Important editorial re government response.
Yes, Steve Aftergood is made out to be wearing a black hat re wikileaks indiscretions, BUT better safe than sorry, as the disclosures ARE highly risky if taken out of a whole context of reactions. This outlines but one of them.
The US State Department is a sorry mess, imho. Will it straighten out?
Cumbaya ...
TREASURY CLASSIFICATION GUIDE, AND OTHER RESOURCES
The Department of the Treasury has recently produced a consolidated classification guide, detailing exactly what kinds of Treasury information may be classified at what level and for how long. It is in such agency classification guides, not in high-level government-wide policy statements, that the nuts and bolts of government secrecy policy are to be found, and perhaps to be changed. See "Security Classification Guide" (pdf), Department of the Treasury, December 2010.
The Congressional Research Service yesterday offered its assessment of the Stuxnet worm, which was evidently designed to damage industrial control systems such as those used in Iran's nuclear program. See "The Stuxnet Computer Worm: Harbinger of an Emerging Warfare Capability" (pdf), December 9, 2010.
Intelligence historian Jeffrey Richelson has written what must be the definitive account of the rise and fall of the National Applications Office, the aborted Department of Homeland Security entity that was supposed to harness intelligence capabilities for domestic security and law enforcement applications. The article, which is not freely available online, is entitled "The Office That Never Was: The Failed Creation of the National Applications Office." It appears in the International Journal of Intelligence and Counter Intelligence, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 65-118 (2011).
The latest issue of the Journal of National Security Law & Policy (vol. 4, no. 2) is now available online. Entitled "Liberty, terrorism and the laws of war," it includes several noteworthy and informative papers on intelligence and security policy.
December 10, 2010
Govt Response to Wikileaks Said to Cause More Damage | Secrecy News
September 24, 2008
SECRECY NEWS update
SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2008, Issue No. 93
September 24, 2008
Secrecy News Blog: http://www.fas.org/blog/
** COURT ORDERS RELEASE OF DETAINEE ABUSE PHOTOGRAPHS
** COURT ORDERS PRESERVATION OF VICE PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS
** NEW LIGHT ON PRIVATE SECURITY CONTRACTORS IN IRAQ
** DEPT OF DEFENSE ROLE IN FOREIGN ASSISTANCE, AND MORE FROM CRS
COURT ORDERS RELEASE OF DETAINEE ABUSE PHOTOGRAPHS
A federal court of appeals this week affirmed that 21 photographs depicting abusive treatment of detainees by U.S. soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan must be disclosed under the Freedom of Information Act.
"The public interest in disclosure of these photographs is strong," the Second Circuit panel concluded in a September 22 ruling in favor of the American Civil Liberties Union and other plaintiffs.
The ruling carefully analyzed and rejected several government arguments against disclosure.
Among other things, the government had contended that the photographs should be exempted from disclosure under FOIA exemption 7(F), which protects law enforcement records that "could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of any individual." Government attorneys said that release of the photographs (which were gathered in the
course of an Army criminal investigation) could be used to incite violence against U.S. forces, coalition forces or civilians in Iraq or Afghanistan, and should therefore be withheld.
But even if potential incitement is a valid concern, the court said, it would not provide a basis for invoking FOIA exemption 7(F), which was intended to serve as "a shield against specific threats to particular individuals arising out of law enforcement investigations, never as a means of suppressing worldwide political violence." The exemption is not supposed to be "an all-purpose damper on global controversy."
In short, the court ruled, the cited FOIA exemption cannot be used as "an ersatz classification system" to bar access to these unclassified photographs.
Nor can the government legitimately invoke the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions that protect prisoners "against insults and public curiosity."
"Both of these treaties were designed to prevent the abuse of prisoners," the court explained. "Neither treaty is intended to curb those who seek information about prisoner abuse in an effort to help deter it."
At the end of World War II, the court noted, the government itself "widely disseminated photographs of prisoners in Japanese and German prison and concentration camps. These photographs of emaciated prisoners, corpses, and remains of prisoners depicted detainees in states of powerlessness and subjugation similar to those endured by the detainees depicted in the photographs at issue here. Yet the United States championed the use and dissemination of such photographs to hold perpetrators accountable."
In the same way, "Release of the photographs is likely to further the purposes of the Geneva Conventions by deterring future abuse of prisoners," the court concluded.
A copy of the 52 page ruling in ACLU et al v. Department of Defense et al is posted here:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/jud/
"These photographs demonstrate that the abuse of prisoners held in U.S. custody abroad was not aberrational and not confined to Abu Ghraib, but the result of policies adopted by high-ranking officials," said Amrit Singh, the ACLU attorney who argued the case.
"Their release is critical for bringing an end to the administration's torture policies and for deterring further prisoner abuse," Ms. Singh said.
http://www.aclu.org/safefree/
COURT ORDERS PRESERVATION OF VICE PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS
In a rare judicial rebuff to the Office of Vice President Dick Cheney, a federal court issued a preliminary injunction requiring the preservation of Vice Presidential records over the objections of Administration attorneys.
A lawsuit brought by Citizens for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington (CREW) along with historians and others alleged that the Office of Vice President had improperly limited the scope of records that it said would be preserved under the Presidential Records Act, and that records outside the scope of that definition were liable to be destroyed.
Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly agreed that there was no legal basis on the record for the Vice President's position. On September 20, she ordered the government to preserve all official Vice Presidential records "without regard to any limiting definitions that Defendants may believe are
appropriate."
http://www.fas.org/sgp/jud/
"It's a pretty strong opinion," said Anne Weismann, chief counsel for CREW. "They will be prevented from destroying anything. It basically means they have to preserve everything in the broadest possible interpretation of what the law requires -- not their narrow interpretation."
http://www.citizensforethics.
NEW LIGHT ON PRIVATE SECURITY CONTRACTORS IN IRAQ
The use of thousands of private security contractors in Iraq represents a quantitatively new feature of U.S. military operations, but relatively little has been publicly disclosed about the contractual arrangements involved.
The war in Iraq "is apparently the first time that the United States has depended so extensively on contractors to provide security in a hostile environment," according to a recently updated Congressional Research Service report.
But "the use of armed contractors raises several concerns, including transparency and accountability," the CRS report said.
"The lack of public information on the terms of the contracts, including their costs and the standards governing hiring and performance, make evaluating their efficiency difficult. The apparent lack of a practical means to hold contractors accountable under U.S. law for abuses and other transgressions, and the possibility that they could be prosecuted by foreign courts, is also a source of concern," the CRS report said.
Thanks to a Freedom of Information Act request filed by David Isenberg of United Press International, new information is now available on the U.S. State Department's Worldwide Personal Protective Services (WPPS) contract, which provides security services throughout Iraq (as well as Afghanistan, Bosnia and Israel).
UPI obtained the WPPS contract specifications from the State Department and reported on the material in "Dogs of War: WPPS World" by David Isenberg, September 19:
http://www.metimes.com/
The newly disclosed contract material itself was posted by UPI here:
http://r.m.upi.com/other/
Extensive background information on the issue is available from the Congressional Research Service in "Private Security Contractors in Iraq: Background, Legal Status, and Other Issues," updated August 25, 2008:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/
DEPT OF DEFENSE ROLE IN FOREIGN ASSISTANCE, AND MORE FROM CRS
The structure, development and ramifications of growing U.S. Department of
Defense foreign assistance activities are described in a major new report
from the Congressional Research Service. See "The Department of Defense
Role in Foreign Assistance: Background, Major Issues, and Options for
Congress," August 25, 2008:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/
Other noteworthy new reports from CRS that have not been made readily
available to the public include the following.
"Pay-for-Performance: The National Security Personnel System," September
17, 2008:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/
"The Defense Base Act (DBA): The Federally Mandated Workers' Compensation
System for Overseas Government Contractors," September 15, 2008:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/
"The North Korean Economy: Leverage and Policy Analysis," updated August
26, 2008:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/
"Presidential Claims of Executive Privilege: History, Law, Practice and
Recent Developments," updated August 21, 2008:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/
"Periods of War," updated August 19, 2008:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/
"The Manhattan Project, the Apollo Program, and Federal Energy Technology
R&D Programs: A Comparative Analysis," September 3, 2008:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/
March 08, 2008
Who leaked the details of a CIA-Mossad plot against Iran?
By Yossi Melman
Tags: Iran, Israel, Mossad
The Bush administration is prolonging the hunting season against journalists. The latest victim is James Risen, The New York Times reporter for national security and intelligence affairs. About three months ago, a federal grand jury issued a subpoena against him, ordering Risen to give evidence in court. A heavy blackout has been imposed on the affair, with the only hint being that it has to do with sensitive matters of "national security."
But conversations with several sources who are familiar with the affair indicate that Risen has been asked to testify as part of an investigation aimed at revealing who leaked apparently confidential information about the planning of secret Central Intelligence Agency and Mossad missions concerning Iran's nuclear program.
Risen included this information in his book, "State of War: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration," which was published in 2006. In the book, he discusses a number of ideas which he says were thought up jointly by CIA and Mossad operatives to sabotage Iran's nuclear capabilities.
Advertisement
One of these ideas was to build electromagnetic devices, smuggling them inside Iran to sabotage electricity lines leading to the country's central nuclear sites. According to the plan, the operation was supposed to cause a series of chain reactions which would damage extremely powerful short circuits in the electrical supply that would have led to failures of the super computers of Iran's nuclear sites.
According to the book, the Mossad planners proposed that they would be responsible for getting the electromagnetic facilities into Iran with the aid of their agents in Iran. However, a series of technical problems prevented the plan's execution.
Another of the book's important revelations, which made the administration's blood boil about James Risen, appeared in a chapter describing what was known as Operation Merlin, the code name for another CIA operation supposed to penetrate the heart of Iran's nuclear activity, collect information about it and eventually disrupt it.
Operation Merlin
The CIA counter proliferation department hired a Soviet nuclear engineer who had previously, in the 1990s, defected to the United States and revealed secrets from the Soviet Union's nuclear program. His speciality was in the field of what is called weaponization, the final stage of assembling a nuclear bomb.
The scientist was equipped with blueprints for assembling a nuclear bomb in which, without his knowledge, false drawings and information blueprints were planted about a nuclear warhead that was supposedly manufactured in the Soviet Union. The plan's details had been fabricated by CIA experts, and so while they appeared authentic, they had no engineering or technological value.
The intention was to fool the scientist and send him to make contact with the Iranians to whom he would offer his services and blueprints. The American plot was aimed at getting the Iranians to invest a great deal of effort in studying the plans and to attempt to assemble a faulty warhead. But when the time came, they would not have a nuclear bomb but rather a dud.
However, Operation Merlin, which was so creative and original, failed because of CIA bungled planning. The false information inserted into the blueprints were too obvious and too easily detected and the Russian engineer discovered them. As planned, he made contact with the Iranian delegation to the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna and handed over to them, also as planned, the blueprints.
But contrary to the CIA's intention, he added a letter to the blueprints in which he pointed out the mistakes. He did not do this with ill intent or out of a desire to disrupt the operation and harm his operators. On the contrary, he did so out of a deep sense of mission and in order to satisfy his American operators. He hoped that in this way he would simply increase the Iranians' trust in him and encourage them to make contact with him for the good, of course, of his American operators.
The result was disastrous. Not only did the CIA fail to prevent the Iranians in their efforts to enhance their nuclear program, this operation may also have made it possible for them to get their hands on a plan for assembling a nuclear warhead.
Freedom of the press
In Israel, military censorship would have prevented the publication of details such as these. But in the U.S., where the principle of freedom of the press is sacred and anchored in the constitution, there is no compulsory and binding censorship. There is, however, an expectation there that the press will show responsibility. This expectation has increased in recent years, particularly with the conservative Bush administration and in the wake of the events of September 11, 2001 and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Risen is not the first journalist to have been subpoenaed to give evidence before a grand jury and reveal his sources. According to the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, some 65 journalists have been summoned for such investigations since 2001. Some agreed, cooperated and testified. Most refused, so that they would not have to reveal their sources. In this way, they exposed themselves to being charged with contempt of court.
There were some who even preferred to be jailed so long as they were not forced to reveal their source. The best-known case was that of Judith Miller, another New York Times writer. The background to her 85-day imprisonment was her refusal to reveal who had leaked the name of Valerie Plame, a CIA agent, to the media.
"It is true that there is tension between the Bush administration and the media," says Steve Aftergood, director of the Project on Government Secrecy on behalf of the Federation of American Scientists, an independent body which aims at analyzing the activities of government with a critical eye, "but I would not go so far as to say that the administration is waging war against the media."
In Aftergood's assessment, the danger to the freedom of the press comes rather from private citizens and organizations, those who feel themselves harmed by journalistic publications and commentators and who would therefore like to limit the press' freedom. The most conspicuous of these is Gabriel Schoenfeld, a senior editor at Commentary, who believes that liberal newspapers like The New York Times are not sufficiently patriotic. In his articles and in testimony before a Senate committee that discussed the issue, Schoenfeld claimed that
The New York Times reporters had revealed confidential material that weakened America's struggle against Al-Qaida. He calls for relinquishing the soft approach which he says the administration has taken against journalists in whose publications, in his opinion, America's security is harmed.
There are many others who take the opposite approach and believe that the right of journalists to keep their sources secret should be anchored in law. Two Congressmen, the Republican Mike Pence, and Rick Boucher, a Democrat, have proposed legislation to this effect - a law for the free flow of information. The House of Representatives has already approved their proposal but the legislation is being held up in the Senate, to the displeasure of the American Civil Liberties Union.
On the face of it, this is a sensitive issue that is intended to draw the lines between the freedom of information, freedom of the media, and the public's right to know, against the right of a democracy to defend itself against enemies that are not democratic. But James Risen has no doubt that the correct and just moral act on his part has to be to defend his sources, even if this means he will lose his freedom.
The next test case in the U.S. concerning the freedom of the press could be of even greater interest to Israel. It is connected to next month's trial of two former senior American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) employees, Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman, who have been charged with crimes based on an old First World War anti-espionage law, which has hardly ever been put into practice since.
The indictment states that they obtained confidential information from officials at the Pentagon and transferred it, inter alia, to Israeli diplomats and journalists. A number of American journalists have already been investigated by the CIA in connection to this, and it is possible that they will be called to give evidence incriminating the two senior AIPAC officials.
