Richard and List, Hmmm, I disagree with some of this. I don't think what happened in the Nixon case was an isolated instance. There is nothing at all to keep it from happening again, with Nixon's or any agency records, at NARA. Perhaps you missed the fact that on the same day NARA released the MOU, it announced the appointment of a director for the soon to be acquired Nixon Library in California. He will have to work with some of the same players who were around when I testified in the Nixonm lawsuit. That, obviously, is why I keep bringing it up. As to the don't look back advice, well, no one else has to look back, other than me, if they don't want to. For me, what I went through was a searing experience and for better or worse, it affects the way I react to almost any archives or records related issue, now. I agree that SAA needs to call for an independent NARA, blah blah blah. The question is, how to achieve that. For better or worse, NARA is a part of the executive branch, its head serves at the pleasure of the President, and the executive agencies are expected to "speak with one voice." How are you going to ensure that NARA is able to concentrate on properly releasing historical records, when the rest of the government may have different objectives? Also, as I've pointed out, U.S. Archivists tend to retire as agency head and never, ever speak up or out about unclassified matters which they dealt with during their tenure. Despite the fact that retirement affords them some freedom of speech. (I speak much more candidly than any former U.S. Archivist, and I'm still a Federal employee. LOL.) That's their choice, but one which I believe harms NARA's ability to protect itself. However, I recognize that there are a few people at NARA who actually hate the fact that I ever say anything about my experiences there, although there are others who appreciate my speaking out. There is no one model for handling these things, we all handle our careers based on our individual assessments of what to do and what not to do. SAA is very limited in what it can do in examining a case that involves national security classification issues. It's not like SAA can subpoena the named and unnamed agencies in the MOU. Or compel anyone involved in this matter to share any information, at all. Consider the present environment, not just at NARA, but elsewhere, regarding these types of issues. Isn't SAA mostly dependent on what others uncover? While I sympathize entirely with your objectives, I think you underestimate the difficulties of SAA independently getting at the facts with these particular players, in the current environment. That is why I cited the Nixon case, where the facts in court filings were unclassified but still never examined by anyone from SAA. That's not to say no one should try. For now, I'm placing my trust in Bill Leonard of NARA's ISOO unit, who sounds as if he is trying to do the right thing under difficult circumstances. Maarja A posting from the Archives & Archivists LISTSERV List sponsored by the Society of American Archivists, www.archivists.org. For the terms of participation, please refer to http://www.archivists.org/listservs/arch_listserv_terms.asp. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send e-mail to [log in to unmask] In body of message: SUB ARCHIVES firstname lastname *or*: UNSUB ARCHIVES To post a message, send e-mail to [log in to unmask] Or to do *anything* (and enjoy doing it!), use the web interface at http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/archives.html Problems? Send e-mail to Robert F Schmidt <[log in to unmask]>