Here's a link to the story Roy mentioned. http://www.sltrib.com/ci_3907507?source=rss Interesting. Generally, in reading stories about NARA, despite all my knowledge (or because of it?), I waver between giving NARA the benefit of the doubt on issues and wondering what the heck really is going on. Federal agencies coould be heavy handed in instances where NARA's own experts might assess balancing tests differently or better. Or, then again, all the parties might act in sync. I tend to hope someone in NARA is pushing to do the right thing. But, ya never know. In this case, there may have been legitimate reasons to restrict some items in the files the researcher was looking at. Or not. It's hard to tell, the account is murky. Becasically, there's insufficient detail in this story for me to assess this properly. But it is interesting, thanks for passing it on, Roy! Maarja ________________________________________________________________________ Check out AOL.com today. Breaking news, video search, pictures, email and IM. All on demand. Always Free. 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]>