One posting this week: In "Federal Workers Win Job Contests" (Washington Post; 8 June 2005) reporter Christopher Lee documents that last year the federal government spent $110 million to determine whether nearly 13,000 federal jobs (including history and archeology positions) could be done more effectively by private contractors; federal in-house workers won the competitions in 91 percent of the cases, thus raising serious questions about whether the projected long-term savings justify continuation of the assessments. The Office of Management and Budget says yes, union officials say no. For the article, tap into:

Who We Are:
The National Coalition for History is a non-profit educational organization that provides leadership in history-related advocacy; it serves as the profession's national voice in the promotion of history and archives, and acts as a clearinghouse of news and information of interest to history-related professionals. Membership in the history coalition is open to organizations that share our concern for history and archives. For information on how your history/archive organization can become a member, visit our website at: http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch/ and click on the "Join the Coalition" web link.

Individuals are invited to help support the NCH by sending a donation directly to the NCH at 400 A Street S.E. Washington D.C. 20003, or, by making an on-line donation
at: http://www.conservenow.org/detail.asp?ORGID=2032&;memflag=true . All contributions are tax deductible.

Subscribe Today!
We invite you to subscribe to this FREE weekly newsletter! You are also encouraged to redistribute the NCH Washington Updates to colleagues, friends, teachers, students and others who are interested in history and archives issues. A complete backfile of these reports is maintained by H-Net on the NCH's recently updated web page at http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch .

To subscribe to the "NCH Washington Update," send an e-mail message to listserv@h-net.msu.edu with the following text in the body of the message (and only this text) SUBSCRIBE H-NCH firstname lastname, institution. To
unsubscribe, send an e-mail message to: listserv@h-net.msu.edu according
to the following model: SIGNOFF H-NCH.

You can accomplish the same tasks by tapping into the web interface at http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/lists/subscribe.cgi and at the "network" prompt, scroll down and select H-NCH; enter your name and affiliation and "submit".

HNN - 12/21/2004

from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy Volume 2004, Issue No. 113 December 21, 2004

The National Archives and Records Administration is asking the Central Intelligence Agency to explain its recent statement to a federal judge that it cannot locate copies of the classified annexes to the intelligence authorization acts for fiscal years 1947 through 1970, as noted earlier this month (SN, 12/10/04).

A newly obtained letter from NARA to the CIA states: "It is our understanding that a record set of those annexes should be preserved among the permanent appropriations and budget files of the CIA,"
wrote Howard P. Lowell, director of modern records programs at the National Archives.


"How can you lose those things?" asked historian Anna Nelson of American University on National Public Radio Weekend Edition on December 18. "You can't lose those things. So, you know, where are they?"

A CIA response is due by the end of the month.

Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the Federation of American Scientists.

HNN - 12/21/2004

National Security Archive Update, December 21, 2004

New Documentary Reveals Secret U.S., Chinese Diplomacy Behind Nixon's Trip

Chinese marshal received Top Secret intelligence briefing from Kissinger in 1972, Member of four marshals who told Mao "play the American card" in 1969

"History Declassified: Nixon in China" premieres December 21, 2004, 10 p.m. EST, on Discovery Times Channel (digital cable by Discovery and the New York Times)

ABC News Productions based show on National Security Archive documents, Interviewed Kissinger, Haig, Lord, Smyser, and China Experts

For more information contact:
William Burr: 202/994-7032


Washington, D.C.: The first TV documentary based on the fully declassified record of President Nixon's historic trip to China in 1972 premieres tonight on the Discovery Times Channel at 10 p.m. EST. Titled "History Declassified: Nixon in China," the show combines previously secret U.S. documents gathered by the National Security Archive with newly available evidence from Chinese files to reveal details of the dramatic diplomacy that remained hidden for 30 years.

Shown on television for the first time are the secret initiatives on the Chinese side that began as early as 1969, when a group of four marshals recommended that Chairman Mao "play the American card" against the Soviet threat and even undertake high-level talks with the U.S.

One of the four marshals then sat across from national security advisor Henry Kissinger during the most secret single meeting of the 1972 Nixon trip, when Kissinger briefed the Chinese in detail on Soviet troop movements -- details so sensitive even the U.S. intelligence community was kept out of the loop. The transcript only emerged in 2003 after appeals by the National Security Archive. "My jaw dropped when I saw what these discussions had covered," says Tom Jarriel, who reported on Nixon's trip for ABC News, in the documentary.

Produced by ABC News Productions for the Discovery Times Channel (the digital cable venture of Discovery Channel and the New York Times), the documentary features interviews with key players and eyewitnesses Henry Kissinger, Winston Lord, Dick Smyser, Alexander Haig, James Lilley, and Jarriel, together with commentary from China experts such as University of Virginia professor Chen Jian and Georgetown University professor Nancy Tucker, along with National Security Archive director Thomas Blanton.

"The new documents are rewriting the history of that amazing breakthrough, of what we thought we knew," comments Blanton on screen in the program. "But the new evidence also serves as a reminder of the use and abuse of government secrecy."

The Archive today posted ten of the documents cited in "History Declassified: Nixon in China," including an excerpt from the four marshals' report, transcripts of telephone calls (telcons) between Nixon and Kissinger, a front page photograph in the Peoples' Daily intended by Mao as a signal to the Americans (which they missed), and the transcript of Kissinger's 1972 intelligence briefing to Marshal Ye Jianying.



THE NATIONAL SECURITY ARCHIVE is an independent non-governmental research institute and library located at The George Washington University in Washington, D.C. The Archive collects and publishes declassified documents acquired through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). A tax-exempt public charity, the Archive receives no U.S. government funding; its budget is supported by publication royalties and donations from foundations and individuals.


PRIVACY NOTICE The National Security Archive does not and will never share the names or e-mail addresses of its subscribers with any other organization. Once a year, we will write you and ask for your financial support. We may also ask you for your ideas for Freedom of Information requests, documentation projects, or other issues that the Archive should take on. We would welcome your input, and any information you care to share with us about your special interests. But we do not sell or rent any information about subscribers to any other party.


TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THE LIST You may leave the list at any time by sending a "SIGNOFF NSARCHIVE" command to <LISTSERV@HERMES.CIRC.GWU.EDU>. You can also unsubscribe from the list anytime by using the following link: <http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=nsarchive&;A=1>

HNN - 12/17/2004

NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE (Vol. 10, #49; 17 December 2004) by Bruce Craig (editor) rbcraig@historycoalition.org) NATIONAL COALITION FOR HISTORY (NCH) Website at http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch


1. TREASURY PARTIALLY LIFTS BAN ON SCHOLARLY PUBLICATIONS On 15 December 2004, the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) issued a ruling that American publishers (including scholarly journals and university presses) do not have to apply for a OFAC license if they wish to edit or publish works by authors who live and work in the embargoed countries of Cuba, Iran, or Sudan. The ruling, however, was limited to informational materials that were "fully created" by people in these countries. The ruling also did not mention the licensing status of works from authors residing or working in other embargoed countries.

The decision was most likely issued in response to a lawsuit filed in federal court by four publisher groups and joined by Shirin Ebadi, an Iranian lawyer and humanist rights activist who won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2003. In their suit against Treasury, the plaintiffs assert that by requiring publishers to get a license from the government to edit and publish works by authors from countries in which the United States had established trade embargoes, OFAC had issued rules and regulations that were contrary to the First Amendment and violated a 1988 act of Congress that "exempted information or informational materials" from governmental licensing.

Violators of the embargo face stiff fines of up to $1-million and jail terms of as much as ten years.

The recent OFAC ruling is being viewed by the plaintiffs as "a very positive step in the right direction," but the suing organizations need more time to analyze the ruling before commenting on what impact it may
ultimately have on the pending case. Rep. Howard L. Berman (D-CA) though
minced no words when he stated that irrespective of some aspects of the ruling, "the regulations continue to represent that the government has the inherent legal authority to regulate these activities under a so-called 'general license.' This violates both the letter and spirit of my amendment, which has been the law of the land since 1988....It also raises critically important Constitutional issues - in America, publishers do not need permission. OFAC is still acting like they have the authority to grant permission and that interferes with our fundamental right to freedom of expression," continued Berman.

A copy of the ruling submitted for publication in the Federal Register may be found at:
http://www.treas.gov/press/releases/reports/office foreign.pdf .

2. GOOGLE LAUNCHES BOOK DIGITIZATION PROJECT On 14 December 2004, five prestigious university and public libraries announced their intention to join with Google Inc. to digitize millions of books and make portions (and in some cases where works are not in the public domain), all of them searchable without cost to users, thus providing researchers with an unprecedented information finding tool. The joint effort of Harvard and Stanford universities, the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor, the University of Oxford, and the New York Public Library may well soon turn Google into the single largest holder of digitized published material. But the collaboration is also likely to rekindle a long-standing debate over copyright and fair use over the Internet.

Google plans to begin by scanning works that are in the public domain. Some publishers, however, worry that the effort will depress hard-copy sales of books in what already is a tough market. Some even predict the demise of the book as it is known today. Many librarians and scholars, however, maintain the online access will enhance public access to books provide a boon to researchers, and benefit anyone who does not have access to a high-quality collection. According to Duane E. Webster, Executive Director of the Association of Research Libraries, "This is a very important move forward for the public's ability to access scholarly information....This enrichment of resources will entice even more users to those libraries that see themselves as learning commons."

Since only excerpts of copyrighted materials will be available online for more recent works, Google officials and librarians hope that the information will be sufficient to let researchers determine whether they want to check out or purchase books. Google will make its money by including links to online booksellers and local libraries where the results of search results can be borrowed or purchased.

Most of the libraries that have agreed to work with Google have done so only on a pilot project basis. Harvard University, for example, has agreed to let Google scan only 40,000 books during the pilot phase of the project.
Yet the number of volumes that could be eventually be scanned is
astounding: Harvard alone holds some 15 million volumes.

The project is expected to take years to complete.

3. MEMBERS OF BLACK HISTORY MUSEUM COUNCIL ANNOUNCED On 7 December 2004, the Smithsonian Board of Regents appointed 19 high profile corporate executives to the founding Council of the National Museum of African American History and Culture, which is slated to open in 2013.
They also named a group of scholars to an advisory committee that will oversee the content of the museum that is expected to cost between $300 million and $400 million to complete.

Smithsonian spokespersons stated the council will be involved in "every aspect of development," though the expertise of the members indicates that fundraising will be a primary concentration. The new council must help "define the mission of the museum." It is also is charged to recommend a location for the museum and to decide what stories of African American history will be emphasized, though it is already clear the structure will be a hybrid history and art museum. At the present time the museum does not have a vast collection of artifacts though the vaults of other Smithsonian museums do house an extensive collection of African American artifacts in history, music, and art.

The members of the board are: James Ireland Cash, formerly of the Harvard Business School; Kenneth I. Chenault of American Express; Ann M. Fudge of Young & Rubicam Brands; James A. Johnson, former Chair of Fannie Mae; Robert L. Johnson, founder of Black Entertainment Television; Quincy Jones, musician; Ann D. Jordan, formerly of the University of Chicago; Michael L.
Lomax, of the United Negro College Fund; Homer Neal, a physicist at the University of Michigan; E. Stanley O'Neal of Merrill Lynch; Samuel J.
Palmisano of IBM; Richard D. Parsons of Time Warner; Franklin D. Raines of Fannie May; Linda Johnson Rice of Johnson Publishing Company; Lawrence M.
Small, Secretary of the Smithsonian; H. Patrick Swygert of Howard University; Anthony Welters of AmeriChoice; Wesley S. Williams Jr., attorney and the representative of the Smithsonian Regents; and entertainer Oprah Winfrey. Biographies of the members can be viewed at:

The members of the five person scholarly committee are: John Hope Franklin, the dean of black historians; Drew S. Days III, professor of law at Yale University, and former U.S. solicitor general and assistant attorney general for civil rights; Deborah L. Mack, a museum and academic consultant who has worked for the Field Museum of Natural History and the Underground Railroad Freedom Center; Alfred Moss, a professor at the University of Maryland and author of The American Negro Academy: Voice of the Talented Tenth; and Richard J. Powell, an art history professor at Duke University who has written extensively on art, race and representation.

On 20 November 2004, the U.S. Senate unanimously confirmed seven Bush nominees to serve as members of the National Museum and Library Services Board. The 20-member board advises the Institute of Museum and Library Services and makes recommendations for the National Award for Museum and Library Service, the nation's highest honor for extraordinary public service provided by these institutions.

"These seven distinguished individuals will make a tremendous addition to our board," said IMLS Director Robert S. Martin. "IMLS is dedicated to creating and sustaining a nation of learners by helping libraries and museums service their communities. With their policy advice, the National Museum and Library Services Board members will help IMLS support libraries and museums in their role as centers of lifelong learning."

The new board members are: Beverly E. Allen, MSLS, the Director of the Morehouse School of Medicine (MSM) Multi-Media Center; Gail M.
Daly, Associate Dean for Library and Technology and Associate Professor of Law at Southern Methodist University's Dedman School of Law; Donald S.
Leslie, the Industry and Government Business Manager for 3M Library Systems; Amy Owen, former Director of the Utah State Library, a division of the Utah Department of Community and Economic Development; Sandra Pickett, Commissioner and Chair of the Texas State Library and Archives Commission and President of the Atascosito Historical Society; Renee Becker Swartz, national library advocate for the past 38 years and chair of the Monmouth County Library, NJ; and Kim Wang, who has served on the California Library Services Board (which was renamed Library of California).

Board members were selected for their broad knowledge of, expertise in, or commitment to museums and libraries. For more on the current board members, please refer to the IMLS website at:
http://www.imls.gov/about/abt_nmlsb.htm .

5. PRESIDENT SIGNS LEGISLATION CREATING KATE MULLANY NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE A multi-Congress effort by members of the New York Congressional delegation came to fruition on 3 December 2004 when President George W. Bush signed legislation (P.L. 108-438) establishing the home of labor activist Kate Mullany as a unit of the National Park System.

Legislation had been introduced during the 107th Congress (H.R. 464) by Representative Michael R. McNulty (D-NY) but his bill went nowhere. Early in the 108th Congress, McNulty reintroduced the bill (H.R. 305) and was later joined by Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) who introduced similar legislation in the Senate (S. 1241).

The new National Historic Site, located at 350 8th Street in Troy New York, is designed to recognize and interpret the "development of early men's and women's worker cooperative organizations" and to "interpret the connection between immigration and the industrialization of the United States (including the history of Irish immigration, women's history, and worker history)." The site will be managed by the NPS in cooperation with the Hudson-Mohawk Urban Cultural Park Commission.

Enactment of this legislation brings to a close a long standing effort by the National Coalition for History to enact this legislation. It is one of a handful of sites recommended by the history coalition for inclusion in the National Park System when it assisted the National Park Service in framing the Labor History theme study nearly a decade ago.

Item #1 -- Passing of Pierre Berton: On 30 November 2004 Pierre Berton, the prolific writer, historian, and broadcaster known as "a great Canadian voice," passed away at the age of 84. Berton was born in Whitehorse in the Yukon Territory and educated at the University of British Columbia. During his lifetime, Berton did much to popularize history in Canada. He published about 70 books, including a scores of history books for children. His most famous works include, The Klondike Fever, and his two-volume railroad history, The National Dream and The Last Spike. Survivors include his wife, Janet, and eight children.

Item #2 -- NEH Summer Seminars and Institutes Announced: Summer 2005 seminars and Institutes for school teachers and a separate program for college and university faculty have been announced by the National Endowment for the Humanities.

The first program is targeted to school teachers. It is designed to strengthen the quality of humanities instruction available to American students. The programs are led by some of the nation's outstanding scholars and take place at major colleges and universities and archival facilities across the country and abroad. Seminar topics include the legacy of George Washington, the origins of the U.S. Civil War, Native American history, African American history, historical cartography, the Holocaust, and programs in the original languages on French history and Latin literature. Seminar participants receive from the NEH a stipend depending on the length of the seminar or institute. Requests for information and completed applications should NOT be directed to the National Endowment for the Humanities; they should be addressed to the individual projects offices as found in the listings. The application postmark deadline is 1 March 2005. For a more information on the program offerings, please visit the NEH website at: http://www.neh.gov/projects/si-school.html), or phone (202/606-8463), or e-mail (sem-inst@neh.gov).

The second NEH program is targeted to college and university teachers. It supports a variety of study opportunities in the humanities for faculty who teach American undergraduates. Designed to strengthen the quality of humanities teaching and scholarship, the seminars and institutes are led by some of the nation's outstanding scholars and take place at major colleges and universities and archival facilities across the United States and abroad. The 2005 summer seminar topics include the Bayeux Tapestry, religion and culture, Latin American philosophy, African cinema, the early American republic, the Vietnam War, and studies of major figures such as St. Francis of Assisi and Ralph Waldo Emerson. Here again, seminar participants receive from the NEH a stipend depending on the length of the seminar or institute. Requests for information and completed applications should NOT be directed to the National Endowment for the Humanities; instead, they should be addressed to the individual projects as found in the listings. The application postmark deadline is 1 March 2005. For a more information please visit the NEH website, http://www.neh.gov/projects/si-school.html), or phone (202/606-8463), or e-mail (sem-inst@neh.gov).

Item #3 -- AASLH Awards Competition Announced: The American Association for State and Local History (AASLH) invites submissions to the 2005 Awards Program. The AASLH's program seeks to recognize achievement in the preservation of local, state, and regional history. Awards are given for general excellence, exhibits, public programming, special projects, media/publications, individual achievement, and preservation or restoration projects. Nominees need not be members of the AASLH to apply. Nominations are due by 1 March 2005. Nomination forms may be obtained by visiting the AASLH website at: http://www.aaslh.org.

Item #4 -- Hawthorne Manuscript To Be Auctioned: On behalf of the town of Natick Massachusetts, Christies auction house will be auctioning to the highest bidder the oldest known copy of Nathaniel Hawthorne's "The Scarlet Letter" along with 17 other historical documents. A relative of Hawthorne apparently donated the corrected page proofs of the book to the Natick Historical Society in 1886. The 700-page manuscript is thought to be the oldest known copy of the work and contains proofreading corrections and comments believed to be in Hawthorne's own hand. The gift was only recently discovered when a museum trustee was cataloging the society's collection. Sale of the document is expected to add more than $250,000 to the town coffers.

One posting this week: In "Rushing for Tax Breaks on Historic Houses" (New York Times 12 December 2004), Fred Bernstein reports on the recent Internal Revenue Service intention to crack down on excessive tax breaks to owners of historic homes. For the article tap into:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/12/realestate/12ease.html .

The National Coalition for History invites you to subscribe to this FREE weekly newsletter! You are also encouraged to redistribute the NCH Washington Updates to colleagues, friends, teachers, students and others who are interested in history and archives issues. A complete backfile of these reports is maintained by H-Net on the NCH's recently updated web page at http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch .

To subscribe to the "NCH Washington Update," send an e-mail message
to: listserv@h-net.msu.edu with the following text in the body of the message (and only this text) SUBSCRIBE H-NCH firstname lastname, institution. To unsubscribe, send an e-mail message
to: listserv@h-net.msu.edu according to the following model SIGNOFF H-NCH.

You can accomplish the same tasks by tapping into the web interface
at: http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/lists/subscribe.cgi and at the "network"
prompt, scroll down and select H-NCH; enter your name and affiliation and "submit".

Sam andy fields - 12/13/2004

On http://hnn.us/readcomment.php?id=40982
This is said:
It is irresponsible of your producers to permit Michelle Malkin’s biased presentation of events to go unchallenged as a factual historical presentation. We therefore respectfully demand that you formally apologize to the Japanese Americans who have been slandered by Ms. Malkin's reckless presentation and invite a reputable historian to present a more even-handed view of the evidence.
Sam Fields:What I am commenting about is how the persons who have put their names to this petition have decided what the evidence is- is it possible somebody else has something they consider to be evidence, only to be locked out by the selfish bigotry of the persons on the list? Who are they to say to the rest of mankind that only THEY are the TRUE holders of THE TRUTH?

HNN - 12/10/2004

NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE (Vol. 10, #48; 10 December 2004) by Bruce Craig (editor) rbcraig@historycoalition.org; and Tim Nolan
Website at http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch


1. CONGRESS ADJOURNS SINE DIE: FINAL ACTION ON APPROPRIATIONS, INTELLIGENCE REFORM, ALEXANDER BILL, WEINSTEIN NOMINATION Having successfully stripped out a controversial provision empowering Congress's appropriations committees to examine the tax return of any American, Congress sent President Bush a $388 billion legislative package (H.R. 4818; H Rept. 108-792) that once he signs it, completes the funding cycle that funds government-wide spending for FY 2005. As is usually the case, few members know precisely what has been added to the bill that numbers 3,016 pages. One such provision (see story "Byrd Mandates Constitutional Instruction" below) mandates a new instructional program on the Constitution in schools that receive federal assistance each Constitution Day.

Congress also reached agreement on an intelligence reform bill (S. 2845), considered a landmark measure that restructures the nation's intelligence community. It passed the House by a vote of 336 to 75 and the Senate by 89 to 2. Of particular interest to historians, scholars, and government openness advocates in the 600-page bill is the statutory re-authorization and "improvement" of authorities of Public Interest Declassification Board.

This Board originally was envisioned by its creator Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan as being central to advancing the cause of government openness. A watered down version was authorized back in 2000 (title VII of P.L.
106-567) but the Bush administration declined to name members to the Board until last month (see "White House Names Members to Declassification Board"
in NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE, Vol 10, #37, 16 September 2004), just two months before the board was to sunset. At the urging of the National Coalition for History and other organizations concerned about government openness, Congress reshaped the old PDIB and created a more powerful board with fairly significant declassification powers. But after the White House registered its objections to the proposed revisions, Congress backed off of some of the proposed changes and compromised on the language that is embodied in Section 1102 of the Intelligence Reform Act.

The "new and improved" PIDB reports to the president and is empowered to review and make recommendations to the president with respect to any Congressional committee or presidential request "to declassify certain records or to reconsider a declination to declassify specific records." In other words the board cannot order the declassification of records in general, but it can act on requests from the president or from a congressional committee. The White House has named its appointees to the board (see "White House Names Members to Declassification Board" in NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE, Vol. 10, # 37; 16 September 2004) though Congress has yet to name its representatives.

In other actions, on 7 December the Senate also joined the House (which had acted earlier) and passed on the unanimous consent calendar Senator Lamar Alexander's (R-TN) "American History and Civics Education Act," legislation that authorizes grants to establish academies for teachers and students for American history and civics. The bill also authorizes grant funds for National History Day.


Finally, Senate action on the nomination of professor Allen Weinstein to become Archivist of the United States did not materialize as some had expected. While the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee was prepared to advance the nomination for Senate confirmation a "hold" was placed on the nomination by an anonymous senator, thereby keeping the nomination from being advanced to the floor. Consequently, unless the president opts to make a recess appointment, final Senate approval of the nomination will not take place until the 109th Congress which is scheduled to convene January 2005.

In a telephone interview, Weinstein expressed gratitude to the Senate Committee for unanimously discharging his nomination and also expressed thanks to the various organizations that have supported his nomination. He plans to continue meeting informally with history and archive groups until he is confirmed in the new year.

The 109th Congress now stands adjourned, sine die.

2. BYRD MANDATES CONSTITUTIONAL INSTRUCTION Shortly before Congress acted on the final $388 billion Omnibus Appropriation spending bill, Senator Robert C. Byrd (D-WV), the Senate's unofficial constitutional scholar, inserted language into the measure requiring that any and all educational institutions that receive federal monies must offer its students an instructional program on the U.S.
Constitution each 17 September (Constitution Day). The measure will apply to all public and private institutions, including colleges and universities, that receive federal money.

Becky Timmons, director of government relations at the American Council on Education, said college leaders are concerned that the provision could set a precedent in which future Congresses would feel free to issue additional mandatory curricular requirements; the U.S. Department of Education is expressly prohibited from establishing a national curriculum. The language of the rider does not specify how the instruction should be carried out, though the Department of Education is expected to issue a rule or letter of guidance to colleges and schools in the coming weeks.

Byrd was motivated to take this action as he firmly believes that Americans need to better understand the Constitution and its importance. "We can build upon the respect and reverence we still hold for our Constitution,"
the Senator said. "But we had better start now, before, through ignorance and apathy, even that much slips away from us."

Byrd's reverence for the Constitution is well known on Capitol Hill. He habitually carries a copy of the document in an inside breast pocket of his suit, and he has been know to flourish it during heated arguments on the Senate floor.

3. HUNDREDS OF ITEMS GO MISSING FROM THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES Reports of the Inspector General released through the Freedom of Information Act to media organizations reveal that the National Archives is missing hundreds of historic documents and photos from its various collections. Many items are suspected to have been stolen. The reports show that while the problem is not pervasive it is problematic, and a solution requires the diligent cooperation of NARA employees, historians and scholars, and the public.

At present NARA has no strict registration system for most of the 10 billion items held in regional facilities, presidential libraries, and other records repositories around the country. It is not always obvious when materials have been lost, stolen, or misplaced. Investigative reports classify some of the documents that cannot be accounted for as simply "missing."

While any researcher making use of a NARA collection could steal documents, security procedures in place at archives facilities serve as a deterrent. Internal theft by NARA employees also is documented as a problem. In its most publicized case of theft, a cache of presidential pardons and other materials valued at $100,000 was stolen by Shawn P.
Aubitz, an Archives employee who had been with NARA for 16 years in Philadelphia. He was convicted and sentenced in July 2002 to 21 months in federal prison. This incident led to an overhaul of security procedures, including installing cameras and recording equipment in the research rooms, background investigation of volunteers working with original records and artifacts, and the development of a pilot program with the University of Maryland on the feasibility of electronic tracking.

Paul Brachfeld, NARA's inspector general, believes that the remedy to this problem is broad vigilance in the manuscript market. Last March, NARA initiated an awareness program in which employees and researchers have been asked to monitor auctions, look through catalogues, and keep an eye out for stolen documents on the growing number of sites such as EBay.

For over a year and a half National Coalition for History staff has also been informally monitoring several of the largest Internet auction houses for stolen documents. Already, materials allegedly pilfered from presidential libraries and other NARA repositories, state archives, and international collections have been identified and referred to Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security officials for action.

In an effort to more systematically address this problem, two weeks ago the National Coalition for History submitted a grant proposal to NARA officials offering to regularly track Internet and other auctions of manuscript materials. That proposal, as well as other ongoing joint efforts by the archival and manuscript/autograph collector communities will be discussed at the upcoming AHA annual meeting in Seattle, during a plenary presidential session entitled, "Stolen Public Records: Challenges in Archival Theft, Institutional Acquisition, and Reacquisition" scheduled for
7 January 2005 9:30 am at the Sheraton Grand Ballroom C.

4. AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN CHENEY TASK FORCE CASE On 30 November 2004, several library, journalist, and public interest organizations filed an Amici Curiae ("Friend of the Court") brief with the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The brief supports public access to information about the energy task force convened by Vice President Cheney in 2001. The case is viewed as a milestone in ongoing efforts to preserve public access to government information under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA).

The case itself seeks to determine whether special oil industry interests unduly influenced the National Energy Policy Development Group (NEPDG) that was convened by Cheney to help craft a new national energy policy. The suit was brought years ago by the Sierra Club and Judicial Watch and heard at the United States Supreme Court in March 2004. The latest action again focuses in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals as the Supreme Court suggested that the lower court consider options for reconciling the competing constitutional and statutory concerns raised in the case. The Amici filed argues that the lower court should accept the Supreme Court's invitation to develop a procedure for accommodating the competing interests asserted in this case.

The Amici are the American Association of Law Libraries, the American Library Association, the Association of Research Libraries, the Center for American Progress, the National Security Archive, the Society of American Archivists, the American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression, the Liberty Project, OMB Watch, and the Society of Professional Journalists.

To obtain a copy of the Amici brief please visit the National Security Archives website at: http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20041130/index.htm .

On 19 November 2004, Judge Maxine M. Chesney, of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, ruled against legal scholars and archivists who had challenged current copyright law in hopes of making it easier to archive old literature and films on the Internet, where they argued they should be available free to the public.

The case, Kahle v. Aschcroft, pitted two archival groups ­ the Internet Archive (a non-profit digital library) and the Prelinger Archives (a film preservation archive) ­ against the Justice Department. The archivists argued that existing copyright laws are collectively keeping people from gaining access to "orphan" works ­ out-of-print books, old films, and academic articles that have little or no commercial value. A central part of the archivists' argument was that it was wrong to have laws granting copyright protection extended to all works, even those for which the creators had not sought specific protection.

However, Judge Chesney disagreed and dismissed the case without hearing arguments on it. She ruled in essence that existing law provides that one need not apply for specific copyright protection in order to benefit from copyright protections. The plaintiffs plan to appeal the ruling.

6. REPORT: ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON THE RECORDS OF CONGRESS On 1 December 2004, the Advisory Committee on the Records of Congress held it final meeting for the year in the United States Capitol, the Secretary of the Senate, Emily Reynolds, presiding. Reynolds summarized the accomplishments of the advisory group. Deputy Archivst Lewis Bellardo (sitting in for Archivist of the United States John Carlin) updated the group on recent happenings at the National Archives, including the recent opening of the "Public Vaults" exhibit. In his opening comments, Clerk of the House Jeff Trandahl updated the committee on the status of the yet to be filled Historian of the House position and stated that names of candidates had been advanced to the Speaker of the House for his consideration. A selection is expected sometime after the 108th Congress wraps up its end of the year business.

Consistent with the committee's long term interest in the papers of retiring members of Congress, committee member and University Archivist at South Dakota State University, Steven Van Buren reported on the status of the disposition of Sen. Tom Daschle's (D-SD) extensive collection (1500 boxes of papers plus electronic records). The collection will be housed at South Dakota State University.

The most intriguing part of the meeting was the discussion of the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs archival project. Elisabeth Butler, Archivist for Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs reported on how she was able to get the cooperation of committee staff to preserve committee records associated with the discussion of the 9-11 Commission and the just passed Intelligence Reform bill. Through her efforts, she was able to get the cooperation of staff to archive their e-mails and convert them to html/pdf cc-rom. The project was also successful in part because the committee's system administrator gave Ms. Butler access to the staff's H drives. Twenty years from now, when the records of the committee are opened for scholarly research, there will be an exceptional record of the internal workings of the Governmental Affairs Committee on these particular issues.

Butler's report led to the discussion of what can be done to encourage other congressional committees to take similar archival actions.
(Currently, only two Senate committees have archivists on staff, the Committee on Governmental Affairs and the Committee on Finance). The committee felt that there is a need to encourage other committees to follow the example of the Governmental Affairs Committee. The group felt that the role of the chief clerks of the committees is critical as is the Senate Rules Committee; both could help advance better archival preservation of committee records.

The committee then heard from Dr. Larry Hudson of the National Institute of Standards and Technology. Hudson reported on current efforts to address the ongoing problem posed by irradiation of Congressional correspondence. Hudson reported on the technical challenges presented by the physical qualities of paper and focused on treatment alternatives currently under consideration.

Finally, Director of the Center for Legislative Archives, Richard Hunt, reported on NARA's recently initiated efforts to accept and begin the processing of the 9-11 Commission records.

Item #1 ­ Community College Survey: A recent national survey finds that most community-college students are not meeting their educational goals.
According to the findings of a Community College Survey of Student Engagement (known as "Cessie") that assessed responses from 92,000 students at 152 colleges in 30 states, 86 percent of students hope to complete a degree or certificate program but only 25 percent of them actually earned one within six years of beginning their studies. The study also reports on such issues as trends on use of textbooks, preparation of papers, study habits, and exam taking. For example, the survey found that remedial students -- those generally considered not as well prepared for college-level work -- are often more engaged in their studies than their better academically prepared peers. A report on the survey, "Engagement by Design," is available online at: http://www.ccsse.org where each institution's performance on certain benchmarks is also available.

Item #2 -- OAH Committee on Academic Freedom Issues Report: An OAH ad hoc committee established last March to "investigate reports of repressive measures having an impact on historians' teaching, research, employment and freedom of expression" has filed its first report. Five major areas of concern have emerged: government surveillance of faculty members, students, visiting scholars, and libraries; foreign historians, students, and researchers being subject to interminable review if they apply for entry to the U.S. or for renewal of green cards; historians' access to government documents during the last two presidential administrations has become increasingly difficult; direct efforts by the federal administration and by foundations and web sites that support it to shape the content of teaching and research in directions favorable to its policies; and finally, many K-12 teachers have been condemned by school boards, organized groups, and individual parents for the content of courses they teach, books they have assigned or recommended to students, and artwork or notices thy have permitted students to post. The committee continues to seek reports and suggestions or information related to academic freedom. Please address comments to: academicfreedom@oah.org .

Item #3-- Library of Congress Enters Into Library Agreement with Iran: On
4 November 2004, Librarian of Congress James H. Billington and Mohammad Kazem Mousavi Bojnourdi, director of the National Library and Archives of the Islamic Republic of Iran, signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). This document permits the two libraries to exchange mutually beneficial information in the areas of library science and preservation. The agreement also allows the exchange of book, periodicals, bibliographical materials and other exchangeable library resources. Billington states, "The agreement signed will hlp to fill a 25-year gap in the Library's collection of materials published in Persian and other languages of Iran," a move that will benefit the Library of Congress as well as scholars of the Middle East.

Item #4 ­ Yale Historian Named Kluge Prize Winner: On 29 November 2004, the Library of Congress announced that Yale historian Jaroslav Pelikan was awarded the second John W. Kluge Prize for Lifetime Achievement in the Human Sciences. The Kluge Prize is given for lifetime achievement in the humanties and social sciences, areas of scholarship for which there are no Nobel Prizes. Pelikan will share the $1 million dollar prize with co-recipient Paul Ricoeur, a French philosopher. Pelikan's research focuses on the whole of the Christian tradition from the ancient New East to the present and has assessed church doctrine through the Western Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church. He is also concerned with the history and practice of worship in its doctrinal and creedal forms over two millennia. Pelikan holds a doctorate form the University of Chicago and over the years has written more than 30 books, including the original five-volume work, "The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctorine."

No posting this week.

The National Coalition for History invites you to subscribe to this FREE weekly newsletter! You are also encouraged to redistribute the NCH Washington Updates to colleagues, friends, teachers, students and others who are interested in history and archives issues. A complete backfile of these reports is maintained by H-Net on the NCH's recently updated web page at http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch .

To subscribe to the "NCH Washington Update," send an e-mail message to listserv@h-net.msu.edu with the following text in the body of the message (and only this text) SUBSCRIBE H-NCH firstname lastname, institution. To unsubscribe, send an e-mail message to listserv@h-net.msu.edu according to the following model: SIGNOFF H-NCH.

You can accomplish the same tasks by tapping into the web interface
at: http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/lists/subscribe.cgi and at the "network"
prompt, scroll down and select H-NCH; enter your name and affiliation and "submit".

HNN - 11/10/2004

MARK BRADY was born in Windsor, Berkshire, England, and lived in Britain for the first thirty years of his life. He read philosophy, politics and economics at Magdalen College, Oxford. Later he was a graduate student in the Austrian economics program at New York University. For many years he taught economics in high schools near London and subsequently to undergraduates at University College Cork, National University of Ireland; Pitzer College in Claremont, California; and New England College in Sussex, England. For five years he directed interdisciplinary seminars for the Institute for Humane Studies. From January 2005 he will be teaching economics at San Jose State University. His intellectual interests include philosophy, history, law, and social science, and he looks forward to writing on all these subjects and more at Liberty & Power.

Stephen Thomas - 10/29/2004

"It is irresponsible of your producers to permit Michelle Malkin’s biased presentation of events to go unchallenged as a factual historical presentation. We therefore respectfully demand that you formally apologize to the Japanese Americans who have been slandered by Ms. Malkin's reckless presentation and invite a reputable historian to present a more even-handed view of the evidence."

The sheer juvenile idiocy of this statement condemns the petitioners. How did such idiot children obtain any position of authority or respect?

I suggest that every one of them be dismissed from their faculty positions.

They are idiots.

And I don't particularly care about either side of this controversy.

HNN - 10/12/2004


October 12, 2004

Contact: Stuart J. Kaufman
(302) 831-1941, skaufman@udel.edu
Security Scholars Give Bush Foreign Policy a Failing Grade

Newark, Delaware - Over 650 foreign affairs specialists in the United States and allied countries have signed an open letter opposing the Bush administration's foreign policy and calling urgently for a change of course.

The letter was released today by "Security Scholars for a Sensible Foreign Policy," a nonpartisan group of experts in the field of national security and international politics.

The letter asserts that current U.S. foreign policy harms the struggle against Islamist terrorists, pointing to a series of "blunders" by the Bush team in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere. "We're advising the administration, which is already in a deep hole, to stop digging," said Professor Richard Samuels of M.I.T.

The scholars who signed the letter are from over 150 colleges and universities in 40 states, from California to Florida, Texas to Maine. They include many of the nation's most prominent experts on world politics, including former staff members at the Pentagon, the State Department and the National Security Council, as well as six of the last seven Presidents of the American Political Science Association. "I think it is telling that so many specialists on international relations, who rarely agree on anything, are unified in their position on the high costs that the U.S. is incurring from this war," said Professor Robert Keohane of Duke University.
The text of the letter, a list of signers and details about Security Scholars for a Sensible Foreign Policy are available at http://www.sensibleforeignpolicy.net.

For more information, please contact:

Stuart J. Kaufman
Professor of Political Science and International Relations University of Delaware
Off: 302 831 1941
Cell: 302 528 7226
H: 302 392 0876

Michael E. Brown
Director, Security Studies Program
Georgetown University
Off: 202-687-5727

Michael C. Desch
Robert M. Gates Chair in Intelligence and National Security Decision-making Bush School of Government and Public Service College Station, TX
Off:  979 458 1703
Cell:  859 396 6854

Barry R. Posen
Ford International Professor of Political Science
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Off:  617 253 8088 
Home: 617 484 6269

Jessica Stern
Lecturer in Public Policy
Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University
Off:  617 496 3623

Francisco Joao do Carmo Cordeiro - 10/5/2004

Hi, I would like to get in touch with Dr. Charles Merrill so I could confront him with recent findings of mine on the internet stating that "Columbus" was not Genoese nor Catalan but Portuguese, specifically from Cuba, Alentejo.
My intention is not to prove him wrong but to be sure he is aware of these theories (although Im quite sure he is). If he is aware (or when he becomes aware), I would have much interest in seeing how he could adopt or refute these other studies that say he was Portuguese.
Here are the links I found on this matter:





This last one is written in portuguese, I think that this will constitute no barrier. It is also the link that has what I HUMBLY consider to be the most solid and coherent analisys on the subject.
Please reply what you can to my email bestunta@hotmail.com as I am very curious on the outcome of "Columbus'" nationality.

HNN - 9/17/2004

NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE (Vol. 10, #37; 16 September 2004) by Bruce Craig (editor) rbcraig@historycoalition.org; and Tim Nolan
Website http//www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch

2. ARCHIVES TECHNICAL AMENDMENT BILL PASSES HOUSE 3. WHITE HOUSE NAMES MEMBERS TO DECLASSIFICATION BOARD 4. "HEROS OF HISTORY" SPEAKER ANNOUNCED 5. BITS AND BYTES: "History Now" launched; Threat Posed by Proposed new FOIA Exemption 6. ARTICLES OF INTEREST: Theft and Misuse of Government Information" in the Journal of Public Inquiry (Fall-Winter 2003)

On 14 September 2004, during a full committee markup, the Senate Appropriations Committee added $2 million to its Subcommittee on Transportation, Treasury, and General Government recommendation of $3 million and set aside a total of $5 million for the National Historical Publications and Records Commission (NHPRC) in FY 2005. While this is still fifty percent less than the commission's FY-2004 funding level, nevertheless, NHPRC supporters were elated that the Senate voted to raise the subcommittee recommendation.

Had the Senate agreed with the President's and House's recommendation of $3 million, there would have been agreement between the two legislative bodies and hence no conference and no chance of seeing a higher number adopted. Hill insiders report that sentiment in the House for possible adoption of a higher number than the one recommended by the Senate is not out of the question once the measure goes to conference at some yet to-be-determined date.

NHPRC supporters had to scramble this year to raise the Senate number. Action alerts issued by the National Humanities Alliance and the National Coalition for History were widely distributed by each organization's members, including the Association for Documentary Editing whose members played a key role in realizing the increase. Many historians and archivists placed last minute phone calls to their senators which also did have positive effects. There also was much behind the scene negotiating and lobbying by key and highly placed NHPRC supporters.

2. ARCHIVES TECHNICAL AMENDMENT BILL PASSES HOUSE On 13 September 2004, the House of Representatives unanimously approved "The National Archives and Records Administration Efficiency Act of 2003"
(H.R. 3478). This legislation seeks to improve the efficiency of operations by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). It was introduced by Representative Adam Putnam (R-FL), Chair of the House Subcommittee on Technology, Information Policy, Intergovernmental Relations and the Census, on 7 November 2003. The bill has now been advanced to the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs for prompt action.

The National Archives and Records Administration Efficiency Act clears the way for regulatory revisions designed to streamline and shorten the current required process for determining agency retention schedules. Secondly, it allows NARA to use fees generated from the use of facilities managed by the archives by other organizations for educational outreach. Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, the legislation enables NARA to enter into cooperative agreements with state and local governments and non-profit organizations in order to advance various programs and activities of NARA. Finally, tacked onto the bill is a legislative reauthorization for the National Historical Publications to Records Commission (NHPRC). It provides for up to $10 million for grants each year through FY 2009.

3. WHITE HOUSE NAMES MEMBERS TO DECLASSIFICATION BOARD The White House has announced the names of five persons who are to be appointed to a new Public Interest Declassification Board (PIDB), the only surviving element of the legislative reform package recommended in 1997 by the Commission on Protecting and Reducing Government Secrecy, chaired by the late Sen. Daniel P. Moynihan. The Public Interest Declassification Board was created in statute four years ago to promote public access to national security information and to advise the government on declassification policies and priorities.

The board was established in Title 7, Section 703 of the 2001 Intelligence Authorization Act (P.L. 106-567), but for years the Bush administration has declined to name members in spite of prodding by the National Coalition for History and other groups. Hill insiders speculate that the catalyst for naming members of the board was the combination of recent Congressional hearings into government secrecy and the introduction of new legislation (S. 2672/ H.R. 4855) by Senators Trent Lott (R-MS) and Ron Wyden (D-OR) and advocates in the House to create a similar board.

Three of the five named by the White House to serve on the PIDB are former intelligence community officials: L. Britt Snider, former CIA General Counsel; Martin Faga, former director of the National Reconnaissance Office; and Elizabeth Rindskopf Parker, former General Counsel of the National Security Agency. The fourth member, Steven Garfinkel, is the highly respected former director of NARA's Information Security Oversight Office (ISSO). The fifth member, Richard Norton Smith is an historian who most recently co-authored with Bob and Elizabeth Dole of their joint autobiography. At this writing, it is not known whether or when the House and Senate leadership will announce the remaining four members of this nine-person board.

The naming of these individuals to the PIDB was welcomed by Steven Aftergood who monitors government secrecy issues for the Federation of American Scientists. According to Aftergood, the members are generally persons with stature and depending on who the House and Senate appoints there "is the making of a strong board." But according to J. William Leonard, the current director of ISOO who is slotted to serve as the board's Executive Secretary, unless Congress acts quickly, this may be the one of the shortest lived boards on record as the legislation establishing the board sunsets in December of this year unless Congress reauthorizes it.

The National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) has announced that Harold Holzer, a prolific writer and lecturer and one of the nation's leading authorities on the Civil War era, will deliver the second annual "Heroes of History Lecture" on 18 October 2004 at historic Ford's Theater in Washington, D.C.

An authority on Lincoln and the Civil War, Holzer's presentation will focus on the plain-spoken heroism of President Abraham Lincoln. The speaker has authored, co-authored, and edited 23 books and written more than 350 articles for both popular magazines and scholarly journals. Over the years, he has also received numerous honors including the Barondess Award of the Civil War Round Table of New York (1984, 1990, 1993), the Diploma of Honor from Lincoln Memorial University (1988), and the Award of Achievement from the Lincoln Group of New York (1988 and 1993).

During the 18 October event medals will be awarded to six high school juniors for their essays in on the subject of how does the Gettysburg Address reflect America's founding ideas, and the relevance of the speech today.

Admission to the 2004 Heroes of History Lecture is free to ticketed guests.
To request tickets, please visit the NEH Web site at http://www.neh.gov no later than 8 October 2004.

Item # 1-- HISTORY NOW Launched: The Gilder Lehrman Institute has launched HISTORY NOW, a new online journal for history teachers and students. HISTORY NOW will feature articles by noted historians as well as lesson plans, links to related websites, bibliographies, and many other resources. In each issue, the editors will bring together historians, master teachers and archivists to comment on a single historical theme. The first issue of HISTORY NOW discusses the topic of elections. In this issue, Joanne Freeman discusses the contested election of 1800, Liette Gidlow looks at television's effect on the 1960 Kennedy-Nixon debates, Steven Mintz examines the history of voting rights, and Ted Widmer reflects on the electoral process from the perspective of Muslim exchange students.
To access HISTORY NOW, tap in to: http://www.historynow.org .

Item #2-- Threat Posed By Proposed New FOIA Exemption: According to the American Library Association (ALA), the Senate has approved a provision in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (H.R. 4200) that would create a new exemption under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). This exemption would restrict public access to unclassified satellite images and related data, such as maps, reports and analysis. Even if government officials felt that the public should have access to the information under FOIA, the provision prohibits the disclosure. According to critics, this completely bars the public from accessing certain commercial images and would threaten significant amounts of unclassified information that journalists, public interest groups, scientists, and the public routinely use. This provision has been incorporated into the House's version of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 as an amendment which is now being discussed in House-Senate Conference. The ALA is urging concerned individuals to contact members of Congress and ask that they defer action on this amendment until its long-term impact has been adequately assessed. To take action, tap into the ALA Legislative Action Center at:
http://capwiz.com/ala/home/>; .
In "Theft and Misuse of Government Information" in the Journal of Public Inquiry (Fall-Winter 2003), author David Berry of the National Labor Relations Board office of the inspector general argues that unauthorized disclosures of government information are essential to daily news gathering and are morally justified in various circumstances. He recognizes that such leaks are "an expression of a higher loyalty" even though they can put the leaker in legal jeopardy as unauthorized disclosure of unclassified information may in some circumstances entail criminal prosecution. For the article, tap into: http://www.fas.org/sgp/eprint/jpi-theft.pdf .

The National Coalition for History invites you to subscribe to this FREE weekly newsletter! You are also encouraged to redistribute the NCH Washington Updates to colleagues, friends, teachers, students and others who are interested in history and archives issues. A complete backfile of these reports is maintained by H-Net on the NCH's recently updated web page
at: http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch .

To subscribe to the "NCH Washington Update," send an e-mail message to:
listserv@h-net.msu.edu with the following text in the body of the message (and only this text) SUBSCRIBE H-NCH firstname lastname, institution. To unsubscribe, send an e-mail message tolistserv@h-net.msu.edu according to the following model: SIGNOFF H-NCH.

You can accomplish the same tasks by tapping into the web interface at:
http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/lists/subscribe.cgi and at the "network" prompt, scroll down and select H-NCH; enter your name and affiliation and "submit".

John Joseph McCarthy - 9/17/2004

-------Original Message-------

From: John McCarthy
Date: 09/16/04 09:01:59
To: amnestyis@amnesty.org
Cc: Jeff Trueman; overtci@cavtel.net; pazuu@spiritone.com; KtHolcombe@aol.com; traude.valko@gmx.de; Gal Tuesday; Spencer Lehmann; slippedm@yahoo.com; ADuncan282@aol.com; Leuren Moret; saraswathis@hcltech.com; Susan j Bauer; VOICEFORVETERANS@aol.com; dcat229@aol.com; STAR2012@aol.com; Srthurlow@aol.com; bross@aiusa.org
Subject: Fw: Re: US Detention Facilities

Greetings Amnesty International.

The following URL's will serve as background for the attempts to obstruct justice in a capital murder case while incarcerating me in virtually complete isolation, in violation of Human Rights Statutes, from November 26, 1967 until April 4th, 1968, in a 5 x 7 foot wooden box serving as a cell in the maximum security compound at the Long Binh Detention Facility in Long Binh, Vietnam during war time in a war zone; a violation in and of itself. The attack on Long Binh during the Tet Offensive of January 30, 1968, proves this point.

I was further incarcerated in the US Military Penitentiary, formerly called the United States Disciplinary Barracks, USDB, at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas from April 7, 1968 until October 6, 1969.

I was then released from incarceration pending appeal and assigned as the Operations Officer of the Combat Surveillance School, still under charges of premeditated murder, and without a security clearance. The URL's below fill in the gaps.





Maximum Security Compound Facility, Long Binh South Vietnam, November 26, 1967-April 4, 1968:

The Maximum Security Compound was located inside the Military Prison Facility which housed approximately 800 American Military prisoners charged, awaiting court-martial, convicted and awaiting prison shipment to the United States for further incarceration. The "Max" was enclosed in triple concertina wire, topped with razor wire, measuring approximately 150 x 150 feet in area guarded by military police at the entrance to the "Max" and covered by two machine gun towers on either side of the compound.

The cells in the U shaped configured Maximum Security Compound, numbering approximately fifty, were enclosed on four sides by two-inch thick oak prefab construction with a 5 x 7 inch window covered with re-bar and mesh screen for observation of inmates, a heavy duty chicken wire suspended from the top of the box above which a continuous burning light bulb was suspended. All of this was covered by a tin roof, which radiated heat down into the cells. Air was circulated through the cells by gaps in between the tin roof and the tops of the cells, allowing red laterite dust to coat the interiors mixed with humidity and perspiration resulting in a constant red muck covering bodies of the inmates. There were no toilet facilities nor running water in any of these cells. Individuals were occasionally escorted to outhouses to relieve themselves in an environment totally avoided by the Military Police Guards. Many of the inmates in the "Max" had syphilis and other contagious venereal diseases which exposed all other inmates who used these latrine facilities.

Inmates were fed by common service trays usually kicked through slots cut into the bottoms of the cell door. Liquid refreshment became mixed with the meager food rations during this process.

Inmates were escorted individually once or twice per week to a shower room adjacent to the cells.

Some prisoners were observed to suffer abuse in the form of beatings with swagger sticks carried and administered by the prison commandant. These prisoners were obviously going insane due to their behavior of playing with their own feces and lack of attention to their constant pleas to relieve themselves. Attempts to provide information of these abusive assaults on inmates was thwarted by JAG Attorneys who often visited inmates with the excuse that "you don't want to rock the boat". One of these attorneys is currently a sitting judge in Northern Virginia.

These inhumane conditions resulted in not just a few inmates going mad from the heat, humidity and isolation, all conditions in violations of human rights. Some were subsequently rendered unconscious with medication, placed in white straight jackets and removed from the Max never to be seen again.

Fortunately, there is no statute of limitations on these crimes against humanity.

I swear that the above is true, witnessed by myself and that I observed these conditions while incarcerated although innocent of any and all charges fabricated against me in a conspiracy to obstruct justice in a capital murder case to cover-up treason in wartime by the President's closest advisors.

John McCarthy

-------Original Message-------

From: bross@aiusa.org
Date: 09/16/04 06:19:29
To: John McCarthy
Subject: Re: US Detention Facilities

Thanks for writing. Since its inception (1961) AI has been concerned with
ill-treatment/torture/killing of prisoners, anywhere, so if you have
details incidents of of ill-treatment, you can send the details to
amnestyis@amnesty.org or by mail to: Amnesty International, International
Secretariat, Attn: Research Department, 1 Easton Street, London WClX 0DW,
UK. To read AI's reports on any country, look in the LIBRARY of

Betsy Ross

"John McCarthy"
<jmac1369@earthli To: <admin-us@aiusa.org>
nk.net> cc: "Jeff Trueman" <verpaphila1@aol.com>,
"overtci@cavtel.net" <overtci@cavtel.net>
09/15/2004 10:19 Subject: US Detention Facilities


Am I to understand that AI is currently recommending an investigation into
all US Military Detention Facilities in light of the abuses at Abu Ghraib,
Guantanamo and others?

Please advise of a focal point for input to your organization re this
matter of grave concern.


John McCarthy

HNN - 9/17/2004

South China Morning Post
September 15, 2004
Truth about Columbus
By Jonathan Powell

For hundreds of years, schools around the world have taught that it was an Italian - Christopher Columbus - who discovered America in the 15th century.

In a new programme to be aired on Discovery Channel, a theory that Columbus concealed his nationality and true origins is tested using modern forensic techniques.

In Columbus: Secrets from the Grave, an American historian and a team of scientists aim to discover the true identity of one of the greatest explorers of all time.

Historical records say that Columbus began life as a humble weaver in the Italian town of Genoa.

But Charles Merrill, the film's key historical investigator, has been studying Columbus' background for 25 years and believes that this account could be wrong. He explained to Young Post why it was important to find out Columbus' origins.

"We want to understand the past and understand how things got to be the way they are," said Dr Merrill, an expert on medieval history.

"To do that, we need to have an understanding of the important characters that made history. Furthermore, we don't want to be deceived. It seems to me that for a long time now, for centuries, Columbus has been identified as being a member of a nationality that he, in fact, wasn't a member of.

"There may not be any immediate, practical consequences to believing that he was not Italian. But I think that it is still important that we know the truth."

Columbus' remains were exhumed and DNA was extracted from his bones to discover more about his background. And by examining documents, manuscripts and historical arguments, they hoped to shed light on his past.

These tests may support the theory that Columbus could have been born in Catalonia, Spain.

"The scientific tests of his language by a professional linguistic scholar and computer expert do support the notion that he was from Catalonia," Dr Merrill said.

"Another type of scientific test was with an expert in medieval handwriting who also supported that notion. I was certainly very curious to find what the DNA test would show. But the DNA is so old that it was hard to work with. They don't seem to be really conclusive."

Dr Merrill is more impressed by handwriting and language evidence which revealed that he never used Italian, even in casual correspondence, and that he was very well-educated and not from a poor background. "I find them more convincing ... more conclusive than the DNA tests," he said.

The research has stirred emotions and nationalistic passions among scholars worldwide. "A lot has to do with national pride. I was a little surprised by how important that it was because Italian historians have reacted to the suggestion that Columbus wasn't Italian with very unscholarly and un-academic anger. Scholars of different nationalities have felt insulted by the results of the research," Dr Merrill said.

HNN - 9/17/2004

September 15, 2004, Wednesday
SECTION: News; International Pg. 14
HEADLINE: Poles won't seek damages for war from Germany
BYLINE: By Hannah Cleaver in Berlin
THE Polish government last night rejected a demand by MPs that it should seek compensation from Germany for its actions during the Second World War.

The decision appeared to draw a line under a dispute which has seen increasingly bitter compensation claims between Germans and Poles which have damaged bilateral relations.

Hours earlier, more than 70 German aristocrats issued an open letter to say that they had dropped claims to properties in Poland and the Czech Republic that were lost by their families at the end of the war.

The Polish parliament voted overwhelmingly last Friday in favour of a resolution stating that Germany had not compensated Poland for wartime damage and calling on the government to "take the matter up" with Berlin.

But last night, Marek Belka, the prime minister, rejected the resolution, which in effect sought to tear up a treaty signed in 1953 between the then communist Polish and East German governments.

HNN - 9/17/2004

from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy Volume 2004, Issue No. 82 September 17, 2004



Acting Director of Central Intelligence John E. McLaughlin told a federal court this week that releasing the amounts of historical CIA budgets from 1947 through 1970 would compromise intelligence methods.

Mr. McLaughlin's statement was presented in opposition to a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit brought by the Federation of American Scientists.

"I have carefully considered the ramifications of releasing the total CIA budgets for fiscal years 1947-70 and a few budget numbers from other agencies for fiscal year 1947," he said in a sworn declaration.

"I have concluded that publicly disclosing the intelligence budget information that plaintiff seeks would tend to reveal intelligence methods that, in the interest of maintaining an effective intelligence service, ought not be publicly revealed," he wrote.

Acting DCI McLaughlin's insistence on preserving the secrecy of even half-century old budget figures contrasts with the recommendation of the 9/11 Commission that current and future intelligence agency budgets "should no longer be kept secret."

DCI McLaughlin's September 14 declaration is posted here (1.25 MB PDF


In accordance with Attorney General Ashcroft's FOIA policy, the CIA's position on budget secrecy is being vigorously defended by the Department of Justice Office of Information and Privacy. See the defendant's motion for summary judgment here:


A reply from FAS is due on September 29.

"We must do something about the problem of overclassification," said Secretary of State Colin Powell at a hearing of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee on September 13. "Today, the intelligence community routinely classifies information at higher levels and makes access more difficult than was the case even at the height of the Cold War."


The Bush Administration "has repeatedly rewritten laws and changed practices to reduce public and congressional scrutiny of its activities," said Rep. Henry Waxman, announcing the release of a major new congressional report on Bush Administration secrecy policy.

"The cumulative effect is an unprecedented assault on the laws that make our government open and accountable," he said.

The new report, issued by the House Government Reform Committee minority, provides an exhaustive critique of executive branch secrecy, from various well-known issues such as the secrecy surrounding the Vice President's Energy Task Force to numerous less-known measures to block congressional access to agency records.

The full text of the September 14 investigative report on "Secrecy in the Bush Administration" is posted here:



Some of the same barriers blocking public access to government information are described from another point of view in a newly revised study from the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press.

"We live in a nation built on the concept of balance," writes RCFP director Lucy A. Dalglish. "When the government, perhaps with the best of intentions, goes too far in its efforts to shield information from the public, it is up to the public and the media to push back. Through a vibrant, information-based election process and through an independent judiciary, we as a society will come to a balance that hopefully will protect our liberties for generations to come."

See "Homefront Confidential: How the War on Terrorism Affects Access to Information and the Public's Right to Know," fifth edition, September



A Pentagon briefing for Defense Secretary Rumsfeld last month laid out the conceptual underpinning for a far-reaching transformation of the U.S. military intended to make it responsive to a broader range of challenges, the Washington Post reported two weeks ago.

The briefing document that was presented to Secretary Rumsfeld has been circulating on the internet (the Washington Post commendably posted a copy). But the document was "locked" by the author in such a way as to prevent copying and printing.

Now an "unlocked" version is available, thanks to a Secrecy News correspondent.

"I had to hack the password for the PDF," wrote M. "Now you can print [it]."

See the printable version of "A Conceptual Framework for Strategic Thinking," For Official Use Only, 19 August 2004, here:


See also "Shift From Traditional War Seen at Pentagon" by Thomas E.
Ricks, Washington Post, September 3, 2004:



The Defense Science Board has been asked to undertake a study of how U.S. adversaries gather information about U.S. military capabilities, how they exploit such information, and what can be done about it.

"Each U.S. Military engagement provides ample opportunity for an adversary to observe U.S. capabilities and respond to them," according to the Terms of Reference for the new study. "The opportunity is enhanced, today, by the documentation provided by embedded and otherwise intrusive news media."

A DSB task force will "identify the channels through which adversaries learn about U.S. capabilities," and will address the question: "Are there any methods that can be used to disrupt, manipulate or control these channels?"

The new project was first reported by Dan Dupont in Inside the Pentagon, September 16, 2004.

A copy of the DSB Terms of Reference on "Red Lessons Learned," August 30, 2004, is available here:



A recently completed Defense Science Board study calls for a new defense initiative to confront the threat of clandestine nuclear attack.

"The [DSB] Task Force addresses the threat of nuclear or radiological attack, by anyone for any purpose in any scenario, against the United States or U.S. military operations, delivered by any means other than missiles or aircraft. In effect, this means hidden/smuggled nuclear weapons, devices, or materials," according to the cover memo from DSB Chairman William Schneider Jr.

"The Task Force finds that this threat is serious enough, and that there are sufficient indications that effective means of preventing successful attack might be developed over the long term, to warrant starting a DoD effort to develop comprehensive capabilities in DoD's areas of responsibility."

Defense against such attacks "should warrant national and DoD attention that is as serious as that devoted to missile defense," the DSB said.

A copy of the Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on Preventing and Defending Against Clandestine Nuclear Attack, dated June 2004, is now available here:



The issues raised by the continued deployment of thousands of nonstrategic nuclear weapons by the United States and Russia are the subject of a new report from the Congressional Research Service.

It is CRS policy to deny direct public access to such reports. But a copy of "Nonstrategic Nuclear Weapons," September 9, 2004, may be found here:


Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the Federation of American Scientists.

To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, send email to
with "subscribe" in the body of the message.

To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a blank email message to

OR email your request to saftergood@fas.org

Secrecy News is archived at:

Secrecy News has an RSS feed at:

Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web: www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email: saftergood@fas.org
voice: (202) 454-4691

Jacek Hubert Stanski - 9/15/2004

Upon the return to the base, a British intelligence officer debriefed both pilots. The next day, the same officer sent for F/O Stanski to inform him:
- Claim Rommel!
- Are you sure?
- Yes I'm sure. Last night the Radio Berlin announced Feldmarshall Rommel - the Desert Fox -
killed in northern France, during strafing attack of British aircarft.
- How can you be sure it was our work?
- Yesterday, only the 308 sortied for France, and only you were strafing vehicles.

"only the 308 sortied for France"
Is it possible to check it?

Jacek Hubert Stanski - 9/15/2004

Welcome to

Keith Stone - 9/2/2004

I thought a true study of history was supposed to be free from Politics. Sure, Historians do reflect the tenor of their times, however, they should attempt to hold back the "Political Correct" nonsense.

cameron wilson gilchrist - 9/2/2004

Gentlemen your pants are down and your politics are showing.

tom plotts - 9/1/2004

I dunno Malkin, if you hold up as well under scholarly grilling as you did under Matthews, it could be a pretty short evening.

Oh well, I figured this book was just to lay the groundwork for making concentration camps fashionable again, for those of us who are bound to be herded up in the next wave of "forced collective happiness" or something. In the words of Trey Parker, "Did I say death camps? I meant happy camps!"


Michelle Malkin - 9/1/2004


Ron L Williams - 9/1/2004

Letter is righteous indignation not followed by facts. Argument seems to be she’s not one of the group, that makes her wrong. Lousy logic. Book makes some compelling arguments and I would appreciate comments and corrections from this group, not petty bickering about credentials.

Clayton Earl Cramer - 9/1/2004

The letter complains about "a blatant violation of professional standards of objectivity and fairness." Okay, fair enough. A professional historian has obligations in these areas. But the next sentence reminds us, "Malkin is not a historian, and she states that she relied almost exclusively on research conducted or collected by others." So why do the professional standards of the historian apply to Malkin?

I suppose that I could take the "professional standards" argument a bit more seriously if we didn't have the recent memory of the Bellesiles scandal, where professional historians did their best to prevent any serious examination of massive and obvious fraud from working its way into popular newspapers and court decisions.

There are professional historians who take what they do seriously, regardless of the political consequences of what they find. But I no longer have any illusion that these "professsional standards" are adhered to by the vast majority of history professors teaching in the U.S.

Oscar Chamberlain - 9/1/2004

See Volokh Conspiracy for a good critique of this statement.

The cause is good, but the statement is not.

Walter D. Kamphoefner - 9/1/2004

Please add my name to the list.

Walter D. Kamphoefner
Professor of History
Texas A&M University
(specialist in German-American immigration and ethnicity)

HNN - 8/31/2004

Editor: HNN received the following press release from historian Greg Robinson.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

We represent the Historians' Committee for Fairness, an organization of scholars and professional researchers. Michelle Malkin's appearance on numerous television and radio shows and her comments during these appearances regarding her book IN DEFENSE OF INTERNMENT represent a blatant violation of professional standards of objectivity and fairness. Malkin is not a historian, and she states that she relied almost exclusively on research conducted or collected by others. Her book, which purports to defend the wartime treatment of Japanese Americans, did not go through peer review before publication. This work presents a version of history that is contradicted by several decades of scholarly research, including works by the official historian of the United States Army and an official U.S. government commission. In fact, the author's presentation of events is so distorted and historically inaccurate that, when challenged by reputable historians, she has herself conceded that her main thesis in incorrect, namely that the MAGIC intercepts of prewar Japanese diplomatic cable traffic, explain and justify the mass incarceration of Japanese Americans. As Malkin states, her critics have noted that "once the decision was made to evacuate ethnic Japanese from the West Coast, many ancillary decisions were made--and MAGIC doesn't explain all or even most of them. True...." (see her website, www.michellemalkin.com, August 6, 2004)

It is irresponsible of your producers to permit Michelle Malkin’s biased presentation of events to go unchallenged as a factual historical presentation. We therefore respectfully demand that you formally apologize to the Japanese Americans who have been slandered by Ms. Malkin's reckless presentation and invite a reputable historian to present a more even-handed view of the evidence.

Sincerely yours, (list incomplete, institutions for identification only)
Allan Austin, Misericordia College
Eiichiro Azuma, University of Pennsylvania
Allida M. Black, George Washington University
Matthew Manuel Briones, Harvard University
Laura Card, University of Utah
Elena Tajima Creef, Wellesley College
Louis Fiset, University of Washington
Shelley Fisher Fishkin, Stanford University
Heather Fryer, Creighton University
Stephen Fugita, University of Washington
Thomas Fujita-Rony, California State University, Fullerton
James Gatewood, Brown University
Neil Gotanda, California School of Law
Arthur W. Hansen, California State University, Fullerton
Michiko Hase, University of Colorado
John Howard, King’s College, University of London
Moon-Ho Jung, University of Washington
Scott Kurashige, University of Michigan
Tom Ikeda, DENSHO
Tetsuden Kashima, University of Washington
Eileen Kurahashi, National Center for the Preservation of Democracy
Karl Kwong-Liem Kwan, Purdue University
Kevin Leonard, Western Washington University
Daryl J. Maeda, Oberlin College
Robert Maeda, Brandeis University
Takeya Mizuno, Bunkyo University
Mitchell Maki, California State University, Los Angeles
Eric R. Muller, University of North Carolina Law School
Don T.Nakanishi, University of California Los Angeles
Franklin Ng, California State University, Fresno
Setsuko Matsunaga Nishi, Brooklyn College, CUNY
Gail M. Nomura, University of Washington
Greg Robinson, Université du Québec À Montréal
George Sanchez, University of Southern California
Mitziko Sawada, Hampshire College
Robert Shaffer, Shippensburg University of Pennsylvania
Stephen H. Sumida, University of Washington
Andrew B. Wertheimer, University of Hawaii
Yuh Ji-Yeon, Northwestern University

HNN - 8/30/2004

August 30, 2004



The upcoming auction of Alexander Autographs on September 19 and 21, 2004 will feature items from the estate of Illinois Senator Paul Simon. An avid collector of Presidential autographs, Simon's extensive collection includes a 1781 war-date letter signed by George Washington and a military appointment signed by Abraham Lincoln.

With a political career beginning in 1955, Simon's personal correspondence includes letters from Presidents Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George H. Bush, and Bill Clinton and an inscribed autographed photograph from President John F. Kennedy, possibly the last photo Kennedy ever signed. The letters give an interesting behind-the-scenes view into the relationships and workings in Washington.

In response to a letter to Jimmy Carter in April 1990 asking if Carter would consider a personal intervention with the Soviets to seek a resolution to friction between Armenians and the neighboring Azerbaijanians, Carter responds: "Paul - I've been invited by one side or the other on numerous occasions. Gorbachev would have to make clear his approval of this. On other issues he has objected. Thanks. Jimmy".

In a letter dated March 31, 1987, President Ronald Reagan explains his refusal to sign HR 2, a Federal highway and transit spending bill. He notes: "...[it] provides excessive funding for mass transit programs and distributes these funds unfairly to certain cities...it favors major metropolitan areas...depriving other regions...The American people have time and again made it abundantly clear that they expect the Federal government to live within its means...I urge you to vote to sustain my veto..."

A cryptic handwritten signed note dated January 20, 1992 from Vice President Quayle reads: "Paul - My reputation is enhanced - yours is now in jeopardy. Dan Quayle." As head of the Senate, Quayle and Democrat Simon no doubt often butted heads.

Also featured will be Simon's on-going correspondence with Barbara Bush; primarily concerning their joint efforts to promote literacy in America, a few of the letters are peppered with a few notes on politics: "...George and I are doing our best to stay out of all policy and personnel decisions regarding our son's administration...we are retired...we are truly keeping hands off - please understand..."

Alexander Autographs has an extensive holding of material and September's sale will offer collectors the opportunity to obtain much sought after signatures and manuscripts. Other highlights include:
• An archive of letters from the family of Confederate agent and alleged Lincoln assassination conspirator Beverly Tucker
• An exchange voucher partly filled out by and bearing the signature of John Slidell and other financial documents concerning the pay of the Confederate Foreign Service
• A hastily written draft by John Lennon [New York, ca. 1970-71] in bold pencil, of a fascinating letter to the head of Apple Records banning Paul McCartney from access to any Beatles recordings
• John Lennon's christening bracelet
• An original watercolor signed by Joan Miro
• Photo stills from The Bride of Frankenstein movie signed by Boris Karloff
• Theodore Roosevelt's book Outdoor Pastimes of the American Hunter signed by him as President
• Babe Ruth signed baseball

Alexander Autographs, Inc., established in 1989, is the premier auctioneer of historic letters, documents and manuscripts. Everything we offer is fully guaranteed for authenticity. We are located at 1 River Road in Cos Cob, Connecticut. The September sale will contain over 1800 lots in two parts. For more information about the auction or to request a catalog, please contact Peter Klarnet at (203) 622-8444 or via e-mail at: peter@alexautographs.com.

Domenico Rosa - 8/30/2004

The August 1, 2004 Discovery Channel program, "Columbus: Secrets from the grave," was saturated with all sorts of truly pathetic flimflam purporting to show that Christopher Columbus was of Catalan origin, probably an illegitimate member of the Colom family of Catalonia.

The legal documents that demonstrate the Genoese origin of Cristoforo, his father Domenico, and his brothers Bartolomeo and Giacomo (Diego) are discussed in Chapter II of Samuel Eliot Morison's "Admiral of the Ocean Sea.

On page 14, Morison wrote:

Besides these documents from which we may glean facts about Christopher's early life, there are others which identify the Discoverer as the son of Domenico the wool weaver, beyond the possibility of doubt. For instance, Domenico had a brother Antonio, like him a respectable member of the lower middle class in Genoa. Antonio had three sons: Matteo, Amigeto and Giovanni, who was
generally known as Giannetto, the Genoese equivalent of "Johnny." Johnny like Christopher gave up a humdrum occupation to follow the sea. In 1496 the three brothers met in a notary's office at Genoa and agreed that Johnny should go to Spain and seek out his first cousin "Don Cristoforo de Colombo, Admiral of the King of Spain," each
contributing one third of the traveling expenses. This quest for a job was highly successful. The Admiral gave Johnny command of a caravel on the Third Voyage to America, and entrusted him with confidential matters as well.

Domenico Rosa

HNN - 8/27/2004

Columbus Dispatch (Ohio)

August 22, 2004 Sunday

$110 million Underground Railroad museum won't save havens for runaway slaves


When the Underground Railroad museum in Cincinnati was receiving a million-dollar gift from Oprah Winfrey, Connie Quarles was getting $5 a bowl for soup.

The bean-soup dinner was held as part of an effort to raise $70,000 to buy the abandoned Zanesville home of former slave Nelson T. Gant, who hid slaves traveling north to freedom.

"We always say, $1 is better than none," Quarles said.

The soup sale netted the Ohio Underground Railroad Association just a couple hundred dollars, and restoration of the Gant house alone will cost another $250,000.

That's hard to come by for Quarles and others like her who rely on word of mouth and small groups, including schoolchildren, for money.

As the grand museum honoring the Underground Railroad opens officially this week in Cincinnati, Quarles' group says many of the 400 sites where slaves hid more than 140 years ago are in danger of being lost. The preservationists are frustrated that they struggle for every dollar while millions flow to support the National Underground Railroad Freedom Center.

"There is money, but it's really hard to find," Quarles said. "Meanwhile, we lose a lot of sites."

Sitting tall on the Ohio River, the $110 million Freedom Center has its official grand opening on Monday. The product of a decadelong fund-raising campaign begun in Cincinnati, the project has attracted the support of world-famous entertainers and celebrities such as actress Halle Berry and boxing legend and human-rights activist Muhammad Ali.

A combination of local, state and federal-government contributions made up about 40 percent of Freedom Center's funding base. Individuals and companies made up the rest.

The center is expected to generate $40 million a year in income and tourism-related revenues.

Quarles is a regional coordinator for the Ohio Underground Railroad Association, a state group whose mission is to save sites along the network. The association doesn't receive public funding.

Its all-volunteer team has identified more than 600 sites in Ohio and -- one house at a time -- works to document the connection of each to the Underground Railroad.

The group struggles to protect such properties from demolition, relying mostly on local residents for money and leadership. Preservationists tout some successes. The Junior League now runs a museum and garden at Columbus' Kelton House on Town Street, once a station on the Underground Railroad.

In Stark County, the city of Alliance and the Ohio Underground Railroad Association joined forces to save the Haines House, home to one of the area's best-known abolitionists.

Usually it takes years to amass enough resources to restore even one site, and Leslie Blankenship of the Underground Railroad Association said her group covets the Freedom Center's bottom line.

"We're always in the process of finding new sites. We'd like to save them all, but we don't have the money," she said.

The Ohio Historic Preservation Office helps research houses and other Underground Railroad stations for designation on national historic registries. But that office also lacks money for actual restoration, a circumstance unlikely to change in tough economic times, officials said.

Meanwhile, the state is losing sites -- more than 200 already are gone -- every day.

In 1998, Congress enacted the Network to Freedom Act, which authorized the National Park Service to identify and preserve pieces of the Underground Railroad across the country. A related bill authorized $2.5 million for "bricks and mortar" projects that would save sites.

Of $500,000 eventually appropriated, half was spent on a mostly unrelated National Park Service study in the state of Delaware, said James Hill, a regional coordinator for the Network to Freedom program.

"Believe me, if there was money, we would've gotten it by now," said Beverly Gray of the Underground Railroad Association's southern region. "We have no beef with what the Freedom Center is doing, but we wish we had money, too."

A losing battle

The Ohio River -- a few hundred feet wide in the 1800s -- separated the free state of Ohio from Kentucky, where slaves were traded openly.

Even in free states, helping fugitive slaves was a crime.

A network of allies in Ohio risked jail and their livelihoods to hide the runaways in homes and barns, and in secret compartments of horse trailers.

The system became known as the Underground Railroad. Everything depended on secrecy, and even after the Emancipation Proclamation of 1863 that freed the slaves, the network remained a mystery.

And because the country was reluctant to relive such painful times, historians say, most former slaves and abolitionists died without telling their stories.

By the time the Underground Railroad Association formed and began documenting sites in 1994, many sites were gone. Others have been altered or are badly deteriorated.

The group created a list of endangered sites and set out to educate communities about saving their local connection to the Underground Railroad.

A state coordinator and 12 regional leaders do the research along with dozens of volunteers.

But, Blankenship said, theirs is a losing battle.

For example, despite protests from Columbus Mayor Michael B. Coleman, then a councilman, a Sunbury Road house was demolished in 1993 to make way for construction by Allstate Insurance. A plaque is all that remains to identify the location as a former stop along the railroad.

Abolitionist Benjamin Lundy's Jefferson County home showed up for sale on eBay. The Lathrop House in the Toledo suburb of Sylvania was moved from its foundation earlier this year to make room for a Catholic Diocese school building.

The Gant home in the Muskingum County seat of Zanesville had been turned into a tavern before a bank foreclosed on it. The structure sat empty until Quarles' group bought it. But restoring the house to its 19th century appearance will be costly.

Gray calls her guided tours of the Underground Railroad sites in Chillicothe the "parking lot tour" because so many have been demolished.

Saving the homes, Blankenship said, is more important than paying for another museum.

"You go to the Rankin House (a preserved site) and look into Kentucky over the Ohio River, and tell me that's not better," she said. "There's a spell that's woven there that you can't get in a museum."

A living history

Inside the Freedom Center, short films illustrate for visitors the painful choice slaves made to escape.

Interactive exhibits engage children and teach the lessons of contemporary struggles for blacks and other minority groups.

A high-tech, surround-sound theater enables viewers to almost feel the sensation of running with the escaping slaves.

Its centerpiece, however, represents perhaps the basest symbol of that era in America: a circa 1830s slave pen moved there from a farm on the Kentucky side of the Ohio River.

While they were being traded or sold, slaves waited in chains inside the wooden cabinlike building, now displayed in one of the lobbies of the museum.

Discovered in a tobacco barn in Maysville, Ky., the pen, some residents argued, should have remained on the farm.

Kentucky officials wanted it left in the state.

But Freedom Center curators argued that more people will see it in Cincinnati and that they could afford to restore and preserve the badly deteriorated slave jail.

Spencer Crew, executive director of the Freedom Center, said the museum wasn't intended to shift interest and support from restoring the homes and other fugitive-slave hideouts.

"While we can offer history, we'll encourage people to see the Underground Railroad sites," he said.

Julie Calvert of the Greater Cincinnati Convention and Visitors Bureau said city leaders hope the center reflects local efforts to improve race relations since the divisive riots of 2001. The unrest was followed by an economic boycott, both sparked after a white officer fatally shot an unarmed black man fleeing police.

Calvert and others have worked to promote the city as well as the museum, including local tours for visiting black leaders and a $110 million advertising campaign.

The National Conference for Community and Justice in Cincinnati first pitched the idea for a museum. But Freedom Center officials have said the Queen City also is appropriate because it shares the long bank of the Ohio River, a major thread through the Underground Railroad.

A new opportunity

Across the Ohio River and 7 miles downstream from Maysville, the Rankin House sits high on a hill, overlooking the Brown County village of Ripley.

From there, it's easy to imagine escaped slaves braving this last obstacle on their journey north to freedom. A light in the upstairs window of the Rev. John Rankin's home showed the way.

Another hour downriver is the new museum in Cincinnati. Ripley preservationists say they'll take full advantage of that proximity.

Oprah Winfrey visited Ripley in October to film a documentary for the center that details the village's key role in the anti-slavery movement.

Today, visitors tour the six-room brick house, where Rankin raised 13 children, and its cellar and secret upstairs alcoves, where he hid slaves.

The Ohio Historical Society has owned the home since 1938 and opened it to the public a decade later. As the state grappled with budget woes in the 1980s, it looked like the Rankin House would close.

A nonprofit local group called Ripley Heritage Inc. stepped in and still runs the museum on a $28,000 annual budget, with funding from the state, private companies and citizens. Admission fees and souvenir sales also help support the operation.

"The Freedom Center can really help boost Ripley," said Betty Campbell, board president for Ripley Heritage.

Down the hill from the Rankin House, historians opened the John P. Parker House last year. Local residents saved the structure, which had been abandoned since the 1960s and was almost beyond saving.

Parker was a slave who bought his freedom. In Ripley, he owned a manufacturing business and held several patents. He also helped escaped slaves on their way north.

A walking tour of other Underground Railroad stops along the river in Ripley also is available.

Finding the money to save Ripley's historic homes hasn't been easy, Campbell said.

But it's worth the trouble, she added.

"It's an important part of history to tell, about this band of people helping African-Americans to their freedom."

HNN - 8/27/2004

Kissinger to Argentine Generals in 1976: "If there are things that have to be done, you should do them quickly"

Newly Declassified Document Shows Secretary of State Gave Strong Support Early on to the Military Junta


Washington, August 27, 2004 - A newly declassified document obtained by the National Security Archive shows that amidst vast human rights violations by Argentina's security forces in June 1976, Secretary of State Henry Kissinger told Argentine Foreign Minister Admiral Cesar Augusto Guzzetti:

"If there are things that have to be done, you should do them quickly. But you should get back quickly to normal procedures."

Kissinger's comment is part of a 13-page Memorandum of Conversation reporting on a June 10 meeting between Secretary Kissinger and Argentine Admiral Guzzetti in Santiago, Chile. The document was obtained by the National Security Archive's Southern Cone Documentation Project through a Freedom of Information Act request to the Department of State filed in August 2002 and appealed in February 2004.

At a time when the international community, the U.S. media, universities, and scientific institutions, the U.S. Congress, and even the U.S. Embassy in Argentina were clamoring about the indiscriminate human rights violations by the Argentine military, Secretary Kissinger told Guzzetti: "We are aware you are in a difficult period. It is a curious time, when political, criminal, and terrorist activities tend to merge without any clear separation. We understand you must establish authority."

Another document recently unearthed by the National Security Archive and posted for the first time today, shows that on July 9, 1976, Secretary Kissinger was explicitly briefed on the rampant repression taking place in Argentina: "Their theory is that they can use the Chilean method," Kissinger's top aide on Latin America Harry Shlaudeman informed him, "that is, to terrorize the opposition - even killing priests and nuns and others."

"The Memorandum of Conversation explains why the Argentine generals believed they got a clear message from the Secretary that they had carte blanche for the dirty war," said Carlos Osorio, Director of the Southern Cone Documentation Project at the National Security Archive. "It appears that Secretary Kissinger gave the 'green light' to the Argentine military during the June 1976 meeting with Guzzetti in Santiago," he added.

These and other documents, along with a detailed chronology of events surrounding the June 10 meeting, are available here:

THE NATIONAL SECURITY ARCHIVE is an independent non-governmental research institute and library located at The George Washington University in Washington, D.C. The Archive collects and publishes declassified documents acquired through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). A tax-exempt public charity, the Archive receives no U.S. government funding; its budget is supported by publication royalties and donations from foundations and individuals.
The National Security Archive does not and will never share the names or e-mail addresses of its subscribers with any other organization. Once a year, we will write you and ask for your financial support. We may also ask you for your ideas for Freedom of Information requests, documentation projects, or other issues that the Archive should take on. We would welcome your input, and any information you care to share with us about your special interests. But we do not sell or rent any information about subscribers to any other party.
You may leave the list at any time by sending a "SIGNOFF NSARCHIVE" command to <LISTSERV@HERMES.CIRC.GWU.EDU>.
You can also unsubscribe from the list anytime by using the following link:

HNN - 8/27/2004

From the Iraq Crisis list serv

Al-Hatra * Important Ancient/Early Islamic site near Mosul at risk from US Army demolition program

Word has reached me that the cultural heritage community in Mosul is deeply concerned that a US Army program to destroy ordinance is irreparably harming the ancient site of al-Hatra 40k south of the city. It is hoped that with Nimrod this site would serve as a focus for tourist development and future archeological research.

Al-Hatra was a Parthian city, and blends Roman/Hellenistic/Arab styles. However twice a week the army is conducting controlled explosions of recovered munitions and mines at the nearby military base. The constant artificial seismic activity is damaging stone arches in the main temple and outer wall. The Army plans to continue to conduct these demolitions for the next five years.

Please consider options for calling additional attention to this issue; presumably the US Army could move further away from these significant archeological remains.

Keith Watenpaugh

[Mr. Watenpaugh teaches the history of the Middle East at Le Moyne.]

HNN - 8/24/2004

Dear subscribers,

Please find below the English version of our appeal, thank you.


Thank you for circulating this alert as widely as possible.

Katell Guiziou


61, rue François Truffaut
75012 Paris

Tél.: +33 (0)1 40 02 05 90
Fax: +33 (0)1 40 02 05 91
Email: info@patrimsf.org



– For immediate release–
Paris, Friday 20 August 2004

Threats to the sacred heritage site of Najaf
and many other cultural sites of Iraq
Appeal by Patrimoine sans Frontières

After two weeks of fighting in Najaf, Iraq, Patrimoine sans Frontières solemnly appeals to all of the parties involved to respect the heritage of this Holy site for Shia Muslims. Patrimoine sans Frontières appeals also to the international community to mobilise against this situation which in effect is taking a cultural and sacred site hostage. This site is one of the jewels of Iraqi cultural heritage and its importance for the history of humanity makes it part of the common heritage of all mankind.

The fighting that has taken place in the very heart of the historic cemetery of Najaf (the Wadi Al-Salam, or valley of peace, one of the largest burial grounds in the world) has caused the degradation of the site with the destruction of many tombstones some of which date back to the beginning of the Islamic era (7th century). The coalition and Iraqi forces are currently surrounding the mausoleum of Ali, tomb of the cousin and brother-in-law of the Prophet Mohammed, where the Moqtada Al-Sadr militias have taken refuge, endangering this monument which has already suffered damages.

Declaring as unacceptable the profanation of sacred sites and the use of cultural heritage remains as shields and military objectives, Patrimoine sans Frontières calls to the:

– Combatants that have taken refuge in the Mausoleum to respect the terms of the Hague Convention of 1954 on the protection of cultural heritage in the event of armed conflict and not use this site as a shield and target;

– International community, and principally UNESCO, ICOMOS and the International Committee of the Blue Shield, to mobilise themselves in the protection of this Holy site of the cultural heritage of Iraq;

– American Government to ratify the Hague Convention and the additional protocol of 1977 to the Geneva Convention of 12 August 1949, regarding the protection of the victims of international armed conflicts;

– Provisional Iraqi Government to respect the terms of the Hague Convention, that Iraq ratified in 1967, and to ratify the additional protocol to the Geneva Convention already cited;

– American troops to respect this sacred and historic site.

Through this communiqué Patrimoine sans Frontières wishes to recall the threats that Iraqi cultural heritage continues to face one year after the beginning of the war. Iraq is situated in a region that is one of the cradles of our civilisation. Hundreds of magnificent monuments, archaeological sites and cultural landscapes can be found throughout this country which now has to face their degradation and destruction, even in certain incidents total obliteration, of sites that have survived several thousand years. The scientific community and journalists in Iraq have been recently moved by the damaged suffered by the ancient site of Babylon by the camps that have been set up on site by international forces. The building of air bases (like the one in Kirkuk) have further harmed archaeological sites. Fighting has left hundreds of sites exposed and unprotected, vulnerable to looters of all sorts that are currently devastating sites by using dynamite and flooding the art market with objects coming out of Iraq. The situation for heritage professionals in Iraq is delicate as they have no materials, have only restricted mobility and are being denied access to many sites. These conditions make it impossible to carry out any emergency conservation.

Despite the mobilisation of the scientific community (namely in an international seminar on the redefinition of the concept of cultural heritage, Istanbul, 24-26 June), and the promise made by Paul Bremer, former civil administrator for Iraq, that the site of Babylon and the ensemble of Iraqi cultural heritage would be respected (11 June), the fate of Najaf attests to the fact that the cultural heritage of Iraq, our common heritage, is still today under threat of disappearing.

Saïd Zulficar, Vice-President of Patrimoine sans Frontières

Patrimoine sans Frontières
61, rue François Truffaut
75012 Paris
tel. 01 40 02 05 92
fax. 01 40 02 05 91
e-mail : info@patrimsf.org
contact : Katell Guiziou (00 33 6 76 09 39 31)

Patrimoine Sans Frontières, a French NGO created in 1992, aims at safeguarding the cultural heritage around the world.
Patrimoine Sans Frontières is a light and independent orgnisation.
Patrimoine Sans Frontières is dedicated to help the forgotten or underestimated heritage: objects, buildings, urban and rural sites, know-how; everything that is precious but endangered or neglected.
Its president is Béatrice de Durfort.

HNN - 8/19/2004

Plain Dealer (Cleveland)

August 16, 2004 Monday

Stephen Koff, Plain Dealer Washington Bureau Chief

War Stories Collide As Kerry’s Vietnam Medals Come Under Fire

Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a group of Vietnam veterans, says Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry lied to get several of his commendations for gallantry in military service 35 years ago and later lied about other aspects of his service. An independent research organization, FactCheck.org, affiliated with the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg Public Policy Center, recently examined some of the claims. Here are the conclusions from it and other sources:

The award: Silver Star, for “extraordinary daring and personal courage . . . in attacking a numerically superior force in the face of intense fire.”

On Feb. 28, 1969, Kerry, commander of a Swift boat in Vietnam, first attacked an “entrenched enemy” less than 50 feet away, ordering “his boat to attack as all units opened fire and beached directly in front of the enemy ambushers,” according to the commendation. “This daring and courageous tactic surprised the enemy and succeeded in routing a score of enemy soldiers” and capturing “many enemy weapons.”

Later, 800 yards away, Kerry’s boat encountered a second ambush and a B-40 rocket exploded “close aboard” Kerry’s boat. “With utter disregard for his own safety, and the enemy rockets, he again ordered a charge on the enemy, beached his boat only 10 feet away from the VC [Viet Cong] rocket position, and personally led a landing party ashore in pursuit of the enemy.”

The charge: That Kerry was not forthright about what happened — specifically, that after beaching the boat he pursued a wounded enemy and shot him in the back. George Elliott, the retired Navy captain who recommended Kerry for the Silver Star, and now a Swift Boat Veteran for Truth, recently signed an affidavit saying: “I was never informed that he had simply shot a wounded, fleeing Viet Cong in the back.”

The facts: The official citation shows Kerry was not awarded the Silver Star for simply pursuing and dispatching the Viet Cong. The killing is not even mentioned in the official citation but, rather, covers Kerry’s decision to attack rather than flee from two ambushes. The citation was based on what Elliott wrote up at the time.

Elliott was quoted by the Boston Globe Aug. 6 as saying he had made a “terrible mistake” in signing the affidavit against Kerry. Later Elliott signed a second affidavit saying he still stands by the words he said in a recent TV ad: “John Kerry has not been honest about what happened in Vietnam.” But Elliott also said in that second affidavit, “I do not claim to have personal knowledge as to how Kerry shot the wounded, fleeing Viet Cong.”

Rather, Elliott said his new beliefs were based on accounts including a book in which Kerry is quoted as saying of the soldier, “He was running away with a live B-40 [rocket launcher] and, I thought, poised to turn around and fire it.”

Elliott previously defended Kerry. As recently as June 2003, he called Kerry’s Silver Star “well deserved” and his action “courageous.”

The award: Bronze Star, for rescuing Jim Rassmann, an Army Special Forces lieutenant, from the water while under enemy fire. According to the official citation, Kerry’s boat was under enemy fire on March 13, 1969, and Kerry had been wounded when an enemy mine exploded near his own boat. Rassmann, a longtime Republican, has said he was under sniper fire from both banks of the river when the wounded Kerry helped him aboard, risking his life “to save mine.”

The charge: Van O’Dell, a former Navy enlisted man who says he was the gunner on another Swift Boat, states in an affidavit that he was “a few yards away” from Kerry’s boat when Kerry pulled Rassmann from the water. O’Dell insists “there was no fire” at the time, adding: “I did not hear any shots, nor did any hostile fire hit any boats” other than his own, PCF-3.

Others in Swift Boat Veterans for Truth back up that account. Jack Chenoweth, who was a lieutenant (junior grade) commanding PCF-3, said Kerry’s boat “fled the scene” after a mine blast disabled PCF-3, and returned only “when it was apparent that there was no return fire.” And Larry Thurlow, who says he commanded a third Swift Boat that day, says “Kerry fled while we stayed to fight,” and returned only “after no return fire occurred.”

The facts: The proximity of these men to Kerry’s boat during the incident is in dispute. They did not serve on Kerry’s crew, and their statements are contrary to the accounts of Kerry and those who served under him.

“This smear campaign has been launched by people without decency,” Rassmann, who considers Kerry a hero, said in a Wall Street Journal guest column last week. Retired Adm. William Crowe, a Kerry supporter, said on CNN that if Kerry had fled, it would have been a court-martial offense, yet none of the officers who now say he fled brought him “into account with a senior officer. That makes no sense whatsoever, that defies reason.”

“Tour of Duty,” a book by historian Douglas Brinkley based largely on accounts from Kerry, describes Rassmann’s rescue and the sniper fire as happening “several hundred yards back” from where the crippled PCF-3 was lying, not “a few yards away,” the distance from which the anti-Kerry veterans claim to have witnessed the incident.

The award: Purple Heart (Kerry’s first), for a shrapnel wound to Kerry’s left arm from a grenade on Dec. 2, 1968.

The charge: Louis Letson, a medical officer and lieutenant commander, says Kerry’s wound was self- inflicted and does not merit a Purple Heart. Letson says “the crewman with Kerry told me there was no hostile fire, and that Kerry had inadvertently wounded himself with an M-79 grenade.” And Grant Hibbard, Kerry’s commanding officer at the time, said in an affidavit that he “turned down the Purple Heart request” and recalled Kerry’s injury as a “tiny scratch less than from a rose thorn.”

The facts: Letson says he treated Kerry for the wound. However, medical records provided by the Kerry campaign list another officer, not Letson. The Kerry campaign says the two crewmen with Kerry that day deny ever talking to Letson. And though Hibbard calls the wound “a tiny scratch,” Letson’s affidavit describes shrapnel “lodged in Kerry’s arm” — though, he notes, “barely.” Hibbard told the Boston Globe in an interview in April that he eventually acquiesced about granting Kerry the Purple Heart, an award sometimes granted for even relatively minor wounds during the Vietnam War, according to the Globe’s biography of Kerry.

The award: Purple Heart, Kerry’s third, qualifying him to leave Vietnam more than six months early, for the injuries he received the day he rescued Rassmann. (Kerry got his second Purple Heart after receiving a shrapnel wound in his leg on Feb. 20, 1969, during a firefight, but that award has not been controversial.)

The charge: The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth says Kerry didn’t deserve his third Purple Heart, which was received for shrapnel wounds in left buttocks and contusions on right forearm. The Swift Boat group’s affidavits state that the wound in Kerry’s backside happened earlier that day in an accident, not in the heat of battle. “Kerry inadvertently wounded himself in the fanny,” Larry Thurlow said in his affidavit, “by throwing a grenade too close (to destroy a rice supply) and suffered minor shrapnel wounds.”

The facts: The grenade incident is actually supported by Kerry’s own account, but the shrapnel wound was only part of the basis for his third Purple Heart, according to official documents. The evidence here is contradictory, says FactCheck.org.

Kerry’s account is in the book “Tour of Duty”: “I got a piece of small grenade in my ass from one of the rice-bin explosions and then we started to move back to the boats.” He said his arm was hurt later, after the mine blast that disabled PCF-3, when a second explosion rocked his own boat and “threw me violently against the bulkhead on the door.”

According to a Navy casualty report released by the Kerry campaign, the third Purple Heart was received for “shrapnel wounds in left buttocks and contusions on his right forearm when a mine detonated close aboard” Kerry’s boat. The official citation for Kerry’s Bronze Star refers only to his arm injury, not to the shrapnel wound. It says he performed the rescue “from an exposed position on the bow, his arm bleeding and in pain.”

Even a “friendly fire” injury such as the wound from the grenade can qualify for a Purple Heart if the grenade is released with the intent of damaging or destroying enemy troops or equipment. Rice was being destroyed by grenades that day on the assumption that it otherwise might feed Viet Cong fighters.

Other dispute: Kerry became an anti-war activist after returning from Vietnam, accusing American troops of rapes, beheadings, torture, and various other war crimes.

His critics say this was based on exaggerations and falsehoods that maligned all Vietnam veterans as misfits, addicts and baby killers.

Kerry also said in the Senate in 1986 that he entered Cambodia on secret missions, which would have been illegal, and in other accounts he specifically recalled being there on Christmas Eve, 1968, a memory “seared” in his mind.

Fellow officers and living commanders said he was 55 miles from the Cambodian border and never entered Cambodia.

They also criticize him for associating President Nixon with the alleged Cambodian incursions of 1968, since Nixon didn’t take office until 1969.

Kerry adviser Michael Meehan said on Friday that Kerry was “near and around the border” on Dec. 24, 1968 — Christmas Eve — and “for certain he transported Special Operations folks into Cambodia” other times.

HNN - 8/12/2004

“War in Film, Television, and History”
at the Dolce International Conference Center in Dallas, Texas
(please visit www.filmandhistory.org <http://www.filmandhistory.org/>; for more information)

Call for Respondents on
“Fahrenheit 9/11 and the (Culture) War at Home”
Saturday, November 13, 2004

Panel: “Fahrenheit 9/11 and the (Culture) War at Home”

An extended session is now being planned on the significance and impact of Fahrenheit 9/11 as a documentary, an historical film, and a popular phenomenon. Three brief 10-15 minute introductory presentations on popular media culture and the 2004 election, Michael Moore and his film and TV work, and a concise production history of Fahrenheit 9/11, will be followed by an open and freewheeling discussion, spurred by a series of respondents who will each have the floor for 3-5 minutes to present a focused argument on some aspect of the topic at hand. The audience, too, will be encouraged to share opinions and ask questions throughout.

Anyone interested in serving as a respondent, please e-mail Gary Edgerton gedgerto@odu.edu <mailto:gedgerto@odu.edu> , panel chair and moderator, with a short 40-50 word summary of the point that you wish to make by September 30. Preference in being selected as a respondent will be given to those attendees who are not otherwise presenting papers at the conference. We will assemble a cross-section of viewpoints and include as many respondents as time allows.

All respondents will be listed in the program by name and institution. Respondents are also expected register for the conference. Full details on registration procedures and fees, travel and accommodations, and related information can be found at www.filmandhistory.org <http://www.filmandhistory.org/>; . The Film & History League is co-hosting the “War in Film, Television, and History” Conference (November 11-14, 2004) with the Literature/Film Association.

bobby chan - 8/12/2004



mark safranski - 8/6/2004

The DNI idea, though this is counterintuitive at first glance, is a solution in search of a problem.

The military intelligence services of the Army, Navy, Air force and Marines serve an irreplaceable function - they are the eyes and ears of battlefield commanders and they need a close relationship with the chain of command in order to provide tactical intelligence on a timely basis. If they are impeded from that job by a civilian appointee thousands of miles away with different priorities then a lot of young soldiers may die. They do not need a DNI.

The IC essentially provides four services across the 14 known intelligence agencies:

1. SIGINT collection
2. HUMINT collection
3. Analysis
4. Paramilitary covert operations

Some of these are from agencies or departments whose primary mission is something other than intelligence or whose culture is alien to clandestine operations.

A NID or the DCI really ought to be concerned only with setting collection priorities for everything but the service MI branches. Analysis should remain competitive but also collaborative instead of compartmentalized as it currently exists. The military should predominantly be in charge of covert special operations but the CIA needs an independent capability here as well. There are simply some missions and regions where sending a bunch of mid-twenty to early thirty, mostly white guys with crew cuts and hard-ass stares will raise eyebrows.


HNN - 8/5/2004

from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy Volume 2004, Issue No. 74 August 5, 2004


Some of the most important intelligence reforms proposed by the 9-11 Commission, including the creation of a Director of National Intelligence (DNI), might have been adopted over a decade ago if not for the opposition of the Secretary of Defense at the time, Dick Cheney.

In a March 1992 letter to Congress, Secretary Cheney defended the status quo and objected to proposed intelligence reform legislation, particularly the DNI position.

"The roles of the Secretary of Defense and the Director of Central Intelligence have evolved in a fashion that meets national, departmental and tactical intelligence needs," Cheney wrote.

The intelligence reform proposals "would seriously impair the effectiveness of this arrangement by assigning inappropriate authority to the proposed Director of National Intelligence (DNI), who would become the director and manager of internal DoD activities that in the interest of efficiency and effectiveness must remain under the authority, direction, and control of the Secretary of Defense," he wrote.

A companion letter from the DoD General Counsel elaborated on Secretary Cheney's objections, complaining that the intelligence reform proposal would "give the DNI far more extensive authority and responsibility for program and budget matters than is now exercised by the DCI," which is indeed the whole point.

Secretary Cheney successfully torpedoed the initiative with his warning that "I would recommend that the President veto [the measure] if [it] were presented to him in its current form."

In fairness, it was not obvious, then or now, that the DNI concept is the best or only solution to what ails U.S. intelligence. And it would be surprising if a Secretary of Defense did anything other than protect his institutional turf.

But Cheney's unyielding opposition stifled the first initiative for post-Cold War intelligence reform. As a result, we now face many of the same problems, and the same proposed solutions, more than a decade later.

See Secretary Cheney's March 17, 1992 letter to House Armed Services Committee chairman Les Aspin here:


Thanks to Robert Steele of Open Source Solution (www.oss.net), which advocates establishment of an independent open source intelligence agency.

HNN - 7/30/2004

The Independent (London)

July 29, 2004, Thursday

SECTION: First Edition; FOREIGN NEWS; Pg. 28

LENGTH: 528 words


BYLINE: TONY PATERSON IN BERLIN The stadium will be used for the 2006 World Cup EPA

THE BERLIN stadium which hosted the 1936 Olympic Games, presided over by Adolf Hitler, is to reopen on Saturday after a multi-million euro facelift designed to dispel its Nazi image and prepare the site for the 2006 World Cup.

The 74,000-seat marble and granite complex was where the Nazi leader famously snubbed the black American athlete Jesse Owens who had won four gold medals.

After the Second World War, the complex that was once conceived as a sporting temple to Aryan supremacy fell into decay while serving first as the headquarters of the British military government of Cold War west Berlin and then as a venue for football matches and concerts.

It has remained a potent symbol of the Third Reich and has been something of an embarrassment to successive Berlin governments. But, this Saturday, the stadium will officially reopen with a huge party attended by more than 70,000 guests. The conductor Daniel Barenboim will host a classical concert and the German singer Nena will also perform.

The party celebrates the completion of a four-year renovation project costing EUR240m (pounds 158m). A roof has been installed as well as comfortable seating and floodlights capable of producing "daylight" illumination over the pitch.

The revamp has been carried for the World Cup finals, which Germany will host - for the first time since 1974 - in 2006. The final is scheduled to be played in the stadium.

"We had to abide by strict preservation rules," said Alexander Goerbing of Walter Bau AG, which carried out the rebuilding project. "Our aim was to retain the building's original character, but to give it a lighter feel which offsets the heavy walls of the stadium."

The refit was not without drama: in January 2002, building workers discovered a British Second World War bomb buried beneath the stadium and had to call in explosive experts to defuse it.

The refurbishment will also include an attempt by German historians to thoroughly explain the arena's Nazi past. A new museum at the stadium's entrance and 35 information boards dotted about the complex will provide details of the building's history. "These historical markers are long overdue," said Hans Joachim Teichler, a history professor at Potsdam University who supervised the renovation project.

"There has been talk of Nazi ghosts and a Nazi atmosphere because the stadium is one of the few Third Reich buildings left. But the new arena is completely different."

The museum explains how the Nazis turned the 1936 Olympics into a propaganda show that was designed to convince the world that Adolf Hitler's new Germany was both a positive and popular development. It features excerpts from the 11-hour Olympic propaganda film Olympia by the Nazi film director Leni Riefenstahl, who died only last year.

Plaques also mark the "Fuehrer box" where Hitler and other German leaders took the Nazi salute from thousands of spectators and watched Owens sprint to victory in the 100 and 200-metre track events, run a leg for the winning 400-metre relay team and win the long jump, beating German athletes and making a mockery of Nazi "master race" ideology.

HNN - 7/30/2004

The Christchurch Press Company Limited
The Press (Christchurch, New Zealand)

July 31, 2004, Saturday

Holocaust denier kept out of NZ


The Immigration Service will bar controversial Holocaust revisionist historian David Irving from entering New Zealand following an outcry from Jewish groups.

The Immigration Service decided yesterday to refuse Irving entry because of his deportation from Canada in 1992.

The decision goes against the opinion of Foreign Minister Phil Goff, who said earlier he personally did not believe Irving should be denied entry unless he had serious criminal convictions.

"In terms of people expressing views that I vehemently oppose, no, that's a part of a democracy," Goff said.

Irving, branded by his critics as anti-Semitic and a Holocaust denier, has been planning a two-week tour of New Zealand including a highly publicised speech at the National Press Club in Wellington.

His plans have caused an uproar in the Jewish community, which has called on the Government to intervene and ban Irving from entering the country.

But it appears such intervention will not be necessary. A spokeswoman for the Immigration Service, Kathryn O'Sullivan, told The Press yesterday that after reviewing the case the service had decided that Irving would not be allowed to enter New Zealand even though he holds a British passport.

"Mr Irving is not permitted to enter New Zealand under the Immigration Act because people who have been deported from another country are refused entry," O'Sullivan said.

"The law doesn't take into account why people have been deported but only the fact that they have been.

"At the moment if he tried to board the plane we've got a new system called advanced passenger screening which would detect him when he checked in for his flight."

Jewish Council president David Zwartz said he was relieved to hear of the NZIS decision.

"I think it is good that the law is being adhered to."

Irving's visit would have caused the Jewish community unnecessary grief, Zwartz said.

"Irving's views are offensive and unpleasant to us. We don't need someone here who is propounding very vigorously anti-Jewish views."

Irving was to speak about Hitler and Winston Churchill under the heading "The problems of writing about World War 2 in a free society". He had promised not to talk about the Holocaust, saying on his website that he was not an expert on the subject.

Irving spoke in New Zealand twice during the 1980s and has no serious criminal convictions. But he was convicted of violating a German law making it illegal to deny the existence of the Nazi extermination of Jews and has been deported from Canada.

He has also been banned from entering the United States, Italy, South Africa, and, since 1992, Australia, despite fighting four legal battles against the ban.

Rick Shenkman - 7/30/2004

NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE (Vol. 10, #33; 29 July 2004) by Bruce Craig (editor) rbcraig@historycoalition.org NATIONAL COALITION FOR HISTORY (NCH)
Website: http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch

1. ACTION ALERT! NHPRC NEEDS THE HELP OF SUPPORTERS 2. LEGISLATIVE UPDATE: HERITAGE AREA BILL PASSES HOUSE 3. BITS AND BYTES: New Coalition Member; Nixon Winter White House Demolished 4. ARTICLES OF INTEREST: "Teaching the Nation's History" (Humanities magazine; July 2004)

EDITOR'S NOTE: This will be the last NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE until the first week of September when we will resume publication. With Congress now out of session and with miserable hot and humid weather setting in here in the District of Columbia, the editor is making his annual escape north to Prince Edward Island, Canada, for much of August. E-mail communications and telephone messages directed to the NCH offices will, however, be checked periodically.

1. ACTION ALERT! NHPRC NEEDS THE HELP OF SUPPORTERS Based on the funding levels passed by the House Committee on Appropriations for the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) on 22 July 2004, funding for the National Historical Publications and Records Commission (NHPRC) in FY 2005 will be dramatically cut unless history/archive supporters act. Earlier in the year, President Bush recommended only $3 million for the grant program and that number has now formally been endorsed by the House Appropriation Committee. If this figure is allowed to stand and is not raised by the Senate, the NHPRC will experience a 70% cut over the "full-funding" level that was appropriated for it last fiscal year. Should this happen, it would be disastrous and undoubtedly would result in curtailment of some ongoing editing projects throughout the country and/or reduction in staffing.

The National Coalition for History has initiated an advocacy effort to raise the level of funding the NHPRC grants program; $6.4 million (a compromise between the President/House recommendation and last year's full funding level) is viewed as the lowest figure that would meet minimum programmatic needs. We urge you, however, to contact your senators and request $8 million for the program. The higher of the two figures is needed in order to ensure that there is room to negotiate when the program is addressed by House and Senate conferees.

Individuals and organizations who wish to express their views on this issue are urged to consider contacting senators via phone calls, faxes (preferred), and e-mails. Ask them to support an $8 million figure for the NHPRC. Well-reasoned arguments with examples that communicate the benefits provided by the program will be needed (see "Key Points" below).
Organizations will need to communicate their total membership, purpose, and then voice support for NHPRC funding.

Please pass this information on to your colleagues and urge them also to act!

For a listing of senators' addresses by state, tap into:
http://www.senate.gov/ .
Communications from constituents of the relevant appropriations subcommittee members listed below are especially needed. If your senator is listed below and you are a constituent, PLEASE WRITE!

In the Senate, the subcommittee with appropriations jurisdictional responsibility for the NHPRC is the Transportation, Treasury and General Government Subcommittee made up of the following senators:
Richard Shelby (Chair, R-AL) Senate Hart Building, Room 110 Washington, D.C. 20510; Phone (202) 224-5744; Fax (202) 224-3416; Christopher Bond (R-MO) Senate Russell Building, Room 274 Washington, D.C.
20510; Phone (202) 224-5721; Fax (202) 224-8149; Robert Bennett (R-UT) Senate Dirksen Building, Room 431 Washington, D.C.
20510; Phone (202) 224-5444; Fax (202) 228-1168; Ben Nighthorse Campbell (R-CO) Senate Russell Building, Room 380 Washington, D.C. 20510; Phone (202) 224-5852; Fax (202) 228-4609; Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R-TX) Senate Russell Building, Room 284 Washington, D.C. 20510; Phone (202) 224-5922; Fax (202) 224-0776; Mike DeWine (R-OH) Senate Russell Building, Room 140 Washington, D.C.
20510; Phone (202) 224-2315; Fax (202) 224-6519; Sam Brownback (R-KS) Senate Hart Building, Room 303 Washington, D.C. 20510; Phone (202) 224-6521; Fax (202) 228-1265; Patty Murray (Ranking Member, D-WA) Senate Russell Building, Room 173 Washington, D.C. 20510; Phone (202) 114-2621; Fax (202) 224-0238; Robert Byrd (D-WV) Senate Hart Building, Room 311Washington, D.C. 20510; Phone (202) 224-3954; Fax (202) 228-0002; Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) Senate Hart Building, Room 709 Washington, D.C.
20510; Phone (202) 224-4654; Fax (202) 224-8858 Harry Reid (D-NV) Senate Hart Building, Room 528 Washington, D.C. 20510; Phone (202) 224-3542; Fax (202) 224-7327 Herbert Kohl (D-WI) Senate Hart Building, Room 330 Washington, D.C. 20510; Phone (202) 224-5653; Fax (202) 224-9787; Richard Durbin (D-IL) Senate Dirksen Building, Room 332 Washington, D.C.
20510; Phone (202) 224-2152; Fax (202) 228-0400; Byron Dorgan (D-ND) Senate Hart Building, Room 713 Washington, D.C. 20510; Phone (202) 224-2551; Fax (202) 226-0893.

The National Historical Publications Commission was created with the National Archives in 1934, given its own staff in 1951, authorized to make grants in 1964, and reorganized in 1975 as the National Historical Publications and Records Commission (NHPRC).

The NHPRC's mandate is to assist in efforts to preserve and to make the documentary heritage of the United States widely accessible by using modest federal grants to stimulate state, local, institutional, and private contributions. The federal funding leverages contributions to projects ranging from publishing the papers of nationally significant individuals and institutions (for example, the papers of founders Franklin, Jefferson, Washington, Adams, and Madison; projects documenting the ratification of the U.S. Constitution and the First Federal Congress; the correspondence between Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony, the Papers of Eleanor Roosevelt, the Frederick Douglass Papers, and the Papers of General George C. Marshall), to projects designed to preserve historical records of enduring value and to cooperative state, regional and national projects to address common archival issues, such as the complex problem of electronic historical records.

The Commission has an excellent record of accomplishment and is seen as a model federal grants program. For example, following the disastrous events of resulting from the terrorist attack of 9/11, it was because of a NHPRC grant that New York City archivists and curators had a disaster preparedness plan in place and were able to cope with and minimize the detrimental impact of the World Trade Center collapse on collections in lower Manhattan.

In the past, both the White House (and until last year) Congress have failed to fund the NHPRC at its full-authorized level. No administration has ever ever recommended full funding. In FY-2004, however, for the first time in history, Congress disregarded the Bush administration's recommendation of $5 million and appropriated $10 million for the Commission -- its full authorized level.

This year, once again the President's budget threatens the programmatic integrity of the NHPRC as well as its recognized ability to leverage monies and to act as a "venture capitalist" for the nation's documentary heritage.
If the Senate adopts the $3 million proposal of the president and that was adopted by the House committee, documentary publications projects, which are already universally understaffed and underfunded, will suffer further cutbacks and their progress will be slowed, or halted altogether. The very existence of state and regional activities in planning and implementing archival programs, already seriously hampered by funding cutbacks in the states, will also be imperiled.

Key Points to Raise in Relation to the NHPRC:
*The nation has a duty to document and preserve its history. NHPRC makes grants each year to institutions across the country to preserve historical records, publish historical papers, and to make historical materials more accessible. The Commission has an outstanding record of making grants to edit and publish historical documents, to develop archival programs, to promote the preservation and use of historical records, to promote regional and national coordination in addressing major archival issues, and to support a wide range of other activities relating to America 's documentary heritage. While the National Archives concentrates on federal records, the NHPRC helps archivists, documentary editors, and historians by making available non-Federal records of exceptional historical significance. Books by scholarly and popular authors like David McCullough's John Adams, would not have been possible without the type of documentary editions that emerge from the NHPRC's work.

*The public benefits that come from the preservation and dissemination of documents significant to an understanding of the United States were most eloquently stated by J. Franklin Jameson, founder of the National Archives and the NHPRC in a 30 November 1927 memorandum, "The publication of documentary historical materials is a regular function of all civilized governments, and it is not likely to be omitted by any government in which there is any appreciation of how much historical study does and can do for the promotion of national patriotism."

*Documentary editions are used not only by scholars, students, and teachers at every educational level, but also by documentary film makers and museum curators. The Internet has literally opened up a new world for the dissemination of the products of NHPRC funded projects but that dissemination and truly democratic access to reliable historical sources will come at a substantial cost.

*Reduction in the NHPRC's funding to projects will have a domino effect causing funding from other sources to be withdrawn or reduced. The NHPRC's grants are the linchpins for the funding structure of most projects--without them the structure will collapse.

Please act today!

2. LEGISLATIVE UPDATE: HERITAGE AREA BILL PASSES HOUSE On 19 July 2004, the U.S. House of Representatives passed legislation (H.R.
4492) designed to extend the authorization of several national heritage areas created under the authority of the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands Management Act of 1996. The legislation authorizes an extension of appropriations for the National Aviation Heritage Area, the National Coal Heritage Area, the Coastal Heritage Trail Route, the Illinois and Michigan Canal National Heritage Corridor, and the Oil Region National Heritage Area. The bill lays out a framework of technical and financial assistance that is to be provided to these areas by the Secretary of the Interior and other federal entities.

While the first national heritage area was designated twenty years ago (and since then Congress has established 24 such areas), generic legislation such as H.R. 1427 (still pending before the House Committee on Resources) that sets forth general parameters for a national program has never been enacted. In the absence of legislation and to help develop guidelines for the National Park Service (NPS), the Director of the NPS has requested that the National Park System Advisory Board assess the outcomes and benefits of the program and make recommendations relating to the future of the program. The advisory board's recommendations are to be formally presented at the International Heritage Development Conference scheduled to take place in Nashville, Tennessee in June 2005.

Item #1 -- New Coalition Member: The board of the National Coalition for History (NCH) is pleased to welcome to our ranks The Society for the History of Discoveries -- the history coalition's latest "Contributing Supporter." Founded in 1960, the society was formed to stimulate interest in teaching, research, and publishing the history of geographical exploration. The scope of the society's activities encompasses the discovery, exploration, and mapping of the earth's land and sea surface from earliest times to the present -- dealing with both the explorers and the explored. The society publishes both a journal as well as a newsletter and holds an annual meeting. For more information, visit the society's webpage at http://www.sochistdisc.org . For information on how your organization can support the work of the NCH, please contact the editor at:
rbcraig@historycoalition.org .

Item #2 -- Nixon Winter White House Demolished: Reuters News Service (21 July 2004) reports that demolition crews have ripped into the former Florida home of the late U.S. President Richard M. Nixon and have destroyed a key building in the Key Biscayne compound once known as the "Winter White House." At one time the compound consisted of five buildings that were used by the president. The report states that the home was the first of two owned by Nixon and that it had been significantly altered since the Nixon era.

One article this week: In Pauline Maier's "Teaching the Nation's History"
(Humanities magazine; July 2004) the author writes that "In the past few decades, historical research has shifted by and large from political to social and then cultural history...but political history is still a fruitful area of research and a necessary part of students'
education." Maier, a professor of American history at the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology says that there is evidence that "political history as a whole is reviving," and that young historians are mistaken if they believe that "all the big questions have been answered." The article, "Teaching the Nation's History," may be found at:
http://www.neh.gov/news/humanities/2004-07/nationshistory.html .

The National Coalition for History invites you to subscribe to this FREE weekly newsletter! You are also encouraged to redistribute the NCH Washington Updates to colleagues, friends, teachers, students and others who are interested in history and archives issues. A complete backfile of these reports is maintained by H-Net on the NCH's recently updated web page
at: http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch .

To subscribe to the "NCH Washington Update," send an e-mail message to:
listserv@h-net.msu.edu with the following text in the body of the message (and only this text) SUBSCRIBE H-NCH firstname lastname, institution. To unsubscribe, send an e-mail message to: listserv@h-net.msu.edu according to the following model: SIGNOFF H-NCH.

You can accomplish the same tasks by tapping into the web interface at http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/lists/subscribe.cgi and at the "network" prompt, scroll down and select H-NCH; enter your name and affiliation and "submit".

John Joseph McCarthy - 7/28/2004

TO: Hon. John Ashcroft
Attorney General of the United States
ATTN: Freedom of Information Act Manager
Washington, DC 20530

FROM: Larry W. Bryant
3518 Martha Custis Drive
Alexandria, VA 22302

DATE: July 25, 2004

When either a former U. S. Army special forces captain (and CIA-trained operative during the Vietnam era) or his associate (Larry J. O'Daniel) writes a series of (unanswered) letters to any cabinet-level official about his concerns over suspected criminal, treasonous activity deriving from a clandestine CIA operation called "Project Cherry," he expects and deserves a thoughtful, comprehensive, and committal reply from that official.

The unanswered correspondence in this case includes a June 9, 2004, "open letter" (now posted upon the Internet) from the whistleblower in question -- Mr. John J. McCarthy, Jr., of Los Angeles, Calif. I'm enclosing a computer-printout of the contents of that letter to you, Mr. Ashcroft.

Of course, your department's continued dead-silence strategy on Mr. McCarthy's revelations not only amounts to administrative discourtesy; it also raises a red flag in the minds of some citizens that your department has a "least said, best said" policy as to exposure of possible wrongdoing in official circles. If, indeed, Mr. McCarthy has pointed you in the right direction toward that exposure, then your continued silence cannot but brand you as an apologist for the alleged wrongdoing -- a position totally contrary to the charter of your department.

So as to shed the full light of accountability on this case, I hereby submit this letter as a formal, written freedom-of-information request: please send me a copy of all Justice Department-received and Justice Department-generated records pertaining to Mr. McCarthy's June 9, 2004, letter and to all related earlier correspondence. For the purposes of this request, I'm enclosing a copy of a recently executed NOTICE OF AUTHORIZATION from Mr. McCarthy, granting me his authority to access the sought-for records.

Since I make this request as an independent writer focusing on actual and/or potential whistleblower-derived evidence exposing official wrongdoing at the highest levels of government, and since such exposure would significantly educate the general public as to all related government activities/policies/programs, I hereby request that you waive all records-search fees incident to your fulfilling this request.

Please note that I'm snail-mailing to you a signed printout of this e-formatted letter.


Copies furnished to:

Mr. McCarthy

Mark S. Zaid, Esq. (Washington, D.C.)

Chairman, U. S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary

Chairman, U. S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence


[An Open Letter] to U. S. Attorney General John Ashcroft

By John McCarthy, June 9, 2004

AG Ashcroft,

If you get around to reversing your stonewalling of Congress re the "torture
memo" circulating throughout the media, it would also not be a bad idea to
respond to the letters re high crimes and treason sent to you over two years
ago by Larry J. O'Daniel: These letters are contained in the URL's below.




Your lack of response to matters of treason is egregious and unconscionable.
Who else but you has the authority to act and react to these most serious of

I demand to know why you have stonewalled our attempts to thwart the
repetition of the WMD fiasco, nearly a repeat of the Intelligence Community's
utter disregard for Presidential Directives issued during National Security
Council meetings, during War Time!


The above URL contain once Top Secret documents declassified by the State
Department in 2000, much to the chagrin of the CIA. Now we know why. These
documents have been sent to interested parties, and it would be a farce and
waste of time to attempt "reclassifying" these matters.

Ironically, CIA has responded to an FOIA request by saying these matters
remain classified. That is a step in the right direction as for the previous
thirty five years, CIA has denied ANY KNOWLEDGE of Project Cherry and related
matters. It is quite apparent that the new minders of the corrupt files at
have not a clue as to their predecessors modus operandi.

The crime of treason must not be classified in an attempt to hide the very
crime itself. If the excuse of protecting "sources and methods" is
invoked, it
should be noted that crimes against the nation must not be secreted and the
perpetrators must be brought to justice.

National Security is not at stake here but National Embarrassment is. It is
time to clean house.
It is high time you crawled out from under your umbrella of arrogance and
deniability and DO YOUR JOB! By the way, you work for me and I want
accountability or your resignation. To date, your conduct is reprehensible
if I was writing your evaluation it would read:

"This officer constantly fails to meet the low standards he sets for

I expect and demand a response.

Signed: John McCarthy
3628 Colonial Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90066
310 397 1143
310 500 6867

HNN - 7/23/2004

A Weekly Bulletin of News and Analysis from the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation
Volume 4, Number 27. July 22, 2004

From Justin's Desk (Guest editorial by Justin Torres)

The governors speak--but are they listening?

If a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it, did it make any noise? If the nation's governors talk about education reform yet it has no effect on what they do, do the words matter? That's the question that arises from the just-concluded summer meeting of the National Governors Association.

NGA is one of the nation's most respected public policy outfits; since it purportedly represents the views of the highest state officials in the land, everyone assumes that what it says matters. But the NGA is compromised by the necessity of representing a wide range of opinions--from conservatives like Bill Owens of Colorado and Jeb Bush of Florida to liberals like Jim McGreevey of New Jersey and Rod Blagojevich of Illinois. Further, it has a new leader every year--and the two parties take turns. As a result, its position papers sometimes tend toward the oracular: weighty yet abstract, lofty and nebulous enough to lend themselves to wide interpretation. Simply put, in the interest of forging the appearance of consensus, the NGA often fudges a great many details and differences.

That doesn't mean its meetings aren't sometimes knife fights. Every governor always has his or her eye on the voters back home, as well as the special interests that can mobilize them. This means staff members--and occasionally living, breathing governors--spend hours in fierce negotiations over punctuation and turns of phrase.

This year's process was no different. What was different, and noteworthy, was the product; what the NGA ended up saying on a number of important issues. (The policy papers aren't yet updated on the web, but you can view the old ones at http://www.nga.org/nga/legislativeUpdate/1,1169,C_POLICY_POSITION,00.html.) For all the caterwauling over NCLB and suchlike, we may be seeing a critical mass of governors lining up more decisively behind important education reforms. This hasn't happened since the mid 1980s. Consider:

Civics and History. No surprise, we adore policies that start by recognizing, as this one does, the valuable contributions of the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation in highlighting the woeful state of history and civics instruction in America's schools (see http://www.edexcellence.net/foundation/global/page.cfm?id=56 for recent reports on the topic). But our admiration for this new NGA policy is not just about ego massage. This solid statement calls for "rigorous and well-developed standards" in civics, history, geography, and economics; "thorough content" and "consistent assessment" under the tutelage of teachers who are "highly qualified" as measured by "accredited coursework." We couldn't have said it better ourselves. Even better, this statement nowhere mentions "social studies," but rather gives each individual discipline comprising that tortured field its own moment in the spotlight. Eradicating that locution--and the philosophical mistakes it reflects--has been a longstanding goal of ours, concerning which we now declare victory.

Head Start. The NGA's revised policy on Head Start is a big improvement, though it still has some distance to go. The governors stopped short of block-granting the program, as the Bush administration proposed, but called for increased state oversight of how funds are spent and for giving states the ability to "coordinate" Head Start with their own child development programs. Better yet, the policy drops its support of "a well-developed staff training program" in favor of "quality staff." That may sound esoteric--or trivial--but the shift means something: recognition that Head Start can't simply remain a jobs program and needs to focus on improving the lamentable quality of too many Head Start employees.

Most important, the governors for the first time recognize "school readiness" as an important goal of Head Start. Obviously, that's one of those classic NGA phrases, which can mean different things to different people. But it creates space for reformers to make the argument that "school readiness" requires an explicit focus on academic basics, those vital pre-K cognitive tools such as shapes and sounds and colors. Let's hope that argument gets made. And heeded.

Standards. The old NGA statement on standards was an embarrassment. The new one is much improved, calling for clear, concise, explicit, and accessible standards that are aligned to tests and operate within a system of accountability. Better, the NGA document embraces the findings of the American Diploma Project (see http://www.achieve.org/achieve.nsf/AmericanDiplomaProject?openform), which urges that high school curricula and exit standards be revised to reflect the knowledge and skills needed for modern jobs and higher education. Better yet, the new statement explicitly recognizes the achievement gap and the need for schools to graduate students who are all "academically prepared to take advantage of postsecondary opportunities." (That NGA for the first time mentions the achievement gap gives you a sense of how bad its previous statements on standards were.)

It's heartening to learn that this statement emerged from a collaborative effort between New Jersey and Florida, states lead by governors from opposite ends of the political spectrum--a good sign that a wide swath of governors is lining up behind the standards agenda.

Charter Schools. Huzzah. The new policy replaces a weak paragraph that was buried in a longer document and clearly meant to be overlooked by everyone. This new one puts the governors, for the first time, squarely in support of charter schools, concluding that "families should have options within the public school system that will most effectively meet their children's needs" and calling for strong charter laws, adequate funding, and strict accountability for performance. It recognizes charters as one tool to narrow the achievement gap and even comes out in favor of funding charter facilities. South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford's team led the charge for this statement, with assists from Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, and California. It's a strong statement of support for charters that we hope gets heard.

Will the new verbiage make any difference? That's the crucial question and one we cannot yet answer. Any governor can ignore NGA position statements issued in his or her name. But these statements serve as a useful baseline, a common denominator of policy thinking among the nation's chief state executives. It's encouraging to realize that this week, America's governors--caveats, ambiguities, and concerns notwithstanding--put themselves on record for high standards, rigorous assessments, serious accountability, and public school choice. Now can we hold them to it?

Justin Torres is research director of the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation and a research fellow at the Hoover Institution.

Kevin Michael Fitzpatrick - 7/16/2004

I wonder if the Russian Arthur proposes a five year plan?

HNN - 7/16/2004

The Houston Chronicle

July 10, 2004, Saturday 3 STAR EDITION

SECTION: A; Pg. 29 Metfront

LENGTH: 814 words

HEADLINE: Dallas searching for fresh image;
New tourism campaign sidesteps JFK assassination


BYLINE: Thomas Korosec, Houston Chronicle Dallas Bureau

DALLAS - With a new image campaign, tourist officials here are anxious to retire thoughts of big hair, cowboy hats and the TV soap opera question, "Who shot J.R.?"

They appear uncomfortable as well, more than 40 years later, with the matter of who shot JFK.

The Dallas Convention and Visitors Bureau recently unveiled a new city tag line, "Live Large. Think Big," and an upbeat, four-minute promotional video. The goal, said Phillip Jones, the bureau's president and chief executive, is to give the city a fresh "brand identity" and "put it back on the radar screen as a top-tier visitor destination."

The new pitch, designed to wrest convention and tourist business from more popular destinations such as San Antonio and Las Vegas, sells Dallas as "a city of big things, where big things happen," Jones said.

By far, the most-visited attractions in Dallas are related to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in Dealey Plaza on Nov. 22, 1963.

But neither the plaza, which is visited by about 2 million people a year, nor the Sixth Floor Museum, which draws 600,000 visitors annually to its collection on the assassination and Kennedy's legacy, can be found in the visitor bureau's new promotion.

Instead, it stitches together fast-moving images of traffic, soaring glass buildings, trendy downtown restaurants, models in Neiman Marcus outfits, rowing crews on a Dallas lake and other ingredients in what city officials call "a cocktail of vibrancy."

"We shot 30,000 feet of video, and we couldn't use them all," said Jones when asked about omission of all things Kennedy. "The Sixth Floor Museum is the city's No. 1 attraction. What we need to do is let folks know all about all the other attractions that are underappreciated and undervisited."

Dawn Quiett, a spokesperson for the private, nonprofit museum, said she and other staffers were surprised to be left out of the new marketing tool.

She and other museum officials declined to comment specifically on being ignored in Dallas' new promotion.

Darwin Payne, a historian who has written extensively on the city's history, said he thought Dallas had moved beyond the era when it thought it must live down the assassination.

"We're over those wounds," he said. "Generally speaking, people are proud of the museum and the high-quality exhibits they have."

Dennis Cordell, a historian at Southern Methodist University, said he and several colleagues have been following the city's image-making campaign.

"The flip side of being able to create a new image is being able to erase the past," he said. There is no history in the hip, of-the-minute images the tourist bureau has chosen.

"I doubt if anybody decides to come to Dallas because of the Kennedy sites, but everybody wants to visit them once they're here," Cordell said.

Payne, who travels frequently, said he believes the city's image is made up of several things.

"There's the assassination, the TV series (Dallas), the Dallas Cowboys, and there's a perception that it's sort of glitzy, maybe superficial," he said.

Jones said the visitor bureau's research, conducted through focus groups and empirical research, found the assassination link has largely faded.

"There are a couple of generations that didn't live through that. There is also a generation coming up that has no clue about J.R.," he said of the 1980s TV show and its central character, scheming oil baron J.R. Ewing.

Still, he said, "Perceptions focused on the TV show, women with big hair, Tex-Mex and margaritas, the fact you could seek cowboys at Billy Bob's and Gilley's."

In shaping new ideas, he said it was necessary to take a conceptual approach because Dallas has no Golden Gate Bridge or Bourbon Street. What came out in the $ 265,000 video was a set of pictures and celebrity quotes portraying the city as diverse, entrepreneurial and chic.

Although there was no room in that picture for Dealey Plaza, where Dallas history began with a log cabin on the edge of the Trinity River, the video depicts one big attraction that does not yet exist.

Next year, Dallas expects to begin constructing the first of three "signature" bridges across the Trinity River. Designed by Spanish architect Santiago Calatrava, the first suspension bridge will be an elegant white structure 40 stories tall. Mayor Laura Miller, in her state of the city speech last month, said the first two bridges will be completed by late 2007.

Dallas' marketing campaign cannot stand to wait.

Two black-and-white drawings of the bridge appear in the new ad spot as a sort of virtual attraction, along with a quote from Calatrava:

"My Dallas is arcs and skyward lines, all pointing up and beyond. It dares you to fly."

Asked if visitors might be let down when they discover the bridges are still on the drawing board, Jones said, "It's aspirational. We want people to know we have big plans.

HNN - 7/16/2004

The Times (London)

July 13, 2004, Tuesday

SECTION: Features; Times2; 6

LENGTH: 2282 words

HEADLINE: Why I won't vote for George Bush

BYLINE: Andrew Billen


AMONG THE signatories to a statement of principles issued in 1997 by a neoconservative outfit called the Project for the New American Century, four names today leap out: Jeb Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz. A fifth also draws attention to itself. It belongs to Francis Fukuyama, a sometime State Department official and author of the heroically optimistic bestseller of 1992, The End of History and the Last Man, a book that seemed to attest that history had come to a full stop with the fall of the Berlin Wall, leaving America Top Nation and the rest of the world panting to emulate its paradigm.

Seven years later history continues on its usual bloody course. Jeb, despite a little local difficulty in Florida, is still George Dubya's beloved brother, Cheney is Vice-President of the US, Rumsfeld is Defence Secretary and Wolfowitz his deputy. Fukuyama, meanwhile, works at Johns Hopkins University in Washington, writing books that set cats among pigeons on issues as diverse as cloning and the disintegration of the family. His great subject, however, is foreign affairs and on these he is no longer of a mind with his co-signatories. For Iraq, Fukuyma thinks, Rumsfeld should resign -and he will not be voting for Bush.

Although its argument, as he will uncomplainingly explain, was widely misunderstood, The End of History concluded that there was no alternative to the liberal, capitalist democratic model. But if you will the end -and Fukuyama used "end" in the sense of goal -perhaps you must will the means and this is exactly what the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) set out to do. Its aim was to "rally support for American global leadership" as it shaped the 21st century into something favourable to its principles and interests. In particular, defence spending needed to increase "significantly" in order to "challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values".

In other words, Fukuyama was almost right: the end of history was nigh. Now America needed to hurry it along. The PNAC hawks finally got their chance in the mayhem after September 11 when they persuaded their President to "challenge" the regimes in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Fukuyama should have been cheering -or been as near to cheering as a softly spoken professor of 51, short and slight, allows himself to get. Instead, as US troops went into Iraq, he quietly prophesied doom. At the time he was working on a book, State Building: Governance and World Order in the Twenty-First Century, whose premise was that building strong states was a noble aim but extremely difficult to achieve. Now just published here, it enumerates the US's involvement in 18 nation-building projects since its conquest of the Philippines in 1899, and counts just three a success: Germany, South Korea and Japan. Even in Bosnia, where peace has returned and the economy revived, there is still, he says, no sign of the emergence of a democratic, self-supporting state. "State building is extremely difficult," he tells me at a hotel in Clerkenwell, London, "and we don't know nearly as much about it as we think we do, which means we have got to be very careful where we try to do it. It would have been better if the Bush Administration had thought that through before the Iraq war happened."

So when he signed up for PNAC, he did not have Iraq in his sights? "Nobody did.

When that letter talked about regime change, what it was supporting was the INC (Iraqi National Congress) and exiles and possibly destabilising the regime, all of which the Clinton Administration ultimately signed on to."

Unlike the White House, Fukuyama stuck to his pre-9/11 pragmatism, believing (wrongly) that Saddam had chemical and biological arms but still thinking he could be contained. "And I thought the cost of managing the postwar thing would be insupportable. If in a hypothetical situation I thought we could have handled the postwar easily, well ..."

Then he might have been pro-invasion? "Yeah, but I guess what I find a little hard to understand is that so many neoconservatives had spent the previous generation arguing against ambitious social engineering on the grounds that nobody can control unanticipated consequences. I found it surprising that they all tended to believe that the democratisation of Iraq would be a relatively straightforward thing."

Fukuyama, in fact, corrects me when I refer to Rumsfeld as neocon. Indeed, Iraq might now be doing better if he truly had been one.

"He was one of the people that was not happy about nation building. He wanted to go in and out quickly. There was a marriage between those conservatives and the neoconservatives prior to the war, where they agreed on the need to get rid of Saddam. I think one of the reasons that there was such a lack of preparation was that Rumsfeld didn't anticipate having to stay there." But US troops were greeted with guns, not roses. Last month Paul Bremer, the departing American administrator, left the Iraqi people with 97 new laws (one demanded that they keep both hands on the steering wheel when driving) and the strong possibility, Fukuyama believes, that their country will disintegrate into civil war and mulch into a breeding ground for terrorism.

So Rumsfeld should go? "I think that given the degree to which he was responsible for the failure to prepare, that would be an honourable thing to do. One of the things that is infuriating to a lot of people is the unwillingness of anyone in the administration to admit that they did anything wrong or that anything was unexpected. I think the reason that that's happened is it's an election year and if they admit that they were wrong it would just become fodder for the other party. But I don't think it's a good situation."

It is not simply a bad situation for Iraq; it is bad for the proactive version of End of History project that he signed up to in 1997. Pre-emptive, nation building America is at bay, he thinks. Even his friend Paul Wolfowitz, who as director of National Planning tempted Fukuyama out of a right-wing think-tank, the Rand Corporation, into a job in Reagan's State Department in 1981, must be having doubts. "Of all the people in the administration I think that he's one of the most reflective and so I think it would be very unlikely that he has not had all sorts of second thoughts," he says, although he has spoken to him only briefly.

"I think it's safe to say that Iraq has become such a black hole it has sucked in all the other dimensions of US foreign policy. The likelihood of this happening again in the near future is probably low. And that's not really a good thing because it may be necessary for the US to act decisively in some future crisis and it won't do so because of this experience. I mean, I think that it's important not to get carried away with the criticism of the way that this particular crisis worked out, because if you look back at the history of US-European relations over the whole period of the Cold War, there were innumerable times where the US took a more forward-leaning position than the Europeans.

"I disagree that it (Iraq) was so out of keeping with the earlier pattern in US-European relations. The only thing that's different is that in the earlier cases US judgment turned out to be good and European judgment not so good, whereas it was kind of the reverse on this one."

Because he is both a historian and a former public servant, I hope he can explain why Bush made this misjudgment without, like the Left, imputing his integrity. In the first place, he says, nothing would have happened if 9/11 had not made it clear that it was not safe to leave Afghanistan to its own devices. The various brands of conservatism within the White House orbit then all began telling Bush the same thing and the former Governor of Texas, famously inexperienced in foreign affairs, acted. It wasn't, then, as some say, that Bush wanted to avenge his father's record in Iraq? "I think that's silly. There is one revealing quotation where he was asked whether he sought advice from his father about the war prior to the war. I think this was in the (Bob) Woodward book (Plan of Attack) He said something like, 'No, I looked to my other father, the father in Heaven'. I think from these titbits that you pick up, he deliberately did not want to talk to his father about this because he did not want to be in his father's shadow."

Others think the war was conducted on behalf of American oil barons. "I think that's ridiculous. If you look at what the oil industry was advocating, what they wanted was a lifting of sanctions. They wanted to be able to go back. They could work with Saddam Hussein as easily as, you know, any other country could."

Because Fukuyama instincts are rightward his criticisms should be hurting Bush in election year. In America, however, he has chosen to lie "fairly low". State Building, with its diagrams and pages of bibliography, has been regarded as a more or less academic text and not generated much publicity. "I am not eager to pick a fight with a lot of friends of mine," he admits.

Instead, controversy still dogs The End of History. It started out as lecture delivered in Chicago in 1988 while he was working once more for the Rand Corporation. By the time he had rewritten it over the winter as an essay for the right-wing magazine, The National Interest, he had re-entered the State Department under the first President Bush. Understandably, it was read as an insight into the new President's mind. When the Berlin Wall fell six months later, it seemed incredibly prescient. The book deal followed.

But not everyone was convinced. Mrs Thatcher muttered: "The end of history? The beginning of nonsense." As the Nineties dawned and darkened and the Balkans followed Liberia, Rwanda and Iraq and Kuwait into war, one US magazine ran a front cover reading: "The End of Fukuyama". Others, such as the historian Philip Bobbitt and various prophets of the internet age, predicted that the nation state was itself about to be superseded by new networks of power.

At least for Fukuyama's father, Toshiko, who was born in Los Angeles, and for his mother, Yoshio, who arrived to study in America from Japan in 1949, their only son's unexpected fame remained a source of pleasure until their deaths. It undid, Frank (as he is known) thinks, some of his left-wing father's unease that he had worked for Rand and Reagan.

The book had, of course, a great title. It was not his own but a homage to Georg Hegel, whose theories had been drummed into him at university by his professor, Allan Bloom. Hegel had used the phrase "end of history" to refer to Napoleon's victory over the Prussians, the moment when the ideals of the French Revolution began to become universal. "I mean, to me and all of the other students of Bloom, if you said 'the end of history' instantly it was, 'Ah yes, the Battle of Jena, 1806'."

But most of his readers would not have got the allusion? "And still have not."

Yet if we accept that he never meant that history had ended, merely that, in a Hegelian sense, it had an end (or goal), we may still think he got it wrong.

Liberal democracies are a young form of government. They are not uniformly happy.

Their openness leaves them vulnerable to attack. Is he still convinced they are going to make it?

"You know, I never made a prediction about them making it in the long run.

Terrorists could set off a nuclear weapon if they got their hands on it and there'd be terrible consequences. I made a much more modest observation, which is that I just didn't see a realistic alternative."

Does he ever wish he could cast off the albatross of misunderstandings? "Well, I can't. I keep writing these books on different subjects ..."

And, I know, the conversation always comes back to The End of History -as it will, after we finish our own talk, at the lecture he later gives at Reuters in Fleet Street. The guest list includes CEOs, ambassadors and professors, including Bernard Crick. It is, I say, an impressive audience for a Washington academic to attract.

"Well, I have no idea why people turn up for my talks. I must say I am surprised people find listening to me so fascinating. My family (he has a wife and three children) don't."

One reason may be that in a downcast age he remains positive. State Building dwells on difficulty, yet the sheer density of its chapter on management theory advertises his belief that nation building can be achieved. He is sometimes pleasantly surprised when it is, as in Afghanistan, where reconstruction is going much better than predicted. Even the situation in Iraq is, he says, "serious but not hopeless".

The Reuters evening at least resolves the mystery of his popularity as a lecturer.

He is diverting and humorous. Word must have got around. Nation building is certainly possible, he jokes during the Q&A, if you have 200 years to do it in as the British had in India. At this an Indian historian pipes up that India is bedevilled by corruption, graft and red tape; people instead of casting votes "vote caste".

"To that," deadpans Fukuyama, "I'd say nothing is perfect. You could be Pakistan."

Of the End of History Man's optimism, I conclude, there is no end.

HNN - 7/16/2004

The Independent (London)

July 13, 2004, Tuesday

SECTION: First Edition; FEATURES; Pg. 2,3

LENGTH: 2788 words


BYLINE: STEVE CRAWSHAW Architects of disaster: actors play Adolf Hitler and Albert Speer in the new film Speer and He'; as they were in real life in 1936; Bruno Ganz as the dictator in The Downfall' (below) BSM; Getty Archive

For 60 years, Germany has been feeling worried. Worried by its own criminal history, worried by the judgement of others - and worried that the lure of Adolf Hitler is not yet dead. Few Germans would seriously argue that modern German democracy is endangered. None the less, the just- in-case taboos remain in place, above all when it comes to the dictator himself.

Elsewhere in Europe, it is easy to find copies of Mein Kampf on the shelves. In the words of the English-language edition, "It remains necessary reading for those who care to safeguard democracy." In Germany, where it was once compulsory reading, it is considered too sensitive to put on sale. Even the dictator's image is subject to powerful taboos. English-language books on the Third Reich often have photographs of the Fuhrer on the cover. When those same books are translated into German, the pictures of Hitler and the swastikas vanish, to be replaced with something more anodyne. Several decades after the war, a German commentator explained why he believed the ban on Mein Kampf to be essential: "The bacillus is too lively, the danger of infection too acute." Even in the 21st century, that fearful logic - though rarely made so explicit - remains in place.

Now, however, remarkable change is on the way. Two new German films both put the Fuhrer unashamedly centre screen. Heinrich Breloer has filmed a huge documentary drama focusing on the role of Albert Speer, Hitler's star architect. Speer and He will be screened on German television in the spring, on the occasion of the 60th anniversary of Hitler's death.

As Der Spiegel points out, Breloer's three-part, EUR12m (pounds 8.5m) documentary series breaks with a long German tradition: "If the dictator appeared at all, then only for a few seconds and usually without words." Demystification is the key. In preparation for the role, Tobias Moretti, who plays Hitler, listened for hours to a unique tape recording, secretly recorded by a Finnish radio technician in 1942: Hitler not as the demagogic orator, but speaking in the voice of an ordinary human being. A second film, Bernd Eichinger's The Downfall, focuses on the last days in the bunker. Bruno Ganz, star of Wim Wenders' Wings of Desire, takes the role of Hitler.

As Frank Schirrmacher, the publisher of the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, has noted, the release of the films will mark an important turning point. "A type of pictorial fear was at work here; a dread of turning the man who has dominated German imagination to the present day into a product of artistic imagination. This is over now." Schirrmacher suggests that these are "the most important historical projects in many years".

These changes do not take place in isolation. Germany's new relaxation is everywhere - in film, literature, and politics. The old taboos are crumbling month by month, day by day. Confrontation with the past, and confrontation with German worries about the past, are inextricably intertwined.

The story of Germany since 1945 has, in many ways, been a story of changing taboos with regard to Hitler and his legacy. Initially, those taboos sought to avoid acknowledging the depth of the crimes that so many Germans had, by their action or inaction, allowed to take place. Reading the West German school- books of the 1950s and 1960s is to expose oneself to a tissue of half-truths, at best. Hitler himself is portrayed in an almost rosy light - the peacemaker, whose efforts were thwarted by a war-hungry Churchill, to whom Hitler "offered peace in vain". (Churchill "knew that England had time, and that the United States would help".)

Where Hitler's crimes are alluded to in passing, the reader is constantly assured that Germans knew little or nothing of what was happening - and that they could, in any case, have done nothing even if they had known. The mass murder of millions, planned with such unique thoroughness, is often passed over in barely a sentence. The German resistance movement, so terribly isolated, receives copious coverage, as does German suffering. Thus, a long catalogue of casualties in the Second World War in a 1956 schoolbook (including, for example, the number of Germans who lost a limb) concludes with the brief postscript: "In addition came the victims who were killed in the concentration camps, the labour camps, the death chambers etc." Whereupon the author returns to safer ground, telling us how much property was destroyed. One book talks at length of the "horrific suffering, such as the world no longer believed possible in the twentieth century". The reference is not to the Holocaust or any other aspect of Nazi crimes, but to what the Germans themselves had gone through.

The fathers-and-children revolution of 1968 and the years that followed - a generational confrontation more dramatic in Germany than anywhere else in Europe or the United States - began to chip away at the lies. The 1968 effect was by no means immediate. (The Baader-Meinhof terrorism of the 1970s, which theoretically demanded more openness about the past, perhaps slowed down the process of change.) When Basil Fawlty goosestepped his way past the German guests in the Fawlty Towers dining room, muttering (not quite sotto voce) "Don't mention the war", he was partly right, despite his buffoonishness, to believe that the Germans were still in denial at that time, in 1975.

Only at the end of the Seventies did the greater openness began to be real. In 1977 came the publication of What I Have Heard about Adolf Hitler, a 350-page book consisting of quotations from a series of school essays on the above theme. The answer to the question was: not much. Hitler was Swiss, Dutch, or Italian; he lived in the 17th century, the 19th century, the 1950s; he was a First World War general, the founder of the East German Communist Party, a leader of German democracy. The ignorance was easily explained. The subtitle of the book, which had a dramatic impact when it was published, was simple: "Consequences of a Taboo." Two years later, the screening of Holocaust - a US television mini-series derided elsewhere as "genocide shrunken to the level of Bonanza with music appropriate to Love Story" - brought the human impact of Hitler's crimes into German homes for the first time. In the words of one of several German books devoted to the extraordinary Holocaust effect: "A whole nation began - as a result of a television film - suddenly to discuss openly the darkest chapter of its history."

The underlying reason for this new openness, which grew through the 1980s, was the change of generations. The children of those who had committed crimes, or who had stood by while crimes were committed, were eager to confront the past in a way that their parents were so reluctant to do.

The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 caused rejoicing across Germany and even, briefly, throughout Europe. But the prospect of German unity the following year quickly soured the mood for many who had privately grown to like the existence of the Iron Curtain. President Francois Mitterrand believed that a united Germany "would mean certain war in the 21st century"; Margaret Thatcher was equally determined to "check the German juggernaut". The wave of neo-Nazi violence in the chaotic and embittered years after unification confirmed the worst fears of those who believed that Germans, in the vivid formulation of Martha Gellhorn, have "a gene loose".

Meanwhile, however, confrontation with the past was by now everywhere. That may have been one reason why far-right parties have failed to gain a single seat in Germany's national parliament in recent years - in sharp contrast to many of Germany's European neighbours, Hitler's native Austria included. (As the East German singer- songwriter Wolf Biermann noted, historical honesty has not always been Austria's strong point: "Austria and East Germany were linked by a common piece of hypocrisy: both pretended to have been forcibly occupied by Hitler's Germany in the Second World War.")

Through the 1990s, Germany continued to feel worried about itself and about how others might perceive it. There was resentment or weariness at the persistence of the Basil Fawlty stereotypes, above all in the UK. But there were self-imposed taboos, too. Thus, less than a decade ago, the opposition Social Democrats roundly condemned the conservative chancellor Helmut Kohl for daring to think of letting German planes be used in policing a no-fly zone in Bosnia, "because of the German past". In the past few years, such taboos have been forgotten. The Social Democrats, now the government party, argued for stronger military action than Kohl and his allies would ever have dared to contemplate, in the Balkans and then Afghanistan. Joschka Fischer, foreign minister and a leading member of the almost- pacifist Greens, explained why he was in favour of sending German ground troops to Kosovo, with reference to the same Hitler legacy that had in the past been a reason for Germany not to send troops abroad: "No more Auschwitz, no more genocide, no more fascism. All that goes together for me."

The preoccupations with German identity, as reflected in Hitler's legacy, have continued into the 21st century, but now with a new twist. In 1969, President Gustav Heinemann obliquely confronted the taboos by wistfully declaring: "There are difficult fatherlands. One of these is Germany." Thirty-five years later, the newly elected president, Horst Kohler, is simultaneously defiant and relaxed with his 21st-century Heinemann update: "I love our country." Just a few years ago, such a statement would have seemed unthinkable. Even now, Germans wonder aloud if it is acceptable for a German president to sound so relaxed about national identity. The words Ich liebe unser Land no longer sound as heretical, however, as they once did - nor do they mean: "Why not forget about the past?"

There are many reminders of Germany's new Unbefangenheit - a word that hovers untranslatably somewhere between "unencumberedness", "relaxedness", and "unbotheredness". In past years, German liberals used Unbefangenheit almost as a term of abuse; Germans were not supposed to be relaxed. Now, that has changed. Hitler is seen as part of German history, but not its sole defining trait. Gunter Grass, the grand old man of the liberal left, writes an authorial apology in his novella Crabwalk, for being so obsessed with Hitler's crimes that other topics were excluded - including the expulsion in 1945 of 15 million German civilians from their homes; two million died by shooting, starvation or freezing to death. "Never," Grass tells his narrator, "should his generation have kept silent about such misery, merely because its own sense of guilt was so overwhelming... with the result that they abandoned the topic to the right wing." This failure, he says, was staggering.

For some commentators, this readiness to broaden the German discourse is itself worrying. A bestselling book published in 2002, The Blaze, describes the Allied firebombing of German cities - a campaign in which more than half a million died - in painstaking detail. British columnists reacted indignantly, asking: "With four million unemployed in Germany, is this the fertile ground in which a new National Socialism might take root?" To which the simple answer is: unlikely. The author, Jorg Friedrich, a liberal historian who has written extensively about the Holocaust, and wrote The Cold Amnesty, a powerful account of the extent to which the post-war West German establishment was still poisoned by the Nazi era, had merely reached the same conclusion as Grass: that the self-evident and well documented German crimes are not a reason why the subject of the suffering of German civilians must remain off limits for all time, or the exclusive preserve of the nationalist right.

The new self-confidence with regard to Hitlerian history is everywhere. The Social Democrat Chancellor Gerhard Schroder declared, on being invited to the 60th anniversary celebrations of the D-Day landings: "The Second World War is finally over." Der Spiegel noted that there was little concern about Schroder's presence in most of Europe; only Britain reacted differently. (This is part of a familiar pattern. When Der Spiegel's London correspondent, Matthias Matussek, published a report earlier this year that dared to suggest all is not well in Blair's Britain, he was the target of UK red- top fury, including from papers that have themselves published lacerating stories on the same subject. Britons may criticise; Germans may not.)

One of the most successful films in Germany in the past year has been Sonke Wortmann's Miracle of Berne, an optimistic film about Germany's arrival in footballing heaven - victory in the World Cup of 1954. Until a few years ago, Hitler's long shadow meant that a feelgood film about Germany would still have seemed unthinkable; a clear sign of occupying the far-right "brown corner", as it is described. "Ten years ago, I wouldn't have made the film," Wortmann told me. "Things are changing in a positive way. Germans are not so verkrampft, so uptight." German television felt emboldened to imitate the BBC's Great Britons series with its own, called Unsere Besten (Our Best). (The top 10, chosen by millions, included the two giants of postwar democracy, the conservative Konrad Adenauer and the socialist Willy Brandt; the executed heroes of the anti-Nazi resistance, Hans and Sophie Scholl; Albert Einstein, driven into emigration; and - especially popular in east Germany - Karl Marx.)

Perhaps most startling of all, if one is looking for signs of the extraordinary new Unbefangenheit, is the creation of a new, ever-so-ironic lifestyle magazine, a kind of wallpaper* for Germany. The magazine's once unthinkable, provocative title: Deutsch. Sixty years after Hitler, the word is being reclaimed from the far right, as if it were just another label, like the self-confident francais or italiano.

It is in this climate of Unbefangenheit that the new wave of Hitler films can be seen. For a new generation, the themes of the Third Reich still need to be explored. That exploration is, however, no longer as explosive as it once was. Florian Illies' 2001 bestseller, Instructions on Being Innocent, mocks "those eyes that Germans make, when the worry-wrinkles stretch almost over the retina because of anxiousness that someone might forget how undeniably dreadful were the things that happened in the Third Reich".

The new relaxedness does not necessarily represent a turning away from the past. Rather, it is an absorption of the past into the mainstream of modern German life. It has been in the 21st century, not at any time in the past 60 years, that Daniel Libeskind's extraordinary, jagged Jewish Museum opened in Berlin. As Libeskind himself told me, "Earlier, it wouldn't have been built." It is now, too, that a huge Holocaust memorial is being built, a field of standing stones close to the Brandenburg Gate. Nor is it just a question of building memorials. Twenty years ago, President Richard von Weizsacker's statement that the Nazi defeat was "liberation" was considered controversial; now it seems self-evident.

There are still plenty of Germans (especially the elderly) who believe that enough is enough, and that it is time to stop talking about the Holocaust. Such attempts to close the discussion down still take place. They usually backfire, however, by reigniting the old debates.

The new Hitler films form part of the new Germany that confronts the past while no longer feeling so stressed about the confrontation. Those who deliberately try to leave the past behind often succeed in achieving the opposite. Conversely, those who are determined to examine all aspects of Hitler's legacy help Germany to be more at ease with itself at last.

John Stuart Mill wrote: "Those only are happy who have their minds fixed on some object other than their own happiness... Aiming thus at something else, they find happiness by the way." The same might be said of the German search for normality. Aiming at something else, Germany may find normality by the way. Films such as The Downfall and Speer and He, by engaging with Hitler not just as myth but as a mortal human being, may help Germany escape being in thrall to the dictator's crimes for all time. Even now, the words "normal" and "Germany" do not sit easily together in the same sentence. In the years to come, however, that could yet change.

Steve Crawshaw, London director of Human Rights Watch, is the author of Easier Fatherland: Germany and the Twenty-First Century' (Continuum)

Arnold Shcherban - 7/14/2004

One more stone put over the grave of A Big Lie -
one-sided resume of the Cold War era.

HNN - 7/13/2004

National Security Archive Update, July 13, 2004

U.S. Nuclear War Plans A "Hazard to Ourselves as Well as Our Enemy"

Overkill Problem Led Top Commanders to Complain About the SIOP's Destructiveness



For more information
Contact: William Burr

Washington D.C., 13 July 2004 - The U.S. included so many nuclear weapons in its first missile-age plan for nuclear war that top military commanders called it a "hazard to ourselves as well as our enemy," according to newly declassified documents posted today by the National Security Archive at George Washington University.

Under the first Single Integrated Operational Plan (SIOP), prepared during 1960, a Russian city the size of Nagasaki--devastated in 1945 with a twenty kiloton bomb--would receive three 80 kiloton weapons. President Dwight D. Eisenhower, then leaving office, along with Navy leaders and White House Science Adviser George Kistiakowsky, was deeply critical of the SIOP's overkill. Eisenhower was later reported to have said that the plan "frighten[ed] the devil out of me." Incoming Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara soon decried the "fantastic" levels of fallout that attacks on a multitude of Soviet targets would produce.

Ever since its creation, the SIOP has been one of the U.S. government's deepest secrets. Even historical information about U.S. nuclear war plans has been hard to come by and documents once available become reclassified again. Today's posting includes never before published as well as previously declassified key documents from 1959-1961 on the history of SIOP-62 (for fiscal year 1962). Among the disclosures in the documents:

* the SIOP included preemptive and retaliatory options; preemption could occur if U.S. authorities had strategic warning of a Soviet nuclear attack;

* a full SIOP strike launched on a preemptive basis would have delivered over 3200 nuclear weapons to 1060 targets in the Soviet Union, China, and their allies in Asia and Europe;

* a full nuclear strike by SIOP forces on high alert, launched in retaliation to a Soviet strike, would have delivered 1706 nuclear weapons against a total of 725 targets in the Soviet Union, China, and allied states;

* targets would have included nuclear weapons, government and military control centers, and at least 130 cities in the Soviet Union, China, and their allies;

* the Marine Corp commandant complained that the SIOP provided for the "attack of a single list of Sino-Soviet countries" and made no "distinction" between those that were at war with the United States and those that were not;

* the Defense Department continues its long-standing pattern of overclassification and inconsistencies over the release of information on the SIOP.

Some evidence exists that after the Cold War ended, Strategic Air Command commander-in-chief General Lee Butler tried to curb what he saw as the SIOP's "grotesque excesses" by paring down the huge target lists. Security classification, however, hides whether General Butler's reforms took hold or whether the SIOP remains an instrument of overkill.

Please follow the link below:

THE NATIONAL SECURITY ARCHIVE is an independent non-governmental research institute and library located at The George Washington University in Washington, D.C. The Archive collects and publishes declassified documents acquired through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). A tax-exempt public charity, the Archive receives no U.S. government funding; its budget is supported by publication royalties and donations from foundations and individuals.
The National Security Archive does not and will never share the names or e-mail addresses of its subscribers with any other organization. Once a year, we will write you and ask for your financial support. We may also ask you for your ideas for Freedom of Information requests, documentation projects, or other issues that the Archive should take on. We would welcome your input, and any information you care to share with us about your special interests. But we do not sell or rent any information about subscribers to any other party.
You may leave the list at any time by sending a "SIGNOFF NSARCHIVE" command to .
You can also unsubscribe from the list anytime by using the following link:

HNN - 7/12/2004

NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE (Vol. 10, #29; 8 July 2004) by Bruce Craig (editor) rbcraig@historycoalition.org and Brian Heyward
Website: http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch

HISTORY COALITION SIGNS ON TO FAULKNER CASE AMICUS The "availability, preservation, and dissemination of prior research is essential for scholarly advancement." For this and other reasons, on 30 June 2004, the National Coalition for History (NCH) joined with over thirty other scholarly and non-profit organizations -- including JSTOR, the American Council of Learned Societies, the American Historical Association, the American Sociological Association, the Association of American University Presses, Duke University Press, the Organization of American Historians, and Oxford University Press -- and signed onto a Brief of Amici Curiae supporting the National Geographic in its legal battle relating to digital preservation and access (see "Important Copyright Case to Be Heard"
in NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE Vol 10, #26; 17 June 2004). By supporting the Amici, these organizations hope to see the judicial opinion issued by a lower federal court in Faulkner v. National Geographic Society affirmed on appeal.

Faulkner and others sued National Geographic for publishing articles and photographs that appeared in a digitized version of the magazine, allegedly, "without permission." Vital to an understanding of cases involving digitization, however, is section 201 (c) of the Copyright Act. This section of the Copyright Act allows owners of collective works, like periodicals, to reproduce the contributions of the original journal as part of a "revision" of the collective work without receiving specific permission from a work's creator.

In 2001 two cases concerning the digitization of print material went before two federal courts -- a United States Circuit Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court. In Greenberg vs. National Geographic, a Circuit Court of Appeals judge ruled in favor of Greenberg arguing that by adding music and other features to digitized photographs, National Geographic had indeed violated section 201 (c) of the Copyright Act by, in essence, "creating a new product." But in New York Times Co., Inc. v. Tasini, the U.S. Supreme Court found that so long as digitization keeps articles within their original context, publishing companies are legally within their rights to digitize articles and photographs without seeking specific authorization from the work's creator.

Judge Lewis Kaplan, who delivered the original ruling in the Faulkner case, found that by adding music and other features to articles National Geographic did not violate the Copyright Act. Kaplan found that transferring articles and photographs from one medium to another, as long
as they are kept in context, is legal. Adding new features for easier
accessibility, he ruled, is a natural part of the "revision" process. For example, converting journal articles into microfilm and hard-cover versions does not violate section 201 (c) of the Copyright Act.

The Amici Curiae was prepared under the auspices of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization that is best known as an electronic archive of the full back-run of digitized versions of important scholarly literature, which it licenses from publishers and learned societies. The brief filed with the court essentially supports the Supreme Court ruling in the Tasini Case and argues that publishing programs like those of JSTOR and the National Geographic fall under its definition of collective work revision.

HNN - 7/12/2004

NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE (Vol. 10, #29; 8 July 2004) by Bruce Craig (editor) rbcraig@historycoalition.org and Brian Heyward
Website: http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch

Despite several hearings and considerable interest by lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, it is nearly certain that the Higher Education Act will not be reauthorized this session of Congress.

Representative Howard P. "Buck" McKeon (R-CA), leader of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce's Subcommittee on Higher Education, has decided the reauthorization has gotten "too partisan" and "too political" and consequently, he will not bring HR 4283, legislation that seeks to extend the Higher Education Act, up for a vote. (HR 4283 is the most recent version of a Higher Education reauthorization bill that wraps other related measures together into one comprehensive bill.) This means that when the Higher Education Act expires later this fall, the Department of Education will join ranks with several other federal agencies, including the National Institutes of Health and the National Endowment for the Humanities, whose programs have operated for some years without a formal Congressional reauthorization.

Two of the most controversial aspects of the Higher Education Act are Titles VI and VII. College lobbyists assert that Title VI imposes intrusive new requirements for accrediting government-supported programs (see "The Battle Continues -- Advisory Boards and the Title VI Higher Education Act" in NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE Vol 10, #7 20 February 2004). Critics claim that the language added to the reauthorization is an attempt by the federal government to "control" university curricula.

Since the tragedy of 9/11 some conservative members of Congress have questioned the work of area studies centers that facilitate study and specialization in foreign languages, cultures, and international affairs at various colleges and universities. Centers that focus on Middle Eastern studies are of particular concern to some lawmakers. During Congressional hearings held earlier in the year, a scholar from the Hoover Institution testified that he believed many such centers teach students to oppose current American foreign policy. The committee's solution was to authorize a Congressional oversight advisory board that would approve university curriculum in the new legislation. Scholarly organizations such as the Middle East Studies Association charged that if the proposed language was allowed to stand, academic freedom would be impacted. Critics argue that legislators, not professors, would be in a position to ultimately determine curricula and course content, thus "establishing a precedent for future legislation directed at any field, discipline, or professional school in any and all universities."

Title VII legislation also generated controversy, though less than Title VI. Proposed new language sought to increase the number of graduate students in fields of "national need" -- science, math, legal studies, humanities, and the arts. One aspect of the bill was an authorization of $30 million a year for five years to improve post-secondary education by supporting "faculty and academic programs that teach traditional American history." The language neatly complimented the "Teaching American History"
grants -- a Department of Education program targeted to secondary school teachers. This title would encourage an increase in teaching "traditional"
American history at the university level with a possible concomitant decrease in emphasis on teaching the history of non-Western cultures. Title VII legislation has passed the House as a stand alone measure (H.R. 3076) but it is not expected to be advanced to the Senate unless it is wrapped into the final House version of the Higher Education bill.

The controversy surrounding the Higher Education bill is such that the majority leadership has perhaps wisely decided not to wage this legislative battle in the few remaining days of the 108th session. To allow the legislation to reach the floor would give Democrats clear ammunition to use against the White House and Congressional Republicans during an election year.

HNN - 7/12/2004

NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE (Vol. 10, #29; 8 July 2004) by Bruce Craig (editor) rbcraig@historycoalition.org and Brian Heyward
Website: http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch


1. TEACHING AMERICAN HISTORY GRANT WINNERS ANNOUNCED On 2 July 2004 the Department of Education (ED) announced its FY-2004 Teaching American History (TAH) grants. The TAH grant program supports professional development projects at local education agencies (LEAs) that work in partnership with non-profit history-related organizations. Their mutual goal -- to raise student achievement in traditional American history by improving teachers' knowledge, understanding, and appreciation for American history through intensive professional development workshops.

Grant awards assist LEAs by teaming them up with groups that have expertise in history. By helping teachers to develop a deeper understanding and appreciation of "traditional" American history as a separate subject within the curriculum, funded programs seek to improve instruction and thereby raise student achievement.

Grant winners do not have to be evenly distributed throughout the United States and this year, as in the past, they were not. This was, however, the first time that educational institutions in every state applied for grants, making the total applicant pool well over 400. Of the 122 schools that were awarded grants, over forty states plus Puerto Rico were represented. The chances that an applying LEA would receive grant funding was about one in four.

A quick perusal of the awardee list suggests that strong partnerships are continuing to develop between school districts and local historical sites as well as regional and nationally based "partner" organizations. The number of partnerships with local history-based organizations and, interestingly, educational television stations is increasing. A larger number of grants also are emphasizing the development of historical thinking skills as part of the programmatic objectives.

Also, it appears that the term "traditional" American history is generally being viewed within a broad context of American history and consequently is not being used to limit the scope of subject matter for professional development. For example, there are programs focusing on religious tensions in colonial times, African and Native peoples heritage, immigration and migration, internment of Japanese Americans, and the expansion of human and womens' rights. Happily, the "Benchmarks for Professional Development"
(http://www.historians.org/teaching/policy/Benchmarks.htm) -- a set of guidelines for sound professional development for teachers of American history developed as a collaborative project between historical organizations and the Department of Education -- is reflected in many of the grant programs.

For a list of the grant awardees, tap into:
http://www.ed.gov/programs/teachinghistory/2004tahabstracts/index.html .

Despite several hearings and considerable interest by lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, it is nearly certain that the Higher Education Act will not be reauthorized this session of Congress.

Representative Howard P. "Buck" McKeon (R-CA), leader of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce's Subcommittee on Higher Education, has decided the reauthorization has gotten "too partisan" and "too political" and consequently, he will not bring HR 4283, legislation that seeks to extend the Higher Education Act, up for a vote. (HR 4283 is the most recent version of a Higher Education reauthorization bill that wraps other related measures together into one comprehensive bill.) This means that when the Higher Education Act expires later this fall, the Department of Education will join ranks with several other federal agencies, including the National Institutes of Health and the National Endowment for the Humanities, whose programs have operated for some years without a formal Congressional reauthorization.

Two of the most controversial aspects of the Higher Education Act are Titles VI and VII. College lobbyists assert that Title VI imposes intrusive new requirements for accrediting government-supported programs (see "The Battle Continues -- Advisory Boards and the Title VI Higher Education Act" in NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE Vol 10, #7 20 February 2004). Critics claim that the language added to the reauthorization is an attempt by the federal government to "control" university curricula.

Since the tragedy of 9/11 some conservative members of Congress have questioned the work of area studies centers that facilitate study and specialization in foreign languages, cultures, and international affairs at various colleges and universities. Centers that focus on Middle Eastern studies are of particular concern to some lawmakers. During Congressional hearings held earlier in the year, a scholar from the Hoover Institution testified that he believed many such centers teach students to oppose current American foreign policy. The committee's solution was to authorize a Congressional oversight advisory board that would approve university curriculum in the new legislation. Scholarly organizations such as the Middle East Studies Association charged that if the proposed language was allowed to stand, academic freedom would be impacted. Critics argue that legislators, not professors, would be in a position to ultimately determine curricula and course content, thus "establishing a precedent for future legislation directed at any field, discipline, or professional school in any and all universities."

Title VII legislation also generated controversy, though less than Title VI. Proposed new language sought to increase the number of graduate students in fields of "national need" -- science, math, legal studies, humanities, and the arts. One aspect of the bill was an authorization of $30 million a year for five years to improve post-secondary education by supporting "faculty and academic programs that teach traditional American history." The language neatly complimented the "Teaching American History"
grants -- a Department of Education program targeted to secondary school teachers. This title would encourage an increase in teaching "traditional"
American history at the university level with a possible concomitant decrease in emphasis on teaching the history of non-Western cultures. Title VII legislation has passed the House as a stand alone measure (H.R. 3076) but it is not expected to be advanced to the Senate unless it is wrapped into the final House version of the Higher Education bill.

The controversy surrounding the Higher Education bill is such that the majority leadership has perhaps wisely decided not to wage this legislative battle in the few remaining days of the 108th session. To allow the legislation to reach the floor would give Democrats clear ammunition to use against the White House and Congressional Republicans during an election year.

3. HISTORY COALITION SIGNS ON TO FAULKNER CASE AMICUS The "availability, preservation, and dissemination of prior research is essential for scholarly advancement." For this and other reasons, on 30 June 2004, the National Coalition for History (NCH) joined with over thirty other scholarly and non-profit organizations -- including JSTOR, the American Council of Learned Societies, the American Historical Association, the American Sociological Association, the Association of American University Presses, Duke University Press, the Organization of American Historians, and Oxford University Press -- and signed onto a Brief of Amici Curiae supporting the National Geographic in its legal battle relating to digital preservation and access (see "Important Copyright Case to Be Heard"
in NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE Vol 10, #26; 17 June 2004). By supporting the Amici, these organizations hope to see the judicial opinion issued by a lower federal court in Faulkner v. National Geographic Society affirmed on appeal.

Faulkner and others sued National Geographic for publishing articles and photographs that appeared in a digitized version of the magazine, allegedly, "without permission." Vital to an understanding of cases involving digitization, however, is section 201 (c) of the Copyright Act. This section of the Copyright Act allows owners of collective works, like periodicals, to reproduce the contributions of the original journal as part of a "revision" of the collective work without receiving specific permission from a work's creator.

In 2001 two cases concerning the digitization of print material went before two federal courts -- a United States Circuit Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court. In Greenberg vs. National Geographic, a Circuit Court of Appeals judge ruled in favor of Greenberg arguing that by adding music and other features to digitized photographs, National Geographic had indeed violated section 201 (c) of the Copyright Act by, in essence, "creating a new product." But in New York Times Co., Inc. v. Tasini, the U.S. Supreme Court found that so long as digitization keeps articles within their original context, publishing companies are legally within their rights to digitize articles and photographs without seeking specific authorization from the work's creator.

Judge Lewis Kaplan, who delivered the original ruling in the Faulkner case, found that by adding music and other features to articles National Geographic did not violate the Copyright Act. Kaplan found that transferring articles and photographs from one medium to another, as long
as they are kept in context, is legal. Adding new features for easier
accessibility, he ruled, is a natural part of the "revision" process. For example, converting journal articles into microfilm and hard-cover versions does not violate section 201 (c) of the Copyright Act.

The Amici Curiae was prepared under the auspices of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization that is best known as an electronic archive of the full back-run of digitized versions of important scholarly literature, which it licenses from publishers and learned societies. The brief filed with the court essentially supports the Supreme Court ruling in the Tasini Case and argues that publishing programs like those of JSTOR and the National Geographic fall under its definition of collective work revision.

Item # 1-- NEH Landmark Workshops: The Division of Education Programs of the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) is seeking applications for Landmarks of American History Workshops for School Teachers and Workshops for Community College Faculty. These grants are part of the "We the People" initiative, which is designed to enhance the teaching, study, and understanding of American History and culture. Landmarks of American History workshops bring groups of K-12 teachers and/or community college faculty together for a one-week residence-based program at or close to a historical site. Eligible applicants include museums, libraries, cultural and learned societies, state humanities councils, colleges and universities, schools and school districts. School teachers seeking more details should tap into:
http://www.neh.gov/grants/guidelines/landmarks.html; Community College faculty should tap into:
http://www.neh.gov/grants/guidelines/landmarkscc.html . Current Landmarks of American History Workshops for School Teachers are described at:
http://www.neh.gov/projects/landmarks.html .

Item #2 -- Military Service Records Transferred to NARA: The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) is the official repository for records of military personnel who have been discharged from the U.S. Air Force, Army, Marine Corps, Navy, and Coast Guard. On 8 July 2004 Archivist of the U.S. John Carlin signed documents that would permanently preserve United States military service records on 56 million veterans who served the nation from 1885 to the present. Modern era military service veterans'
records will be protected and made available for research at NARA facilities. Not only will these files benefit historians, genealogists, and biographers but also will help veterans and their families who may need the files to claim life-long rights and entitlements that result from military service. For more information tap into:
http://www.archives.gov/media_desk/press_releases/nr04-66.html .

Item #3 -- Comments Sought on NARA Electronic Records Policy Working Group
Report: A National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) draft report entitled "Barriers to the Effective Management of Government Information on the Internet and other Electronic Records" has now been posted on the Interagency Committee on Government Information (ICGI) web site at:
http://www.cio.gov/documents/ICGI.html . The document may be found under "Requests for Public Comment" and also under the "ICGI Documents Library."
Comments are due by 1 August 2004. NARA requests that comments be sent to the following address: ERPWG@nara.gov.

Item # 4 -- FOIA Update: 4 July 2004 marked the 38th anniversary of President Johnson signing the Freedom of Information Act into law. To commemorate the event, the George Washington University's National Security Archive posted on its website interesting FOIA facts. Here one can learn that last year over 4,000 news stories were released as a result of federal, state, and local freedom of information acts. Included among these were revelations about bacteria infested meat, misuse of government funds, conflicts of interest in the personal finances of public officials, technical flaws in space equipment, and many more. In 2002 over 2.4 million people used FOIA; critics say this cost the government over $300 million. With an estimated increase of use in 2003, the United States Census Bureau projects that FOIA will cost approximately $1.03 per person
-- a relatively low expense, the archives implies, for ensuring an open and
honest government. For more information including directions on how to
use FOIA, tap into: http://www.nsarchive.org .

One article this week: In "Humanities Funding Up, But News Isn't All Good"
(Chicago Tribune; 20 June 2004) a report by the Foundation Center and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences finds that funding for the humanities by a sample group of some 1,000 large U.S. foundations more than doubled, but total foundation giving tripled in that same time period and the humanities' share of the pie crumbled from 2.5 percent in 1992 to 2.1 percent in 2002. For the article tap into:

The National Coalition for History invites you to subscribe to this FREE weekly newsletter! You are also encouraged to redistribute the NCH Washington Updates to colleagues, friends, teachers, students and others who are interested in history and archives issues. A complete backfile of these reports is maintained by H-Net on the NCH's recently updated web page
at: http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch .

To subscribe to the "NCH Washington Update," send an e-mail message to:
listserv@h-net.msu.edu with the following text in the body of the message (and only this text): SUBSCRIBE H-NCH firstname lastname, institution. To unsubscribe, send an e-mail message to: listserv@h-net.msu.edu according to the following model: SIGNOFF H-NCH.

You can accomplish the same tasks by tapping into the web interface at:
http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/lists/subscribe.cgi and at the "network" prompt, scroll down and select H-NCH; enter your name and affiliation and "submit".

Nitza Liora Brown - 7/10/2004

I am a British writer and journalist (from an Orthodox Sephardic Jewish background), who is currently writing a book and doing a television programme on incest between consenting adults. I would very much like to stress the words "consenting" and "adult" as I have no truck whatsoever with incestuous abuse either of children or unwilling participants.
However, when the participants are both of legal age nd willing, I am at one with Professor Munz in maintaining that, as long as they are harming - or pleasing - no one but themselves, they should be allowed the legal right to do so, without harassment.
In both my book and televison programme,I am also taking the view that the current climate of hysteria and fear surrounding incest between consenting aduls is on a par with that towards homosexuals in the 1950s and '60s.
I should aso be extremely interested if readers who are in a consensuaal and loving incestuous relationship would contact me with view to being interviewed both for my book and television programme.
Nitza Brown

HNN - 7/2/2004

Copyright 2004 San Antonio Express-News
San Antonio Express-News (Texas)

June 25, 2004, Friday , METRO


LENGTH: 363 words

HEADLINE: 2nd Texana sale brings big prices ; An IOU to buy beef for the Alamo's defenders goes for $172,904.

BYLINE: Amy Dorsett

BODY: For a second week, Alamo artifacts have proven a big draw at auction.

Early Thursday, a rare letter signed by William Barret Travis on the first day of the Alamo's siege fetched $172,904, greatly exceeding its pre-auction estimate of $40,000 to $80,000.

The Travis note was one of several Texas-based lots being offered by R&R Enterprises Autograph Auctions, an online and phone-based New Hampshire auction house.

The sale was to have closed last week, but it was extended because of technical difficulties.

Kay Burris, operations manager for the auction house, said the results exceeded their expectations.

"It went extremely well," she said.

The Travis letter, dated Feb. 23, 1835, was a promissory note written to Ignacio Perez to secure 30 cattle to feed the garrison.

In Spanish, Travis pledged to pay for the animals just as soon as the provisional government of Texas had the money.

The letter was sold to an anonymous, private buyer in Texas.

The auction included items from Davy Crockett, Sam Houston and Stephen F. Austin. They came from an anonymous Texas collector, whose widow is liquidating the collection.

The R&R auction came on the heels of last week's Texas Independence Collection, offered by Sotheby's in New York City.

That sale, which included a copy of the Texas Declaration of Independence that went for $764,000, hauled in $2.1 million, well above the $1.1 million to $1.5 million predicted.

Bruce Winders, curator and historian for the Alamo, said he wasn't surprised to see the lots draw such big money.

"There's a deep-seated interest in Texana, and it's not just in Texas," he said. "They don't come up that often. If they've got the money, I could see people paying whatever it takes.

"It's one of the reasons we didn't bid. Besides not having the money, we knew if we got involved, it would drive up the bidding even more."


"There's a deep-seated interest in Texana, and it's not just in Texas. ... I could see people paying whatever it takes."

Bruce Winders

Alamo curator and historian

HNN - 7/2/2004

Copyright 2004 Guardian Newspapers Limited
The Guardian (London) - Final Edition

June 26, 2004

SECTION: Guardian Foreign Pages, Pg. 17

LENGTH: 603 words

HEADLINE: Another rewrite for India's history books

BYLINE: Randeep Ramesh in Delhi

India's new government is poised to rewrite the history taught to the country's schoolchildren after a panel of eminent historians recommended scrapping textbooks written by scholars hand-picked by the previous, Hindu nationalist, administration.

Hundreds of thousands of textbooks are likely to be scrapped by the National Council of Educational Research and Training, the central government body which sets the national curriculum for students up to 18.

The move, one of the first made by the new Congress-led government, will strongly signal a departure from the programme of its predecessor.

The "saffronisation" of history, say critics of the last government, depicted India's former Muslim rulers as barbarous invaders and the medieval period as a dark age of Islamic colonial rule which snuffed out the glories of the Hindu empire that preceded it.

Memorably, one textbook claimed that the Taj Mahal, the Qu'tb Minar and the Red Fort, three of India's outstanding examples of Islamic architecture, were designed and commissioned by Hindus.

India's foremost historian, Romila Thapar, whose History of India concluded that the "Aryans" venerated by the Hindu right as indigenous geniuses who created the Indus Valley civilisation were in fact nomadic tribes who spread from the Middle East, was removed from the Indian Council for Historical Research less than three months after the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata party (BJP) took power in 1999.

There has also been much criticism of the way that under the BJP the pernicious effects of the caste system was played down, and that practices now considered anathema to religious Hindus but once widespread, such as beef eating, were simply erased from the history books.

The three-member panel of historians which examined the "inadequacies" of history textbooks recommended the "discontinuation" of their use in the national syllabus.

After submitting a report to the education minister, Professor S Settar, a distinguished historian of ancient India, told reporters: "We found it not advisable to continue (with these books)."

The government will decide early next month to what extent it will accept the academics' verdict, but as it has stressed that it will seek to reach out to minorities, it is expected to implement Prof Settar's report in full.

Hindu nationalists have long sought to overturn the conventional view of Indian culture: that it developed through the process of mass migrations and trade links with neighbouring empires.

Instead, the religious revivalists wanted to emphasise the uniqueness of Hinduism and its resilience to "foreign" invasion.

Many on the Hindu right are furious that their revisionist interpretation of history is now being revised, blaming the influence of "leftists and Marxists".

"If highlighting only Muslim rule in India as a gift to humanity, and dismissing the pre-Muslim period as a dark age, amounts to history, we are against that sort of history," said Seshadri Chari, a former editor of Organiser, the house organ of the BJP.

However, more traditional academics are scathing about the previous government's acts, saying they amounted to little more than vandalism.

Professor Arjun Dev, author of a textbook "updated" by the last government, said the changes were "belated".

"The government did not need experts to tell them history had been rendered false.

"It was so clumsily done that awkward facts, like the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi by a Hindu nationalist in 1948, were simply left out of some textbooks."

HNN - 7/2/2004

Copyright 2004 Globe Newspaper Company
The Boston Globe

June 27, 2004, Sunday ,THIRD EDITION


LENGTH: 687 words



A small neighborhood park recently moved a step closer to showcasing its role in history as a training ground for one of the first black regiments to serve in the Civil War.

A trust fund managed by the City of Boston awarded a $15,000 grant to the Heritage Guild, Inc., to advance its plans for a memorial at Camp Meigs Park in Readville. The Guild, an organization of African-American women, has developed a design for $400,000 in landscaping and historic markers at the state-owned park and playground, located in a residential area near Wolcott Square. The grant is to go toward fund-raising for the project.

The commemoration would honor the black soldiers including the 54th Massachusetts Volunteer Militia regiment, which made a desperate and heroic charge on Fort Wagner in South Carolina and was featured in the 1989 film "Glory." Denzel Washington won an Academy Award for his performance in the movie.

Adelaide M. Cromwell, a historian and president of the Heritage Guild, said the black soldiers' contribution to history warrants a more fitting commemoration.

"It's not sufficient to put up a bronze plaque and say, 'there was a camp there,' " she said.

The planned memorial would give a 19th-century look to the 2.8-acre park, with winding brick and stone walkways and 3-foot-high stone walls.

The history of Camp Meigs would be told in engravings on the stones in the walls. Slate pieces on the paths would be engraved with the occupations of the men who trained at the camp; many would be marked "ex-slave." The chain-link outfield fence in the existing baseball field would be replaced with a wood and steel structure, the top of which would sway with the wind. The design is intended to illustrate the link between the Civil War and baseball, which was played at Civil War camps.

"I think it is going to be a nice, dignified observation of the part played by Camp Meigs in the Civil War," said Nancy Hannan, president of the Hyde Park Historical Society.

The 139-acre Camp Meigs, located south of the present-day Neponset Valley Parkway, was where thousands of Union soldiers trained before departing to fight the Confederacy.

One of the units at the camp in 1863 was the 54th Massachusetts Volunteer Militia, made up of free blacks from throughout the United States and Canada. Two sons of the abolitionist Frederick Douglass served in the unit.

Later, a second black infantry regiment, the 55th, and a black cavalry unit were formed and trained at Camp Meigs. The camp also was used by thousands of white soldiers from Massachusetts and other states in the Northeast.

"This is an important part of the history of Boston and the African-American community," said Robert J. Fleming, executive secretary of the city's trust office. "This is the last open space where the training camps were." His office is prepared to help fund construction, Fleming said.

After the Civil War, much of the area where the camp had been was developed as house lots. A warehouse complex built by Stop & Shop Supermarkets occupies a large section of the former military site. Cutting across the area are railroad tracks used by the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority's commuter trains and Amtrak's Boston-New York service.

The only preserved open space on the Camp Meigs site is the park, which has a basketball court, a youth baseball field, tennis courts, and a playground for small children. The park also has several historic markers, a small monument, and a replica of Civil War cannon.

The tree-lined park, which gets considerable use by neighborhood residents, is surrounded by homes.

Cromwell said neighborhood residents have reviewed the architect's plan for the memorial and expressed support for it. Anthony Dowling, a Readville community activist who lives across the street from the park, said of the memorial plans, "I think most people agree it's a positive thing. It's only going to beautify the park."

HNN - 7/2/2004

Copyright 2004 Times Newspapers Limited
The Times (London)

July 1, 2004, Thursday

Scots to remember Somme heroism

Robert Hands

TODAY marks the 88th anniversary of one of the blackest days in British military history. The Battle of the Somme began its internecine course on July 1, 1916, claiming the lives of countless soldiers, the bloodiest of the "big pushes" that Allied commanders believed would swing the war their way.

That the Somme did not herald a swift conclusion to the First World War was hardly down to the hapless men who marched to death and injury through the shell and machinegun fire, in extraordinary acts of courage and daring that have echoed down the generations.

One of the outstanding feats of that terrible first day on the Somme came from an unusual Edinburgh regiment. The 16th Royal Scots, which numbering among its ranks several leading footballers from the Heart of Midlothian club, penetrated farthest into enemy-held territory, and for a short time its soldiers managed to hold their own in the small hamlet of Contalmaison, deep inside the German trench system.

It was a remarkable effort when you consider the statistics of that day: close to 20,000 men killed and double that wounded. The 16th battalion Royal Scots, known as "McCrae's Own" after their charismatic leader, Sir George McCrae, suffered casualties of around three-quarters of their strength. Yet somehow a small party from the battalion's C Company defied the odds to take Contalmaison. They were soon chased back to a captured German strongpoint called Scots Redoubt, which they held under heavy fire for three days.

The 16th Royal Scots was unusual in that it had been assembled largely on the back of McCrae's personal standing in Edinburgh. In November 1914 he determined to raise a battalion on behalf of Lord Kitchener and did so within a week, helped by the enlistment of 11 professional footballers from Hearts -the Scottish League leaders and one of the top British sides of the moment.

The story of the unit is told with some brio by Jack Alexander, in McCrae's Battalion (Mainstream Publishing, £15.99). It has become a crusade for Alexander to ensure that this brave and doughty battalion should be properly remembered.

A plan to erect a permanent memorial was shelved in 1920 because of a lack of funds, and was never revived. Now the Edinburgh historian has inspired another "big push" that has come to rather better fruition: last month, stonemasons from Scotland began work on a 14ft-high commemorative cairn in Contalmaison that fulfils at last the dream of more than 80 years ago.

"The survivors (all of whom are now dead) wanted to do this," Alexander said. "In their declining years, there was no way they could revive the idea and they infected me with their disappointment. None of those men went on to have vast wealth and there was never enough money available."

Until now.

With help from a handful of Hearts supporters, around £25,000 has so far been raised for the project, and the cairn, complete with four substantial bronze-relief plaques explaining the history of the battalion, should be finished this month.

It is not yet enough, however. The final cost will be around £50,000, with an official unveiling of the "simple Scottish cairn" in November, which McCrae's grandson is hoping to attend as guest of honour.

"It is a noble cause," Alexander said. "It was an unlikely assortment of lads from Edinburgh and Fife who earned the greatest credit (on the first day of the Somme), yet until now their deeds have been largely unrecorded."

HNN - 7/2/2004

Hartford Courant (Connecticut) June 29, 2004 Tuesday



With Gov. John Rowland poised to depart, journalists had to know how many Connecticut governors had resigned in the past. Seven media outlets called state historian Christopher Collier, who had the answer: Five -- one for health reasons and four to take jobs in Washington.

In a small irony, Mr. Collier leaves office the same day Mr. Rowland does, July 1, but under different circumstances. Mr. Collier retires after 19 years as state historian with the gratitude of the state.

He has been a steadfast resource for reporters, jurists, teachers, researchers and government officials on such subjects as slavery in the Colonial period, the history of school recess, Native American issues, Thanksgiving proclamations and the history of jails in the state.

Mr. Collier often testified as an expert witness on state and constitutional history. He was one of the experts who testified in the Sheff vs. O'Neill school desegregation case. He fought to reopen the four state museums when fiscal cutbacks forced their closure, and served on numerous boards and commissions whose work related to history.

Mr. Collier, a retired University of Connecticut history professor, took the unpaid post as state historian to "bring sophisticated history to the general public." He may best have accomplished that through his writing for middle-school students. He and his brother, James Lincoln Collier, have written eight historical novels for adolescents, including the middle-school staple, "My Brother Sam Is Dead," which has sold 3 million copies. They've also written nonfiction historical works for middle-schoolers including a 23-volume history of the United States.

Mr. Collier has also written adult histories. His recently published "All Politics Is Local" examines Connecticut's integral role in the creation of the U.S. Constitution. He is now working on a history of the state's public schools.

The new state historian will be Walter Woodward, a former advertising executive. Perhaps he can use his promotional skills to tell Connecticut's great stories.

But today, we salute Mr. Collier with the certainty that not a single journalist in the state will delete his phone number.

HNN - 7/2/2004

Copyright 2004 St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Inc.
St. Louis Post-Dispatch (Missouri) June 29, 2004 Tuesday Five Star Late Lift Edition


LENGTH: 795 words

HEADLINE: Illinois farm field is mined for treasure of racial history Team excavates first U.S. town incorporated by African-American

BYLINE: JOEL CURRIER Of the Post-Dispatch


The tale of a small Illinois town, extinct for nearly 100 years, is being rebuilt and retold piece by piece.

On Friday, an archaeological team of 15 people from around the country finished the first of a three-phase excavation of a rolling farm field about 35 miles southeast of Quincy, Ill. The team has spent the last five weeks digging thousands of artifacts from the 42-acre prairie grass pasture once known as New Philadelphia -- the first town in the United States incorporated by an African-American.

"Our goal is to make this place a part of the national public memory," said Paul Shackel, an anthropology professor at the University of Maryland and lead archaeologist on the New Philadelphia site. "I think this is a very important step."

Local historians cite Brooklyn, Ill., as being the oldest African-American city. Black residents settled in Brooklyn (then known as Lovejoy) as early as the 1830s, but the town was not incorporated until after the Civil War.

New Philadelphia's history began with Francis "Free Frank" McWorter, a black slave from Kentucky who earned enough money mining saltpeter to buy his freedom. McWorter bought, subdivided and sold 42 acres in Pike County and incorporated it in 1836 -- a time when much of the country was segregated. He used the revenue from the parcels of land to buy the freedom of 16 of his family members so they could join him in Illinois.

Shackel said Thursday that McWorter's efforts helped shape a rare, racially integrated community. By 1870, more than a third of the town's 170 people were black, he said. It became a commercial hub for traders, carpenters, shoemakers and blacksmiths until 1868, when the railroad was routed several miles north. The move choked the town's small economy.

"That was the death knell of the town," Shackel said. "It was strangled. And people slowly left."

By 1900, just six households remained. Years later, the land -- and the town's heritage with it -- was plowed over, as if it never existed.

The archaeological team of three investigators and 12 college students was handpicked from around the country. The project, set to end in 2006, is sponsored by the National Research Foundation and is a collaboration of the University of Maryland, the University of Illinois-Springfield, the Illinois State Museum in Springfield and the nonprofit New Philadelphia Association. Shackel said he hopes to add the site to the National Register of Historic Places. Two student archaeological teams will resume excavations for the next two summers.

The project began in fall 2002 with a series of weekend surveys that unearthed more than 7,000 artifacts, including broken ceramic bits, glass shards and rusted nails.

In the past five weeks, archaeologists uncovered what they think is a mortar pit used for mixing lime and the remnants of what could have been a basement garbage pit.

They also found a miniature pewter pitcher and spoon from a child's tea or dollhouse set and an 1898 Indian Head penny.

The findings are promising for future discoveries, said Terry Martin, the curator of anthropology at the Illinois State Museum in Springfield.

"There's good potential for lots of social history via our archaeological study," he said. Dana Blount, 23, who grew up in St. Louis and now majors in history at Alabama's Tuskegee University, said she was drawn to the project because of McWorter's compelling story.

"To me, it's putting the pieces together and being at the bottom level of who and what was here," Blount said. "It's about being a part of history."

Nicole Armistead, a former bridge builder, is trustee of New Philadelphia Land Trust, which owns the 42-acre pasture. Armistead is also vice president of the New Philadelphia Association and has lived on a farm next to the site since 1988. She said her goal is to raise awareness of New Philadelphia history and someday transform the land into a museum and full-time archaeological site.

"I can just picture these pioneer people," she said. "They either had to make it themselves, build it themselves or find it -- themselves. I wonder what made this town so unique that allowed these blacks and whites to come together to live."

Accepting the challenge of finding out is St. Louis native Richard Fairley, 20, who begins his junior year at Lane College in Jackson, Tenn. Fairley is among the 15 team members cleaning and cataloging the findings starting this week at the Illinois State Museum in Springfield.

"Being an African-American, it's helped me a lot in learning about my heritage and background of 'Free Frank,'" said Fairley. He was enthusiastic about the team's finding of a tiny pewter spoon. "That whole spoon was in the ground that way. I always say, 'If these things could talk.'"

HNN - 6/29/2004

From The Education Gadfly

A Weekly Bulletin of News and Analysis from the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation
Volume 4, Number 24. June 24, 2004

The Bible in schools

It's almost impossible to get a decent grasp of Dante, Milton, Shakespeare, William Blake, the Mayflower Compact, the speeches of Lincoln or King, or hundreds of other topics, writers, and historical events, without knowing something about the Bible. But schools are still wary of teaching about the Bible as an important literary and cultural document for fear of lawsuits and accusations of sectarianism. That's a real loss to cultural literacy, one that is being rectified by the Bible Literacy Project (http://www.bibleliteracy.org), which has produced a handy guide for schools and is presently writing a textbook, The Bible and American Civilization, that explains how the Bible has affected political, literary, and historical endeavors and institutions. It's a rare example of true ecumenism in education, supported as it is by the major teachers' union, the ACLU, and major Christian, Jewish, and Muslim groups, and a worthy initiative you should know about.

"Putting Bible back in school," by Rena Pederson, Dallas Morning News, June 20, 2004 (registration required)

HNN - 6/29/2004

The 2004 Conference on Illinois History
October 28-29, 2004

Springfield, Illinois

The Conference on Illinois History?now in its sixth year?is the state's

largest meeting devoted to the history of the Prairie State. More than two

hundred fifty attended the 2003 conference, which featured traditional

academic papers, local history studies, teacher workshops, and roundtable

discussions. The Conference on Illinois History is a meeting that

encourages the sharing of Illinois history research with a diverse audience

that serves

*Established scholars who seek a forum and feedback for their ongoing


*Graduate students planning academic careers who wish to gain experience

delivering papers at professional conferences

*Avocational historians who wish to share a local history study with a

broader audience

*Public historians who have an institutional history or project of

interest to the focused audience of the conference

*Teachers with a desire to bring new perspectives and teaching

techniques into their classrooms

*Students of Illinois history of all ages and all walks of life who

appreciate opportunities to learn in a welcoming environment with others

who share an interest in the history of Illinois and its people

This year's luncheon and dinner speakers (preregistration required):

David Kenney and Bob Hartley, authors of An Uncertain Tradition: U.S.

Senators from Illinois, 1818-2003

Tim Samuelson, author of But Wait! There's More: The Irresistible Appeal

and Spiel of Ronco and Popeil

Catherine Clinton, author of Harriet Tubman: The Road to Freedom

The Conference is accredited by the Illinois State Board of Education for


Registration deadline: October 18, 2004

For more information, contact Donna Lawrence, IHPA, 1 Old State Capitol

Plaza, Springfield, IL 62701, by email at donna_lawrence@ihpa.state.il.us,

or phone 217/785-7933.

Details will be posted as they become available at


Shanta Thoele

Circulation Manager

Office of Constituent Services

Illinois Historic Preservation Agency

1 Old State Capitol Plaza

Springfield, IL 62701-1507

217-524-6045 phone


HNN - 6/25/2004

NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE (Vol. 10, #27; 23 June 2004) by Bruce Craig (editor) rbcraig@historycoalition.org and Brian Heyward
Website: http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch


1. BUDGET DETAILS -- HOUSE PASSED INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATION BILL On 17 June 2004, the House of Representatives passed its version of the "Department of Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2005"
(HR 4568). The $19.5 billion measure is the House's attempt to provide FY
2005 funding for various Interior department agencies such as the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA), the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH), the National Park Service (including the Historic Preservation and Land and Water Conservation Funds), the Smithsonian Institution, the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. Considering the current governmental fiscal crunch, history- and heritage-related programs fared better than some other domestic programs, but still the bottom-line figures are disappointing.

Though the House approved numbers fell well below the president's requests, NEA and NEH supporters were generally pleased to see the House provide moderate increases for the endowments. By a vote of 241 to 185, the House approved a last-minute amendment offered on behalf of the Congressional Arts Caucus by Representative Louise M. Slaughter (D-NY), who, with support from Chris Shays (R-CT), Norm Dicks (D-WA), and Jim Leach (R-IA) was able to garner an additional $10 million for the NEA and $6.5 million for the NEH over what the House Appropriations Committee had recommended. Due to the Congresswoman's efforts the NEA's budget stands at $131 million, $10 million of which is for the "American Masterpieces" program. The additional NEH funds translate into a total budget of $141.8 million for the agency, of which about $13 million will go toward the "We the People"
initiative. This is considerably less than the president's $33 million request, but more than was allocated in FY 2004. About $3 million of the increase will be used to provide for administrative expenses and fund a small across-the-board program increases for nearly all NEH program activities.

The National Park Service (NPS) "operations" account is to receive $1.7 billion. Recognizing that park units (especially small historic units) were fiscally strapped for cash, the House Appropriations Committee opted to increase the funding levels for "base operations" needs of the parks by $55 million over the enacted FY 2004 level. This is significantly more than the administration's requested budget; in toto, approximately $1 billion will be available for park operations. But, to pay for the increase, the House agreed to a plan to virtually zero out any monies for land acquisition or new park development. Overall, they recommended an appropriation $93 million less than the administration had requested. The House also expressed concern over the rising number of so-called "partnership projects" that are having a "devastating impact on backlog maintenance projects and on the operating budget for the parks." Finally, the House allocated $71.5 million for the Historic Preservation Fund including $30 million for the "Save America's Treasures" Program.

For the Smithsonian Institution (SI), the House is recommending $620 million, a $24 million increase over FY 2004 and $8 million above the administration's request. The funding includes some $123 million for construction-related expenses. The House continues to see the necessity to micro-manage aspects of Secretary Lawrence Small's operations. There are a vast number of administrative provisions and directives to the SI management limiting the Smithsonian Secretary's traditional discretionary authority to manage the SI and reprogram funds. For example, Mr. Small may not reprogram funds "without the advance written approval of the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations."

The Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars is to receive $8.9 million and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation slotted to receive $4.6 million.

Action on the Interior appropriations bill now moves to the Senate where a mark-up of its version of the legislation is not expected until after the 4 July recess.

2. LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS UPDATE On 15 June 2004, a House Appropriations Subcommittee approved a recommendation for $2.75 billion to fund the Legislative Branch in FY 2005. The appropriation provides operational money for the Architect of the Capitol, the Library of Congress, and other congressional support agencies. With only a handful of exceptions, the bill the committee passed would freeze funding for most agencies at last year's levels.

The Architect of the Capitol and the Government Printing Office (GPO) are both slotted to take modest cuts, though the funding levels adopted would maintain current staffing levels and fully fund cost of living adjustments for staff. The Library of Congress would see a $20 million increase over FY
2004 to $543 million. Under this legislation the House would receive an operational budget of just over $1 billion. The Senate has yet to act on its proposed budget.

Readers may recall a story last month ("Smithsonian Major Donor Flees to Cuba" NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE vol. 10, #19; 6 May 2004) in which Herbert Axelrod, a 76-year-old pet-products and publishing tycoon and major donor to the Smithsonian Institution National Museum of American History (NMAH), fled to Cuba to avoid tax fraud charges. An update....last week Axelrod was arrested in Germany on a U.S. fugitive warrant and will probably be returned to the United States to face charges that stem from his business dealings during the 1990s. And in a related development, the Senate Finance Committee is examining Axelrod's connections with the Smithsonian Institution (SI).

German police took Axelrod into custody at a Berlin airport as the disgraced philanthropist arrived on a flight from Zurich, Switzerland. According to a spokesman for the U.S Attorney's office, authorities spotted Axelrod's name on an Interpol list of known fugitives.
It is unclear when Axelrod left Cuba but it appears that he had been traveling in Europe since at least last month.

U.S. officials notified German authorities they plan to seek Axelrod's extradition, a process that could take months as some European countries, among them Switzerland, are notoriously slow to agree to extradition in cases that involve relatively minor crimes.

An 12 April indictment charges Axelrod with conspiracy to defraud the Internal Revenue Service and aiding and abetting the filing of a false tax
return. The multi-millionaire faces up to five years in prison if convicted.

Because Axelrod has made several large donations to the Smithsonian Institution (Axelrod claims his contributions to the SI are valued in excess of $50 million), the Senate Finance Committee is examining allegations that Axelrod may have been inflated the value of donations. According to Senate Finance Committee Chair Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa), the committee has asked the Smithsonian for a history of its association with Axelrod and will investigate allegations of "overvalued deductions." The Senate investigation is part of a broader examination into charitable donations to non-profit organizations.

4. ISOO DIRECTOR LEONARD DELIVERS WARNING TO GOVERNMENT CLASSIFIERS During a 15 June 2004 speech to the National Classification Management Society's (NCMS) annual training seminar, J. William Leonard, Director of Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO), warned that the integrity of the current federal agency classification system might be in danger. "Too much classification unnecessarily impedes effective information sharing, and inappropriate classification undermines the integrity of the entire process," stated Leonard.

In issuing Executive Order 12958 last year, President Bush ensured that classification standards would be rigorously upheld. However, Leonard points out, "as evidenced by a view of newspaper headlines over the past several months, agencies are finding it is increasingly difficult for them to hold their own employees accountable for adhering to the requirements for protecting classified information." This disturbing trend is the result of excessive classification and because of this "I believe that it is no coincidence that some of these same agencies are currently experiencing a veritable epidemic of leaks -- part and parcel of what occurs when individuals begin to lose confidence in the security classification system." Leonard also stated that while classification is "an inherently discretionary act" in determining what is to be classified, "the original classification authority must be able to identify or describe the damage to national security that would arise if the information was subject to unauthorized disclosure." , Leonard stated his belief that with so many documents being classified, agency employees' are becoming desensitized to the significance of the classification process.

Leonard reminded his audience that, "in no case can information be classified in order to conceal violations of law or to prevent embarrassment to a person, organization or agency." Prior to classifying a document, government classifiers should ask themselves the following
questions: if released, what possible damage will the document cause to international or national security? Who produced the document? Is it owned by a United States government agency?

Leonard concluded, "the integrity of the security classification program is essential to our nation's continued well-being. The consequences of failure are too high. Thus, the American people expect and deserve nothing less than that we get the basics right each and every day."

Thanks to the Federation of American Scientists, the full text of Leonard's speech may be found at: http://www.fas.org/sgp/isoo/leonard061504.pdf .

Item # 1-- LC Digital Research Grants Initiative: The Library of Congress is partnering with the National Science Foundation (NSF) to establish the first research grants program to specifically address the preservation of digital materials. The NSF will administer the program, which will fund cutting-edge research to support the long-term management of digital information. This effort is part of the Library's collaborative program to implement a national digital preservation strategy. The research program announcement coincides with the signing of a memorandum of understanding between the Library of Congress and NSF to collaborate over the next decade on a broad set of research activities related to digital libraries and archives. The new Digital Archiving and Long-Term Preservation research program, which expects to make approximately $2 million in initial awards using funds from the Library of Congress, has three main focus areas for which proposals are sought: digital repository models; tools, technologies, and processes; and organizational, economic, and policy issues. The NSF Directorate for Computer and Information Science and Engineering, Division of Information and Intelligent Systems, will issue a call for proposals shortly; check the NSF Web site at: http://www.cise.nsf.gov/div/index.cfm?div=iis
for up-to-date information.

Item # 2 -- FOIA Guidebook: The Justice Department Office of Information and Privacy has published a newly updated edition of its Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Guide. The guide is a comprehensive treatment of the act's provisions, extensively annotated with footnotes to the ever-growing body of case law. While the principal audience for the Guide seems to be government attorneys and FOIA officers who must implement the act, it is also a useful resource for FOIA requesters seeking insight into FOIA practice and procedure. The full text of the May 2004 edition of the FOIA guide is now available on the Justice Department web site at:
http://www.usdoj.gov/oip/foi-act.htm .

Item # 3 -- Foundation Funding Sourcebook: "Foundation Funding for the
Humanities: An Overview of Current and Historical Trends" (2004) is the Foundation Center's first study focused exclusively on humanities giving.
Prepared in cooperation with the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, it documents the size and scope of foundation giving for the humanities between 1992 and 2002. It also includes an essay by noted philanthropy historian James A. Smith that identifies the principal grantmakers and trends influencing foundation support for the humanities from the start of the twentieth century through today. To download Foundation Funding for the Humanities for free, tap into: http:
//www.fdncenter.org/research/trends_analysis/ .

One article this week: In "African-American Museums Struggle for Funds"
Joel Rose of National Public Radio member station WHYY reports on the difficult that several of the nation's African-American museums are having in raising funds and attracting a broader audience. Many rely heavily on public funding at a time when state governments are facing budget shortfalls. For the audio link, tap into:
http://www.npr.org/rundowns/segment.php?wfId=1971433 . If you need to download the story using a RealAudio or WindowsMedia player, please visit NPR's audio help page at: http://www.npr.org/audiohelp/ . For a transcript of the story, tap into: http://www.npr.org/transcripts/story.html .

The National Coalition for History invites you to subscribe to this FREE weekly newsletter! You are also encouraged to redistribute the NCH Washington Updates to colleagues, friends, teachers, students and others who are interested in history and archives issues. A complete backfile of these reports is maintained by H-Net on the NCH's recently updated web page
at: http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch .

To subscribe to the "NCH Washington Update," send an e-mail message to:
listserv@h-net.msu.edu with the following text in the body of the message (and only this text): SUBSCRIBE H-NCH firstname lastname, institution. To unsubscribe, send an e-mail message to: listserv@h-net.msu.edu according to the following model: SIGNOFF H-NCH.

You can accomplish the same tasks by tapping into the web interface at:
http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/lists/subscribe.cgi and at the "network" prompt, scroll down and select H-NCH; enter your name and affiliation and "submit".

Lillian Adelman - 6/20/2004

I don't have a comment, just a question. Would Prof. Adelman be a relative? My family stems from Dusiat, Lithuania.

I'm always on the lookout for family even if I may disagree with their politics.

geohagan2000 doe - 6/19/2004

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them.
That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998-Truth!
This was a quote from President Clinton during a presentation at the Pentagon defending a decision to conduct military strikes against Iraq.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear.
We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998-Truth!
Bill Clinton went to the Pentagon on this occasion to be briefed by top military officials about Iraq and weapons of mass destruction.
His remarks followed that briefing.

"Iraq is a long way from USA but, what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998-Truth!
This is a quote from Albright during an appearance at Ohio State University by Albright, who was Secretary of State for Bill Clinton.

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998-Truth!
This was at the same Ohio State University appearance as Madeline Albright.
"We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S.Constitution and Laws, to take necessary actions, (including, if appropriate,
air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998-Truth!
According to the U.S. Senate website, the text of this letter was signed by several Senators, both Democrat and Republican, including Senator John McCain and Joseph Lieberman.

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998-Truth!
The text of this statement by Nancy Pelosi is posted on her congressional website.

"Hussein has .. chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999-Truth!
This was from an appearance Albright made in Chicago.
She was addressing the embargo of Iraq that was in effect at the time and criticism that it may have prevented needed medical supplies from getting into the country. Albright said, "There has never been an embargo against food and medicine. It's just that Hussein has just not chosen to spend his money on that. Instead, he has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction, and palaces for his cronies."

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs
continue a pace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001Truth!
The only letter with this quote from December 5, 2001 that we could find did not include the participation of Senator Bob Graham, but it was signed nine other senators including Democrat Joe Lieberman.
It urged President Bush to take quicker action against Iraq.

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002-Truth!
These were remarks from Senator Levin to a Senate committee on that date.

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002-Truth!
This and the quote below was part of prepared remarks for a speech in San Francisco to The Commonwealth Club.

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002-Truth!

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002-Truth!
Part of a speech he gave at Johns Hopkins.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998.
We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities.
Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002-Truth!
On the floor of the Senate during debate over the resolution that would authorize using force against Iraq.
He was urging caution about going to war and commented that even though there was confidence about the weapons in Iraq, there had not been the need to take military action for a number of years and he asked why there would be the need at that point.

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002-Truth!
Senator Kerry's comments were made to the Senate as part of the same debate over the resolution to use force against Saddam Hussein.

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated
the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002-Truth!
Senator Rockefeller's statements were a part of the debate over using force against Saddam Hussein.

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his
chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002-Truth!
Senator Waxman's contribution to the Senate debate over going to war.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological
weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program.
He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002-Truth!
Senator Clinton acknowledged the threat of Saddam Hussein but said she did not feel that using force at that time was a good option.

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime He presents a
particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his
continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction
So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ..."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan.23.2003-Truth!
In a speech to Georgetown University

HNN - 6/18/2004

Copyright 2004 Newspaper Publishing PLC
Independent on Sunday (London)

June 13, 2004, Sunday

SECTION: Final Edition; FEATURES; Pg. 24,25,26

LENGTH: 1690 words


BYLINE: MARK ELLWOOD The latest scoop: this photograph of a woman and her children enjoying some of the first ever ice-cream cones was one of the most celebrated of the Fair. Right: an altar to food in Utah's 1904 World's Fair exhibit. Far right: the Grand Basin shows the full glory of the St Louis event Eat me in St Louis: two of the many eateries at the Fair. Right: the Filipino tribesmen displayed' at the event. Rumours that they ate dog gave rise to the naming of the favourite food - a sausage in a bun - at the nearby Olympics

Ted Drewes ice-cream parlour is a whitewashed shack on the outskirts of St Louis, Missouri, filled with the constant hum of blenders; there are no tables, just take-out windows, the scrawled menus pasted on the glass. Yet, even on a cold March day, the line for sundaes snakes out of the carpark. What most of the shivering, scarf-wrapped people are waiting for is the house special: a Concrete - a scoop of frozen vanilla custard pureed in a blender with a choice of thickeners from chunks of chocolate to a slab of cherry pie, to a jaw-breaking consistency (hence the name). But the strangest thing about Ted's sundaes isn't their ingredients or moniker - it's the fact that they're served in a cup rather than a cone. Strange because this sweet-toothed city deep in the US's Midwest is where the ice-cream cone was invented. In fact, it was during the World's Fair of 1904 that in one short summer the city helped introduce not only cones but peanut butter, the hot dog, Dr Pepper, iced tea and candy floss too. If any city can lay claim to being the capital of the Fast Food Nation, this is it.

Staged here to celebrate the centenary of America's westward expansion, the 1904 Fair was officially called the Louisiana Purchase Exposition; at that time, St Louis was the fourth largest town in the US and a natural site for a spot of jolly nationalism (and a little chirpy romance, as Judy Garland would find out 40 years later in the classic musical, Meet Me in St Louis). The fair took place in a vast green space now known as Forest Park; more than 20 million people came to see exotica such as a live village shipped wholesale from the Philippines and one of the raunchy dancers performing on an entertainment strip dubbed The Pike.

Scantily clad girls aside, most of the exhibits were nakedly commercial, from lightbulbs to Bissel vacuum cleaners; there were even demonstrations showing the time-saving advantages of cooking with electricity. "Unlike Chicago's exhibition in 1893, this fair didn't focus on art and architecture, it was about what you can buy," explains Andrew Walker, director of collections for the Missouri Historical Society, "it was the dawn of the age of convenience." Nowhere was that clearer than in the Fair's fast food: take the ice-cream cone, an iconic image of the event even in contemporary accounts. "One of the most celebrated pictures taken by the official photographer running around the Fair was of a woman and her children enjoying an ice-cream cone," notes writer and food historian Suzanne Corbett. In colonial times, ice-cream had been a pricey delicacy, but by the 1870s, technical advances made it an affordable if upscale treat; in fact, the turn-of-the-century temperance movement trumpeted it as a genteel substitute for sherry.

Ideal for the clammy St Louis summer, ice-cream was offered in The Pike, but demand was so high that the stallholder ran out of plates to serve it on; that's when Ernest Hamwi - a Syrian immigrant who was making waffles next door - stepped in. He twisted one of his waffles to carry the treat and created the first ever ice-cream cone. "The cone took ice-cream out of the ice-cream parlour and fancy drawing rooms, to make it a food of the masses," explains Corbett. Several manufacturers, including the St Louis Ice-Cream Cone Company and the Missouri Cone Company, sprang up after the fair and for many years the city was the main supplier of cones to the whole country.

Hamwi's waffle solved one of the barriers to the take off of fast food: being able to handle what you're eating. Until the fair, the few carry- out foods on offer usually came with a handy pair of gloves to keep fingers and food apart - stashed in a bun, hot dogs needed no such equipment. And these on-the-go specials quickly became a favourite not only with the throngs visiting the Fair but with spectators at the Olympic Games (which was taking place in the city at the same time) who snapped them up in their thousands.

Certainly, sausages were not invented at the Fair and frankfurters were probably brought to St Louis years before by German immigrants. But it was here that, tucked in a bun, they got a following - and a name. Rumour raged that the Filipino tribesmen in the village exhibit favoured canine cuisine and, even though their government purportedly supplied dozens of dogs for them to eat, local pets were said to be vanishing to satisfy the hunger of the savages. Seeing the publicity potential in this, savvy vendors dubbed their sausage and bun combos "hot dogs".

There was another reason, Corbett explains, that frankfurters were so hot at the time. "At the time, these sausages were a food that even the most strait-laced grandmother saw as healthy and nutritious," she says. The same was true for peanut butter. "It was marketed as a healthy food for children," Corbett continues. Peanuts were known to be packed with protein; and for several years, physicians had been fiddling with ways to launch them into the everyday diet. Cereal king John Harvey Kellogg, for example, patented a paste he created from boiled nuts with little success. The problem? Its bland flavour. It was a smart doctor from St Louis (whose name no one can now agree on) who came up with roasting the nuts first. Pureed, they now had a stronger, richer taste. The doctor marketed his paste as ideal for anyone who couldn't chew, whether through poor health or lack of teeth.

But it was yet another man, CH Sumner, who realised peanut butter's potential as a snack food and snapped up the concession to hawk it at the Fair. "He had the peanut-butter grinding apparatus on site so he could grind it freshly," Corbett says. "There is talk that he sold it with crackers or bread, and even as a carry-out item in a little tub for buyers to snack on later." Sumner's instincts were spot-on: he made more than $ 700 and the product was soon launched into mass production by a local entrepreneur (though it would be well into the 1930s when another company came up with the idea of stirring in nut chunks to create a crunchy version).

All that food made the Fair's visitors thirsty. Fortunately, the exhibitors were there to help. Two of the drinks launched at the Fair became favourites: iced tea and Dr Pepper. The former had existed in the Deep South for some time but settlers usually steeped the tea in a jug, left it out in the sun all day and then served it tepid. The St Louis version was brewed hot and poured over ice - an innovation thought up by a group of Chinese and Indian tea producers exhibiting at the Fair and frustrated that no one was buying their hot beverages.

As for Dr Pepper, it was introduced in Texas in 1885 (the name, a tribute to the inventor's first boss, and its oddball flavour coming from prune juice) but it took 20 years for the company to gather enough cash and courage to launch the fizzy drink nationwide; the 1904 Fair was chosen, and to pique interest, free gifts with purchase - think soda-pop watches - were offered, essentially making them the world's first Happy Meal.

Candy floss which, like Dr Pepper, pre-dated the Fair, also kicked off in 1904. The process had been cooked up in Tennessee but here its inventors marketed bundles in wooden boxes and sold almost 70,000 portions of the stuff.

But just why was junk food the legacy of the St Louis show? "There was a boom in product development in the late-19th century," explains Corbett, "and at the same time fast food became acceptable for all classes to eat and enjoy." And not only were these snacks cheap so every fair-goer could afford them, they were also marketed as hot, new 20th-century fads. Unlike past fairs in Chicago or Paris, which looked back at the city's achievements, the mercantile, factory-packed town of St Louis chose to look forwards and predict the products of the next 100 years (and, in the process, stake its claim to mass producing them). Timing was also critical because, as Corbett explains, "by 1904, more people were able to travel than ever before but it still hadn't been considered socially polite to walk around eating things. As communications and transport became faster, food followed suit and became more mobile and more packable."

But the success of iced teas and ice-creams was down to marketing as much as mobility: World's Fairs were the primetime "infomercials" of their day, with the selling power of an ad during Coronation Street and a splash in the Sun combined. Paul Greenhalgh, the former head of research at the Victoria & Albert Museum who is working on a book about World's Fairs notes that various brands, such as Thomas Cook, also owe their pre-eminence to these exhibitions (in Cook's case, London 1851). "There were Olympiads alongside the fairs, they were political events, with giant congresses of doctors and medics, and huge trade fairs," says Greenhalgh. And it was this convergence of business and entertainment that gave absolutely everyone a reason to visit.

The acres of publicity also helped - daily bulletins of the Fair's goings on were such a staple of newspapers across the world that the St Louis board even instituted a Department of Exploitation to churn out propaganda. It was a chance that entrepreneurs such as the Dr Pepper company and CH Sumner seized wisely. "World's Fairs were vital for producing the modern popular and high cultural world," Greenhalgh believes, "from blockbuster exhibitions to all forms of natural history displays as well as the Olympics and Olympia-type trade shows such as the Motor Show."

Though Cook may have London to thank for his travellers' cheques, other cooks - especially reluctant ones - will thank St Louis for ushering in the era of culinary convenience. And while there are always competing claims over the origins of foodstuffs (some say a circus helper invented candy floss 50 years earlier, and sausages are namechecked in the Bible), what's indisputable is that the 1904 St Louis Fair marked the Triumph of Take-Out. After all, contemporary accounts single out a seventh dish as a breakout hit: Chinese fried rice.

HNN - 6/18/2004

Bush Censure by Envoys, Military May Be a First, Historians Say
June 18 (Bloomberg) -- The statement by 27 former diplomats and military officers on Wednesday calling for the defeat of U.S. President George W. Bush may be unprecedented.

``Their prominence and seniority and influence when in their diplomatic or military posts, and their number, is really remarkable,'' said Richard Kohn, the Pentagon's chief Air Force historian from 1981-1991 who's now chairman of the war and defense curriculum at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

The group, which includes Democrats and Republicans, said Bush's foreign policy and the war in Iraq have damaged U.S. security. Its statement may sway voters already concerned by reports of abuse of Iraqi prisoners by U.S. soldiers and the conclusion by a bipartisan commission that Saddam Hussein had no connection to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

``Bush's credibility has been damaged by Iraq,'' said Greg Valliere, chief political strategist at Schwab Soundview Capital Markets. ``Kerry has greater potential to get traction on issues like this,'' he said, referring to the Democratic presidential candidate, Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts.

``From the outset, George W. Bush adopted an overbearing approach to America's role in the world, relying upon military might and righteousness, insensitive to the concerns of traditional friends and allies, and disdainful of the United Nations,'' the group, Diplomats and Military Commanders for Change, said in a statement. They said Bush, 57, should be defeated, without explicitly endorsing Kerry, 60, a four-term senator.

`Always Naysayers'

The group included Jack Matlock Jr., President Ronald Reagan's ambassador to the Soviet Union; retired Admiral William Crowe, Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman under Reagan; Charles Freeman, President George H.W. Bush's ambassador to Saudi Arabia; and retired Air Force Chief of Staff Merrill McPeak, who is advising Kerry's campaign.

``I can't remember anything comparable to that,'' said historian Arthur Schlesinger Jr., who was an adviser to President John F. Kennedy, a Democrat. ``I can't remember a precedent.'' Schlesinger, 86, won the Pulitzer Prize for his 1965 book, ``A Thousand Days: John F. Kennedy in the White House.''

Pew Poll

The Bush campaign said at least 20 of the signatories have been active politically before and at least 13 have contributed to Democrats. The president's supporters said the statement wouldn't make a difference.

``There's always some naysayers that get rounded up by the opposition,'' said Edwin Meese, 72, who served as attorney general under Reagan. ``I don't think it'll have much effect at all in the election, in as much as their statements seem inconsistent with their past positions.''

Bush's approval rating among adults in the U.S. climbed in the last month as more Americans said the military effort in Iraq was going well, according to a poll from the Pew Research Center.

The survey conducted June 3-13 found the president's overall approval rating rose to 48 percent from 44 percent in May. He also gained in the presidential race against Kerry, pulling into a statistical tie after trailing the Massachusetts senator by 5 percentage points, according to data released by the Washington- based Pew Center.


Professors such as Michael Munger, chairman of the political science department at Duke University, and former diplomats and military officials said the group's charges won't resonate with most voters. The people paying the most attention are the so- called swing voters, who can go either way, they said.

``These are people who don't get their crank turned by the main issues,'' Munger said. ``Iraq bears no resemblance to Vietnam militarily, but it may start to resemble Vietnam politically. What is the mission? When will it end?''

In the latest Los Angeles Times poll, Kerry led Bush by a margin of 51 percent to 44 percent. Fifty-five percent of voters said they disapproved of Bush's handling of the war in Iraq, up from 46 percent in March. The June 5-8 poll of 1,230 registered voters nationwide had a margin of error of 3 percentage points.

`Open Season'

Crowe laid the groundwork for such a group when he endorsed Democrat Bill Clinton for president in 1992, said Thomas Keaney, executive director of the foreign policy institute at Johns Hopkins University's School of Advanced International Studies. At the time, it was rare even for a retired military officer to speak out, he said.

``Today that is more and more prevalent,'' said Keaney, a retired Air Force Colonel who has also been a professor at the National War College. For diplomats and ex-military officials, political acts ``ought to remain extraordinary,'' Keaney said. ``It will hurt if the code changes, if it becomes open season.''


In the Vietnam War era, the types of people speaking out were lower-ranked officers or soldiers without commissions, said Phyllis Bennis, a fellow with the Institute for Policy Studies, a Washington research group that promotes democracy and human rights. Kerry, a Navy lieutenant in Vietnam who earned three Purple Hearts for injuries, a Silver Star for gallantry in action and a Bronze Star for valor, was one of those protesters.

``I don't remember a group of this stature before this war,'' Bennis said. ``The war is a crucial issue for every voting bloc -- those that are uncertain where they stand will take this as a very serious consideration.''

Eisenhower Denounced

In the late 1950s, high-ranking retired military officials publicly denounced President Dwight Eisenhower's military strategy against the Soviet Union, said Christopher Preble, director of foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute, a Washington public policy group that advocates limited government and libertarian issues. They acted as individuals, he said.

``We have seen this on specific issues at times -- expressing some unhappiness -- but not a broad blast at the administration like this,'' said Casimir Yost, director of the Institute for the Study of Diplomacy at Georgetown University.

The U.S. group may have been following counterparts in the U.K. In an open letter released April 26, 52 former U.K. ambassadors and international officials criticized Prime Minister Tony Blair for his support of the U.S. administration's policies in Iraq and in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Politically Inspired

Secretary of State Colin Powell on Wednesday said the U.S. group's statement was politically motivated. ``I disagree with their point of view,'' Powell, 67, said in an interview with the Arab television channel Al-Jazeera. ``They wish to see President Bush not reelected. I do not believe that will be the judgment of the American people.''

The Bush campaign has more than 80,000 veteran and military volunteers and 49 Medal of Honor recipients who support the president, spokesman Scott Stanzel said. There are just 130 living recipients of the nation's highest military award, according to the Web site http://www.medalofhonor.com .

``We are not surprised that John Kerry has the support of people who share his belief that the threat of terror is exaggerated,'' Stanzel said. ``This is a group of partisan individuals who have been previously active in politics. They certainly have a right to express their Democratic views, but we're not concerned with their activity.''

Military issues have gained more attention in the 2004 election because of Iraq and Kerry's efforts to organize 1 million veterans to help him.

``To be involved in an act that will be seen by many as political if not partisan is for many of us a new experience,'' said Phyllis Oakley, a career diplomat who served as assistant secretary of state for intelligence and research under President Clinton and signed the statement. ``As career government officials, we have served loyally both Republican and Democratic administrations.''

HNN - 6/18/2004

NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE (Vol. 10, #26; 17 June 2004) by Bruce Craig (editor) rbcraig@historycoalition.org and Brian Heyward
Website: http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch

IMPORTANT COPYRIGHT CASE TO BE HEARD On 28 June 2004, the Second Circuit of the Southern District of New York will hear an appeal in the copyright case of Faulkner v. National Geographic Society. For historians and other scholars, the Faulkner case is significant because it may very well decide the future of the digital preservation and ready access to scholarly materials in an electronic format.

At stake in this case is whether publishers of collective works like JSTOR, can re-publish those works in a digital format without engaging in copyright infringement. JSTOR, for example, offers the scholarly community access to over 600 collections and journals in the arts, humanities, and social sciences that are both multi-disciplinary and discipline-specific.

The technical intricacies of this case are built upon two previous cases -- Greenberg v. National Geographic and another that regular readers of this publication should be familiar with -- New York Times Co., Inc. v. Tasini.

The controversy in all three cases focuses on Section 201 (c) of the Copyright Act. This section allows owners of collective works to reproduce the contents of their periodicals as part of a revision process without specific permission from the creator. In the Greenberg case (2001), a freelance photographer sued National Geographic for reproducing his images in a digital version of the magazine. The Eleventh Circuit Court argued that the digitization of the photographs, which in the CD-ROM version were accompanied by music, constituted a "new work" thereby violating Greenberg's copyright. But in the Tasini case (2001), the Supreme Court found that as long as articles and photographs were kept within their original context than Section 201 (c) was applicable to digitized periodicals.

Like Greenberg, the Faulkner case involves freelance photography and journal articles that appeared on a National Geographic CD-ROM. On 11 December 2003 Judge Lewis Kaplan issued an opinion based on the Tasini decision. Kaplan found that as long as digital versions placed photographs and articles within the context of their original purposes then there was
no infringement of copyright. The fact that articles and photographs
appear in a new medium, CD-ROM (that includes keyword search abilities and other features), makes no difference to the case. Judge Kaplan found that, "media neutrality is a fundamental principle of the Copyright Act." Essentially, Kaplan's ruling found that switching the format in which articles and photographs may be seen as a part of the revision process; a case in point is that the Copyright Act is not violated by the creation of microfilm or hardcover versions of periodicals. These versions, like digital copies, have features that deviate from the original journal publication (i.e. introductions, indices, etc.) that in the end make access easier.

If the Second Circuit departs from the Greenberg opinion, undoubtedly the Faulkner case will advance to the United States Supreme Court.

HNN - 6/18/2004

NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE (Vol. 10, #26; 17 June 2004) by Bruce Craig (editor) rbcraig@historycoalition.org and Brian Heyward
Website: http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch


1. HOUSE RAISES ENDOWMENT BUDGET NUMBERS On 16 June 2004, the House of Representatives acted on the FY 2005 Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations bill (HR 4578) and approved an amendment granting slight increases over House Appropriations Committee marks for the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) and the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA). Although earlier in the year the president had proposed large increases for both the NEH (to $162 million) and NEA (to
$139 million), last week the House Appropriations Committee refused to approve the administration's request. Nevertheless, yesterday, the full House approved an amendment offered by Representative Louise M. Slaughter
(D-NY) that provided an additional $10 million for the NEA and $3.5 million for the NEH over the appropriation committee recommendations. If approved by the Senate, the increases would bring the FY 2005 appropriations for the endowments to $131 million and $142 million, respectively.

In a letter from the co-chairs of the Congressional Arts Caucus (Representatives Louise Slaughter (D-NY) and Chris Shays (R-CT)) to members asking for their support for the proposed amendment, Slaughter and Shays asked Congress to consider how much money the NEH and NEA bring into the government and how many jobs the agencies create. They pointed out that the non-profit art and humanities industry is estimated to be a $134 billion a year business that collectively employs more than 4.85 million Americans full-time. As an industry, each year the arts and humanities generate more than $89.4 billion in household income and over $24 billion in taxes.

Earlier in the week, endowment supporters hoped an amendment could be advanced that would raise the NEH budget by $5 million a year and the NEA budget by $15 million. Even with these increases, supporters argued, "funding for our two agencies remains considerably low." But in order to do so they had to work with committee staff to find another program that could be cut to give the endowments a larger share of the Interior department budget. Given the current fiscal crisis, finding the needed offsets proved difficult.

Along with providing budgets for the NEH and the NEA, the Interior and Related Agencies appropriations bill also sets annual funding levels for the Smithsonian Institution, the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, various historic preservation programs, the National Park Service, and other history-related programs (The NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE will have more on the House budget figures for these programs in next week's posting). The fy 2005 budget that Congress approved to fund all these programs is $19.5 million, $300 million less than this year's operating budget (FY 2004).

2. IMPORTANT COPYRIGHT CASE TO BE HEARD On 28 June 2004, the Second Circuit of the Southern District of New York will hear an appeal in the copyright case of Faulkner v. National Geographic Society. For historians and other scholars, the Faulkner case is significant because it may very well decide the future of the digital preservation and ready access to scholarly materials in an electronic format.

At stake in this case is whether publishers of collective works like JSTOR, can re-publish those works in a digital format without engaging in copyright infringement. JSTOR, for example, offers the scholarly community access to over 600 collections and journals in the arts, humanities, and social sciences that are both multi-disciplinary and discipline-specific.

The technical intricacies of this case are built upon two previous cases -- Greenberg v. National Geographic and another that regular readers of this publication should be familiar with -- New York Times Co., Inc. v. Tasini.

The controversy in all three cases focuses on Section 201 (c) of the Copyright Act. This section allows owners of collective works to reproduce the contents of their periodicals as part of a revision process without specific permission from the creator. In the Greenberg case (2001), a freelance photographer sued National Geographic for reproducing his images in a digital version of the magazine. The Eleventh Circuit Court argued that the digitization of the photographs, which in the CD-ROM version were accompanied by music, constituted a "new work" thereby violating Greenberg's copyright. But in the Tasini case (2001), the Supreme Court found that as long as articles and photographs were kept within their original context than Section 201 (c) was applicable to digitized periodicals.

Like Greenberg, the Faulkner case involves freelance photography and journal articles that appeared on a National Geographic CD-ROM. On 11 December 2003 Judge Lewis Kaplan issued an opinion based on the Tasini decision. Kaplan found that as long as digital versions placed photographs and articles within the context of their original purposes then there was
no infringement of copyright. The fact that articles and photographs
appear in a new medium, CD-ROM (that includes keyword search abilities and other features), makes no difference to the case. Judge Kaplan found that, "media neutrality is a fundamental principle of the Copyright Act." Essentially, Kaplan's ruling found that switching the format in which articles and photographs may be seen as a part of the revision process; a case in point is that the Copyright Act is not violated by the creation of microfilm or hardcover versions of periodicals. These versions, like digital copies, have features that deviate from the original journal publication (i.e. introductions, indices, etc.) that in the end make access easier.

If the Second Circuit departs from the Greenberg opinion, undoubtedly the Faulkner case will advance to the United States Supreme Court.

3. LEGISLATIVE UPDATE -- BILLS PASSED, HEARINGS CONDUCTED, LEGISLATION INTRODUCED National Great Blacks in Wax Museum and Justice Learning Center (S. 1233/HR
2424): On 10 June 2004, having passed both the House and Senate, legislation (S. 1233) to authorize assistance for the Baltimore based National Great Blacks in Wax Museum and Justice Learning Center was presented to the president for signature. The bill directs the Attorney General, acting through the Department of Justice, to make a grant of up to
$5 million to the Great Blacks in Wax Museum, Inc., to help in the effort to expand its existing facilities and carry out programs relating to civil rights and juvenile justice.

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park (S. 1576): On 15 June 2004, the House Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation and Public Lands conducted a hearing on legislation (HR 3305) to expand the boundary of Harpers Ferry National Historical Park in West Virginia. Testimony was received from Representative Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), the Department of Interior, and public witnesses. Capito's bill -- a companion bill to Senator Robert C Byrd's (D-WV) legislation (S. 1576) that has already passed the Senate -- seeks to increase the size of Harpers Ferry National Park from 2,505 to
3,745 acres. The legislation would authorize a donation from the Civil War Preservation Trust, facilitate the transfer of lands from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and allow the National Park Service to purchase of a small amount of private property for inclusion in the park.

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (S. 2469): On 20 May 2004, Senator Jim Talent (R-MO) introduced legislation, "To Amend the National Historic Preservation Act to provide authorization and improve the operations of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation" (S.
2469). Talent's bill seeks to increase the funding of the Advisory
Council by allowing the agency to enter into contracts and charge agencies, outside the Department of Interior, for services rendered. According to the original National Historic Preservation Act the council's annual budget was not to exceed four million dollars until after the fiscal year 2005. This legislation, which on 8 June 2004 was heard before the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources' subcommittee on National Parks, would allow the Council to exceed its mandated budget and solicit "such amounts as may be necessary to carry out this title."

Servitude and Emancipation Archival Research Clearing House Act of 2004 (S.
1292/HR 4147): On 19 June 2003 Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA) with seven co-sponsors introduced the "Servitude and Emancipation Archival Research Clearing House Act of 2003" (S. 1292) -- a companion bill to Representative Elijah Cummings's (D-MD) House measure (HR 4147) introduced 2 April 2004 with thirty-three co-sponsors. This act would authorize the expenditure of ten million dollars to the National Archives to establish a national database of historic records of servitude and emancipation in the United States to "assist African Americans in researching their genealogy." Action is pending in both the Senate Committee on Government Affairs and the House Committee on Government Reform.

Item # 1 -- Monticello Grant: Robert and Clarice Smith donated $15 million to the Jefferson Foundation, which owns and operates Monticello, President Thomas Jefferson's home. This gift, which was announced on 11 June 2004 at an annual black tie affair at Monticello, is the largest gift the eighty-year-old foundation has received. The money will go mostly to funding and expanding its international center, which was renamed to honor Robert Smith. The International Center of the Jefferson Foundation has tried to spread Jefferson's ideas on democracy and liberty throughout the world. In conjunction with supporting the International Center, $1.5 million of the gift will be used to expand programs involving children and archaeology. Another $1 million will upgrade the center's historic 78-acre campus. The remaining donation will boost the center's endowment. For more on the donation, tap into:

Item #2 -- FRUS Volume Released: On 10 June 2004, the Department of State released volume XXXIII of the FRUS series -- "Foreign Relations of the United States 1964-1968, the Organization and Management of Foreign Policy:
United Nations." This compilation of official documents illustrate how the theories behind the operation of intelligence and foreign policy differed from their actuality. Chapters focus on the roles of the Department of State, the National Security Council, and the Central Intelligence Agency during the Johnson presidency. The volume highlights efforts in the Johnson administration to increase the number of women and African Americans in high profile State Department positions. It also documents the president's relationship with the National Security Council, his CIA Director and United Nation's representative, and how the Vietnam war affected United States relations with the United Nations. Text of the volume, the summary and a press release is available at:
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/frus/johnsonlb/xxxiii . For more information on how to purchase the volume go to the U.S. Government Printing Office online bookstore at: http://bookstore.gpo.gov/index.html .

Item # 3 -- Gilder Lehrman Grants Announced: The Gilder Lehrman Institute has announced its 2004 scholarly fellowships, history scholarships and essay prizewinners. The fellowships given to doctoral candidates provide support for research conducted in five archives in New York City including the Gilder Lehrman Collection; the Library of the New York Historical Society; the Columbia University Rare Book and Manuscript Library; the New York Public Library Humanities and Social Science Library, and the Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture. To see the names of the winners tap into: http:
//www.gilderlehrman.org/historians/scholar2.html. History scholarships were awarded to fifteen outstanding undergraduates. To see the list of the recipients visit http://www.gilderlehrman.org/teachers/student2.html. The institute also co-sponsors with the only journal to publish historical writing by high school students, The Concord Review annual prizes for the best essay in American history by a high school student. To see this year's recipients click
on: http://www.Gilderlehrman.org/teachers/student6.html. Finally, to view a list of the high school winners of the Institute and the Civil War Round Table's Civil War Essay contest, go to http:

Item # 4 -- New FOIA Guidebook Available: The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press has published a newly updated edition of its handbook, "How to Use the Federal FOI Act." The publication offers "step-by-step guidance for requesters along with a short course on the exemptions to the FOI Act that will help individuals seeking FOIA documents to frame their initial requests to agencies and to write appeals of denials. The book also offers advice on how to obtain expedited review and suggestions for overcoming other problems." For the guide, tap
into: http://www.rcfp.org/foiact/index.html .

One article this week: In "Cheney Strives to Keep Putting Her Stamp on History" (Education Week 16 June 2004) reporter Kathleen Kennedy Manzo traces Lynne Cheney's efforts to strengthen history education. Tap into:
http://www.edweek.org/ew/ewstory.cfm?slug=40Cheney.h23 .

The National Coalition for History invites you to subscribe to this FREE weekly newsletter! You are also encouraged to redistribute the NCH Washington Updates to colleagues, friends, teachers, students and others who are interested in history and archives issues. A complete backfile of these reports is maintained by H-Net on the NCH's recently updated web page
at: http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch .

To subscribe to the "NCH Washington Update," send an e_mail message to:
listserv@h-net.msu.edu with the following text in the body of the message (and only this text)SUBSCRIBE H-NCH firstname lastname, institution. To unsubscribe, send an e-mail message to: listserv@h-net.msu.edu according to the following model: SIGNOFF H-NCH.

You can accomplish the same tasks by tapping into the web interface at:
http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/lists/subscribe.cgi and at the "network" prompt, scroll down and select H-NCH; enter your name and affiliation and "submit".

HNN - 6/16/2004

NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE (Vol. 10, #25; 15 June 2004) by Bruce Craig (editor) rbcraig@historycoalition.org and Brian Heyward
Website at http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch


The National Humanities Alliance (NHA) reports that THIS WEEK the U.S.
House of Representatives is expected to act on the FY 2005 Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations bill, the spending legislation that provides funding for the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) and the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA). As reported out of the Appropriations Committee on 9 June, the bill recommends a small increase for the NEH and level funding for the NEA -- $138 million for the NEH and $120 million for the NEA. The NEH allocation represents only a $3 million increase over the FY 2004 approved funding level of $135 million.

The good news is that the Co-Chairs of the House Art Caucus -- representatives Louise Slaughter (D-NY) and Chris Shays (R-CT) -- plan to offer a floor amendment to increase funding for both agencies. Committee staff state that the bill may reach the House floor as early as Wednesday afternoon (16 June). Consequently, constituent communications in support of an amendment are IMMEDIATELY needed for all House Members.

Please take two minutes out of your day and contact your Representative and ask him/her to support any amendments offered to increase the funding levels for the NEH and NEA and to oppose any amendments to cut funding for either agency. Example: "I'm calling/writing to request that Congresswoman X support any floor amendments offered to the FY 2005 Interior spending bill to increase funding for the NEH and the NEA." Please leave your name and address with staff and ask that your member let you know how they voted on the pending measure.

To be most effective, communications should be sent in the form of a PHONE CALL or FAX. All House offices can be reached via the U.S. Capitol Switchboard at (202) 224-3121. Contact information for individual members can also be obtained from the House web site at: http://www.house.gov .

Please act TODAY! Your action can make a difference!

The FY 2005 Interior spending bill (totalling $19.5 million) is about $300 million below the current FY 2004 level and does not fund any of the new initiatives requested by the President. The House Interior Appropriations Subcommittee marked up the FY 2005 spending bill on 3 June, and the subcommittee's recommendations were approved by the full Appropriations Committee on 9 June. In addition to the NEH and NEA, the Interior spending bill provides annual funding for the Smithsonian, the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, various preservation programs (including the Historic Preservation Fund and Save America's Treasures), the National Park Service, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the National Forest System, Federal land acquisition and other programs.

The National Coalition for History invites you to subscribe to this FREE weekly newsletter! You are also encouraged to redistribute the NCH Washington Updates to colleagues, friends, teachers, students and others who are interested in history and archives issues. A complete backfile of these reports is maintained by H-Net on the NCH's recently updated web page
at: http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch .

To subscribe to the "NCH Washington Update," send an e_mail message to:
listserv@h-net.msu.edu with the following text in the body of the message (and only this text) SUBSCRIBE H-NCH firstname lastname, institution. To unsubscribe, send an e-mail message to: listserv@h-net.msu.edu according to the following model: SIGNOFF H-NCH.

You can accomplish the same tasks by tapping into the web interface at http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/lists/subscribe.cgi and at the "network" prompt, scroll down and select H-NCH; enter your name and affiliation and "submit".

HNN - 6/16/2004

http://chronicle.com/prm/daily/2004/06/2004061601n.htm (subscribers only)

'Foreign Affairs' Loses a Longtime Editor and His Replacement in Row Over Editorial Independence

David Glenn

A bitter row at Foreign Affairs magazine over history, power, and the alleged conduct of Henry A. Kissinger led to the departure of a longtime book-review editor in May and now has claimed that editor's replacement.

Jeremy I. Adelman, a professor of history at Princeton University who was hired to succeed Kenneth R. Maxwell as the magazine's book-review editor for the Western Hemisphere, resigned on Friday after only three weeks.

Mr. Maxwell, a prominent scholar of the history of Brazil, had held that editing job at Foreign Affairs and a senior fellowship at its parent organization, the Council on Foreign Relations, for 15 years. He quit in May, claiming that the journal had bowed to pressure from Mr. Kissinger and cut short an exchange of letters about U.S.-Chile relations and the 1976 assassination of Orlando Letelier, a former Chilean diplomat. Mr. Kissinger was U.S. secretary of state at the time of Mr. Letelier's killing, and he is a former member of the council's board of directors.

"The Council's current relationship with Mr. Kissinger evidently comes at the cost of suppressing debate about his actions as a public figure," Mr. Maxwell wrote in his resignation letter.

The editor of Foreign Affairs, James F. Hoge Jr., denies those charges. In an interview on Tuesday, he insisted that the Chile debate ran longer than the magazine's typical letters-page skirmishes. Mr. Hoge did acknowledge that Peter G. Peterson, the chairman of the council's board of directors, called him at least once to convey Mr. Kissinger's displeasure with Mr. Maxwell's essays. (Among other things, Mr. Maxwell wrote that the State Department "knew much more about the atrocities committed in Chile than was admitted to at the time.") But Mr. Hoge said that Mr. Kissinger's unhappiness had no impact whatsoever on his editorial decisions.

Mr. Adelman, who is a friend of Mr. Maxwell's, said on Monday that he had no initial qualms about filling the position, despite Mr. Maxwell's difficulties. But when news of the imbroglio broke on The Nation's Web site on June 3, he had second thoughts.

"This position was, as a result of everything that was coming out, too stigmatized for me to do without spending a lot more time explaining why I was doing it at this juncture, in the wake of all the revelations," Mr. Adelman said. "And that's time that I just don't have."...

HNN - 6/15/2004

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE. List under OFF-BROADWAY; it is on a mini-contract.
Press contact: Timothy Haskell at 212.307.1118

Pulitzer Prize Winning Historian, Garry Wills, Leading a Talk-Back after Performance of…
Conceived by Julian Mulvey, written by Julian Mulvey with Chris Breyer
June 20th after 3 PM performance

New York, NY (May 3rd, 2004) – Green Chinchilla, Executive Producer Anya Hoerburger and producer Stacey Cooper McMath, proudly present Historian Garry Wills to speak after the Sunday, June 20th 3 pm matinee performance of Rush’s Dream by Julian Mulvey. He will speak for approximately 20 minutes and then open up the floor for a question and answer session with the audience. Admission is included in the ticket for that performance which is $15. All performances are at HERE Arts Center (Mainstage Theater 145 6th Avenue, between Spring and Broome) currently performing through Independence Day, July 4th. Performances normally run Wednesdays – Saturdays at 8:30 PM and Saturdays and Sundays at 3:00 PM. Tickets can be purchased by calling 212.868.4444 or by going to http://www.smarttix.com.

After Thomas Jefferson succeeded John Adams to the presidency in 1800, the two statesmen, Founding Fathers and once best friends parted bitterly, their friendship unable to sustain the muckraking journalism and fervent differences of political opinion that had characterized their campaigns. Rush's Dream is the true story of how, during some of the most remarkable times in American History, their friendship was reinstated as a result of the vivid dreams and persistence of Benjamin Rush, their mutual friend and fellow statesman. The story spans 25 years of American history and is crafted entirely from the eloquent and surreal letters written by John Adams, Benjamin Rush, Thomas Jefferson, and Abigail Adams, letters that reveal their complexity as people and the tenuousness of America’s political beginnings.

Garry Wills, a distinguished historian and critic, is the author of numerous books, including the Pulitzer Prize-winning “Lincoln at Gettysburg”, “Saint Augustine”, and “Negro President: Jefferson and the Slave Power”. A regular contributor to the New York Review of Books, he has won many awards, among them two National Book Critics Circle Awards and the 1998 National Medal for the Humanities. He is an adjunct professor of history at Northwestern University.

Julian Mulvey is a Democratic media consultant and the principal of julianmulvey.com. He has won five Pollie Awards from the American Association of Political Consultants and the Visionary Award from the D.C. Independent Film Festival. His company is currently advising a number of Congressional campaigns across the country. Before starting his own firm, Mulvey, 32, worked for the premier Democratic consulting firm of Shrum, Devine, Donilon. He began his career in political media at the Kennedy School of Government, Harvard, before moving to Washington, DC, to work for C-SPAN. He is fortunate to be a British subject and an American citizen. Rush’s Dream is his first play.

Director Alexandra Farkas has staged her own adaptation of August Strindberg's Miss Julie and Alice O'Neill's What I Came For (both at the Red Room), and O'Neill's Speed of Light at the New Georges' Perform-a-thon 2003 (Connelly Theater), et al.

Douglas A Davidge - 6/13/2004

I have more fuel for the fire on the Rommel story. I too read the recent story about Charlie Fox and found it of interest. I don't necessarily dispute what Mr. Fox had recorded that day in his flight log but is he the only one that noted a similar event? It is entirely possible there were several German staff cars travelling in this area of France on July 17th. I expect more than one would have been targeted by Allied pilots as targets of opportunity. I think the person who wrote the newspaper article (Mr. Lavigne) should at least indicate if there were other possibilities - and there is at least one other. I submit the following official record (Mention in Dispatches) relating 4 members of 193 Squadron who were also credited for injurying Rommel:

"SWITZER, F/L William Alexander (J21618) - Mention in Despatches - Overseas - Award effective 1 January 1946 as per London Gazette of that date and
AFRO 155/46 dated 15 February 1946. Home in Edson, Alberta; enlisted in Edmonton, 11 July 1941. Trained at No.4 ITS (graduated 2 January 1942), No.18
EFTS (graduated 13 March 1942) and No.1 SFTS (graduated 17 July 1942). Arrived in UK 19 August 1942; No.7 (P) AFU, 4 September 1942; No.56 OTU,
28 September 1942; No.193 Squadron 15 December 1942. Injured in action, 15 August 1944. Participated in attack which may have injured Rommell, 17 July
1944 (others were J17690 F/L R.W. Davidge, R132595 WO1 A.W.E. Sugden and J85756 F/L G.E. Langille, all of No.193 Squadron, a Typhoon unit). See
Wing Abroad, 26 October 1944."

Given that there are at least two official accounts linking two different Squadrons to Rommel's injuries, I think it would be prudent to acknowledge both. If Mr. Lavigne had thoroughly researched Squadron 193's official logs then he may have written a slightly differrent article.


HNN - 6/11/2004

By Norman Solomon

If journalism is history’s first draft, the death of Ronald Reagan has caused a step-up in the mass production of falsified history.

It’s mourning in America.

The main technique is omission. People who suffered from the Reagan presidency have no media standing today. It’s not cool to mention victims of his policies in, for example, Central America.

President Reagan lauded and subsidized the contra guerrillas -- extolling them as “freedom fighters” while they terrorized the population in Nicaragua, killing thousands of civilians. And he proudly funneled large-scale support to governments aligned with death squads murdering thousands more in Guatemala and El Salvador.

With all the media-fueled mourning in America, there’s been none left for the victims of Reaganite policies in Angola, either. His tireless support for the guerrilla forces of Unita “freedom fighter”
Jonas Savimbi deserves much of the credit for making Angola the artificial limb capital of the world. Reagan saw to it that Uncle Sam walked in the bloody footsteps of colonial Portugal and apartheid South Africa to sustain Savimbi’s monstrous warfare.

“Every year since the mid-1980s, I have interviewed dozens of displaced peasants who described attacks on their villages by Unita, kidnaping of young men and boys, looting, beatings, and killings, while in hospital beds the rows of mutilated women bore witness to the mining of their fields,” journalist Victoria Brittain wrote in the New Statesman magazine a decade ago. “Defectors from Unita told more chilling stories of mass rallies at the headquarters in Jamba where women were burned alive as witches. These were not stories the outside world wanted to hear about Unita, whose leader was regularly received at the White House.”
Very warmly. By Ronald Reagan.

Mainstream news outlets encourage us to mourn his passing but not to grieve a whit for his victims.

Reagan lavished big money from the U.S. Treasury on anti-Soviet mujahadeen -- “freedom fighters” in Afghanistan who evolved into groupings like Al Qaeda and the Taliban. Yet his supposed idealism rarely gets a critical look through the obit-omit media lens.

Since he passed away, American media outlets have drowned the country in nonstop veneration for Reagan as a symbol of devotion to principle. There’s precious little U.S. media space for the kind of reporting that Agence France Presse provided a few days after he died:
“Reagan, determined to check arch-foe Iran, opened a back door to Iraq through which flowed U.S. intelligence and hundreds of millions of dollars in loan guarantees even as Washington professed neutrality in Baghdad’s war with Tehran. ... Sales of UH-1H helicopters and Hughes MD-500 Defender helicopters were approved by Washington. Though sold as civilian aircraft, nobody objected when they were quickly converted for military use.”

President Reagan was in the habit of telling whoppers. His tales ranged far and wide: to deny environmental degradation, or blithely pretend that widespread human rights violations by U.S.-backed regimes didn’t exist, or denigrate low-income people in the United States. Yet now, more than ever, he’s being hailed as the Great Communicator.

Promoting huge tax breaks for multimillionaires and large corporations, he presided over an unprecedented transfer of wealth to the already rich at the expense of everyone else. But today’s dominant media images present him as a beloved populist hero.

That’s media mourning in America.

He’s being hailed as a champion of “small government” -- yet he vastly increased the size of Defense Department budgets and methodically appointed federal judges who enlarged the intrusive powers of government.

President Reagan spoke out for labor rights in Poland while spearheading anti-union measures in the United States and avidly supporting regimes on several continents that repressed workers and oversaw systematic murders of labor activists. Now, rewritten media history is touting him as a friend to working people.

It’s media mourning in America.

He was a president so immersed in anti-gay bigotry and so bereft of non-Hallmark-style compassion that from the time the Centers for Disease Control announced the discovery of AIDS in mid-1981, until 1987, he couldn’t bring himself to publicly utter the name of the deadly disease -- part of a policy approach that surely cost many thousands of lives. Yet he is being lauded by countless pundits for his sunny disposition.

Reagan thumbed his nose at basic civil rights legislation, including efforts to protect voting rights. In words and deeds, he conveyed disinterest in helping to move the country beyond the curse of racism.

But his media persona endures as a man with a big smile and an even bigger heart.

The mourning in America is overwhelming. But the country is starved for honesty.


Norman Solomon is co-author, with Reese Erlich, of “Target Iraq: What the News Media Didn’t Tell You.”

HNN - 6/10/2004

NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE (Vol. 10, #24; 10 June 2004) by Bruce Craig (editor) rbcraig@historycoalition.org and Brian Heyward
Website: http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch


1. CONGRESS AND THE EFFORT TO COMMEMORATE THE REAGAN LEGACY President Ronald Reagan's death this past weekend raises, among Republicans and Democrats alike, questions about how best to memorialize the fortieth President of the United States. Thus far Congress has introduced over 30 pieces of legislation recognizing him, enacted five resolutions recognizing his birthday, and passed two bills implementing a national day in his honor. They have presented him with the Congressional Gold Medal and named two post offices, a courthouse, an aircraft carrier, and a national airport after him. Now some members of Congress are attempting to place his face on American currency.

Even before the former President's death, Grover Norquist, President of the Ronald Reagan Legacy Project, led a movement to memorialize Reagan throughout the nation. Now he is focusing on the effort to change the face of the ten-dollar bill. In the near future, Senator Mitchell McConnell
(R-KY) reportedly will sponsor legislation to replace Alexander Hamilton with a portrait of Reagan. Hamilton was never president but he was a New York member of the Continental Congress, a founding father, the first
Treasury Secretary, and a principal author of the Federalist Papers. But
according to Darlene Anderson, spokeswoman for the Bureau of Engraving and Printing, paper money is never changed because of aesthetic considerations. It has only been changed to prevent counterfeiting.

Several years ago Norquist attempted to have the president's face replace President Franklin D. Roosevelt on the dime (H. R. 3633). Changing the appearance of currency is not difficult. In absence of specific congressional guidance, the final decision to change the appearance of currency rests in the hands of the Treasury Secretary, who, prior to rendering a decision, must seek the advice of the Bureau of Engraving and Printing. The redesign must also be reviewed by the Commission of Fine Arts. The law prohibits any living person's face from appearing on money. Although Norquist had some success with both Bush and Clinton's Treasury secretaries, he could not convince former first lady, Nancy Reagan who was also consulted on the proposal. She declined to support the dime project.

Placing President Reagan's face on currency may be the quickest way to create a lasting memorial for the former Commander-In-Chief. Though some would be supportive of constructing a memorial to Ronald Reagan in Washington D.C. similar to the one honoring Franklin D. Roosevelt, legislation passed last year (P.L. 106-126) bars the construction of any new memorials on the Mall. In conjunction with this, the Commemorative Works Act, a bill that President Reagan signed into law during his second term, permits non-military commemorative works to be built in the District of Columbia only on the twenty-fifth anniversary of the death of the commemorated person.

As regular readers of this publication may recall, on 1 November 2001, President George Bush issued Executive Order (EO) 13223 establishing new policies and procedures implementing the Presidential Records Act (PRA). Shortly thereafter, a number of historical, archival, and government openness organizations sued the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) claiming that the new Bush EO was unlawful and violated the spirit of PRA. Last month, Federal District Court Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly dismissed the plaintiff's case partially on the grounds of "ripeness" and argued that since Reagan's "confidential" (P-5
classified) papers had been released, the plaintiff's case was no longer justiciable.

On 24 May, in response to the judge's ruling, plaintiffs filed a memorandum urging the court to alter or amend the judgment. Public Citizen Litigation Group is representing the plaintiffs. In its recent filing, Public Citizen argued that the continued classification of 74 pages of Reagan era confidential memorandums is "neither hypothetical nor conjectural" and this alone gives the PRA case legal standing. Furthermore, claimed Public Citizen, "the assertion of Privilege over the 74 contested pages, together with the other undisputed facts of record underscores the justiciability of the plaintiffs challenge to the lawfulness of EO 13233."

If Judge Kollar-Kotelly concurs, the case may still be "ripe." Potentially, the judge's Memorandum Opinion and Order dismissing the case could be rescinded in whole or in part. In so doing, the court would probably also have to address the legal merits of challenge to E.O.

It may be several months before the court addresses the issue.

3. REPORT: ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON THE RECORDS OF CONGRESS On 7 June 2004 the Advisory Committee on the Records of Congress met. Emily Reynolds, Secretary of the United States Senate, chaired the meeting. All members were present. Among the items discussed were the impending departure of John Carlin as Archivist of the U.S., the Capitol Visitor Center, the move to digitize and manage Congressional documents, and the future of the September 11 Commission records.

Because of the possibility that this would be the last meeting attended by Archivist of the U.S. John Carlin, members of the advisory committee thanked Carlin for his nine years of service to the committee and for his accomplishments as Archivist of the United States. [Carlin has stated his intention to resign once a new archivist (historian Allen Weinstein has been nominated by President Bush) is confirmed by the Senate.] In a veiled comment on the controversy surrounding his "resignation," Carlin jokingly stated that each day he read the obituaries to "make sure I'm still here"
and then the Washington Post federal page to see if he still has a job. On a more serious note, Carlin expressed gratitude for the assistance that the committee has provided him over the years and he urged them to continue in their important work.

The committee was briefed on the progress being made on the Capitol Visitor Center. Ideas, comments, and suggestions were solicited from the committee on the thematic contents of a 12-minute visitor orientation video that is to be produced for the new center. Their suggestions included: focusing on the varying cultures of each body of Congress; emphasizing the importance of the legislative branch; and showing voters why Congress was an important institution. Carlin suggested that the video should invoke emotion.

The committee heard a series of presentations on several ongoing Congressionally based digitization database and document management projects. Richard Hunt, the new director of the Center for Legislative Archives, then briefed the committee on NARA plans regarding the 9/11 Commission records.

According to Hunt, in July 2004 the September 11 Commission will complete its report and shut down operations. Millions of pages of documents generated by the Commission, including electronic records, 400,000 scanned documents, emails, websites, interviews, videos, and audio collections will be transferred to the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) probably in August or September. In an effort to protect the privacy of certain individuals and insure the classified nature of some of these documents, NARA staff will be meeting with Senate committee staff to develop guidelines for processing and providing public access. Deputy Archivist Michael J. Kurtz interjected that "this is a major priority" and that while NARA has no special appropriated funds for processing these records every effort will be made to facilitate public access as soon as possible. Kurtz also stated that NARA anticipates many screening challenges and that the openness guidelines provided by the commission itself will be of critical importance.

After the meeting, committee members toured the Rotunda and viewed the progress being made with the construction of the Capitol Visitor Center.

On 7 June 2004 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Americans may sue foreign governments over property stolen by the Nazi's. In the case Austria v.
Altmann the court found in favor of an 88-year-old Jewish refugee and ruled she could sue Austria in American courts for $130 million worth of Gustav Klimt paintings that were stolen from her family during World War II. The decision may facilitate additional expropriation claims and may impact relations with some foreign nations.

In their 6-3 ruling the Justices concluded that Maria Altmann's case was permitted under a 1976 federal law that only allows suits in U.S. courts against foreign governments in cases involving property. Justice Paul Stevens, who authored the majority opinion, wrote, "the act. . .clearly applies to conduct, like [Austria's] alleged wrong doing, that occurred prior to 1976. . ." Justice Anthony Kennedy joined by the Chief Justice and Justice Clarence Thomas dissented. They argued, that the majority view "injects great prospective uncertainty into our relations with foreign sovereigns."

This ruling may impact cases pending against France in which a national railroad is charged with transporting Jews out of the country, and one involving Japan where a suit has been brought against that nation for sexually enslaving thousands of "comfort women." Although Altmann's victory extends opportunities for litigating other expropriation claims, it may create difficulties for some aging claimants who, unlike Altmann, decided not to sue Austria. A multimillion-dollar settlement for claimants had been negotiated between the Clinton administration and Austria now depends upon whether additional suits, like Altmann's, are won.

Item # 1 -- Vatican Opens "Secret" Archives: In an effort to illustrate the humanitarian efforts of Pope Pious XII during his WW II papacy, the Vatican is releasing more than two million files from its secret archives. The Vatican has continually defended its wartime pontiff from accusations that he did not do enough to save Jews during the Holocaust. Last year the Vatican started making millions of documents, covering the time leading up to the war, available to scholars. The documents indicate that during the Second World War Vatican City established an office to help individuals trace missing family members, particularly POWs, across Europe. In an effort to combat charges of inhumanity the records from this office will be available in a two-volume set that covers the years between 1939 and 1946; it will cost $90.
Additionally, an eight DVD set containing the images of the original files in the archives will be available for $490. For more information on this release, tap into:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A25526-2004Jun8.html .

Item # 2 -- North Carolina Reclaims Civil War Letter: On 17 May 2004 a letter from Jefferson Davis, President of the Confederate States of America to Governor John W. Ellis, Governor of North Carolina was returned to the state's Office of Archives and History (NCOAH). An anonymous collector had
acquired the letter at a Sotheby's auction in 1982. On 11 March 2004 that
collector sought to sell the letter (the letter was expected to realize a bid of between $20,000 and $25,000) through an auction house. North Carolina initiated legal proceedings against the auction house to stop the sale and to reclaim the letter. Ultimately, the item was withdrawn from sale after the collector met with state officials. In dropping the lawsuit Dr. Jeffrey Crow, deputy secretary of the N.C. Department of Cultural Resources, Office of Archives and History stated, the owner and auction house "recognized the historical value of this document and made the conscious decision to return it to its rightful owner – the state of North Carolina." For more information on the state's successful effort to reclaim its documentary history, tap into:
http://www.ncdcr.gov/news/2004/ah5-17-04.htm .

One article this week. In "On FOIA Front, More Agencies Contract Out,"
Washington Post (8 June 2004) staff writer Christopher Lee focuses on the long wait many researchers face after filing Freedom of Information Act
(FOIA) requests from government agencies. In their efforts to rectify this ever-increasing problem federal agencies are hiring private contractors to meet the needs of FOIA requesters. For the article, tap into:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A23282-2004Jun7.html .

The National Coalition for History invites you to subscribe to this FREE weekly newsletter! You are also encouraged to redistribute the NCH Washington Updates to colleagues, friends, teachers, students and others who are interested in history and archives issues. A complete backfile of these reports is maintained by H-Net on the NCH's recently updated web page
at: http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch .

To subscribe to the "NCH Washington Update," send an e_mail message to:
listserv@h-net.msu.edu with the following text in the body of the message (and only this text): SUBSCRIBE H-NCH firstname lastname, institution. To unsubscribe, send an e-mail message to: listserv@h-net.msu.edu according to the following model: SIGNOFF H-NCH.

You can accomplish the same tasks by tapping into the web interface at http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/lists/subscribe.cgi and at the "network" prompt, scroll down and select H-NCH; enter your name and affiliation and "submit".

HNN - 6/10/2004

Published on Wednesday, June 9, 2004 by the Agence France Presse
Reagan Played Decisive Role in Saddam Hussein's Survival in Iran-Iraq War

WASHINGTON - As Americans mourn the passing of president Ronald Reagan, almost forgotten is the decisive part his administration played in the survival of Iraq's president Saddam Hussein through his eight year war with Iran.

US soldiers now fighting the remnants of Saddam's regime can look back to the early 1980s for the start of a relationship that fostered the rise of the largest military in the Middle East, one whose use of chemical weapons set the stage for last year's war.

Reagan, determined to check arch-foe Iran, opened a back door to Iraq through which flowed US intelligence and hundreds of millions of dollars in loan guarantees even as Washington professed neutrality in Baghdad's war with Tehran.

It was complemented by French weaponry and German dual-use technology that experts say wound up in Iraq's chemical and biological warfare programs.

Donald Rumsfeld, then Reagan's special Middle East envoy, is credited with establishing the back channel to Saddam on a secret trip to Baghdad in December 1983.

Washington had plenty of motives to help Saddam stave off an Iranian victory. Not only was the United States still smarting from the 1980 hostage-taking at the US embassy in Tehran, but its embassy and a marine barracks in Beirut had been struck with truck bombings earlier in 1983.

In fact, the United States had begun to tilt in favor Baghdad even before Rumsfeld's arrival in Baghdad.

In February 1982, the State Department dropped Baghdad from its list of state sponsors of terrorism, clearing the way for aid and trade.

A month later, Reagan ordered a review of US policy in the Middle East which resulted in a marked shift in favor of Iraq over the next year.

"Soon thereafter, Washington began passing high-value military intelligence to Iraq to help it fight the war, including information from US satellites that helped fix key flaws in the fortifications protecting al-Basrah that proved important in Iran's defeat in the next month," wrote Kenneth Pollack in his recently published book "The Threatening Storm."

Economic aid poured into Iraq in the form of hundreds of millions of dollars worth of loan guarantees to buy US agricultural products, indirectly aiding the war effort.

Sales of UH-1H helicopters and Hughes MD-500 Defender helicopters were approved by Washington. Though sold as civilian aircraft, nobody objected when they were quickly converted for military use.

A May 9, 1984 memo unearthed by the National Security Archive, a Washington research organization, noted that US policy for the sale of dual-use equipment to Iraq's nuclear program also was reviewed.

The memo said its "preliminary results favor expanding such trade to include Iraqi nuclear entities."

By March 1985, the United States was issuing Baghdad export permits for high tech equipment crucial for its weapons of mass destruction programs, according to Pollack.

US allies also were active in Iraq.

"By 1982, Iraq accounted for 40 percent of French arms exports," wrote Pollack. "Paris sold Baghdad a wide range of weapons, including armored vehicles, air defense radars, surface-to-air missiles, Mirage fighters, and Exocet anti-ship missiles."

"German firms also rushed in without much compunction, not only selling Iraq large numbers of trucks and automobiles but also building vast complexes for Iraq's chemical warfare, biological warfare, and ballistic missile programs," he wrote.

The aid came despite clear evidence as early as mid-1983 that Iraq was using chemical weapons on Iranian forces.

Washington said nothing publicly, but noted "almost daily" Iraqi use of chemical weapons in internal reports.

"We have recently received additional information confirming Iraqi use of chemical weapons," a November 1, 1983 State Department memo said. "We also know that Iraq has acquired a CW production capability, primarily from western firms, including possibly a US foreign subsidiary."

It said "our best present chance of influencing cessation of CW use may be in the context of informing Iraq of these measures."

Washington did not publicly denounce Iraqi use of chemical weapons until March, 1984 after it was documented in a UN study.

The Reagan administration opened full diplomatic relations with Baghdad in November, 1984. Iraqi chemical attacks continued not only on Iranian forces but also on Kurdish civilians, notably at Hallabja in 1987.

For its support, Pollack wrote, Washington got a bulwhark against Iran, cheap oil and Iraqi support for peace negotiations with Israel.

But when the Iran-Iraq war ended, Baghdad was left with huge debts and a large and menacing military looking for easy prey.

HNN - 6/8/2004

from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy Volume 2004, Issue No. 51 June 7, 2004



The Central Intelligence Agency budget for fiscal year 1955 was
$335 million, according to newly disclosed classified budget documents from half a century ago.

The 1955 CIA budget included $225 million for normal operations "and a contingency reserve of $110 million for unforeseen emergencies and/or projects which were not planned."

CIA funds are not appropriated directly. The 1955 CIA budget was concealed within eleven separate line items in the Department of Defense budget, from which it was transferred to the Agency.

This budget information is still considered "classified" by the CIA, which adheres to a Cold War information security policy.

The 1955 CIA budget information was described in a May 11, 1954 letter from the CIA to the Senate Appropriations Committee, with various attachments.

The budget documents were located by Prof. David Barrett of Villanova University in the course of his archival research for a forthcoming book on the history of intelligence oversight.

Prof. Barrett generously provided a copy of this material to Secrecy News. See:


For several years, the Federation of American Scientists has been seeking the declassification of historical intelligence budget information from 1947 to 1970 in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the CIA. Last week, coincidentally, the judge in that proceeding ordered the parties to propose a schedule for the filing of dispositive motions.


The leadership of the House of Representatives has declined to conduct an investigation into the torture of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison and related questions about prisoner interrogation, calling it a distraction from the war on terrorism.

But even some Republicans are dismayed by what they consider a dereliction of their duty to conduct oversight.

"We should be doing this directly and bluntly, and in the House we are not," Rep. Heather Wilson (R-NM) told the New York Times (06/06/04). "It's been very disappointing to me."

Now House Democratic leaders are moving to fill the oversight void and they are seeking the cooperation of the White House to acquire 35 specified categories of documents concerning prisoner interrogation that they said are needed to conduct a meaningful investigation.

"We are writing to inform you of our determination to investigate the prison abuses at Abu Ghraib and elsewhere and to request your assistance in obtaining key documents," wrote six senior Democrats in a June 3 letter to President Bush.

The authors, all ranking members of their respective committees, were Reps. Henry Waxman, John Conyers, David Obey, Ike Skelton, Tom Lantos and Jane Harman.

See their June 3 letter here:



The term "weapons of mass destruction," like "terrorism," is often used as a rhetorical blunderbuss rather than to achieve strategic clarity. There are so many qualitatively distinct technologies and substances that qualify as WMD that basic differences between threats of global apocalypse and minor hazards which may result in few or no casualties are obscured.

A new report from the Congressional Research Service attempts to unpack this loaded term and to evaluate some of its diverse components, focusing on the potential for small-scale terrorist attacks involving the use of chemical and biological weapons (CBW).

The CRS report proposes an analytical framework that considers the difficulty of manufacturing or acquiring various CBW agents, the feasibility of using them as weapons, their public health impact, the availability of medical treatment, and various other factors.

It promptly becomes clear that not all CBW threats are equal or equally urgent. The ranking of threats logically implies a prioritization of needed countermeasures and defenses, and the beginning of a sensible policy approach.

See "Small-scale Terrorist Attacks Using Chemical and Biological Agents: An Assessment Framework and Preliminary Comparisons" by Dana A. Shea and Frank Gottron, Congressional Research Service, May 20, 2004 (89 pages, 750 KB PDF file):


Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the Federation of American Scientists.

To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, send email to
with "subscribe" in the body of the message.

To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a blank email message to

OR email your request to saftergood@fas.org

Secrecy News is archived at:

Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web: http://www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email: saftergood@fas.org
voice: (202) 454-4691

William Cecil Scott - 6/6/2004

I Have known Charley Fox for some time now and always known him to be an honourable and truthful man, and surely not a boaster.
In the case of the Australian vs Brown in the downing of the Red Baron; from your own words it tells me that the Red Baron was diving for his life because ( obviously) there were strikes on him. It would also say that if the Australian did mortally wound the Baron that in the times of the second war, each party would have received a 1/2 kill. Even in the days of the second war though, forensics would have been easily satisfied with the placement, angle, and caliber of the bullets to be able to distinguish who's bullet reached the Red Baron.

However, in the case of the Rommel shooting, (first) it was rommels own report that disallowed the American pilots claim that a P-47 had shot him. His statement, which is in the official German records clearly state that it was Spitfires that had fired on them. there was another squadron of Spits flying near the same area but the very accurate squadron logs also disallowed them as well because they had already landed by the time of the incident. Logs don't lie. And they were already written up and entered well before any sure knowledge of the shooting of Rommel had come out. Quite an easy task to verify, once a thorough researcher like Mr. Lavigne had found the official squadron logs of each squadron that was claiming it. Once he had proven what Squadron had done the shooting, thats when he looked up the pilots involved with the mission that day and that eventually led him to Charley Fox. Mr. Lavigne had already found out that Charley was leading the flight and did the shooting. All verified by official flying records of the second world war.

HNN - 6/5/2004

NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE (Vol. 10, #23; 4 June 2004) by Bruce Craig (editor) rbcraig@historycoalition.org and Brian Heyward
National Coalition for History (NCH)
Website http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch


1. HOUSE APPROVES SMALL INCREASE FOR NEH On 3 June 2004, the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior and Related Agencies marked up its version of the massive Interior department bill that includes funding for the National Endowment for the Arts and Humanities. By voice vote, the subcommittee approved an $19.7 million Interior bill that includes $138 million for the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) and $121 million for the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA).

The subcommittee markup translates into a $3 million increase for the NEH. That figure is well below -- by some $23.5 million -- the administration's request. The slight increase would probably cover programmatic fixed costs but it certainly will not allow for the for expansion of the "We the People" program sought by Chairman Bruce Cole.

Figures for the arts endowment were even more disappointing. In spite of President Bush's and First Lady Laura Bush's strong support for a significant increase for the NEA in FY 2005, the subcommittee provided only for level funding ($121 million) or $18 million less than the president had requested. Some Hill insiders believe that cut in particular was designed to send a message that Congress intends to make the White House share the pain of fiscal belt tightening.

According to Subcommittee Chair Charles Taylor (R-NC), with a Budget Committee allocation some $300 million less than enacted for FY-2004, the subcommittee did its best within a framework of inadequate funding, but, as a result, many of the subcommittee's goals simply could not be met. Ranking Minority Member of the full Appropriations Committee David Obey (D-WI) agreed that Representative Taylor had been fair in working with limited funds. Obey then launched into a blistering attack on the administration for providing a huge tax break for 257,000 Americans with incomes of $1 million or more at the expense of arts, humanities, education, and social programs. Amazingly, no Republican on the subcommittee responded to Obey's critical statements.

The full House Appropriations Committee is expected to meet next week to mark-up the Interior bill along with the Defense and Homeland Security department funding measures. Hill insiders do not expect significant changes to the subcommittee mark. All in all, not a very auspicious beginning to what promises to be a long and contentious battle over the 13 annual appropriation bills that will need to be passed to fund government departments and agencies beginning this October.

A dream seventeen years in the making came true for Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur (D-OH) when the World War II Memorial on the National Mall in Washington D.C. was officially opened and dedicated on Memorial Day, 29 May 2004. This is the first memorial in the United States dedicated to more than a specific battle of the Second World War.

Controversies over funding and location of the memorial plagued the project from the outset. By 1995, the first $7 million had been raised through the sale of government commemorative coins. Eventually, the rest of the $175 million needed for the memorial was raised through private donations. An additional $20 million also was raised to establish a trust to help defray anticipated long-term maintenance costs.

Architects proposed that the memorial be placed upon the central axis of the Mall, around the Rainbow Pool and between the Lincoln Memorial and the Washington Monument. But from inception the proposed site drew criticism. Critics feared that the monument would destroy the Mall's open space, impair the view between the Washington Monument and the Lincoln Memorial, and because so much land was used, the number participants who could attend future special Mall events would be reduced. Judy S. Feldman, President of the National Coalition to Save our Mall, whose organization vigorously opposed the site location, stated, "if we don't have our public space and our commons, where do we go to celebrate, to demonstrate?" Despite her organization's successful lawsuit to prevent construction the monument, Congress intervened and passed special legislation rendering the court decision moot.

Visitors to the memorial see an oval with the Rainbow Pool at its center around which one finds two large pillars at each arch and smaller columns to complete the enclosure. The two large pillars represent the Atlantic and the Pacific fronts and the smaller columns have each state's and U.S.
territories name engraved onto them and are interlinked by a bronze rope signifying the bond between the states. Every aspect, from the inlaid medals of freedom, scenes of battles, wreaths representing different industries, and quotes about the war and the home front is beautiful. The most inspiring part of the memorial are the 4,000 gold stars placed on the Wall of Freedom commemorating the 400,000 Americans who died in the war. The memorial is built in such a way that at the Wall of Freedom the view from the Lincoln Memorial to the Washington Monument, and to the Capitol building is not obstructed.

Monday's dedication drew thousands including President Bush. In coming months millions of the nearly four million surviving veterans are expected to make the trek to visit the memorial. Sixteen million veterans survived the war, ten million were alive in 1987 when Congresswoman Kaptur proposed the construction of this memorial. With one thousand World War II veterans dying a day; the dedication is bittersweet for the Congresswoman -- she wished more could have seen it in their lifetime.

3. THE CASE OF THE KENNEWICK MAN -- A LANDMARK LEGAL DECISION The politics of Native American archeology, land claims, the use of hard and soft scientific evidence in court cases were impacted by a recent United States Court of Appeal's decision, Bonnichsen v.United States. In February 2004, the court ruled against a confederation of Native American tribes, government officials and some archeologists and instead found in favor of another group of archaeologists who maintained that the Native American Graves Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) should not apply to the oldest human remains ever found in the United States, Kennewick Man.

Kennewick Man was found by a group of teenagers in 1996 on federal property near the shore of the Columbia River in Washington State. The features and age of this find astonished anthropologists and archeologists. Carbon dating indicated the remains were between 8340 and 9200 years old. Though found on lands belonging to the Army Corps of Engineers, the remains were relinquished to the Secretary of Interior. Archeologists wanted to study the ancient remains. Citing NAGPRA, however, several Native American tribes and confederations requested that the bones be repatriated. The Secretary of the Interior concurred with the Native American request and denied the archaeologists the right to examine Kennewick's bones. The archaeologists sued.

After several lower court rulings the case was advanced to the Federal Appeals Court for the Ninth Circuit. On 4 February 2004, the Appeals Court issued a decision in support of the archeologists who had originally sued.

The court's decision rests on three central issues: the intent of Congress in passing NAGPRA, the validity of claimed cultural affiliation, and scientific evidence. The court found that, because NAGPRA is worded in the present tense, an individual tribe (rather than a confederation of tribes or the Native American community in general) had to establish that Kennewick man was genetically related to a modern day Native American tribe for the Act to apply. The court also found that cultural links and DNA findings were both deemed valid evidence of "cultural affiliation,"
however, the court rejected Native American arguments that the occupation of land over time alone should be sufficient to establish the continuity of a cultural affiliation.

The opinion highlights the varying weight the judicial community places on hard science (DNA evidence, for example) and soft science (such as oral
history). In his opinion Judge Ronald Gould stated that, "oral histories
change relatively quickly, that oral histories may be based on later observation . . ." and therefore may not be the best evidence.

The ruling is generally viewed a legal victory for the archaeological community. Some scholars also believe the decision has potential ramifications beyond the mere application of NAGARA and the Archeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA) on federal lands. It could, for example, impact pending cases relating to Native American land claims. Should prior residency and present day occupation be challenged in court, some Native American land claims may be called into question.

4. NEH SEEKS NOMINATIONS FOR HUMANITIES MEDALS Nominations for the 2004 National Humanities Medal are being accepted until
11 June 2004. These annual awards recognize individuals or groups who have significantly enhanced Americans' understanding of history, literature, philosophy or other humanities subjects. Past winners have made outstanding contributions to the humanities through philanthropy, the advancement of technology, excellence in education, or outstanding scholarly work.

Nominations are reviewed by members of the National Council on the Humanities, the Endowment's presidentially appointed board of advisors, and by the NEH Chairman. Their recommendations are then forwarded to the President of the United States for selection consideration.

Individual nominees must be living U.S. citizens or permanent residents who have filed for naturalization. Nominated organizations must be established or incorporated in the United States. Self-nominations are not permitted. Past recipients are ineligible for the award, as are paid employees of the federal government and state humanities councils.

To nominate an individual or organization, please follow the instructions found on the NEH website at: http//www.neh.gov/medalsnominate.html
. Questions concerning the submission of nominations may be directed to Andrew Hazlett at: ahazlett@neh.gov or by telephone at : (202) 606-8355.

5. LEGISLATION INTRODUCED / LEGISLATION PASSED Servitude and Emancipation Archival Research Clearing House Act of
2003: On 19 May 2003 Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA) with the co-sponsorship
of five Democrats and one Republican introduced legislation (S. 1292 -- a companion bill to Congressman Elijah Cummings (D-MD) bill -- H.R. 4147), the "Servitude and Emancipation Archival Research Clearing House Act of 2003." The legislation "directs the Archivist of the United States to establish, as part of the National Archives, a national database consisting of historic records of servitude and emancipation in the United States to assist African Americans in researching their genealogy." If enacted, the National Historical Publications and Records Commission (NHPRC) would be charged to maintain the database. Both Landrieu and Cummings' bills have been sent to their respective Senate and House committees on Government Affairs and Government Reforms for consideration.

Harpers Ferry National Historical Park Boundary Revision Act of 2004: On
19 May 2004 the Senate approved legislation (S. 1576) the "Harpers Ferry National Historical Park Boundary Revision Act of 2004" that had been introduced by Senator Robert C. Byrd (D-WV) and co-sponsored by Senator John D. Rockefeller (D-WV). The bill would expand the boundaries of Harpers Ferry National Historic Park by up to 1,200 acres and seeks to protect endangered Civil War battle sites. Harpers Ferry is located at the confluence of the Potomac and Shenandoah rivers and is a popular tourist attraction. It is the infamous site of a former federal armory that was captured by abolitionist John Brown and his followers in 1859 and a place where Lewis and Clark cached supplies on their journey west. A House companion bill (H.R. 3305), introduced by Representative Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), is pending action before the House Resources Committee.

Item # 1 -- Death of William Manchester: The author of many military
history books and best-selling biographies of the Rockefellers, Douglas MacArthur, Winston Churchill, and three works on John F. Kennedy died 1 June at his home in Middletown, Connecticut. He was 82. Manchester was fascinated with power and its roots and application. His prose was simple, sparse, but illuminating in terms of bringing the drama of human events into perspective. While some reviewers found Manchester's works fell prey to the problem that plagues even the best of biographers -- hero worship -- his books won praise from the scholarly community and appealed to a popular audience. Manchester possessed an MA in English from the University of Massachusetts. In addition to writing, Manchester taught at Wesleyan University where he was history professor emeritus.

Item # 2 -- NARA Kissinger Release: On 26 May 2004 the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) released approximately 20,000 pages of transcripts of telephone conversations of Nixon administration presidential aide Henry Kissinger. These conversations occurred between 21 January 1969 and 8 August 1974 while Kissinger served as assistant to the President for National Security Affairs and Secretary of State. Despite the fragmentary nature of these conversations, Kissinger's ideas and feelings are candidly expressed. As a Nixon aide Kissinger was involved in the secret bombing of Cambodia and the bombing of Hanoi. He also played a key role in the SALT treaty, the Berlin Agreement, President Nixon's 1972 visit to China, the Jordan crisis, the Pentagon Papers, the India-Pakistan War, the Munich Olympics Massacre, the 1973 Arab-Israeli War, and other key events of the time.

NARA also released some 1,600 pages of "White House Central Files Name Files," including a small amount of material relating to presumed Democratic Party presidential nominee John Kerry. For additional information, tap into:
http://www.archives.gov/media_desk/press_releases/nr04-60.html .

No articles this week but readers may want to consider subscribing to the National Endowment for the Humanities "NEH CONNECT" electronic newsletter. The monthly publication is designed to deliver news, project announcements, upcoming events, and grant deadlines from the NEH. To subscribe, tap into: http://www.neh.gov/news/nehconnect.html .

The National Coalition for History invites you to subscribe to this FREE weekly newsletter! You are also encouraged to redistribute the NCH Washington Updates to colleagues, friends, teachers, students and others who are interested in history and archives issues. A complete backfile of these reports is maintained by H-Net on the NCH's recently updated web page at.

To subscribe to the "NCH Washington Update," send an e_mail message to listserv@h-net.msu.edu with the following text in the body of the message (and only this text)SUBSCRIBE H-NCH firstname lastname, institution. To unsubscribe send an e-mail message tolistserv@h-net.msu.edu according to the following model: SIGNOFF H-NCH.

You can accomplish the same tasks by tapping into the web interface athttp//www2.h-net.msu.edu/lists/subscribe.cgi and at the "network" prompt, scroll down and select H-NCH; enter your name and affiliation and "submit".

HNN - 6/4/2004

Contact: Jeff Morgan, GHF
(650) 325 7520
Cheryl Fenske, DMOA
(973) 605-2121

Global Heritage Fund (GHF) and the The World Bank will partner with Iraq’s Minister of Culture and State Board of Antiquities to conduct a 8-day workshop for thirty leading Iraqi site directors and conservators June 15-22nd in Petra, Jordan.
The mission of the Iraq Heritage Congress is to develop world-class master conservation plans over the coming year for protection and preservation of the priceless historical and cultural sites in Iraq, according to Jeff Morgan, Executive Director of the GHF and Christiaan Poortman, World Bank Vice resident for Middle East and North Africa.
UNESCO, the Jordanian Ministry of Culture and Tourism, the Oriental Institute at University of Chicago, Brown University, the American Center for Oriental Research (ACOR) and the Petra National Trust also are participating in the Iraq Heritage Congress.
While security remains a primary concern in Iraq, this is a critical time for Iraqi officials and regional and international organizations to begin to set priorities and create the basis for conservation funding from governments, agencies, banks and private sector conservancies like Global Heritage Fund. Iraq possesses many of the mankind’s most ancient archaeological sites, but these wonders of the “cradle of civilization” are still in their infancy for research, tourism development and heritage management. Most site directors are without resources to protect these ancient treasures from looting, vandalism and destruction.
“Today we have the experience and understanding to reverse the devastation of these world-class ancient sites, create new opportunities for developing countries like Iraq to become financially stable through sustainable tourism, and keep these important treasures from humankind’s past in our future,” said Morgan. “At current rates of destruction, there is at least one world heritage-class site lost each year in the Middle East, and we can’t afford to lose one more.”
Thirty leading Iraqi site directors and archaeological conservators will participate in an intense program of site management and planning workshops led by international experts in funding sources, technology and site management and planning. Participants from the Iraq Antiquities Department’s goal is to improve their own professional skills and to enhance their ability to acquire funding and expertise from international donor agencies.
Sites represented by Iraqi conservation leaders who will be attending the Iraq Heritage Congress in Petra include: Nineveh, Nimrud, Hatra, Ashur, Babylon, Samarra, Ukhaidhir, Ur, Aqar Quf, Ctesiphon, Tell Harmal and National Site Museums.
The primary emphasis of the workshops will be to complete drafts for site management plans for each participating Iraqi Heritage site. These plans will:
 provide a framework to guide conservation of archaeological and cultural heritage sites in contexts to their urban and natural surroundings;
 identify potential economic opportunities for sustainable tourism and private enterprise to support for long-term conservation;
 form the basis for legislation and designation of protected national parks, monuments or preserves;
 provide guidance in conservation work and archaeological research and exploration.

Global Heritage Fund is working with Iraq’s Minister of Culture and State Board of Antiquities to develop state-of-the-art, comprehensive site management plans for Iraq’s most endangered world heritage sites. GHF hopes to accelerate funding for protection and preservation of these ancient treasures by helping directly in the development of world-class site management plans based on the Burra Charter developed by the International Council of Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) and the UNESCO World Heritage Convention.

# # #

About Global Heritage Fund
Global Heritage Fund is the leading international conservancy preserving endangered world heritage sites in developing countries. The conservancy’s goal is to enable successful, long-term preservation of humankind’s most important archaeological sites and ancient townscapes, creating new opportunities for economic growth. Global Heritage Fund is a registered non-profit international conservancy based in Palo Alto, California.

The role of the Global Heritage Fund is to develop comprehensive Master Conservation Plans, provide early matching grants and training, build local institutions and promote sustainable tourism development to further permanent protection for global cultural treasures. To view GHF’s Master Conservation Planning Guidelines, see:

GHF Master Conservation Planning Guidelines

Agenda - GHF-World Bank Iraq Heritage Congress – June 15-22nd, 2004
Petra Jordan

At the very heart of GHF’s conservation efforts are the organization’s Leaders in Conservation, the Advisory Board, and Trustees for Global Heritage, a distinguished network of philanthropists and foundations committed to preserving and protecting these one-of-a-kind archaeological sites and ancient buildings.

GHF Website: http://www.globalheritagefund.org

About The World Bank
The World Bank Group’s mission is to fight poverty and improve the living standards of people in the developing world. It is a development Bank that provides loans, policy advice, technical assistance and knowledge sharing services to low and middle income countries to reduce poverty. The Bank promotes growth to create jobs and to empower poor people to take advantage of these opportunities.

The Bank's lending and advisory services continued to grow, focusing on work at the country level and reflecting the Bank's focus on its corporate and global public goods priorities. It provided debt relief to some of the world's poorest nations and extended this relief to countries emerging from conflict. The Bank's knowledge sharing activities continued to expand, leading to participatory activities with governments, nongovernmental organizations, private sector representatives, and donor government colleagues.

HNN - 6/3/2004

The Times (London)
June 1, 2004, Tuesday

SECTION: Home news; 8
HEADLINE: If you managed to survive the war, the plague and revolt, life in the 14th century wasn't all that bad
BYLINE: Adam Sherwin and Helen Nugent

IF THE Black Death didn't get you, then the battlefield surely would: the 14th century will be named in a new historical series as the worst possible time to be alive A new Channel 4 series will argue that, with war, plague and social revolt, it is able to name the world's worst century.

Even the trenches, death camps and industrial-scale carnage of the 20th century cannot compare, historians claim. But others argue that for those who survived the plague and accusations of witchcraft, the 14th century provided an escape from scarcity and the first seedlings of the Renaissance.

World's Worst Century will feature documentaries on three landmark events during the 1300s: the Black Death, which wiped out more than one third of Northern Europe's population; the Hundred Years War against France, which reached a bloody climax after the Black Death; and the Peasants' Revolt.

An earlier Channel 4 series, Plague, Fire, War, Treason investigated the cataclysmic events which engulfed 17th-century England. But the earlier period had the edge in overall human misery, Channel 4 believes.

The 14th century is presented as a period of turmoil, a loss of confidence in institutions and a feeling of helplessness as ordinary people claimed that God had turned His back upon them.

The Black Death, introduced into Europe in 1348 and believed to be transferred by rats' fleas, resulted in about 20 million deaths and decimated the agriculture-based economy. The Church could not explain the disaster and heresies flourished.

John Hatcher, Professor of Economic and Social History at Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, said: "There is a plausible case for calling the 14th century the worst-ever.

"There were famines even before the Black Death and the most recent research is pushing the death rates even higher. More Europeans died as a proportion of the population than during the First and Second World Wars." But the plague was quite good news for those who survived.

Professor Hatcher said: "There is more land available for fewer people. Workers benefit from a labour shortage and people pay less rent on their land."

Professor Linda Paterson, an expert at Warwick University on the medieval period, said that the 14th century can lay claim to the most miserable 100-year period.

"With the Black Death and the Hundred Years War, the 14th century was a pretty bad time to be alive," she said. "There were also horrible penalties for criminals and public executions and torture."

The Hundred Years War, brewing since 1066 but started by Edward III to gain total sovereignty over the region, caused most pain for the French as retreating armies laid waste to farmland. Channel 4's documentary about the war stretches the 14th century concept to include the battle of Agincourt in 1415. Based on first hand accounts from soldiers, the film describes "the last and bloodiest pitched battle of the medieval age, in which combat based on chivalric codes of honour would be cast aside for a new and ruthless approach to warfare".

Agincourt set the seal on the world's worst century and paved the way for the new order that followed, the film claims. Punitive taxation to pay for the war provoked rebellions in England and France.

Tony Robinson, the Blackadder star and Time Team presenter, will retrace the route of the 1381 Peasants' Revolt, provoked by a hated poll tax.

While the Black Death had dealt a sledgehammer blow to the feudal certainties of medieval Britain, Robinson concludes by celebrating the men and women who challenged the status quo and came close to toppling the monarchy.

Dr Mark Horton, an archaeologist at Bristol University, specialises in excavating 14th-century sites. He dismissed the premise for Channel 4's new show as "complete piffle".

"Every century has its good and bad times, it's all relative," he said. "When you consider the Black Death, the number of people killed is greatly overstated. And you could say that the Black Death led to the birth of the individual. The large shortage of labour meant that people could be more mobile and were freed from their obligations to earn more money."

Since commissioning the series, which will be screened in August, Hamish Mykura, Channel 4's Head of History, admitted that he may have done the 14th century a disservice. Mr Mykura said: "Perhaps I should have added a question mark to the series title. The decimation of lives caused by the Black Plague is unparalleled.

But the films show how the close-knit communities, feudal social system and the devout beliefs of the age enabled society to bounce back from disaster with surprising speed and agility."

Mr Mykura hopes that the series will challenge "Monty Python" perceptions of the 14th century as a "comically nasty" time. People reacted rationally to the deprivations they encountered and emerged stronger, he says.

Mr Mykura could have invoked miserable episodes during the 14th century from elsewhere to strengthen his original thesis. The Little Ice Age saw the Baltic Sea freeze over in 1303, 1306 and 1307, Alpine glaciers advanced and Norse settlements were cut off, while grain cultivation ceased in Iceland.

In 1309, the Pope lived in Avignon, Southern France, with his French mistress, rather than Rome and commentators condemned the "corruption and moral laxity" of the Church. Italian cities revolted against rule from a Pope in exile, with one uprising in Cesena brutally supressed with a massacre of 5,000 civilians.

The Turks advanced into the Balkans, bringing Islam close to the heart of Europe.

The seeds of future Balkan conflicts were sown as thousands converted to Islam in Bosnia and were regarded as traitors. In 1396, the Pope called for a Crusade against the Turks and a Christian army marched into the region, where they were slaughtered at Nicopolis in Bulgaria.


England had a population of five or six million in 1348. Within a year Black Death killed half of them. It recurred five times in 1361-1413

It killed 23 million people in northern Europe during the 14th century

It is thought to have caused the deaths of up to 200 million people worldwide during the past 1,500 years

The disease still affects between 1,000 and 3,000 people a year globally

New analysis concluded that the Black Death was not spread by rats, as originally believed, but by travellers in search of work

Some parents abandoned their children once they were ill and showing "God's tokens": red rings on the skin where the blood vessels were leaking into the tissue


The Peasants' Revolt of 1381 began as a local reaction to an over-zealous poll-tax collector in Essex and quickly spread across much of southeast England

Rebels marched on London and demanded an end to serfdom. The King was placed in the Tower of London

The rebels burnt down the Savoy Palace and set fire to the Treasurer's Highbury Manor, opened prisons and destroyed legal records

Peasants invaded the privy wardrobe of the Tower. They killed the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Chancellor and John of Gaunt's physician

Over time the authorities regained control in all areas of insurrection. The surviving rebel leaders were executed


The Hundred Years War between England and France in fact lasted 116 years between 1337 and 1453

It originated in 1328. The French king died heirless and Edward III thought he had a claim to the throne. He declared war in 1337

The English won a massive victory at Poitiers in 1356

In 1415 the French army caught up with Henry V at Agincourt, where Welsh archers wiped out the French nobility

In 1429 Joan of Arc began her quest to drive the English out of France. She was burnt at the stake in 1431

Bordeaux's capture in 1453 meant the English had lost all French land except Calais

A treaty to end the war was signed in 1475

HNN - 5/28/2004

From the American Revolution Roundtable Newsletter (June 2004):

You think Paul Revere was the only midnight rider who aroused a slumbering countryside by screaming "The British are coming?" Think again. A group of Connecticutians are

pushing hard to give sixteen year old Sibyl Ludington equal billing in the alarm sweepstakes. Sibyl was the daughter of militia Colonel Henry Ludington. When she heard a British army was about to pillage nearby Danbury in 1777, she mounted her horse and rode through the countryside, turning out hundreds of well armed patriots who hastened the redcoats' retreat to their ships.

These Sibyl fans are planning to create films, novels, "education items" and maybe even a TV series based on the teenager's derring do. The first product of this enthusiasm will be the publication this summer of "Ludington's Ride," an historical novel based on her night of courage and patriotism. The publisher, Steve Hart, head of Hart-Burn Press, is offering a pre-publication sale at 40 percent off to insiders and assorted buffs, including Round Tablers. Mr. Hart has offered to donate part of any purchases to the Round Table's speakers fund.

HNN - 5/27/2004

Source: Victoria Independent Media Center, Mary 21

conscience" on May 21, in which he called upon the women and men
of the diplomatic corps and intelligence community to fulfill
their responsibilities as "trustees" of the U.S.'s honor and
Some key sections of the letter, first published on
{Salon}, follow:

"You know how recklessly a cabal of political appointees
and ideological zealots, led by the exceptionally powerful and
furtively doctrinaire Vice President Cheney, corrupted
intelligence and usurped policy on Iraq and other issues. You
know the bitter departmental disputes in which a deeply
politicized, parochial Pentagon overpowered or simply ignored any
opposition in the State Department or the CIA, rushing us to
unilateral aggressive war in Iraq and chaotic, fateful
occupations in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

"You know well what a willfully uninformed and heedless
President you serve in Bush, how chilling are the tales of his
ignorance and sectarian fervor, lethal opposites of the erudition
and open-mindedness you embody in the arts of diplomacy and
intelligence. Some of you know how woefully his national security
advisor fails her vital duty to manage some order among
Washington's thrashing interts, and so to protect her President,
and the country, from calamity. You know specifics. Many of you
are aware, for instance, that the torture at Abu Ghraib was an
issue up and down not only the Pentagon but also State, the CIA
and the National Security Council staff for nearly a year before
the scandalous photos finally leaked.

"As you have seen in years of service, every Presidency has
its arrogance, infighting, and blunders in foreign relations. As
most of you recognize, too, the Bush Administration is like no
other. You serve the worst foreign policy regime by far in the
history of the republic. The havoc you feel inside government has
inflicted unprecedented damage on national interests and
security. As never before since the United States stepped onto
the world stage, we have flouted treaties and alliances,
alienated friends, multiplied enemies, lost respect and
credibility on every continent. You see this every day. And
again, whatever your politics, those of you who have served other
presidents know this is an unparallel bipartisan disaster. In its
militant hubris and folly, the Bush Administration has undone the
statesmanship of every government before it, and broken faith
with every Presidency, Democratic and Republican (even that of
Bush I), over the past half century....

"Beyond your discreetly predigested press summaries at the
office, words once unthinkable in describing your domain, words
once applied only to the most alien and deplored phenomenon, have
become routine, not just at the radical fringe, but across the
spectrum of public dialogue: `American empire', `American
gulag'. What must you think? Having read so many of your cables
and memorandums as a Foreign Service officer and then on the NSC
staff, and so many more later as a historian, I cannot help
wondering how you would be reporting on Washington now if you
were posted in the U.S. capital as a diplomat or intelligence
agent for another nation. What would the many astute observers
and analysts among you say of the Bush regime, or its toll or of
the courage and independence of the career officialdom that does
its bidding?...

"... [I]t is you whose voices are so important now. You
alone stand above ambition and partisanship. This administration
no longer deserves your allegiance or participation. America
deserves the leadership and example, the decisive revelation, of
your resignations.

"Your resignations alone would speak to America the truth
that beyond any politics, this Bush regime is intolerable -- and
to an increasingly cynical world the truth that there are still
Americans who uphold with their lives and honor the highest
principles of our foreign policy....

"Unless and until you do, however, please be under no
illusion. Every cable you write to or from the field,
every letter you compose for Congress or the public, every
memo you draft or clear, every budget you number, every
meeting you attend, every testimony you give extends your
share of the common disaster.

"The America that you sought to represent in choosing your
career, the America that once led the community of nations not by
brazen power but by the strength of its universal principles, has
never needed you more. Those of us who know you best, who have
shared your work and world, know you will not let us down. You
are, after all, the trustees." [nbs]

HNN - 5/26/2004

The Times (London)
May 20, 2004, Thursday

SECTION: Overseas news; 18
HEADLINE: Russians rise in face of threat to 1812 landmark
BYLINE: Clem Cecil in Moscow

More than 2,000 Russians have launched a campaign to prevent Moscow's mayor from demolishing one of the city's best-loved buildings.

The Neo-Classical Manezh, nestling under the walls of the Kremlin, was built in the ruins of the city after Napoleon's withdrawal in 1812.

It was damaged by fire in March -on the day of President Putin's re-election - and an investigation revealed signs of arson.

Iosif Ordzhonikidze, the deputy mayor, said this week that rather than restoring the building, the city authorities were now talking about its "re-creation" - condemning it to the same fate as 60 other listed buildings in Moscow which have been destroyed over the past 12 years to make way for new stuctures.

More than one third of the 12,000 fires in Moscow each year are thought to be started deliberately. Buildings damaged by fire are usually demolished.

In the absence of a strong stock market, many Russians invest in property and land, and prices are high. One of Moscow's biggest construction companies is owned by Russia's first woman billionaire, Elena Baturina, the wife of Moscow's Mayor, Yuri Luzhkov. Yesterday Mr Luzhkov took out a full-page advertisement in the daily newspaper Izvestya, which published the petition, to quell the growing indignation.

Historians, architects and restorers have joined other Muscovites in petitioning the city and President Putin "to take urgent measures to save the architectural heritage of Moscow and save the country from a cultural catastrophe".

Alexei Klimenko, chairman of the Russian Artists' Union Commission on Preservation of Historical and Cultural Heritage, said that the city centre was the most profitable area for development. He added: "These decisions are taken from a purely economic point of view, without a thought for culture and history."

The Manezh was built as a cavalry training ground between 1817 and 1820 and is one of Moscow's finest examples of Neo-Classical architecture. It was used as a garage by the Bolsheviks and for the past few years has been an exhibition centre.

A group of foreigners has formed the Moscow Architecture Preservation Society. Guy Archer, a founding member, said. "I think (Mr) Luzhkov is underestimating public reaction to his plans for the Manezh."

HNN - 5/26/2004

The Press (Christchurch, New Zealand)
May 20, 2004, Thursday

HEADLINE: Scrap ban on incest between consenting adults - scholar

One of New Zealand's most distinguished scholars has told Parliament the ban on incest between consenting adults should be repealed.

Professor Peter Munz, a historian, was told by The Press yesterday that his comments had caused a stir.

"Look, I don't care two hoots," he said. Even if one of the adults were a parent and the other a child, it should not be illegal as long as the child were old enough to give consent, he said.

Such relationships between family members were "very, very rare, for a simple psychological reason" -- people who grew up in the same family were not usually sexually attracted to each other "unless you're a psychopath, and in that case you have another problem".

The incest ban was in the statute books, "but it doesn't seem to be a great crime".

Incestuous relationships could produce children, but Munz said the risk of interbreeding causing genetically damaged children was no reason for a legal ban.

"It has been shown that such genetic damage, being sporadic in the first place, will be eliminated after several generations," he told MPs who were considering the Crimes Amendment Bill (No. 2).

Recessive genes would be weeded out as the dominant genes returned. He had been asked to come to Parliament because of his interest in historical reasons for prohibitions against incest.

For 10 years, he had been working on a book on the evolution of culture.

He said the Pharaohs in ancient Egypt were prohibited from having children with anyone but their sisters. Royal genes were not to be diluted. "That's an interesting sideline on the whole thing," he said.

Munz told MPs the worldwide taboo against incest was an inheritance from paleolithic society. "In each tribe or society, women must not be available for consumption, so to speak, at home."

Peter Munz, born in 1921, was a German Jewish refugee when his family arrived in New Zealand in 1940. They came to Christchurch, where he completed teacher training and received an MA from then- Canterbury University College.

He studied with philosophers Karl Popper and Ludwig Wittgenstein. Further post-graduate work was done at Cambridge.

He returned to Wellington in the late 1940s to start a 40-year career as a history professor at Victoria University. He retired in 1987.

HNN - 5/22/2004

From the newsletter of the Organization of American Historians (May 2004):

The selection of a venue and the room rate that OAH offers attendees has been an issue of concern for several years. Two years ago, the OAH surveyed its members to determine if the time of year in which OAH hosts its meeting (typically March or April) should be changed to the summer or fall to take advantage of lower-occupancy times and thus lower hotel rates. Most members responding to the survey preferred to retain spring as the best meeting time. A large majority, however, did indicate that a change in the days of the meeting would be acceptable. Based on this response, OAH negotiated a lower room rate for its Washington, D.C., meeting in 2006 and New York meeting in 2008. Instead of the usual Thursday to Sunday schedule, the D.C. meeting will begin Wednesday and end Saturday, while the New York convention will open Friday and close Monday.

OAH continues to investigate other options for future meeting sites. We are researching smaller, less expensive cities in the Northeast, West, and Central regions. Over the last several years we have considered a mix of cities of different sizes, including Long Beach, Spokane, Albuquerque, and Houston, as well as San Francisco, San Diego, Seattle, Minneapolis, and Phoenix. Research on various cities in the last few years has shown that smaller cities are not necessarily less expensive. Oftentimes, the savings on the hotel room rate are offset by the higher cost of airfare and ground transportation. Airfares to smaller cities can be as much as $160 higher than airfare to major metropolitan airports over the same dates. Meetings in smaller cities with several hotels can also be a hardship for attendees who have difficulty walking long distances or in cities where mass transit is not available. In keeping with our members’ wishes OAH does offer a mix of large and smaller cities. Between Washington in 2002 and Boston in 2004 we met in Memphis. Similarly, between Washington in 2006 and New York in 2008, we will meet for our 2007 centennial convention in Minneapolis.

Lee Formwalt and Amy Stark

HNN - 5/21/2004

NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE (Vol. 10, #21; 20 May 2004) by Bruce Craig (editor) rbcraig@historycoalition.org National Coalition for History (NCH) Website http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch

1. "Habits of Racism in America Persist" Declares President Bush and Challenger Kerry at Events Commemorating Brown Anniversary 2. Budget Deal May Be Near 3. Investigator General Investigates NEH Leak 4. Report: NHPRC Meeting -- Commission Adopts New Directions, Announces Grants 5. NARA Release Documents US-Nazi Collaboration in Protecting War Criminals 6. Bits and Bytes: Television Program Focuses on History; Doyle Papers Fetch $1.7 Million 7. Articles of Interest: "Now and Then: A Hankering for History"
(Washington Post 20 May 2004)

1. "HABITS OF RACISM IN AMERICA PERSIST" DECLARES PRESIDENT BUSH AND CHALLENGER KERRY AT EVENTS COMMEMORATING BROWN ANNIVERSARY On 17 May 2004 -- the 50th anniversary of the Supreme Court's landmark decision Brown v. Board of Education -- Congress, President Bush, and presumptive Democratic Party presidential nominee John Kerry (D-MA) all hailed the decision which ended legal segregation in public schools. The House and Senate passed a joint resolution (H. Con. Res. 414) expressing the "sense of Congress" that all Americans "observe the anniversary." The two presidential rivals spoke at separate events in Kansas -- President George W. Bush addressed a crowd at the grand opening of the Brown v. Board of Education National Historic Site in Topeka, and John Kerry spoke to students at the Kansas Statehouse.

The concurrent resolution declares that "in the field of education, the doctrine of 'separate but equal' has no place." During floor debates, however, administration critics, such as Rep. Danny K. Davis (D-IL), spoke about the inconsistencies between what Brown represents verses the realities. He also posed the larger question -- whether Brown has achieved its goal of equality in education and educational opportunity for African Americans? Davis and other speakers pointed out that data from the 2000 census "makes it clear that the ridged lines of ethnic and racial segregation persists across the entire country," that segregation, though legally ended, "has taken on a new face" and that it "is now a matter of access to quality education."

Under sunny skies and in front of a flag-waving crowd of 3,000, President Bush delivered a brief 12-minute speech marking the grand opening of the Brown v. Board of Education National Historic Site, formerly the Monroe Elementary School (one of the segregated schools that black children were forced to attend prior to the Brown decision). In his remarks, Bush stated that "segregation could never be squared with the ideals of America" and that "as far as we've come, we still have not met the promise of Brown." Bush brushed aside critics though when he declared that "segregation is a living memory." With Education Secretary Rod Paige (who as a child had attended segregated schools in southern Mississippi) by his side, the president praised the administration's "no Child Left Behind"
initiative. That program, said Bush, continues to "strive to improve failing schools" and is a vital part of his administration's policy to build an "opportunity society."

At a separate event six blocks away, on the steps of the Kansas state capitol, presumed Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry cited a list of statistics that underscored that minorities still suffer higher rates of poverty and joblessness than do whites. Kerry declared that "too many school systems" in America still "are separate and unequal." Kerry also stated that although "Brown represents the law...there are those who still seek, in different ways, to see it undone...to roll back affirmative action, to restrict equal rights, [and] to undermine the promise of our
Constitution." Though he gave no programmatic details, Kerry declared,
"the next great challenge is to put up the ladder of opportunity for all."

These commemorative events in Kansas marked the first time Bush and Kerry both traveled to the same place to talk about the same subject since the presidential campaign season opened. Advisors to both candidates claimed the events were "non-political" though it was difficult not to notice the undercurrent of politics that marked the comments of both Bush and Kerry:
in his speech, Bush defended his education policies while in Kerry's, the candidate highlighted conditions he would strive to fix.

In the end, it was Cheryl Brown Henderson, president of the Brown foundation and one of three daughters of the late Oliver Brown (for whom the lawsuit is named), who perhaps did more to de-politicize the anniversary than anyone else officially connected with the various commemorative events when she appeared at both.

Readers of this publication may have noted that precious little seems to be happening (or being reported) on Capitol Hill in terms of movement on FY
2005 appropriation bills. While Congressional investigations into U.S.
abuse of Iraqi prisoners is capturing headlines, Congress seems to be enacting few measures except routine legislation renaming post offices and federal buildings for notable Americans.

On 19 May 2004, after weeks of stalemate, Republican lawmakers in the House and Senate reached agreement on a non-binding budget resolution on the fiscal 2005 budget. The House approved the $2.4 trillion agreement Wednesday night on a largely party-line vote (216-213). If the blueprint is agreed to by the Senate, discretionary spending allocations would be advanced to appropriations committees and consequently some agency appropriations could be approved prior to the November elections.

According to press accounts, the federal budget for FY 2005 would include $50 billion for military operations in the Middle East. A rule would also be passed that would make it difficult to make permanent the president's tax cut initiative, which is the heart of the Bush economic plan. The pending deal seems to bring both fiscal conservatives and moderates together on the key issue of the ballooning budget deficits.

3. INSPECTOR GENERAL INVESTIGATING NEH LEAK According to the Chronicle of Higher Education, Sheldon Bernstein, the inspector general (IG) of the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) has initiated an investigation into the actions of Julia C. Bondanella, a former NEH employee, for allegedly improperly disclosing information about grant applicants and employee matters to a Chronicle reporter.

In January 2004, the Chronicle published a lengthy article by Anne Marie Borrego on the NEH practice of "flagging" -- that is, identifying applications dealing with controversial topics (i.e. ones dealing with sexuality, race, or gender) and giving them closer scrutiny in the review process. In the lengthy article Bondanella was briefly quoted about the agency's ongoing practices.

Bondanella joined the NEH in 2001 but left after about a year in part because she believed that politics, not merit, was guiding the agency's grant-review process. She made this point clear in comments printed in the Chronicle article. According to her lawyer, David Colman, the NEH letter threatens Bondanella with civil and criminal penalties (criminal penalties for disclosure of confidential information can result in major fines and up to one year in prison). Bondanella denies she did anything improper and claims the NEH is merely being "vindictive...[and] just trying to dig up dirt" on her.

At this juncture because the investigation is ongoing, neither Bondanella's legal counsel nor the NEH have released any of the correspondence exchanged between the parties. The Chronicle, however, has filed a Freedom of Information (FOIA) request for relevant public documents. All agency inquiries into the matter are being referred to its general counsel, Daniel Schneider. Public-affairs spokesman Erik Lokkesmoe, however, stated that the NEH "takes very seriously our responsibility to protect the confidentiality of our applicants and our current and former employees."

4. REPORT: NHPRC MEETING -- COMMISSION ADOPTS NEW DIRECTIONS, ANNOUNCES GRANTS At its 11-12 May 2004 meeting, the National Historical Publications and Records Commission (NHPRC) set a new course for funding the national archival system. The commission adopted a new Strategic Plan as well as a new Mission Statement: "The NHPRC promotes the preservation and use of America's documentary heritage essential to understanding our democracy, history, and culture." The commission issued a call for leadership in public policy, distribution of the nation's most important traditional documents in American history, and for the creation of a national network for state and local documentary preservation and utilization.

The commission also approved a new Vision Statement: "America's documentary heritage preserves the rights of American citizens; checks the actions of government officials; and chronicles the national experience. Democracy demands an informed and engaged citizenry. By preserving our documentary heritage and promoting its distribution and use, the people seek to guarantee the protection of the rights of all, hold accountable government and other public institutions, and increase understanding of our history and culture for generations to come.
The NHPRC is a public trust for documenting democracy."

Six new goals were also adopted for the NHPRC: 1) Exercise leadership for public policy in the preservation of and access to America's documentary heritage; 2) Expand the distribution of the most important traditional documents in American history; 3) Promote a national network for state and local documentary preservation and utilization efforts; 4) Support institutions that promote preservation, dissemination, and use of historical records; 5) Support institutions in meeting the challenges of preserving and managing electronic documentation; 6) Support education and training of professionals engaged in preservation and dissemination.

The commission also recommended to the Archivist of the United States grants of up to $5,873,786 for 71 projects in 27 states and the District of Columbia. These recommendations included $3.3 million for documentary editing projects which focus on the papers and records of significant Americans such as Frederick Douglass, Thomas Edison, Martin Luther King, and Eleanor Roosevelt, and of significant events in U.S. history, such as the Freedom History Project on Emancipation, and the Presidential Recordings Project dealing with the White House tapes of Presidents Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon. Grants for publication subventions will also make possible individual volumes of the James Madison Papers, the Ratification of the Constitution, the George Washington Papers, the U.S.
Grant Papers, and the first volume of Moravian Spring Mission Among the Cherokee. A three-year grant to the Supreme Court Historical Society will enable editors to complete work on the Documentary History of the Supreme Court of the United States, 1789-1800.

Funds up to $2.2 million also went to records access projects to preserve and make accessible important documents and archives in collections around the country. Included among these grants are the archival collections of Japanese Americans during World War II at the Japanese American National Library; the architectural records in the Bertrand Goldberg Archive at the Art Institute of Chicago; photographs from the Louisiana Purchase Exposition of 1904 at the Field Museum of Natural History; the Records of the YWCA of the USA at Smith College; film footage from the Eyes on the Prize documentary film at Washington University in St. Louis; and New York City's General Society of Mechanics and Tradesmen records dating from 1785 to 1955. Finally, the commission provided support for two State Historical Records Advisory Boards and funded two Electronic Records Projects to create records management systems for Maine state agencies and archival collections at Tufts University and Yale University.

5. NARA RELEASE DOCUMENTS US-NAZI COLLABORATION IN PROTECTING WAR CRIMINALS On 13 May 2004, hundreds of thousands of pages of FBI, CIA, and other intelligence records related to Nazi and World War II war crimes were released under provisions of the Nazi War Crime Disclosure Act of 1998. While over 8 million pages of declassified documents have been released since 1999, according to NARA sources, the latest installment of 240,000 pages of FBI records, 419 CIA files on individuals, and 3,000 pages of U.S. Army information "alter our understanding of the Holocaust and the world of intelligence" before, during, and after World War II.

The documents demonstrate that U.S. and Allied intelligence services failed to understand how closely the "Jewish question" was related to the central goals of the Nazi regime. The records also show how U.S. banks and financial institutions assisted the Nazis from 1936-41. Along with the declassified materials, NARA has also released a book entitled "U.S.
Intelligence and the Nazis" (National Archives Trust Fund, ISBN 1-880875-26-8; $24.95; to order call toll-free 866-272-6272) that provides hard documentary evidence of what Cold War historians have long contended
-- that there were close collaborative relationships established between U.S. government officials and Nazi intelligence officers who were thought to be useful in the struggle against the Soviet Union in the post-war era.

FBI documents, for example, show that Bureau director J. Edgar Hoover resisted taking action against Viorel Trifa, a former officer in the pro-Hitler Romanian Iron Guard when he immigrated to the United States in 1950. Also, the CIA recruited former SS officer Otto von Bolschwing as an agent and for years protected him from war crimes prosecution. At least five close associates of Adolf Eichmann -- each significant in the Nazi effort to exterminate Jews from the face of the earth -- became CIA agents in the post-war era, and another 23 war criminals were approached by the CIA for recruitment. The documents also detail the role that the United States played in setting up the official intelligence service of West Germany in the post-war era.

Item # 1 -- Television Program Focuses on History: The 18 May 2004 installment of the U.S. Department of Education television program
"Education News" focused on American history, humanities, and civics. The
show reviewed recent National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) reports on American history and civics and examined a variety of programs that seek to improve student understanding of these subjects. Those featured included: Cathy Gorn, executive director of National History Day (NHD); Ruben Zepeda, director of the Los Angeles American History Institute; Cynthia Mostoller, a teacher at Alice Deal Junior High in Washington, D.C.; and Myra Luftman, principal of the High School of American Studies. Questions addressed in the program included: How do history, the humanities, and civics create better citizens? What does high-quality history and civics instruction look like? How can history be made engaging for students while not watering down content? What types of partnerships or program can help to ensure that students have high-quality history, humanities and civics instruction? For how best to access "Education News" in your community visit:
http://www.ed.gov/news/av/video/edtv .

Item #2 -- Doyle Papers Fetch $1.7 Million: The personal papers of Sherlock Holmes creator Sir Arthur Conan Doyle fetched $1.7 million at an auction recently held under the auspices of Christies Auction House. The collection included letters, notes, handwritten manuscripts. Of the 135 lots up for auction, some 31 failed to meet their reserve price and remained unsold.

One article this week: in "Now and Then: A Hankering for History"
Washington Post (20 May 2004) columnist Tina Brown reflects on the outpouring of history books by superstar academics who are peddling their tomes to a nation hungry for perspective. For the article tap into:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A41576-2004May20.html .

The National Coalition for History invites you to subscribe to this FREE weekly newsletter! You are also encouraged to redistribute the NCH Washington Updates to colleagues, friends, teachers, students and others who are interested in history and archives issues. A complete backfile of these reports is maintained by H-Net on the NCH's recently updated web page
at: .

To subscribe to the "NCH Washington Update," send an e-mail message to listserv@h-net.msu.edu with the following text in the body of the message (and only this text): SUBSCRIBE H-NCH firstname lastname, institution. To unsubscribe send an e-mail message to: listserv@h-net.msu.edu according to the following model: SIGNOFF H-NCH.

You can accomplish the same tasks by tapping into the web interface at:
http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/lists/subscribe.cgi and at the "network"
prompt, scroll down and select H-NCH; enter your name and affiliation and "submit".

HNN - 5/21/2004

The Australian
May 14, 2004 Friday All-round Country Edition

HEADLINE: Little general fights back
BYLINE: Michael Thurston
Waterloo is again becoming a real battlefield and this time Napoleon looks like doing better, writes Michael Thurston
ALMOST two centuries after the Battle of Waterloo, French forces will soon be on the move again on the famous plain south of Brussels.
A French firm has unveiled a multi-million-euro facelift for the site of the 1815 battle at which the Duke of Wellington defeated Napoleon Bonaparte.
In a bid to boost tourism, the local Wallonia government has signed a deal with Paris-based Culture Espaces to transform the rundown battlefield into a world-class heritage site.
"It is one of the most famous battlefields in the world," Walloon Economy Minister Serge Kubla said. "But when tourists arrive now they are sometimes disappointed with what they find."
With the new site, Waterloo would become a "model for international tourism", Mr Kubla said.
The battlefield, a 30-minute drive from Brussels, draws about 300,000 visitors a year to a site dominated by a pyramid-like hillock topped by a huge lion overseeing the surrounding farmland.
A hotchpotch of taverns, fast-food eateries and a blockhouse-style visitor centre lie at the foot of the hill, while coachloads of Japanese and other tourists frequently brave cars roaring through the centre of it all.
The new site, planned for completion by 2008, includes a vast underground multi-media visitor centre at the heart of a tree-lined pedestrian-friendly layout to present a "history experience" to tourists from around the globe.
"We want to go to 500,000" visitors per year," Mr Kubla said, adding authorities were targeting tourists from Asia and North America.
But the project has re-ignited debate about the historical representation of the battle, which turned the tide of European history.
Napoleon, having spent 100 days rebuilding his army after escaping from British custody on the island of Elba, finally met his match at Waterloo when he was defeated by the combined Anglo-Prussian forces of Wellington and Field Marshal Bluecher.
A journalist at the presentation of the plans -- held in the Bivouac de l'Empereur tavern -- opined that, after a quick visit to the souvenir shop next door, "one might have thought Napoleon won the battle".
But Culture Espaces spokesman Bruno Monnier denied suggestions that the presentation of the site might be tainted by French historical revisionism. "Even if we are French, we are concerned to have historical rigour," he said, adding that a multi-national committee of historians would monitor every aspect of the project.
A key seal of approval has come from the Duke of Wellington's descendant, the 88-year-old eighth duke, who lives near Basingstoke in southern England.
Mr Monnier said an inspiration for the revamped Waterloo site was American Civil War battlegrounds at Gettysburg and Williamsburg, in particular because of the access to walking and cycling tracks around the battlefield itself.
Kees Schulten, head of the team of historians monitoring the project, said he was sure the renovated site would present a balanced view -- but acknowledged the sheer force of Napoleon's reputation could lead to him dominating accounts.
"The problem is that the historical personality of Napoleon made much more of an impression than Wellington. He is the one who draws the attention, but the final victory was without doubt for Wellington," the Dutch historian said.

HNN - 5/21/2004

Columbus Dispatch (Ohio)
May 16, 2004 Sunday, Home Final Edition

SECTION: FEATURES - TV PLUS; Cover Story; Pg. 03
BYLINE: Tim Feran, The Columbus Dispatch
This is no three-hour tour.
Nor is it a game, or even a "reality" game.
The "colonists" who participate in the "experiential history" of Colonial House quickly grasp that they won't easily survive by the rules of 1628 for six months.
Created by the folks who made Frontier House, Manor House and The 1900 House, the four-night PBS series should explode more than a few myths.
The latter-day Pilgrims don't wear funny hats or shoes with buckles.
They do face the labor of indentured servitude and the lack of baths and showers -- and the prospect of a strict social and religious code, including compulsory church attendance and public punishment.
And yet, even though the applicants were told about such conditions, more than 5,000 people from throughout the United States and the United Kingdom applied for the 24 slots.
The early moments of Colonial House set the tone: The colonists sail to their new homes on a tall-masted ship -- cramped, uncomfortable and mostly open to the elements.
"Two words come to mind right now: hypothermia and hell," one mutters.
They prepare to land after learning about their roles: governor, unmarried freeman and so on.
Right away, viewers are reminded that the time-traveling Pilgrims will encounter slightly different, probably easier circumstances than did those who arrived on the Mayflower.
For one thing, while roughly half of the cast members are indentured, about two-thirds of the real Colonists began their new lives as servants.
For another, the modern colonists disembark into smaller rowboats from the tall ship and land onshore -- whereas, back in the 17th century, women and children stayed on the Mayflower for two months after arriving in the New World, waiting while the men set up the living quarters.
Unlike Frontier House, on which the settlers competed to determine who could best prepare for winter, Colonial House asks the participants to form a functioning -- and profitable -- community.
It provides not only a laboratory experiment in the tight bonds that result from hardships but also an illustration of imperial capitalism -- the rationale behind the original Colonies.
Inevitably, the producers admit, they break the rules: They give the colonists bug sprays to ward off a fierce cloud of insects and toothbrushes to fight off the beginnings of tooth decay.
And, when a dog is hurt or one of the men is injured with an ax, modern medicine is used.
Still, by drawing on the advice of experts from Plimouth Plantation in Plymouth, Mass., as well as other historians, the two dozen Colonial House participants come to understand all too well the sacrifices involved in founding a nation.
As one says, "This ain't no pleasure cruise."

HNN - 5/21/2004

Ottawa Citizen
May 16, 2004 Sunday Final Edition

SECTION: The Citizen's Weekly; Pg. C5
HEADLINE: Comrade Arthur?: Complete with leather-bikinied Guinevere, Hollywood does up King Arthur in grand style -- and gives the British legend a Russian background
SOURCE: The Sunday Times
BYLINE: John Harlow
Scholars have derided a $190-million Hollywood film about King Arthur that portrays the legendary saviour of Britain as a Russian warrior in the pay of the Roman empire.
Jerry Bruckheimer, the producer who turned the Disney theme park ride Pirates of the Caribbean into a multiplex blockbuster, claims his king, played by Clive Owen, is the "most historically accurate" version of Arthur ever committed to film.
But after seeing extracts from the movie, which will be released in Britain and North America in July, U.S. academics have called it "weird" and insulting.
In the Bruckheimer script for King Arthur, the "once and future king" is a fifth-century warrior born in a land that would later form part of Russia. He is recruited by the failing Roman empire to save its colony, Britain, from the Saxon hordes in an attempt to avert a "domino effect" of collapse in other imperial territories.
Wearing full Roman armour, Arthur builds Camelot inside a crenellated fort and marries a leather-clad warrior princess called Guinevere, played with cleavage-baring aplomb by Keira Knightley from Pirates of the Caribbean.
Guinevere, an expert archer who can fire a flaming arrow more than half a kilometre, later goes to war with Arthur before becoming entangled in a love affair with Sir Lancelot.
The script writer is David Franzoni, who won an Oscar for Russell Crowe's Gladiator and is working on a screenplay about the Carthaginian general Hannibal. Franzoni has said he wanted to show the historical man behind the myth.
"In the film, Arthur is from that area called 'beyond Germania,' known today as Russia, where the Romans recruited soldiers to fight their later enemies, such as the Goths. They would not waste one of their own aristocrats to solve the British problem," said a source close to Bruckheimer.
"The film makers are not saying it's 100-per-cent accurate, but it's more realistic than, say, John Boorman's Excalibur."
Arthur's origins remain mysterious but his legend has evolved in the work of writers since the 12th century, when Glastonbury monks claimed to have found his tomb.
While some scholars such as the British television historian Michael Wood have suggested he is entirely mythical, others believe there is evidence of a war leader who defeated the Saxons in a battle in about 496 AD, holding back the invaders for a generation. This historical figure may have been called Arthur.
The 12th-century chronicler Geoffrey of Monmouth, and French poet Chretien de Troyes produced some of the earliest work on Arthurian themes, and the Norman writer Wace mentioned the Round Table.
Arthur's Camelot has been variously identified as Caerleon in Wales, Camelford in Cornwall, Cadbury Castle in Somerset and, by Sir Thomas Malory in the 15th century, as Winchester in Hampshire.
Prof. Alan Lupack, who runs the Camelot Project at the University of Rochester, New York, collating Arthurian literature, said some enthusiasts might be offended by this latest portrayal on screen.
He said there was no evidence that Arthur had been engaged by Rome, let alone that he had come from Russia.
"Because this is legend rather than history, writers and film makers are free to do what they want, but then they cannot call it historically accurate," he said.
John Boucher, who is writing a guidebook to Arthurian sites such as Tintagel in Cornwall, said: "It appears that Clive Owen is defending Hadrian's Wall from the Saxons rather than the Scots, which is just plain strange."
But this was not as "weird" as making Arthur Russian. "I think the British, and the Welsh in particular, who always claim Arthur, will be insulted and mystified," he added.
"I love the pictures of Guinevere in her leather bikini -- but historically accurate? Please, someone, give Arthur a break!"

HNN - 5/18/2004

from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy Volume 2004, Issue No. 45 May 18, 2004


In the last of the large, focused declassification initiatives of the 1990s, an Interagency Working Group last week announced the release of hundreds of thousands of pages of documents declassified under provisions of the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act of 1996. See:



In a stroke of legislative brilliance, the authors of the 1996 Act overcame the CIA's habitual secrecy regarding historical matters by modifying the DCI's authority to withhold such information.

Thus, records related to Nazi war crimes could not be automatically withheld just because they pertained to "intelligence sources and methods." Rather, source information could be withheld only if it "would clearly and demonstrably damage the national security interests of the United States," a much tougher and more sensible standard.

As a result, "We had unprecedented success at actually opening CIA files that ordinarily are never opened," said Steven Garfinkel, director of the Interagency Working Group.

Nearly 800 CIA "name files" have now been opened, Mr. Garfinkel noted, whereas in the past only one, on Lee Harvey Oswald, had ever been made available.

Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the Federation of American Scientists.

To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, send email to
with "subscribe" in the body of the message.

To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a blank email message to

OR email your request to saftergood@fas.org

Secrecy News is archived at:

Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web: http://www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email: saftergood@fas.org
voice: (202) 454-4691

Kevin Michael Fitzpatrick - 5/17/2004

At this point we are probably never going to know. Some of this is on the level of high school locker room thinking. He liked opera so obviously he was gay. And does it matter?

HNN - 5/14/2004

The Scotsman
May 11, 2004, Tuesday

BYLINE: Ian Johnston
SHE was the founder of modern nursing who worked so long into the night to help injured soldiers in the Crimean War that they came to know her as "the Lady with the Lamp." But she was also later derided as a malingerer and a hypochondriac for taking to her bed on and off for more than 20 years.
Now sufferers of ME are claiming Florence Nightingale had the condition and have been holding a series of awareness-raising flag days in Scottish cities to mark her birthday on 12 May.
But the claim that Nightingale was a sufferer of a condition once dismissed as "yuppie flu" has sparked controversy among leading historians.
During her lifetime, Nightingale's condition was treated seriously by doctors, who saw it as a form of nervous exhaustion thought common among women at the time.
Later scholars have viewed her retreat to her bedroom as a way to escape public life as she struggled to cope with the horrors of the Crimea.
But for Kelly McLellan, 32, the convener of the Edinburgh ME Self-Help group (MESH), the suggestion that Nightingale - who died in 1910 at the age of 90 - may have been a fellow sufferer could help increase understanding of the condition.
"It goes to show that ME, or at least a poorly understood illness which causes serious chronic fatigue, is not a recent phenomenon and is an illness which can strike anyone," he said.
"But I think that we still have a long way to go. Recognition is not just about getting treatment - it is also about respect. A lot of ME sufferers are not treated well because people don't recognise their illness. I hope that Florence Nightingale's life shows that ill people deserve respect even if their illness isn't understood."
Mr McLellan, of Barnton, Edinburgh, was forced to give up a PhD in biochemistry at Oxford University in 1996, two years after contracting ME, and now works as a private tutor.
"Florence Nightingale's story sounds a lot like many of the ME sufferers that I know. We all try to work round the condition in some way," he said.
Nightingale's illness has been the subject of much debate since an academic paper in 1995 suggested she had chronic brucellosis, a bacterial infection often found in the Mediterranean.
Her own doctors decided she had been suffering from what was then called neurasthenia, an obsolete term now associated with a psychosomatic illness.
They recorded her symptoms as including headache, nausea at the sight of food, breathlessness, an irregular heartbeat, palpitations and a generally neurotic disposition.
Last year, a conference in the United States which looked into her illness decided she had "bipolar depression", which combines periods of depression with manic behaviour over a long period of time.
However, it is the claim by Dr Robert Fekety, of Michigan University, that chronic brucellosis should be classed as a form of chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), or can lead to it, which has been seized on by ME sufferers. Allen Hutchinson, a professor of public health at the University of Sheffield and an expert on ME, said the condition was still not fully understood - studies are ongoing in UK, Australia and the US - and was used as an umbrella term for a range of ailments.
"There's no doubt that a few people with CFS spend very long periods of their lives in bed, but only very few of them. But if there is a truism it is likely to be that CFS has more than one underlying cause," he said.
Prof Hutchinson dismissed claims that ME was "yuppie flu", or all in the mind, as "simplistic and ridiculous".
He said: "Clearly, these people need to be helped in some way or another.
"I think it is possible that someone like Florence Nightingale had CFS; it's almost certainly not a new illness. The notion of it being yuppie flu is not very likely."
Professor Lynn McDonald, of the University of Guelph in Ontario, a leading expert on Nightingale, said: "There's an enormous amount of speculation as to what her ailment was, but obviously none of us is going to know.
"I just don't see the point of speculating - it's something we cannot possibly know.
"I think Nightingale is very interesting and her strategy for coping with her condition is interesting. But what she was coping with ... I think this is far -fetched, speculating about somebody who died in 1910."
Alex Attewell, the director of the Florence Nightingale Museum in London, said:
"I can see why it's been suggested that Florence Nightingale may have had ME, because having a famous person who suffered from it helps to promote understanding of it."

HNN - 5/14/2004

The Australian
May 11, 2004 Tuesday All-round Country Edition

HEADLINE: Critics nail wooden 'Michelangelo'
SOURCE: The Times
BYLINE: Richard Owen
* Rome
ART experts have dismissed claims a privately owned wooden statuette of Christ is the work of Michelangelo.
The piece, which would be worth a fortune if it were indeed made by the Renaissance master, went on show at the Horne Museum in Florence on Saturday and will be displayed until July.
Giancarlo Gentilini, an Italian art historian, said he had first noticed the 41cm statuette in a private collection in Turin 15 years ago and had thought "long and hard" about it before concluding that it was an unknown work by the young Michelangelo.
He has outlined his theories in a book entitled Proposta per Michelangelo Giovane (A Proposal for the Young Michelangelo).
Professor Gentilini said Michelangelo created the work in 1495 at the age of 20.
The Italian daily newspaper Corriere della Sera suggested the reattribution would "change the history of art in Florence at the time of Savonarola". But James Beck, professor of art history at Columbia University has expressed doubt, saying, "every year or two there seems to be a discovery of a new Caravaggio or a new Michelangelo".
He said the size of the statuette alone made it highly unlikely it was the work of Michelangelo, as did the fact it was carved in wood.
William Wallace, professor of art history and archaeology at Washington University in St Louis also had doubts, and said the market value of "new" Michelangelos was so astronomically high "one has been discovered every few years since 1900".
Most turned out to be wrongly reattributed.
But Professor Gentilini and two other Italian scholars, Luciano Bellosi of the University of Siena and Umberto Baldini of the University of Florence, said that according to Ascanio Condivi, a 16th-century biographer of Michelangelo, monks at the Priory of Santo Spirito in Florence allowed Michelangelo to study anatomy by attending the dissection of corpses.
Condivi wrote that Michelangelo gave the monks a wooden crucifix by way of thanks. All this accounted for the "anatomical accuracy" of the statuette, they said.

HNN - 5/14/2004

NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE (Vol. 10, #20; 14 May 2004) by Bruce Craig (editor) rbcraig@historycoalition.org> National Coalition for History (NCH) Website http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch

1. Poet Helen Vendler Delivers Jefferson Lecture
2. Report: LC Symposium on the Future of the History Textbook
3. ISSO to Investigate Possible Classification Rule Violation
4. PBS Historical Documentary Serves as Catalyst for Reopening Emmitt
Till Case
5. Bits & Bytes: Correction; "Reinvigorating the Humanities" Report
6. Articles of Interest: "National Museum of American History Marks 50th
Anniversary of the Brown v. Education" (USNewswire.com)

1. HELEN VENDLER DELIVERS JEFFERSON LECTURE On 6 May 2004 Harvard University poetry critic Helen Vendler delivered the 33rd annual Jefferson Lecture at the District of Columbia Convention Center. In her talk entitled "The Ocean, the Bird, and the Scholar,"
Vendler proposed that humanistic study ought to center on the arts as they teach students more about humanities and national heritage than do either philosophy or history. By focusing on language, literature, and the arts students can gain a truer portrayal of "the way we are and were, the way we actually live and have lived."

According to Vendler, "The arts are too profound and too far-reaching to be left out of our children's patrimony...the arts have a right, within our schools, to be as serious an object of study as molecular biology or
mathematics." Like geography and history, the arts "confer a patina on
the natural world," Ms. Vendler stated. She also said that they lend significance to a field in Gettysburg or a rustic bridge in Lexington, sensitizing us to our surroundings. She concluded that American schools will produce more well-rounded students once they teach an equal balance of science and art.

The Jefferson Lecture is the highest honor that the federal government bestows for distinguished intellectual and public achievement in the humanities and is the highest award the National Endowment for the Humanities makes to a scholar. Recipients receive a $10,000 prize and a high-profile forum in which to speak on any topic they choose. Past lecturers include such luminaries as Arthur Miller, James McPherson, Robert Penn Warren, and Lionel Trilling. For Vendler's lecture, tap into http://www.neh.fed.us/whoweare/vendler/lecture.html .

2. REPORT: LC SYMPOSIUM ON THE FUTURE OF THE HISTORY TEXTBOOK On 12-13 May 2004 the Library of Congress (LC) convened an international symposium entitled "Stories of Our Nations, Footprints of Our Souls:
History Textbooks in Middle Schools and High Schools." The symposium, held at the LC's John W. Kluge Center, was attended by several dozen professional historians, publishers, high school teachers, students, congressional staff, and education specialists. For a day and a half discussants focused on the tensions, difficulties, and challenges facing history professionals, such as the conflicting demands that have led to culturally and politically charged disputes about the "ownership" of history.

The symposium was organized around a series of thematic-based panels. The first panel explored how historical topics are selected or omitted from history texts. Questions emerged concerning the nature of changing contexts and what topics should receive emphasis in historical narrative. A second panel discussed the relationships between history professionals, publishers, school district text review committees, and the role that other "interested parties" have in the development of history texts. The next day, a third panel drew upon the experiences of middle and high school teachers and students who reflected on the role of textbooks, digital resources, and on-line courses. A general discussion followed on a broad array of questions that centered on how history is taught in schools today.

One of the strengths of the symposium was the international character of the proceedings. While the emphasis was clearly on an exploration of the issues impacting the teaching of history in the United States, panelists from Europe, Asia, and elsewhere expanded the discussion to address concerns that transcended the American experience. Joke van der Leeuw-Roord, for example, discussed EuroClio and how historical ideas and concepts are selected for history textbooks used by member states of the European Union. Her insights had particular relevance on the dynamics at play in the presentation of "national" history.

University of Chicago's Jean Bethke Elshtain and George Mason University's Hugh Heclo brought the discussion closer to home by concentrating their comments on the lack of emphasis on political (as contrasted from
"cultural") history and how religion, in Heclo's words, is "avoided,
marginalized or politicized" in history texts. Romila Thapar, the Kluge
Chair for Countries and Cultures of the South, provided insightful comments following the formal presentations of the first group of panelists. For most participants her thoughtful comments were the highlight of the day.

The second panel focused on issues facing publishers of textbooks and those who use them in classroom settings. Speakers concluded that publishers generally are keeping up-to-date on historical scholarship and that texts reflect the current trends in historical thinking. Also during the panel, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN) made a brief appearance and delivered off-the-cuff remarks on what he feels is wrong with history education today. For Alexander, history and civics should focus on "American exceptionalism" and teach students "what it means to be an American."

On the second day, a third panel comprised of teachers and students from several nearby schools reflected on their experiences in using texts and commented on the use of other materials such as digital resources that teachers often use to enhance the teaching of history. The views and insights of the teachers and students were drawn out through the exploration of a set of prepared questions posed by the symposiums's moderator, the LC's Prosser Gifford.

All in all, participants came away from the symposium feeling that the future of the secondary school history text is secure but evolving to meet the changing needs of educators, school boards, and students. Teachers find that textbooks still have a role in the classroom though they are limited in their usefulness in bringing history to life for students or in serving as the catalyst for "teachable moments." School boards see the texts as the central means to communicate factual information that is to be assessed through standardized tests. Students, see the texts as a necessary reference tools though they find other modes of historical exploration far more instructive and palatable.

3. ISSO TO INVESTIGATE POSSIBLE CLASSIFICATION RULE VIOLATION The Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO) -- the agency housed in the National Archives and Records Administration that is responsible for oversight of classification policy in the executive branch -- will investigate the decision to classify a U.S. Army report concerning the torture of Iraqi prisoners by U.S. military personnel. In an apparent violation of governmental classification rules, the report issued by Major General Antonio M. Taguba and discussed in a recent Congressional hearing, which identified numerous illegal acts of abuse, was classified "Secret/No Foreign Dissemination."

According to the Federation of American Scientists, the executive order that governs national security classification states that "In no case shall information be classified in order to... conceal violations of
law...." On 6 May the Federation sent a letter to ISOO questioning the
classification applied to the Army report and requesting an investigation.
"It is disappointing to realize that in this case the national security classification system functioned, intentionally or not, to cover up an egregious set of crimes," the FAS letter stated. (For the FAS letter, tap
into: http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2004/05/sa050604.pdf .)

William Leonard, director of the ISSO whose office is already investigating related questionable Defense Department classification policies regarding detention and interrogation activities at Guantanamo Bay, stated that "it is my intent to pursue the issues your identified in your letter....I will advise you when my review is complete." (For the ISSO response tap into:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2004/05/isoo050604.pdf .) Leonard is hoping to resolve this issue "sooner rather than later" and expects to hear from the Department of Defense on the issues he raised with them within 30 days.

4. PBS HISTORICAL DOCUMENTARY SERVES AS CATALYST FOR REOPENING EMMITT TILL CASE Based on evidence presented in a recent Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) documentary "The Murder of Emmett Till," and after pressure from Senator Charles E. Schumer (D-NY), the Department of Justice has officially re-opened the investigation of the 1955 murder of Emmett Till, a 14-year-old boy whose murder in Mississippi served as the catalyst for the fledgling civil rights movement nearly 50 years ago. According to federal officials new evidence in the case suggests that some of the participants in the killing may still be alive.

On 28 August 1955, Till, a native of Chicago who was visiting relatives in Mississippi, was dragged from his bed, kidnaped, and murdered after he purportedly whistled at a white woman and may have touched her hand. Two white men (who eventually admitted to the killing) were tried but acquitted less than a month after the murder. Both have long since died, but evidence presented in the PBS documentary suggests that others who are still alive (perhaps as many as ten people) may have also been involved.

Several newspapers are reporting that the new investigation has prompted mixed feelings in both black and white residents of the small Mississippi town located by the Tallahatchie River where the murder took place. Some residents are not eager to rehash the past, and others predict that revisiting the event will bring nothing more than "fresh dread." But for others reopening the case is considered "a beacon of hope" that may bring change to a community where black and whites still live in separate parts of town, where schools remain segregated, and where an undercurrent of hostility between blacks and whites remains.

Senator Schumer, who had called for the case to be re-opened, said that he expects the Justice department to "conduct a thorough, complete, and speedy investigation as time is of the essence because of the advanced age of many of the potential witnesses."

Item #1 -- Correction: In last week's posting "Clinton Presidential Library Head Named" (NCH Washington Update, vol 10, #19, 6 May 2004) we inadvertently attributed the comment on the appointment of David Alsobrook to Archivist of the United States John Carlin. The quote should have been attributed to former President William Jefferson Clinton.

Item #2 -- "Reinvigorating the Humanities" Report: The Association of American Universities (AAU) has issued a report "Reinvigorating the
Humanities: Enhancing Research and Education on Campus and Beyond." Edited by Katherine Bailey Mathae and Catherine Langrehr Birzer, the 158-page report was requested by the AAU Executive Committee and has been three years in the making. The report urges a stronger emphasis on humanities at the nation's colleges and at research universities, in particular. It contains models of successful practices and recommendations for enhancing humanities research and education. While the report found that universities are supporting a wide range of humanities related projects, programs, and facilities, they are often carried out on an ad-hoc basis without full integration into the broader goals of the university.
According to the report, "No research university can succeed without an extensive, vigorous humanities program." For the report tap into:
http://www.aau.edu .

One article this week: In "National Museum of American History Marks 50th Anniversary of the Brown v. Education" the Smithsonian Institution details an exhibition and related programs and events to commemorate the landmark Supreme Court decision. The exhibition opens 15 May. For the press release tap into:
http://releases.usnewswire,com/GetRelease.asp?id=105-05122004 .

The National Coalition for History invites you to subscribe to this FREE weekly newsletter! You are also encouraged to redistribute the NCH Washington Updates to colleagues, friends, teachers, students and others who are interested in history and archives issues. A complete backfile of these reports is maintained by H-Net on the NCH's recently updated web page
at: .

To subscribe to the "NCH Washington Update," send an e-mail message to:
listserv@h-net.msu.edu with the following text in the body of the message (and only this text): SUBSCRIBE H-NCH firstname lastname, institution. To unsubscribe send an e-mail message to: listserv@h-net.msu.edu according to the following model: SIGNOFF H-NCH.

You can accomplish the same tasks by tapping into the web interface at http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/lists/subscribe.cgi and at the "network" prompt, scroll down and select H-NCH; enter your name and affiliation and "submit".

HNN - 5/13/2004

The Washington Post
May 12, 2004 Wednesday
Final Edition

SECTION: Style; C01
HEADLINE: 'Beyond Brown' Teaches America A Sad Lesson
BYLINE: Linton Weeks, Washington Post Staff Writer
"Beyond Brown: Pursuing the Promise," a documentary that airs tonight at 10 on Channel 22 and at 11 on Channel 26, is a somber and sobering appraisal of the integration of contemporary American schools.
Sometimes jumpy, sometimes poignant, the hour-long film features interviews with students, teachers, parents and others whose lives have -- and have not -- been touched by Brown v. Board of Education. The case was decided by the Supreme Court on May 17, 1954. The decision was designed to end segregation in America's public schools.
"Beyond Brown" is directed by Stanley Nelson, a MacArthur Fellow who won an Emmy last year for "The Murder of Emmett Till." The reporting in that documentary film led the Justice Department to announce this week that it will assist in a new investigation into the 1955 murder of the young black boy in Mississippi.
The upshot of the new film: According to UCLA education professor Jeannie Oakes, "In the 50 years since Brown, I think the Supreme Court could not possibly have predicted how resistant Americans would be to desegregation and how the institutions would find ways to resegregate students."
The documentary, which is narrated by actor Joe Morton, points out the huge disparities in public education -- through gifted-and-talented programs, increased funding in affluent suburbs and standardized testing that doesn't take cultural discrepancies into account.
It opens with a historic look at the dreadful circumstances -- including vandalized, hand-me-down textbooks and a maggot-infested bathroom -- that spurred the students of R.R. Moton High, an all-black public high school in Prince Edward County, to walk out in 1951 and take the matter to court. That case, and four others, became collectively known as Brown v. Board of Education.
After the separate-but-equal laws were struck down by the court, Prince Edward County closed all of its public schools in 1959 rather than integrate. This was an early warning flare that change in the classroom would not come easily. In 1964, the schools were ordered reopened.
The film's focus then shifts to present-day, still-resistant-to-change America. "Segregation is a very big issue today," writer Luis Rodriguez tells students at North Hollywood High School in California. Using a bar chart, Rodriguez points out that though the school's population is 70 percent Latino, only 11 percent of the students in the school's magnet program are Latino.
Like a Greek chorus, various characters appear in the film and deliver grim observations. Wade J. Henderson, executive director of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, says, "The value of integration to provide a better understanding of who we are has been lost to us."
Feeling blue? The story gets sadder. In another segment, the cameras follow a young white couple who are moving from New York to the suburbs so their children will have better schools. The higher a locale's home values and property taxes, the narrator explains, the more money is funneled to public education. Inevitably, public schools such as Farragut Middle School in Westchester County will be better funded than those in many parts of Manhattan.
Juxtaposed against the educational Eden of Farragut's large, sunny rooms and sparkling wireless computers is Public School 173 in New York, where Rachel Brickman teaches second grade. She has to buy her own materials to create the lowest-of-tech learning games for her classes.
"Not everyone can escape to suburbia," says one PS 173 mom, speaking in Spanish. "We can't move because of our economic situation."
She adds: "I don't think it's fair that someone should have to move from a place for a better school."
There are other provocative profiles, such as one of a voluntary integration program in the Boston suburbs. But one of the most wrenching moments comes from Orlando, where Ashley Johnson, an honor student, failed one of Florida's standardized tests as a senior and lost her college scholarship. She is now a ride operator at the Universal Studios theme park. In a close-up shot, tears stream from her puzzled eyes and she talks of contemplating suicide.
There are probably a dozen more documentaries to be made about the subjects covered in "Beyond Brown." Nelson tries to do too much. But as students, teachers, parents and historians point out, there is much to do.
James H. Cone, a New York theologian, gets in the last words. Half a century after Brown, he says, there is still "a gap between what is and what ought to be."

HNN - 5/12/2004

National Security Archive Update, May 12, 2004

For more information:
Thomas Blanton - 202/994-7000
Peter Kornbluh - 202/994-7116


Washington D.C. May 12, 2004: CIA interrogation manuals written in the 1960s and 1980s described "coercive techniques" such as those used to mistreat detainees at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, according to the declassified documents posted today by the National Security Archive. The Archive also posted a secret 1992 report written for then Secretary of Defense Richard Cheney warning that U.S. Army intelligence manuals that incorporated the earlier work of the CIA for training Latin American military officers in interrogation and counterintelligence techniques contained "offensive and objectionable material" that "undermines U.S. credibility, and could result in significant embarrassment."

The two CIA manuals, "Human Resource Exploitation Training Manual-1983" and "KUBARK Counterintelligence Interrogation-July 1963," were originally obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by the Baltimore Sun in 1997. The KUBARK manual includes a detailed section on "The Coercive Counterintelligence Interrogation of Resistant Sources," with concrete assessments on employing "Threats and Fear," "Pain," and "Debility." The language of the 1983 "Exploitation" manual drew heavily on the language of the earlier manual, as well as on Army Intelligence field manuals from the mid 1960s generated by "Project X"--a military effort to create training guides drawn from counterinsurgency experience in Vietnam.

Recommendations on prisoner interrogation included the threat of violence and deprivation and noted that no threat should be made unless the questioner "has approval to carry out the threat." The interrogator "is able to manipulate the subject's environment," the 1983 manual states, "to create unpleasant or intolerable situation, to disrupt patterns of time, space, and sensory perception."

After Congress began investigating reports of Central American atrocities in the mid 1980s, particularly in Honduras, the CIA's "Human Resource Exploitation" manual was hand edited to alter passages that appeared to advocate coercion and stress techniques to be used on prisoners. CIA officials attached a new prologue page on the manual stating: "The use of force, mental torture, threats, insults or exposure to inhumane treatment of any kind as an aid to interrogation is prohibited by law, both international and domestic; it is neither authorized nor condoned"--making it clear that authorities were well aware these abusive practices were illegal and immoral, even as they continued then and now.

Indeed, similar material had already been incorporated into seven Spanish-language training guides. More than a thousand copies of these manuals were distributed for use in countries such as El Salvador, Guatemala, Ecuador and Peru, and at the School of the Americas between 1987 and 1991. An inquiry was triggered in mid 1991 when the Southern Command evaluated the manuals for use in expanding military support programs in Colombia.

In March 1992 Cheney received an investigative report on "Improper Material in Spanish-Language Intelligence Training Manuals." Classified SECRET, the report noted that five of the seven manuals "contained language and statements in violation of legal, regulatory or policy prohibitions" and recommended they be recalled. The memo is stamped: "SECDEF HAS SEEN."

The Archive also posted a declassified memorandum of conversation with a Southern Command officer, Major Victor Tise, who was responsible for assembling the Latin American manuals at School of the Americas for counterintelligence training in 1982. Tise stated that the manuals had been forwarded to DOD headquarters for clearance "and came back approved but UNCHANGED." (Emphasis in original)

Follow the link below to view the documents:

THE NATIONAL SECURITY ARCHIVE is an independent non-governmental research institute and library located at The George Washington University in Washington, D.C. The Archive collects and publishes declassified documents acquired through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). A tax-exempt public charity, the Archive receives no U.S. government funding; its budget is supported by publication royalties and donations from foundations and individuals.
The National Security Archive does not and will never share the names or e-mail addresses of its subscribers with any other organization. Once a year, we will write you and ask for your financial support. We may also ask you for your ideas for Freedom of Information requests, documentation projects, or other issues that the Archive should take on. We would welcome your input, and any information you care to share with us about your special interests. But we do not sell or rent any information about subscribers to any other party.
You may leave the list at any time by sending a "SIGNOFF NSARCHIVE" command to .
You can also unsubscribe from the list anytime by using the following link:

HNN - 5/12/2004

May 12, 2004
Contact: Joya Wesley

Phone: (336) 275-5953

Fax: (336) 230- 2428



GREENSBORO, N.C. – The Greensboro Truth & Community Reconciliation Project (GTCRP) will swear in a Truth and Reconciliation Commission, the first of its kind in the United States, at 10:30 a.m. Saturday, June 12, at The Depot, 236 E. Washington St.

U. S. Rep. Mel Watt (D-N.C.), former Greensboro Mayor Carolyn Allen and District Court Judge Lawrence McSwain will officiate the historic public ceremony. The swearing-in is a milestone in the process designed to transform an ugly chapter in one city’s history into lessons upon which understanding, healing, forgiveness and true connections can be forged.

Modeled on truth-seeking efforts in South Africa, Peru and elsewhere, the Greensboro project hopes to become a model that other American communities can use to address unresolved injustice in their own histories. Initiated by survivors, the GTCRP has grown and is now being conducted by a task force of diverse residents who believe an unhealed wound is hurting the city’s human relations.

On Nov. 3, 1979, members of the Ku Klux Klan and American Nazi Party killed five people and wounded ten others gathered in Greensboro for a march for racial, social and economic justice organized by the Worker’s Viewpoint Organization (later known as the Communist Worker’s Party).

Despite the fact that four TV crews captured the killings on film, the shooters were twice acquitted of any wrongdoing. In a third trial, a federal civil trial, Klansmen, Nazis and members of the Greensboro Police Department were found jointly liable for one of the deaths.

Although the City of Greensboro paid that $350,000 civil judgment on behalf of all three defendant groups, it has never apologized or publicly acknowledged any wrongdoing. Distrust and anger linger, simmering below the surface.

From more than 70 nominations, an independent panel representing a broad array of Greensboro’s social, religious and political sectors worked to select seven commissioners recognized for their integrity. Once seated, they will review documents and hear testimony to determine the truth, causes and consequences of what happened, produce a report, then suggest ways that both the individuals involved and the entire city can reconcile and heal.

The International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ), an organization founded by the deputy chairman of the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission, is serving as a consultant to the GTCRP, as it has in similar efforts in nations including Peru, Colombia, Guatemala and Sierra Leone.

HNN - 5/11/2004

‘The Outbreak of War: New Thoughts on 1914’

8-10 September 2004

On the 90th anniversary of the outbreak of the First World War the Scottish Centre for War Studies (University of Glasgow) and the Open University (Milton Keynes) are organising a three-day conference to address the war’s origins, a question that remains as contested as ever. We have a full and exciting programme with leading experts in the field presenting their latest research and new evidence. While we currently cannot accept any more papers, the format of the event deliberately includes a great deal of time for discussion. We very much would like to encourage any one who is interested to attend the event and contribute to the conference in this way.

The conference will be held from 8-10 September 2004 at the University of Glasgow. Full conference fees are £75, and reduced fees (students) £50 for which a cheque should be made payable to the University of Glasgow and send to the address below. The registration and payments deadline is August 13th 2004. Late registrations will be accepted but there will be an additional £10 charge to the fees. If you wish to be kept informed on changes relating to our conference you can sign up for our email list. If you would like to be added to our email list, if you wish to receive a registration form, additional information or have questions please do not hesitate to contact our secretary Ms Natasja de Bruijn at warstudies@arts.gla.ac.uk.

The conference committee is not in a position to organise travel or accommodation for attendees, but an information leaflet is available from Ms de Bruijn at warstudies@arts.gla.ac.uk which provides some tips, website addresses and telephone numbers to help you organise your trip.

We look forward to seeing you in September!

Phillips O’Brien Annika Mombauer

Cheques made payable to the University of Glasgow should be send to:

Ms Natasja de Bruijn
‘The Outbreak of War’
Scottish Centre for War Studies
2 University Gardens
G12 8QQ
Email (for registration forms and inquiries only): warstudies@arts.gla.ac.uk

Kenneth T. Tellis - 5/9/2004

I am always puzzled when a story gets out of hand and someone attempting to make heros of their own countrymen create new stories of unknown heros. There were claims that the Red Baron Manfred Von Richtofen the German ace was shot down by a Canadian pilot. When leter it turns out that he was killed by a Pvt. Evans who mache-gunnned the Baron's plane as it was diving to avoid being hit from the rear by the Canadian pilot, which turns out to be the real story. Thus it was the Australian Pvt. Evans who was responible for Manfred Richotfen's death and not the Canadianpilot who claimedhe was You still will not find a Canadian who admits that their pilot did not kill the Red Baron. Alas, nationalism takes takes a front row seat and reality is no where to be seen.

Even the story of Louis Riel, who lead the North-West Rebellion in Manitoba, who was a school-teacher and sheriff in a small town in Minnesota, and who became an American citizen is still not recognized as an American in Canada, and that is what Canadian nationalism is about. They want to doctor history and look good. Of coursewhy should reality matter, where national pride is concerned.

Kenneth T. Tellis - 5/8/2004

Will the Top Secret Study of Vietnam intelligence ever reveal the truth of all the War Crimes committed there?

In My Lai the Team that went with Lieut. William Calley,Jr. was not exposed for a long time and even then real justice was missing. 500 Vietnamese old men, women and children including babes in arms died as a result of Calley's actions. This was the same amont of people who were by the Waffen SS in the village of Lidice (Liditz) , Czechoslovakia on June 10, 1942. So in fact My Lai was the Lidice of Vietnam.

Then there was the seven US Navy SEALS led by Bob Kerrey that descended on the peaceful village of Thanh Phong in Vietnam and murdered every living thing they could find. It did not matter to these War Criminals, because they thought that it were on a turkey-shoot. Every member of US Navy SEAL team that killed those 21 civilians at Thanh Phong got the Navy Medal for his War Crime.

Now about the Tiger Force of the US 101st Airborne Division that ran amok for seven long months in the South Highlands and killed countless Vietnamese civilians. They usually stalked them and then killed them as if they were on an African safari. They then then cut off the ears of their victims and string them round their necks as a souvenir. Even a little babe's head was severed from the neck to mount on a jeep antenna. Again there was no come-back. It took 30 long years for the war crimes of these 45 maniacs to be exposed. The US government did not prefer changes against any of these War Criminals, saying that 30 years had passed and it was too late to lay charges. Why then does the US hunt Gernan War Criminals, when World War two is now 59 old? Is there a different statute of limitations for US War Criminals than those from other countries?

Now we arrive at Abu Ghraib prison, Iraq. Why was not one US officer aware of the War Crimes being committed there? Were they all asleep on the job, or was it something that was ordered by US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld because he felt Americans were superior? There is no question that in this case Donald Rumsfeld is the WAR CRIMINAL and should be tried as one. There can be no excuse for the goings-on at Abu Ghraib and elsewhere in Iraq. Severe action must be taken against all those responsible, including Donald Rumsfeld himself.

HNN - 5/7/2004

The Irish Times

May 4, 2004


LENGTH: 372 words

HEADLINE: Fortress find 'perhaps most significant in a century'


The discovery of a 1,200-year-old Viking fortress at Woodstown, near Waterford city, has been hailed by a leading historian as "the most significant new find in Viking studies in perhaps a century".

Prof Donnchadh O Corrain, professor of medieval studies at University College Cork, said the site - home to the largest known Viking river camp, or longphort, in Ireland - was "of international importance".

Archaeologists have unearthed materials used in ship-building during the Viking raids of the mid-ninth century. The remains of a Viking warrior armed with a spear, a sword and a pin have also been recovered.

Prof O Corrain said there was a "high possibility" the body belonged to a Danish chieftain called Rothlaibh, or Rodulf, who has a fort named after him at Dunrally, Co Laois.

He said the warrior had evidently been given a pagan burial, adding "there may be 50 graves in there. We do not know. But if there is one there is the possibility of there being very many more."

The longphort, which dates from 850-870, was believed to have been used as the command headquarters of Rothlaibh who sent raiding parties from Waterford up the Barrow, Nore and Suir rivers. The fortress dates from the second wave of Viking invasions, more than 50 years after the first recorded Viking raid in Ireland at Rathlin Island off the coast of Antrim.

Some historians believe Rothlaibh was the son of Harold, a former king of Denmark who had been expelled from Denmark in 827. According to one theory, Rothlaibh, or Rodulf, left Ireland in or around 862 to lead a group of Vikings on the River Rhine.

Prof O Corrain said the Woodstown longphort may have been a base not just for ship-building, but for the trading of slaves. Among the 350 items discovered are weights, measures, locks, chains, nails and a decorative figurine.

Only a small number of longphorts have been discovered in Ireland, most notably at Dunrally; Athlunkard, Co Clare; and Annagassan, Co Louth. None are said to be on the same scale as the Woodstown site, which predates Waterford city.

Prof O Corrain added: "This site is as important as Wood Quay in its own way. It is a major site, not just of Irish but of international consequence."

HNN - 5/6/2004


P.O. Box 5263, Amman, JORDAN
Tel. (home): 011 962-6-593-1915
Tel. (mobile): (079) 5630-977
Fax: 962-6-5820-129
E-mail: allhistoryislocal@yahoo.com


Languages: Fluent English, Arabic and French.


Ph.D., Modern Middle Eastern History, University of California at Los Angeles, 1986. (Dissertation: “The Development of the Regional Market in Iraq and the Northern Gulf.”)

M.A., Modern Middle Eastern History, University of California, 1979.

M.L.S, Library and Information Science, Syracuse University, 1975.

B.A., European History, Beirut University College (now the Lebanese American University), 1972.

Professional Experience:

2004-2006: Resident Director and Scholar-in-Residence, The American Academic Research Institute in Iraq (TAARII), presently situated in Amman, Jordan.

2002-2004: Consultant on Iraq, Konrad Adenauer Foundation, Amman, Jordan.

1998-2002: Fellow, Royal Institute for Inter-Faith Studies, Amman, Jordan.
1996-1998: Researcher, Interfaith and Cultural Affairs, Office of the Crown Prince of Jordan.

1990-1993: Visiting Professor, History Department/Center for Contemporary Arab Studies, Georgetown University, Washington, D.C.

Service to the Academic Community:

Three terms as member of the Editorial Board, International Journal of Middle East Studies (1999-2002, 2002-2007).


Awarded an SSRC Postdoctoral Fellowship in 1988-90 to revise my dissertation for publication.


Courses Taught (Georgetown):

Undergraduate: Survey of the Middle East in the Nineteenth Century, Survey of Arab Culture, Survey of World History, Survey of the History of the Middle East in the Twentieth Century.

Graduate: Colloquium on the History of Iraq and Syria, Colloquium on the Middle Eastern State, Colloquium on Arab Historiography, Colloquium on the History of Yemen and Oman, Colloquium on the History of Technology in the Middle East, Colloquium on the History and Politics of Saudi Arabia.


Books and Monographs:

The Politics of Regional Trade in Iraq, Arabia and the Gulf, 1745-1900 (State University of New York Press, 1997).
A Brief History of Iraq ( Facts on File, forthcoming).
Co-edited book with Magnus Bernhardsson. Identity, Nation and State in Iraq (under review, Palgrave-Macmillan).



“ Iraqi Universities and Libraries: One Year After the Occupation” in MESA Bulletin, vol.38, no.1, June 2004.

“ Why was the Iraqi Endowments Ministry abolished?”, Daily Star (Beirut), September 20, 2003.

“ In the Groves of Academe”, Daily Star (Beirut), July 31, 2003.

“Opening the Doors: Intellectual Life and Academic Conditions in
Post-War Baghdad” (Co-author, along with by Keith Watenpaugh, Edouard Metenier and Jens Hanssen), June 15, 2003.
Available on-line at:
and at the IFLANET  site[International Association of
Library Associations and Institutions]

““Wahhabi” Influences, Salafi Responses: Shaikh Mahmud Shukri and the Iraqi Salafi Movement, 1745–1930” in  Journal of Islamic Studies, vol.14, no.2, May 2003.

“Negotiating Nationhood on the Net: The Case of the Turcomans and Assyrians of Iraq,” in Kyra Landzelius, ed., Going Native on the Net: Indigenous CyberActivism and Virtual Diasporas over the World Wide Web (Routledge, forthcoming).

“The Question of the ‘Artificiality’ of Iraq as a Nation-State,” in Shams Inati, ed., Iraq: Politics, Culture and Society (Promotheus Press, 2003).

“Islamic Universalism and the Construction of Regional Identity in Turn-of-the-Century Basra: Shaikh Ibrahim al-Haidari’s Book Revisited,” in  Laila Fawaz, ed., European Modernity and Cultural Difference from the Mediterranean Sea to the Indian Ocean, 1890s-1920s (Columbia University Press, 2002).

“Culture and Identity in the Work of an Historian of Ottoman Basra,” ISIM Newsletter (Leiden, The Netherlands) 3 (2002).

“Writing for an Arab Internet Portal,” online at Georgetown University’s Arab Information Project (see <www.georgetown.edu/research/arabtech/fattah.html>), posted October 2000.

“Representations of Self and the Other in Two Iraqi Travelogues of the Ottoman Period,” International Journal of Middle East Studies 30 (February 1998).

“A Short History of Kuwait,” in Phyllis Bennis and Roger Moushabeck, eds., Beyond The Storm : A Gulf Crisis Reader (Olive Branch Press, 1991).

“The Politics of the Grain Trade in Iraq, c.1840-1917,” New Perspectives on Turkey, nos. 5-6 (Fall 1991).

Book Reviews:

In International Journal of Middle East Studies; Bulletin of the Royal Institute for Inter-Faith Studies (Amman); The Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History; The Middle East Journal; Al-Nadwah (Amman); and Jusur: The UCLA Journal of Middle Eastern History.

Papers at Conferences:

“Identity and Difference in the Sunni historiography of Eighteenth and Nineteenth Century Iraq”, European International University, Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, Mediterranean Program, Sixth Mediterranean Social and Political Research Meeting, Montecatini Terme, 16 – 20 March 2005.

“A Report on the Higher Education and Culture Sectors in Postwar Iraq”, Conference on Postwar Iraq organized by the Konrad Adenauer Foundation and the Centre for European Integration (ZEI), Brussels, Belguim, July 2003 .

“The Impact of the Wahhabi Movement on Sunni salafi Circles in Iraq,” presented at the Second Mediterranean Social and Political Research Meeting (Robert Schuman Center for Advanced Studies, European International University), Florence, Italy, March 2001.

“The Contribution of Father Anastase Marie al-Karmali to Iraq’s Literary Awakening   in the Early Twentieth Century,” presented at the conference on Muslim Civilization: The Non-Muslim Dimension, Amman, Jordan, 1997.

“Alienation and Identity among Scholar-Sojourners from Ottoman Iraq,” presented at the annual MESA conference in Phoenix, Arizona (November 1995).

“The Concept of the Frontier in Iraqi Historiography, c.1700-1880,” presented at the annual MESA conference in Portland, Oregon (October/November 1992).

“The Politics of Hunger in Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Century Iraq and the Gulf, 1840-1914,” presented at the annual AHA conference, Washington, D.C. (December 1987).

“Muslims or Kuffar? A Critique of the Regional Historiography of the Wahhabi Movement in the Late Eighteenth and Early Nineteenth Centuries,” presented at the Oriental Institute, University of Chicago (January 1987).

HNN - 5/6/2004

National Security Archive Update, May 6, 2004


State's Intelligence Bureau Warned Kennedy & Johnson on Vietnam; INR's Small Staff More Often Right than Larger Intelligence Community; Pessimism and Dissents May Have Helped Limit Escalation; Former Director Identifies "Public Hawk/Private Dove" Phenomenon

Vietnam Experience Offers Lessons for Iraq, Says Archive Director;
Needed: More Dissents and Debates, Less Secrecy and Centralization

For more information:
Thomas Blanton - 202/994-7000


Washington, D.C., May 6, 2004 - A Top Secret 1969 study of U.S. intelligence performance during the Vietnam War shows pessimists and dissenters were largely vindicated by history, but were unable to persuade top officials to change policies, according to the newly declassified text obtained under the Freedom of Information Act and posted today on the Web by the National Security Archive at George Washington University.

Touted by TIME Magazine in 1971 as the State Department equivalent of the "Pentagon Papers," the 596-page study summarizes and critiques the Vietnam analysis produced by State's Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR) from 1961 through 1968, in the context of intelligence community debates (and frequent INR dissents) over progress in the Vietnam War. Classified Top Secret, the study was partially released in November 2003 as the result of Freedom of Information requests by Professor Edwin Moise (Clemson University) and the National Security Archive; a final missing section was released last week as a result of the Archive's appeal, although a number of questionable deletions remain.

Then-INR director Thomas Hughes, who commissioned the study, comments in his retrospective preface for today's posting: "INR's analysis on Vietnam stood out as tenaciously pessimistic from 1963 on, whether the question was the viability of the successive Saigon regimes, the Pentagon's statistical underestimation of enemy strength, the ultimate ineffectiveness of bombing the North, the persistence of the North Vietnamese and the Vietcong, or the danger of Chinese intervention." Mr. Hughes contrasts INR's consistency with that "of leading actors who were hawks by day and doves by night." Mr. Hughes laments that "while we were heeded, we were unable to persuade, sway, or prevail when it came to the ultimate decisions."

Archive senior fellow John Prados, who edited the Archive's forthcoming documentary collection on Vietnam, gives INR more credit in his introduction, calling the Bureau "the mouse that roared." Dr. Prados concludes that INR "helped hone U.S. intelligence conclusions, called attention to the poor data and inadequate intelligence collection taking place in Vietnam, saved the CIA and other agencies from going even farther out on a limb than they climbed, and ... also helped limit the war by contributing to the reluctance of top officials to escalate too far."

Archive director Thomas Blanton comments in his overview of the posting that "Lessons from the Vietnam experience run directly counter to today's reform proposals for the U.S. intelligence community. Instead of a centralized 'czar,' this history suggests we need a multiplicity of competing agencies and analyses. Instead of policymakers who cherry-pick only the intelligence they want to hear, we need to encourage dissents and force closer examination of contrary findings. Instead of covering up with the cloak of secrecy, we need to open the insider critiques in real time and enrich the public debate."

Earlier this week Washington Post columnist David Ignatius called INR "one of Washington's hidden jewels" in a story praising the bureau's track record on the war in Iraq. That article is available here:


The posting today includes all summary, analysis and critique sections of the 596-page study, leaving only the 265-page section of document source excerpts for future publication.

Please use the following link:

THE NATIONAL SECURITY ARCHIVE is an independent non-governmental research institute and library located at The George Washington University in Washington, D.C. The Archive collects and publishes declassified documents acquired through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). A tax-exempt public charity, the Archive receives no U.S. government funding; its budget is supported by publication royalties and donations from foundations and individuals.
The National Security Archive does not and will never share the names or e-mail addresses of its subscribers with any other organization. Once a year, we will write you and ask for your financial support. We may also ask you for your ideas for Freedom of Information requests, documentation projects, or other issues that the Archive should take on. We would welcome your input, and any information you care to share with us about your special interests. But we do not sell or rent any information about subscribers to any other party.
You may leave the list at any time by sending a "SIGNOFF NSARCHIVE" command to .
You can also unsubscribe from the list anytime by using the following link:

HNN - 5/6/2004

NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE (Vol. 10, #19; 6 May 2004) by Bruce Craig (editor) rbcraig@historycoalition.org> National Coalition for History (NCH) Website http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch

1. Representatives of Archives and History Organizations Meet With Senate
Staff on Archivist Position -- Issue Call for General Oversight Hearing
2. Smithsonian Major Donor Flees to Cuba
3. Report: NEH "We the People" Forum on Colonial and Founding Period History
4. Clinton Presidential Library Head Named
5. Bits & Bytes: Survey Finds Faculty Salaries Up Slightly; Bush Public
Papers 2001 Volume; Data Collection for Archives Census Begins; Passing of USDA Historian Wayne D. Rasmussen
6. Articles of Interest: "Iran Professor Will Not Appeal Sentence,"
(Associated Press 4 May 2004)

Chair) and Joseph I. Lieberman (D-CT; Ranking Member) of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee that will be considering the nomination of historian Allen Weinstein as Archivist of the United States, on 5 May representatives of history and archival organizations met with Senate staff to discuss the confirmation process and the qualifications of the nominee. The meeting was the first step in the Congressional recommendation that representatives of the history and archives communities be "consulted" regarding the Archivist of the U.S.

Representing the archival and history communities were Tim Ericson (Society of American Archivists), Bruce Craig (National Coalition for History), Lee Formwalt (Organization of American Historians), Arnita Jones (American Historical Association), and Karl Niederer (Council of State Historical Records Coordinators). Attending the meeting on behalf of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee were representatives of Senators Collins and Lieberman as well as staff for Senators Richard J. Durbin (D-IL), Carl Levin (D-D-MI), and Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ).

During the meeting, the representatives of the archival and history organizations suggested that the committee consider establishing a new procedural precedent for the confirmation process by holding a general oversight hearing on the management of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) prior to a confirmation hearing each time a new Archivist is to take office. Since such general oversight hearings are rare events (no such hearing has been conducted by the Senate in at least a decade and neither the House nor Senate Appropriations committees regularly assess the operating programs of NARA during the annual appropriations cycle), conducting such a hearing prior to confirming a new Archivist would provide the committee with valuable information and insights about the changing needs and priorities of NARA.

The representatives suggested the oversight hearing should include an assessment of progress and problems in carrying out the NARA Strategic Plan, as well as an assessment of specific programmatic and activity centers such as digitization and electronic records, documentary acquisition and access, administration of the Presidential Records Act
(PRA) and presidential libraries, the National Historical Publications and Records Commission (NHPRC), the administration of the regional archives and records centers, public outreach programs, and internal management, staffing, and training practices. Such a hearing conducted prior to the confirmation hearing would serve to educate both the committee and the nominee of the needs of the archives when a new archivist takes the helm.
Committee staff agreed to take the recommendation under advisement and agreed to discuss the suggestion with the senators.

The meeting also included a frank and open discussion of a number of questions and issues that the representatives recommended the committee address in its examination of the qualifications of the nominee. Two "statements" were advanced to the committee last week (see "Archives and History Organizations Appeal to Senate to Initiate "Consultation" On Archivist Position" in NCH Washington Update, Vol. 10, #18; 28 April 2004)
-- one detailing specific questions that ought to be asked of the nominee, and a second outlining selection criteria for the Archivist position. The two statements were jointly prepared by The Society of American Archivists, The National Association of Government Archives and Records Administrators, and The Council of State Historical Records Coordinators and were presented to committee staff last week for their consideration.

Following the meeting Senate staff stated they would be back in touch with the representatives of the professions in an effort to continue the consultation process.

2. SMITHSONIAN MAJOR DONOR FLEES TO CUBA Herbert Axelrod, a 76-year old pet-products and publishing tycoon and philanthropist known for his charitable donations to cultural institutions including the Smithsonian Institution's (SI) National Museum of American History (NMAH), has fled to Cuba to avoid tax fraud charges. His flight puts on hold a Smithsonian plan to rename the NMAH Hall of Musical Instruments in his honor and has raised the eyebrows of several members of Congress about the SI's relationship with donors.

According to press reports, a federal judge issued an arrest warrant for the multi-millionaire after he failed to show up for an arraignment where he was to enter a plea regarding an allegation that he conspired to use Swiss bank accounts to hide income from the Internal Revenue Service. Axelrod was also to answer charges that he filed a false tax return. A spokesperson for Axelrod confirmed that his client indeed did not show up at the arraignment and instead sailed his yacht to Cuba. While Axelrod is now an international fugitive, it is unclear whether he will ever be brought to justice (he faces up to five years in prison if
convicted) since Cuba does not have an extradition treaty with the United States.

Hailed as one of the greatest arts benefactors, Axelrod, is considered a flamboyant, eccentric, and mercurial figure in philanthropist circles. By some estimates he has contributed over $100-million to various recognized charities, including millions to the Smithsonian.

Axelrod's dealings with the Smithsonian began in 1955 when he co-authored "The Handbook of Tropical Aquarium Fishes" with a well-know Smithsonian scientist. However, the book was illustrated with gorgeous color plates apparently copied from another book. Several years later Axelrod donated
1.5 million to the National Museum of Natural History's Division of Fishes.

Axelrod's largest contributions to the SI have directly benefited NMAH musical instrument preservation programs and performing arts funds. He donated four inlaid Stradivarius instruments (Axelrod declared a $50 million value for tax purposes, a figure that some independent appraisers consider "preposterous" and assess their true value at under $15 million). In appreciation for his gifts, the museum's chamber players were officially renamed the Axelrod String Quartet.

Axelrod also donated another quartet of instruments (the Amati Quartet) and made several large cash contributions to endow the care/maintenance of the instruments he donated to the SI. In toto he has donated over $1.25 million to support the Smithsonian Chamber Music program. In appreciation for all his contributions on behalf of musical heritage, the Smithsonian Board of Regents recently proposed to name the NMAH Hall of Musical Instruments for him. But now, according to a Smithsonian spokesperson, "Any action on the naming is on hold until the issues are resolved in the legal arena."

Large tax-deductible gifts such as those claimed by Axelrod are now also the subject of a Congressional investigation. Senator Charles E. Grassley (R-IA), chair of the Senate Finance Committee, has sent a letter to the Smithsonian demanding the Institution justify the $50 million valuation. The senator has also requested copies of all documents related to the gift. The SI, however, in accordance with the policies of virtually every major museum, never placed a valuation on any of the Axelrod gifts or endorsed his appraisal figure.

Institutions accepting donations have no duty to establish the value of such donations -- that duty is exclusively the responsibility of the donor and his/her tax preparer. Museums have long fought IRS proposals that accepting institutions should be held accountable should a major donor fraudulently establish an excessively high valuation for a donated item.
Nevertheless, Grassley is troubled that the SI "may be turning a blind eye to tax mischief" and plans on holding hearings on the regulation of charitable donations in coming months.

3. REPORT: NEH "WE THE PEOPLE" FORUM ON COLONIAL AND FOUNDING PERIOD HISTORY On 30 April 2004, the "We the People" program office of the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) conducted a by-invitation forum on the subject of American history, culture, and ideas during the colonial and founding periods. The objectives of the event were to present a succinct "state of the field" assessment of these historical periods, and to foster a dialogue between scholars and NEH staff in order to understand the research agendas and concerns of the various humanities communities.

Nearly 60 participants and NEH staff were welcomed by NEH Chair Bruce Cole who delivered opening remarks and introduced the keynote speaker. A series of panel presentations followed. They focused on three generalized areas:
political history and ideas; social and economic history; and literature, religion, and culture.

Pauline Maier, William R. Kenan, Jr. Professor of American History at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, delivered the keynote address. Maier argued that there were significant disjunctions between the fields of American colonial and revolutionary history. She said that scholars studying colonial America tend to emphasize different themes than do those studying the revolutionary and early national eras. She lamented that in spite of the existence of exciting new documentary evidence and sources, there are few new bold interpretations and the fields are moribund in old interpretations and arguments. She challenged scholars "to use the freedom that tenure provides...to follow your nose" and explore new research and interpretive avenues.

Following Maier's thoughtful setting of the stage, renowned specialists presented their reflections on the state of the field in the three broad arenas of assessment selected by the NEH. Speakers addressed what they considered major research issues and gaps in the literature relating to both the colonial and founding periods. The presentations were reflective of a diversity of scholarly opinion. Following each of the formal panel presentations there was ample time for open dialogue and discussion between panelists and audience participants.

This forum is the first in what the NEH hopes will be a program fostering "continuing dialogue" between resource specialists. Preliminary plans are now being laid for the next forum in which inside sources report several topics under active consideration include the Civil War era, and the World War II era.

4. CLINTON PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARY HEAD NAMED On 5 May, Archivist of the United States John W. Carlin announced the selection of David E. Alsobrook as Director of the William J. Clinton Presidential Library. The appointment is effective immediately. According to Carlin, "Alsobrook has the experience, the credentials, and temperament needed to guide and direct this library."

Alsobrook, who received a Ph.D. in U.S. history from Auburn University, brings 27 years of archival experience working with presidential records.
Since August 2000, he has served as the Director of the Clinton Presidential Materials Project where he oversaw the move of all of the presidential materials from the White House to a temporary facility in Little Rock, Arkansas. Previously, he directed the transition of the Bush presidential materials from the White House to temporary space in Texas and then to the Bush Presidential Library. In 1997, he was selected as Director of the Bush Presidential Library. Alsobrook was also the liaison for the National Archives at the Carter White House and then spent ten years as the supervisory archivist at the Carter Library in Atlanta, Georgia. Prior to coming to the Carter Library, he served as an archivist with the Auburn University Archives and the Alabama Department of Archives and History.

The William J. Clinton Presidential Library will be the 11th presidential library operated by the National Archives and Records Administration. The new library, which will be dedicated on 18 November 2004, is located in the William Jefferson Clinton Presidential Park in Little Rock, Arkansas. The library will house the records of the Clinton Presidency, including more than 75 million pages of official and personal papers, 1,850,000 photographs, and 75,000 presidential gifts. These primary sources document Clinton's eight years as president. The 68,698 square foot facility will be both a major research institution and a museum, showcasing a permanent exhibit as well as temporary exhibits and public programs designed to better inform visitors of the programs and policies of the Clinton presidency.

Item #1 -- Survey Finds Faculty Salaries Up Slightly: According to the annual survey of faculty-member salaries based on input from 793 colleges and universities and prepared by the College and University Professional Association for Human Resources, law professors continue to be the best paid faculty members at four-year academic institutions. As in the salary report recently issued by the American Association of University Professors (see "Faculty Salary Increases -- Lowest in 30 Years Says AAUP Report" NCH Washington Update, Vol. 10 #17, 23 April 2004) the small rise in salaries is attributed to budget cuts and squeezes at public institutions. Unlike the AAUP report, the new study assesses salaries by discipline. Lowest paid disciplines are English, nursing, and the performing arts which average less than $55,000 per year. History professors make on average $60,646, with those employed in private institutions making slightly more – $62,488. Average salaries of faculty members represented by a union are $66,260; those not part of a union make an average of $62,800. For the report tap into the CUPA-HR website at http://cupahr.org .

Item #2 -- Bush Public Papers 2001 Volume: The National Archives and Records Administration has released the second volume of the "Public Papers of President George W. Bush, 2001." The 888-page hard-back volume was compiled by the Office of the Federal Register and covers the period 1 July to 31 December 2001. It contains the text of public speeches, news conferences, messages and statements, and official communications to Congress. Order Stock No. 069-000-00149 from the Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office ($47.00). Charge orders may be placed through the GPO order desk at (202) 512-1800.

Item #3 -- Data Collection for Archives Census Begins: The Society of American Archivists (SAA) reports that the first official invitations to participate in the A*CENSUS survey of archival professionals were mailed 30 April 2004 to the nearly 12,000 individual names collected from archival associations, education providers, and other sources. Those on the mailing
list should receive the A*CENSUS Survey letter this week. On
approximately 7-8 May everyone on the SAA list for whom an email address exists (about 80% of the total) can also expect to receive a follow-up, personalized e-mail from MSI, the survey firm that is managing the data collection. At the end of May, a paper version of the survey form will be mailed to those individuals for whom the SAA did not have an e-mail address. To keep costs down and make it economically feasible to reach as many potential respondents as possible, the SAA encourages survey participants to complete the A*CENSUS survey on the web if at all possible. For additional information about the A*CENSUS, visit the SAA website at: http://www.archivists.org/a-census/ .

Item #4 -- Passing of USDA Historian Wayne D. Rasmussen: A well-known and influential figure in the public history movement died 30 April 2004 at the age of 89 of Parkinson's disease at his home in Concord, Massachusetts. Wayne David Rasmussen, whose career began in 1937 as a records clerk in the Agriculture Department, spanned decades and included years of service as chief historian of that department. Rasmussen was a pioneer in the fledgling public history movement. He served as president of the Agricultural History Society; the Association for Living History, Farm and Agricultural Museums; and the Society for History in the Federal Government. Rasmussen wrote several books and was awarded many history-related awards including virtually every honor that can be bestowed on an individual employed by the Agriculture Department. His legacy will long be remembered.

One article this week: In "Iran Professor Will Not Appeal Sentence," the Associated Press (New York Times 4 May 2004) reports that a university history professor sentenced to death for criticizing clerical rule will not appeal a death sentence. For the report tap into http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Iran-Death-Sentence.html .

The National Coalition for History invites you to subscribe to this FREE weekly newsletter! You are also encouraged to redistribute the NCH Washington Updates to colleagues, friends, teachers, students and others who are interested in history and archives issues. A complete b backfile of these reports is maintained by H-Net on the NCH's recently updated web page
at: .

To subscribe to the "NCH Washington Update," send an e-mail message to listserv@h-net.msu.edu with the following text in the body of the message (and only this text): SUBSCRIBE H-NCH firstname lastname, institution. To unsubscribe send an e-mail message to: listserv@h-net.msu.edu according to the following model: SIGNOFF H-NCH.

You can accomplish the same tasks by tapping into the web interface at http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/lists/subscribe.cgi and at the "network" prompt, scroll down and select H-NCH; enter your name and affiliation and "submit".

HNN - 5/4/2004


MTG launches history web
Scandinavian group adds to inhouse channel portfolio


AMSTERDAM -- Scandinavian media outfit Modern Times Group (MTG) has launched a new pay TV channel Viasat History in eight Central and Eastern Europe (C&E) countries.
Viasat, the broadcast arm of MTG, has 26 inhouse channel brands in C&E, including TV3 and TV1000. Channel is being broad-cast 18 hours a day and distributed via local and national cable nets in Russia, Poland, Bulgaria, Belarus, Moldova, Hungary, Ukraine, and Romania.

Content lineup includes programming on the history of science, sport, music, military conflict and bizz as well as biographies.

HNN - 5/4/2004

AMSTERDAM -- Scandinavian media outfit Modern Times Group (MTG) has launched a new pay TV channel Viasat History in eight Central and Eastern Europe (C&E) countries.
Viasat, the broadcast arm of MTG, has 26 inhouse channel brands in C&E, including TV3 and TV1000. Channel is being broad-cast 18 hours a day and distributed via local and national cable nets in Russia, Poland, Bulgaria, Belarus, Moldova, Hungary, Ukraine, and Romania.

Content lineup includes programming on the history of science, sport, music, military conflict and bizz as well as biographies.

HNN - 5/3/2004

National Security Archive Update, May 3, 2004

Dubious Secrets Update:
14 Million New Secrets Last Year - Here's One of Them

For more information:
Thomas Blanton - 202/994-7000


Washington, D.C., May 3, 2004 - The U.S. government classified more than 14 million new national security secrets last year, up from 11 million in the previous year and 8 million the year before, according to the new annual report to President Bush from the oversight office for the national security secrecy system. Dated 31 March 2004 and made publicly available last week, the report provides the Information Security Oversight Office's best estimate of the rising tide of secrecy, and also warns that "Allowing information that will not cause damage to national security to remain in the classification system, or to enter the system in the first instance, places all classified information at needless increased risk."

The National Security Archive today posted on the Web one of the 14 million new secrets, a Biographical Sketch produced in 1975 by the Defense Intelligence Agency on the Chilean then-dictator, General Augusto Pinochet. The DIA blacked out large sections of the Sketch on ostensible national security grounds, including General Pinochet's liquor choices - "scotch and pisco sours" - when DIA released the document under the Freedom of Information Act last year.

Also posted today is the Pinochet Sketch as released in full, with no deletions, by President Clinton's 1999 declassification of U.S. documents related to human rights abuses in Chile. The document appears uncensored on pages 181-183 in the Archive book, The Pinochet File: A Declassified Dossier on Atrocity and Accountatibility, by Peter Kornbluh, which was published this past September by The New Press, New York, and was selected by the Los Angeles Times as a "Best Nonfiction Book of 2003."

"Pinochet's pisco sours are certainly not the only dubious secret among the 14 million new ones," commented Archive director Thomas Blanton. "The real question is whether the secrecy veil really makes us safer, or does it hide our country's vulnerabilities and policy problems when what we need to do is fix them?"

The Pinochet Sketch is also the subject of today's "In the Loop" column by Al Kamen of The Washington Post, under the headline "Millions of Secrets."

THE NATIONAL SECURITY ARCHIVE is an independent non-governmental research institute and library located at The George Washington University in Washington, D.C. The Archive collects and publishes declassified documents acquired through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). A tax-exempt public charity, the Archive receives no U.S. government funding; its budget is supported by publication royalties and donations from foundations and individuals.
The National Security Archive does not and will never share the names or e-mail addresses of its subscribers with any other organization. Once a year, we will write you and ask for your financial support. We may also ask you for your ideas for Freedom of Information requests, documentation projects, or other issues that the Archive should take on. We would welcome your input, and any information you care to share with us about your special interests. But we do not sell or rent any information about subscribers to any other party.
You may leave the list at any time by sending a "SIGNOFF NSARCHIVE" command to .
You can also unsubscribe from the list anytime by using the following link:

HNN - 4/30/2004

NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE (Vol. 10, #18; 28 April 2004) by Bruce Craig (editor) National Coalition for History (NCH) Website http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch

1. Archives and History Organizations Appeal to Senate to Initiate "Consultation" on Archivist Position 2. Supreme Court Hears Arguments on Energy Task Force Documents: Echoes of Watergate?
3. Presidential Sites Bill Gets Senate Hearing 4. Senate Acts on Manhattan Sites Study Bill 5. Government Secrecy Classification Activity On the Increase 6. Bits & Bytes: WW II Memorial Opens; Boorstin Remembered at LC Event; NEH Announces Grants 7. Articles of Interest: No posting this week

1. ARCHIVES AND HISTORY ORGANIZATIONS APPEAL TO SENATE TO INITIATE "CONSULTATION" ON ARCHIVIST POSITION In a letter to Senators Susan M. Collins (Chair) and Joseph I. Lieberman (Ranking Member) of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee that will consider the nomination of historian Allen Weinstein as Archivist of the United States, the National Coalition for History (NCH) formally requested that the Senate "initiate the process of formal consultation with members of our [history and archives] communities."

The letter was accompanied by two attached papers -- one detailing questions that ought to be asked of the nominee, and a second outlining selection criteria for the Archivist position. The two statements were jointly prepared by The Society of American Archivists, The National Association of Government Archives and Records Administrators, and The Council of State Historical Records Coordinators.

The first paper includes approximately forty questions that the organizations believe the committee should pose to the nominee. The questions are designed to assess a nominee's knowledge, skills, and abilities relating to five topics: leadership and advocacy, management, professional knowledge and values, and personal experience and reputation. The second paper, a "Joint Statement on Selection Criteria for the Archivist of the United States," urges the committee to consider that "the nomination and confirmation process must conform to legal requirements and must address concerns raised by professional archivists, records managers, and historians concerning the person nominated to be Archivist of the United States."

The statement notes that prior to the nomination of Dr. Allen Weinstein by the Bush White House, "there was no consultation with professional organizations of archivists or historians." The statement then calls on the White House and Congress to "endorse an open and transparent process for selecting, nominating, and confirming the next Archivist of the United States" and suggests that the Senate explore "the reasons why the Archivist [John Carlin] is being replaced."

On 27 April, the Supreme Court heard arguments on Vice-President Richard Cheney's effort to keep the public from knowing who met with him behind closed doors three years ago when the Bush administration drafted a new energy policy. While at first the issue appears to be one of marginal interest to historians, archivists, and political scientists, in fact, like the access questions that surrounded the Watergate tapes and papers controversy, the suit has important ramifications on what government documents researchers are permitted to see now and in the future.

In early 2001, shortly after the Bush administration assumed control of the White House, Vice-President Cheney convened a task force to draft a new energy policy for the nation. Its membership was secret, but environmental groups charged that in addition to government officials, big energy companies (including the embattled Enron) and major campaign donors were permitted to participate. The conservative Judicial Watch and the liberal Sierra Club both argued that because people who are not federal employees were de facto members of the task force, the Federal Advisory Committee Act kicks in and that it requires that records of meetings must be made public.
Cheney stated that the act does not apply because the task force's members were all federal employees. Judicial Watch and the Sierra Club sued in federal court for access to the task force participant list.

In an effort to decide the case a trial court ordered Cheney to provide "limited disclosure" of who participated on the task force. Cheney's lawyers argued that the court's order violated the vice-president's executive privilege and rejected all efforts to reach a negotiated settlement with the trial court. Cheney then short-circuited regular trial court procedures and sought a higher court blanket order to keep the names of the participants secret.

Though many of the issues that the court must address involve arcane procedural questions about pre-trial discovery rules, the substantive issue relates to the degree to which a vice-president can claim special privileges. As the Supreme Court held in a landmark case involving President Richard Nixon's Watergate tapes, the executive privilege assertion has its limits. With that precedent in mind, Judicial Watch and the Sierra Club attorneys argued before the court that Mr. Cheney may be entitled to ask that the disclosure requests be narrowed, but the law does not exempt him entirely. Cheney's attorneys argued the case is "about the separation of powers" and that forcing the White House to release confidential papers would jeopardize the president's ability to receive candid advice.

If the legal questions alone were not controversial enough, once the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case, it was publically revealed that Justice Antonin Scalia had accompanied the vice-president on a hunting trip suggesting a close personal tie with Cheney. The disclosure resulted in widespread calls for the justice to recuse himself when the court considered the plea. Scalia declined. Scalia's questions during the court's oral arguments clearly revealed his hand when he declared, "Involvement of private individuals in the committee does not mean de facto membership." Now that the Supreme Court has heard arguments a decision is expected in July 2004.

Some court watchers predict another Bush v. Gore type decision -- where the court decided the Bush-Cheney re-election campaign by a 5 to 4 decision, with Justice Scalia casting the deciding vote. Should that happen again, the reputation of a court whose authority and objectivity is already seriously questioned by many may find itself once again attacked by critics who see the court as a political tool of the administration, and not guided by impartial application of the laws of the land. For researchers though, depending on how the court decides, the result may be an evisceration of important provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act that seek to provide an orderly process guaranteeing government openness in some of its operations.

3. PRESIDENTIAL SITES BILL GETS SENATE HEARING On 27 April 2003, the Senate National Parks Subcommittee of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee conducted a hearing on six measures, including Senator Michael DeWine's (R-OH) "Presidential Sites Improvement Act" (S. 1748), legislation that seeks to establish a program to award grants to improve and maintain presidential sites throughout the nation.

Testifying in support of the measure was Senator DeWine and Richard Moe, President of the National Trust for Historic Preservation. Letters of support on behalf of the National Coalition for History, along with several other groups, were entered into the official hearing record. Both DeWine and Moe spoke passionately in favor of the measure. Moe stated, "the bill would direct a relatively modest amount of funding to places that need it most and -- through a matching requirement -- help invigorate efforts to raise the private dollars that are essential to meeting the needs of most historic sites."

Paul Hoffman, an Interior department Deputy Assistant Secretary of Fish and Wildlife and Parks, however, stated the administration's opposition to enactment of the bill "because of the financial implications of this bill on national parks and park programs." Hoffman stated that the department is committed to eliminating the deferred maintenance backlog in national parks and that the funds that would be siphoned off by the legislation should "more appropriately [be] directed at this time to reducing the long list of necessary but deferred construction projects that have been identified in our national parks." According to inside sources, Interior's draft statement was prepared by NPS officials, concurred in by top-level Interior officials, and cleared by the Office of Management and Budget.

The bill is considered non-controversial and is expected to move through the Senate despite the administration's stated opposition. Senator DeWine, a Republican with considerable clout, is expected to weigh in with Interior officials and Committee members to ensure passage of the bill. Companion legislation (H.R. 3903) was introduced in the House on 4 March 2004 by Rep.
Paul E. Gillmor (R-OH); House hearings have yet to be scheduled.

4. SENATE COMMITTEE ACTS ON MANHATTAN SITES STUDY BILL On 28 April 2004, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee approved legislation (S. 1687) that seeks to assess whether places associated with the Manhattan Project (which led to the production of the atomic bomb) will someday become national park units.

The study bill authorizes the National Park Service (NPS) to conduct an assessment of older, unused sections of national laboratories at Los Alamos, New Mexico, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, and Hanford, Washington. If the NPS finds these sites possess sufficient historical integrity and national significance and provided they pass certain "feasibility" requirements, one or more of the areas may become units of the national park system. The older buildings at the three sites already are on the National Register of Historic Places, but the Department of Energy has made it clear to lawmakers that it is not in the caretaker business and that another more qualified agency should operate the sites for public access. It its testimony, the NPS expressed its reluctance to play this role and stated it would prefer that Congressional sponsors find another backer for managing the sites. No nonprofit group has stepped forward to tackle what is expected to be an expensive undertaking.

The study alone could cost as much as $700,000 and there are numerous "feasibility" issues relating to safety and site security (many of the labs are still top-secret facilities) that would also have to be resolved. Nevertheless, Committee Chairman Pete Domenici (R-NM) seeks to overcome the hurdles and said, "My hope is that this can help Americans to better understand the project and its impact on history and mankind."

According to the annual report to the president prepared by the Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO) -- an executive branch agency housed in the National Archives and Records Administration that oversees classification and declassification activity in the executive branch -- there was a marked increase in national security secrecy activity last year. Executive branch agencies classified a total of more than 14 million new documents. ISOO reported a total of 14,228,020 classification decisions by executive branch agencies in fiscal year 2003, up from
11,271,618 classification actions in FY 2002. This represents a 25% rise over the previous year's production of classified documents.

According to Steve Aftergood of the Federation of American Scientists, a group that monitors government secrecy activities, "The report confirms what many people have suspected that the volume of official secrecy is expanding."

Critics contend that the government's classification system is applied to significant quantities of information unnecessarily, and that in this process, actually contributes to damaging national security. The ISOO report implicitly acknowledged the merits of that argument. "Allowing information that will not cause damage to national security to remain in the classification system, or to enter the system in the first instance, places all classified information at needless increased risk," states the report.

The report also states that "ISOO has asked all agency heads to closely examine efforts to implement and maintain the security classification system at their agencies... This effort includes ensuring that information that requires protection is properly identified and safeguarded and, equally important, that information not eligible for inclusion in the classification system remains unclassified or is promptly declassified." The report also notes that "Many senior officials will candidly acknowledge that the government classifies too much information...although often times the observation is made with respect to the activities of agencies other than their own."

Thanks to the Federation of American Scientists, a copy of the new ISOO annual report for fiscal year 2003 is available at:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/isoo/2003rpt.pdf .

Item #1 -- WW II Memorial Opens: The National World War II Memorial opened on 29 April 2004, one month before its official dedication on 29 May. The dedication is expected to draw up to 800,000 veterans to Washington D.C. Of the estimated 16 million Americans who served in WW II, fewer than
4 million are believed to be alive; veterans continue to die at an estimated rate of 1,100 a day. The youngest of those veterans is thought to be 76 years old. The $175 million memorial was authorized in 1993 but took years to gain approval as opponents presented evidence that the nature and size of the memorial on the 7.4-acre site would deface the National Mall, obstruct views of the Washington and Lincoln Memorials, and upset the surrounding ecology. Irrespective of the validity of these concerns, "the sweep of the memorial will take your breath away" said Alan K. Simpson, a former Republican senator from Wyoming who supported its construction at the present site.

Item #2 -- Boorstin Remembered at LC Event: 12th Librarian of Congress
(1975-1987) Daniel J. Boorstin was remembered 27 April 2004 at a memorial service at the Library of Congress. James H. Billington, his successor as librarian, declared Boorstin was "above all else, a man of the book." Speaker after speaker eulogized Boorstin. If Boorstin is remembered for nothing else, he will be remembered for opening up the LC to the average American. Prior to his appointment as librarian, in 1969, Boorstin became the director of the Smithsonian Institution's National Museum of History and Technology which evolved into the National Museum of American History. His books "The Americans" and "The Discoverers" won Pulitzer Prizes.

Item # 3 -- NEH Announces Grants: On 28 April 2004, the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) announced that cultural institutions in 18 states will receive $9.9 million for 42 projects to preserve humanities collections, increase public access, and create humanities research tools and reference works. Ten of these projects have been named We the People projects, a special recognition by the NEH for model projects that advance the study, teaching, and understanding of American history and culture. The "We the People" portion of the grants include projects to preserve significant cultural resources from American Indian languages to railroad records and news broadcasts. The projects supported include the creation of a historical dictionary of the ancient Sumerian language, creation of a catalog of feature films produced in the U.S. from 1971- 80, and the development of a virtual city, a computerized three-dimensional model of St. Louis from 1850 to 1950 linked to historical resources and designed for use by K-16 students humanities scholars. For the complete list of grants, available as a 7-page PDF file, tap into:
http://www.neh.gov/pdf/PreservationAccess-April04.pdf .

No posting this week.

The National Coalition for History invites you to subscribe to this FREE weekly newsletter! You are also encouraged to redistribute the NCH Washington Updates to colleagues, friends, teachers, students and others who are interested in history and archives issues. A complete b backfile of these reports is maintained by H-Net on the NCH's recently updated web page
at: .

To subscribe to the "NCH Washington Update," send an e-mail message to listserv@h-net.msu.edu with the following text in the body of the message (and only this text): SUBSCRIBE H-NCH firstname lastname, institution. To unsubscribe send an e-mail message to: listserv@h-net.msu.edu according to the following model: SIGNOFF H-NCH.

You can accomplish the same tasks by tapping into the web interface at http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/lists/subscribe.cgi and at the "network" prompt, scroll down and select H-NCH; enter your name and affiliation and "submit".

HNN - 4/29/2004

The Washington Post

April 24, 2004 Saturday
Final Edition

SECTION: A Section; A03

LENGTH: 403 words

HEADLINE: Census Taker's 1860 List Has Slaves' Names

BYLINE: William L. Holmes, Associated Press



A renegade census taker charged with recording the population of a tiny northeastern North Carolina county in 1860 left behind a record of slave names that is the only such known document in the state -- and perhaps in the nation.

The find by a state archivist researching his family background stunned historians and genealogists who routinely find slaves listed only by color (black or mulatto), gender and age.

But the handwritten Camden County record compiled by census taker Jesse Bell includes the first names of the slaves owned by each family. Under the entry for farmer A.P. Cherry, for example, Bell listed the names of 16 slaves -- ranging from 55-year-old Moses down to 3-month-old Enoch. The letter S is written beside each name on the 19-inch-by-15-inch yellowed ledger paper, which has the header "Free Inhabitants."

The names are not listed in the official federal index of the 1860 census.

"We see a lot of things here at the archives, but there are very few things that make us stop," said Earl Ijames, an archivist for the state Department of Cultural Resources who helped verify the record first noticed by colleague Chris Meekins of Elizabeth City, who was searching for ancestors.

Listing the names of slaves was a violation of the census regulations of the time, said Michael Hovland, a historian with the U.S. Census Bureau. Census takers were instructed to list only the number of slaves and their vital information -- and even that information was in a part of the census report separate from the list of free people. Slaves were considered property, and each was counted as three-fifths of a person.

The 1860 census lists the population of Camden, which borders Virginia, as 5,343, including 2,127 slaves.

Hovland said he has never seen or heard of a census document that included slaves' names. "It is very unusual," he said.

Someone apparently realized Bell's mistake, Ijames said, because the record was amended by someone who added parentheses to the slaves' names but did not cross them out.

"They probably called him a nitwit and all sorts of other names," Ijames said. "He realized his error -- if it was indeed an error."

Ijames suspects that Bell may have included the slaves' names on purpose. "I think he did it kind of tongue-in-cheek. He probably could not help but understand the personable nature of people and that they were people, not property," Ijames said.

HNN - 4/29/2004

The Independent (London)

April 26, 2004, Monday

SECTION: First Edition; NEWS; Pg. 17

LENGTH: 326 words



AN AUTHOR regarded as the world's leading authority on the Beatles has signed a pounds 1.2m deal to write the defining history of the Fab Four after a fierce bidding war between publishers.

Mark Lewisohn, a cultural historian who has catalogued the entire Beatles-related recordings at Abbey Road and written The Complete Beatles Chronicle, is to produce three volumes over 12 years.

It is understood that the publishing house Little, Brown - part of Time Warner - fended off stiff competition from rivals including the Harry Potter publisher, Bloomsbury, to acquire the trilogy. The rights are being auctioned in America.

Simon Trewin, of Peters Fraser and Dunlop which represents Lewisohn, said: "There will be many other books on the Beatles, but I think this is the lasting word. The whole point of this book is that the Beatles are, were and will continue to be a cultural phenomenon unlike anything else the world has ever seen.

"It's not just a history of the Beatles, but of post-war British culture. Mark is the person to bring the story to life. He's got a fantastic archive and is very well connected. But it won't be official. And it's not a hagiography."

The first volume is likely to be released in 2008, coinciding with Liverpool's year as European capital of culture. Subsequent volumes are expected to follow at four-yearly intervals.

Asked whether another book on the Beatles was necessary, Paul Gambaccini, the DJ and pop expert, said: "History will need it. They are the Mozart of our time and in 100 years from now people will be glad that Mark Lewisohn has done it.

"He is the right person to do it and it's best to do so while the iron is still hot. Memories are still fresh and there can be corrections by survivors. This is a historical record so let's get it right."

Four years ago, The Beatles Anthology was published, billed as the official Beatles history through their own reminiscences.

HNN - 4/29/2004

Ottawa Citizen

April 27, 2004 Tuesday Final Edition

SECTION: News; Pg. A3

LENGTH: 820 words

HEADLINE: The Canadian who ended Rommel's war: History changed on July 17, 1944 when the Nazis' greatest general, Field Marshal Erwin Rommel, was wounded when his staff car was strafed by a Spitfire during the fighting in Normandy. Randy Boswell reports on new research showing it was a Canadian, Charley Fox, who knocked the Desert Fox out of the war.

SOURCE: The Ottawa Citizen

BYLINE: Randy Boswell

A Canadian pilot long recognized for his Second World War heroics -- including three sorties on D-Day alone -- is now being credited with knocking legendary German field marshal Erwin Rommel out of action in the crucial weeks following the invasion of Normandy.

The story of how Spitfire ace Charley Fox strafed Rommel's staff car as it sped through the French countryside July 17, 1944, is finally becoming clear after almost 60 years of uncertainty over who wounded the the "Desert Fox," the Nazis' greatest field commander.

A U.S. air crew initially claimed to have fired on Rommel's car. Many historical accounts say South African pilot J.J. Le Roux carried out the strike. Other possible attackers have been cited over the years.

But a Quebec historian researching the controversy at Library and Archives Canada says the official operational record book of Mr. Fox's unit, 412 Squadron, puts the Ontario-born pilot in the air at the right time and place to have taken out Rommel.

"Charley Fox is probably the guy that fired at Rommel's car," concludes Michel Lavigne, author of several books about the Second World War. "This is the official account from the time, usually filled out by a clerk with the squadron, recording when planes took off and came back. It's very precise, very exact."

Mr. Lavigne's findings confirm Mr. Fox's own log entry from that day and his recollections of swooping down on a German staff car and watching the bullet-riddled vehicle veer off the road.

"We took off late in the afternoon," recalls Mr. Fox, 84, who lives in London, Ont., and is to be installed as honorary colonel of his old wartime unit, 412 Squadron, at a ceremony this week in Ottawa.

"As soon as we got airborne at Bernieres-sur-mer, we started heading towards Caen and we split up into three sections of four, and we were to look for 'targets of opportunity' -- anything that was moving. It was the other side of Caen, and I saw this staff car coming along between a line of trees on a main road," says Mr. Fox. "I made no motion until it was just about 9 o'clock, and I did a diving, curving attack down and I probably started firing at about 300 yards. I saw hits on it and I saw it start to curve and go off the road -- and by then I'm on my way."

Mr. Fox says the incident remains "very clear in my mind." And the July 17 entry in his own wartime log book records

"1 staff car damaged" along with the destruction of a mechanical transport vehicle. At the end of the entry, Mr. Fox had written:

"? Rommel -- Yes."

Kenneth T. Tellis - 4/26/2004

Do not only point out to Nazi sympathizers in Latvia as being the only culprits in pogroms. I do not believe that Nazism is the only evil in the world as some are making out to be. The Belgians were as brutal as the Nazis in their dealings with Africans when colonizing the Congo. The Germans also murdered Africans in South-West Africa. Of course no one dares mention the Italian atrocities in Abyssinia, in which 1.5 million people were tortured and killed, with one exception, the Pope gave it his blessings.

While the Italian authorities want to try German SS Officers as War Criminals for crimes carried out in Italy during World War II, they should think about trying members of the Italian army that served in Abyssinia campaign and carried out massacres there. Or are they only interested in crimes committed against Italians alone? While they are quite willing to overlook the War Crimes committed by members of the Italian armed forces. How very generous of them.

Jesse David Lamovsky - 4/24/2004

Ever get the feeling that if Nazis, or neo-Nazis, didn't exist, it would be necessary for some people to invent them?

Richard Henry Morgan - 4/23/2004

Amazing. Newspapers are reporting massacres in the Sudan, and the UN condemns SS glorification. Surreal.

HNN - 4/23/2004

RICHMOND, Virginia (AP) -- Virginia's governor pledged $2 million Wednesday to fund scholarships for students denied an education when public schools across the state closed rather than integrate in the late 1950s.

Gov. Mark R. Warner signed a bill creating the program, then told nearly 200 black residents from Prince Edward County gathered on the steps of the Capitol that "Virginia got it wrong, we got it incredibly wrong."

The county in south central Virginia was the site of the longest school shutdown in the country to avoid racial integration, from 1959-1964.

Warner spokeswoman Ellen Qualls said about 250 to 350 former students, now middle-aged, could receive several thousand dollars each. The money could be used toward a high school diploma, a GED certificate, career or technical training, or an undergraduate degree from a Virginia college.

One victim of the school shutdown, John Hurt, said he would use the money to improve his skills so he could get a better job with the Virginia Department of Transportation, where he currently works.

Hurt, now 54, was in the first grade when Prince Edward closed its schools in 1959. He was out of school for five years, then returned for two, only to drop out because he was so far behind. He learned to read and write as an adult.

Several public school systems across Virginia shut their doors rather than integrate, but none as long as Prince Edward. Public money was used to start a private all-white academy in the county, while blacks and some poor whites either left home to continue their education elsewhere or didn't go to school at all.

The Supreme Court ordered Prince Edward to reopen its public schools in 1964.

Kenneth T. Tellis - 4/23/2004

Let us never forget the price paid by the Polish Home Army under Bor Komorowski during the Warsaw uprising, not leaving out the fact that they were deliberately denied supplies of weapons by Stalin's plan to make sure that the Germans wiped out the Free Poles, because he had intentions of setting up the Lublin Soviet puppet government in Poland under Soviet domination. Looking back to the Katyn Forest at Smolensk, that was necessary and inevitable, if the Soviet were to take over Poland. As for Roosevelt he sat on the fence, quietly supporting Joe Stalin's every move. He even arranged the assassination of the Prime Minister of the Polish government in exile in Gibraltar. Yes! Poland was betryed by those she trusted including the United States of America. The Polish people must depend on themselves, not on those who break their promises. That a museum being built to honour those 18,000 Polish men who died in the Warsaw uprising will be a reminder to the Polish nation of their struggle against outside forces, but they should not leave out the 15,000 Officers who died by the hands of the Soviet KGB at Katyn.

Kenneth T. Tellis - 4/23/2004

Let us never forget the price paid by the Polish Home Army under Bor Komorowski during the Warsaw uprising, not leaving out the fact that they were deliberately denied supplies of weapons by Stalin's plan to make sure that the Germans wiped out the Free Poles, because he had intentions of setting up the Lublin Soviet puppet government in Poland under Soviet domination. Looking back to the Katyn Forest at Smolensk, that was necessary and inevitable, if the Soviet were to take over Poland. As for Roosevelt he sat on the fence, quietly supporting Joe Stalin's every move. He even arranged the assassination of the Prime Minister of the Polish government in exile in Gibraltar. Yes! Poland was betryed by those she trusted including the United States of America. The Polish people must depend on themselves, not on those who break their promises. That a museum being built to honour those 18,000 Polish men who died in the Warsaw uprising will be a reminder to the Polish nation of their struggle against outside forces, but they should not leave out the 15,000 Officers who died by the hands of the Soviet KGB at Katyn.

Kenneth T. Tellis - 4/23/2004

No one seems to pay any attention to history. When the first Englishman became Pope Adrian IV, he decided to obtain money any way he could. So he sold Ireland in its entirety to Henry II of England and the company that was formed to run the enterprise was from London. It started its operations in Derry and thus the name Londerry came into being. As for Pope Adrian IV, he assumed that since the Irish had offered their country to the pope in obeisance it was his to do as he pleased. But in those days obeisance was customary thing in the Catholic countries of Europe, and did not really mean that the Roman Pontiff had any ownership rights at all.

HNN - 4/23/2004

NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE (Vol. 10, #17; 23 April 2004) by Bruce Craig (editor) National Coalition for History (NCH) Website http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch

1. Plaintiffs File Motion to Alter Judgement in PRA Case 2. The Weinstein Nomination -- An Update 3. Faculty Salary Increases -- Lowest in 30 Years Says AAUP Report 4. "Ten Most Wanted" Documents List Released 5. Bits and Bytes: National History Day Joins History Coalition; Wilson Center Fellowships 6. Articles of Interest: "Museums Step Up Fight Against Trade in Artifacts" (Washington Post 16 April 2004)

1. PLAINTIFFS FILE MOTION TO ALTER JUDGEMENT IN PRA CASE On 12 April 2004, plaintiffs party to the suit to overturn President Bush's Executive Order 13233 which relates to the administration of the Presidential Records Act (PRA) filed a motion to "alter or amend" the judgement entered 29 March 2004 that dismissed the plaintiffs case on standing and ripeness grounds (see "Court Issues Decision on Presidential Records Suit" in NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE, Vol. 10, #13; 2 April 2004).

Scott L. Nelson, the attorney handling the case for the Public Citizen Litigation Group, filed papers on behalf of historical, archival, and government openness organizations requesting that the court reconsider its dismissal. Nelson cites two reasons in the
motion: first, "that the Court's
decision appears to overlook the uncontested fact that EO 13233 is currently being applied on an ongoing basis to all releases of Reagan presidential documents and Bush vice-presidential documents" so that the plaintiffs injuries "is by no means speculative or hypothetical"; and second, that the court's opinion seems to rest in part on "a misapprehension of fact" as 74 pages of materials "are still being withheld under the Executive Order."

The motion was filed just days after Public Citizen was notified of a denial of its FOIA appeal on some 74 pages of materials (11 separate documents) of Reagan era records that have yet to be released to scholars under constitutionally-based privilege provisions of the PRA. Among the records being withheld: a six-page 8 December 1986 memo to the President and Director of Public Affairs entitled, "Talking Points on Iran/Contra Affairs"; a series of memos dated 22 November and 1 December 1988 for the President entitled, "Pardon for Oliver North, John Poindexter, and Joseph Fernandez"; and a two-page memo for the President from the Attorney General, "Appeal of the Decision Denying the Enforcement of the Anti-Terrorism Act of 1987."
Other withheld memos relate to the extension of claims of Executive Privilege over the release of Justice Rehnquist's papers and materials relating to "Use of Military Aircraft by Mrs. Reagan."

The privilege claims asserted on these documents were originally claimed by the legal representatives of former President Reagan and were concurred by President George W. Bush (for the list of withheld documents see item "Special Postings -- Withheld Reagan PRA Papers"
posted on the NCH webpage at: http:www2.h-net.msu.edu~nch/ ). Scholars who believe that these materials have potential research value and would be interested being listed with other researchers on an affidavit proclaiming the importance of these materials are urged to contact Scott Nelson at Snelson@citizen.org .

2. THE WEINSTEIN NOMINATION -- AN UPDATE Controversy continues to mount over the Bush administration's nomination of Allen Weinstein to succeed John Carlin as Archivist of the United States. Press coverage in major newspapers including the Washington Post, New York Times, and other major publications and wire services such as the Associated Press has helped heighten public awareness of the issue that focuses on an apparent attempt by the White House to replace John Carlin as Archivist of the United States with a person of its own choosing.

Due in part to the publicity and to a statement of concern issued by nearly two dozen historical and archival organizations (see http://www.archivists.org/statements/weinstein.asp ), the White House effort to confirm the nominee through an "expedited" appointment process appears to have been thwarted. The Senate Governmental Affairs Committee -- the committee of jurisdiction that will be making a recommendation to the U.S. Senate about the qualifications of the nominee -- indeed will give the Weinstein nomination a full and proper hearing in coming weeks. According to committee spokesperson Leslie Phillips, "We're just beginning the vetting process...But we will examine him [Weinstein] carefully as we do all nominees."

In the meantime, evidence that the nomination was initiated more by the White House rather than by Carlin's desire to step down prior to summer 2005 continues to grow. When reporters queried about allegations that Carlin was being forced out, the White House issued a 19 December 2003 letter signed by John Carlin in which the Archivist states his intention to resign in the future and urges the White House to begin a "smooth transition of leadership." NCH sources inside NARA report that the letter was requested of Carlin by the White House with some critical parts being "essentially dictated." When asked by reporters whether the 19 December letter was generated by the White House, Carlin declined, through a spokesperson, to comment whether he is leaving voluntarily.

Statements to the press by the nominee himself, however, are suggestive of the reliability of the insider's assertion. When asked by Washington Post reporter George Lardner exactly when the nominee was approached by the White House, Weinstein stated that he was contacted by the administration about his nomination in the "fall" of 2003, weeks if not months prior to the crafting of Carlin's intention to resign letter.

While the selection may well be partly driven by politics, in interviews with press representatives Weinstein declared that "I am not in anybody's pocket and I am committed to maximum access."
He states he is a registered Democrat -- "a raving moderate" and that "the National Archives as far as I am concerned, works for the American people and is not a creature of the administration."

Critics note that while Weinstein may be a registered Democrat, The Right Web, a watchdog group that profiles right-wing organizations and includes on its lists Weinstein's Center for Democracy, documents the nominee's ties to conservative groups and funding institutions and notes that his wife Diane Weinstein, is legal counsel to former Vice-President Dan Quayle.

Discussion also continues about the nominee's credentials. Friends and supporters are beginning to speak out in support of the Weinstein nomination. Richard Norton Smith, executive director of the Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library and Museum, views the present controversy as so much "faculty-lounge politics." He sees Weinstein as someone who can bridge the gap between historians and the public. He also notes that Weinstein played a role in persuading the Church of Christ, Scientist, to release the once highly restricted records of the founder of the Christian Science church, Mary Baker Eddy. Said Smith, "He [Weinstein] made the case that if the [church's] library was going to have intellectual legitimacy, it would have to have transparency."
Stephen H. Balch, president of the National Association of Scholars, also comments that Weinstein is "a man who is capable of confronting evidence honestly and changing his mind."

Critics, however, continue to raise questions about some of Weinstein's scholarly practices. In the past, the nominee has been criticized for his record on providing access to his research notes used in writing two controversial books about Soviet espionage. According to American University history professor Anna K. Nelson, "his history of sharing information is not all that great."

In an interview with New York Times reporters, Weinstein did not address allegations regarding his records practices and opted to reserve discussion of that until his Senate confirmation hearings. He did, however, forthrightly respond to the widely publicized allegation that he or his publisher paid the KGB some $100,000 for special access to records that facilitated the writing of his latest book, "The Haunted Wood." "That's a total slander" declared Weinstein, though he admitted that his publisher Random House did pay a retired agent's group for "access to files"
that contributed to the writing of four books, including his own. But, "no personal money passed hands" he stated. Critics continue to question the ethical ramifications of purchasing access and note that Weinstein continues to restrict access to his research notes based on those restricted files.

The Weinstein nomination will undoubtedly continue to spark lively discussion through the spring and possibly summer months. Hill insiders report that the upcoming November presidential election, coupled with accusations from Democrats that the Bush administration is too secretive in general, could spell difficulty for the Weinstein nomination. Even if the nominee is deemed qualified by the Senate committee assessing his qualifications, his confirmation could be held up until after the election by a single senator who could put a hold on the nomination.

3. FACULTY SALARY INCREASES -- LOWEST IN 30 YEARS SAYS AAUP STUDY According to an annual report released 16 April 2004 by the American Association of University Professors (AAUP), the average salary of full-time faculty members rose by just 2.1 percent in the
2003-4 academic year. This represents the lowest percentage increase in three decades.

A survey of 1,343 colleges and universities reveals that the average pay for a full-time faculty member rose to $66,475 in the 2003-4 academic year, up from $65,048 the previous year. This is just slightly over the rate of inflation that is pegged at 1.9 percent.
According to the report, state
budget cuts have contributed to keeping salary increases small. Nationally, state appropriations for higher education declined by 2.1 percent in 2004.

The study also demonstrates that because public institutions have suffered greater cuts than private ones, the salary gap between public and private universities continues to widen. Full professors at public doctoral institutions in 2003-4 earned 77.4 percent of what their counterparts at private universities earned. The salaries of full and associate professors rose respectively, on average to $88,591 and $63,063; assistant professor salaries rose to $52,788.

The gender gap in faculty salaries persists. Female full professors earned just 88.4 percent of what male full professors earned in 2004 -- $80,452, compared with $91,002. Some encouraging news though -- the gap narrowed between male and female faculty members at the
associate- and
assistant-professor ranks. For the full salary report, tap into:

4. "TEN MOST WANTED" DOCUMENTS LIST RELEASED On 15 April 2004, a new coalition released its first annual survey of "The Ten Most Wanted Documents." The release was the inaugural event of OpenTheGovernment.org, an organization comprised of 33 organizations (of which the National Coalition for History is one) working on freedom of information issues. The organization seeks to galvanize public support for open, accountable government. The group represents an unprecedented coalition, bringing together First Amendment advocates, good government groups, journalists, environmentalists, and organizations.

According to Rick Blum, Coordinator of the coalition and Director of the Freedom of Information Project of OMB Watch, "We are witnessing a broad expansion of government secrecy that runs counter to our core democratic values. We must reverse this course so the public can access the information it needs to hold our government accountable, make our families safer, and generally strengthen democracy."

The list targets secrecy in all three branches of government and is the result of an Internet survey, in which respondents ranked documents covering a broad spectrum of issues, from women's rights to animal welfare to our government's fight against terrorism. Roughly 500 people completed the online survey. Of these, 76 percent said they have personally accessed federal government information within the last two years.

Nine out of ten respondents thought the government classifies too much information, abuses legitimate privacy protections, and uses the threat of terrorism and national security concerns to withhold information. Eighty-eight percent also said trade secrets and business confidentiality too often shield information the public should know about.

Among the many issues covered by the list of Ten Most Wanted Documents, three themes stood
out: first, respondents expressed a deep skepticism about the information the government provides; second, the government should do more to make its day-to-day operations open to the public; and third, the government should reverse its unprecedented expansion of secrecy and give the public a more open and complete accounting for its efforts to make our communities safer.

Here is the list of the ten "most wanted documents" for 2004: The 28-page Secret Pages of the Congressional Joint Inquiry into 9/11 Intelligence Failures; types of crime investigated each time a Patriot Act power was invoked; a list of the contaminants found in the sources of drinking water; records of court cases partially or totally closed to the public and an explanation why for each; industry-written reports on chemical plants' risks to communities; the Identities of those detained after 9/11 on immigration charges or as material witnesses; gifts from lobbyists to Senators and their staff; Federal contracts, grants and other agreements, their total value (in dollars), records documenting violations, and fines and other federal enforcement actions; all changes made to publicly available versions of congressional legislation before a committee vote; and Congressional Research Service Reports.

For more information about the coalition, tap into:
http://www.OpenTheGovernment.org .

Item #1 -- National History Day Joins History Coalition: The National Coalition for History welcomes its newest Contributing Supporter -- National History Day. National History Day's mission is to improve the teaching and learning of history in elementary and secondary schools so that students become better prepared, knowledgeable citizens. Through publications and education programs NHD provides a critically acclaimed model for education reform and professional development. For more information about NHD and its programs, tap into:
http://www.NationalHistoryDay.org . For information on how your organization can support the National Coalition for History, contact the editor at:
rbcraig@historycoalition.org .

Item #2 -- Wilson Center Fellowships: The Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars is currently accepting applications for its 2005-06 Fellowship competition. The center offers residential fellowships for the entire U.S. academic year (September through May), or for a minimum of four months during the academic year, to individuals in the social sciences and humanities who submit outstanding project proposals on a broad range of national and/or international issues. Proposed topics should intersect with questions of public policy or provide the historical and/or cultural framework to illuminate policy issues of contemporary importance.
Fellows are provided with a stipend and work from private offices at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, DC. Eligibility is limited to the postdoctoral level and, normally, to applicants with publications beyond the Ph.D.
dissertation. For other
applicants, an equivalent level of professional achievement is expected. The center seeks a diverse group of Fellows and encourages applications from women and minorities. Deadline for applications is 1 October 2004. For additional information tap into:
http://www.wilsoncenter.org/fellowships or e-mail at fellowships@wwic.si.edu; telephone (202) 691-4170.

One article this week: In "Museums Step Up Fight Against Trade in Artifacts" (Washington Post
16 April 2004), the International Council of Museums has unveiled a new tool to help combat the theft of cultural objects from Peru, Mexico, Ecuador, Colombia, Guatemala, and other countries.
Tap into:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A16313-2004Apr15.html .

The National Coalition for History invites you to subscribe to this FREE weekly newsletter! You are also encouraged to redistribute the NCH Washington Updates to colleagues, friends, teachers, students and others who are interested in history and archives issues. A complete b backfile of these reports is maintained by H-Net on the NCH's recently updated web page at:

To subscribe to the "NCH Washington Update," send an e-mail message to listserv@h-net.msu.edu with the following text in the body of the message (and only this text):
SUBSCRIBE H-NCH firstname lastname, institution. To unsubscribe send an e-mail message to:
listserv@h-net.msu.edu according to the following model: SIGNOFF H-NCH.

You can accomplish the same tasks by tapping into the web interface at http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/lists/subscribe.cgi and at the "network" prompt, scroll down and select H-NCH; enter your name and affiliation and "submit".

HNN - 4/22/2004

The Jerusalem Post
April 20, 2004, Tuesday

HEADLINE: UN backs resolution condemning SS glorification
BYLINE: Jonathan Fowler, Ap
GENEVA - The top UN human rights watchdog has denounced modern day glorification of the Nazi-era Waffen SS.
In a 36-13 vote, the UN Human Rights Commission last week backed a Russian resolution expressing deep concern over the building of memorials to the military section of the dreaded Nazi Schutzstaffel. Such monuments "do injustice" to the Nazis' victims, "poison the minds of young people" and fuel modern-day extremist groups, the motion said.
The resolution did not identify any country, but Western diplomats said it was a veiled attack on Latvia and was an attempt to distract attention from its own record in Chechnya. Since regaining its independence as the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, the tiny Baltic nation has had tense relations with Moscow.
Last year, the country faced criticism over a memorial to the Latvian Legion, part of the Waffen SS. Latvian leaders have claimed that members of the unit were drafted or joined not out of any sympathy for Nazis, but to fight against the Soviets they feared even more.
During World War II, Latvia was sandwiched between the Nazi and Soviet armies. About 250,000 Latvians ended up fighting on one side of the conflict or the other as the country changed hands three times.
Nazi hunters from the Simon Wiesenthal Center say as many as a third of the Latvian Waffen SS soldiers may have been involved in the murder of Jews as auxiliary police alongside the Nazis. Many Latvian historians dispute the claims, saying the numbers were much lower.
Nearly 80,000 Latvian Jews, 90 percent of the prewar Jewish population, were killed during the Nazi occupation, most before the formation of the Latvian Legion.
In Friday's vote, Russia mustered support from developing countries, which dominate the 53-nation commission. Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Honduras, and South Korea abstained. European nations, the United States, Australia and Japan voted against.
"I do not understand how one could vote against a resolution denouncing the encouragement of such ugly phenomena," Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Yuri Fedotov was quoted as saying by the Interfax news agency. "Obviously, they had their own considerations. If they did, they should tell us about them."
While deploring the crimes of the Waffen SS and the activities of current extremists, Western diplomats criticized Russia for submitting the resolution.
"We strongly condemn all forms of intolerance, including neo-Nazism - however its manifests itself. It must be combatted wherever it occurs," said Irish Ambassador Mary Whelan, speaking for the EU. "This initiative fails to address neo-Nazism in a global and balanced way and so does not add to our consideration of the issue. We question the timing and the motivations of the Russian Federation."
During the commission meeting, Russian Ambassador Leonid Skotnikov said the resolution was "thematic" - the UN body's term for general resolutions that do not criticize the human rights abuses in particular nations.
During voting on countries' rights records Thursday, Russia successfully ducked condemnation of abuses by its forces in Chechnya for the third year running.
The Russian proposal surfaced last week when Latvia and six other former Warsaw Pact members were admitted to NATO. It is one of 10 mainly ex-communist countries set to join the EU on May 1.

HNN - 4/22/2004

Financial Times (London, England)
April 20, 2004 Tuesday
London Edition 1

HEADLINE: Modern Poland carves new identity for the future out of sacrifices of history: A new Warsaw museum symbolises a nation's struggle to understand its bloody past, writes Jan Cienski
Warsaw has never had a museum commemorating one of the most significant events in its history: the failed 1944 uprising against the Nazis that killed 200,000 and destroyed 80 per cent of the city.
But now, after decades of ideological battles over the its legacy, a museum dedicated to the uprising is due to open on August 1, the 60th anniversary of the outbreak of fighting.
As Poland prepares to enter the European Union, Poles are grappling with the role history has played in shaping their own nation. For a country that endured centuries of occupation, the authorities are keen to assert Poland's own identity as it enters a new type of union.
For Janusz Tyman, a veteran of the uprising, the museum is vindication for the years when Poland's communist rulers vilified the uprising.
"How can you deprive us of our own story?" says the veteran, wearing his combat decorations as he explains how he and his fellow fighters were forbidden from meeting or talking about their role in the uprising for decades. "It's the basis of our existence."
Poland also needs to explain its history to a continent that knows little about it, says Jerzy Kloczkowski, a history professor at the Catholic University in Lublin who lost an arm in the uprising.
He has had French and German colleagues, all historians, exclaim: "I didn't know you were Jewish," when they hear he was wounded, confusing the city-wide revolt in 1944 with the Jewish uprising in the Warsaw ghetto a year earlier.
"Until now European history has really been French and German history," said Mr Kloczkowski at a recent conference on Poland's history. "But now there is this realisation that European history has to be broadened to include the 10 new member states."
In happier countries such as Britain or Sweden, history is left to schoolchildren to memorise. But in Poland, history has a hard and bloody edge.
Like the Irish, Poles have cultivated their history of occasional glory interspersed with defeat and destruction as a model for future generations.
Poland's "martyrology" is long: being swallowed up in the 18th century by Russia, Prussia and Austria, failed uprisings against Russia in 1830 and 1863, battles against the Soviets while regaining independence after the first world war, and the blood-soaked nightmare of the second world war followed by allied betrayal and communist dictatorship.
Until recently history continued to serve its normal purpose: the battle for independence, this time against the Moscow-backed communist government.
The communists tried to turn history to their own ends, playing down past conflicts with the Russians, denouncing the pre-war government and playing up class struggles. Outside the classroom most Poles were taught the ancient national struggles - including the Warsaw uprising - by family and the church.
"The uprising devastated the economy and the intelligentsia but it was a point of reference for the future - that you had to fight for Poland," says Leon Kieres, head of the Institute of National Remembrance, which documents and prosecutes past crimes against Poles.
But in 1989, the role of history changed. Communism collapsed and for only the second time in more than two centuries Poland was completely independent.
Instead of absorbing the lessons of the past to prepare for the future, young Poles rushed to learn English and study business. History became just another school subject.
"We find huge gaps in the knowledge of the young, things we thought were obvious," laments Tomasz Merta, a historian.
Freed from the need to nurture the national spirit, historians started poking around the darker recesses of the past, such as the massacre of 1,500 Jews in the north-east town of Jedwabno by their Polish neighbours in 1944, the anti-Semitic hysteria of 1968, and the pre-war government's suppression of Ukrainian nationalism.
As well as communicating Poland's past to the rest of Europe, historians are also trying to reach out to Poland's young, explaining events that now seem unfathomably distant in an era of wireless connectivity and euros.
If the past has lost its didactic role, it can at least make the young pause and revere those who went before, say the founders of the museum.
Looking at a 62m wall that will bear the names of 18,000 partisans who lost their lives during the uprising, Marcin Roszkowski, the new museum's 25-year-old spokesman, expresses awe.
"This history is part of our heritage, part of who we are."

HNN - 4/22/2004

The Boston Globe
April 20, 2004, Tuesday ,THIRD EDITION

BYLINE: By Matthew Gilbert, Globe Staff
Two young men are hiking in the wilderness. Suddenly the skies open up, buckets of rain fall, and they take breathless refuge in a cozy farm hut. August lays a dry cloth on the hay, and his friend strips down and wraps himself in the cloth. "He was highly amused by the whole venture," August recalls, "whose romantic conclusion pleased him greatly. Besides, we were nice and warm by now."
No, this isn't the pivotal love scene from one of Gordon Merrick's lathery gay romance novels. It's a voice-over snippet derived from the memoir "Adolf Hitler, Friend From My Youth" by August Kubizek, and it's one of the many clues collected in a half-baked Cinemax documentary called "The Hidden Fuhrer: Debating the Enigma of Hitler's Sexuality." The movie, which premieres tonight at 7, asserts that the dictator may have been a closeted homosexual, despite the fact that he annihilated thousands of gays. Indeed, the documentary suggests that Hitler's homosexuality may have fueled his rounding up of gays; self-loathing and closeted homosexuals (Roy Cohn, for example) can certainly be among the most vigorously homophobic.

Taken on its own, the movie's presentation of Kubizek's insinuating book passage is not a strong piece of evidence - it's translated into English, read by a narrator in a lusty tone, and backed by music more fitting for "Love Is a Many-Splendored Thing." Like too much of "The Hidden Fuhrer," it's actually
a dreary bit of audience manipulation. Naturally, as the movie trots out story after story of Hitler's homosexuality, some possible and others quite ridiculous, you may find yourself tempted to wonder. After all, we've made assumptions about the likes of Eleanor Roosevelt with even less evidence. But ultimately, the movie fails to persuade, as it continually falls back on dramatic rumors and leaps in logic.
Actually, the documentary is a visual presentation of research done by Lothar Machtan for his controversial 2001 book "The Hidden Fuhrer." It uses period footage and talking heads to illustrate the German historian's work - how Hitler stayed in hotels known for sex between older and younger men, for example, and how he was consistently awkward and nonsexual with women. We hear that Hitler may have ordered crimes - murdering the openly gay Ernst Rohm, for example - to cover up his early gay indiscretions and to protect himself from blackmail. And we hear that Hitler's aesthetic fit a gay stereotype, including his love of opera and his admiration for masculine ideals. One commentator argues that Hitler's choice of Leni Riefenstahl to direct the propaganda film "Triumph of the Will," with its glorification of young male bodies, would be analogous to George W. Bush hiring Bruce Weber.
Whether you're slightly convinced or not, of course, the question remains: If Hitler had homosexual experiences, what difference does it make? Is Machtan's mission an attempt to further pathologize gay people in our culture, to say that being gay somehow played a role in the Final Solution? Those are questions "The Hidden Fuhrer" doesn't seriously address. Some of the smartest comments in the movie are from the local author Michael Bronski, who finds Machtan's endeavor "irresponsible." The attempt to make Hitler gay, he says, "functions as a form of cultural shorthand. Nazis are evil. Who else is evil? Well, homosexuals are evil."
And will knowing more about Hitler ever really amount to an explanation of his sheer evil? Sometimes reducing massive and profound events to easy explanations - the Holocaust comes down to Hitler's tortured homosexuality, for instance, or his failure to succeed as an artist - makes it too easy for us to dismiss them and blindly move on.
"The Hidden Fuhrer" is also dogged by dullness. It's a more cerebral and conventional documentary than the material merits. The movie isn't a debate about Hitler's sexuality, as the title promises; it gives only token attention to those naysayers, such as Bronski, who see Machtan's theory as the stuff of tabloids, not scholarship. For every long and stylized exploration into reports of Hitler's gay past, the movie delivers an obligatory, brief cut to experts saying it's all bosh. "Hitler sells. Sex sells," says author Geoffrey Giles. "I think that's what it comes down to."
Filmmakers Randy Barbato and Fenton Bailey probably should have abandoned objectivity altogether, rather than give us this poorly balanced scale. The filmmakers, who created more excitement in "The Eyes of Tammy Faye," could have made this movie about - and not out of - Machtan's scholarly crusade.

HNN - 4/22/2004

April 17, 2004, Saturday

SECTION: News; International: Pg. 14
HEADLINE: Ice Maiden triggers mother of all disputes in Siberia Revolt is in the air over a mummified princess. Julius Strauss reports from Gorno-Altaisk
HIGH in the Altai mountains of southern Siberia, where shamans still practise their ancient rites and most people are descended from Asiatic nomads, there is a whiff of revolt in the air.
Local officials, urged on by the increasingly militant electorate, are collecting signatures, writing petitions and demanding audiences with regional political leaders.
Their demands are simple and have nothing to do with the inept rule, poverty, corruption and ecological disasters dogging the region.
They want a 2,500-year-old mummy, found by Russian archaeologists 11 years ago and being studied in the Siberian capital of Novosibirsk, to be reinterred without delay.
Egged on by powerful shamans who local people believe act as go-betweens with the heavenly spirits, they say only the mummy's reburial will put an end to a rash of earthquakes and other problems assailing the region.
The mummy in question is an archaeological jewel. When her ornately tattooed body was found entombed in ice in an ancient burial chamber, the find was acclaimed as one of the most important in Russia's recent history. The Ice Maiden, as she was dubbed, had survived almost intact in the permafrost of the southern Siberian mountains, surrounded by a burial sacrifice of six horses in gilt harnesses.
Now the battle lines over her future are being drawn up. The fight pits modern Russian science against the ancient beliefs of the Altai people who lived in the region for centuries before Russian colonisers arrived 300 years ago. It is also at the heart of strained relations between Moscow, often seen as high-handed and out of touch, and the many indigenous peoples of Russia, growing in self-confidence and demanding ever-greater autonomy even as President Vladimir Putin seeks to rein them in.
The campaign to rebury the Ice Maiden began soon after a strong earthquake hit the region last September, destroying many buildings.
Aulkhan Djatkambayev, the head of the Kosh-Agach administration in the Southern Altai region, is a leading proponent of the cause.
"People say the failure to rebury the mummy has brought a string of misfortunes and I respect their opinions," he said. "It is not only a question of earthquakes, but there is a rising incidence of suicide and sickness.
"I respect science but we are nomads not scientists and every people has the right to its own level of understanding. Only by reburying the mummy can we lay the spirits to rest and calm people's fears."
The Russian scientists studying the mummy in Novosibirsk, some 400 miles north, scorn such talk.
Vyacheslav Molodin of the Russian Academy of Sciences, whose wife discovered the Ice Maiden, said that during the 1990s when funding was scarce, scientists at the research centre even gave some of their pay for expensive conservation materials.
He said: "Burying the mummy would make us a laughing stock of the world scientific community. As for the earthquakes, the Altai has always been a high-risk zone and earthquakes are nothing unusual there."
The discovery of the Ice Maiden was of great scientific importance. By studying her, archaeologists have been able to piece together much about a little-known people called the Pazyryks, fierce nomadic fighters and skilled horsemen who lived in the first millennium before Christ.
Previously historians had been forced to rely almost exclusively on the writings of Herodotus, who was fascinated by these warrior-nomads who grazed their herds at the ancient historical gateway known locally as the Pastures of Heaven. Today it is the point where Russia, Mongolia, China and Kazakhstan meet.
Herodotus wrote of virgin warriors, some of whom cut off a breast to make them better archers. He wrote: "No maiden may marry until she has killed a man of the enemy. Some die old women, unmarried, because they cannot fulfil the law."
The Ice Maiden, who died when she was about 25, was certainly an important member of society, though probably not a warrior or a princess, as local people claim, but a story-teller, a highly revered position in nomadic culture.
She was buried in a long coffin made of larch and a table was set out with horse-meat and mutton to accompany her into the afterlife. She wore a tall wooden headdress and coriander seeds were sprinkled around her.
There were many such burial sites but most were ruined by grave-robbers during the Dark Ages. The Ice Maiden survived only because looters did not search further after finding another body buried on top of her coffin. She was preserved because her body had been stuffed with peat and bark and ice seeped into the grave.
Even the most sceptical admitted that during the work to excavate her there were suspicions of strange forces at work. Jeanne Smoot, an American archaeologist at the dig, told of a sense of foreboding that plagued the team, and frequent nightmares.
When they took the mummy to Novosibirsk, their helicopter's engine failed and it crash-landed. On arrival, the body was almost ruined when it was placed in a freezer that had been used to store cheese and began to develop fungi. The Ice Maiden was saved only when she was rushed to Moscow for treatment by the embalmers who worked on Lenin's body.
In Gorno-Altaisk, the shabby, Soviet-built capital of the stunningly beautiful Altai region, talk of ill fortune shadowing the Ice Maiden comes as no surprise.
At the local market, traders said that until she was laid to rest bad luck would continue.
Tatyana Kazantseva, 48, said: "Our princess must be reburied immediately, everybody here agrees. Having her in a laboratory might be good for the scientists but it has brought only bad for us."
The director of the ethnographic museum, Rima Yerkinova, said: "Personally I am torn. As the director of the museum, I feel she must be returned to us to be put on display for our people to see. But something inside me says she should be reburied. It is the belief of our people."

HNN - 4/22/2004

The Times (London)
April 16, 2004, Friday

SECTION: Home news; Scotland; 11
HEADLINE: Unfinished Scott novel to be published after 172-year wait
BYLINE: Shirley English
AN UNFINISHED novel by Sir Walter Scott, written the year before he died and suppressed by his associates as an inferior work by an ailing old man, will finally be published in full for the first time next week.
It has taken experts more than seven years to decipher the 126 pages of sometimes incomprehensible handwriting, scant punctuation and eccentric spelling that make up the neglected manuscript of Reliquiae Trotcosienses.
But academics say the semi-fictional work that has emerg-ed 172 years after Scott's death reveals that the vigorous mind of the author of Waverley, Ivanhoe and Rob Roy was as powerful as ever despite his fading health.
Scott had suffered a series of strokes by the time he took up a commission by his publishers to write an account of his home at Abbotsford, near Melrose, detailing the contents of its library and museum collection. Instead of a guidebook, however, he wrote a semi-fictional novel featuring the musty historian Jonathan Oldbuck, a character from his earlier novel The Antiquary, who introduces the book before readers are taken on a tour of his imaginary home.
Written largely in Scott's own shaky hand, using his trademark brown ink, the novel pokes fun at its central hero and his obsession with the past, in what has now been recognised as a thinly veiled portrait of the author himself and his Abbotsford home. The novel -its Latin title roughly translates as The Relics of Trotcosey -finishes abruptly in the library on page 126, probably only three quarters complete.
The manuscripts, held for years at Abbotsford until they were moved to the National Library of Scotland, were deciphered by two world- renowned Scott scholars, Dr Alison Lumsden of Aberdeen University and Dr Gerard Carruthers of Glasgow University.
Dr Carruthers said: "It is certainly not Scott at his best but it is as imaginative and humorous as ever...It is quite historic in literary terms because unless something dramatic happens and a new discovery is made, this is really the last substantial, unpublished work by Sir Walter Scott."
Dr Lumsden said: "Even late in his life this book shows he is still interested in the interplay of history and fiction which he demonstrates so well in earlier works. He is having fun with literature and this is the Sir Walter Scott we know so well and love."
The result of their labours is published by Edinburgh University Press next Friday.

HNN - 4/22/2004

The Irish Times
April 16, 2004

HEADLINE: DUP claims to have found royal manuscript which proves name of city is Londonderry
The Democratic Unionist Party in Derry claims to have unearthed an historical royal manuscript which they believe settles once and for all the row over the official name of the city.
The manuscript, in antique book form, contains translations of royal charters granted almost 400 years ago which state the name of the city "shall for ever hereafter be and shall be named and called the city of Londonderry".
Yesterday's discovery came on the day when it was revealed that the nationalist-controlled city council had written to more than 170 non-governmental organisations, sports and community groups and business groups reminding them that under its policy the council only recognised the name Derry as being the official name of the city.
Among the groups which received the letter were the Londonderry Chamber of Commerce, the Londonderry Port and Harbour Commissioners and Londonderry District Sports Council.
Twenty years ago the council changed its name from Londonderry to Derry and nationalist councillors have maintained that that automatically changed the name of the city to Derry.
The city received five royal name charters between 1604 and 1689, but the second charter, granted by King James 1 on March 29th, 1613, is accepted by historians as being the most significant. That charter, a copy of which the DUP says it has uncovered, states that "the said city or town of Derry, for ever hereafter be and shall be named and called the city of Londonderry".
DUP Alderman Mr William Hay said the discovery of the royal manuscript proved legally and conclusively that Londonderry was the official name of the city.
"I just can't describe the anger which this move by the council to effectively force people to use the name Derry in correspondence with the council has caused among unionists. Any organisation which corresponds using the name Londonderry should be respected and left alone. The same goes for those who use the name Derry," said Mr Hay.
However, Sinn Fein councillor Mr Barney O'Hagan said the city needed to have one unambiguous brand name. "There is no republican agenda at work here. At present we use a plethora of names, trying to be all things to all people, and in doing that that gives an air of division.
"I don't think that claims by members of the Protestant community that the name Derry and the council's policy on the issue makes them feel alienated and unwanted stands up to any scrutiny at all.
"The unionists should be confident about their position in this city and we should all rally around that one name of Derry."

HNN - 4/22/2004

The Independent (London)
April 16, 2004, Friday

SECTION: First Edition; COMMENT; Pg. 8
Irving sparks protests with pre-election tour
VIn a move that will lead to widespread protests, the right-wing historian David Irving is planning a lecture tour of the UK in the run-up to June's European elections.
The controversial Holocaust revisionist will speak in 10 towns and cities - including London, Horsham, Halifax, Birkenhead, Farnborough, Newcastle and Edinburgh - on a visit to the UK in May.
Anti-racist groups yesterday promised to picket all of the lectures, claiming that the British National Party, which is fielding candidates in every UK region, is behind the scheduling of the tour.
A spokesman for the Anti-Nazi League said: "The BNP is already active in each of the towns he will visit. The lectures may not be formal party events, but you will see BNP supporters turning out in force for them. We believe it is part of drive to give the party intellectual kudos in advance of the elections."
In recent years, Irving - who claimed of Auschwitz: "It's baloney; it's a legend" - has mostly restricted his public speaking to the US.
Currently living in Key West, Florida, he yesterday confirmed that the visit would take place, but denied any formal BNP involvement. "I have no idea which towns the BNP are active in; we are not in contact with one another," he told Pandora.

HNN - 4/20/2004

Contact: Jennifer Heffelfinger
Alexander Street Press, LLC
800-889-5937 ext. 5


New Oral History Collection Gives Voice to Thousands;
Open Access through May

(Alexandria, VA - April 20, 2004) Alexander Street Press this week launched the largest Web index of English-language oral histories ever assembled – Oral History Online. More than 7,000 interviews and 850 collections, spanning topics from MARC records to Jim Crow to skateboarding in New Zealand, have been fully indexed and are – through May – freely accessible.
The collections and interviews reside in repositories around the world, ranging from Columbia University’s Oral History Research Office (New York) to the Imperial War Museum (London) to The Sydney Opera House (Australia). Said Eileen Lawrence, Alexander Street’s vice president of sales and marketing, “It’s as if we’re putting a microphone to thousands of original voices that have been speaking to us all along – but that we haven’t been able to hear.”
And what voices! The collection provides first-person narratives of the common man alongside those of world leaders. These are the intimate, oft-neglected stories that document what went on behind the scenes – not the well polished words of formal publications. Covering fields ranging from women’s studies to psychology to business, the narratives provide the power of perspectives that have hitherto been missed. For more than 2,700 interviews, the index provides keyword searching of transcripts and links to the associated full text. In more than 300 cases, audio or video links are also present.
The ease of Web publishing has spawned literally hundreds of new oral history collections, with more becoming available every year – but with no easy way to find or search them. “That difficulty of access has forced oral histories to take a back seat to more traditional sources for historical research – journals and books,” explained Stephen Rhind-Tutt, Alexander Street’s president. “And yet historians tell us that these narratives are essential for the teaching of twentieth century history.” Oral History Online, the first major audit of these materials, finally makes them easy to search and allows the narratives to be cited in formal publications.
Oral History Online launched with more than 7,000 interviews from 850 collections. Over the next year, the database is expected to grow to more than 300,000 interviews and more than 2,300 collections.
From now until May 31st Oral History Online is freely available through open access (no password required). Visit http://alexanderstreet.com for more information. Thereafter, it will be sold by annual subscription with prices scaled to library type and budget. Reviews are welcome. Please contact Jennifer Heffelfinger, manager of marketing and public relations (jheffelfinger@alexanderstreet.com or 800-889-5937 ext. 5).

Alexander Street Press, L.L.C., is an academic publisher of electronic full-text databases in the humanities and social sciences. Founded in June 2000, the company publishes collections in history, literature, women’s studies, sociology, ethnic and diversity studies, popular culture, film studies, the arts, and other areas. Alexander Street Press is located in Alexandria, Virginia.
EDITORS: For additional information on Alexander Street Press and its products, please contact Eileen Lawrence, Vice President, Sales and Marketing, 800-889-5937, email lawrence@alexanderstreet.com, or visit http://alexanderstreet.com.

Hans Vought - 4/20/2004

As a member of the Organization of American Historians, I am very upset with the board’s decision to make an “official” pronouncement on the gay marriage issue. OAH board members are certainly welcome to make whatever individual, private comments on the issue they wish, but they have NO RIGHT whatsoever to claim to speak on behalf of all OAH members. The announcement is worded so as to give the false impression that all American historians, or at least all OAH members, are opposed to maintaining the traditional heterosexual definition of marriage. Did they poll members? If so, I wasn’t contacted. The OAH board members have abused the position of authority in which they have been placed, and I call on all of them to resign immediately.

Furthermore, the argument that marriage has been a fluid institution throughout history, while certainly correct, is not a rational justification for ANY position on the issue. One might with equal justification argue that because marriage has been fluid throughout history, people should be free to marry multiple spouses, immediate family members, or ten-year-old children.

Jeremy Arthur McLellan - 4/19/2004

The historical arguments found in the resolution above would certainly give ample reason for opposing laws that restrict homosexual practice (such as sodomy). However, throughout the books by scholars of homosexual history, I have failed to find reference to the term "marriage" being used to refer to homosexual unions. What religious or merely pro-Amendment pundits have argued is that "marriage" is a religious term, and thus they are unwilling to relinquish the phrase to those who fall outside of what their religion accepts as legitimate. Has anyone found historical evidence to suggest that throughout history the term "marriage" has fluctuated along with public opinions toward sexuality?

Furthermore, the assertion that democracy will collapse if homosexual unions are given “marriage” status is somewhat of a straw-man, since one of the primary arguments that religious enthusiasts put forward is that a society is judged by how well it conforms to Christian moral standards (thus, “digression” or “failure” is a moral term, not a democratic one). Books by historians (like George Chauncey’s Gay New York) have successfully dispelled the myth (held by many Christians) that acceptance of homosexuality has emerged from some self-imposed closet in the 1970s. But the varying degrees of acceptance that Chauncey marshals in defense of his political views are precisely what religious authorities are opposing.

What I am requesting is two things: evidence that suggests that the term “marriage” has been used fluidly across history, and some sort of reason why this should give Christian politicians cause to uphold homosexual marriage.

If anyone finds any such evidence please send it to underthefigtree@aol.com

HNN - 4/19/2004

HNN received the following email from Jesse Lemisch on April 19, 2004. It went out to the historiansagainstwar listserv.

Below is the call for support of the Columbia strike that I just sent out. Historians against the War has a special problem. Although HAW members have supported resolutions put forward by GESO (Yale) at the AHA and OAH, HAW has refused to make an organizational endorsement on grounds that HAW is a "single-issue" organization. I have opposed this notion and hope to precipitate some discussion on this list about getting an organizational endorsement for the Columbia strike.

Jesse Lemisch

This morning, Joanne Landy and I joined the picket line at the 116th Street and Broadway entrance to Columbia. The essence of the problem seems to be this: a "liberal" university has been complicit with the Bush administration, and the arrival of Lee Bollinger hasn't made any difference; after a union election two years ago, Columbia appealed to the vile Bush's vile NLRB, which has impounded and thus never counted the ballots from a 2002 election by TA's/RA/s. In the face of clear and recently reaffirmed support for GSEU [Graduate Student Employees United] by graduate students and undergraduates, Columbia has stood fast. The strikers seek recognition (see their website, http://www.2110uaw.org/gseu/)

The picket was lively, though the inflated rat balloon that was there in 2002 has yet to make its appearance. Students carried signs appropriate to their discipline, with references to logic, Kant and duty, and, "this is not a sociology research project, this is a strike." Chants rhymed Columbia's stalling with "appalling." There are drums, whistles, cream cheese, bagels, pins, etc

Columbia Spectator supports the strike and describes Columbia's behavior as "atrocious." President Lee Bollinger (write to him at bollinger@columbia.edu) has stood against recognition, and historian Alan Brinkley (ab65@Columbia.edu), now the unversity's vocal point person as provost, has surprised history graduate students who see a contrast between his present practice and previous statements. I saw not one Columbia faculty member on the picket line in the hour I was there, and some names that would be recognizable to all on this list have taken the position that "this is not a good time," as if there ever were a good time. Write to friends on the Columbia faculty and urge them at very least to observe the picket lines and hold classes outside the campus. ("Off-campus" apparently allows for the use of Barnard and Teachers College classrooms.)

Faculty support. Write to Bollinger, Brinkley and your friends on the Columbia faculty. Perhaps we can compose a unified letter for signatures by non-Columbia faculty. It would be good if we could turn out in an organized way, with banners. at noon on Wednesday, when there will also be a support march by undergraduates. I have an unbreakable medical appointment at that hour, but would be glad to attempt to coordinate this.

Jesse Lemisch

Kenneth T. Tellis - 4/17/2004

It seems that the federal government of Canada does everything it can to promote the Canadien, who are are a people of mixed origin by calling them French-Canadian, when in fact they are a mixture of 24 different races including French and Native American Indian. This being the case how can anyone in their right mind call them French or French-Canadian? This is denial or their real origins in order to claim French heritage, and demean their Native American blood. Why should a people very much like the Cape Coloreds South Africa, claim a European heritage? Because from 1763 onwards, these descendents of the mixed blooded people called Habitants that France abandoned after ceding New France to Great Britain wanted to be called French and French-Canadian, rather than Metis or Mestizo.

Do not forget that these Canadien were also responsible for the massacre of Fort William Henry in August 1758, with the approval of Louis-Joseph Marquis de Montcalm, another butcher like Pierre Le Moyne d'iberville. Under these circumstances even the term canadienne-francaise is a historical joke and misnomer that has taken on a life of its own. French-Canadian has now become Francophone to cover up the lies of historical data. Mule or mutt would well suffice.

Indeed the people of Newfoundland have been insulted in honouring a murderer and acclaiming him a great hero, when murdered their people. But this just one more push by todays Francophone power that rules Canada, through its control of the Canadian Federal government in Ottawa.

HNN - 4/16/2004

Untitled Document RELEASE DATE: April 16, 2004

CONTACT: Lee Formwalt, Executive Director, Organization of American
Phone: (812) 855-7311, E-Mail: oah@oah.org

Media may also contact the leading national scholars, who are members
of the OAH, listed at the end of this press release for additional
comments or interviews related to same-sex marriage and U.S. history.

########################## FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE ##########################


The Executive Board of the Organization of American Historians, the
largest professional and learned society dedicated to the teaching and
study of American history, including legal and constitutional history,
the history of marriage and the family, and the history of civil rights
movements, voted unanimously to approve the following resolution in
opposition to President Bush's call for a federal constitutional
amendment banning gay marriage. This action took place at the
organization's annual meeting in Boston, Massachusetts, March 25-28,
2004. The OAH has more than 9,000 members including college and
university professors, precollegiate teachers, archivists, public
historians, independent scholars, and students:

Research by numerous scholars who have studied marriage, sexuality, and
kinship throughout U.S. history supports the view that diverse types of
families, including families built on same-sex partnerships, have
existed across time, even as law and government have accorded some of
those families unequal status. Laws and customs regulating marriage, as
well as the U.S. Constitution, have not been static, but have tended to
increase the number of people entitled to claim the benefits and
responsibilities of legal marriage. Because no evidence exists that a
viable democracy depends upon defining marriage as the union of one man
and one woman, and because the campaign against same-sex marriage
promotes discrimination, the Executive Board of the Organization of
American Historians strongly opposes a federal constitutional amendment
limiting marriage to heterosexual couples.

Founded in 1907, the Organization of American Historians is a nonprofit
association with more than 9,000 individual members and 2,300
institutional subscribers. OAH publishes three quarterly periodicals:
the OAH Newsletter, the OAH Magazine of History, an important classroom
tool for teachers, and the Journal of American History, which for
decades has been the leading scholarly journal for the study of the
American past.


George Chauncey, professor of history at the University of Chicago, is
author of Gay New York: Gender, Urban Culture, the Making of the Gay
Male World, 1890-1940 and has a book due out from Basic Books in
August, Why Marriage? The History Shaping Today's Debate over Gay Equality.
Phone: c/o Jamie Brickhouse at Basic Books, (212) 340-8161
E-Mail: c/o Jamie.Brickhouse@perseusbooks.com

Nancy Cott, professor of history at Harvard University and director of
the Schlesinger Library, is author of Public Vows: A History of
Marriage and the Nation.
E-Mail: ncott@fas.harvard.edu
(Professor Cott will provide her phone number in response to E-Mail

Estelle Freedman, professor of history at Stanford University, is the
co-author of Intimate Matters: A History of Sexuality in America (with
John DEmilio) and No Turning Back: The History of Feminism and the
Future of Women.
Phone: (650) 723-4951, E-Mail: ebf@stanford.edu

Michael Grossberg, editor of the American Historical Review and
professor of history and law at Indiana University, is the author of
Governing the Hearth: Law and the Family in Nineteenth-Century America.
Phone: (812) 855-7609, E-Mail: grossber@indiana.edu

Jeremy Arthur McLellan - 4/16/2004

The historical arguments found in the resolution above would certainly give ample reason for opposing laws that restrict homosexual practice (such as sodomy). However, throughout the books by scholars of homosexual history, I have failed to find reference to the term "marriage" being used to refer to homosexual unions. What religious or merely pro-Amendment pundits have argued is that "marriage" is a religious term, and thus they are unwilling to relinquish the phrase to those who fall outside of what their religion accepts as legitimate. Has anyone found historical evidence to suggest that throughout history the term "marriage" has fluctuated along with public opinions toward sexuality?

Furthermore, the assertion that democracy will collapse if homosexual unions are given “marriage” status is somewhat of a straw-man, since one of the primary arguments that religious enthusiasts put forward is that a society is judged by how well it conforms to Christian moral standards (thus, “digression” or “failure” is a moral term, not a democratic one). Books by historians (like George Chauncey’s Gay New York) have successfully dispelled the myth (held by many Christians) that acceptance of homosexuality has emerged from some self-imposed closet in the 1970s. But the varying degrees of acceptance that Chauncey marshals in defense of his political views are precisely what religious authorities are opposing.

What I am requesting is two things: evidence that suggests that the term “marriage” has been used fluidly across history, and some sort of reason why this should give Christian politicians cause to uphold homosexual marriage.

If anyone finds any such evidence please send it to underthefigtree@aol.com

HNN - 4/16/2004

NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE (Vol. 10, #16; 16 April 2004) by Bruce Craig (editor) National Coalition for History (NCH) Website http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch

1. Historical and Archival Communities Push for Senate Hearing on Archivist of the U.S. Position 2. Historians and Archivists Take a Closer Look at the Weinstein Nomination 3. State Department Turns Over Electronic Records to NARA 4. Job Postings -- Historian of the House and Director, National Museum of African American History and Culture 5. Bits and Bytes: Recovering Iraq's Past Grants Awarded; Gilder Lehrman Fellowships; Fordham Report 6. Articles of Interest: "Archeologists Mourn Plunder of Iraq's Treasures"
(Washington Post 10 April 2004)

1. HISTORICAL AND ARCHIVAL COMMUNITIES URGE SENATE HEARING ON ARCHIVIST OF THE U.S. POSITION Concern is growing within the archival and historical communities regarding the Bush administration's hoped for "fast-track" process to replace Archivist of the United States John Carlin with one of its own choosing -- historian Allen Weinstein. According to informed sources, the administration hopes to short-circuit the normal confirmation process and see Weinstein confirmed through an "expedited" process. Their goal
-- place Weinstein in the position prior to the November election.

According to Hill insiders, the effort to replace Carlin is coming from the highest levels of the White House. Reportedly, Karl Rove who is widely viewed as one of the president's chief political advisors, if not his political mastermind and, Alberto R. Gonzales, Counsel to the President, want their own archivist in place for two overarching reasons: first, because of the sensitive nature of certain presidential and executive department records likely to be opened in the near future, and second, because there is genuine concern in the White House that the president may not be re-elected.

Though it is not widely known, in January 2005, the first batch of records (the mandatory 12 years of closure having passed) relating to the president's father's administration will be subject to the Presidential Records Act (PRA) and could be opened. Another area of concern to presidential officials relates to the 9-11 Commission records. Because there is no mandatory 30-year closure rule (except for highly classified White House and Executive Department records and documents), all materials relating to the commission are scheduled to be transferred to the National Archives upon termination of the Commission later this year. These records could be made available to researchers and journalists as soon as they are processed by NARA.

In what appears to be a calculated move by administration officials, Rove and Gonzales have advanced the nomination of Weinstein fully aware that according to the "National Archives and Records Administration Act of 1984 (P.L. 98-497) the Archivist of the United States position is to be an appointment based "without regard to political affiliations and solely on the basis of the professional qualifications required to perform the duties and responsibilities of the office of the Archivist." If Weinstein is confirmed and if President Bush is not elected, then President Kerry could be accused of "politicizing" the position should he try to replace Weinstein. In fact, though, the president's strategy in seeking to replace Carlin at this time rather than later injects an element of partisanship that could give John Kerry, should he be elected president in November, ample justification to replace Weinstein in the same manner that the White House is seeking to replace Carlin.

Carlin has made it widely known that he anticipated stepping down from the Archivist position in July 2005, upon his 65th birthday, upon the tenth anniversary of his appointment to the position, and upon the completion of his ten-year strategic plan for NARA. His intention not to step down until then has been stated in several public interviews including (reportedly), in a recent interview with CNN's Brian Lamb (26 November 2003 broadcast of "National Journal"). Months back, recognizing that Carlin intended to step down next year, archival organizations had begun to pull together qualification statements and a "highly qualified" list of names for the White House to consider in finding Carlin's replacement. What appeared to be an orderly procedure to pass power from Carlin to a new archivist in summer 2005 has now been short-circuited.

There are two basic ways for the Archivist of the United States to be replaced -- resignation or replacement by the President. In his letter to NARA employees last week (see "Historian Allen Weinstein Slotted by Bush Administration to be Next Archivist of the United States" in NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE, Vol 10, #15 8 April 2004) Carlin stated that he was not resigning and he would not submit his resignation until a new archivist is appointed. There is no indication that the White House has any cause-related reason to replace Carlin and no reason was communicated to Congress when Weinstein's nomination was advanced formally last week. Some observers speculate that by refusing to resign until a new archivist is in place, Carlin is tacitly protesting what Hill insiders consider his "premature" removal.

If Carlin (a Democrat appointed by Bill Clinton) had resigned outright, the decks would have been cleared for the White House to promptly replace him.
However, that did not happen. It appears that the White House does not want any adverse publicity that would be generated by officially coming up with a "reason" for communicating to Congress its desire to replace Carlin as required by law ("the President shall communicate the reasons for any such removal to each House of the Congress"). Hence, by advancing Weinstein's nomination (which was received by the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee on 8 April) and by securing Weinstein's confirmation, the White House can then quietly force Carlin's resignation.

Owing to the controversy surrounding the anticipated resignation of Carlin, historians and archivists are calling for these and other issues to be addressed in Weinstein's confirmation hearing. To that end, some historical and archival organizations believe that John Carlin should also be invited to testify under oath regarding the pressure he is under and what he knows about his "premature" resignation. Governmental Affairs Committee staff, however, report that such a move would almost be unprecedented in a confirmation hearing.

On 14 April 2004, archival, historical, and other governmental watchdog organizations concerned both the politicization of the appointment process and the qualifications of the nominee, issued a "statement" calling for the Senate to conduct a confirmation hearing consistent with other positions of importance requiring Senate confirmation. The statement drafted by the Society of American Archivists and issued on behalf of several archival and historical organizations (see http://www.archivists.org/statements/weinstein.asp ) raises a concern about "the sudden announcement on April 8, 2004, that the White House has nominated Allen Weinstein to become the next Archivist of the United States."

According to the statement that has the endorsement of the Society of American Archivists, the Association of Research Libraries, Council of State Historical Records Coordinators, Northwest Archivists, Inc., the Association of Documentary Editors, Midwest Archives Conference, the American Association for State and Local History, and the Organization of American Historians: "Prior to the announcement, there was no consultation with professional organizations of archivists or historians. This is the first time since 1985 that the process of nominating an Archivist of the United States has not been open for public discussion and input. We believe that Professor Weinstein must -- through appropriate and public discussions and hearings -- demonstrate his ability to meet the criteria that will qualify him to serve as Archivist of the United States....the decision to appoint a new Archivist should be considered in accordance with both the letter and the spirit of the 1984 law."

The statement also calls on the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs "to schedule open hearings on this nomination in order to explore more fully 1) the reasons why the Archivist is being replaced, and 2) Professor Weinstein's qualifications to become Archivist of the United States."

2. HISTORIANS AND ARCHIVISTS BEGIN TO TAKE A CLOSER LOOK AT THE WEINSTEIN NOMINATION Now that the nomination of Allen Weinstein has been officially advanced to the Senate for confirmation (see related story above), historians and archivists are scrambling to learn more about the president's nominee.

Allen Weinstein possesses both strong Republican political connections and scholarly qualifications. In the past he has served as a foreign policy adviser to Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN) Chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Lugar has worked with Weinstein for years in promoting democracy across the globe. According to the senator, Weinstein "always has had a keen understanding and perspective of the complexities of democratic societies, qualities that will serve him well as head of the agency that preserves the nation's most important documents." (For Weinstein's official bio, tap into http://www.centerfordemocracy.org/awbio.html ).

But outside the world of Republican political activists and a small circle of historians of espionage, Weinstein is not very well known by many academics. Also, he is a virtual unknown to archivists. Though he possesses fine academic training and qualifications, Weinstein has not been a member of either the Organization of American Historians or the American Historical Association for years, essentially since his career turned to that of being an activist in the field of foreign relations and international service.

Several historians and journalists familiar with Weinstein's scholarly and popular writings (especially relating to the contentious Alger Hiss case) and career have started to express their views on the nominee privately and publicly. His nomination has been characterized by former National Security Archive founder and director Scott Armstrong as "the most cynical appointment of an Archivist possible. He [Weinstein] has a very clouded, very complicated, self-promoting, neo-con, politically manipulative record....While he uses historical documentation in his work, he is very selective in his use."

Much of the controversy on Weinstein's work relates to the disposition of his research notes and his research methods relating to his "Perjury: The Hiss-Chambers Case" (1978, rev. 1998) and a more recent work, "The Haunted
Wood" (1999). His book on the Alger Hiss case is considered in many
circles as definitive. Because Weinstein concluded that Alger Hiss was Soviet spy, he earned the wrath of Hiss's defenders (including Victor Navasky publisher of The Nation), but, at the same time, Weinstein found himself embraced by conservatives for the same reasons. "Perjury" served as his entree into the world of conservative causes and financing which Weinstein has tapped throughout the years to help underwrite his various projects. (For interesting reading focusing on the records-related issues regarding "Perjury," tap into:
http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml%3Fi=19971103&s=navasky and http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20010716&c=1&s=navasky ).

More controversial questions arise out of a more recent study in which allegedly Weinstein (or his publisher) paid a fee to the KGB for "exclusive access" to documents that no other historians have been able to see relating to Soviet espionage in America. Historian Ellen Schrecker writes about Weinstein's role in the payment to the KGB (in possible violation of Russian law) that resulted in the crafting of "The Haunted Wood"
co-authored by Weinstein and former KGB agent Alexander Vassiliev (For more on this controversial issue, tap into:
). Schrecker notes "this sort of research is not the kind that inspires confidence within the scholarly community" and it raises "ethical questions." (See also other recent postings on the History News Network by British economist-historian Roger
Sandilands: http://hnn.us/articles/printfriendly/4604.html and The Nation lead editorial, "The Haunted Archives" at:
http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20040503&s=editors ).

In addition to professional historians' concern about Weinstein's research methods and attitudes about access to records, Weinstein has yet to establish his credentials in the realm of archival management. Consequently, archivists have begun to compile a series of questions that Weinstein will be asked to respond to.

In the statement issued 14 April (see related story above) archivists have expressed a desire to learn more about Weinstein's "knowledge and understanding of the critical issues confronting NARA and the archival profession generally, especially the challenges of information technology, and the competing demands of public access to government records, privacy, homeland security, and ensuring the authenticity and integrity of all records." To that end, archivists wondered how Weinstein believes NARA "should balance competing interests for protecting sensitive or confidential information with those seeking to gain access to records created by government agencies; ideas for continuing essential programs as well as important new archival initiatives, such as the Electronic Records Archives project; his thoughts on fully supporting the National Historical Publications and Records Commission (NHPRC) whose grants help to raise the level of archival practice at state and local levels," and his "experience and demonstrated ability to lead and manage a large government agency such as NARA."

No doubt in the weeks ahead, answers to these and other questions stand to make this nomination controversial both in terms of the politicization of the office of Archivist of the United States and with respect to the nominee's specific qualifications. Hopefully, answers will come when the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee holds confirmation hearings that have yet to be scheduled.

3. STATE DEPARTMENT TURNS OVER ELECTRONIC RECORDS TO NARA On 13 April 2004, Archivist of the Unites States John W. Carlin accepted the first increment of the electronic diplomatic records from the Department of State dating from July 1973 to December 1974. These documents contain approximately 700,000 communications between the U.S.
State Department in Washington D.C. and foreign service posts all over the world. According to Carlin, "The State Department records are the second most heavily used category of records after genealogical resources" and that "this is the first major body of electronic records the National Archives has ever accepted."

At the ceremony, the State Department and the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) also signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) setting forth details on how the agencies will work cooperatively on standardizing formats for data transfer to the archives. The MOU provides a framework for a research initiative which uses the Electronic Records Archives' vital laboratory to further two common objectives: to resolve e-document transfer issues well in advance of their transfer and to explore relevant knowledge management technologies to provide the public with full, effective access to these records once they are permanently transferred to the National Archives.

The release of these records had been a subject of controversy for some years and was a topic of frequent discussion by historians who serve on the Department of State Advisory Committee on Historical Diplomatic Documentation. After a processing period, NARA will make these records available to the public via the Internet. Once on-line, these records will become the first publicly accessible application developed under the National Archives Electronic Records Archives program, Access to Archival Databases.

4. JOB POSTINGS -- HISTORIAN OF THE HOUSE AND DIRECTOR NATIONAL MUSEUM OF AFRICAN AMERICAN HISTORY As readers of this publication are aware, only on rare occasions do we post job announcements. However, this week two come to our attention -- a re-advertisement for the Historian of the House and a new posting for the Director of the new National Museum of African American History and Culture.

First Position -- U.S. House of Representatives (Washington, DC): "The Office of the Clerk, U.S. House of Representatives, is seeking a historian to serve as the in-house authority on House historical matters. Provide historical information to House leadership, members, and officers, conduct public lectures, participate in interviews and panel discussions, respond to press/media inquiries, serve as a member of the Capitol Visitors Center exhibit content team, and lead various initiatives such as establishing and developing oral history and photographic archives programs. Requirements include demonstrated authoritative knowledge of Congressional history and operations, particularly the House of Representatives. Experience participating in interviews, panel discussions and other media events.
Temperament to communicate with a variety of personalities in a tactful, pleasant, and professional manner. Advanced degree in American history preferred. Salary$103,969. Closing Date May 15, 2004. Fax cover letter and resume to Mr. Kenneth Kato, Office of History and Preservation, Office of the Clerk, U.S. House of Representatives, B-106 Cannon House Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20515. Fax (202) 226-5204. EOE. For a related URL tap into: http//www.clerkweb.house.gov ."

Second Position -- Director, National Museum of African American History and Culture: The Smithsonian Institution has announced the selection of a committee to conduct a nationwide search for a director of the new National Museum of African American History and Culture. Sheila P. Burke, Deputy Secretary and Chief Operating Officer of the Smithsonian, will chair the nine-member committee. Members of the committee are: James C. Early, director of cultural heritage policy at the Smithsonian's Center for Folklife and Cultural Heritage and acting director of the Anacostia Museum and Center for African American History and Culture; Deborah L. Mack, an independent museum consultant in Savannah, Ga.; Walter Massey, president of Morehouse College in Atlanta and a member of the Smithsonian's Board of Regents; Charles Ogletree, the Jesse Climenko Professor of Law and Associate Dean for Clinical Programs at Harvard University Law School; Rodney Slater, former Secretary of Transportation and partner at Patton Boggs, LLP, in Washington, D.C.; H. Patrick Swygert, president of Howard University in Washington, D.C.; J.C. Watts Jr., former congressman from Oklahoma and president of the J.C. Watts Companies based in Norman, Okla., and Washington, D.C.; Anthony Welters, chief executive officer of AmeriChoice Corp., a health care company based in Vienna, Va.; and W.
Richard West, director of the Smithsonian's National Museum of the American Indian.

The committee will meet for the first time between mid-May and early June, with the hope of making its recommendations for director by year's end. In addition, the Smithsonian will retain an outside search consultant to assist the committee in its efforts.

The duties of the director of the museum include coordinating the museum's fundraising efforts and budget development; identifying and refining the museum's mission; and developing public programs about the history, culture and contributions of African Americans. Individuals interested in applying for the position should write: jlapiana@si.edu.

Item #1 -- Recovering Iraq's Past Grants Awarded: The National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) has announced the first awards under the agency's
special initiative, "Recovering Iraq's Past." Six grants totaling
$559,000 will support projects to preserve and document Iraq's cultural resources and to develop education and training opportunities for Iraq's librarians, archivists, and preservation specialists. The awards are part of a coordinated effort by the U.S. Department of State, the U.S. Agency for International Development, and other federal agencies to assist in rebuilding the cultural heritage infrastructure in Iraq. Projects funded under the initiative focus on the preservation and documentation of resources, which, because of their intellectual content and value as cultural artifacts, are considered highly important for research, education, and public programming in the humanities. Additional information about the awards and assistance program special initiative can be found at: http://www.neh.gov .

Item #2 -- Gilder Lehrman Fellowships: The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History invites applications for short-term fellowships in two categories, Research Fellowships for post-doctoral scholars at every faculty rank, and Dissertation Fellowships for doctoral candidates who have completed exams and begun dissertation reading and writing. Fellowships support work in one of five archives: The Gilder Lehrman Collection, on deposit at The New York Historical Society; The Library of The New York Historical Society; The Columbia University Rare Book and Manuscript Library; The New York Public Library - Humanities and Social Sciences Library and the Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture (NYPL). The deadline for applications is 1 May 2004. For details about the program, please visit: http://www.gilderlehrman.org/historians/scholar1.html .

Item #3 -- Fordham Report: The Thomas B. Fordham Foundation has released its latest in a series of reports on the state of our history curriculum in schools around the country. This newest report, entitled "The Stealth
Curriculum: Manipulating America's History Teachers," authored by Sandra Stotsky, examines the supplemental materials and workshops that history teachers take to fill in the knowledge gaps on subjects ranging from the history of racism in the U.S. to the history of Islam, and finds many of them coming up short. According to the report, "instructional materials that teachers rely upon to supplement their textbooks and their own knowledge may be dangerous to children's educational health. The creators of such materials (and professional development programs for teachers) often inject bias and political manipulation into the minds of teachers and, subsequently, their students." To access the report, tap into:
http://www.edexcellence.net/foundation/publication/publication.cfm?id=331 .

One article this week: In "Archeologists Mourn Plunder of Iraq's Treasures" (Washington Post 10 April 2004) there is a discussion of looting of archeological sites in Iraq, "which began more than a decade ago, has picked up sharply in the past year amid the chaos that has sprung up since the war to overthrow Saddam Hussein. And as it has grown more pervasive, so it has become more organized and ingenious." For the article, tap into:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A1193-2004Apr10.html .

The National Coalition for History invites you to subscribe to this FREE weekly newsletter! You are also encouraged to redistribute the NCH Washington Updates to colleagues, friends, teachers, students and others who are interested in history and archives issues. A complete b backfile of these reports is maintained by H-Net on the NCH's recently updated web page
at: .

To subscribe to the "NCH Washington Update," send an e-mail message to listserv@h-net.msu.edu with the following text in the body of the message (and only this text): SUBSCRIBE H-NCH firstname lastname, institution. To unsubscribe send an e-mail message to: listserv@h-net.msu.edu according to the following model: SIGNOFF H-NCH.

You can accomplish the same tasks by tapping into the web interface at http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/lists/subscribe.cgi and at the "network" prompt, scroll down and select H-NCH; enter your name and affiliation and "submit".

HNN - 4/15/2004

The Times (London)
April 10, 2004, Saturday

SECTION: Home news; 11
HEADLINE: Titanic perfume comes in waves
BYLINE: Chris Johnston
A perfume re-created from a fragrance recovered from the wreck of the Titanic will go on sale this year.
The public was given its first whiff of the scent yesterday at the Edinburgh International Science Festival.
The fragrance was retrieved from the sunken ship four years ago and has been recreated by establishing its chemical composition and determining its components.
David Pybus, a perfume historian responsible for reproducing the scent, said: "It's like forensic science. We need only a few drops and then we can identify all the ingredients and create the perfume again." He described the smell as a mixture of rose and violet.
The original scent was created by Adolphe Saalfield, a German Jewish immigrant from Manchester. He had been in the first-class section of the ship, hoping to make his fortune in New York. He lost the pouch containing the vials as the boat sank in April 1912 and he jumped into a lifeboat.
That action destroyed his career as the public took a dim view of men who had survived on lifeboats designated for women and children.
The perfume may be called Heart of the Ocean, after the necklace worn by Kate Winslet in the Oscar-winning film.

Thomas E. Rodgers - 4/14/2004

My comments are based on the perspective of an adjunct professor in American history. I teach at a state university with about 10,000 students. The history department has only 1 FTE in American history. This semester 18 of the 20 courses in American history are being taught by adjuncts. As a professional organization the OAH is supposed to be dedicated to promoting the interests of the profession. Whatever the organization is doing for the profession, it is at best ineffective. It is also passionless. When I read the news from this past convention, I see such things as support for gay marriage and opposition to the war in Iraq. A few years ago the organization nearly bankrupted itself protesting allegations of discrimination that were loosely connected to a hotel the annual convention was meeting at.

When will we see the kind of passion the OAH and many of its most prominent members show for their political and social causes applied to the problems of underfunding of departments and the excessive use of adjuncts. If one wants to promote a social or political cause, one can join any number of organizations. If one wants to do something about what is plaguing the history profession, what does one do when his or her professional organizations reserve their passion for social and political causes. However noble the political or social cause, it is not supposed to be the focus of a professional organization. Why are the OAH and its leaders so sensitive to so many forms of social injustice, but so obtuse and passionless when it comes to the naked exploitation of so many members of their own profession?

HNN - 4/13/2004

The Times (London)
April 12, 2004, Monday

SECTION: Features; 25
HEADLINE: Will's will recalls a theatrical debt
BYLINE: David Thompson
THE National Archives has announced that one million wills from the last millennium will be placed online for the benefit of historians, genealogists and the curious. For £3 you can download the wills of Jane Austen, Napoleon, the Duke of Wellington, Percy Shelley, John Donne, Samuel Pepys and William Wordsworth. But the most famous, that of William Shakespeare, can be downloaded free.
Nearly every news report about this eminently valuable treasure trove of information has made reference to Shakespeare's bequest of his "second-best bed" to his wife, Anne Hathaway. It's reassuring that at least some papers are starting to acknowledge that - far from being a slight - the second-best bed was actually of genuine value to Anne, as Shakespeare's house (and the best bed) went to their daughter Judith and her husband.
Unfortunately, though, the most historically significant and culturally important aspect of Shakespeare's last will and testament continues to languish in relative obscurity.
In addition to provisions for his family, Shakespeare specifically left 26s 8d each for the purchase of rings of friendship for three people whose efforts transformed both the English stage and, even more significantly, literary history: Richard Burbage, John Heminge and Henry Condell.
Richard Burbage was, with Shakespeare, the leader of the Lord Chamberlain's Men, later the King's Men. Equally importantly, he played the leads in the first productions of Hamlet, Richard III, King Lear, Macbeth and many many more. Where Shakespeare transformed dramatic writing from declaratory pronouncements of feeling into subtle explorations of thought, desire, fear and love, Burbage brought the psychological depth needed to make the plays resonate for contemporary audiences. Together, the pair brought dramatic writing and playing to an entirely new level.
But even Burbage's contribution to theatre pales in comparison with the work of Heminge and Condell. After their friend Shakespeare's death, these two fellow members of the King's Men devoted several years to the compilation and publication of the First Folio of 1623. The textual authority of the First Folio has long been a matter of dispute for academics and some directors - but without it, nearly half of the plays in "the canon" would almost certainly be lost forever. No Julius Caesar, no Antony & Cleopatra, no Winter's Tale, no Twelfth Night, no As You Like It and no Tempest. The production of the First Folio ensured that not only would a record of the plays last beyond the author's era, but that working scripts would be available. Without Heminge and Condell, Shakespeare's work might, to paraphrase Ben Jonson, have been for an age rather than all time.
The author is deputy managing director of the sponsorship and media consultants Kallaway Ltd.

Peter Novick - 4/13/2004

I am, for various reasons, strongly opposed to a federal constitutional amendment limiting marriage to heterosexual couples. Among those reasons is that the proposed amendment represents an intrusion of the federal government into matters long--and wisely--reserved to the states. It's a TERRIBLE idea.

It's ALSO a terrible idea for the OAH to be issuing pronouncements on this matter, which clearly falls outside the boundary of the appropriate concerns of an organization of professional historians. The allegedly "historical" reasons for opposing the amendment contained in the Executive Board's resolution are so meretricious as to make the OAH appear ridiculous. Did those who drafted it do so with a straight face?

I have never accepted, and do not now accept, the claims of some conservative historians that they are a "persecuted minority" within the major professional associations. But it is hard to respond to the more moderate charge that social conservatives are "made to feel unwelcome" when the OAH takes an official stand on this controversial issue of public policy--one which has no conceivable connection with its mandate.

Richard Henry Morgan - 4/10/2004

Since we're casting a public policy question as falling within the preserve of historians (and thus within the purview of the Executive Board of the OAH), and since "no evidence exists that a viable democracy depends upon defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman", why does the Executive Board of the OAH stop at opposing a federal constitutional amendment limiting marriage to same-sex couples? Is there any evidence that polygamy is inconsistent with democracy? Just wondering. I wouldn't want to discriminate without evidence, and I'm sure the OAH wouldn't either.

And since a growing proportion of children are born out of wedlock, or subsequent to marriage are being raised by a single parent, and our democracy hasn't failed yet, shouldn't the OAH go beyond merely opposing an amendment, and take a positive position opposing marriage itself as discriminatory? Let's not be provincial, now.

HNN - 4/10/2004

The executive board of the Organization of American Historians has approved a resolution opposing "a federal constitutional amendment limiting marriage to heterosexual couples." The resolution was sponsored by Ellen Herman, a historian at University of Oregon. Over 100 members of the OAH signed a statement in support of the resolution. It was adopted by the board at the end of the annual meeting of the OAH on Sunday March 28, 2004. No vote was taken at the Business Meeting. The OAH plans to release a statement soon.

The OAH Resolution

Research by numerous scholars who have studied marriage, sexuality, and kinship throughout U.S. history supports the view that diverse types of families, including families built on same-sex partnerships, have existed across time, even as law and government have accorded some of those families unequal status. Laws and customs regulating marriage, as well as the U.S. Constitution, have not been static, but have tended to increase the number of people entitled to claim the benefits and responsibilities of legal marriage. Because no evidence exists that a viable democracy depends upon defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman, and because the campaign against same-sex marriage promotes discrimination, the Executive Board of the Organization of American Historians strongly opposes a federal constitutional amendment limiting marriage to heterosexual couples.

Signers of the Resolution

Untitled Document Brett L. Abrams, American University
Jean-Christophe Agnew, Yale University
A. J. Aiseirithe, University of Chicago
James Axtell, College of William and Mary
Lois Banner, University of Southern California
Peter Bardaglio, Ithaca College
Norma Basch, Rutgers University, Newark
Randolph W. Baxter, Saddleback College
Peter Boag, University of Colorado
Nan Alamilla Boyd, Sonoma State University
Howard Brick, Washington University
Mari Jo Buhle, Brown University
Paul Buhle, Brown University
Susan Cahn, State University of New York, Buffalo
Margot Canaday, University of Minnesota
Christopher Capozzola, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
E. Wayne Carp, Pacific Lutheran University
John Carson, University of Michigan
George Chauncey, University of Chicago
Mike Czaplicki, University of Chicago
Peggy Cooper Davis, New York University
John D'Emilio, University of Illinois, Chicago
Matthew Dennis, University of Oregon
Nancy Dowd, University of Florida
Doreen M. Drury, University of Massachusetts, Boston
Sara M. Evans, University of Minnesota
Paula Fass, University of California, Berkeley
Lane Fenrich, Northwestern University
Kirsten Fischer, University of Minnesota
Ellen Fitzpatrick, University of New Hampshire
Robert Frame, University of Minnesota
Estelle B. Freedman, Stanford University
Susan Freeman, Minnesota State University
Wendy Gamber, Indiana University
John Gilkeson, Jr., Arizona State University
James Goodman, Rutgers University, Newark
James N. Green, Brown University
Stephen Hahn, University of Pennsylvania
Evelynn Hammonds, Harvard University
Bert Hansen, Baruch College, CUNY
Ben Harris, University of New Hampshire
Hendrik Hartog, Princeton University
Jay Hatheway, Edgewood College
Lisa Gail Hazirjian, Duke University
Chad Heap, George Washington University
Ellen Herman, University of Oregon
Martha Hodes, New York University
John Howard, University of London
Sarah Igo, University of Pennsylvania
Nancy Isenberg, University of Tulsa
John Jackson, University of Colorado
Jesse W. Lord Johnson, Fordham University
Jacqueline Jones, Brandeis University
Michael Katz, University of Pennsylvania
Ben Keppel, University of Oklahoma
Wendy Kline, University of Cincinnati
Felicia Kornbluh, Duke University
Karen C. Krahulik, Duke University
Molly Ladd-Taylor, York University
Mark A. Largent, University of Puget Sound
Ian Lekus, Duke University, North Carolina State University
Elizabeth Lunbeck, Princeton University
Jennifer Manion, Rutgers University
Paul Mapp, College of William and Mary
James Martel, San Francisco State University
Elaine Tyler May, University of Minnesota
Martin Meeker, University of California, Berkeley
Barbara Melosh, George Mason University
Leisa Meyer, College of William and Mary
Joanne Meyerowitz, Indiana University
Heather Lee Miller, Ohio State University Press
Steven Mintz, University of Houston
Chad Montrie, University of Massachusetts, Lowell
Stephen O. Murray, El Instituto Obreg#n
Michael J. Murphy, Washington University
Scott Nelson, College of William and Mary
Alice O'Connor, University of California, Santa Barbara
Jeffrey Ostler, University of Oregon
Peggy Pascoe, University of Oregon
William Pencak, Pennsylvania State University
Gregory M. Pflugfelder, Columbia University
Daniel Pope, University of Oregon
Daniel K. Richter, University of Pennsylvania
Horacio N. Roque Ramirez, University of California, Santa Barbara
Elizabeth S. Reis, University of Oregon
Rosalind Rosenberg, Barnard College
Leila Rupp, University of California, Santa Barbara
Lynn Sacco, University of California, Santa Barbara
Jennifer Scanlon, Bowdoin College
Laurence Senelick, Tufts University
Carole Shammas, University of Southern California
Carol Sheriff, College of William and Mary
Michael Sherry, Northwestern University
Charley Shively, University of Massachusetts, Boston
Marlene Shore, York University
Jeff Sklansky, Oregon State University
Alexandra Minna Stern, University of Michigan
Timothy Stewart-Winter, University of Chicago
Tom Sugrue, University of Pennsylvania
Martin Summers, University of Oregon
Nancy Unger, Santa Clara University
Debbie Weinstein, Harvard University
Barbara Y. Welke, University of Minnesota
LeeAnn Whites, University of Missouri, Columbia
Les K. Wright, Mount Ida College
Leila Zenderland, California State University, Fullerton
Michael Zuckerman, University of Pennsylvania

HNN - 4/9/2004

National Security Archive Update, April 8, 2004

Archive Calls for Declassification of the President's Daily Brief

Documentation Experts Question Secrecy Myths, Coverup; Post Declassified Examples of Ten Historic PDBs on Web

For more information:
Thomas Blanton, 202/994-7000


Washington, D.C., April 8, 2004 - The National Security Archive at George Washington University today called for the public declassification of the controversial President's Daily Brief from August 6, 2001 - discussed at length in today's testimony by national security adviser Condoleezza Rice before the commission investigating the 9/11 attacks.

Commission members Bob Kerrey, Richard Ben-Veniste and Timothy Roemer each asked Dr. Rice to declassify the document, and each time she ducked the direct question, telling Mr. Roemer that "I think you know the sensitivity of presidential decision memoranda... I don't know if they've ever been made available in quite this way."

Archive director Thomas Blanton said, "In fact, ten historic President's Daily Briefs have previously been declassified - all are posted on the National Security Archive Web site - and the August 6, 2001 Brief could also be released simply by blacking out any still-sensitive sources-and-methods information."

Today's posting also includes a detailed refutation, written by Mr. Blanton, of PDB-related secrecy claims made by the White House, the CIA, and even the 9/11 commission's chairman, former New Jersey governor Thomas Kean. Mr. Kean said at today's hearing that the commission had formally requested declassification of the August 6 PDB.

"The White House reversed itself on letting Dr. Rice testify, after weeks of bad publicity, because administration credibility was at stake," said Mr. Blanton. "Let's hope they've learned a lesson so the turnabout happens more quickly on releasing the Brief."

THE NATIONAL SECURITY ARCHIVE is an independent non-governmental research institute and library located at The George Washington University in Washington, D.C. The Archive collects and publishes declassified documents acquired through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). A tax-exempt public charity, the Archive receives no U.S. government funding; its budget is supported by publication royalties and donations from foundations and individuals.
The National Security Archive does not and will never share the names or e-mail addresses of its subscribers with any other organization. Once a year, we will write you and ask for your financial support. We may also ask you for your ideas for Freedom of Information requests, documentation projects, or other issues that the Archive should take on. We would welcome your input, and any information you care to share with us about your special interests. But we do not sell or rent any information about subscribers to any other party.
You may leave the list at any time by sending a "SIGNOFF NSARCHIVE" command to .
You can also unsubscribe from the list anytime by using the following link:

HNN - 4/8/2004

NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE (Vol. 10, #15; 8 April 2004) by Bruce Craig (editor) National Coalition for History (NCH) Website http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch

1. Historian Allen Weinstein Slotted By Bush Administration to Be Next Archivist of the United States 2. OFAC Softens Draconian Guidelines
3. Scholar Sues for Free On-line Access to Books, Articles and Films
4. NPS Historians' Jobs Probably Secure – Not Subject to Outsourcing 5. Pulitzer Prizes Awarded To Historians 6. Bits and Bytes: NARA Request for Public Comments 7. Articles of Interest: "Embracing Relics and High Tech" (New York Times
4 April 2004)

//www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/04/20040408-2.html ) that President George W. Bush intends to nominate historian Allen Weinstein to become the ninth Archivist of the United States. Weinstein currently works at the International Foundation for Elections Systems as Senior Advisor for Democratic Institutions and Director of its Center for Democratic Initiatives. Along with former Archivist of the United State Don W.
Wilson, Weinstein is also a trustee of the Boston based Mary Baker Eddy Library for the Betterment of Humanity, which is affiliated with the Christian Science church.

Earlier in his career, Weinstein was a Professor at Boston University (1985-89), Georgetown University (1981-1984), and Smith College (1966-1981) where he served as a Professor of History and Chair of Smith's American Studies Program. He earned his bachelor's degree from Columbia College and his master's and Ph.D. from Yale University.

In 1985 Weinstein created and served as president of The Center for Democracy, a non-profit foundation located in Washington, D.C. The foundation seeks to promote and strengthen the democratic processes and played an active role in promoting democracy in former Soviet republics following the collapse of the Soviet Union. Weinstein's international awards include the United Nations Peace Medal (1986) for his "efforts to promote peace, dialogue and free elections in several critical parts of the world" and he was twice awarded (1990 and 1996) The Council of Europe's Silver Medal which was presented by its Parliamentary Assembly for Weinstein's "outstanding assistance and guidance over many years."

Weinstein is well-known as a historian of espionage. His most recent book
(1999) is "The Haunted Wood Soviet Espionage in America -- The Stalin Era." It is considered a controversial work that was co-authored with a Russian journalist Alexander Vassiliev, a former KGB agent. Weinstein's book "Perjury - The Hiss-Chambers Case" is, in many circles, considered the "definitive" work establishing that Alger Hiss was a Soviet
spy. Weinstein has also written more broadly with such books as "Freedom
and Crisis: An American History," "Between the Wars: American Foreign Policy From Versailles to Pearl Harbor," and "Prelude to Populism: Origins
of the Silver Issue" among his credits. Weinstein's articles and essays
have appeared in a wide range of scholarly and popular publications. (For more on Weinstein tap into: http://www.centerfordemocracy.org/awbio.html .)

Shortly after the White House announcement Archivist of the U.S. John Carlin issued the following statement to all NARA employees. It reads
(verbatim) as follows:

"Through two Administrations, I have had the honor to lead the National Archives and Records Administration as the Archivist of the United States. Upon taking the position in June 1995, I made a commitment to you and our stakeholders to remain at NARA long enough to see its transition from an agency primarily focused on paper records to one positioned to deal with the challenges posed by the electronic records now being created by our Government. At that time I estimated that such a transformation would take 8 to 10 years.

In June I will complete my ninth year as Archivist and as an agency, we have made great strides toward becoming the National Archives of the 21st century. We have not only made progress in using new technologies to preserve Government records, but also in making our invaluable documentary resources more widely available to the American people. This past winter, I informed the White House of our progress and noted that with the completion of a major initiative in the fall, it would be time for me to begin looking for other career opportunities.

Today President Bush announced the nomination of Allen Weinstein to be the next Archivist of the United States. Based on the past history of acting archivists running NARA for extended periods of time since we became an independent agency in 1985, the best interests of the agency are served by a smooth transition of leadership. Therefore, I will continue to serve as Archivist while the Senate undertakes the confirmation process. I will submit my resignation to the President effective upon the confirmation and swearing in of the Ninth Archivist of the United States.

As the confirmation process moves forward, I ask that you remain focused with me on our critically important work. I want to thank each and every one of you for your sincere commitment to NARA's mission of ready access to essential evidence-records which protect citizens' rights, ensure accountability in Government, and tell the story of our evolution as a democratic nation. I am immensely grateful for the opportunity I have had to lead this uniquely important agency, which serves not only the citizens of today, but all those citizens yet to come."

As Carlin states, nominees for the position of Archivist of the United States must be confirmed by the U.S. Senate. At this writing it is unknown how long the confirmation process may take.

On 2 April the U.S. Department of Treasury issued a letter somewhat easing barriers on editing manuscript materials from nations that are under U.S.
trade embargoes including Cuba, Iran, Libya, and Sudan (for background see "Ruling on Countries Under U.S. Sanctions Riles Publishers and Scholars" in NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE, Vol. 10 #12; 24 March 2004). The letter states that provided certain editorial criteria are met, editors and publishers of scholarly publications may engage in limited peer review and copy-editing of articles written by authors who live and work in such countries without facing fines and imprisonment.

Though the letter applies only to the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) -- an organization whose members produce about 30 percent of the world's literature in electrical and electronics engineering and computer science -- Treasury officials state the issuance provides other publishers with guidance on what the government deems "acceptable" editing and peer review practices and procedures. The letter also specifies certain editorial functions where there is a necessity to obtain a governmental license to publish. But according to scholarly publishers and other critics of recent Treasury Department rulings, the issuance to the IEEE is overly narrow in defining editing and peer review. More importantly, critics state that mere issuance of the letter that asserts authority over the licensing of author works violates basic First Amendment constitutional guarantees relating to the freedom of the press.

The policy clarification was communicated on 2 April 2004 in a letter (to access a redacted version of the letter see document titled, "Publishing Activities Involving Manuscripts from Sanctioned Countries" – Ruling number 0404405-FARCL-lA at http://www.ustreas.gov/offices/eotffc/ofac/rulings/index.html ) to the IEEE. The Institute had opted to comply with governmental requirements and last year had requested a "license" to publish from the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC). For months the organization had been waiting for a response.

In a nutshell, the ruling letter states that the IEEE's framework for peer-review and editing processes is exempt from OFAC regulation. The central issue addressed in the letter focuses on whether the standard scholarly peer review and editing processes "substantively" change manuscripts submitted by authors working or residing in countries under a U.S. sanction or trade embargo. If so, American nationals (i.e. scholarly editors and publishers) could be considered to be assisting enemies of the United States, which, of course, is a prohibited activity. The penalties for violating the so-called Trading With the Enemy Act are steep: fines of up to $1 million and prison terms of up to ten years could be imposed.

Though in 1988 Congress exempted "information or informational materials"
from government regulation, late last year OFAC issued a series of narrow rulings that exempted only those materials that had been "fully created" by people in the embargoed countries and that had not been significantly altered in the United States. Originally OFAC had ruled that mere "reordering of sentences, correction of syntax, grammar, and replacement of inappropriate words by U.S. persons, prior to publication, may result in a substantively altered or enhanced product, and is therefore prohibited." Furthermore, if a manuscript was "significantly altered" a publisher had to seek a license to publish from the government, which is what the IEEE did.

Some publishers have refused to seek licenses to publish, and, as a consequence, articles have not been published and proposed book contracts have been cancelled because of publishers fear of violating OFAC's interpretation of law. Some publishers assert that OFAC's interpretation of law and the newly established procedures violate the First Amendment and constitute a disturbing intrusion into the scholarly publishing process.

OFAC's 2 April ruling retreats somewhat from its previous draconian guidelines. In its letter the agency determined that IEEE's specific form of copy and style editing "does not constitute substantive or artistic alteration or enhancement of the informational material." However, a close look at the letter suggests that the exemption from OFAC licensing applies only to a specific type of peer review and style and copy-editing processes. The ruling does not say that peer review or copy editing "in general" are exempt from OFAC regulation, but only those specific procedures engaged in by the IEEE.

According to the ruling, peer review for "technical or scientific value...clarity, logic and language" is permitted. Also eight editing activities are specified as "allowable," including correcting grammar, spelling, and slight formatting of text. OFAC determined that such activities do not result in any "substantive or artistic alterations or enhancements of the manuscript" nor do they result in "substantial re-write or revision" of an author's manuscript, hence they are permitted activities. But co-authorship, commissioning, developmental editing, or any form of "collaborative interaction" between a publisher and foreign author is described as prohibited.

Critics of OFAC's recent rulings are probably now left with little recourse than to challenge Treasury's assertion of authority in federal court. OFAC has now clearly staked out its position and so have the critics. According to Peter Givler, Executive Director of the Association of American University Presses, "Treasury's continuing assertion that it has licensing authority over publishing is denied by the express language of the Berman Amendment as well as the First Amendment's protection of the freedom of the press."

For more on the issue from the perspective of publishers, tap into the Association of American Publishers webpage at: http://www.publishers.org and go to the links posted on the right side of the homepage.

3. SCHOLAR SUES FOR FREE ON-LINE ACCESS TO BOOKS, ARTICLES AND FILMS Lawrence Lessig, a prominent Stanford University law professor, has filed a federal lawsuit in an attempt to make entire books and films available on the Internet. By filing suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, Lessig is challenging current copyright law on behalf of two Internet archives. He argues that when taken collectively, the 1988 Berne Convention Implementation Act, the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998, and the Copyright Renewal Act are unconstitutional.

At issue is the accessibility of what are known as "orphan" works
-- out-of-print books, films, videos, and scholarly articles that have little or no commercial value but remain unaccessible to the public because of copyright restrictions. The lawsuit has been filed as Lessig began promoting his new book, Free Culture in which he claims that large media interests conspire to "lock down culture." Lessig's book is available free online at http://www.free-culture.cc .

4. NPS HISTORIANS' JOBS PROBABLY SECURE – NOT SUBJECT TO OUTSOURCING Some 200 federal historians employed by the National Park Service (NPS) appear to have won a modest victory in the Bush administration's ongoing effort to "out-source" federal jobs. An NPS advisory group has accepted a recommended classification revision that groups all job-series 170 historians as "core to mission." If the recommendation is approved by the NPS Director and also passes muster with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), historians, like park rangers and some of their cultural resource-related colleagues (archivists for example), would not be forced to compete with private sector contract employees in order to keep their jobs.

Prior to the reclassification, only a handful of historians with supervisory duties and a few others with unique job responsibilities were deemed exempt from A-76 assessment review. Although historians are now deemed "core to mission," some may still find their positions included in what the bureau terms "pre-assessments" – internal, area-specific personnel review studies designed to maximize efficiency of human resources. As a result of those studies, some historians could find their work loads reduced, expanded, or shifted to other operational units and areas. The bottom line, though, is that it will not be possible for Bush administration officials to replace NPS historians with private sector contractors on a wholesale basis as some would have liked.

Contracting for historical services from private sector sources has been an important function of many NPS history professionals regular job duties for years. Park administrative histories, historic resource studies, and other special history-based assessments often have been prepared by a host of highly competent contractors under the supervision of NPS regional and park historians. These activities are expected to continue if not increase in coming years. Critics of the NPS's A-76 outsourcing initiative had feared, however, that to save money some NPS superintendents and central office managers would like to see far more cultural resource work performed by outside contractors and would use the government's outsourcing initiative to accomplish this task.

5. PULITZER PRIZES AWARDED TO HISTORIANS This last week the Pulitzer Prizes in History, Biography, and General Non-fiction were awarded to scholars and journalists. Each winner will receive a cash prize of $10,000. Historian Steven Hahn won the History prize for his "A Nation Under Our Feet: Black Political Struggles in the Rural South From Slavery to the Great Migration." Hahn's book already had received the Bancroft Prize for the best book on American History and the Merle Curti Prize for the best book in social history earlier this year. Hahn's book is published by The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Finalists for the prize included David Maraniss's "They Marched Into Sunlight: War and Peace, Vietnam and America" and Daniel Okrent's "Great Fortune: The Epic of Rockefeller Center."

For Biography, the prize went to William Taubman for his "Khrushchev: The Man and His Era." Finalists nominated included James Gleick for his "Isaac
Newton" and Hayden Herrera for "Arshile Gorky: His Life and Work." The
General Non-Fiction prize went to Anne Applebaum for "Gulag: A History."
Finalists nominated for the prize included Steven Nadler for "Rembrandt's Jews" and Dana Priest's "The Mission: Waging War and Keeping Peace with America's Military."

Item #1 -- NARA Request for Public Comments: On 31 March 2004, the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) published a proposed revision to its research room rules in the Federal Register (page 16863). NARA proposes to revise its regulations on research room procedures. Included in the proposal is new language on access to unclassified records and donated historical materials, as well as access to national security information. This proposed rule will affect both scholarly researchers and the general public. The online text of the proposed rule appears
. All comments must be received on or before 1 June 2004.

One article this week: In "Embracing Relics and High Tech" (New York Times
4 April 2004) reporter Glenn Rifkin shows how a software entrepreneur has opened access to "some of the nation's most valuable relics from the obscurity of storage rooms and displaying them on the Internet," including "more than 33 million books, prints, recordings, periodicals, works of art, photographs and personal objects from the famous and the not-so-famous"
that otherwise not be accessible to the public at the Boston Public Library. For the article, tap into:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/04/business/yourmoney/04prof.html .

The National Coalition for History invites you to subscribe to this FREE weekly newsletter! You are also encouraged to redistribute the NCH Washington Updates to colleagues, friends, teachers, students and others who are interested in history and archives issues. A complete b backfile of these reports is maintained by H-Net on the NCH's recently updated web page
at: .

To subscribe to the "NCH Washington Update," send an e-mail message to listserv@h-net.msu.edu with the following text in the body of the message (and only this text): SUBSCRIBE H-NCH firstname lastname, institution. To unsubscribe send an e-mail message to: listserv@h-net.msu.edu according to the following model: SIGNOFF H-NCH.

You can accomplish the same tasks by tapping into the web interface at http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/lists/subscribe.cgi and at the "network" prompt, scroll down and select H-NCH; enter your name and affiliation and "submit".

HNN - 4/7/2004

NBC News Transcripts
SHOW: Today (7:00 AM ET) - NBC
April 5, 2004 Monday

HEADLINE: Times Square celebrates 100th anniversary; Mayor Bloomberg promotes it
KATIE COURIC, co-host:
And welcome back, everybody. Since the turn of the century, Times Square has been the place to party. Well, now there is a real reason to celebrate, because this week, Times Square turns 100. Here's a look back at Times Square through the last century.
Times Square has been called the crossroads of the world. And in the good old days, it was jumping. From the birth of Vaudeville and the speakeasies, to Broadway's Great White Way, this spot right in the heart of Manhattan has long been the life of the party for the city that never sleeps.
Mr. BARRY LEWIS (Archaeological Historian): The irony of it is that this square 100 years ago, 120 years ago was the furthest thing from the theaters you could imagine. This was where you actually bought a horse and a carriage.
COURIC: The area was originally called Long Acre Square, but that changed at the turn of the century when a little newspaper called The New York Times moved into the neighborhood.
Mr. ARTHUR OCKS SULZBERGER, Jr. (New York Times Publisher): It's one of the fascinating tidbits that so few people really know that Times Square was named after The New York Times.
COURIC: In the early 1900s, as a publicity stunt for their new building, The New York Times dropped a ball in the newly-named Times Square to usher in the new year.
Mr. LEWIS: Throughout the world, whatever time zone you're in, they can see the ball drop in Times Square, New York City, and they know that the year has officially begun.
COURIC: Times Square didn't just attract crowds celebrating the new year, over the decades people have flocked to see the biggest names in show biz, from "Old Blue Eyes" himself, to Elvis Presley. And this being New York, wacky stunts always drew a crowd.
Mr. LEWIS: That's what I loved about Times Square. It gave you just about anything you wanted.
COURIC: During the Depression, what people wanted was to escape to the movies, and to less expensive and more titillating forms of entertainment.
Mr. LEWIS: Many of the 42nd street theaters, became movie houses, burlesque houses, grind houses. Some of the hotels off the Square became bordellos.
COURIC: Historically, Times Square has been a place to gather in war and in peace, and even lock lips. For over seven decades, people have been drawn to Times Square to catch breaking news off the electronic ticker known as "The Zipper."
Mr. SULZBERGER, Jr.: And the news would flash across The Zipper, telling them about what was happening in the world according to The New York Times.
COURIC: The dazzling electric signs became legendary. The tackier and splashier, the better.
Mr. LEWIS: Especially electric lighting done so creatively. Done so sexily. Whoever thought the electric bulb could be sexy? But in Times Square it was.
COURIC: The decline of Times Square began in the '60s, hit rock bottom in the '70s, and was probably portrayed best on the big screen in "Midnight Cowboy" and "Taxi Driver."
(Clip from "Taxi Driver")
Mr. LEWIS: It became known as the place for pimps, prostitutes, for drug dealing for all of the seamier side of New York. And that scared people off even more. Even tourists were afraid to come here.
COURIC: But with the help of Mickey Mouse, in the '90s, Times Square cleaned up its act. Today, Times Square stretches from 53rd Street all the way down to 40th. It is always changing just like the city itself, and it's always where the action is.
Mr. LEWIS: You can stand on the sidewalk and watch the whole world go by through Times Square. No wonder they call it the crossroads of the world.
COURIC: And Mayor Michael Bloomberg is here joining me on top of the beautiful Marriott Marquis rooftop here in the heart of Times Square.
Hey, Mr. Mayor.
Mayor MICHAEL BLOOMBERG (New York City Mayor): Great weather and a good time.
COURIC: Yeah...
Mayor BLOOMBERG: And New York around us.
COURIC: ...it's brisk, as you said.
Mayor BLOOMBERG: Brisk is the way the tourist people would describe it. Cold is to you and me.
COURIC: So tell me, do you have any favorite moment from Times Square?
Mayor BLOOMBERG: Well, my inauguration took place in Times Square, and I thought--it was right after 9/11, three months later--and I thought it was really time to really say to everybody, 'The city still goes on. The terrorists aren't going to beat us. America is still together.' And I think that's what Times Square is all about. It's America. It really is.

HNN - 4/7/2004

Sudbury, Massachusetts—The tenth annual Ralph Waldo Emerson Prizes for student work of outstanding academic promise in history at the secondary level will be awarded this Spring to Jacob C. Goldberg, a Senior at the Horace Mann School in New York, Kimberly Salomé Greenberg of Great Neck North High School in New York (now at Wesleyan), Jennifer Hsiao of Hall High School in Hartford, Connecticut, (now at Princeton), Michael Korzinstone of Upper Canada College in Toronto, Canada (now at the Wharton School), and Jan Michal Zapendowski of St. Mark’s School of Dallas, Texas (now at Brown), according to Will Fitzhugh, Editor and Publisher of The Concord Review.

The awards will be hosted by the History Department of The Horace Mann School in the Bronx, New York, in the afternoon on Saturday, April 17, 2004.

Each Emerson Prize laureate will receive a check for $3,000, and a copy of David McCullough’s Pulitzer Prize-winning biography Truman, along with the letter of award. Past Emerson awards have gone to 30 high school students, from Czechoslovakia, Colorado, Florida, California, Louisiana, Tennessee, Vermont, New Zealand, Maryland, Utah, Massachusetts, Russia, Washington State, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Illinois, Japan, and New York.

Founded in 1987, The Concord Review, the first and only quarterly journal in the world for the academic work of secondary students, has published 58 issues with 638 essays (average 5,500 words) by students of history in forty-three states and thirty-three other countries. These exemplary essays have been distributed to subscribers throughout the United States and in thirty-two other countries.

David McCullough wrote: “I very much like and support what you’re doing with The Concord Review. It’s original, important, and greatly needed, now more than ever, with the problem of historic illiteracy growing steadily worse among the high school generation nearly everywhere in the country.” Diane Ravitch, Senior Research Scholar at New York University and former Assistant Secretary of Education has said: “The Concord Review provides a splendid forum for the best student work in history. It deserves the support of everyone in the country who cares about improving the study of history in the schools.” Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., Historian, has said: “The Concord Review offers young people a unique incentive to think and write carefully and well…The Concord Review inspires and honors historical literacy. It should be in every high school in the land.”

Will Fitzhugh [founder]
National History Club
The Concord Review
National Writing Board
730 Boston Post Road, Suite 24
Sudbury, MA 01776 USA
978-443-0022; 800-331-5007
http://www.tcr.org; fitzhugh@tcr.org
Varsity Academics®

HNN - 4/6/2004

Sightings 4/5/04

Wilken's Sneak Peek
-- Martin E. Marty

No, I am not guilty of plagiarism or piracy, but I may be guilty of promotion: while the gist and meat of this column come directly from someone else's, Sightings will give full credit. So, no plagiarism. Promotion? Guilty.

The column is "The ABC of Holy Week" by Robert Louis Wilken, "a professor of the history of Christianity at the University of Virginia." Robert and I go back all the way to 1960, when he was my "Sunday Assistant Pastor" in a busy suburban church where I was pastor. He went on to complete a doctorate in early Christianity and has written a number of path-breaking books. I didn't know he was at home in popular culture and television criticism (as I am not) until I read him in The Wall Street Journal on Friday (April 2). So, let him do my work for me and perhaps together we can perform a service for those of you -- I suppose, and maybe hope, the majority of you -- who do not read that newspaper every day, as I do.

To the point (at last): Wilken has seen in advance an ABC program airing tonight, a three-hour documentary titled "Jesus and Paul: The Word and the Witness," narrated by Peter Jennings. Jennings is a pioneer of sorts; he brought a full-time religion-telecaster to his prime-time news program but then dropped her and the regular religion theme, I don't know why. I doubt that it was penance, but it may have been curiosity and a sense of public service, that helped him bring to the TV screen what Wilken, who never suffers fools or foolishness gladly, speaks of in very positive terms.

Jesus from the beginning is presented as "an object of faith and devotion … not merely a historical figure." We are shown excellent examples of Christian art, historical-type reporting, first-person analysis by some who are not in the usual cast of characters in public religion, and some "refreshing" theological statements. Wilken cannot resist a bit of a smart crack against Harvard Divinity School as he praises the choice of an evangelical to make some comment. The quiet crack and the choice are standard these days.

Tolerant of the Christian rock used to pose some personal-theological question, Wilken does praise the range of scholars called to comment. Jewish scholars especially, he says, are generous and perceptive. The critic is happy to see a treatment of Paul, so often the bad guy in films and books devoted to Jesus, but unhappy (as I would be) to find him portrayed as "a puritanical and intolerant moralist on the wrong side of elite opinion today."

Being a learned historian, Wilken cannot not find some historical blunders and sees some silliness in one Jennings interview. "But this is a show for serious-minded viewers, scholarly yet respectful of belief, informative and entertaining." Coming from Prof. Wilken, that's almost four stars!

I'll be driving to a college commitment in Iowa today, so I won't see it, but I hope many of you will be watching and checking up on Prof. Wilken, Peter Jennings, Paul, and, of course, Jesus. And next week I'll do my own work of Sightings again.

And if you share Wilken's enthusiasm, let the Jennings people know.


Sightings comes from the Martin Marty Center at the University of Chicago Divinity School.

Submissions policy
Sightings welcomes submissions of 500 to 750 words in length that seek to illuminate and interpret the forces of faith in a pluralist society. Previous columns give a good indication of the topical range and tone for acceptable essays. The editor also encourages new approaches to issues related to religion and public life.

Columns may be quoted or republished in full, with attribution to the author of the column, Sightings, and the Martin Marty Center at the University of Chicago Divinity School.

Contact information
Please send all inquiries, comments, and submissions to Elizabeth Hayes Alvarez, managing editor of Sightings, at sightings-admin@listhost.uchicago.edu. Subscribe, unsubscribe, or manage your subscription at the Sightings subscription page.


HNN - 4/5/2004

Louise Barnett, PA News http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=2740580
April 5, 2004

The British are a nation of history dunces with many believing Adolf Hitler never existed, a new survey has revealed.

A quarter of those interviewed were not sure if the Battle of Trafalgar was a real historic event, while one in seven did not know the Battle of Hastings really took place, the survey showed.

Researchers found that many of the 2,069 adults questioned could not tell fact from fiction. More than one in 20 thought the sci-fi classic War of the Worlds, in which Earth is invaded by Martians, was a historical event.

Some even believed the Battle of Helm’s Deep from the Lord of the Rings trilogy and the Battle of Endor from Return of the Jedi actually took place.

Almost half of those asked thought William Wallace never existed and more than half believed King Arthur was real.

A quarter thought Robin Hood was a genuine historical figure, while one in 20 thought Conan the Barbarian was real.

Some of the respondents confused popular television series with fact, with some believing Edmond Blackadder and Zena Warrior Princess had existed.

The survey of adults aged 16 and over was commissioned to coincide with the 300th anniversary of the Battle of Blenheim.

Yet the results showed that, despite being one of the greatest victories in British military history, nearly three quarters of the population had never heard of the battle.

John Hoy, chief executive of Blenheim Palace, said: “We set out to establish where the Battle of Blenheim stood in the nation’s consciousness and were amazed to find out that so few people had even heard of the battle. We’re determined to do all we can to change this.

“The problem for many people is that they associate history with dry and dusty dates and facts.

“Once they realise that history is about people, the way we used to live and the way we live now, it becomes more relevant and more exciting.”

The 300th anniversary of the Battle of Blenheim will take place on August 13.

HNN - 4/5/2004

NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE (Vol. 10, #14; 5 April 2004) by Bruce Craig (editor) National Coalition for History (NCH) Website http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch


As regular readers of the NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE are aware, last week the House Interior and Related Agencies Subcommittee on Appropriations conducted a hearing on the proposed budget for the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH). At the opening of that hearing, Subcommittee Chair Charles Taylor (R-NC) indicated that was going to be a "difficult year for appropriations" at all levels. This holds true in both the House and the Senate.

While the hearing in the House is over, we have an opportunity to advocate on behalf of the NEH in the Senate! A "Dear Colleague" letter (a "Dear Colleague" letter is a mechanism where one member of Congress urges another member to support a specific legislative proposal) is now circulating in the Senate in support of the administration's FY 2005 budget request of
$162 million for the NEH. The letter being circulated is co-sponsored by Senators Richard Durbin (D-IL) and Susan Collins (R-ME).

Please take a moment TODAY to contact your Senators' offices, either by phone or fax, and ask them to contact either Senator Durbin or Collins's office and "sign-on" to this letter. (The letter will be submitted to the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior and Related Agencies.)

To contact your Senator, call the U.S. Capitol switchboard at (202)
224-3121 and ask to be connected to your Senator's office. Once connected, inform staff that you support the Bush administration's recommendation for
$162 million for the NEH and urge the Senator to "sign-on" to the Dear Colleague letter being circulated by Senators Durbin and Collins. To sign-on representatives of Senate offices need to contact one of the following legislative aides:

Caleb Gibson, in the office of Illinois Senator Richard J. Durbin caleb_gibson@durbin.senate.gov
(202) 224-2152
Brooke Hayes, in the office of Maine Senator Collins brooke_hayes@collins.senate.gov
(202) 224-2523

Before you end your conversation, be sure to leave your name and address and ask for written confirmation as to the action taken by your member of Congress.

Please call today!

The National Coalition for History invites you to subscribe to this FREE weekly newsletter! You are also encouraged to redistribute the NCH Washington Updates to colleagues, friends, teachers, students and others who are interested in history and archives issues. A complete b backfile of these reports is maintained by H-Net on the NCH's recently updated web page
at: .

To subscribe to the "NCH Washington Update," send an e-mail message to listserv@h-net.msu.edu with the following text in the body of the message (and only this text): SUBSCRIBE H-NCH firstname lastname, institution. To unsubscribe send an e-mail message to: listserv@h-net.msu.edu according to the following model: SIGNOFF H-NCH.

You can accomplish the same tasks by tapping into the web interface at http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/lists/subscribe.cgi and at the "network" prompt, scroll down and select H-NCH; enter your name and affiliation and "submit".

HNN - 4/2/2004

NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE (Vol. 10, #13; 2 April 2004) by Bruce Craig (editor) National Coalition for History (NCH) Website http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch

1. Appropriations Hearing: Focus on the NEH
2. Appropriations Hearing: Focus on the Parks
3. Court Issues Decision on Presidential Records Suit
4. Report: OAH Boston Meeting
5. Bits and Bytes: The Rudolph W. Giuliani Papers, An Update; Meeting
Announcement: The Mid-Atlantic Regional Center for the Humanities 6. Articles of Interest: "The President's Daily Brief," (National Security Archives website; 22 March 2004)

1. APPROPRIATIONS HEARING: FOCUS ON THE NEH On 1 April 2004, National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) Chair Bruce Cole appeared before the House Interior and Related Agencies appropriations subcommittee to speak in support of the Bush administration's FY-2005 request of $162 million for the NEH. In his opening remarks, subcommittee Chair Charles Taylor (R-NC) stated that FY-2005 was going to be a "difficult year for appropriations" at all levels. Ranking Member Norman Dicks (D-WA) nodded in agreement but added that NEH funding levels already "lag significantly behind historic levels" and that he fully supported the administration's request of $162 million.

In delivering his testimony Cole deviated significantly from his prepared statement. He tailored it to his audience and used his time adroitly to focus on the new programs that he wanted to see funded. He used the occasion to announce that a memorandum of understanding had been just signed (31 March) with the Library of Congress that lays the foundation for the "National Digital Newspaper Program" -- a project that will convert microfilm copies of U.S. newspapers into fully searchable digital files and then place them on the Internet. He also spoke to the importance of various other components of the "We the People" initiative, including the "Landmarks of American History Program" and the "We the People Bookshelf"
program. Cole also took special care to emphasize the importance of the "lynchpin in the NEH's efforts to extend its reach" -- the $3.2 million request for the 56 state humanities councils.

During questioning, Rep. Taylor asked Cole to prioritize the programs that he especially wanted funded. Cole was not taken off-guard by the question and answered that "all the ‘We the People' programs are important," and then itemized the projects of particular importance: the digital newspaper program, the landmarks projects, the bookshelf program, and other digital conversion projects. Rep. Dicks asked Cole to explain why NEH programs were important. Cole responded that "democracy is not self-sustaining" and that as America must provide for its national security both inside and outside of its boundaries. "It's important to make the case that we are spending billions of dollars, rightly so, to defend our rights abroad" said Cole, "but if our citizens don't know what those rights are, then half of that defense is missing."

Members questioned Cole about administrative expenses and posed concerns about duplicate efforts with other agencies, such as the Department of Education. They also wondered whether the NEH should consider placing more emphasis on digital projects as "they reach more people" in a "cost-effective manner." Cole gracefully answered all the questions.
Regarding the issue of whether to place greater emphasis on digital projects, Cole explained that, while there is a place for such projects in his budget, they are no substitute for the teaching and learning that takes place at historic sites or the interaction between participants and scholars in summer seminars and other educational outreach programs.

Comments supportive of the proposed NEH budget were also offered by the other two committee members in attendance: Rep. James Moran (D-VA) and Rep.
Maurice Hinchey (D-NY).

All in all, the general tone of the hearing was upbeat. Given the present environment of fiscal austerity, the hearing probably could not have gone much better. NEH supporters now await word on the committee's mark-up numbers (expected in late spring or early summer) -- totals that will undoubted less but hopefully not significantly under those requested by the administration.

In contrast to the NEH hearing, last week's hearing on the budget request for the National Park Service was not nearly so cordial.

In recent months, the leadership of the National Park Service (NPS) – the federal bureau charged with the stewardship of some of the nation's most important natural and historic sites – has come under increasing criticism and scrutiny. The central target has been the Director of the NPS, Fran P.

In a recent report, the National Parks Conservation Association, a national park citizen watch-dog group, documented that "severe" staffing shortages are "crippling" the parks and that Mainella is doing little to address the problem. Another recent survey of some 1,361 NPS employees indicates that employee morale is at an "all-time low" and, in addition, two-thirds of those surveyed worried that politics is driving decision making in the
service. Denny Huffman, a former superintendent of Dinosaur National
Monument and spokesman for the Coalition of Concerned National Park Service Retirees, states that under Mainella's watch as director, a "culture of fear" has developed in the NPS.

It was under this cloud that on 25 March 2004, Director Mainella appeared to defend the administration's proposal for a modest 4.8% increase ($76.5
million) for the parks before the House subcommittee on appropriations which oversees the NPS budget. In her opening statement, the director declared that under her watch the parks have "more funds per employee, per acre, and per visitor than at any time in its history." She predicted that, contrary to recent reports by watchdog groups, this summer, "the parks will be open, their natural resources will be protected, and they will provide outstanding visitor services."

Mainella faced sharp questioning about some of her recent actions by members of the committee on both sides of the aisle. Her decision to allocate construction funds for a new $100 million visitor center at Valley Forge National Historical Park without obtaining Congressional approval drew particular criticism. Mainella responded by stating that she would review the construction projects.

Much of the hearing focused on the NPS's travel expenses and the allegation that Mainella needed to put a stop to "reckless travel spending." In fact, last year, of the $2.2 billion enacted budget, the NPS spent a relatively small part – some $44 million on travel (most of it on training and other official park planning and operations business), with only a portion ($300,000 in FY 2003) earmarked for travel to foreign countries, most of which was for the support of the NPS's international assistance program.

In her response to criticism Mainella told the committee that she was canceling all foreign travel for employees (one proximate result of this decision is that no National Park Service employees will be able to officially attend the annual meeting of the National Council for Public History that is taking place in Victoria, British Columbia, this week) and that in addition, she was ordering an across-the-board cut in domestic travel. Nevertheless, because of the committee's distrust of Maniella's ability to deploy resources, it was announced that in the House approved FY 2005 NPS budget, there will be a provision banning foreign travel without the committee's explicit approval.

In a related development, last week Representatives Mark Souder (R-IN) and Brian Baird (D-WA) announced the formation of a bi-partisan 32-member National Parks Caucus that will seek to "ensure that the legacy inherited by our generation is adequately preserved for the next." One of the concerns of the members of the new caucus is the leadership provided by Mainella.

Even if President Bush is re-elected, whether or not Mainella will continue as the NPS director, is a matter of considerable speculation. Given the bad publicity the director has been generating for the Bush administration lately, and given the mistrust of her actions by the Republican controlled Congressional appropriations committee, some park-watchers consider that her continued presence at the helm of the NPS is becoming a liability in the president's re-election effort.

3. COURT ISSUES DECISION ON PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS SUIT In November 2001, President George W. Bush issued Executive Order (EO)
13233 that purported to "further implement" the Presidential Records Act
(PRA) of 1978. Based on concerns focusing on the Bush administration's effort to delay the release of some of Ronald Reagan's presidential records, a coalition of historical, archival, anti-government secrecy organizations, and a number of scholars filed suit in federal court contending that the EO was an impermissible exercise of executive power.
For nearly three years the suit languished in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. On 28 March 2004, Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly rendered her decision and dismissed the plaintiff's suit, contending that "it is not justiciable at this juncture."

In making her decision the judge did not pass judgement on the merits of the case. She merely claimed since the Reagan documents that were the subject of litigation had been released (with the exception of 11 documents [a total of 74 pages] that she maintained were being "properly withheld"
based on President Bush's decision "to assert constitutionally based privilege in concurrence with former President Reagan"), and with no other presidential records subject to dispute, the claim was no longer justiciable. She also stated that the plaintiffs did not show that they had "standing to bring the suit" and that their claim is not "ripe."

In order to have "standing" the plaintiffs needed to establish that they had suffered an "injury in fact" and not one that was merely hypothetical. The judge found that originally the plaintiffs' inability to access materials was indeed "an injury in fact," yet since the papers have been released their claim now "amounts to something less than a denial of access." The court also noted that there was no evidence presented to suggest that "future injury is sufficiently imminent."

On the issue of "ripeness," there is a constitutional requirement of "impending injury" which "plaintiffs have not established." In order to be ripe there must be "live controversy at each stage of litigation." That test not being met, a review of the plaintiff's claims "is inappropriate at this time" stated Kollar-Kotelly. The judge concluded her 23-page opinion by stating: "In keeping with the Article III prohibition on advisory opinions, the Court must find this suit non-justiciable, and consequently the Court has not jurisdiction over this case at this time" – language suggesting that in the future it may be appropriate to bring suit again.

According to Public Citizen Litigation Group's Scott Nelson, the attorney handling the case, the plaintiffs have 60 days in which to appeal, and a shorter amount of time to request an amendment to the judgement. Since there may be a number of errors in the interpretation of fact in the ruling, and because 74 pages are still being withheld by the Bush administration and, in fact, are under "administrative appeal," the suit may still be justiciable. A decision on whether to challenge the judge's ruling will need to be made by the plaintiffs in coming weeks.

Thanks to the Federation of American Scientists, the ruling by Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly is posted at: http://www.fas.org/sgp/jud/aha.pdf .

From 25-28 March 2004, nearly 3,000 historians and others interested in American history convened in Boston, Massachusetts for the 97th annual meeting of the Organization of American Historians. Attendees could select from nearly 250 sessions and over a dozen guided tours and special events.
The theme of the conference was "American Revolutions."

It was a memorable conference with absolutely splendid evening events. The first night, Howard Zinn spoke to a crowd of hundreds at the Old South Meeting House on a variety of topics. The next evening, an even larger crowd (perhaps over 1100 people) were treated to a panel of speakers who discussed the Brown v. Board of Education Supreme Court decision. The discussion featured John Hope Franklin, Charles Ogletree, Lani Guinier, Derrick Bell, and Robert L. Carter, a member of the NAACP legal team that argued the case before the court. On Saturday evening outgoing OAH president Jacquelyn Dowd Hall delivered what some characterized as a stunning presidential address that calling on historians to reject the notion that the Civil Rights movement began with the Montgomery bus boycott and instead examine its roots in the 1930s. She also argued that the movement can be viewed as a casualty of the Cold War that led to the collapse of a vibrant black-labor-left alliance.

During the business meeting of the organization on Sunday morning, a resolution offered by graduate students critical of Yale University's handling of a unionization effort passed with little opposition. Also, a special committee headed by Yale historian David Montgomery was created to examine allegations of repression involving historians. After the completion of all business, Dowd passed the gavel to incoming president James Horton, who hammered the meeting to a close.

Item #1 – The Rudolph W. Giuliani Papers, An Update: Readers of this publication may recall the 2001 controversy relating to the papers of New York Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani. In a nutshell, when Giuliani left New York's City Hall at the end of 2001, he decided not to send his mayoral papers to the city's municipal archives as previous mayors had, but instead turned them over to private archivists for processing. The mayor argued the private firm would be able to make his papers research-ready more quickly than could the municipal archives. The project also raised some concern as it was to be funded by a non-profit group that was controlled by Giuliani. Critics alleged that private archivists would be directed to screen out any papers that would cast a blemish on Giuliani's administration. In a statement issued by Saul S. Cohen, president of the Rudolph W. Giuliani Center for Urban Leadership, this was and continues to be an "unwarranted concern" as "no one who was involved in the mayoralty is involved in the process of archiving and copying." Cohen states that to date more than 900 of the 2,118 boxes of papers have been processed and have been sent to the municipal archives, and that all the boxes - containing an estimated five million pages - were expected to all be redeposited in the city archives by mid-2005.

Item #2 – Meeting Announcement: Speaking of archival issues, the Mid-Atlantic Regional Center for the Humanities (MARCH) will hold its annual meeting in Washington D.C. on 17 April 2004. There will be a panel discussing the status of the D.C. municipal archives from 1:30-2:45 P.M.
featuring former Acting Archivist of the United States Trudy Huskamp Peterson, D.C. Archives Administrator Clarence Davis, and MARCH director Howard Gillette. At 5:00 P.M. University of Pittsburgh Professor of History Edward K. Muller will deliver the Frederic M. Miller Lecture entitled, "Industrial Preservation: Connecting People, Place, and History."
The event is free. For additional information, contact Howard Gillette at:
hfg@camden.rutgers.edu .

One article this week: In "The President's Daily Brief," (National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book # 116; National Security Archives website; 22 March 2004) National Security Archives director Tom Blanton exposes the myth that the CIA-prepared PDB is a sacrosanct document. Blanton argues in an online article that excerpts of several PDBs have in fact entered the public domain, with or without authorization.
For the article tap into: http://www.nsarchive.org/NSAEBB/NSAEBB116/index.htm .

The National Coalition for History invites you to subscribe to this FREE weekly newsletter! You are also encouraged to redistribute the NCH Washington Updates to colleagues, friends, teachers, students and others who are interested in history and archives issues. A complete b backfile of these reports is maintained by H-Net on the NCH's recently updated web page
at: .

To subscribe to the "NCH Washington Update," send an e-mail message to listserv@h-net.msu.edu with the following text in the body of the message (and only this text): SUBSCRIBE H-NCH firstname lastname, institution. To unsubscribe send an e-mail message to: listserv@h-net.msu.edu according to the following model: SIGNOFF H-NCH.

You can accomplish the same tasks by tapping into the web interface at http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/lists/subscribe.cgi and at the "network" prompt, scroll down and select H-NCH; enter your name and affiliation and "submit".

HNN - 4/1/2004

Ottawa Citizen
March 28, 2004 Sunday Final Edition
SECTION: News; Pg. A8
HEADLINE: Queen was to flee to Canada in event of nuclear attack
SOURCE: The Daily Telegraph
BYLINE: Elizabeth Day
LONDON - In the event of a nuclear attack on Britain, the Queen was to be taken to a secret cabinet bunker and then flown out of the country, possibly to Canada, secret government files show.

The files, drawn up in the 1950s and 1960s, form part of a forthcoming exhibition by the National Archives outlining the rescue operation for the Queen in case of nuclear war with the Soviet Union.

They also set out the disastrous consequences of a nuclear attack and list the targets in Britain believed to be most at risk of being bombed.

In one 1967 file, marked "Top Secret," intelligence officers estimated that London, the Soviet's prime target, would be hit by several H-bombs with a total yield of about eight megatons, or 616 Hiroshima bombs.

The plans are outlined in one of the most intriguing documents in the file, written in 1965 in blue ink on the back of a brown envelope. Who wrote it is unknown, but archivists have speculated that it was probably Cmdr. J.R. Stephens, a senior civil servant in the Cabinet Office Secretariat.

The note advises how what was left of the country would be governed: the setting up of a system of regional courts, the assumption of operational control being taken over by NATO and the manning of a secret war cabinet bunker. It ends with Harold Wilson, the prime minister, authorizing nuclear retaliation under the codename "Operation Visitation."

The sketchy outline was to form the basis for the subsequent "Doomsday Drill" evacuation plan for the Royal Family. That document, thought to be in the Windsor archive, is still classified.

The operation was considered so secret that the Queen herself was only informed of it in March 1965.

Although some selected documents have previously been made available for historians of the period, this will be the first time that the entire selection will be displayed.

Peter Hennessy, the Attlee Professor of Contemporary British History at the University of London and the exhibition curator, called the files "terrifying and compelling."

HNN - 4/1/2004

The Times (London)
March 29, 2004, Monday
SECTION: Home news; 7
HEADLINE: How Scott's No 2 was left out in the cold
BYLINE: Dalya Alberge Arts Correspondent
THE discovery of unpublished diaries has for the first time revealed the strained relations between Scott of the Antarctic and his second in command.

Captain Albert Borlase Armitage, navigator and magnetic observer of the SS Discovery under Robert F. Scott, recorded in meticulous detail one of the most arduous and hazardous tests of human endurance: the Antarctic expedition of 1901 to 1904.

The manuscript relates how clashes and quarrels between two hardened men became so acute that Scott wanted to expel Armitage from the expedition. Their rivalry reached a climax over Scott's apparent fears that a member of his team might outshine him by wanting to explore farther towards the South Pole than anyone had previously managed.

The damp-stained and dog-eared volume was described by historians and explorers yesterday as an extraordinary piece of polar history.

The Scott Polar Research Institute in Cambridge, the world's premiere polar library, is now desperately trying to raise money to save it for the nation. No one had known of the journal's existence until it surfaced from a private collection. Its anonymous owner is to sell it at Bloomsbury Auctions in London on April 22, where it is estimated to fetch between £30,000 and Pounds 40,000.

Scott (1868-1912) went on to lead the expedition to the South Pole, where he arrived in January 1912 only to find that Roald Amundsen had beaten him by little more than a month. Sickness, a shortage of food and severe weather took their toll and a search party eventually found Scott's frozen body in his tent.

Armitage's diary dates from between December 24, 1901, and January 31, 1904, an heroic age of polar exploration. In addition to the physical feat of being the first human beings to explore the region, they also did valuable scientific work.

Armitage was observing magnetic fields, while other members of the team were studying the wildlife, including seals and penguins.

Scott and Armitage initially had the highest respect for each other, but as the expedition wore on their differences of opinion and rivalry descended into frustration and hostility. Armitage recorded conversations and nuances in intricate detail, only to leave readers today on tenterhooks: some of the pages after the heated exchanges have been torn out of the diary by an unknown hand.

Simon Luterbacher, manuscripts expert with Bloomsbury Auctions, said that we could draw our own conclusions why those passages were removed; perhaps Armitage, who lived until 1943, felt some guilt after Scott's death in 1912.

But the sour atmosphere between the two men has survived on the journal's pages.

Although diaries kept by other men on the expedition hinted at it, the full extent of the rift is revealed for the first time in Armitage's private writings.Mr Luterbacher said that Armitage omitted to mention the hostility in his book, Two Years in the Antarctic in 1905: "He was not going to mention that sort of thing," he said.

"He had to get permission from Scott to publish his own version. You are not going to put that you fell out with your captain."

In his entry for April 26, 1903, Armitage recorded his wish to take a small expedition and push it farther south than Scott had done. Scott told him that "I had no idea of the difficult surface to travel over; and that he certainly did not 'smile' on the idea, and considered it to be a waste of time".

Their relationship continued to deteriorate. They squabbled, for example, over the accuracy of Armitage's chronometer readings: "The captain...is that kind of man who always wants 'just a little more'."

On October 8, 1903, Armitage wrote: "When the captain went to turn in I went to his cabin to ask the reason of his unfriendly manner towards me, for since his return he has hardly spoken a word to me, & ignored me when I have spoken to him, or answered very briefly.

"After hesitating for a little, he replied ..." At this point, the pages have been carefully removed. Eventually, Scott, at the end of his tether, wanted to send his navigator home.

Instead, he banned Armitage from the sledging runs.

Scott may well have had reason to fear being undermined by his deputy, an important explorer in his own right. Armitage became the first person to penetrate the polar icecap, journeying from sea level to 9,000ft. Bloomsbury Auctions will also sell his 110-page handwritten report on that exploration.

Mr Luterbacher said: "Obviously with nearly 50 men living in close proximity in conditions of extreme hardship for a period of three years, tensions were bound to arise, egos were bound to clash and there might well have been professional jealousies."

The journal features many descriptions of the physical and mental state of the men. In one passage, referring to Sir Ernest Shackleton as he was to become, Armitage wrote: "Shackleton had been unable to do any work all the way back. He suffered from bronchial asthma and threw up blood.

"The Capt feared he would never get him back to the ship; and Wilson (Edward Wilson, a naturalist who died with Scott on the second expedition) assured me that it was only Shackleton's pluck that enabled him to do so. All of them, too, were attacked by scurvy..."

Robert Headland, curator of the Scott Polar Research Institute and an explorer who was a member of the first British Antarctic Survey in 1977, said: "It's amazing what comes out of the woodwork.

A journal from the second in command is so exciting. A man's diary is always his confessional."

The sale is the first to be held in Bloomsbury Auctions' new premises at Bloomsbury House, 24 Maddox Street, London W1.

HNN - 4/1/2004

from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy Volume 2004, Issue No. 32 April 1, 2004

A lawsuit that sought to challenge Bush Administration restrictions on public access to Presidential records from past Administrations was dismissed by a federal court this week.

In November 2001, President Bush issued an executive order that significantly increased the authority of current and former presidents to block public requests for unclassified records from prior administrations.

In one of its more extravagant formulations, the Bush order asserted a hereditary right of executive privilege by which the heirs of a deceased or disabled former president could assert the privilege on his behalf.

The executive order (EO 13233) was challenged by a broad coalition of historians and public interest researchers led by Scott Nelson of the Public Citizen Litigation Group.

But their complaint was not "justiciable," a court ruled, concluding that the plaintiffs did not have standing and could not demonstrate imminent injury.

Fundamentally, the ruling suggests that the courts cannot serve as an effective venue in which to challenge official secrecy policies, no matter how egregious they may be.

See the March 28 ruling by Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly here:


HNN - 3/24/2004

NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE (Vol. 10, #12; 24 March 2004) by Bruce Craig (editor) National Coalition for History (NCH) Website http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch

1. Ruling on Countries Under U.S. Sanctions Riles Publishers and Scholars 2. Archive Groups Issue "Statement" on eBay 3. Library of Congress Adds Recordings to National Registry 4. Bits and Bytes: Rank Government Documents For Their Importance; Seminar Announcement; NCH Policy Board To Meet -- New Meeting Location 5. Articles of Interest: "Principals' Poll Shows Erosion of Liberal Arts Curriculum" (Education Week; 17 March 2004) __________________________________________
Editor's Note: It has come to our attention that some of you who are subscribed to this publication via H-net have been receiving two copies of the posting. Please be aware that we are aware of the problem and are working with H-net to correct the problem.

1. RULING ON COUNTRIES UNDER U.S. SANCTIONS RILES PUBLISHERS AND SCHOLARS Recently, the U.S. Treasury Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) rendered a series of decisions concluding that peer reviewing and editing of works by authors who live or work in embargoed countries by U.S.
publishers is against the law. The decisions have significant First Amendment implications and already appear to be having a chilling effect on the publication of journal articles and books by authors living and working in such countries as Iraq and Iran. In a nutshell, the rulings and policy procedures they create makes the government the ultimate arbiter of what scientific and cultural information may be made available to the American public.

In 1977, Congress enacted the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), legislation that enables the president to impose sanctions on countries whose actions threaten American national security and to establish guidelines to regulate trade with hostile nations. The law seeks to insure that when economic and other sanctions are imposed by the government, actions by American citizens will not assist enemies of the United States. The penalties for violating the law are steep: fines up to
$1 million and prison terms for up to ten years may be imposed.

In 1988, Congress passed "the Berman Amendment" to IEEPA. The amendment stipulates that transactions involving "information and informational materials" (i.e. printed materials including scholarly journal articles, videotapes, CD-ROMS, and other modern communications media) are generally exempt from such sanctions.

Now though, the Treasury Department has taken the position that the Berman amendment does not exempt from regulation certain types of information. For example, OFAC maintains that editors of publications may not edit or alter the works of a scholar who resides in a sanctioned nation (i.e. Iran, Cuba, Iraq, Libya, North Korea, and the Sudan) as such revisions constitute a "substantive enhancement" to the originating author's work and thus create a "benefit" to a sanctioned nation. Critics maintain that on its face OFAC's interpretation of law is unconstitutional.
Representative Howard Berman (D-CA), who wrote the amendment exempting informational materials, characterized the Bush administration's position as "patently absurd" (see http://www.house.gov/apps/list/speech/ca28_berman/newcomb_letter.html).

According to OFAC, the government is to make a distinction between "works in being" and "works in progress." Scientific, technical, scholarly, and popular works originating from sanctioned countries may be published provided manuscript materials do not deviate from a camera-ready version of an article or manuscript supplied by a scholar. If a manuscript is edited or receives any "substantive enhancement," the work may not be published in an edited form unless it is approved and sanctioned under license from OFAC. The agency also has determined that peer review of journal articles is permitted, provided that not even a comma is altered in the original document. Critics declare this policy "makes a mockery of the editorial and peer review process."

Academic publishers also assert that OFAC's interpretation of the law (especially the provision regarding the government's asserted licensing
authority) "flaunts the freedom of the press guarantees provided by the First Amendment." According to Peter Givler, executive director of the Association of American University Presses, "No publisher should ever be forced to seek government permission to make scientific and cultural information available to the American public." Furthermore, Givler notes the irony that the ruling does not restrict what people in sanctioned countries may learn about the United States (information that arguably may have national security implications) but rather, what people in America may learn from historians, scientists, philosophers, poets, and novelists in other countries "are to be monitored and perhaps even banned."

So what is being done? One publisher known to have applied for a OFAC license in October 2003 -- the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers -- has yet received a determination on its license request (for more information on the IEEE request, tap into http://www.ieee.org and click on the OFAC ruling news in the "IEEE News" section of the webpage).
Congressman Berman continues to press the administration for a "reconsideration" of the ruling and publishing and scholarly organizations are considering their options, including filing suit in federal court to force a retraction of the policy. We will keep readers posted on this issue as the situation develops.

2. ARCHIVE GROUPS ISSUE "STATEMENT" ON E-BAY Over the last couple of years, more and more stolen and illegally obtained historic artifacts and manuscripts have shown up on various Internet auction sites. One of the largest and most popular of these sites is eBay.com. Here one can find historic objects for sale ranging from Bill Clinton's boyhood home (see "Clinton Boyhood Home For Sale on E-Bay" in NCH Washington Update; Vol. 10, #11 18 March 2004) to presidential autographs, manuscript material, and even booty from sunken Spanish galleons. Just last week, eBay officials discovered that a chunk of the Statue of Liberty was up for sale on their site. Apparently the seller's father had swiped a piece of Lady Liberty when he was working as part of the team contracted by the National Park Service (NPS) to give the monument a facelift in 1986. Officials at eBay quickly nixed the sale and notified the NPS; the seller agreed to return the artifact to the NPS.

Manuscript material and public records, some of which are stolen from state archives, are also increasingly showing up on eBay. In the last two years documents believed to have been stolen from state archives in Rhode Island, Maine, Delaware, and Tennessee have been spotted. The growing magnitude of the problem led the governing bodies of the Society of American Archivists (SAA), the Council of State Historical Records Coordinators (COSHRC), and the National Association of Government Archivists and Records Administrators (NAGARA) to try to do something about it. A joint ad-hoc committee met in January 2003. It was agreed there was a need to communicate with eBay regarding the sale of historical public records. The results of their work -- a "Statement Regarding the Sale of Historical Public Records on E-Bay" -- has now been posted:
http://www.coshrc.org/issues/publ-rec-auctions.htm .

The statement declares that historical records of government agencies "should remain where they are available for public inspection," and that their disappearance into private hands deprives the public of access to important details concerning our collective history. "To protect the integrity of the public record" the groups "respectfully request eBay's assistance in alerting its users to the ramification of the sale of historical public records."

To meet this goal, the three organizations suggest that eBay alert users to the ramifications of the sale of illegally obtained historical public records and direct customers to a site (still yet to be developed) that would help train people how to distinguish between the kinds of records that can and should not be sold. The site would also provide eBay users with access to expert advice to answer questions relating to questionable documents. It would also offer direct links to relevant National Archives and Records Administration sites, including those that excerpt relevant federal and state legislation relating to the illegal possession of our nation's documentary heritage.

The drafters of the statement report that eBay has been cooperative when stolen historical records have come to their attention. There is every reason to believe that the statement will continue to advance that cooperative relationship.

3. LIBRARY OF CONGRESS ADDS RECORDINGS TO NATIONAL REGISTRY The second annual selection of 50 sound recordings considered "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant" to the nation has been added to the National Recording Registry. This year's list includes a 1921 re-inactment of William Jennings Bryan's "Cross of Gold" speech and Chuck Berry's rock classic, "Roll Over Beethoven" (1956). The selections attest to the diversity of significant recorded sound in our lives - not only music of many types, but political addresses, comedy, sports, poetry, sermons, and machinery.

Like the library's companion registry of films project, selections for the registry of recorded sound are ultimately the responsibility of the Librarian of Congress though each year nominations for the registry are gathered from members of the public, who may submit suggestions online ( http://www.loc.gov/nrpb ), and from an advisory group -- the National Recording Preservation Board -- which is comprised of leaders in the fields of music, recorded sound, and preservation. In addition to the criteria that a selection celebrate the richness and variety of the nation's audio legacy, selections must be at least ten years old to be eligible for listing.

The library is currently accepting nominations for the 2004 National Recording Registry at the National Recording Preservation Board Web site, http://www.loc.gov/nrpb. The deadline for public nominations is 15 July 2004.

Item #1 -- Rank Government Documents For Their Importance: A few months back we alerted readers to the survey being conducted by OMB Watch and the Center for Democracy and Technology for OpenTheGovernment.org to select the "Ten Most Wanted" government documents that the government should make readily available to the public. A short-list has now been compiled and the public is again being asked for input by ranking the experts' choices. The list now includes 19 items (participants can still nominate the 20th) including yet unclassified records of former U.S. presidents, crime records relating to the Patriot Act, and documents relating to important court cases. A second survey question asks the public to identify the biggest problems faced in getting information from government. The results of the survey will be announced in April. The deadline to respond is 31 March 2004. To cast your preferences, tap into:
http://www.ombwatch.org/TenMostWanted/survey.phtml .

Item #2 -- Seminar Announcement: The Council of Independent Colleges and the Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History will conduct a seminar "Slavery Scholarship and Public History" at Columbia University, 9-11 August 2004. During the intensive three-day seminar, participants will examine writings by historians who have attempted to explain the history of American slavery and its role in the formation of the nation's political, economic, and social structure. This seminar will focus on American slavery scholarship, and the difficulty of public presentation of this most important aspect of American history as it confronts the nation's memory and sense of heritage. The seminar is open to faculty members in American History and related fields from private colleges and universities. David W. Blight, professor of history at Yale University, and James O. Horton, Benjamin Banneker Professor of American Studies and History at George Washington University, will lead it. The selection process is based on nominations by chief academic officers, and the deadline for nominations is
23 April 2004. Nomination guidelines and forms are available online
http://www.cic.edu/conferences_events/workshop/seminar/glehrman_2004.asp .
For additional information, please contact Stephen Gibson at CIC at sgibson@cic.nche.edu .

Item #3 -- NCH Policy Board To Meet, New Meeting Location: During the upcoming meeting of the Organization of American Historians, the policy board of the National Coalition for History will meet Saturday, 27 March
2004 at 7:30 - 9:00 am. The meeting will take place in the Massachusetts Room (5th Floor) of the Marriott Copley Place, 110 Huntington Avenue, Boston, MA; phone (617) 937-5623. As always, institutional representatives who are not members of the policy board are welcome to attend.

One article this week: In "Principals' Poll Shows Erosion of Liberal Arts Curriculum" (Education Week; 17 March 2004) reporter Kathleen Kennedy Manzo summarizes a new report "Academic Atrophy: The Condition of the Liberal Arts in America's Public Schools" produced for the Washington-based Council for Basic Education. The report finds that "a comprehensive curriculum is moving out of reach for more of the nation's pupils as elementary schools turn greater attention to the subjects states are required to test under the No Child Left Behind Act." The report finds that minority children, in particular, are experiencing a narrowing of the curriculum as their low-achieving schools place more emphasis on basic literacy and numeracy skills. The trend in many schools of increasing instructional time in the tested subjects threatens student access to a high-quality liberal arts curriculum that includes the arts, foreign languages, and social studies. For the report, tap into:
http://www.edweek.org/ew/ewstory.cfm?slug=27Curric.h23 .

The National Coalition for History invites you to subscribe to this FREE weekly newsletter! You are also encouraged to redistribute the NCH Washington Updates to colleagues, friends, teachers, students and others who are interested in history and archives issues. A complete b backfile of these reports is maintained by H-Net on the NCH's recently updated web page
at: .

To subscribe to the "NCH Washington Update," send an e-mail message to listserv@h-net.msu.edu with the following text in the body of the message (and only this text): SUBSCRIBE H-NCH firstname lastname, institution. To unsubscribe send an e-mail message to: listserv@h-net.msu.edu according to the following model: SIGNOFF H-NCH.

You can accomplish the same tasks by tapping into the web interface at http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/lists/subscribe.cgi and at the "network" prompt, scroll down and select H-NCH; enter your name and affiliation and "submit".

HNN - 3/23/2004

From: PUBLISHERS WEEKLY Untitled Document Publishers Weekly Newsline:

Tuesday, March 23, 2004

College Says 'No Basis' for Scribner Author's Plagiarism Charge

A George Mason University review panel has rejected the claims of plagiarism directed against author and George Mason faculty member Beverly Lowry and her Knopf biography Her Dream of Dreams: The Rise and Triumph of Madam C.J.

As reported yesterday, A'lelia Bundles, author of the Scribner biography On Her Own Ground: The Life and Times of Madam C.J. Walker, had made a formal complaint to the university alleging that Lowry had committed "academic plagiarism" by lifting words and paraphrasing sections from Bundles' 2001 book.

In a telephone conversation, Deborah Kaplan, chair of the English Dept. at George Mason University, said that the matter had been "handled according to university procedures," and that the panel "has found no basis for the allegations." Kaplan declined to describe the review or even say how long the review process took.

Told that GMU had found that was "no basis for the allegations," Bundles said, "I'm not surprised that her university would circle the wagons. This is an expected response from an institution." She added, "USA Today defended Jack Kelley for a very long time until they could no longer justify doing so. Despite the conclusion of the English Dept. at George Mason University, I still feel confident that the examples I have provided show that Lowry has taken material from my book without proper attribution." As we went to press, Lowry had not responded to a phone call requesting comment. --Calvin Reid

March 23, 2004
By Calvin Reid, editor of PW NewsLine

A'lelia Bundles, author of On Her Own Ground: The Life and Times of Madam C.J. Walker, a biography published by Scribner in 2001, has filed a formal complaint alleging that sections of her critically acclaimed book have been plagiarized by Beverly Lowry, author of a competing biography of Walker that came out last year. It is the latest and most serious criticism leveled at Lowry by Bundles, who has been critical of the Lowry book since it was first published.

Bundles has filed a formal complaint with George Mason University, where Lowry teaches, calling for academic peer review of Lowry's Her Dream of Dreams: The Rise and Triumph of Madam C.J. Walker, published by Knopf in 2003, claiming "academic plagiarism" as defined by the George Mason University faculty handbook and by other references for academic standards.
She alleges that in at least 28 instances, Lowry has "lifted my actual words, paraphrasing several sentences, paragraphs and sections of my book without the appropriate quotation marks or citations."

Bundles is also alleging that Lowry has used her original research, which includes personal family documents and formal research at research facilities in more than a dozen U.S.
cities, without "proper attribution." In addition to being her biographer, Bundles is the great-great-granddaughter of Madam C.J. Walker, a black female entrepreneur who made a fortune selling hair-care products and rose to political and social prominence in the early 20th century. "I'm confident that any literate person who makes a sentence by sentence, paragraph by paragraph comparison of the two books will see that Lowry has plagiarized portions of my work and claimed credit for research that I know, I personally developed," Bundles says.

Told of the allegations, Paul Bogaards, a spokesperson for Knopf, said that, "We stand by our book and by Beverly Lowry.
She has the unequivocal support of her publisher and of her university." According to Bogaards, George Mason University will issue a letter in support of Lowry. George Mason University had not yet responded to a phone call for comment as we went to press.

S&S, meanwhile, responded carefully to the allegations.
Spokesperson Adam Rothberg said that "Bundles has written a critically acclaimed work based on research and family records and has set a high standard for a work on Walker. She's raised questions about whether another book's use of her work conforms to academic standards. We welcome and support her efforts to obtain academic peer review."--Calvin Reid

HNN - 3/22/2004

Foreign Policy Research Institute
A Catalyst for Ideas

Distributed Exclusively via Fax & Email

by George P. Shultz

March 22, 2004

This FPRI E-Note is a condensed version of the Kissinger Lecture delivered by former Secretary of State George P.
Shultz on February 11, 2004, at the Library of Congress.


by George P. Shultz

We are at one of those special moments in history: the topic of the day is Iraq and weapons not accounted for; but our action in Iraq has implications that go far beyond this in areas including Israeli-Palestinian issues and our own dangerous dependence on imported oil.

We have struggled with terrorism for a long time. In the Reagan administration, I was a hawk on the subject. I said terrorism is a big and different problem, and we have to take forceful action against it. Fortunately, Ronald Reagan agreed with me, but not many others did (Don Rumsfeld was an outspoken exception). I argued against those who said that "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter." Some people are still saying this; they are dreadfully wrong.

In those days we focused on how to defend against terrorism.
We reinforced our embassies and increased our intelligence effort. We established the legal basis for holding states
responsible for using terrorists to attack Americans
anywhere. Through intelligence, we did abort many potential
terrorist acts. But we didn't really understand what
motivated the terrorists or what they were out to do.

In the 1990s, the problem began to appear even more menacing. Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda were well known, but the nature of the terrorist threat was not yet comprehended and our efforts to combat it were ineffective. Diplomacy without much force was tried. Terrorism was regarded as a law enforcement problem and terrorists as criminals. Some were arrested and put on trial. (Early last year, a judge finally allowed the verdict to stand for one of those convicted in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.) Terrorism is not a matter that can be left to law enforcement, with its deliberative process, built-in delays, and safeguards that may let the prisoner go free on procedural grounds.

Today, looking back on the past quarter century of
terrorism, we can see that it is the method of choice of an extensive, internationally connected ideological movement dedicated to the destruction of our international system of
cooperation and progress. We can see that the 1981
assassination of President Sadat, the 1993 bombing of the WTC, its destruction in 2001, and scores of other terrorist attacks in many countries were carried out by one part or another of this movement.

First and foremost, we must shore up the state system. The world has worked for three centuries with the sovereign state as the basic operating entity, presumably accountable to its citizens and responsible for their well-being. In this system, states also interact with each other to accomplish ends that transcend their borders. They create international organizations to serve their ends, not govern them.

Increasingly, the state system has been eroding. Terrorists have exploited this weakness. But no replacement system is in sight that can perform the essential functions of establishing an orderly and lawful society, protecting essential freedoms, providing a framework for fruitful economic activity, and providing for the common defense.

Our great task is restoring the vitality of the state system. All established states should stand up to their responsibilities in the fight against our common enemy, terror; be a helpful partner in economic and political development, and take care that international organizations work for their member states. When they do, they deserve respect and help to make them work successfully.

We need to remind ourselves and our partners of the message carried on the Great Seal of our Republic. The central figure is an eagle holding in one talon an olive branch and in the other, thirteen arrows. As President Harry Truman insisted at the end of World War II, the eagle will always face the olive branch to show that the United States will always seek peace. But the eagle will forever hold on to the arrows to show that, to be effective in seeking peace, you must have strength and the willingness to use it.

Strength and diplomacy: they go together. They are not alternatives; they are complements. As President Bush put it in his 2004 State of the Union address, "Nine months of intense negotiations involving the United States and Great Britain succeeded with Libya, while 12 years of diplomacy with Iraq did not. And one reason is clear: For diplomacy to be effective, words must be credible, and no one can now doubt the word of America."

The civilized world has a common stake in defeating the terrorists. We now call this what it is: a War on Terrorism.
In war, you have to act on both offense and defense. The
diplomacy of incentives, containment, deterrence, and
prevention are all made more effective by the demonstrated possibility of forceful preemption. If you deny yourself the
option of forceful preemption, you diminish the
effectiveness of your diplomatic moves. With the
consequences of a terrorist attack as hideous as they are, the U.S. must be ready to preempt identified threats. And not at the last moment, when an attack is imminent, but before the terrorist gets in position to do irreparable harm.

Over the last decade we have seen more of the "failed state", an ideal environment for terrorists to plan and train. Earlier, people allowed themselves to think that, for example, an African colony could gain its independence, be admitted to the UN as a member state, and thereafter remain
a sovereign state. Then came Somalia. All government
disappeared. No more sovereignty, no more state. The same was true in Afghanistan. Who took over? Islamic extremists.
They talked about reviving traditional forms of pan-Islamic rule with no place for the state. They were fundamentally, and violently, opposed to the way the world works.

The United States launched a military campaign to eliminate the Taliban and al-Qaeda's rule over Afghanistan. Now we and our allies are trying to help Afghanistan become a real state again. Yet there are many other parts of the world where state authority has collapsed or, within some states, areas where the state's authority does not run. That's one area of danger: places where the state has vanished. A second area of danger is found in places where the state has been taken over by criminals, gangsters, or warlords. Saddam Hussein was one example. Kim Jong-Il of North Korea is another.

They seize control of state power to enhance their wealth, consolidate their rule, and develop their weaponry. As they do this, they claim the privileges and immunities of the
international system, such as the principle of non-
intervention. For decades these thugs have gotten away with it, and the leading nations of the world have let them. This
is why the case of Saddam Hussein and Iraq is so

After Saddam Hussein consolidated power, he started a war against one of his neighbors, Iran, and in the course of that war he committed war crimes including the use of chemical weapons. About ten years later he started another war against another neighbor, Kuwait. In the course of doing so he committed war crimes. He took hostages and launched missiles against a third and then a fourth country in the region.

That war was unique because Saddam totally eradicated another state and turned it into "Province 19" of Iraq. The aggressors in wars might typically seize some territory, or occupy the defeated country, but Saddam sought to erase Kuwait from the map of the world. That got the world's attention. That's why, at the UN, the votes were wholly in favor of a U.S.-led military operation - Desert Storm - to throw Saddam out of Kuwait.

When Saddam was defeated, in 1991, a cease-fire was put in place. Then the UN Security Council decided that, in order to prevent Saddam from continuing to start wars and commit crimes against his own people, he must give up his arsenal of WMD. Recall the way it was to work. If Saddam cooperated with UN inspectors, produced his weapons and facilitated their destruction, then the cease-fire would be transformed into a peace agreement between the international system and Iraq. But if Saddam did not cooperate, and materially
breached his obligations regarding his WMD, then the
original Security Council authorization for the use of "all necessary force" against Iraq would be reactivated and Saddam would face another round of U.S.-led military action.
Saddam agreed to this arrangement.

In the early 1990s, UN inspectors found plenty of materials in the category of WMD and dismantled a lot of it. They kept on finding such weapons, but as the presence of force
declined, Saddam's cooperation declined. He began to
undermine the inspection effort.

By 1998 the situation was untenable. Saddam had made inspections impossible. President Clinton, in February 1998, declared that Saddam would have to comply with the UN resolutions or face American military force. UN secretary- general Kofi Annan flew to Baghdad and returned with a new promise of cooperation. But Saddam did not cooperate. The U.S. Congress then passed the Iraq Liberation Act by a vote of 360-38 in the House of Representatives; the Senate gave
its unanimous consent. Signed into law in October, H.R.
4655 supported the renewed use of force against Saddam with the objective of changing the regime. By this time, Saddam had openly rejected the inspections and the UN Security Council resolutions.

In November 1998 the Security Council passed a resolution declaring Saddam to be in "flagrant violation" of all the UN resolutions going back to 1991. That meant that the cease- fire was terminated and the original authorization for the use of force against Saddam was reactivated. President Clinton ordered American forces into action in December 1998. But the U.S. military operation was called off after only four days - apparently because President Clinton did not feel able to lead the country in war at a time when he was facing impeachment.

So inspections stopped. The U.S. ceased to take the lead.
The inspectors reported that as of the end of 1998 Saddam
possessed major quantities of WMD across a range of
categories, and particularly in chemical and biological weapons and the means of delivering them by missiles. All the world's intelligence services agreed on this. But from that time until late last year, Saddam was left undisturbed to do what he wished with this arsenal of weapons. The international system had given up its ability to monitor and deal with this threat. All through the years 1998-2002 Saddam continued to rule Iraq as a rogue state.

President Bush made it clear by 2002, and against the background of 9/11, that Saddam must be brought into compliance. It was obvious that the world could not leave this situation as it was. The U.S. made the decision to continue to work within the scope of the long line of UN Security Council resolutions to deal with Saddam. After an extended and excruciating diplomatic effort at the UN in New York and in capitals around the world, the UN Security Council late in 2002 passed Resolution 1441, which gave Saddam one final chance to comply. When on December 8, 2002, Iraq produced its required report, it was clear that Saddam was continuing to play games. His report, thousands of pages long, in no way accounted for the remaining WMD that the UN inspectors had reported to be in existence at the end of 1998. That assessment was widely agreed upon.

That should have been that. But the debate at the UN went on and on. And as it went on it deteriorated. Instead of keeping the focus on Iraq and Saddam, France induced others to regard the problem as one of restraining the U.S. - a position that seemed to emerge from France's aspirations for greater influence in Europe and elsewhere. By March 2003 it was clear that French diplomacy had resulted in splitting NATO, the EU, and the UN Security Council, and probably convincing Saddam that he would not face the use of force.
The French position, in effect, was to say that Saddam had begun to show signs of cooperation with the UN resolutions because more than 200,000 American troops were poised on Iraq's borders ready to strike him; so the U.S. should just keep its troops poised there for an indeterminate time to come, until presumably France would instruct us that we could either withdraw or go into action. This of course was impossible militarily, politically, and financially.

Where do we stand now? These key points need to be

* There has never been a clearer case of a rogue
state using its privileges of statehood to advance
its dictator's interests in ways that defy and
endanger the international state system.

* The international legal case against Saddam - 17
resolutions - was unprecedented.

* The intelligence services of all involved
nations and the UN inspectors over more than a
decade all agreed that Saddam possessed WMD that
posed a threat to international peace and

* Saddam had four undisturbed years to augment,
conceal, disperse, or otherwise deal with his

* He used every means to avoid cooperating or
explaining what he has done with them. This
refusal in itself was adequate grounds for
resuming the military operation against him that
had been put in abeyance in 1991 pending his

* President Bush, in ordering U.S. forces into
action, stated that we were doing so under UN
Security Council Resolutions 678 and 687, the
original bases for military action against Saddam
Hussein in 1991. No nation in the history of the
UN has ever engaged in such a sustained and
committed multilateral diplomatic effort to adhere
to the principles of international law and
organization within the international system. In
the end, it was the U.S. that upheld and acted in
accordance with the UN resolutions on Iraq, not
those on the Security Council who tried to stop

The question of WMD is just that: a question that remains to be answered, a mystery that must be solved. Just as we also must solve the mystery of how Libya and Iran developed nuclear capability without detection, how we were caught unaware of a large and flourishing black market in nuclear material, and how we discovered these developments before they got completely out of hand and have put in place promising corrective processes. The question of Iraq's presumed stockpile of weapons will be answered, but that answer will not affect the fully justifiable and necessary action that the coalition has undertaken to bring an end to Saddam Hussein's rule over Iraq.

As Dr. David Kay put it in a February 1 interview with Chris Wallace, "We know there were terrorist groups in state still seeking WMD capability. Iraq, although I found no weapons, had tremendous capabilities in this area. A marketplace phenomena was about to occur. [They had] the knowledge of how to make them_. Iraq remained a very dangerous place in terms of WMD capabilities, even though we found no large stockpiles of weapons."

Above all, and in the long run, the most important aspect of the Iraq war will be what it means for the integrity of the international system and the effort to deal effectively with terrorism. The stakes are huge and the terrorists know that.
That is the reason for their tactic of violence in Iraq. And that is why, for us and our allies, failure is not an option. The message is that the U.S. and others in the world who recognize the need to sustain our international system will no longer quietly acquiesce in the takeover of states by lawless dictators who then carry on their depredations behind the shield of protection that statehood provides. If you are one of these criminals in charge of a state, you no longer should expect to be allowed to be inside the system at the same time that you are a deadly enemy of it.

North Korea is such a case. The circumstances do not
parallel those of Iraq, so our approach is adjusted
accordingly. China, Japan, Russia and South Korea must man laboring oars. One way or another, that regime will undergo radical change or come to an end. Iran is another very
different case, where the interplay of strength and
diplomacy is producing tentative results and where internal turmoil may change the complexion of the state.

Demography plays a role here. In the Middle East, the population is exploding out of control, youth is by far the largest group, and these young people have little to do.
Governance in these areas has failed them. In many
countries, oil has produced wealth without the effort that connects people to reality. Physical work is often done by imported labor in some of these countries. The submissive role forced on women has led to the population explosion.
Generations of young people have grown up in these societies with a surplus of time on their hands and a deficit of productive occupations. Disconnected from reality, they live in a world of fantasy. Denied opportunity, many have turned to a destructive, terror-using ideology. Islamism is the name most specialists have settled on. Yet these young people can see on their TVs that a better life is possible in many other places in the world. Their frustration is immense. A disproportionate share of the world's many violent conflicts is in the Middle East.

Many Muslin regimes in the area have finally realized that the radical variant of Islam is violently opposed to the modern age, globalization, secular governance and those Muslim regimes themselves - their primary target. Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Pakistan top the target list. Years ago these regimes, and others, began a frantic search for ways to deflect the threat. Some tried to coopt the Islamists into their governments. Some paid extortion money. Some
pushed the Islamists into other countries and then
subsidized them. Some of them pumped out huge volumes of propaganda to incite the Islamists to turn their attention from the "near enemy," such as Saudi Arabia, to the "far enemy," Israel and the United States. Some of these targeted regimes tried all these defensive tactics in an attempt to buy time.

Since 9/11, some of these Muslim regimes have begun to realize that this approach is a loser; it only strengthens their Islamist enemies, who will, sooner rather than later, turn against them directly. They have now had a reality check. We are witnessing nothing short of a civil war in the Arab-Islamic world. On one side are those who, for reasons
they ascribe to their version of Islam, reject the
international system of states, international law and
organization, international values and principles such as human rights, and diplomacy as a means to work through problems. On this side are al-Qaeda and similar non-state terrorist groups that have spun a network running from West Africa to the East Indies, with outlying cells on every continent. Also on this side was the dictatorship of Saddam's Iraq, a pirate sailing under the false flag of statehood. And on this side as well are those Middle Eastern regimes such as Syria that have facilitated terrorism elsewhere in an attempt to keep it from bringing them down at home.

On the other side of the civil war are those regimes in the
Arab-Islamic world that, however much they may have
appeased, bought out, or propagandized the terrorists, have nonetheless now recognized that they are members of the international system of states and must find a way to reconcile their Islamic beliefs and practices to it. Saudi Arabia and others in the world of Islam must, in their own
interests, recognize their responsibility to stop the
preaching of hate and to reform their societies. Young people must have access to the world of opportunity. Women must be free to play substantial roles in their societies.

The U.S., in our war with Iraq, has just intervened in this civil war in the Middle East. Because we have used our strength credibly and because we stand for good governance and the right of Middle Eastern peoples to participate in the international system, and as these peoples see that we will stay the course, we can expect attitudes in the region to shift in a positive way.

And we have taken our longstanding role in the Israeli- Palestinian conflict to a new and deeper level, also because of a renewed recognition of the importance of the state. In
1979 Egypt and Israel recognized each other as legitimate states and signed a peace treaty. At that time Egypt took on the role of state negotiator with Israel on behalf of the Palestinians, who did not have a state. This was in recognition that states can make peace only with other states within the international state system.

But after Islamists murdered President Sadat, Egypt dropped its role as state negotiator. Jordan took up that role, but dropped it in 1988. Since that time the negotiations have not made serious progress, despite some apparent highpoints, because there has been no state partner to sit across the table from the State of Israel.

But now the picture has some new possibilities. Yes, optimists should stand aside, but fatalists should, too. You
do not work on probabilities in this area, just
possibilities. But work we must - and with energy and timing
- since the issues involved are vital in this dangerous world. The possibilities are far more in evidence than is commonly assumed.

Security for Israel is clearly an essential for fruitful negotiations. So far, nothing has worked. Those who seek to eliminate the State of Israel have regarded efforts at Oslo or Camp David II and elsewhere as proof that terrorism works, and that every Israeli step toward peace is really a
sign of weakness. Now a security barrier is under
construction. Israel has stated that its path can be changed in the event of a negotiation. Israel seems ready to pull back some settlements beyond the new barrier, as in Gaza. If Israel, through these measures, gains security in its land, that will be a major step toward peace. Once again, Israel will have demonstrated that it cannot be beaten militarily, this time by terrorist violence. And when Palestinians face the fact that terrorism has become both ineffective and self-destructive, that realization may enable them to take a major step toward peace.

What else can we list as a basis for possibility? The war in Iraq has eliminated a rogue state that repeatedly acted to disrupt progress toward peace. And Operation Iraqi Freedom has had an impact all across the region: as Iraq stabilizes, people in the Middle East will see that change for the better is possible.

Importantly, for the first time in the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, important Arab states have stated a willingness to promote peace between Israel and Palestine. Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Jordan are the keystones of this structure. Remember the important initiative of Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, under which the Arab League, in the event that a peace agreement is reached between Israel and a State of Palestine, would recognize Israel as a permanent, legitimate state in the Middle East and the international state system.

And there is a "Roadmap" to work from. This document spells out the general directions for progress toward an Israeli- Palestinian peace. No document since the founding text of the peace process - the 1967 UN Security Council Resolution
242 - has had such wide, even if tentative, international support. Israelis and Palestinians, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and "the Quartet" - the United States, the EU, Russia, and the UN - all have indicated willingness to take this Roadmap as a working paper of the parties to the conflict, and of the leading nations and organizations of the international state system itself.

This approach incorporates a way to fix the negotiating problems of the past twenty years. It provides for the establishment of a Palestinian state, not at the end of the negotiations, but in the midst of the effort. Of course, there is much more to making a state than an announcement.
But a structure of governance can be established and, if Egypt and Jordan will help, violence can be suppressed and the emerging state can control the use of force. Then there would be a Palestinian state partner for the State of Israel to negotiate with. The Palestinians charged with governance will have more leverage, and the Israelis will have more confidence that their negotiating partner can deliver on the deal that is made. Put some projects in the mix, about water, for example, to energize those Palestinians who yearn for peace and a chance for a better life. Help them take the play from extremists so that their state has a chance for decent governance. Who knows, maybe possibility could become probability and then a new reality.

A WORLD OF DANGER AND A WORLD OF OPPORTUNITY I cannot emphasize too strongly the danger and extent of the challenge we are facing. We are engaged in a war, a long and bitter war. Our enemies will not simply sit back and watch as we make progress toward prosperity and peace in the world. But 9/11 forced us to comprehend the extent and danger of the challenge. We began to act before our enemy was able to extend and consolidate his network. If we put this in terms of World War II, we are now sometime around 1937. In the 1930s, the world failed to do what it needed to do to head off a world war. Today we are doing what needs to
be done. With a powerful interplay of strength and
diplomacy, we will win this war.

We and our partners throughout the world can then work and
live in a time of immense promise. Scientific and
technological advances are breathtaking virtually across the board. The impact on the human condition is profound. New
technologies are changing the way we live and work,
globalizing access to an extraordinary range of information.
People everywhere can see that economic advance has taken place in countries of every size, with great varieties of ethnic, religious, and cultural histories. So we should not be surprised that -- as Freedom House and the Heritage Foundation and The Wall Street Journal carefully document -- open economic and political systems are becoming more common.

This new reality means that America's political-military- diplomatic policy must be joined by economic policy aimed at transforming the international energy picture. Our strength and our security are vitally affected by our dependence on oil coming from other countries and by the dependence of the world economy on oil from the most unstable part of the
world: the Middle East. Presidents from Eisenhower on have called for energy independence. Ike, no stranger to issues of national security, thought that if foreign oil were more than 20 percent of our consumption, we were headed for trouble. The number is now pushing 60 percent and rising.
What would be the impact of terrorist sabotage of key elements of the Saudi pipeline infrastructure? I remember proposals for alternatives to oil from the time of the first big oil crisis in 1973. Pie in the sky, I thought. But now the situation is different.

Hybrid technology is on the road and increases gas mileage by at least 50 percent. Sequestration of effluent from use of coal may be possible. Maybe coal could be a benign source of hydrogen. Maybe hydrogen could be economically split out of water by electrolysis, perhaps using renewables such as wind power. An economy with a major hydrogen component would do wonders for both our security and our environment. With evident improvements in fuel cells, that combination could amount to a very big deal. Applications include stationary as well as mobile possibilities. Scientists, technologists, and commercial organizations in other countries are hard at work on these issues. The administration is coordinating potentially significant developments. We should not be put off by experts who say that the possible is improbable.
Scientific advance in recent decades is a tribute to and validation of creative possibilities. Bet on them all.
Sometimes long odds win.

Now is the time to push hard on research and development with augmented funds directed at identified targets such as sequestration, electrolysis, and fuel cells, and other money going to scientists with ideas about energy. You never know what bright people will come up with when resources and enthusiasm combine. We can enhance America's security and simultaneously improve our environment.

So an unprecedented Age of Opportunity is ahead, especially for low-income countries. The United States and our allies
can rally people all over the world: Don't let the
terrorists take away our opportunities. We have the winning hand. We must play that hand with skill and confidence.

You may forward this email, provided that you send it in
its entirety, attribute it to the Foreign Policy Research
Institute, and include our web address (http://www.fpri.org). If you post it on a mailing list, please contact FPRI with the name, location, purpose, and number of recipients of the mailing list.

If you receive this as a forward and would like to be placed directly on our mailing list, send email to FPRI@fpri.org.
Include your name, address, and affiliation.

For further information or to inquire about membership in
FPRI, please contact Alan Luxenberg at al@fpri.org or call
(215) 732-3774 x105.

If you would like to be removed from our distribution list, please type "Remove" in an email message to fpri@fpri.org.

FPRI, 1528 Walnut Street, Suite 610, Philadelphia, PA 19102-3684.
For information, contact Alan Luxenberg at 215-732-3774, ext. 105 or email fpri@fpri.org or visit us at http://www.fpri.org

HNN - 3/19/2004

The Times (London)
March 13, 2004, Saturday
SECTION: Overseas news; 21
HEADLINE: Secret papers show Mussolini tried to stop persecution of Jews
BYLINE: Richard Owen in Rome
BENITO MUSSOLINI tried to persuade Hitler not to persecute Jews just as the Nazis were preparing to introduce anti-Semitic laws, according to documents seen by The Times.

The records, unearthed at the Vatican Secret Archives, show that Mussolini protested to the Nazis in 1933. The office of the Vatican Secretary of State reported to Pope Pius XI in a document dated April 1933 that "the head of the Italian Government" had given "an oral exhortation and then a secret message to Hitler imploring him not to allow himself to be carried away by an anti Semitic campaign". The message had been read to Hitler and Goebbels half an hour before the Nazi meeting that approved the banning of Jews from state employment.

In 1938 Mussolini, whose image is currently undergoing a rehabilitation in Italy, fell in line with Hitler and introduced the Racial Laws, and widespread persecution of Jews began.

The man who found the documents also claims to have found evidence that the wartime Pope, Pius XII, had encouraged Mussolini to "intervene" with Hitler. Far from turning a blind eye to the Holocaust, as has been claimed, he had condemned racial hatred and sought to protect Italian Jews, according to the scholar, Father Giovanni Sale.Some historians say Pius XII, the former Cardinal Eugenio Pacelli, connived in anti-Semitism not only as Pope but as nuncio in Berlin and from 1929 as Secretary of State to Pius XI.

A draft note that he wrote as a cardinal in 1938, seen by The Times, praised Mussolini for his "moderating influence on the German Chancellor, Signor Hitler" and his attempts to "intervene against the continuing religious persecution in Germany". Father Sale argues in a book to be published in April that Mussolini introduced Racial Laws only after turning against what he termed "the Jewish-Masonic plutocracies" -Britain and France -after the League of Nations decided to enforce sanctions against Italy for occupying Abyssinia.

Silvio Berlusconi, the Prime Minister, recently said that Mussolini's rule had been "not so bad" and the dictator had "never murdered anyone".Jewish groups have expressed concern at such claims. Seven thousand Italian Jews were sent to death camps after the Germans occupied Italy in 1943.

Father Sale said that Mussolini had tried to dissuade Hitler from persecuting Jews "not for ethical reasons" but because he realised most Italians were not anti-Semitic and saw the "Aryan" racial ideal as absurd.

HNN - 3/19/2004

March 14, 2004, Sunday
SECTION: News; International: Pg. 32
HEADLINE: Greeks put stop to 'Elgin Marbles' museum New government says pounds 700m project to house sculptures is destroying the heritage of Athens
THE NEW Greek government has stopped work on a pounds 700 million museum being built to house the Elgin Marbles and legal action has begun against those who authorised the project.

A month after its surprise election victory, the centre-Right New Democracy Party has reversed the project in Athens that it tried to block while in opposition.

Petros Tatoulis, an MP who has recently been appointed to the new government, argued that the museum would cause irreparable damage to the remains of ancient buildings on the site, including mosaics.

The former socialist government, however, was committed to building the Acropolis Museum, which it hoped would accommodate the Elgin Marbles if - and it is a big if - Britain agreed to return them.

The marbles - 2,500-year-old sculptures which were removed from the Parthenon in Athens by Lord Elgin at the end of the 18th century - are on display at the British Museum. The Greek socialists, who were in power for more than a decade, were determined to go ahead with the project although the country's Supreme Court ruled that the building was illegal last year. The government passed a law making the museum "legal" again.

Work started on it more than four years ago after approval was given to a building 115ft tall on a 10-acre site. As work halted last week, the Supreme Court began proceedings to prosecute the committee members who awarded the design contract to the architects, Bernard Tschumi and Michael Photiades, for breach of duty.

The Supreme Court's prosecutor said he would also bring criminal charges against the Central Archaeological Council, which approved the plans and gave permission for the building work to start.

The museum - like the Elgin Marbles - has been a focus of controversy. Mr Tschumi designed a modern, glass building which he hoped would also be a leisure complex with restaurants and cafes. He insisted that once completed, the British Governement would not be able to resist pressure to return the marbles.

After the New Democracy Party came to power last month, however, Mr Tatoulis, an arch-opponent of the museum, was appointed deputy minister of culture. He said that he was determined to hold to account those who took the decision to build it.

Mr Tatoulis is only one of many people who objected to the new museum. In 1999, Ismini Trianti, the Acropolis's head archaeologist, warned that its construction presupposed the destruction of the archaeological finds beneath it.

An international coalition of archaeologists, art historians, artists and architects also resisted. Spiros Kalogeropoulos, a sculptor, said it would have been a catastrophe. "The building work which has already been undertaken in digging the foundations has destoyed mosaics, walls, floors, casts, and possibly an ancient sculpture factory," he said.

Mr Kalogeropoulos claimed that ancient remains kept appearing under the bulldozers, even when the workmen were digging at a depth of 20 metres.

At least seven layers of archaeological remains lie buried where the museum's foundations have been laid, dating from the original prehistoric settlements through to the classical, Hellenistic and Byzantine periods.

"The museum was supposed to preserve artefacts and objects from Greece's ancient heritage," said Mr Kalogeropoulos. "It has ended up destroying them indiscriminately."

As the debate about the rightful location of the Elgin Marbles continues, there is near universal agreement in Greece that they should be returned. "They must be returned to Athens," said Mr Kalogeropoulos. "We simply need to find a place for them that does not involve destroying our heritage."

Mr Tschumi, the project architect who lives in New York, has ignored concerns that his construction would destroy ancient buildings and artefacts.

"It's history," he said. "The Parthenon itself was built on the site of a smaller temple. Cities are built up in layers. They have to be. Otherwise, we'd be living in an Indian village instead of New York."

HNN - 3/19/2004

March 17, 2004, Wednesday
SECTION: News; International: Pg. 14
HEADLINE: France accused of genocide by Rwanda's leader
BYLINE: By Tim Butcher Africa Correspondent
PRESIDENT Paul Kagame of Rwanda yesterday accused France of direct responsibility for the 1994 genocide of at least 800,000 people in the central African country.

His remarks reignited a bitter diplomatic row between Rwanda and France and threatened attempts to mark the 10th anniversary of the killings with dignity.

Mr Kagame claimed that the French government supplied weapons, logistical support and even senior military planners to the regime of militant ethnic Hutus responsible for the slaughter of 800,000 ethnic Tutsis and moderate Hutus.

Diplomats and witnesses to the genocide have often accused France of tacit involvement, but Mr Kagame's comments are the most explicit statement of the allegations.

He made them after a French police report, which took six years to prepare, blamed him for the shooting down of a plane carrying Juvenal Habyarimana, Rwanda's then president and an ethnic Hutu, on April 6, 1994.

Mr Habyarimana's death sparked 100 days of mass killing in Rwanda. Most historians, diplomats and journalists believe that militant Hutus shot down the plane as a deliberate pretext for their premeditated slaughter.

Mr Kagame, an ethnic Tutsi, flatly denied any involvement in Mr Habyarimana's death and launched a blistering counter-attack against France in an interview given to RFI, the French state-run radio station.

"The French supplied weapons; they gave orders and instructions to the perpetrators of genocide," he said.

"The French were there when the genocide took place. They trained those who carried it out.

"They had positions of command in the armed forces who committed the genocide.

"They also directly participated in operations by putting up roadblocks to identify people by ethnic origin, punishing the Tutsis and supporting the Hutus."

Journalists who covered Rwanda in the early 1990s reported that French peacekeepers appeared to side with the Hutu government and against the Tutsi-based Rwandan Patriotic Front, led by Mr Kagame, which had been responsible for an armed incursion into Rwanda in 1990 from exile.

In at least one case, French troops moved United Nations peacekeepers away from a college where they were protecting 2,000 Tutsis. After the peacekeepers were moved, the Tutsis were slaughtered. Mr Kagame said the police report blaming him for Mr Habyarimana's death was a politically motivated attempt to deflect blame from France.

"In '91 or '92 I was in Paris at the invitation of the authorities and an official said to me, 'If you do not stop the war, by the time you arrive in Kigali you will all be dead'.

"I never forgot those words which are proof of the involvement of the French government, or of certain elements."

The police report, compiled by a French judge on behalf of the French aircrew who died in the plane, was put together in France and no interviews were taken in Rwanda itself.

The exact details of the shooting down remain in doubt and only last week the UN admitted that it had failed to investigate properly the plane's black box voice recorder, recovered at the crash site.

The box was shipped back to the UN headquarters in New York where it remained overlooked in a filing cabinet until last week.

The UN secretary-general, Kofi Annan, said it was a "first-class foul-up" but claimed there had been no cover-up. The black box will now be fully tested to glean as many details as possible about the doomed plane.

HNN - 3/18/2004

NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE (Vol. 10, #11; 18 March 2004) by Bruce Craig (editor) National Coalition for History (NCH) Website http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch

1. "Humanities Advocacy Day 2004" Draws On Efforts of Over 130 Humanities Advocates 2. Legislative Update: Manhattan Project Sites -- Possible National Park Designation?
3. NEH Announces "We the People" Bookshelf Awards 4. Report: Census Bureau Symposium 5. Bits and Bytes: Women's History Websites of Interest; Nickel to Honor Lewis and Clark Journey; NARA Seeks Comment on Regulation; Gilder Lehrman Traveling Exhibit Panels; Clinton Boyhood Home For Sale on E-Bay 6. Articles of Interest: "Looting Ring Unravels: Native American Artifacts Plundered" (Washington Post; 15 March 2004)

1. "HUMANITIES ADVOCACY DAY 2004" DRAWS ON EFFORTS OF OVER 130 HUMANITIES ADVOCATES On 15-16 March over 130 humanities advocates descended on Capitol Hill to speak with members of Congress and their staff on behalf of the National Endowment for the Humanities and other issues of concern to the scholarly community. The annual event is sponsored by the National Humanities Alliance (NHA) and is co-sponsored by some thirty-five organizations, including the National Coalition for History.

On the afternoon of the 15,th participants heard from speakers who passed along some practical advice for making congressional visits and how to be an effective advocate. Participants were also briefed on a number of pending issues of concern to the scholarly community including funding needs for such history/archival entities as the National Historical Publications and Records Commission and the Institute for Museum and Library Services.

The last speaker, Michael Stephens, Minority Staff Director of the Subcommittee on Interior and Related Agencies of the House Appropriations Committee, spoke in detail about the current appropriations climate.

Stephens indicated that as a starting point for humanities appropriations, he felt "things were about as positive as any year" [in terms of the president's proposals] but then warned participants "not to be fooled into thinking that this robust start will indeed materialize." Stephens stated that it is "hard to be optimistic" as there is a huge deficit and members of Congress are challenged as to how best to get a handle on it. He also reported that largely because of the pending presidential election, "partisanship is at an all time high" and as a result "analytic arguments"
that have helped the cause of humanities may not prove as effective in this political environment as they have in the past. He also predicted that only a few appropriation bills (Interior, which includes the NEH budget line, being one) have a chance of being finalized prior to the election. Instead, Stephens expected that Congress would pass a series of continuing resolutions to put off tough decisions until after the November elections.

In the evening, during the NHA-sponsored a reception, Bruce Cole, Chair of the National Endowment for the Humanities, addressed the group. The NHA then honored Representative Louise M. Slaughter (D-NY) by presenting her with the Sidney R. Yates Award for Distinguished Public Service to the Humanities.

The next day, participants made visits to members of over Congressional delegations in over 20 states to discuss the funding needs of the NEH and other humanities-based programs.

On 9 March the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on National Parks held a hearing on legislation (S.1687) "Manhattan Project National Historical Park Study Act of 2003." The legislation was introduced by Senator Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) and has the bi-partisan support of four co-sponsors. A House companion bill (H.R. 3207) has also been introduced in the lower chamber but has yet to receive a hearing.

Bingaman's legislation seeks to authorize the National Park Service (NPS) to conduct a "special resource study" to assess the feasibility and suitability of several sites associated with the Manhattan Project for possible national park designation. Those sites include the Los Alamos National Laboratory and Trinity Site in New Mexico, the Oak Ridge Laboratory in Tennessee, and the Hanford site in Washington. The ultimate goal of the senator's legislative effort is to assess how best to preserve and interpret the important history of the Manhattan Project by unifying and promoting the various efforts at these diverse sites through the coordinating efforts of the NPS.

The historical significance of these sites is well established. Several of the three principal Manhattan Project sites are already listed on the National Register of Historic Places though they are not all National Historical Landmarks. The concerns of the NPS do not focus on the historical importance of these sites, rather, they center on "feasibility"
issues such as health and safety and the "tremendous potential costs of maintenance." A vote on the Senate bill is expected in late April.

3. NEH ANNOUNCES WE THE PEOPLE "BOOKSHELF" AWARDS The National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) has awarded free copies of
15 classic books from the first "We the People Bookshelf" to 500 school and local libraries throughout the country. The awards will go to neighborhood and public school libraries, as well as private schools, charter schools, tribal schools, and military schools. Libraries selected to receive the awards will organize programs or events to raise awareness of these classic books and engage young readers. Selected public and school libraries in all 50 states and U.S. territories will each receive a set of the 15 books, posters, bookmarks, and other promotional materials from NEH through the American Library Association, which is working in partnership with NEH.

The new award program is a part of the endowment's "We the People"
initiative, which supports projects that strengthen the teaching, study, and understanding of American history and culture. The theme of this year's bookshelf was "courage." The selection of titles sought to enable younger readers to examine the meaning of courage from many perspectives.
These books inspire readers with stories of characters, real and fictional, who demonstrated personal courage when faced with difficult situations in uncertain times.

The book selections are as follows: grades K-3: The Cabin Faced West by Jean Fritz, Anansi the Spider by Gerald McDermott, and Sylvester and the Magic Pebble by William Steig. For grades 4-6: The Matchlock Gun by Walter D. Edmonds, The Dream Keeper and Other Poems by Langston Hughes, My Side of the Mountain by Jean Craighead George, and Little House on the Prairie by Laura Ingalls Wilder. For grades 7-8: Johnny Tremain by Esther Forbes, Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass by Frederick Douglass, and The Hobbit by J.R.R. Tolkein. And for grades 9-12: The Red Badge of Courage by Stephen Crane, Invisible Man by Ralph Ellison, Profiles in Courage by John F. Kennedy, Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain, and To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee.

At the first deadline on 15 October 2003, the Endowment received 625 eligible requests. Because of the interest the program generated among libraries, the NEH intends to make an additional 500 awards later this year.

A complete list of the first 500 school and public libraries to receive the "We the People Bookshelf" can be found on the Internet at:
http://www.neh.gov which also provides additional information about NEH and its "We the People" initiative

On 4-5 March 2004, the Census Bureau and the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars (with the financial support of the Russell Sage Foundation of New York) hosted a symposium entitled "America's Scorecard:
The Historic Role of the Census in an Ever-Changing Nation," at the Wilson Center's headquarters in the Ronald Reagan Building in Washington, DC.

In attendance were 225 participants. Over the course of the two-day event, some fifty speakers explored two central topics: the census as a series of demographic and economic snapshots of the people and economy of the United States taken at regular intervals over the course of more than two centuries; and the role that the census bureau has played in broadening data users' understanding of census information through training and outreach programs and its data dissemination efforts.

The first day consisted of two pairs of concurrent sessions focusing on several topics: public needs and private information; changing demographics; apportionment and fair representation; and economic data collection, analyses and use in the public and private sectors. The thread tying these disparate subjects together was that ultimately they all rely on data provided by the Census Bureau. In the evening, the bureau sponsored a dinner held at the Wilson Center that featured a presentation by David M. Kennedy, the Donald J. McLachlan Professor of History at Stanford University. Kennedy provided an overview of the key role that the census has played in U.S. history. He also discussed some of the ways historians have used those data over the past two hundred years.

The next day, a round-table discussion on public needs and private information drew upon the expertise of several individuals from varying fields, including former Census Bureau Director Kenneth Prewitt (now a professor of political science at Columbia University in New York City), Sandy Liddy Bourne (American Legislative Exchange Council), and Steven Ruggles (professor of history at the University of Minnesota). Three pairs of concurrent sessions followed the plenary session that focused on changing demographics, genealogical issues, local uses of census data, and aging.

The symposium was conceived and organized by the Census Bureau history staff, under the direction of its chief, William Maury. It is hoped that the proceedings of the conference will be published.

5. Bits and Bytes
Item #1 -- Women's History Websites of Interest: March being womens'
history month, here are a couple of webpages of potential interest. The Library of Congress (LC) has launched "American Women: A Gateway to Library of Congress Resources for the Study of Women's History and Culture in the United States," part of the LC "American Memory" website. Tap into it at:
http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/awhhtml/ . For a related LC site, take a look at "Women's Words of Wisdom -- Activity, Learning Page." This site displays quotes and photos of 16 famous women -- Abigail Adams, Harriet Tubman, Susan B. Anthony, Ella Fitzgerald, and others. Tap into:
http://memory.loc.gov/learn/features/womenswords/index.html . The U.S.
Department of Education also has a number of learning resources focusing on women's history. A portal site is located at:
http://www.ed.gov/free/w-history.html .

Item #2 -- Nickel to Honor Lewis and Clark Journey: This month, the U.S.
Mint will begin to commemorate the bicentennial of the 1804 historic expedition by Meriwether Lewis and William Clark to explore the newly purchased western lands by releasing the first of two redesigned Jefferson nickels. The fist redesign is based on the original Jefferson Peace Medal that Lewis and Clark handed out to Native Americans as a token of good will. The second will be released in August and features an illustration of the keel boat that transported the explorers party up the Missouri River. The Jefferson nickel will return to its original design in 2006.

Item #3 -- NARA Seeks Comment on Regulation: The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) is considering revising and reorganizing the existing regulations on Federal records management to incorporate current standards and practices and to make the regulations easier to read, understand, and use. NARA proposes to restructure the regulations to better reflect the life cycle of records, from creation through active agency use to disposition. To affect this change a proposal is pending to consolidate definitions to more clearly reflect the life cycle of records and considering incorporating new guidance on electronic record-keeping. NARA envisions that the regulations would also be re-written in accordance with plain language principles (such as using the question-style for the section
headings) to make them easier to read, understand, and use. Comments from federal agencies and the public on the proposed reorganization of the regulations for federal records management will be accepted through 14 May 2004. See 15 March 2004, Federal Register (at page 12100) A link to the proposed rule is available at:
http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/fedreg/a040315c.html .

Item #4 -- Gilder Lehrman Traveling Exhibit Panels: The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History is making available free of charge to public schools, public libraries, and historic sites (especially schools in the Glider Lehrman network or with districts with whom the institute is partnering), several traveling panel exhibitions. The panel exhibitions are interpretive exhibitions using graphic reproductions of documents to explore specific historical events. There are four panel exhibitions:
"Freedom: A History of the US" examines changing principles and realities of freedom from the founding era through the Civil War; "Frederick Douglass From Slavery to Freedom, The Journey to New York City" uses images, broadsides, and letters to explore the early life of Douglass; "Looking at
Lincoln: Political Cartoons from the Civil War Era" presents political drawings from the age before radio, television, and the Internet, when many Americans received news and expressed their opinions about politicians and presidents through newspapers; and finally, "Free at Last: A History of the Abolition of Slavery in America" traces the history of the movement to abolish slavery from the framing of the Constitution to its abolition during the Civil War. For additional information, contact: Jessica Hardin, The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History at (646) 366.9666 or by e-mail at: hardin@gilderlehrman.org .

Item #5 -- Clinton Boyhood Home For Sale on E-Bay: Former President Bill Clinton's boyhood home in Hope Arkansas is up for sale on the Internet- based auction house E-Bay. The little white house located at 321 E. 13th Street in Hope is available to the highest bidder. An E-Bay search for "Bill Clinton's home" shows that over 170 individuals have already bid over $250,000 for the 950-square-foot three-bedroom one-bath bungalow which served as Clinton's home from 1951-1953. Clinton is associated with several other homes and his $170-million presidential library complex in Little Rock will open this fall. The present owners claim that they paid twice what the house was worth ten years ago, but given the bidding frenzy they expect to make out fine with their investment. Bid closing on the property is 9 April.

One article this week: In "Looting Ring Unravels: Native American Artifacts Plundered" (Washington Post; 15 March 2004) reporter Ryan Slattery traces the story of the successful effort to recover more than 11,100 Native American relics stolen from public lands in California and Nevada in violation of the Archeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA). The ringleader has been sentenced to a three-year sentence, the longest jail-term ever imposed for a first-time offender of the resources protection law. Tap into: http://hnn.us/readcomment.php?id=31902 .

The National Coalition for History invites you to subscribe to this FREE weekly newsletter! You are also encouraged to redistribute the NCH Washington Updates to colleagues, friends, teachers, students and others who are interested in history and archives issues. A complete b backfile of these reports is maintained by H-Net on the NCH's recently updated web page
at: .

To subscribe to the "NCH Washington Update," send an e-mail message to listserv@h-net.msu.edu with the following text in the body of the message (and only this text): SUBSCRIBE H-NCH firstname lastname, institution. To unsubscribe send an e-mail message to: listserv@h-net.msu.edu according to the following model: SIGNOFF H-NCH.

You can accomplish the same tasks by tapping into the web interface at http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/lists/subscribe.cgi and at the "network" prompt, scroll down and select H-NCH; enter your name and affiliation and "submit".

HNN - 3/17/2004


A law professor at the University of Alabama suggested on Monday that the institution apologize for owning slaves before the Civil War and possibly grant reparations to their descendants.

Alfred L. Brophy, who teaches on the Tuscaloosa campus, noted that antebellum faculty members and administrators also promoted a pro-slavery philosophy, in both their writings and their classrooms.

"The institution was a defender of slavery," Mr. Brophy said. "The University of Alabama was teaching students that their role at the top of the slave hierarchy was appropriate. For a university, that is the most troubling part -- that we failed to question the system."

Mr. Brophy said he had found evidence that two to six slaves worked on the campus from 1831, when it began admitting students, to the end of the Civil War. The university also occasionally rented slaves from local residents and faculty members, he said.

HNN - 3/15/2004

The Washington Post
March 15, 2004 Monday
Final Edition
SECTION: A Section; A02
HEADLINE: In Las Vegas, Looting Ring Unravels; Native American Artifacts Plundered; Five Convicted After Two-Year Probe
BYLINE: Ryan Slattery, Special to The Washington Post
It happened by chance: An alert park ranger saw a pair of men loading things into their car in Death Valley National Park. The ranger questioned the men. One of them said he had "Indian rocks" in his car for his personal collection. And from there, the plot began to unravel.

What the ranger had stumbled upon was a ring of thieves who looted Native American artifacts, and authorities are calling it one of the largest operations of its kind.

During the course of a two-year investigation, authorities recovered more than 11,100 relics, including a human skull, lifted from public lands in California and Nevada, many from areas never charted by archaeologists. The five members of the ring were convicted of violating the Archaeological Resources Protection Act and recently sentenced in U.S. District Court here. The ringleader, Bobbie Wilkie, 45, began serving a three-year sentence in federal prison last month. It was the longest jail term ever imposed for a first-time offender of the resources protection law.

The case began on a December day in 2001 when ranger Todd Garrett spotted two men in an area of Death Valley known to contain sensitive resources.

Garrett watched as the men loaded a car and drove away. When Garrett pulled them over he discovered the men, Frank Embrey, 54, and David Peeler, 53, had three old Indian grinding stones in their vehicle. The ranger searched the car in what was the beginning of a widespread investigation that involved nearly a dozen federal agencies.

"What we found was the most egregious example of looting, ever," said archaeologist Tim Canaday, who worked on the investigation and said he remains shocked by the scope of the looting. "They collected things that, as an archaeologist for 25 years, I had never seen. The only times I got to see some of those artifacts were in a museum."

The stolen artifacts included projectile points and arrowheads, yucca fiber sandals, pottery shards, clay figurines, basket fragments, hand-held grinding tools and pendants. Most of the items were collected at 14 sites within a day's drive of Las Vegas. The thefts, authorities say, occurred between late 1997 and December 2001. And this was hardly a crew of amateurs.

According to investigators, the group not only invested in sifting screens, flipping sticks, probes, trowels and shovels to excavate the sites, but also narrowed search areas using books, catalogues and maps to find places historically inhabited by Nevada tribes.

"These guys were sophisticated. They could look out at the lay of the land, as an archaeologist would, and say, 'I think there's something over there,' " Canaday said. But they did not use the care of professional archaeologists, sometimes damaging their search areas. "There were holes deep enough to hide a truck."

Canaday said it is likely a similar looting ring is working somewhere in the country right now. "Are there bigger ones going on out there? Unequivocally, yes. It's rampant nationwide. I'm always finding evidence that someone has gotten to a site before me."

Operation Indian Rocks, as the investigation came to be called, resulted in some of the stiffest penalties ever issued for archaeological crimes. Embrey was sentenced to 18 months in prison. Kevin Peterson, 43, received five months; and Wilkie's ex-wife Deanne Wilkie, 44, and Peeler each received five years of probation and six months of home detention. The group was also ordered to pay about $344,000 in fines.

Looting and poaching on federal lands is a widespread problem, said Andrea Keller, a National Parks Conservation Association spokeswoman.

Ginseng root theft and bear poaching is prominent in Virginia's Shenandoah National Park. Barrel cacti, snakes and reptiles are disappearing from the Mojave National Preserve. Elk are hunted from Yellowstone. And a few years back, a man was caught with a metal detector hidden in his pants scouring Gettysburg National Military Park for Civil War relics.

But some of the biggest battles are in the desert Southwest, where federal agencies such as the National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management and Fish and Wildlife Service manage large swaths of land.

Rudy Mauldin, a veteran BLM law enforcement agent specializing in archaeological crime in Salt Lake City, said Utah's problem with vandalism and theft is among the worst in the country.

"We probably lead the nation in where damage occurs," Mauldin said of a state with 21 law officers patrolling 22.9 million acres of BLM land. But Utah also tops the list when it comes to prosecuting archaeological crimes, with at least 38 convictions under the resources protection law over the past decade. "It's not something we take lightly."

In one case, investigators matched DNA on a discarded cigarette discovered at an illegal dig site to a suspect in a looting case. The man was indicted and convicted, and served five years in prison.

In most states, catching thieves or poachers is hit-or-miss. Often arrests come by a stroke of luck, a law enforcement officer with good timing. What is more frustrating to archaeologists and historians is that there is no law to prevent digging on private lands, a practice that is increasing.

Larry Baldwin, a private investigator who works for a landowner whose property is adjacent to Arizona's Petrified Forest National Park, tries to keep the looters off the private land. He said he routinely bumps into thieves pocketing petrified wood or digging Anasazi graves searching for valuable pottery. Sometimes the looters are armed. Ancient funeral pots can fetch as much as $60,000 on the black market.

John Madsen, a resource coordinator for the Arizona State Museum in Tucson, said archaeological crime has gone corporate. Volunteer groups such as the Arizona Site Stewards succeeded in protecting state lands with intensive patrols, but Madsen said the looters have moved onto private property, where they pay the owners a fee to search the land.

"A lot of the old stewards of the land were ranching families," Madsen said. "But the economy forced them to sell. The big ranches folded, and now the commercial looting companies are getting contracts and excavating the sites with bulldozers and backhoes. A lot of these guys are doing this for a living."

Madsen said that entire pueblos, such as the 600-room Bailey Ruin, have been removed in recent months. "They know exactly where to go and what to look for," Madsen said. "We are losing so many important sites in northeastern Arizona. And after a good year of rain, grasses come up and you'd never know anything was ever there."

HNN - 3/12/2004

National Public Radio (NPR)

SHOW: Tavis Smiley (9:00 AM ET) - NPR

March 5, 2004 Friday

LENGTH: 1360 words

HEADLINE: Scot French discusses the historic image of Nat Turner and his new book "The Rebellious Slave"


TONY COX, host:

From NPR in Los Angeles, I'm Tony Cox, in for Tavis.

If we take a look at what the history books tell us about enslaved preacher and self-styled prophet Nat Turner, we'd learn that he led a slave revolt for 24 hours in Southampton County, Virginia. Fifty-seven white people died. State militiamen, federal troops and armed volunteers mutilated the insurgents. Nat Turner eluded capture for more than two months, and after surrendering to a local farmer he recounted his so-called "Confessions" to a lawyer named Thomas Gray, a former slave holder. To this day, that interpretation of history has been accepted as the most accurate account of the uprising. History professor and historian Scot French says: Hold on. He's making some assertions of his own about Turner's rebellion. I talked with French about his new book, titled "The Rebellious Slave: Nat Turner in American Memory." Today Thomas Gray and William Styron have been noted historically for their versions of Nat Turner's confessions, but it was Gray's account that Professor French scrutinized.

Professor SCOT FRENCH (Author, "The Rebellious Slave"): Well, if you read the "Confessions," one of the first lines says that his intention is to answer and to quash the thousands of exaggerated and idle rumors that were circulating. And that really intrigued me. I wanted to know more about the stories that were being, in effect, suppressed by Gray's narrative. And so...

COX: And what did you discover?

Prof. FRENCH: What I came to see was that some of these stories that were easily dismissed as rumor or idle talk had a great deal more to them, and that people of some authority believed them. These were rumors that circulated widely among civil and military authorities. Robert E. Lee, who was a lieutenant colonel--or second lieutenant, I believe, actually--serving in Virginia, heard these rumors and repeated them in letters to his mother, and he heard them from his commanding officers. So I thought, 'Well, there may be more to this, and maybe we've been too quick to dismiss all accounts that don't comport with Gray's narrative.'

COX: Which of those rumors struck you as being perhaps the most believable?

Prof. FRENCH: The one that had the widest resonance at the time was a rumor that stated that the slaves throughout the region were planning to rise on the fourth Sunday of August, and that the slaves of Southampton County rose a week too soon. That was a really important and unsettling rumor, because what it meant to white civil and military authorities was that every slave was under a cloud of suspicion. And in the aftermath of Turner's rebellion, what this meant was that every slave was potentially a victim of white vigilantism, and that's what we saw, was a great deal of civil disorder. And in a sense, I was trying to show how the need for Nat Turner's capture and the taking of his confessions was an attempt to establish a master narrative that would help to re-establish social order, that would give white people a sense that all of the guilty parties had been captured and had been brought to justice, or had been killed on the battlefield.

COX: You know...

Prof. FRENCH: That's what the "Confessions" does.

COX: ...your book takes us through various eras in which Nat Turner's reputation evolved both positively and negatively, as well. In which era would you say it had its biggest impact--the reputation? Would it be the Civil War era or immediately after the rebellion? When?

Prof. FRENCH: I would say that in the 1840s and 1850s, he became a major symbol of militant abolitionism, and many black abolitionists who had earlier embraced the pacifist philosophies of William Lloyd Garrison were turning instead to a much more militant embrace of violence as the only solution. Another period when you see Nat Turner sort of returning to a very prominent public place is right after Harpers Ferry, right after John Brown's raid. There's a great deal of discussion about whether the slaves had ever risen, and there was a great interest in history, the history of slave rebellions.

COX: You know, the rebellion occurred in 1831, a full four years after the black press in this country was founded. What response did the ethnic press have to Turner? And how much of a role did the black press play in fashioning Turner as a heroic figure?

Prof. FRENCH: In the immediate aftermath, there was not much publicly expressed sympathy for Turner. It really came later, in the 1840s and 1850s. In the 1830s, most black commentary on Turner's rebellion regretted the incident and really urged an embrace of Garrisonian principles of non-resistance.

COX: When considering who Nat Turner actually was, how much does history remake the man? This is something that you talk about in your book. And who decides what the makeup of the remade man is going to be?

Prof. FRENCH: That's a really difficult question. I think it's always up for grabs, but the people who have the greatest influence are those with the greatest cultural authority, and that varies according to the times. This is really what I try to understand, is why does one image of Turner prevail as sort of the dominant image at any given moment? Why is Nat Turner sort of out of favor in the 1870s but returned in some ways to wide African-American celebration in the 1920s and 1930s?

COX: You know, it seems that the lessons from what you're saying to be learned from Nat Turner's rebellion can hardly be limited to the issue of abolishing slavery, and that perhaps the lasting rebellion is one of people's perception of history and which history they want to adhere to.

Prof. FRENCH: That's true. And a lot of what we find most appealing are stories that speak to our world, and that's really what's happening, is that people are trying to make the past relevant to their own worlds. That's why the story lives. That's why we continually remake our image of Nat Turner and our image of the rebellious slave: to speak to the issues of our own day.

COX: So in a sense, we may never know who the real Nat Turner was, and in another sense, perhaps it doesn't really matter in terms of how people want to relate to history.

Prof. FRENCH: I don't think we'll ever settle on any one real Nat Turner. There are--all we have are sketches of Turner in the historical record. And I think I would argue that, in some ways, we've focused a bit too much on him as an individual, as the great man. That version of events, the placing of--the making of Nat Turner as sort of the scapegoat for the event--I think that served the interests of white civil and military authorities in 1831, but I don't think that serves our interests today. There was a lot more going on. The event was much bigger in many ways than Nat Turner. And I think we need to be looking more broadly at the wider landscape, at the marginal people, the people who are not heard and seen in most traditional accounts of Turner's rebellion.

COX: This is my last question for you. You say in the book that you lost your faith and objectivity after your experiences with the research of Thomas Jefferson. Did you regain it with the research on Nat Turner?

Prof. FRENCH: Well, I think objectivity is still an ideal. I just think that to claim objectivity is often to fool ourselves, that we're always writing from a particular perspective that's shaped by our own present-day concerns. There's just no escaping it. Every generation has to decide whether to embrace the traditions that are handed down to them or whether to overthrow those old orthodoxies and write new stories that make some sense of the past, make better sense of the past.

COX: Scot French is an assistant professor in the Corcoran Department of History and an assistant director of the Carter G. Woodson Institute for African and African-American Studies at the University of Virginia. He is the author of a new book titled "The Rebellious Slave: Nat Turner in American Memory."

Scot, thanks for being with us.

Prof. FRENCH: Thank you very much.

COX: It's 29 minutes after the hour.

HNN - 3/12/2004

NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE (Vol. 10, #10; 12 March 2004) by Bruce Craig (editor) National Coalition for History (NCH) Website http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~nch

1. Library of Congress Opens Blackmun Papers
2. Jefferson Lecturer Announced By NEH
3. Legislative Update -- Bills Introduced, Bills Passed: Presidential
Sites Improvement Act; "Bleeding Kansas" Heritage Area; Fort Bayard NHL
4. Report: Meeting of the State Department's Advisory Committee on
Historical Diplomatic Documentation
5. Report: CIA Conference on Intelligence
6. Bits and Bytes: Archival/Library Groups File Amicus Brief; NARA
Comments Sought on ERA; Meeting Date for NCH Policy Board Set 7. Articles of Interest: "Greatest Generation Struggled with History Too"
(Washington Post, 9 March 2004); "Bush's ‘Grand Strategy'"(Washington Times; 12 March 2004)

On 4 March 2004, the Manuscript division of the Library of Congress (LC) opened the papers of deceased Supreme Court Justice Harry A. Blackmun to researchers. Blackmun was appointed to the high court in 1970 by President Richard Nixon and served until his retirement in 1994 at the age of 85. The justice gave his papers to the library in May 1997 with the stipulation that they were not to be opened until five years after his death. Blackmun died on 4 March 1999. His collection is now housed at the LC with the papers of 38 other justices. The Blackmun papers are comprised of 1,585 boxes (630 linear feet); the collection is the second largest of the federal judicial holdings in the LC.

The opening of the papers attracted considerable attention in the nation's press largely because Blackmun was a contemporary, for varying amounts of time, with seven of the current sitting associate justices. Select researchers, who were permitted an advance peek at the papers, reported in the Washington Post, the New York Times, and other major newspapers of record that the papers and an extensive oral history the justice left behind will significantly add to knowledge of the court interpretation of constitutional law over three decades.

While the collection covers all aspects of Blackmun's life -- the earliest files contain material from his days as a high school, college, and law school student -- of particular interest to researchers are his Supreme Court files. They greatly increase the knowledge of the largely secretive decision-making processes involved in formulating modern constitutional law.

During his 24 years on the court, Blackmun was involved in many of the most important cases of the Burger Court (1969-1986); he was also a jurist for the first eight years that the court operated under the leadership of Chief Justice Rehnquist. Of particular importance are his papers relating to the Pentagon Papers case (New York Times v. U.S., 1971), the Watergate tapes case (U.S. v. Nixon, 1974), a number of death-penalty decisions, and several constitutional controversies that involved congressional powers and federal-state relations. Blackmun is perhaps best known, however, for his landmark opinions in the abortion-rights cases of Roe v. Wade and Doe v.
Bolton (1973).

According to library spokespersons, the justice's materials that currently are attracting the most attention from researchers relates to the abortion cases and the Nixon Papers case (U.S. v. Nixon). Also receiving attention are the individual topic specific name and case files and the law clerk files. According to researchers who have examined the collection, many of the justice's documents bear Blackmun's personal emendations and commentaries, including candid appraisals of opinions drafted by others.

Helen Vendler, author of numerous books on poets and poetry and a professor at Harvard University, will deliver the 2004 Jefferson Lecture in the Humanities. The annual National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) sponsored Jefferson Lecture is the highest honor the federal government bestows for distinguished intellectual achievement in the humanities.
Vendler will present the 33rd Jefferson Lecture in the Humanities on Thursday, 6 May 2004, at 7:30 p.m. in Washington, D.C. The lectureship carries a $10,000 honorarium.

NEH Chair Bruce Cole stated, "Through her many wonderful books, lectures, and reviews, Helen Vendler leads us first to understand and then to love the great poems and poets of the English language. Her vast learning, beautiful prose, and analytical powers bring the power and magic of the written word to life and into our lives."

Vendler is the A. Kingsley Porter University Professor at Harvard, where she received her Ph.D. in English and American Literature in 1960. Before coming to Harvard in 1985, she taught at Cornell University, Swarthmore, Haverford, Smith Colleges, and Boston University. She has held many fellowships and is a member of several academic organizations, including the Modern Language Association, of which she was president in 1980. She holds 23 honorary degrees from universities and colleges in the United States, England, Ireland, and Norway.

Attendance at the lecture is by invitation and free. Those interested in receiving an invitation should call (202) 606-8400 or send an e-mail message to info@neh.gov. Additional information about the National Endowment for the Humanities and a list of previous Jefferson Lecturers is available on the Internet at http://www.NEH.gov.

Presidential Sites: On 4 March 2004, representative Paul E. Gillmor (R-OH) along with 16 co-sponsors introduced legislation (H.R. 3903), the "Presidential Sites Improvement Act," a companion bill to Senator Mike DeWine's (R-OH) bill (S. 1748) introduced 16 October 2003 that creates a partnership of public and private entities and authorizes $5 million a year to assist sites associated with American presidents. The bill was referred to the House Committee on Resources for action.

"Bleeding Kansas" and the Enduring Struggle for Freedom National Heritage Area Act: On 4 March 2004, Representative Jim R. Ryun (R-KS), with the backing of the entire Kansas Congressional delegation, introduced legislation (H.R. 3909) that seeks to designate Lawrence and 24 Kansas counties as a National Heritage Area. The collection of sites would feature the story of the pre-Civil War battle over slavery that helped spark the Civil War. Proponents of the bill hope that if enacted, the legislation could draw as much as $10 million in federal funds to help northeast Kansas preserve the area's history and promote tourism. The bill was referred to the House Committee on Resources for action.

Fort Bayard National Historic Landmark Act: Legislation (H.R. 2059) designating Fort Bayard, in southwest New Mexico, a national historical landmark, has cleared Congress and is on its way to the White House to be signed into law. From 1866 to 1899 Fort Bayard served as a military base for Buffalo Soldiers who fought the Apache wars, and as a hospital. The designation allows the Secretary of the Interior to enter into cooperative agreements to provide assistance to public and private entities to protect what little is left of the fort's historic resources. National Park Service insiders report that the NPS determined that there were problems relating to historic structure and site "integrity" and hence the bureau did not conclude that the fort met the stringent NHL designation guidelines. NHLs are usually designated by the Secretary of the Interior and not by Congress. In this instance, however, the Congressional NHL designation of the site trumped the NPS professional assessment.

At the Department of State on 8 March, Roger Louis, the new chair of the Advisory Committee on Historical Diplomatic Documentation, presided over a brief open session meeting of the committee. Following the approval of the minutes of the 8-9 December 2003 meeting ( http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/adcom/mtgnts/27165.htm ), Executive Secretary Marc Susser and Deputy Historian David Herschler made their reports.

Susser gave a brief update on the status of current outreach projects including the impending completion of a 30-minute educational video and teacher packet focusing on diplomacy. Herschler reported that the FY-04 budget allocation. Though "less than expected," nevertheless, funds are sufficient to enable the History Office (HO) to hire four additional contract historians, thus making the HO only two positions shy of being fully staffed. He also reported on a policy background paper that was prepared by the HO focusing on "reopening embassies in post-conflict periods" that was used to support a departmental foreign policy initiative.

A most interesting report was made by the FRUS General Editor Ted Keefer. Keefer stated that he believed that the FRUS series had reached "the end of a publishing drought" and predicted that "the rains are coming." Keefer confidently stated that researchers could expect an average of twelve FRUS volumes to be released beginning in FY 2006 and in each year thereafter for the foreseeable future. He reported that four of the six unpublished Johnson presidency era volumes are now fully cleared, leaving only two volumes in review; that four Nixon era volumes are fully cleared, and three more are in the final stages of clearance. In toto, he stated that 46 projected volumes for the Nixon/Ford eras (of which about a quarter will be published in an electronic format) are slotted for release:
13 volumes are under review by other agencies and 22 are in preparation by the HO, thus leaving only 12 yet to be started.

Keefer's upbeat report was contrasted by reports by Office of Information Programs and Service's Brian Dowling and Margaret Peppe, who updated the committee on the status of declassification and public access to the department's 25-year old and older records. Dowling stated that he anticipated "meeting" his FY 2006 goal for declassification of paper records and that he hoped to "squeeze by" in the realm of electronic records (a total of some 12 million pages) declassification, though he declined to make any guarantees in the latter case. Dowling (who is now nearing retirement) also reported with uncharacteristic forthrightness on his ongoing aggressive effort to effect a change in current management policies and practices that "needlessly' impede declassification. His thoughtful suggestions and recommendations that he has made to the Undersecretary for Management were discussed fully by the presenters, committee members, and public members in attendance.

In the most depressing report of the day, Margaret Peppe stated that the long-awaited electronic release of the 1972-73 State Department cables has experienced yet another delay. She stated that while the "internal review"
by departmental heads has now been completed, copies of the cables have been sent to the Department of Energy, and, that upon her initiative she had also sent them to two other departments (that she declined to name publicly), for review. Peppe stated that one of these departments had completed its review and the other was expected to finish with the cables within 45-days. Then, once the collection had been fully cleared by all parties, it would still be yet another six months (time needed to complete all technical aspects of posting) before the documents would be available to researchers.

This meeting of the Advisory Committee was a refreshing departure from the past. In his opening remarks, the new Chair, Roger Louis, re-emphasized to all in attendance that these were "public meetings" and encouraged not just members of the committee to pose questions but also HO staff and public representatives. In presiding over the meeting, Louis created an air of openness and accountability to the committee and to the public that may have made some HO officials in attendance uncomfortable. Nevertheless, one was left with the feeling that future all-too-brief open sessions would not necessarily be "orchestrated" events that characterize the open-session portions of so many governmental agency advisory committee meetings.

The CIA has released a summary of proceedings of the 10-11 September 2003 conference in Charlottesville, Virginia, sponsored by the CIA's Center for the Study of Intelligence. The conference report entitled "Intelligence for a New Era in American Foreign Policy" focuses on a broad-ranging assessment of the evolution of the international security environment, America's changing role in it, and consideration of the best strategies for improving the capabilities of the intelligence community. Participants included noted intelligence policy experts, military experts and historians, though academic historians outside of the intelligence community were not represented.

The report reflects some thoughtful comments on the history of intelligence gathering. Speakers emphasized the need to "understand the enemy" and spoke of the importance of the regional study centers and the cultivation of "area experts"- an educational training program currently under attack by some Congressional conservatives (see "The Battle Continues -- Advisory Boards and the Title VI Higher Education Act" in NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE; Vol. 10., #7; 20 February 2004).

Conferees addressed the "Pearl Harbor problem" relating to flawed intelligence gathering and emphasized the need to reform the way intelligence data is collected. In many ways participant comments anticipated the 11 February announcement by Deputy Director of Intelligence Jami Miscik's to agency officials in which it was announced that the agency would implement "new procedures" for information sharing among CIA analysts of information gleaned from clandestine sources.

Finally, some conferees suggested that the CIA's age-old attitude toward "deniability" needed to be superceded with a new policy. Though the report does not attribute individual comments to any specific individual, one participant stated that there is "the need for secrecy [to carry out operations]" but "not necessarily [for] deniability after the fact." Comments by additional participants reinforced that suggestion. Several others, however, noted the affect of such a new policy on Congressional oversight: Congress would be kept in the dark for a time, or as stated by one conferee, "it may mean there has to be something of a lag [in getting information to them]. Such a policy, if implemented, also would potentially influence the way CIA operations are documented in such official histories as the State Department's "Foreign Relations of the United States" series.

The report is not posted on the Center for the Study of Intelligence web page though copies of the report are available by request by calling (703) 613-1753.

Item #1 -- Archival/Library Groups File Amicus Brief: A coalition of library and archival associations (including NCH member the Society of American Archivists) and four public interest groups filed a joint amicus brief on 11 March 2004 in the U.S. Supreme Court case brought by Vice President Richard Cheney to prevent discovery into the makeup of his controversial energy policy task force. The vice-president argued that because the formal members of the task force were government officials, the open government law known as the Federal Advisory Committee Act did not apply, and if it did, that would violate the constitutional separation of powers. The amicus brief argues that the Supreme Court should "reject the government's claim that it may conduct the public's business in secret." The brief asserts that public participation in government can be meaningful only if the people know what officials are doing and how they are doing it. Equally, without that information the people cannot hold
public officials accountable. To access the amicus brief tap into:

Item #2 -- NARA Comments Sought on ERA The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) Electronic Records Policy Working Group has issued a request for interested persons to provide comment on issues relating to implementing section 207(e)(1)(A) of the E-Government Act of 2002. Specifically, the Working Group is seeking feedback on the definition of "Government information on the Internet and other electronic records" and perceived barriers to effective management of such information. Comments should be sent to the general email box erpwg@nara.gov no later than 5 April. For addit