Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Secrecy News
Common Ground Common Sense > Issues that Affect Our Lives > Foreign Policy and National Defense > Foreign Policy & National Defense Issues Archive
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Snuffysmith
SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2006, Issue No. 68
June 9, 2006

** FORMER DDCI STUDEMAN NAMED TO PUBLIC INTEREST DECLASS BOARD
** AVOIDING CONTAMINATION FROM CHEM/BIO/NUKE WEAPONS
** CRS: ACCOUNTING FOR POW/MIAS, AND MORE


FORMER DDCI STUDEMAN NAMED TO PUBLIC INTEREST DECLASS BOARD

U.S. Navy Admiral (ret.) William O. Studeman was appointed this week
by Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert (R-IL) to serve on the Public
Interest Declassification Board.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2006/06/pidb060606.html

Adm. Studeman is a former Deputy Director of Central Intelligence and
a former Director of the National Security Agency. As a member of
the Board, he is now supposed to represent the public interest in
declassification of government records.

Adm. Studeman is currently vice president and deputy general manager
for intelligence and information superiority at Northrop Grumman
Mission Systems.

He is the eighth member of the nine-person Board named to date. The
Board is chaired by former CIA Inspector General L. Britt Snider.

The Public Interest Declassification Board advises the President on
declassification policies and priorities. The Board will hold a
public meeting on June 23 at the National Archives.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2006/06/fr060806.html


AVOIDING CONTAMINATION FROM CHEM/BIO/NUKE WEAPONS

Tactics, techniques and procedures that military forces should use to
avoid contamination from an attack involving chemical, biological,
radiological and nuclear (CBRN) weapons are set forth in a recent
military manual.

"The possibility that an adversary will use CBRN weapons against the
United States and its allies continues to increase daily," the
manual states.

"If these weapons are used, our forces must be ready to implement the
principles of CBRN defense [including] contamination avoidance,
protection, and decontamination."

"Executed at all levels and coupled with an effective retaliatory
response, these fundamentals will increase the likelihood of a US
victory."

See "Multiservice Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures for Chemical,
Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Contamination Avoidance," U.S.
Army, Marine Corps, Navy, and Air Force, February 2006 (13.5 MB
PDF):

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm3-11-3.pdf


CRS: ACCOUNTING FOR POW/MIAS, AND MORE

"There has been a long-running controversy about the fate of certain
U.S. prisoners of war (POWs) and servicemembers missing in action
(MIAs) as a result of various U.S. military operations," a newly
updated Congressional Research Service (CRS) report on the subject
begins.

"While few people familiar with the issue feel that any Americans are
still being held against their will in communist countries
associated with the Cold War, more feel that some may have been so
held in the past in the Soviet Union, China, North Korea, or North
Vietnam," according to the CRS author.

There is currently one U.S. Army soldier who is listed as a Prisoner
of War following his capture by Iraqi insurgents on April 9, 2004.

See "POWs and MIAs: Status and Accounting Issues," June 1, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33452.pdf

Some other recent CRS reports obtained by Secrecy News that are not
readily available in the public domain include the following:

"Federal Emergency Management and Homeland Security Organization:
Historical Developments and Legislative Options," updated June 1,
2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/RL33369.pdf

"Military Airlift: C-17 Aircraft Program," updated May 30, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/RL30685.pdf

"F/A-22 Raptor," updated May 24, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/RL31673.pdf
Snuffysmith
SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2006, Issue No. 69
June 12, 2006

Secrecy News Blog: http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/


** AGENCIES PURSUE STANDARDIZED POLICY FOR "SENSITIVE" INFO
** ARMY MEMO ON OVERSIGHT OF SENSITIVE ACTIVITIES
** NSA DECLASSIFICATION PLAN
** PREPAREDNESS FOR A DIRTY BOMB ATTACK IN NEW YORK
** WHY DOES THE WASHINGTON POST PUBLISH CLASSIFIED INFO?


AGENCIES PURSUE STANDARDIZED POLICY FOR "SENSITIVE" INFO

An interagency report on proposals to streamline controls on
so-called "sensitive but unclassified" (SBU) information is due
to be presented to the White House this month.

Efforts to promote information sharing among government agencies
and others involved in homeland security have been stymied by the
growing use of over sixty different types of access controls on
unclassified information, such as For Official Use Only, Law
Enforcement Sensitive, Limited Official Use, and many more. Such
controls are often poorly defined and mutually incompatible.

Last December 16, the White House initiated an ongoing review that
began with preparation of an inventory of all of the various SBU
access controls used in the federal government, which was
completed in March. The next step was to formulate
recommendations for standardizing SBU policies related to
terrorism, homeland security and law enforcement, which are now
due.

See Guideline 3, "Standardize Procedures for Sensitive But
Unclassified Information," in the December 16 White House memo
here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2005/12/wh121605-memo.html

As of last week, a report to the President on those
recommendations was awaiting the signatures of the Attorney
General and the Secretary of Homeland Security.

The pending report sets forth principles upon which SBU policy
should be based, but stops short of the crucial task of defining
exactly how those principles ought to be implemented, government
officials said.

One of those principles is that each type of control on
unclassified information should have a uniform, public and
government-wide definition so that it is employed the same way by
all agencies. That is not the case today.

The proposed principles include provisions for oversight of how
SBU controls are used, officials told Secrecy News.

They also include a proposed moratorium on the creation of new SBU
categories.

The new report to the President has not been released. But a 2005
report prepared for the Department of Homeland Security provides
one detailed perspective on the complexity of the information
sharing problem and some options for addressing it.

See "Information Sharing and Collaboration Business Plan,"
Institute for Defense Analyses, June 2005 (205 pages, 1.5 MB
PDF):

http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/dhs/ida2005.pdf


ARMY MEMO ON OVERSIGHT OF SENSITIVE ACTIVITIES

Some agencies treat oversight of their programs as a burden or a
threat to be avoided or evaded. But that is a shortsighted view.

The paradox of oversight is that when properly performed it
actually serves the interests of the overseen program by building
confidence in its legitimacy and integrity.

Perhaps with that in mind, U.S. Army Secretary Francis J. Harvey
recently issued a memo to senior Army leaders stressing the
importance of effective oversight, especially when it comes to
classified "sensitive" activities.

"I expect my oversight team to have an informed understanding of
the Army's conduct of, or support to, sensitive activities,"
Secretary Harvey wrote.

"Sensitive activities may include intelligence activities and
military operations, organizational relationships or processes,
and technological capabilities or vulnerabilities."

See "Oversight of Sensitive Activities," May 18, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/army/harvey051806.pdf


NSA DECLASSIFICATION PLAN

"The National Security Agency is committed to declassifying
national security information as instructed in Executive Order
12958, as amended," the NSA declared in a 2005 declassification
plan.

"The Agency will use all available resources to successfully
accomplish the provisions of the E.O. within the required time."

See "NSA Declassification Plan for Executive Order 12958, as
Amended," January 13, 2005 (obtained by Michael Ravnitzky):

http://www.fas.org/sgp/isoo/declass/nsa.pdf

"The fact that the U.S. Army and Navy mounted a [World War II]
effort called Project BOURBON against certain Soviet
cryptosystems can be released," according to a newly disclosed
2001 NSA notice on declassification policy.

"Most details beyond this statement, as well as the cooperation
with the British in this effort, remain classified."

See selected NSA declassification guidance, released June 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/nsa/misc.pdf

Other agency declassification plans, including newly posted plans
of the Army and Navy, may be found here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/isoo/declass/index.html


PREPAREDNESS FOR A DIRTY BOMB ATTACK IN NEW YORK

"Is New York City adequately prepared for a 'dirty bomb' attack?"
asked John Sudnik, a deputy chief at the New York Fire Department
in a recent master's thesis on the prospects of a terrorist
incident involving a radiological weapon.

In response to this question, the author provided an assessment of
the threat, the consequences of an attack, and the possibilities
of mitigating such consequences.

See "'Dirty Bomb' Attack: Assessing New York City's Level of
Preparedness from a First Responder's Perspective" by John
Sudnik, Naval Postgraduate School, March 2006:

http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/sudnik.pdf


WHY DOES THE WASHINGTON POST PUBLISH CLASSIFIED INFO?

"Why does The Washington Post willingly publish 'classified'
information affecting national security?" wrote former Post
editor Robert G. Kaiser in a Sunday Outlook piece.

"Should Post journalists and others who reveal the government's
secrets be subject to criminal prosecution for doing so? These
questions, raised with new urgency of late, deserve careful
answers."

He proposed some thoughtful answers in "Public Secrets,"
Washington Post, June 11:

http://tinyurl.com/hhbop




_______________________________________________
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the
Federation of American Scientists.
Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web: www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email: saftergood@fas.org
voice: (202) 454-4691
Snuffysmith
SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2006, Issue No. 70
June 15, 2006


** "CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT OF INTELLIGENCE IS BROKEN"
** AIR FORCE SPACE COMMAND ON SATELLITE OPERATIONS
** IN OTHER NEWS
** SOME MORE CRS REPORTS


"CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT OF INTELLIGENCE IS BROKEN"

Congressional oversight of intelligence is "dysfunctional," according
to a new report from the liberal Center for American Progress.

Some of the most urgent and fundamental policy issues facing the
nation are matters of intelligence policy: What are the proper
boundaries of domestic intelligence surveillance? What is the legal
framework for interrogation of enemy detainees? Why haven't the
recommendations of the 9/11 Commission been effectively implemented?

But at a moment when intelligence policy is relatively high on the
public agenda, the intelligence oversight committees in Congress seem
to have little to contribute.

Even on specific intelligence questions such as the conduct of
warrantless domestic surveillance by the National Security Agency,
the public can gain more insight from the Senate Judiciary Committee,
which has held several public hearings on the subject, than from the
Senate Intelligence Committee, which has held none.

The new Center for American Progress report provides a useful survey
of the history of intelligence oversight and its current failings,
along with a prescription for improvement.

"Correcting the problems that plague congressional oversight of
intelligence will not require dramatic changes in the existing
oversight structure. Congress has all the tools it needs to conduct
its oversight responsibilities effectively....it is simply not using
them. It must."

See "No Mere Oversight: Congressional Oversight of Intelligence is
Broken," June 13, 2006:

http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.as...J8OVF&b=1761097

Some of the limitations of intelligence oversight are implicit in the
structure of the process.

For an earlier (1992) self-critical account by a staff member of the
Senate Intelligence Committee, see "Congressional Oversight of
Intelligence: One Perspective" by Mary K. Sturtevant, American
Intelligence Journal, Summer 1992:

http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/sturtevant.html

A recent study of Romania's intelligence apparatus finds that
"legislative control of intelligence in Romania can be estimated on a
low-medium-high scale as 'medium to high'."

Furthermore, in Romania "the budgets of the intelligence agencies are
transparent," which is more than can be said about U.S. intelligence.

See "The Intelligence Phenomenon in a New Democratic Milieu: Romania
-- A Case Study" by Valentin Fernand Filip, Naval Postgraduate
School, March 2006:

http://www.fas.org/irp/world/romania/filip.pdf


IN OTHER NEWS

The National Security Archive filed suit against the Central
Intelligence Agency after the CIA began imposing costs to process
Freedom of Information Act requests that it said were not
"newsworthy" and therefore not entitled to a fee waiver.

By interposing its own editorial judgment in the FOIA process, the CIA
in effect is "trying to close off use of the FOIA by journalists,"
said Archive General Counsel Meredith Fuchs.

See "CIA Claims the Right to Decide What is News," June 14:

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20060614/index.htm

The ACLU filed suit against the Pentagon seeking disclosure of
information about the TALON (Threat and Local Observation Notice)
database, which has been used improperly to store information on
domestic political activities.

See "ACLU tries to force Pentagon to turn over records on peace
groups" by Drew Brown, Knight Ridder Newspapers, June 14:

http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/14818782.htm

In almost every lawsuit against the government in which an agency
invokes the "state secrets" privilege, the courts end up dismissing
the entire case.

"But that's not the way it has to be," wrote constitutional scholar
Louis Fisher of the Law Library of Congress in a new op-ed. "Judges
have a constitutional duty to function as neutral referees to allow
each side to present its case fairly."

See "Give judges a peek at secrets" by Louis Fisher, Los Angeles
Times, June 14:

http://tinyurl.com/qovb5

"The Pentagon has stopped releasing its assessment of the number of
Iraqi army units deemed capable of battling insurgents without U.S.
military help," in what appears to be a clear instance of
politically-motivated secrecy.

"The decision to stop making the information public came after reports
showed a steady decline in the number of qualified Iraqi units."

See "U.S. mum on strength of Iraqi troops" by Eric Rosenberg, Hearst
Newspapers, June 12:

http://tinyurl.com/rsxbv


AIR FORCE SPACE COMMAND ON SATELLITE OPERATIONS

The organization and management of U.S. Air Force space activities
from pre-launch to post-operational disposal are described in a new
AF Space Command Instruction on "satellite operations."

"The objective of satellite disposal is to reduce the potential for
spacecraft collisions and frequency interference, to mitigate the
creation of additional space debris and to open orbital slots to
newer SVs [satellite vehicles]."

"Therefore, de-orbiting or removing a non-mission capable satellite
from its operational orbit and placing it into an established
disposal region is of paramount importance."

See "Satellite Operations," U.S. Air Force Space Command Instruction
10-1204, 1 June 2006:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/usaf/afspci10-1204.pdf


SOME MORE CRS REPORTS

Some random reports of the Congressional Research Service that are not
otherwise readily available in the public domain include the
following:

"Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education
Issues and Legislative Options," May 22, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL33434.pdf

"Australia: Background and U.S. Relations," April 20, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL33010.pdf

"China's Impact on the U.S. Automotive Industry," April 4, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL33317.pdf

"The Congressional Charter of the American National Red Cross:
Overview, History, and Analysis," March 15, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL33314.pdf

Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web: www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email: saftergood@fas.org
voice: (202) 454-4691
Snuffysmith
SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2006, Issue No. 71
June 19, 2006

Secrecy News Blog: http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/


** GAO SAYS IT WILL FOREGO OVERSIGHT OF INTELLIGENCE
** GEN. HAYDEN ON INTELLIGENCE OVERSIGHT (2005)
** AGENCY FOIA IMPROVEMENT PLANS PRESENTED
** DOJ INSPECTOR GENERAL REPORT ON MOUSSAOUI
** THE MUBTAKKAR OF DEATH
** SELECTED DOCS ON MILITARY POLICY
** TIME OUT


GAO SAYS IT WILL FOREGO OVERSIGHT OF INTELLIGENCE

One way to supplement and improve intelligence oversight would
be to employ the Government Accountability Office (GAO), an
investigative arm of Congress, to perform routine audits of key
intelligence functions.

Yet this potentially valuable oversight tool lies dormant due to
opposition from the CIA and other intelligence agencies.

The GAO will not even attempt to conduct oversight of
intelligence unless it is specifically tasked to do so by the
Congressional intelligence committees, a GAO official said last
week.

"For us to undertake such work would require the sponsorship of
the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence or the House
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence."

"While we have the authority to do such work, we lack the
cooperation we need to get our job done in that area. As a
result, unless and until we receive such cooperation, and given
GAO's limited recourse, we will continue our long-standing
policy of not doing work that relates directly to intelligence
matters unless requested to do so by one of the select
intelligence committees."

The statement appeared in a June 14 letter report to Congress on
security clearance policy (footnote 1). See:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/gao/gao-06-693r.pdf

This places responsibility on the intelligence committees to
fully utilize the tools at their disposal, including the GAO.

"Every committee member up for re-election in 2006 and 2008 ...
should be required to commit publicly to applying the full
weight of the GAO, with added resources, to intelligence
matters," urged Robert Steele of Open Source Solutions
(www.oss.net).

In 2001 testimony, a GAO official outlined his agency's
authority to conduct intelligence oversight and described the
history of GAO access to intelligence information.

"We have not actively audited the CIA since the early 1960s,
when we discontinued such work because the CIA was not
providing us with sufficient access to information to perform
our mission," said Harry L. Hinton, Jr.

See "Observations on GAO Access to Information on CIA Programs
and Activities," July 18, 2001:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2001_hr/071801_hinton.html


GEN. HAYDEN ON INTELLIGENCE OVERSIGHT (2005)

Gen. Michael Hayden, who is now the new CIA director, presented
himself as a committed proponent of intelligence oversight in
an April 2005 hearing on his nomination to become Deputy
Director of National Intelligence.

But the record of that hearing, which has just been published,
takes on a different aspect in light of the NSA warrantless
surveillance program which was disclosed by the New York Times
in December 2005 and kept secret from most members of the
congressional intelligence committees.

"In a variety of sessions I have tried to be completely open and
have treated the Committee as a stakeholder in our operational
successes," Gen. Hayden told the Senate Intelligence Committee
in spring 2005.

He explained his understanding of the indispensable role of
oversight.

"To be successful, the American intelligence community has to be
very powerful and largely secret. And yet we live in a
political culture that distrusts two things most of all: power
and secrecy."

"The path through what would otherwise be an unsolvable dilemma
is the Congressional oversight structure where the people's
elected representatives have full access to our activities --
thus ensuring necessary secrecy while creating the public
confidence that ultimately allows us to create and exercise the
powers that we need," Gen. Hayden said then.

It follows logically that a failure to provide elected
representatives with "full access to our activities" would
engender a loss of public confidence.

See "Nomination of Lt. Gen. Michael V. Hayden to be Principal
Deputy Director of National Intelligence," hearing before the
Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, April 14, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2005_hr/shrg109-270.html


AGENCY FOIA IMPROVEMENT PLANS PRESENTED

In a December 14, 2005 Executive Order, President Bush directed
government agencies to review their Freedom of Information Act
programs, evaluate their performance, and develop plans to
reduce backlogs and improve efficiency.

http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo/eo-13392.htm

Those plans were due on June 14 and some of them, not all, have
now been published by the Department of Justice Office of
Information and Privacy here:

http://www.usdoj.gov/04foia/agency_performance.html


DOJ INSPECTOR GENERAL REPORT ON MOUSSAOUI

The Department of Justice Inspector General released a newly
declassified version of its 2004 audit of the FBI's handling of
intelligence information related to the September 11 attacks,
including a newly disclosed chapter on the case of Zacarias
Moussaoui.

In a previously released version of the report, the entire
chapter 4 on Moussaoui had been withheld by court order because
of Moussaoui's ongoing trial. With the conclusion of that
trial last month, the suppressed chapter was approved for
release.

See "A Review of the FBI's Handling of Intelligence Information
Related to the September 11 Attacks," as released June 16,
2006:

http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/doj/oig/fbi-911/index.html


THE MUBTAKKAR OF DEATH

Al Qaeda terrorists contemplated an attack on New York subways
in 2003 using an "easily constructed" device called a
"mubtakkar" to release cyanide gas, according to a story in
Time Magazine this week:

http://www.time.com/time/nation/printout/0...1205309,00.html

But there are reasons to question the reliability and
significance of the story, suggested chemist George Smith of
GlobalSecurity.org.

For one thing, "why, if the mubtakkar of death is so easy to
make has it not been seen since, or employed in Iraq, or used
anywhere there have been other terror attacks?"

See Smith's skeptical account on his new blog Dick Destiny:

http://tinyurl.com/qvpye

An overview of chemical warfare agents and analytical methods
for their identification was prepared this year by Defence
Research and Development Canada.

See "Analysis of Chemical Warfare Agents: General Overview,
LC-MS Review, In-House LC-ESI-MS Methods and Open Literature
Bibliography," Defence Research and Development Canada, March
2006:

http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/cbw/drdc2006.pdf


SELECTED DOCS ON MILITARY POLICY

"The alteration of official DoD imagery by persons acting for or
on behalf of the Department of Defense is prohibited," advises
a new Pentagon Instruction.

See "Alteration of Official DoD Imagery," DoD Instruction
5040.05, June 6, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/dod/i5040_05.pdf

"The days of total air superiority by friendly forces are over.
Our potential enemies now may have as many or more aircraft
than we do," according to a new Army correspondence course on
defending against attacks from the air.

"Our potential enemies will gain air superiority over sectors of
the battlefield for certain periods.... Successful small arms
defense against air attack is an essential element of survival
on the battlefield."

See "Small Arms Defense Against Air Attack," US Army Air Defense
Artillery School, May 2006:

http://www.fas.org/man/eprint/sad.pdf

Some recent Congressional Research Service items include:

"Peacekeeping and Related Stability Operations: Issues of U.S.
Military Involvement," updated May 18, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/IB94040.pdf

"Periods of War" (on the official beginning and ending of war)
May 1, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RS21405.pdf

And for no extra charge: "Net Neutrality: Background and
Issues," May 16, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS22444.pdf


TIME OUT

I will be away for much of the next ten days.



_______________________________________________
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the
Federation of American Scientists.
Snuffysmith
SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2006, Issue No. 72
June 29, 2006

Secrecy News Blog: http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/

** "SEALED V. SEALED": HOW COURTS CONFRONT STATE SECRETS
** HOW DID U.S. ASSESS IRAQI BIOWEAPON PRODUCTION?
** DHS, CRS ON SENSITIVE SECURITY INFORMATION
** FACING DEATH: MORTUARY AFFAIRS IN JOINT OPERATIONS


"SEALED V. SEALED": HOW COURTS CONFRONT STATE SECRETS

The government's increasing use of the "state secrets privilege" to
resist civil litigation on national security matters has often been
met by courts with uncritical, even abject deference to the executive
agencies that invoke the privilege. But another, more assertive
response is possible.

"The state secrets privilege is absolute," wrote Judge Royce C.
Lamberth categorically in a newly disclosed decision from July 2004.

In that case, former DEA agent Richard Horn alleged that his phone had
been illegally wiretapped by the U.S. government when he served in
Myanmar (Burma) in 1993. The government asserted the state secrets
privilege and moved for dismissal.

Plaintiff Horn then proposed that the provisions of the Classified
Information Procedures Act (CIPA) be adapted to permit the secure
adjudication of classified information in his lawsuit, as is done in
certain criminal trials such as espionage cases.

But, Judge Lamberth reasoned, "If the Court adopted CIPA,... the [state
secrets] privilege would not be absolute." So he simply dismissed the
case.

Horn's lawsuit -- Horn v. Huddle, D.C. District Case No. 94-1756 -- is
sealed. It does not appear in the public docket of the D.C. District
Courthouse. Instead, it is tagged "SEALED v. SEALED" with the
annotation "Case is not available to the public."

But a redacted copy of Judge Lamberth's July 28, 2004 order dismissing
the case was obtained by Secrecy News. It is available here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/jud/statesec/horn072804.pdf

A markedly different judicial response to a state secrets claim may be
emerging in a current lawsuit brought by the Electronic Frontier
Foundation alleging unlawful domestic surveillance.

Instead of simply granting "absolute" deference to the government
whenever it asserts the state secrets privilege, the Court admitted
that there are multiple interests at stake that must somehow be
reconciled:

"How can the court minimize the conflict between plaintiffs' right to
litigate this case and the government's duty to protect state
secrets?" Judge Vaughan R. Walker asked the parties in a January 20
order:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/jud/statesec/hepting062006.pdf

"Allowing the executive branch to treat the privilege as an absolute
bar to judicial review, as the Bush administration is attempting,
would be profoundly unwise," argued constitutional scholar Louis
Fisher in a new op-ed. "It would let self-serving assertions by one of
the litigants usurp the judge's authority."

See "State Your Secrets" by Louis Fisher, Legal Times, June 26
(reprinted with permission):

http://www.fas.org/sgp/jud/statesec/fisher.pdf

A critical view of the Bush Administration's use of the state secrets
privilege was presented in "The Bush Code of Secrecy" by Mark Follman,
Salon, June 23:

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/06/23/state_secrets/

Last March, the Central Intelligence Agency asserted the state secrets
privilege in a somewhat mysterious case called Jane Doe v. CIA, and
moved for dismissal. Last week, Mark S. Zaid, the attorney for "Jane
Doe," asked the Court not to dismiss the case. See:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/jud/statesec/doe061906.pdf

"The privilege has been used in this administration more than any other
administration," according to University of Texas-El Paso professor
William Weaver.

"Depending on how you count it, it's been asserted ... between 19 and
21 times," he told National Public Radio on June 19.


HOW DID U.S. ASSESS IRAQI BIOWEAPON PRODUCTION?

One of the most vivid allegations made by the U.S. government regarding
Iraqi weapons of mass destruction was the claim that Iraqi had
developed mobile laboratories for the production of biological
weapons. The allegation, based on reports from a source known as
"Curveball," proved to be false.

But the U.S. intelligence assessment of the supposed mobile BW labs,
though erroneous, raised questions that still remain unanswered, wrote
bioweapons expert Milton Leitenberg of the University of Maryland.

According to a cryptic reference spotted by Leitenberg in the
Silberman-Robb WMD Commission report, U.S. contractors performed a
"replication" of the Iraqi design and found that "it works."

The exact nature of this "replication" and whether it led to the
production of actual BW agents are among several lingering questions
he posed.

See "Unresolved Questions Regarding US Government Attribution of a
Mobile Biological Production Capacity by Iraq" by Milton Leitenberg,
June 2006:

http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/unresolved.pdf


DHS, CRS ON SENSITIVE SECURITY INFORMATION

"Sensitive Security Information (SSI) is information that would be
detrimental to transportation security if publicly disclosed,"
according to a Department of Homeland Security directive released last
week under the Freedom of Information Act.

See DHS Management Directive 11056, "Sensitive Security Information,"
December 16, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/dhs/md11056.pdf

Confusingly, however, SSI is also a control marking used by the
Department of Agriculture to mean something quite different, observed
information policy expert Harold C. Relyea of the Congressional
Research Service in a new report on classification and other
information controls.

SSI "is both a concept and a control marking used by the Department of
Agriculture (USDA), on the one hand, and jointly by the Transportation
Security Administration (TSA) of the Department of Homeland Security
as well as by the Department of Transportation, on the other hand, but
with different underlying authorities, conceptualizations, and
management regimes for it," he wrote.

See "Security Classified and Controlled Information: History, Status,
and Emerging Management Issues," June 26, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/secrecy/RL33494.pdf

While the number of different designations for "sensitive but
unclassified" information has been estimated at over 60, that number
approaches 100 if different agency definitions of the same designation
are taken into account, a Justice Department official told Secrecy
News.


FACING DEATH: MORTUARY AFFAIRS IN JOINT OPERATIONS

In a somewhat gruesome but unblinking new publication prepared for the
Joint Chiefs of Staff, the U.S. military prescribes doctrine for the
recovery, identification, handling and burial of deceased soldiers,
enemy combatants and civilian detainees.

The violent, horrible death of combatants and non-combatants is of
course a defining characteristic of war. And the strange efforts by
the Bush Administration to prevent the media from photographing
flag-draped coffins of soldiers killed in Iraq (until a lawsuit
overturned the policy last year) did nothing to change this reality.

The new doctrinal publication anticipates that the casualties of war
may be mutilated or dismembered. They may be dangerously contaminated
with chemical or biological agents or radioactive materials. Mass
casualties may overwhelm existing facilities, forcing improvised
solutions such as mass interment.

The publication stresses the dignified treatment of the dead, and
includes summary accounts of the rituals associated with Protestant,
Catholic, Jewish and Muslim religious traditions. ("Other than common
respect, Buddhists do not have any particular requirements concerning
the handling of human remains following death.")

See "Mortuary Affairs in Joint Operations," Joint Publication 4-06,
June 2006 (195 pages, 2.5 MB):

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/dod/jp4_06.pdf



_______________________________________________
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the
Federation of American Scientists.
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web: www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email: saftergood@fas.org
voice: (202) 454-4691
Snuffysmith
SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2006, Issue No. 73
July 2, 2006

Secrecy News Blog: http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/


** HOUSE CONDEMNS DISCLOSURE OF CLASSIFIED INFO
** GAO EXAMINES DOD, DOE CLASSIFICATION PRACTICES
** STANLEY MARKOWITZ, CIA OFFICIAL
** SELECTED CRS REPORTS


HOUSE CONDEMNS DISCLOSURE OF CLASSIFIED INFO

The House of Representatives last week condemned the unauthorized
disclosure of classified information concerning a government program
to track terrorist financing that was reported in the New York
Times, the Los Angeles Times and other news outlets on June 23.

The June 29 resolution, approved 227-183, included a veiled rebuke to
the press, stating that the House "expects the cooperation of all
news media organizations in protecting the lives of Americans ... by
not disclosing classified intelligence programs such as the
Terrorist Finance Tracking Program."

The House debate on the resolution was none too edifying.

Rep. Barney Frank pointed out that the resolution contained a number
of factual errors, including its assertion that "In 1998, disclosure
of classified information regarding efforts to monitor the
communication of Osama bin Laden eliminated a valuable source of
intelligence information on al Qaeda's activities."

Rep. Frank showed that this allegation, referring to a supposed leak
that was published in the Washington Times, has been conclusively
refuted. But to no avail. Under the uncompromising rules adopted
by the Republican leadership, no amendments were permitted. As a
result, it was not possible to correct errors in the House
resolution or to clarify matters of principle.

Nevertheless, there is a broad consensus on the outer limits of the
debate.

On the one hand, all parties (other than a few provocateurs on the
political right) agree that freedom of the press means that the
press must be free to publish more than just what government
officials authorize them to publish. On the other hand, there is
universal agreement even among the media that certain types of
information should not be published in the interests of national
security.

What remains in dispute is whether information on programs such as
warrantless domestic surveillance or terrorist finance tracking
falls in the proscribed category.

The transcript of the floor debate on House Resolution 895,
"Supporting Intelligence and Law Enforcement Programs to Track
Terrorists and Terrorist Finances," may be found here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2006_cr/h062906.html

The campaign to criminalize publication of classified information was
reviewed by Scott Sherman in "Chilling the Press," The Nation, July
17:

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060717/sherman

A ringing defense of the disclosure of the terrorist finance tracking
program was offered in a June 28 editorial in the Minneapolis-St.
Paul Star-Tribune that was syndicated by the Scripps Howard News
Service. See "Secret U.S. program deserves scrutiny":

http://www.startribune.com/561/story/519381.html


GAO EXAMINES DOD, DOE CLASSIFICATION PRACTICES

One reason why classification is an unreliable guide as to what
should or should not be published by the press is that
classification policy is implemented erratically by the government.

In a new report for Congress, the Government Accountability Office
found numerous problems in classification activity at the Department
of Defense.

"Our review of a ... sample of 111 classified DOD documents from five
OSD offices shows that, within these offices, DOD personnel are not
uniformly following established procedures for classifying
information, to include correctly marking classified information,"
the GAO report said.

"In our review of the OSD documents, we questioned DOD officials'
classification decisions for 29 documents--that is, 26 percent of
the sample."

"The majority of our questions centered around two problems: the
inconsistent treatment of similar information within the same
document, and whether all of the information marked as classified
met established criteria for classification."

See "Managing Sensitive Information: DOD Can More Effectively Reduce
the Risk of Classification Errors," June 30, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/gao/gao-06-706.pdf

A companion report review classification activity at the Department
of Energy.

See "Managing Sensitive Information: Actions Needed to Ensure Recent
Changes in DOE Oversight Do Not Weaken an Effective Classification
System," June 30, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/gao/gao-06-785.pdf


STANLEY MARKOWITZ, CIA OFFICIAL

Stanley Moskowitz, a Central Intelligence Agency official who
recently played a leading role in winning declassification of
intelligence records on Nazi war criminals, died last week.

"Stan Moskowitz deserves a lot of credit for the Nazi records
release, which he managed to accomplish despite a lot of opposition
from a directorate which shall not be named," one former CIA
employee told Secrecy News.

"His position was that, not only were the records 50 years old, but
most of the people mentioned in them were Nazis for god's sake. What
and why should we still be protecting?"

"Stan Moskowitz pursued this like he did every other assignment in
his lifetime of service to America, to preserve and protect our
freedom while honoring the democratic traditions of a government
which we can trust and be proud of," wrote B, another admirer.

"He conducted his lifetime of service within the constraints of the
ethical and moral principles which set us apart from those who wish
us harm."

See "Stanley M. Moskowitz, 68; Twice CIA Liaison to Congress,"
Washington Post, July 1:

http://tinyurl.com/q6x72


SELECTED CRS REPORTS

The global war on terror has cost the U.S. $437 billion since
September 11, the Congressional Research Service estimated last
month, including $319 billion for the war in Iraq. (The Pentagon
claims the latter figure should be $210 billion.)

The CRS cost estimate has been widely reported, but the underlying
report has not been widely available to the public. Now it is:

"The Cost of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Other Global War on Terror
Operations Since 9/11," updated June 14, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33110.pdf

Some other notable CRS reports obtained by Secrecy News include the
following.

"Military Operations: Precedents for Funding Contingency Operations
in Regular or in Supplemental Appropriations Bills," June 13, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RS22455.pdf

"Defense Procurement: Full Funding Policy -- Background, Issues, and
Options for Congress," updated June 20, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/RL31404.pdf

"U.S. Democracy Promotion Policy in the Middle East: The Islamist
Dilemma," June 15, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RL33486.pdf

"Freedom of Speech and Press: Exceptions to the First Amendment,"
updated June 2, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/95-815.pdf


_______________________________________________
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the
Federation of American Scientists.

To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, send email to
secrecy_news-request@lists.fas.org
with "subscribe" in the body of the message.

To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a blank email message to
secrecy_news-remove@lists.fas.org

Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web: www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email: saftergood@fas.org
voice: (202) 454-4691
Snuffysmith
SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2006, Issue No. 74
July 3, 2006

Secrecy News Blog: http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/

** ARMY UPDATES COUNTERINSURGENCY DOCTRINE
** MORE CRS REPORTS


ARMY UPDATES COUNTERINSURGENCY DOCTRINE

Three years into the war in Iraq, the U.S. Army has nearly
completed a thorough revision and update of its official doctrine
on counterinsurgency.

"It has been 20 years since the U.S. Army published a manual
devoted to counterinsurgency operations, and 25 since the Marine
Corps published its last such manual. With our Soldiers and
Marines fighting insurgents in both Afghanistan and Iraq, it is
thus essential that we give them a manual that provides principles
and guidelines for counterinsurgency operations (COIN)."

The new doctrine begins with a thoughtful presentation of the
nature of insurgency and counterinsurgency, their evolution and
their characteristic strategies, and proceeds to consider the
design of counterinsurgency operations.

"Traditionally, armies have had to unlearn much of their doctrine
and (re)learn the principles of COIN while waging COIN campaigns."

Counterinsurgency "presents a complex and often unfamiliar set of
missions and considerations for a military commander."

Among the "paradoxes of counterinsurgency" are the fact that "the
more you protect your force, the less secure you are"; "the more
force [is] used, the less effective it is"; and "sometimes doing
nothing is the best reaction."

The new counterinsurgency doctrine has not been publicly released,
but a copy of the final coordination draft was obtained by Secrecy
News.

See "Counterinsurgency," U.S. Army Field Manual 3-24 (Final Draft),
June 2006 (241 pages, 2.4 MB PDF file):

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm3-24fd.pdf


MORE CRS REPORTS

Some notable new reports of the Congressional Research Service not
readily available to the public include the following.

"Nonproliferation and Threat Reduction Assistance: U.S. Programs in
the Former Soviet Union," updated June 26, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/RL31957.pdf

"Syria: U.S. Relations and Bilateral Issues," June 22, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RL33487.pdf

"Pakistan-U.S. Relations," June 21, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL33498.pdf

"Iraq: Recent Developments in Reconstruction Assistance," updated
June 15, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RL31833.pdf

"U.S. Policy Regarding the International Criminal Court," updated
June 14, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL31495.pdf

"U.S. Space Programs: Civilian, Military, and Commercial," updated
June 13, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/space/IB92011.pdf

"Homeland Security: Defending U.S. Airspace," updated June 6, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/RS21394.pdf



_______________________________________________
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the
Federation of American Scientists.

Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web: www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email: saftergood@fas.org
voice: (202) 454-4691
Snuffysmith
SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2006, Issue No. 75
July 5, 2006

Secrecy News Blog: http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/


** LAW AND THE MILITARY
** U.S. MARINE CORPS ON COUNTERINSURGENCY
** CONTROLLING STRESS IN COMBAT, AND MORE
** FOIA AT FORTY


LAW AND THE MILITARY

With its decision last week to strike down the Bush
Administration's unilateral creation of military tribunals for
trying detainees, the Supreme Court highlighted and reinforced
the rule of law in the conduct of military operations.

Several recent publications provide rich background on military
law.

The 2006 edition of the "Operational Law Handbook" published by
the Army Judge Advocate General is "a 'how to' guide for Judge
Advocates practicing operational law. It provides references and
describes tactics and techniques for the practice of operational
law."

The Handbook covers the gamut of issues that arise in the field,
from the Law of War to intelligence-related law to detainee
operations.

See "Operational Law Handbook (2006)," Judge Advocate General's
Legal Center and School (598 pages, 3.7 MB):

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/law2006.pdf

U.S. military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq and the "war on
terrorism" have raised a variety of novel legal issues,
according to a 2004 study performed for the Army on "legal
lessons learned."

"Whether determining the applicability of the law of armed
conflict to non-state terrorist actors, applying traditional and
new fiscal authorities to a military occupation, or assisting in
the development of rules of engagement (ROE) for an enemy that
blended into civilian populations, JAs [judge advocates] and
paralegals wrestled with cutting-edge legal issues during OEF
[Operation Enduring Freedom] and OIF [Operation Iraqi Freedom]."

See "Legal Lessons Learned From Afghanistan and Iraq: Volume 1,
Major Combat Operations," Center for Law and Military
Operations, 1 August 2004 (454 pages, 7.1 MB PDF):

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/clamo-v1.pdf

Volume 2 of that study has recently been made public.

See "Legal Lessons Learned From Afghanistan and Iraq: Volume 2,
Full Spectrum Operations," Center for Law and Military
Operations, September 2005 (368 pages, 3.3 MB PDF):

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/clamo-v2.pdf

Secrecy News is honored to be a recipient of the 2006 Public
Access to Government Information award from the American
Association of Law Libraries.

http://www.aallnet.org/press/ftdo_claire_germain_061906.asp


U.S. MARINE CORPS ON COUNTERINSURGENCY

The Marine Corps has recently published a series of documents on
counterinsurgency:

"Small-Unit Leaders' Guide to Counterinsurgency," June 2006 (4.7
MB PDF file):

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/usmc/coin.pdf

"Countering Irregular Threats: A Comprehensive Approach," 14 June
2006 (3.2 MB PDF file):

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/usmc/irreg.pdf

"Tentative Manual for Countering Irregular Threats: An Updated
Approach to Counterinsurgency Operations," 7 June 2006:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/usmc/manual.pdf


CONTROLLING STRESS IN COMBAT, AND MORE

Military doctrine on the control of the stress in combat is
presented in a new Army field manual.

"In our own Soldiers and in the enemy combatants, control of
stress is often the decisive difference between victory and
defeat across the operational continuum. Battles and wars are
won more by controlling the will to fight than by killing all of
the enemy combatants. Uncontrolled combat stress causes erratic
or harmful behaviors, impairs mission performance, and may
result in disaster...."

See "Combat and Operational Stress Control," U.S. Army Field
Manual 4-02.51, July 2006:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm4-02-51.pdf

A recent Congressional Research Service report "presents
difficult-to-find statistics regarding U.S. military casualties
in Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) and Operation Enduring Freedom
(OEF, Afghanistan), including those concerning medical
evacuations, amputations, and the demographics of casualties."

"Some of these statistics are publically available at the
Department of Defense's (DOD's) website, while others have been
obtained through contact with experts at DOD."

See "United States Military Casualty Statistics: Operation Iraqi
Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom," June 8, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RS22452.pdf

"Medical Program Support for Detainee Operations" is the subject
of Department of Defense Instruction 2310.08E, issued June 6,
2006:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/dod/i2310_08.pdf


FOIA AT FORTY

The fortieth anniversary of the Freedom of Information Act,
signed into law by President Johnson on July 4, 1966, was marked
with the release of several interesting and informative
publications.

The colorful and contentious history behind the adoption of the
Act was described by Tom Blanton of the National Security
Archive based on documents obtained from the Johnson Library.
See "Freedom of Information at 40":

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB194/index.htm

The legislative history of the Freedom of Information Act is
newly available from the National Security Archive here:

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/foialeghi.../legistfoia.htm

The FOIA improvement plans that were recently developed by
executive branch agencies were critically assessed by
OpenTheGovernment.org in a new report. See "FOIA's 40th
Anniversary: Agencies Respond to the President's Call for
Improved Disclosure of Information":

http://www.openthegovernment.org/

"The federal government continues to fall further behind in
getting information to people seeking public records under the
Freedom of Information Act," according to a study by the
Coalition of Journalists for Open Government:

http://www.cjog.net/documents/.pdf

"By far the heaviest use of the Freedom of Information Act comes
from the nation's businesses, seeking government records on
contracts or for a host of other commercial uses," another
Coalition report found:

http://www.cjog.net/documents/Who_Uses_FOIA2.pdf

Sixty-eight countries now have freedom of information statutes,
according to an updated survey by David Banisar published by
freedominfo.org. See "Freedom of Information Around the World
2006":

http://www.freedominfo.org/countries/index.htm

I chatted with reporter Julie Corwin of Radio Free Europe/Radio
Liberty about "40 Years Of The Freedom Of Information Act" here:

http://tinyurl.com/h8uqo



_______________________________________________
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the
Federation of American Scientists.

Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web: www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email: saftergood@fas.org
voice: (202) 454-4691
Snuffysmith
SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2006, Issue No. 76
July 6, 2006

Secrecy News Blog: http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/


** CRS ON PROTECTING NATIONAL SECURITY INFORMATION
** ENGINEERING BIO-TERROR AGENTS


CRS ON PROTECTING NATIONAL SECURITY INFORMATION

"It's not a crime to publish classified information," explained
Washington Post reporter Dana Priest in an electric moment on last
Sunday's NBC Meet the Press, even though "[commentator William]
Bennett keeps telling people that it is."

Mr. Bennett, who was sitting right next to Ms. Priest, had declared
last April that reporters like Ms. Priest who publish classified
information "against the wishes of the President" should be
"arrested."

"I don't think what they did was worthy of an award," Mr. Bennett
had said, referring to the Pulitzer Prize-winning reporting by
Ms. Priest and two New York Times reporters -- "I think what they
did is worthy of jail." (Editor and Publisher, 04/18/06).

But Mr. Bennett was wrong and Ms. Priest was correct: There is no
comprehensive statute that outlaws the publication of classified
information.

(As Ms. Priest went on to explain, there are several narrow
categories of classified information, such as communications
intelligence, covert agent identities, and a few others that are
protected by statute.)

A new report from the Congressional Research Service describes the
legal framework governing the disclosure and publication of
classified national security information.

"This report provides background with respect to previous
legislative efforts to criminalize the unauthorized disclosure of
classified information; describes the current state of the laws
that potentially apply, including criminal and civil penalties
that can be imposed on violators; and some of the disciplinary
actions and administrative procedures available to the agencies of
federal government that have been addressed by federal courts."

"Finally, the report considers the possible First Amendment
implications of applying the Espionage Act to prosecute newspapers
for publishing classified national defense information."

The Congressional Research Service does not make its products
directly available to the public. But a copy of the new CRS
report was obtained by Secrecy News.

See "Protection of National Security Information," June 30, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/secrecy/RL33502.pdf


ENGINEERING BIO-TERROR AGENTS

A private researcher investigating the history of the U.S.
biological weapons program at the National Archives recently came
up empty.

"She asked for the files for Fort Detrick from 1946 to 1956, and
was brought 16 cartons," recounted Milton Leitenberg of the
University of Maryland. "However, every single file in every one
of the 16 cartons had been removed, and replaced with a page dated
post-2002, saying that the item had been withdrawn."

The Fort Detrick records were removed from public access "after the
Bush administration ordered agencies to withhold anything that
might aid terrorists," reported Scott Shane, then of the Baltimore
Sun, in an August 1, 2004 Sun story on Fort Detrick's Special
Operations Division.

Meanwhile, the record of a congressional hearing that was held last
year on biological terrorism has just been published.

See "Engineering Bio-Terror Agents: Lessons from the Offensive U.S.
and Soviet Biological Weapons Programs," House Committee on
Homeland Security, July 13, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2005_hr/bioterror.html

Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web: www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email: saftergood@fas.org
voice: (202) 454-4691
Snuffysmith
SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2006, Issue No. 77
July 7, 2006

Secrecy News Blog: http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/


** GEN. MCCAFFREY VISITS GUANTANAMO
** INADVERTENT DISCLOSURES OF DOE CLASSIFIED INFO DROP SHARPLY
** DOE RELEASES HISTORICAL RECORDS DECLASSIFICATION GUIDE
** OMB ISSUES REPORT ON SECURITY CLEARANCES


GEN. MCCAFFREY VISITS GUANTANAMO

"Arrogance, secrecy, and bad judgment have mired us in a mess in
Guantanamo from which we are having great difficulty in extricating
ourselves," wrote U.S. Army Gen. (Ret.) Barry R. McCaffrey in a report
on his recent trip to the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay.

"The JTF Guantanamo Detention Center is the most professional, firm,
humane and carefully supervised confinement operation that I have
ever personally observed," he stated.

At the same time, "Much of the international community views the
Guantanamo Detention Center as a place of shame and routine violation
of human rights. This view is not correct. However, there will be no
possibility of correcting that view."

"There is now no possible political support for Guantanamo going
forward," Gen. McCaffrey wrote.

"We need a political-military decisive move to break the deadlock" and
to permit the closure of the Guantanamo detention facility.

Gen. McCaffrey proposed a combination of steps including transfer of
as many detainees as possible to their host countries, criminal
trials for some, and efforts to engage foreign and international
legal organs to assume jurisdiction.

"We need to rapidly weed out as many detainees as possible and return
them to their host nation with an evidence package as complete as we
can produce. We can probably dump 2/3 of the detainees in the next 24
months."

"Many we will encounter again armed with an AK47 on the battlefields
of Iraq and Afghanistan. They will join the 120,000 + fighters we now
contend with in those places of combat."

But even if that is so, he wrote, "It may be cheaper and cleaner to
kill them in combat then sit on them for the next 15 years."

"We need to be completely transparent with the international legal and
media communities about the operations of our detention procedures
wherever they are located," Gen. McCaffrey advised.

A copy of Gen. McCaffrey's June 28, 2006 trip report on his June 18-19
trip to Guantanamo is available here:

http://www.fas.org/man/eprint/mccaffrey.pdf


INADVERTENT DISCLOSURES OF DOE CLASSIFIED INFO DROP SHARPLY

Department of Energy classification reviewers at the National Archives
examined over 2.5 million pages of previously declassified records
earlier this year and found nine (9) pages that they said contained
classified information which should not have been publicly disclosed,
according to a new report to Congress.

This is a vanishingly small error rate of less than a thousandth of a
percent, the smallest ever reported by DOE since it began searching
for inadvertently released classified nuclear weapons information in
declassified files in 1999.

This might be considered well within the boundaries of what is
reasonably achievable under a risk management approach to security
policy.

Yet the DOE declassified document review program seems predicated on
absolute risk avoidance, in which no release of classified
information, no matter how outdated or innocuous it may be, is
acceptable. And so the reviewers toil on, and public access to
historical records at the National Archives remains disrupted.

See the Twenty-First Report to Congress on Inadvertent Disclosures of
Restricted Data, U.S. Department of Energy, May 2006 (released in
redacted form July 2006):

http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/doe/inadvertent21.pdf


DOE RELEASES HISTORICAL RECORDS DECLASSIFICATION GUIDE

The Department of Energy has released a redacted version of its
October 2005 Historical Records Declassification Guide, a document
used by classification reviewers to determine which information may
be publicly released under the declassification provisions of
executive order 12958.

There are 15 categories of DOE national security information that are
exempt from automatic declassification, the Guide explains, including
information on naval nuclear propulsion, chemical and biological
defense, space nuclear reactors, and much more.

The redacted Guide identifies topics within each one of those
categories and indicates whether they are classified or unclassified.

Some of the material is of broader interest and significance.
Appendix B, for example, provides a summary account of the history
of nuclear weapons accidents, and explains that any further
information beyond what is presented there must undergo
classification review.

See "Historical Records Declassification Guide" (CG-HR-3), Department
of Energy, October 2005 (redacted version):

http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/doe/cg-hr-3/index.html


OMB ISSUES REPORT ON SECURITY CLEARANCES

"The Administration has taken significant steps to improve the process
by which the Federal Government grants individuals access to
classified information," the Office of Management and Budget said in
a recent report on security clearances.

"The average time it takes today to complete the security clearance
process has been reduced by 18 days, or 6 percent."

That is, instead of an FY 2005 average of 297 days to get a security
clearance, the average wait in the first quarter of FY 2006 dropped
to 279 days.

The proposed goal for December 2006 is 134 days.

See "Report on The Status of Executive Branch Efforts to Improve the
Security Clearance Process," Office of Management and Budget,
February 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/omb-clearance.pdf

The OMB report was first reported by Rati Bishnoi in Inside the
Pentagon (defense.iwpnewsstand.com) on July 6, 2006.


Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web: www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email: saftergood@fas.org
voice: (202) 454-4691
Snuffysmith
SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2006, Issue No. 78
July 11, 2006

Secrecy News Blog: http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/


** A NEW IRAQ CULTURE SMART CARD
** DOD ON GENEVA CONVENTIONS, CRS ON MILITARY COMMISSIONS, ETC.
** FOREIGN INFLUENCE AND SECURITY CLEARANCE DETERMINATIONS
** THE CIA'S ANTI-BUSH CABAL


A NEW IRAQ CULTURE SMART CARD

"Don't use your left hand for contact with others," advises the U.S.
Marine Corps in a new edition of the Iraq Culture Smart Card which
is distributed to military personnel in Iraq. "It is considered
unclean."

It seems late in the day for such niceties. Amid the daily brutality
of the Iraq war, there is probably little to be gained by courtesy
or to be lost by mere rudeness.

But the Marine Corps Intelligence Activity evidently thinks
otherwise.

The MCIA has produced an updated Iraq Culture Smart Card, which
features rudimentary information on Iraqi customs, religion and
language. A copy was obtained by Secrecy News and is available here
(in a very large 22 MB PDF file):

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/usmc/iraqsmart-0506.pdf


DOD ON GENEVA CONVENTIONS, CRS ON MILITARY COMMISSIONS, ETC.

In a significant policy reversal, the Department of Defense last week
formally directed that the humane treatment requirements of Common
Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions shall henceforth be applied to
all prisoners and detainees in DoD custody (as first reported by the
Financial Times). See this July 7 memorandum from Deputy Secretary
of Defense Gordon England:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/dod/geneva070606.pdf

The procedures for trying enemy prisoners and detainees in the war on
terror are again a subject of deliberation (and of a hearing before
the Senate Judiciary Committee today) in the wake of the Supreme
Court's ruling that the tribunals established by the Bush
Administration are unlawful.

A 2005 report of the Congressional Research Service provides some
background on the development of this issue. Though now out of date
in certain respects, it includes useful tables comparing the various
features and procedural safeguards of general courts-martial with
those of military commissions and tribunals.

See "The Department of Defense Rules for Military Commissions:
Analysis of Procedural Rules and Comparison with Proposed
Legislation and the Uniform Code of Military Justice," updated
August 4, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL31600.pdf

Other notable new CRS reports not readily available in the public
domain include the following.

"National Emergency Powers," updated June 20, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/98-505.pdf

"Nuclear Weapons: Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty," updated June 21,
2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/IB92099.pdf

"Combat Aircraft Sales to South Asia: Potential Implications," July
6, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/RL33515.pdf

"Restructuring U.S. Foreign Aid: The Role of the Director of Foreign
Assistance," June 16, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL33491.pdf


FOREIGN INFLUENCE AND SECURITY CLEARANCE DETERMINATIONS

The House Government Reform Committee will hold a hearing July 13 on
the role that considerations of foreign influence play in decisions
to grant or deny security clearances for access to classified
information.

One of the principal considerations leading to denial of a security
clearance is when the applicant has relatives or relationships or
other ties abroad in countries of concern, and particularly in the
Middle East and the Far East.

This approach, if applied too rigidly, can be counter-productive
since the best linguists and the most accomplished area experts will
almost invariably have "relationships" of one kind or another with
persons in their region of expertise.

But the process for adjudicating disputes over clearances seems
distinctly skewed against the applicant.

In a new report, attorney Sheldon Cohen identified a peculiar anomaly
in the performance of the Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals
(DOHA), which rules on disputed clearance matters for the Defense
Department. In the large majority of disputes presented to it, he
found, DOHA has consistently ruled against the applicant.

"If Department Counsel appeals a decision granting a clearance, it is
virtually assured that the Appeal Board will reverse. Yet, if an
applicant appeals a decision involving a foreign connection denying
a clearance, the Appeal Board will assuredly affirm the denial,"
found Cohen, who specializes in security clearance cases.

See "Appeal Board Decisions of the Defense Office of Hearings and
Appeals: Are They Arbitrary and Capricious?" by Sheldon I. Cohen,
July 10, 2006, linked from here:

http://www.sheldoncohen.com/publications/


THE CIA'S ANTI-BUSH CABAL

A May 18 letter sent to President Bush by House Intelligence
Committee chairman Rep. Pete Hoekstra criticizing Administration
policy on intelligence (first reported July 9 by Eric Lichtblau and
Scott Shane of the New York Times) has already earned an enduring
place in the annals of congressional oversight of intelligence.

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2006_cr/hoekstra051806.html

While it has been welcomed by some as a sign of congressional vigor
and independence, the letter from Chairman Hoekstra also features a
weird admixture of paranoia and pique.

"I have been long concerned that a strong and well-positioned group
within the Agency intentionally undermined the Administration and
its policies," he wrote.

This conspiracy theory, previously alleged mainly by some conservative
bloggers and editorial writers, "is supported by the Ambassador
Wilson/Valerie Plame events" -- despite the fact that Valerie Plame,
whose CIA career was destroyed, would appear to be a victim rather
than a perpetrator -- "as well as by the string of unauthorized
disclosures."

"I have come to the belief that, despite his service to the
[Directorate of Operations], Mr. Kappes [the new CIA Deputy
Director] may have been part of this group."

Kappes must be viewed with suspicion, Hoekstra explained, since his
appointment was not opposed by House Democrats!

"I must take note when my Democratic colleagues - those who so
vehemently denounced and publicly attacked the strong choice of
Porter Goss as Director - now publicly support Mr. Kappes's
return," Chairman Hoekstra observed acutely.

"Further, the details surrounding Mr. Kappes's [2004] departure from
the CIA give me great pause. Mr. Kappes was not fired, but, as I
understand it, summarily resigned his position shortly after
Director Goss responded to his demonstrated contempt for Congress
and the Intelligence Committees' oversight responsibilities."

This is an idiosyncratic description of a dispute that arose between
senior DO officials and the former congressional staff members who
accompanied Director Goss to CIA, which led to the resignations of
several officials.

"The fact is, Mr. Kappes and his Deputy, Mr. Sulick, were developing
a communications offensive to bypass the Intelligence Committees and
the CIA's own Office of Congressional Affairs. One can only
speculate on the motives but it clearly indicates a willingness to
promote a personal agenda," Rep. Hoekstra wrote.

As David Corn wrote in The Nation, "It's hard to know who to root
for" in this strange clash of personalities and institutions.

Maybe the answer is that the conflict itself is the good news, since
it restores a healthy tension to the oversight process and drives
the disclosure of new information into the public domain.

Coincidentally, Michael Sulick, one of the members of the supposed
anti-Bush "cabal" at CIA named by Rep. Hoekstra, is the author
of a colorful new first-person account of a CIA initiative to
establish relations with Lithuania in 1991 when the Soviet Union
fell.

See "As the USSR Collapsed: A CIA Officer in Lithuania" by Michael J.
Sulick, Studies in Intelligence, vol. 50, no. 2, 2006:

http://www.cia.gov/csi/studies/vol50no2/ht...Lithuania_1.htm



_______________________________________________
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the
Federation of American Scientists.

Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web: www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email: saftergood@fas.org
voice: (202) 454-4691
Snuffysmith
SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2006, Issue No. 79
July 14, 2006

Secrecy News Blog: http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/

Support Secrecy News:
http://www.fas.org/static/contrib_sec.jsp


** IMPROVED INFO SHARING: A PATH FORWARD
** CRS ON TERRORIST FINANCING, ARMY OFFICER SHORTAGE
** CBO ON IRAQ SPENDING
** THE TRACKING OF DONALD KEYSER


IMPROVED INFO SHARING: A PATH FORWARD

The need to improve the dissemination of terrorism-related
information was among the preeminent policy lessons of September 11.

Yet five years later, "systematic, trusted information sharing
remains more of an aspiration than a reality," according to a new
task force report from the Markle Foundation.

The report proposes a new conceptual framework for authorizing and
promoting information sharing, based on the information's intended
uses rather than its bureaucratic origin or other incidental
characteristics.

This would permit each agency to get the information it needs to
perform its mission, the authors say, while allowing auditing to
ensure proper use and instill public confidence.

The Markle task force report also calls for a new approach to
national security classification policy that is more tolerant of
potential disclosure risks so as to permit more effective sharing.

"Current classification procedures and practices... overemphasize the
risks of inadvertent disclosure over those from failing to share."

"We recommend a new risk management approach to handling classified
and other sensitive information that gives adequate weight to the
risks of not sharing, and provides greater flexibility and more
emphasis on mitigating the risks of disclosure."

The authors stress the need for a transparent policy development
process.

"In the absence of public confidence that personal information is
being used effectively, appropriately, and consistently with both
applicable laws and shared expectations of privacy, the necessary
public support will not be forthcoming, and even the most promising
intelligence systems will fail."

The task force does not envision the general public as a consumer of
terrorism-related information and so it does not contemplate
measures to improve public disclosure of such information, whether
classified or unclassified.

And in an overview of information sharing policy development, the
report neglects a few recent innovations that are at least modestly
consistent with its recommendations, such as the 2003 executive
order provision that permits emergency disclosure of classified
information to non-cleared persons, and the "RELIDO" marking that
delegates disclosure authority for intelligence information beyond
the originator.

Overall, however, the Markle task force report provides an
intelligent account of a vexing set of issues. And it has the great
virtue of going beyond critique to propose potentially workable
solutions as well as a process for implementing and refining them.

See "Mobilizing Information to Prevent Terrorism: Accelerating
Development of a Trusted Information Sharing Environment," Third
Report of the Markle Foundation Task Force chaired by Zoe Baird and
James Barksdale, July 13:

http://www.markle.org/

As if to validate the most pessimistic view of the state of
information sharing, the Baltimore Sun reported that a White House
initiative to strengthen sharing by standardizing the use of
"sensitive but unclassified" markings is off track and behind
schedule.

See "Turf war hampers war on terror" by Siobhan Gorman, Baltimore
Sun, July 13:

http://tinyurl.com/fzf63


CRS ON TERRORIST FINANCING, ARMY OFFICER SHORTAGE

A new Congressional Research Service report provides a resume of the
Terrorist Finance Tracking Program that was recently described in
news stories.

See "Treasury's Terrorist Finance Program's Access to Information
Held by the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial
Telecommunication (SWIFT)," July 7, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RS22469.pdf

News reports on the program elicited furious criticism of the New
York Times and other publications from those who believed classified
information had been improperly and damagingly disclosed.

But "closely similar" accounts were publicly presented years ago in
open congressional hearings, the Washington Post reported today.

See "Watching Finances Of Terror Suspects Discussed in 2002" by
Walter Pincus, Washington Post, July 14:

http://tinyurl.com/fldw8

Another new CRS report describes the erosion of the U.S. Army officer
corps.

"The Army currently projects an officer shortage of nearly 3,000 in
FY2007, with the most acute shortfalls in 'senior' captains and
majors with 11 to 17 years of experience."

See "Army Officer Shortages: Background and Issues for Congress,"
July 5, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33518.pdf


CBO ON IRAQ SPENDING

The Congressional Budget Office has prepared a new account of U.S.
spending in Iraq in response to a request from Rep. John Spratt
(D-SC).

"The Congress has appropriated $432 billion for military operations
and other activities related to the war on terrorism since September
2001. According to CBO's estimates, from the time U.S. forces
invaded Iraq in March 2003, $290 billion has been allocated for
activities in Iraq."

For reasons explained in the report, the estimates are slightly lower
than those prepared recently by the Congressional Research Service.

See "Estimated Costs of U.S. Operations in Iraq Under Two Specified
Scenarios," Congressional Budget Office, July 13:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2006_rpt/iraqcosts.pdf


THE TRACKING OF DONALD KEYSER

Donald Keyser, who had been a respected State Department expert on
China, pled guilty last year to illegally removing classified
documents from the State Department, making false statements to the
FBI, and concealing his relationship with a Taiwanese intelligence
officer.

Now the government says that he is failing to fulfill the terms of
his plea agreement, and it told a court that the agreement should
therefore be revoked, the New York Sun reported today.

In support of its position, the Justice Department filed a detailed
and occasionally sordid account of Keyser's alleged entanglement
with Taiwanese intelligence.

"The unusual filing opens a window onto the FBI's counterintelligence
tradecraft," wrote reporter Josh Gerstein in the Sun. He also noted
that Keyser's attorney denies the allegations and says the new
Justice Department memo is unfair and inaccurate.

See "A Novel-Like Tale Of Cloak, Dagger Unfolds in Court" by Josh
Gerstein, New York Sun, July 14:

http://www.nysun.com/article/36073

The government memorandum places the worst possible construction on
Keyser's activities, including many that seem easily susceptible to
benign explanations. In any case it remains true that he conducted
an improper relationship with a foreign intelligence officer and
violated classification procedures.

A copy of the July 5 government memorandum in support of its motion
to find Keyser in breach of his plea agreement is posted here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/ops/ci/keyser070506.pdf

Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web: www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email: saftergood@fas.org
voice: (202) 454-4691
Snuffysmith
SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2006, Issue No. 80
July 17, 2006

Secrecy News Blog: http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/


** FORMER STATE OFFICIAL KEYSER REBUTS ESPIONAGE ALLEGATIONS
** CIA REPORT ON TERRORIST RECRUITMENT (2002)
** DOD DOCTRINE ON OPERATIONS SECURITY
** ODNI CASTS A WIDE NET TO HIRE STAFF
** ANDORRA RATIFIES NUCLEAR TEST BAN TREATY


FORMER STATE OFFICIAL KEYSER REBUTS ESPIONAGE ALLEGATIONS

Former State Department China expert Donald Keyser last week firmly
disputed allegations that he had engaged in espionage on behalf of
Taiwanese intelligence.

"Mr. Keyser denies that he was ever an agent of Taiwan's intelligence
agency," his attorneys said in a statement. They further denied that
he had failed to comply with the terms of his plea agreement, as the
government asserted earlier this month (Secrecy News, 07/14/06).

"Mr. Keyser disclosed no classified information to [Taiwanese
intelligence official] Ms. Cheng or her superior, Mr. Huang, and his
communications were all in furtherance of U.S. Government interests,
even if he was answering questions that Ms. Cheng asked him,"
according to a July 14 motion filed by the defense.

The defense argued in its latest pleading that the government was
improperly using the Classified Information Procedures Act to
withhold vital information from the defense.

The new defense motion features a supporting declaration by Kent
Harrington, a former CIA officer (and public affairs official), who
warned the court against relying on isolated, unanalyzed scraps of
foreign intelligence information such as Chinese government
communications to draw legal conclusions about the Keyser case.

"When we acquire the communications of any foreign government
agency..., there is a tendency to assume that the contents are
unvarnished facts, but experience tells us otherwise," Mr. Harrington
wrote.

"Such communications are just as prone as other forms of intelligence
to manipulation and can also contain false or exaggerated statements
designed to advance the career or the bureaucratic position of the
author," he wrote.

See the July 14, 2006 defense pleading in the Keyser case, with the
attached Harrington declaration, here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/ops/ci/keyser071406.pdf

Time Magazine reported on Saturday that Mr. Keyser's wife, a CIA
officer detailed to the Office of the Director of National
Intelligence, was aware that Mr. Keyser had improperly stored
classified records at home and had also done so herself.

See "A Steamy Spy Scandal at the State Department," Time, July 15:

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8...1214911,00.html

The government allegations cited in the Time story are grossly
misleading, Mr. Keyser emailed friends over the weekend. The Time
story, he said, "lacks only a nocturnal descent of alien spacecraft,
a documented Elvis sighting, and a cameo performance by Michael
Jackson to qualify for enshrinement in The National Enquirer hall of
fame."

See "Official at Center of Taiwanese Spying Probe Cries Foul" by Josh
Gerstein, New York Sun, July 17:

http://www.nysun.com/article/36134

The Keyser case is before Judge T.S. Ellis, III, who also presides
over the controversial case of two former officials of the American
Israel Public Affairs Committee who are accused of improperly
receiving and transmitting classified information. The trial in that
case, which had been set for August 7, has been postponed until a new
date which is to be set by the court on July 18.


CIA REPORT ON TERRORIST RECRUITMENT (2002)

A 2002 report prepared by the CIA Counterterrorist Center discusses
how terrorists recruit members in prisons such as Guantanamo Bay.

"Terrorists groups, including al-Qa'ida, use incarcerated members to
recruit and train new members, and in some cases run terrorist
organizations and manage or facilitate terrorist attacks."

The classified CIA report was previously published on the web site The
Smoking Gun (www.thesmokinggun.com).

See "Terrorists: Recruiting and Operating Behind Bars," CIA
Counterterrorism Center, August 20, 2002:

http://www.fas.org/irp/cia/product/ctc082002.pdf

The last page of the document provides an extensive list of sources
which are numbered -- "but the numbers aren't keyed to the text,"
noticed former CIA analyst Allen Thomson.

He recalled being puzzled by this practice more than two decades ago,
and investigating the matter at the time.

"The list of sources wasn't kept for reasons of documenting the
reasoning that went into publications," Mr. Thomson explained. "It
was solely a security requirement so that, should somebody think that
information had been published at too low a level of classification,
the matter could be checked. Curiously, there was no master copy with
the sources keyed to the text to aid in such security checking, so I
suspect that checking was seldom done, if ever."


DOD DOCTRINE ON OPERATIONS SECURITY

"Operations security" (OPSEC) refers to the practice of identifying
and controlling information that could be exploited by a hostile
observer to discern intelligence about U.S. operations.

"OPSEC is a methodology that denies critical information to an
adversary," according to a new Defense Department publication on the
subject.

"Unlike security programs that seek to protect classified information,
OPSEC measures identify, control, and protect generally unclassified
evidence that is associated with sensitive operations and
activities."

See "Operations Security," Joint Publication 3-13.3, June 29, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/dod/jp3_13_3.pdf


ODNI CASTS A WIDE NET TO HIRE STAFF

Many U.S. intelligence agencies as well as the congressional
intelligence oversight committees hire their senior staff from a
predictable, somewhat in-grown pool of personnel, which frequently
includes those who have previously worked in the intelligence field
since they can be immediately cleared.

But the Office of the Director of National Intelligence seems to be
casting an unusually wide net as it seeks the best qualified staff it
can find in academia and the public interest sector.

Historian Nancy Bernkopf Tucker, a China specialist at Georgetown
University, became an Assistant Deputy Director of National
Intelligence for Analytic Integrity in January 2006, and was
appointed last month as the first ODNI "analytic ombudsman." (She
also previously served in the State Department.)

In her new capacity, Dr. Tucker will be "a fact finder, mediator, and
facilitator for intelligence analysts who desire to raise concerns
regarding timeliness, politicization and objectivity in intelligence
analysis without fear of reprisal," according to a June 16 ODNI news
release.

Even more remarkably, Timothy H. Edgar, a prominent critic of Bush
Administration national security policies with the American Civil
Liberties Union, has joined the ODNI staff.

"I have recently taken a job as deputy to Alex Joel, the Civil
Liberties Protection Officer in the Office of the Director of
National Intelligence," he wrote in an email message to former
colleagues last week.

"This was a position that Congress mandated in the Intelligence Reform
and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 and it reports directly to the
DNI."

"The new job is challenging and I am looking forward to continuing to
defend civil liberties within the government," Mr. Edgar wrote.


ANDORRA RATIFIES NUCLEAR TEST BAN TREATY

The tiny Western European nation of Andorra has become the latest
country to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.

On July 12, it became the 134th country to do so, according to a news
release today from the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Organization in
Vienna:

http://www.fas.org/irp/news/2006/07/ctbto071706.html

On the same day, Armenia became the 133rd country to ratify the
Treaty. The United States has not ratified it.

Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web: www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email: saftergood@fas.org
voice: (202) 454-4691
Snuffysmith
SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2006, Issue No. 81
July 19, 2006

Secrecy News Blog: http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/

Support Secrecy News:
http://www.fas.org/static/contrib_sec.jsp


** U.S. COVERT ACTION IN JAPAN IN THE 1960S DISCLOSED
** U.S. ARMY ISSUES MANUAL ON POLICE INTELLIGENCE OPERATIONS
** NAPA REPORT ON NIH ETHICS RELEASED
** A HISTORY OF SPACE NUCLEAR POWER
** SELECTED CRS REPORTS


U.S. COVERT ACTION IN JAPAN IN THE 1960S DISCLOSED

"In the 1958 1968 decade, the U.S. Government approved four covert
programs to try to influence the direction of Japanese political
life," the State Department revealed this week in the latest volume
of Foreign Relations of the United States, the official history of
U.S. foreign policy.

"Concerned that potential electoral success by leftist political
forces would strengthen Japanese neutralism and eventually pave the
way for a leftist government in Japan, the Eisenhower administration
authorized the Central Intelligence Agency before the May 1958
elections for the Japanese House of Representatives to provide a few
key pro-American and conservative politicians with covert limited
financial support and electoral advice," according to an Editorial
Note in the new volume (document 1).

"By 1964, key officials in the Lyndon Johnson administration were
becoming convinced that because of the increased stability in
Japanese politics, covert subsidies to Japanese politicians were no
longer necessary."

"Furthermore, there was a consensus that the program of subsidies was
not worth the risk of exposure. The subsidy program for Japanese
political parties was phased out in early 1964."

"Meanwhile, a broader covert program, divided almost equally between
propaganda and social action and designed to encourage key elements
in Japanese society to reject the influence of the extreme left,
continued to be funded at moderate levels -- $450,000 for 1964, for
example -- throughout the Johnson administration."

See Foreign Relations of the United States, 1964-1968, Volume XXIX,
Part 2, Japan:

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/frus/johnsonlb/xxix2/index.htm


U.S. ARMY ISSUES MANUAL ON POLICE INTELLIGENCE OPERATIONS

A new U.S. Army Field Manual introduces the concept of "police
intelligence operations," an emerging hybrid of military
intelligence and law enforcement.

"Police intelligence operations are a military police function that
supports, enhances, and contributes to a commander's situational
understanding and battlefield visualization and FP [force
protection] programs by portraying the relevant criminal threat and
friendly information, which may affect his operational and tactical
environment."

The new manual presents doctrine that is broadly applicable to
support military operations abroad as well as domestic military
facility protection.

A copy of the new manual was obtained by Secrecy News.

See "Police Intelligence Operations," Field Manual 3-19.50, 21 July
2006 (3.8 MB PDF):

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm3-19-50.pdf


NAPA REPORT ON NIH ETHICS RELEASED

Last year the National Academy of Public Administration developed a
proposal to perform an "ethics audit" of the National Institutes of
Health (NIH).

The proposal was a response, at NIH's request, to persistent concerns
from members of Congress and others that numerous NIH employees had
conflicts of interest arising from their compensated activities
outside of the agency.

Rumor had it that the resulting NAPA proposal contained in a January
2006 report was "not what NIH wanted, so they simply buried the
paper after it was given to the Director."

"One of the ... people who felt it got deep-sixed thought it would be
of interest to the NIH research community," a friendly tipster
wrote.

Secrecy News requested the document under the Freedom of Information
Act, and it was promptly released by NIH.

See "Enhancing Risk Management at the National Institutes of Health
Through an Audit of the Ethics Program," prepared by a National
Academy of Public Administration Staff Study Team, January 2006
(4 MB PDF file):

http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/napa-nih.pdf


A HISTORY OF SPACE NUCLEAR POWER

On January 19, 2006 NASA successfully launched the New Horizons
spacecraft on a mission to Pluto. It will fly by the ninth planet
on July 14, 2015 before proceeding into the Kuiper Belt.

New Horizons is powered by a radioisotope thermoelectric generator
(RTG) fueled by plutonium-238. The natural heat of decay of the
plutonium-238 fuel is converted to about 200 watts of electricity by
means of thermoelectric cells.

"Since 1961, the United States has successfully flown 41 radioisotope
thermoelectric generators (RTGs) and one reactor to provide power
for 24 space systems," reported Gary L. Bennett in a newly updated
history of space nuclear power.

"The development and use of nuclear power in space has enabled the
human race to extend its vision into regions that would not have
been possible with non-nuclear power sources," wrote Bennett, a
former Energy Department and NASA official who devoted much of his
career to the development of space nuclear power sources.

See "Space Nuclear Power: Opening the Final Frontier" by Gary L.
Bennett, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics paper
number AIAA-2006-4191, presented at the 4th International Energy
Conversion Engineering Conference, June 2006 (posted with the
author's permission):

http://www.fas.org/nuke/space/bennett0706.pdf


SELECTED CRS REPORTS

Some notable new reports of the Congressional Research Service that
are not readily available to the general public include the
following.

"Navy F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and EA-18G Growler Aircraft: Background
and Issues for Congress," updated June 8, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/RL30624.pdf

"Air Force Aerial Refueling Methods: Flying Boom versus
Hose-and-Drogue," updated June 5, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/RL32910.pdf

"Project BioShield," updated June 5, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/RS21507.pdf

"China Naval Modernization: Implications for U.S. Navy Capabilities
-- Background and Issues for Congress," June 2, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL33153.pdf

"Presidential Transitions," updated June 9, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL30736.pdf

"An Overview and Funding History of Select Department of Justice
(DOJ) Grant Programs," June 23, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL33489.pdf

"Changing Postal ZIP Code Boundaries," June 23, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL33488.pdf

Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web: www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email: saftergood@fas.org
voice: (202) 454-4691
Snuffysmith
On Monday, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued a press release announcing that it had updated its citizen preparedness web site, Ready.gov, with “special preparedness information for pet owners, senior citizens, and individuals with disabilities and special needs,” and “increased state and local information.” Through a meticulous comparison of the new Ready.gov to a version archived by FAS in early June, we found that the changes are largely cosmetic.



The Good News

The revised site includes valuable information for seniors and pet owners, a constructive change from the nominal details previously available. The state and local information is more comprehensive, which is good news since familiarity with community response plans is essential to preparedness. Summaries of FEMA’s information on preparedness and response for 12 natural disasters have also been added to Ready.gov. Changes to layout make the site significantly easier to navigate; however, there are still many problems.



The Bad News

Even though DHS claims that its disabilities information is revised, a simple comparison to a 2003 version of Ready.gov demonstrates that not a single word has changed in the past three years. This remains a serious issue because the advice is too broad and does not answer important questions about special considerations to make when developing an evacuation plan or how to create a support network to help you, as the National Organization on Disability suggests. DHS has also failed to rectify inaccurate information on other pages of its site, such as a recommendation to get out of the area if possible during an outdoor chemical attack. Experts at RAND have declared that evacuation should never be considered as a response to this kind of attack. Instead you should go to the upper floor of the closest building and seal yourself into a room. The RAND study can be found at http://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1731/index.html



Almost all of the material on the “new” site was copied verbatim from the previous version, which means that unnecessarily lengthy descriptions and obvious advice have not been edited out. For example, “Quickly assess the situation,” the first instruction for responding to a nuclear attack, is an innate response that does not need to be dictated to concerned citizens. DHS has made some beneficial first steps with its updates. However, if Ready.gov really aims to prepare the American public for natural disasters and terrorist attacks, more than updating a few pages and changing the color scheme needs to be done. According to DHS the site had 23 million unique visitors from February 2003 to March 2006. People who visit the site deserve accurate and useful information. The revised site is better, but not adequate.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Join FAS today and receive an introductory annual membership rate of $35 instead of our regular $50 annual dues (remember, if you are a student or a senior your dues are only $25).

Then take advantage of special discounts made available to FAS members from Foreign Affairs, Jane’s Intelligence Review, Public Affairs Books, Scientific American and Wired Magazine. Please Note: subscription information varies especially for international subscriptions; special codes are available to FAS members only.

To Join and qualify for these special discounts please visit: http://www.fas.org/static/member-offer.jsp?ref=lnav
Snuffysmith
SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2006, Issue No. 82
July 21, 2006

Secrecy News Blog: http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/

** EVOLUTION OF THE FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE SURVEILLANCE ACT
** COURT DENIES STATE SECRETS CLAIM IN WIRETAPPING CASE
** SEEKING TRANSPARENCY IN FEDERAL FUNDING
** DOD DOCTRINE ON MILITARY DECEPTION


EVOLUTION OF THE FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE SURVEILLANCE ACT

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the 1978 law that is
supposed to govern surveillance of foreign intelligence targets
within the U.S., has had an unusually dynamic legislative history.
It has been modified in a hundred ways on at least a dozen occasions.

Despite the demonstrated adaptability of this statute, the Bush
Administration chose to conduct its NSA Terrorist Surveillance
Program outside of the legally binding FISA framework and has not
sought to amend it.

"Abiding by FISA does not mean clinging to [an obsolete] 1978
structure," emphasized Rep. Jane Harman, ranking member of the House
Intelligence Committee at a hearing this week. "FISA has been
modernized."

"Each time the Administration has come to Congress and asked to
modernize FISA, Congress has said 'yes'," she recalled.

"Congress extended the time for obtaining emergency warrants so that
surveillance can begin 72 hours before the government obtains a
warrant. Congress expanded the authority to conduct 'trap and trace'
surveillance on the Internet. Congress expanded the ability to get
'roving John Doe' wiretaps for terrorists who switch cell phones."

"The surveillance the President wants to do can and must be done
completely under the current FISA system," Rep. Harman concluded.

She asked the Congressional Research Service to provide a listing of
prior amendments to the FISA, which turned out to be a 29 page
tabulation.

See "Amendments to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA),
1994-2006," Congressional Research Service, July 19:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/m071906.pdf

The prepared testimony from a July 18 House Intelligence Committee
hearing on "Modernization of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
Act" is here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2006_hr/index.html#fisa

The Senate Judiciary Committee has scheduled a hearing on "FISA for
the 21st Century" on July 26.


COURT DENIES STATE SECRETS CLAIM IN WIRETAPPING CASE

In a rare judicial denial of an official "state secrets" claim, a
federal court yesterday rejected a government assertion that a
lawsuit against AT&T alleging illegal wiretapping should be dismissed
because it would place state secrets at risk.

In May, Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte formally
asserted the state secrets privilege in support of a motion to
dismiss the lawsuit brought by the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

But instead of simply deferring to the executive branch, Judge Vaughn
R. Walker did his own analysis of the matter.

"The first step in determining whether a piece of information
constitutes a 'state secret' is determining whether that information
actually is a 'secret'," he wrote.

He went on to conclude, based on public statements by the President
and other officials, that the state secrets privilege was
inapplicable in this case.

"Because of the public disclosures by the government and AT&T, the
court cannot conclude that merely maintaining this action creates a
'reasonable danger' of harming national security."

"It is important to note that even the state secrets privilege has its
limits. While the court recognizes and respects the executive's
constitutional duty to protect the nation from threats, the court
also takes seriously its constitutional duty to adjudicate the
disputes that come before it.... To defer to a blanket assertion of
secrecy here would be to abdicate that duty...."