Been going through the batch released last autumn and yes, the pattern of redactions is strange. It's not just names and dates being blacked out - you'd expect that. It's whole methodological sections, and not consistently either. Some fairly damning procedural stuff got left in while other passages that seem almost mundane are completely gone.
What gets me is the clustering. Certain researchers' names appear unredacted in one document then vanish entirely from another document covering the same time period and facility. That's not standard declassification procedure, that's selective.
Has anyone cross-referenced the redaction patterns against the Church Committee transcripts from '75? I did this a few years back and found some interesting gaps that line up a bit too neatly. Would be curious whether anyone else has done teh same work more recently with the newer releases.
Also worth asking - who actually reviews these before release? The assumption is it's routine archival process but I've never seen a clear answer on that. Anyone here dug into teh declassification review board membership for these specific files?
