It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The National Archives is releasing documents previously withheld in accordance with the JFK Assassination Records Collection Act. The vast majority of the Collection (88%) has been open in full and released to the public since the late 1990s. The records at issue are documents previously identified as assassination records, but withheld in full or withheld in part. Learn more These releases include FBI, CIA, and other agency documents (both formerly withheld in part and formerly withheld in full) identified by the Assassination Records Review Board as assassination records. The releases to date are as follows: July 24, 2017: 3,810 documents (read press release) October 26, 2017: 2,891 documents (read press release) Accessing the Release Files To view or download a released file, follow the link in the “File Number” column. You can also download the full spreadsheet with metadata about all the documents. The files are sorted by NARA Release Date, with the most recent files appearing first. The previous withholding status (i.e., formerly withheld in part or formerly withheld in full) is identified in the “Formerly Withheld Status” column.
In a statement, the agency said none of the 18,000 remaining records will be withheld in full and that the redacted — or blacked out — parts of these remaining records represent less than 1 percent of the total CIA information in the assassination-related documents.
The CIA says the redactions were made to protect information that, if released, would harm national security. The agency says the redactions hide the names of CIA assets and former and current CIA officers as well as specific intelligence methods and partnerships that remain viable to protect national security.
originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: Deny Arrogance
Why didn't I see this coming? OF COURSE these files would be used to push the partisan divide happening today on all fronts. Why am I surprised? Carry on with your partisan BS, we see how well it's worked in the past few years, why not do it with this, something that shouldn't be a partisan issue at all?
In a June 10, 2013, PolitiFact Virginia article, Carole Emberton, associate professor of history at the University at Buffalo, noted that the "party lines of the 1860s/1870s are not the party lines of today."
"Although the names stayed the same, the platforms of the two parties reversed each other in the mid-20th century, due in large part to white ‘Dixiecrats’ flight out of the Democratic Party and into the Republican Party after the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964," she said. "By then, the Democratic Party had become the party of ‘reform,’ supporting a variety of ‘liberal’ causes, including civil rights, women’s rights, etc. whereas this had been the banner of the Republican Party in the nineteenth century."