(d) Information that has not previously been disclosed to the public under proper authority may be classified or reclassified after an agency has received a request for it under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552) or the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), or the mandatory review provisions of section 3.5 of this order only if such classification meets the requirements of this order and is accomplished on a document-by-document basis with the personal participation or under the direction of the agency head, the deputy agency head, or the senior agency official designated under section 5.4 of this order.
Sec. 1.8. Classification Challenges. (a) Authorized holders of information who, in good faith, believe that its classification status is improper are encouraged and expected to challenge the classification status of the information in accordance with agency procedures established under paragraph (b) of this section.b) In accordance with implementing directives issued pursuant to this order, an agency head or senior agency official shall establish procedures under which authorized holders of information are encouraged and expected to challenge the classification of information that they believe is improperly classified or unclassified. These procedures shall ensure that:
(1) individuals are not subject to retribution for bringing such actions;
(2) an opportunity is provided for review by an impartial official or panel; and
(3) individuals are advised of their right to appeal agency decisions to the Interagency Security Classification Appeals Panel (Panel) established by section 5.3 of this order.
----- Original Message -----
From: Anita Langley
To: bill payne
Sent: Saturday, September 30, 2006 9:19 PM
Subject: Re: fumble, bumble and inept
Hardy is a familiar name around here, his name is signed onto a few FOIA related cover letters.
Agent's name's are routinely redacted and are covered under FOIA regulations, that's why he's brushing you off. Depending upon the situation in which the agent's name is hidden (ie, if it is on a previously released foia document), it may be possible to appeal due to special circumstances or relevance to your case. When you request a foia release, you cannot request information on a person unless you have written permission from that person or if the person is dead, and that along with the routine redactions for agents makes it very difficult to pin point federal agents.
If the document in question is a previously released foia document, consider filing an appeal on the redaction, at which point you should give your reasons. -
Anita
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fred Fair"
To: "payne payne"
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 11:50 AM
Subject: visit
Bill: be leaving for Denver early tomorrow and back by 4pm so any time after that. My place: go about three miles north of plaza and look for Atilano Rd on left(just past a mail box cluster) - if you pass the El Prado post office you went too far. Go down Atilano jog slightly right on Atilano Ln (sign on Rumsfeld fence) - that's my drive way - cross 4 cattle guards and a couple 90 degree turns - it's a two story territorial with a red tin roof in a pasture all by itself - a smaller one story guest house will be at the opposite end of the pasture. My phone, when you get lost, is 758 9331 or cell which I never answer is 613 0653. See you tomorrow. Regards,
Photo of Rumsfeld's Taos fence taken Tuesday September 28, 2006
Wilson, Madrid wage political war
Comments are not allowed on this story at this time. Please check the open for comments page for details.
FREE newmexican.com new comments page.
Crude comments clog our online forums
Comment posted Tuesday October 24, 2006
Time for shaping-up the legal system. Thanks to Internet!
And the editors of FREE
newmexican.com!
| Albuquerque Journal Tuesday October 24, 2006 carries article
titled Survey gives Wilson edge on honesty. Evidence in court receipts for $644 for two paid for 12 person jury trial lawsuits guaranteed inviolate by New Mexico and federal constitutions against former second judicial district judge W John Brennan et al for Breech of Contact shows that Patricia Madrid failed to uphold her Oath of Office and was involved in cover-up of fraud seen in documents referenced in an appeal letter to Congresswoman Wilson: http://www.prosefights.org/nmlegal/wilson/wilson.htm#wilson |
 from PAGE Al Wilson's Honesty Figures Top Approval Rating pollster Brian Sanderoff. "It's another thing to call them dishonest." He believes the less-than-stellar honesty numbers for both candidates are mostly the result of months of fierce, negative campaigning from both sides. The TV ad salvos began this summer and have only intensified since, leaving many voters wondering: Is there any way to make Nov. 7 come any sooner? "Both the thrower and recipient of the mud is called into question by the voters," said Sanderoff, president of Research & Polling Inc., whose firm conducted the Oct. 17-19 Journal survey of 503 registered, likely voters in the district. "The negative campaigning, and the polarizing nature of this race, has taken its toll on the two candidates," Sanderoff said. Madrid leading In the same Journal Poll, 45 percent said they would vote for Madrid, compared with 42 percent for Wilson. The result fell within the poll's margin of error of plus or minus 4.4 percentage points. However, Sanderoff said the trend over the past three Journal Polls - in which Madrid went from trailing slightly in late August to leading slightly in mid-October - shows there has been a change in the nationally watched congressional battle. Sanderoff said he doesn't see Madrid's slight lead as a statement of whether Madrid is popular or Wilson is unpopular. Instead, he said, many Voters simply view the Democratic candidate as an agent of needed change in Washington. One honesty statistic that might support that view: According to Sanderoff, 13 percent of those who view Madrid as dishonest said they plan to vote for her anyway, while only 6 percent of those who view Wilson as dishonest plan to vote for the incumbent. Wilson, an Air Force Academy graduate and Rhodes Scholar, has cultivated an image as a lawmaker above reproach. The image is underscored in a recent TV ad endorsement by New Mexico senior Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., perennially the state's most popular politician. Sanderoff said the image also could be playing a male in Wilson's better honesty numbers among voters. "It's interesting to note Wilson's honesty figures are higher than her approval rating," Sanderoff added: In late-August Journal polling, 46 percent approved of the job she was doing in Washington. Madrid's job approval rating was state attorney general was 44 percent. "Some people might recognize (Wilson's) integrity, but disagree with her on the issues," Sanderoff said. Nine percent of 1st District voters in the new Journal survey remained undecided on how they would vote. Sanderoff said Wilson's slight edge in honesty numbers could help her in the long run to pull a few more votes from undecided voters. "I'd rather have a higher honesty rating than a low one," he said. "In a close race, honesty and integrity has always been seen as an important consideration among voters." The wording of the poll questions was: Please tell me if you believe each of the following people is very honest, somewhat honest, somewhat dishonest or very dishonest. Ethics Ethics questions have played 'a key role in the battle between Wilson and Madrid. Wilson started criticizing Madrid this summer for doing' nothing as attorney general to address a corruption problem at the state Treasurer's Office. Madrid, meanwhile, has faulted Wilson for taking campaign contributions from disgraced or questionable congressional members and associates. Much of the 21st District battle is being fought through expensive TV attack ads. Each camp accuses the other of stretching - or outright butchering - the truth in hopes of smearing its opponent. "The point of a campaign is not to be honest. The point of a campaign is to win," said University of New Mexico political science professor Lonna Atkeson. "Both candidates have come out swinging pretty hard against the other candidate's character, and part of their character is their honesty," she said. "They're spinning things in such a way to hurt the other (candidate). That's the point." Among party members, the Journal Poll said 69 percent of Democrats believed Madrid is either somewhat or very honest, while 82 percent of Republicans believed Wilson falls into those two categories. Atkeson said those numbers, might suggest Wilson could be more successful than Madrid in raising questions about her opponent in the minds of opposing party members. However, that does not necessarily amount to more votes: The Journal polling shows that Wilson's support among Democrats has slipped since late August. The new poll found that 64 percent of Republicans considered Madrid dishonest, while 51 percent of Democrats considered Wilson dishonest. Coming Wednesday: How honest are Gov. Bill Richardson and challenger John Dendahl? Albuquerque Journal Tuesday October 24, 2006 |
