SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 80
August 16, 2005


** IT'S EASY FOR TERRORISTS
** PENTAGON ISSUES DOCTRINE ON HOMELAND SECURITY
** JASON ON TACTICAL INFRASOUND
** ABLE DANGER: WELDON UNLEASHED
** NRC ADOPTS POLICY ON DISCLOSURE OF SECURITY INFORMATION
** DECLASSIFICATION AT THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES
** SELECTED CRS REPORTS
** SUPPORT SECRECY NEWS


IT'S EASY FOR TERRORISTS

"To attack [America's electrical] grid, a terrorist need only study
publicly available trade journals, which explain where new
facilities are constructed," according to an op-ed in the New York
Times on August 13. "A terrorist could then disable a particular
system by destroying the computers and relays housed in the poorly
protected building."

The New York Times op-ed editor has an affinity for such claims
about the simplicity of perpetrating a disastrous act of terrorism.

On May 30, the Times published an op-ed article asserting that "a
terrorist," using a 27 page manual found online, could manufacture
gram quantities of botulinum toxin and cause tens or hundreds of
thousands of casualties. No lab scientist familiar with the
procedures involved would endorse that scenario, presented by a
Stanford business professor.

The notion of a hyper-competent terrorist who can easily overcome
the physical and technical obstacles that perplex and detain
ordinary mortals has become a common rhetorical trope in public
discussions of terrorism.

George Smith of GlobalSecurity.org conducted a Nexis search for the
phrase "easy for a terrorist" (and similar formulations) and found
about one hundred mainstream media citations over the past two
years.

Judging from press reports, nearly everything comes "easy" to
terrorists:

"From food terror, to manipulating the flu virus, to blowing up
chemical plants, to getting driver's licenses, to coming across the
Mexican border, to buying large caliber guns, to shooting down
planes with ground-to-air missiles, to spreading hoof-and-mouth
disease and destroying the cattle industry, to paralyzing Los
Angeles by attacking power stations, to causing major blackouts, to
putting anthrax in bagged rice," Smith found. "There really is no
end to it. It's stupefying in its universality."

Such glib assessments of terrorist capabilities are worse than
simply wrong. They spread fear and a sense of helplessness, doing
the work of the terrorists, and they threaten to dissipate limited
security and financial resources in a hundred different directions.


PENTAGON ISSUES DOCTRINE ON HOMELAND SECURITY

A new Department of Defense publication spells out official doctrine
for the conduct of military operations in defense of homeland
security.

The military has two "distinct but interrelated" homeland security
missions, the new publication explains: homeland defense and civil
support.

Homeland Defense is "the protection of US sovereignty, territory,
domestic population, and critical infrastructure against external
threats and aggression or other threats as directed by the
President."

Civil Support refers to "support to US civil authorities for
domestic emergencies, and for designated law enforcement within the
scope of restrictions required by the Posse Comitatus Act and other
support approved by the SecDef."

The new publication "describes the homeland security framework,
mission areas, missions and related supporting operations and
enabling activities. It also discusses legal authorities; joint
force, multinational, and interagency relationships; command and
control; planning and execution; and training and resource
considerations," the preface states.

The new doctrinal publication is "Homeland Security," Joint
Publication 3-26, dated 2 August 2005 (flagged by docuticker.com).
A copy is posted here (117 pages, 4 MB PDF file):

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/dod/jp3_26.pdf


JASON ON TACTICAL INFRASOUND

The military and intelligence value of monitoring "infrasound" --
inaudible sound waves of a frequency less than 20 Hertz -- is the
subject of a new report from the secretive JASON advisory group on
military science and technology.

"Using sound as a source of intelligence in a tactical setting has a
long military tradition. Our study was undertaken to assess how
this technique might be exploited in contemporary settings, in
particular at tactical infrasound arrays," the JASON authors write.

"An array of low power robust sensors could be used to monitor
diverse activities from a distance. Sonic data could provide
strategic information to corroborate rocket launches that are
detected by other means, including perhaps location information for
mobile launch vehicles. Activity levels at military airfields
could be monitored from a safe distance. Real time bomb damage
assessments could be augmented with sonic data; particularly when
attacking targets below the surface, listening for the explosions
can help identify instances when the ordinance fails to detonate.
These are but a few examples of the potential utility of sonic
monitoring in the intelligence arena," the report stated.

The JASON report was prepared for the Army's National Ground
Intelligence Center.

A copy was obtained by Secrecy News.

See "Tactical Infrasound," May 2005 (72 pages, 1.4 MB PDF file):

http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/dod/jason/infrasound.pdf


ABLE DANGER: WELDON UNLEASHED

Rep. Curt Weldon (R-PA) caused a stir lately by alleging that a
classified military intelligence data mining program codenamed ABLE
DANGER had identified September 11 hijacker Mohammed Atta as a
threat as early as summer of 2000 and that the 9/11 Commission had
been so informed but had chosen to suppress the information.

In an official statement on the matter, former Commission Chair and
Vice Chair Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton disputed Weldon's account,
and Weldon himself has begun to backtrack, stating that he is no
longer certain that a chart he obtained from the military in 2001
actually named Atta.

A copy of the August 12 Kean-Hamilton statement is here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/news/2005/08/pdp081205.pdf

Rep. Weldon has a history of making inflammatory allegations that
later proved to be unfounded.

On June 7, 1999 he stood on the House floor and accused the Clinton
Administration of leaking the design of the W87 nuclear warhead to
U.S. News and World Report. It was a charge he repeated several
times, referring to an artist's rendering of the W87 warhead which
appeared in the magazine's July 31, 1995 edition.

"This administration leaked this document to U.S. News & World
Report, giving the entire populace of the world... access to the
design of the W87 nuclear warhead," he alleged.

"I have been told... that it was [Secretary of Energy] Hazel O'Leary
herself who gave U.S. News & World Report the actual diagram of the
W87 nuclear warhead in 1995," he said.

On June 8, 1999 he stated flatly: "Hazel O'Leary leaked the plans,
which are in this magazine, for the W87 nuclear warhead."

None of this was true.

No government diagram of the W87 warhead was given to U.S. News.
The artist's rendering of the weapon was a conceptual drawing, not
a design. It was explicitly credited by the magazine to the
Natural Resources Defense Council. An NRDC analyst confirmed that
he had supplied the information to the graphic artist, and that it
was based on informed speculation, not classified information.

In accordance with the political tactics used to attack the
Clinton-Gore Administration throughout much of the 1990s, Rep.
Weldon never retracted or apologized for his unfounded accusations.
See:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/bulletin/sec80.html#weldon

According to an August 10 story in The Hill, Rep. Weldon said House
Speaker Dennis Hastert will support his potential bid to become the
next chairman of the House Armed Services Committee in 2008.


NRC ADOPTS POLICY ON DISCLOSURE OF SECURITY INFORMATION

Following a dispute with the National Academy of Sciences over the
release of security-related information in an NAS report on spent
nuclear fuel, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission undertook a review
of its policy regarding public disclosure of such information.

An NRC Task Force prepared a report on the subject, and the NRC
recently approved a new statement of disclosure policy.

"The task force has concluded that the Commission has considerable
authority to withhold from public disclosure information that could
be useful, or could reasonably be expected to be useful, to a
terrorist, provided that the information is not readily available
to the public already," the report stated.

The resulting NRC policy concluded generally that "to the extent
practicable," the withholding of sensitive information from public
disclosure should conform to Freedom of Information Act principles
for withholding security-related information.

See "NRC Task Force Report on Public Disclosure of Security-Related
Information," Nuclear Regulatory Commission, May 18, 2005 (approved
June 30, 2005) (thanks to MJR):

http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/nrc-disc.pdf


DECLASSIFICATION AT THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES

A proposed rule on declassification of national security information
at the National Archives (NARA) would update current policy to
reflect President Bush's March 2003 amendments to classification
policy.

The proposed rule, published for public comment in the Federal
Register on August 12, also sets forth procedures for automatic
declassification and for reclassification of information that has
been previously declassified.

The Federal Register notice presents a useful and informative series
of questions and answers regarding classification and
declassification policy. (It mistakenly continues to refer to the
"Director of Central Intelligence," a position that no longer
exists.)

Thus: "Can previously released White House-originated information be
reclassified or have its classification restored?"

The answer: "An agency or an entity within the Executive Office of
the President that solely advises and assists the President, may
ask NARA to temporarily close, review, and possibly reclassify or
restore the classification of White House-originated information
that has been declassified and previously released."

See the Proposed Rule on Declassification of National Security
Information, Federal Register, August 12:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2005/08/nara081205.html


SELECTED CRS REPORTS

The Congressional Research Service does not make its publications
directly available to the public. The following CRS reports were
obtained by Secrecy News.

"Missile Survey: Ballistic and Cruise Missiles of Selected Foreign
Countries," updated July 26, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/RL30427.pdf

"Iran's Nuclear Program: Recent Developments," updated August 2,
2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/RS21592.pdf

"'Bunker Busters': Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator Issues, FY2005
and FY 2006," updated August 2, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/RL32347.pdf

"Black Members of the United States Congress: 1870-2005," updated
August 4, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL30378.pdf

"Cambodia: Background and U.S. Relations," July 8, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL32986.pdf
_______________________________________________
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the
Federation of American Scientists.

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 85
September 7, 2005


** DEMONSTRATED DESTRUCTION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS (1967)
** SECRECY REPORT CARD
** A RAFT OF CRS REPORTS


DEMONSTRATED DESTRUCTION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS (1967)

Once upon a time, the government of the United States sought ways
and means to achieve negotiated reductions in stockpiles of
nuclear weapons through the verified destruction of such weapons.

In 1965, US Ambassador to the United Nations Arthur J. Goldberg
presented what was known as the "Transfer" proposal, under which
the U.S. would transfer 60,000 kilograms of weapons grade uranium
to nonweapons uses if the Soviet Union would transfer 40,000
kilograms. Each country would destroy existing nuclear weapons to
make these materials available.

In order to assess whether nuclear weapons could be verifiably
destroyed for this purpose without disclosing sensitive design
information, the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency and the
Defense Department conducted a field test of the process in summer
1967.

The field test was part of a program known as "Cloud Gap," a
remarkable government initiative established in 1963 "to test the
feasibility of hypothetical arms control and disarmament
measures."

The 1967 Cloud Gap Field Test-34 was "an investigation of the
demonstration of the destruction of nuclear weapons by visual
observation, use of radiation detection equipment, inspection of
X-ray plates of weapons, and laboratory analyses of the resulting
fissionable material."

The field test, which was documented in more than a thousand
pages, did in fact identify weaknesses in the protection of
classified information and in the ability of inspectors to
distinguish real weapons from decoys. The final report on the
test, however, also noted ways in which these weaknesses could be
mitigated.

Today, Cloud Gap Field Test-34 is scarcely a footnote in the
history of nuclear weapons and national security, a road not taken.
Yet in its unusual dedication to the empirical testing of policy
options, Cloud Gap may still have something to teach.

An assortment of Cloud Gap documents obtained by the Federation of
American Scientists, including the Final Report on Field Test-34,
may be found here:

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/cloudgap/index.html


SECRECY REPORT CARD

Many Americans have sensed a qualitative reduction in their access
to government information, particularly when it concerns matters
of security policy.

Now a new publication from the coalition OpenTheGovernment.org
provides some quantitative benchmarks that confirm and document
the rise in official secrecy.

Metrics cited in the report range from formal classification --
which is at a record high -- to the fraction of federal advisory
committee meetings closed to the public -- nearly two-thirds.

See the Secrecy Report Card 2005 by Rick Blum,
OpenTheGovernment.org, September 2005:

http://www.openthegovernment.org/otg/SRC2005.pdf


A RAFT OF CRS REPORTS

Some recent reports of the Congressional Research Service obtained
by Secrecy News include the following:

"Oil and Gas: Supply Issues After Katrina," August 31, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS22233.pdf

"Tactical Aircraft Modernization: Issues for Congress," updated
August 30, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/IB92115.pdf

"Strategic Petroleum Reserve," updated August 29, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/IB87050.pdf

"Federal Disaster Recovery Programs: Brief Summaries," updated
August 29, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/RL31734.pdf

"Federal Stafford Act Disaster Assistance: Presidential
Declarations, Eligible Activities, and Funding," August 29, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/RL33053.pdf

"Risk-Based Funding in Homeland Security Grant Legislation:
Analysis of Issues for the 109th Congress," August 29, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/RL33050.pdf

"Sudan: Humanitarian Crisis, Peace Talks, Terrorism, and U.S.
Policy," updated August 26, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/IB98043.pdf

"Department of Homeland Security Reorganization: The 2SR
Initiative," August 19, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/RL33042.pdf

"Al Qaeda: Profile and Threat Assessment," August 17, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/RL33038.pdf

"Legislative Approaches to Chemical Facility Security," August 16,
2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/RL33043.pdf

"Loss-of-Use Damages From U.S. Nuclear Testing in the Marshall
Islands: Technical Analysis of the Nuclear Claims Tribunal's
Methodology and Alternative Estimates," August 12, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/RL33029.pdf

"Tsunamis and Earthquakes: Is Federal Disaster Insurance in our
Future?," April 6, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL32847.pdf




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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 86
September 9, 2005


** GLOBAL STOCKS OF NUCLEAR EXPLOSIVE MATERIALS
** STATE SECRETS IN A PATENT CASE
** CRS ON KATRINA
** AIR FORCE HISTORY
** THE PRESS AND THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT


GLOBAL STOCKS OF NUCLEAR EXPLOSIVE MATERIALS

In an exemplary exercise of what might be termed "public
intelligence," the Institute for Science and International
Security (ISIS) has published a new account of nuclear explosive
materials around the world.

The ISIS database provides estimates of national inventories of
plutonium and highly enriched uranium (as well as neptunium-237
and americium) for countries from Argentina and Armenia to
Vietnam through the end of 2003. More than 50 countries were
found to possess five kilograms or more of these materials.

Such information is ordinarily very closely held, not only by the
foreign governments themselves but also by U.S. government
agencies.

"Some agencies would classify all of this stuff," observed a
State Department intelligence official seated next to me at the
ISIS briefing on September 7 presenting the new estimates.

But of course classification renders information unavailable for
public deliberation.

The purpose of the ISIS publication, in contrast, is "to create a
set of data that everyone can use," said ISIS President David
Albright.

"We need a common language to discuss this," he said,
particularly in light of the threat of diversion of nuclear
materials by terrorists.

"There is a lot of fissile material in the world," Albright said,
noting that ISIS had estimated the production of nearly 4000
tonnes of highly enriched uranium and plutonium, enough for more
than 300,000 nuclear weapons.

See "Global Stocks of Nuclear Explosive Materials," Institute for
Science and International Security, published September 2005:

http://www.isis-online.org/global_stocks/e...ofcontents.html


STATE SECRETS IN A PATENT CASE

Once rarely used, the state secrets privilege is now being
invoked by the government with uncommon frequency to limit or
block litigation. It surfaced yet again this week in an ongoing
patent infringement lawsuit.

In 1998, the Crater Corporation alleged violation of its patent
for an underwater fiber optic coupling device, but the
government stepped in citing the state secrets privilege.
Then-Secretary of the Navy Richard J. Danzig declared that
"discovery in this case could be expected to cause extremely
grave damage to national security." The case was dismissed, and
appealed.

This week, a federal appeals court ruled that the state secrets
privilege had been properly asserted, but that the district
court nevertheless erred in dismissing the plaintiff's lawsuit.

A copy of the September 7 ruling in Crater v. Lucent Technologies
and United States, US Court of Appeals for the Federal District,
is here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/jud/crater090705.pdf

See also "Government Secrecy Request Stalls IP Case," Patently-O
Patent Law Blog (thanks to MJR):

http://patentlaw.typepad.com/patent/2005/0...nment_secr.html

The state secrets privilege was the subject of a news segment on
National Public Radio Morning Edition by Jackie Northam today.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4838701


CRS ON KATRINA

The Congressional Research Service promptly prepared several
reports related to the aftermath and implications of Hurricane
Katrina. Despite congressional prohibitions on direct public
access to CRS products, the latest reports were made available
courtesy of Pennyhill Press.

"New Orleans Levees and Floodwalls: Hurricane Damage
Protection," September 6, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS22238.pdf

"Price Increases in the Aftermath of Hurricane Katrina: Authority
to Limit Price Gouging," September 2, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS22236.pdf

"Disaster Evacuation and Displacement Policy: Issues for
Congress," September 2, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS22235.pdf

"Tax Deductions for Catastrophic Risk Insurance Reserves:
Explanation and Economic Analysis," September 2, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL33060.pdf

A few other notable recent CRS publications are:

"Venezuela: Political Conditions and U.S. Policy," updated August
24, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL32488.pdf

"Argentina: Political Conditions and U.S. Relations," updated
August 17, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RS21113.pdf

"Science and Technology Policy: Issues for the 109th Congress,"
updated August 22, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL32837.pdf


AIR FORCE HISTORY

Air Force history "is an objective, accurate, descriptive, and
interpretive record of all activities of the Air Force in peace
and war. By recounting lessons learned, Air Force history
enables our nations' military and civilian leaders to approach
current problems and concerns more intelligently and
professionally."

It is the mission of Air Force historians "to provide immediate
and continuing historical documentation of [military
operations], and to preserve complete, accurate, and useful
records for future analysis and study."

The role of the Air Force historian was spelled out at length in
two Air Force Instructions that were issued last month. See:

Air Force Instruction 84-101, "Historical Products, Services, and
Requirements," 1 August 2005:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/usaf/afi84-101.pdf

Air Force Instruction 84-102, "Historical Operations in
Contingencies and War," 1 August 2005:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/usaf/afi84-102.pdf


THE PRESS AND THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT

"Without the media the Civil Rights Movement would have been a
bird without wings," said movement veteran Rep. John Lewis in a
tribute published yesterday.

"Without the media's willingness to stand in harm's way and
starkly portray events of the Movement as they saw them unfold,
Americans may never have understood or even believed the horrors
that African Americans faced in the Deep South."

"That commitment to publish the truth took courage. It was
incredibly dangerous to be seen with a pad, a pen, or a camera
in Mississippi, Alabama or Georgia where the heart of the
struggle took place," Rep. Lewis said.

His remarks, a timely reminder of the importance of a free press,
also carried an implicit suggestion that the summit of
journalistic achievement may be something other than the
Watergate-style expose.

See "On the Contribution of the Press to the Civil Rights
Movement," by Rep. John Lewis, entered in the Congressional
Record, September 8, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2005/h090805.html



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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 88
September 15, 2005


** CRS VIEWS CONVENTIONAL WARHEADS FOR ICBMS
** POPPY SATELLITE PROGRAM DECLASSIFIED
** SOME MORE CRS REPORTS


CRS VIEWS CONVENTIONAL WARHEADS FOR ICBMS

A new report from the Congressional Research Service examines the
possibility of replacing the nuclear warheads on U.S. long range
ballistic missiles with conventional warheads, and sorts through the
implications of such a move.

From the warfighter's perspective, the availability of
conventionally-armed long-range ballistic missiles would mean
increased flexibility and would permit prompt global offensive
reach.

Critics worry that any use of such a missile would lend itself to
misinterpretation as a nuclear strike and thereby lower the
threshold for nuclear war.

Others suggest that conversion of long-range missiles to conventional
warheads would facilitate sharp reductions in nuclear weapons
stockpiles, if there were a will to pursue such reductions.

The U.S. currently has an estimated 4,868 nuclear warheads on 982
land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles and submarine-launched
ballistic missiles.

The U.S. nuclear weapons targeting plan that was formerly known as the
SIOP (Single Integrated Operational Plan) is now designated OPLAN
8044, the CRS report notes, and "it reflects changes in U.S.
targeting plans and priorities that resulted from the Bush
Administration's nuclear posture review."

A copy of the new CRS report was obtained by Secrecy News.

See "Conventional Warheads For Long-Range Ballistic Missiles:
Background and Issues for Congress," September 6, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/RL33067.pdf


POPPY SATELLITE PROGRAM DECLASSIFIED

Information about the POPPY intelligence satellite program, which
operated from 1962 to 1971, was declassified this week.

"POPPY was the successor to the nation's first ELINT [electronic
intelligence] satellite, known as 'GRAB' (Galactic Radiation and
Background)," according to a September 12 press release from the
National Reconnaissance Office.

"The POPPY system was designed to detect land based radar emitters
and support ocean surveillance."

The newly declassified information is summarized in a POPPY Program
Fact Sheet, dated September 12, 2005, and available here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/nro/poppy.pdf


SOME MORE CRS REPORTS

Some recent reports of the Congressional Research Service obtained
by Secrecy News include the following:

"Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Hurricane Katrina Relief,"
September 7, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS22239.pdf

"An Emergency Communications Safety Net: Integrating 911 and Other
Services," September 1, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/RL32939.pdf

"Agricultural Disaster Assistance," updated August 29, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS21212.pdf

"V-22 Osprey Tilt-Rotor Aircraft," updated August 4, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/RL31384.pdf

"Defense Outsourcing: The OMB Circular A-76 Policy," updated June 30,
2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL30392.pdf

"Federal Flood Insurance: The Repetitive Loss Problem," June 30, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL32972.pdf




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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 89
September 16, 2005


** BUSH WAGE CUTS FOR RELIEF WORKERS MAY BE LEGAL ERROR
** DOD DICTIONARY OF MILITARY TERMS


BUSH WAGE CUTS FOR RELIEF WORKERS MAY BE LEGAL ERROR

On September 8, President Bush issued a proclamation suspending the
minimum wage requirements for relief workers engaged in Katrina
recovery operations.

But in order to do so, he relied upon a statutory authority that
has been dormant for thirty years and that appears to be legally
inoperative.

"I find that the conditions caused by Hurricane Katrina constitute
a 'national emergency' within the meaning of section 3147 of title
40, United States Code," President Bush declared on September 8 as
he removed the Davis Bacon Act wage supports for workers in
Louisiana, and portions of Mississippi, Alabama and Florida.

But this emergency statute was one of numerous authorities that
were rendered dormant by the National Emergencies Act of 1976, and
that can only be activated by certain procedural formalities that
were absent in this case.

In particular, the President must formally declare a national
emergency under the National Emergencies Act, and he must specify
which standby legal authorities he proposes to activate so as to
permit congressional restraint of emergency powers.

Strangely, however, President Bush proceeded as if the National
Emergencies Act did not exist.

The September 8 presidential declaration was "an anomaly,"
according to a new Congressional Research Service assessment, and
it did not follow "the historical pattern of declaring a national
emergency to activate the suspension authority."

"The propriety of the President's action in this case may be
ultimately determined in the courts," the CRS report stated
delicately.

The newly updated CRS report, written by Harold C. Relyea, traces
the evolution of emergency powers and includes a tabulation of
declared national emergencies from 1976-2005.

See "National Emergency Powers," Congressional Research Service,
updated September 15, 2005 (esp. pp. 18-19):

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

The President's September 8 proclamation is here:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20...20050908-5.html

Why would the President deviate from established practice in this
way?

One subject matter expert consulted by Secrecy News rejected the
idea that there was any self-interested motive at work, and noted
that the President had properly invoked the National Emergencies
Act in previous cases.

"I think it's just poor staff work at the White House," he said.

But if it was an innocent mistake, that doesn't mean it is an
inconsequential one.

"The hell-to-pay could come if a union or some affected worker
decides this [wage cut] was improperly done" and files a lawsuit
to challenge it, a possibility implicitly raised by the CRS above.

Meanwhile, taking the President's proclamation at face value, Rep.
George Miller and several dozen other members of Congress
introduced a bill to undo what the President has proposed.

H.R. 3763, introduced on September 14, would "reinstate the
application of the wage requirements of the Davis-Bacon Act to
Federal contracts in areas affected by Hurricane Katrina."


DOD DICTIONARY OF MILITARY TERMS

The Department of Defense has updated and substantially expanded
its Dictionary of Military Terms.

The Dictionary is useful for students of military policy and also
provides some striking adaptations of ordinary language to
military needs.

"Space," picking an example at random, is defined as "A medium like
the land, sea, and air within which military activities shall be
conducted to achieve US national security objectives."

See "Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated
Terms," Joint Publication 1-02, amended 31 August 2005 [746 pages,
2 MB PDF file]:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/dod/jp1_02.pdf




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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 90
September 20, 2005


** REMOVING HEU FROM ARGENTINA
** ARKIN: EARLY WARNING
** KATRINA AND CLASSIFIED RECORDS
** REMEMBERING PHILIP MORRISON
** SELECTED CRS REPORTS


REMOVING HEU FROM ARGENTINA

The U.S. Department of Energy, "in secret and under heavy security
measures," has been removing highly enriched uranium fuel elements
from the RA3 nuclear research reactor in Ezeiza, Argentina,
according to a September 18 report in the Buenos Aires newspaper
Clarin, as part of a continuing effort to convert such reactors to
the use of low enriched uranium fuel.

See "EE.UU. se lleva materiales nucleares de la Argentina" by
Daniel Santoro, Clarin, September 18, 2005:

http://www.clarin.com/suplementos/zona/200.../18/z-03615.htm


ARKIN: EARLY WARNING

A new blog by author and critic William Arkin on the
WashingtonPost.com web site has become instantly "bookmarkable"
for students of national security affairs.

The web is already supersaturated with opinion, of course, and with
analysis of varying degrees of sophistication or self-indulgence.
But Arkin's blog, Early Warning, stands out because he also
offers access to official records that are otherwise not publicly
available.

In his first outing on September 14, for example, he posted the
April 2005 Department of Homeland Security National Planning
Scenarios, which are "for official use only." On September 19, he
disclosed another FOUO document on "Potential Terrorist Use of
Pressure Cookers." And "there is a lot more where that came
from," he promises, or threatens.

See "Early Warning" here:

http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/


KATRINA AND CLASSIFIED RECORDS

One of the many disruptive effects of Hurricane Katrina with which
residents and government agencies have to contend is the loss of
personal and official records.

The National Archives has "consulted with Federal agencies
concerning classified national security information that may be
affected by the hurricane," according to a September 19 news
release. See:

http://www.archives.gov/press/press-releas...5/nr05-120.html


REMEMBERING PHILIP MORRISON

Physicist Philip Morrison, a Manhattan Project veteran and former
FAS President who died earlier this year, is recalled in an
obituary in the latest FAS Public Interest Report by Priscilla
McMillan. See:

http://www.fas.org/faspir/2005/v58n2/morrison.htm

Ms. McMillan's recent book "The Ruin of J. Robert Oppenheimer" was
perceptively reviewed by author Thomas Powers, along with several
other recent books on Oppenheimer, in the September 22 New York
Review of Books:

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/18268


SELECTED CRS REPORTS

Some new or newly acquired reports of the Congressional Research
Service obtained by Secrecy News include the following:

"Emergency Preparedness and Continuity of Operations (COOP)
Planning in the Federal Judiciary," updated September 8, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/secrecy/RL31978.pdf

"Legislative Initiatives to Temporarily Relocate Federal Courts
Interrupted by Natural or Man-Made Disasters, 109th Congress,"
September 8, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/secrecy/RS22244.pdf

"Continuity of Government: Current Federal Arrangements and the
Future," updated August 5, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/secrecy/RS21089.pdf

"Homeland Security: Protecting Airspace in the National Capital
Region," September 1, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/RS22234.pdf

"Military Base Closures: A Historical Review from 1988 to 1995,"
updated October 18, 2004:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/97-305.pdf



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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 91
September 22, 2005


** HOUSE INTEL COMMITTEE BEGINS HEARINGS ON LEAKS
** GUIDELINES FOR ACCESS TO GEOSPATIAL DATA
** US ARMY WEAPONS SYSTEM HANDBOOK
** ABLE DANGER HEARING
** A CITIZEN'S GUIDE TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT


HOUSE INTEL COMMITTEE BEGINS HEARINGS ON LEAKS

The first of a series of congressional hearings on the unauthorized
disclosure of classified information was held last week by the
House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. The closed
hearing featured "a representative of the intelligence community"
who discussed the consequences of such unauthorized disclosures.

Committee chairman Pete Hoekstra (R-Mich.) said the committee will
hold open hearings on the issue in the future. He indicated that
no legislation on unauthorized disclosure is pending before the
committee and that no decision has been made to introduce a bill,
according to a September 14 news release. See:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2005/09/hpsci091405.pdf

Meanwhile, the Committee voted on party lines to reject a resolution
requesting that the executive branch provide documents on the
unauthorized disclosure of the identity of CIA officer Valerie
Plame.

When it comes to leaks, the Republican majority said, "the House
must focus on the problem broadly rather than focusing solely on
any specific case."

Democrats said "the Committee missed a critical opportunity to
exercise appropriate and responsible oversight of this serious
matter."

See the House Intelligence Committee report on the resolution here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2005_rpt/hrpt109-228.html


GUIDELINES FOR ACCESS TO GEOSPATIAL DATA

Official guidelines for deciding whether and how to permit public
access to geospatial data -- such as maps and satellite imagery
-- have recently been issued by the Federal Geographic Data
Committee of the U.S. Geological Survey.

"In the United States many public and private organizations and
individuals originate geospatial data and make them available to
the public," the Guidelines note. "Because of this condition
centralized control of information is not viable and decision
making about the sensitivity and safeguarding of geospatial data
will be decentralized."

To assist in such decentralized decision making, the Guidelines
define general procedures for identifying sensitive information
and weighing the risks and benefits of disclosure.

See "Guidelines for Providing Appropriate Access to Geospatial
Data in Response to Security Concerns," Federal Geographic Data
Committee, June 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/fgdc0605.pdf


US ARMY WEAPONS SYSTEM HANDBOOK

The 2005 U.S. Army Weapons System Handbook, a descriptive catalog of
dozens of current and near-term weapons systems used by the U.S.
Army, is now available on the Federation of American Scientists web
site.

Previous editions of the Handbook were routinely made available on
Army web sites. But along with many thousands of other
unclassified documents, they were withdrawn from online public
access a few years ago when the Army moved much of its web-based
content behind a password-protected portal called Army Knowledge
Online. A softcopy of the new edition was obtained by Secrecy
News.

The unclassified Handbook is not sensitive, even by government
standards. A hardcopy of the publication can still be purchased
through the Government Printing Office. But the online version was
a casualty of the Army's retreat from the web, until now.

See the 2005 U.S. Army Weapons System Handbook here:

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/wsh/index.html


ABLE DANGER HEARING

The Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing yesterday on ABLE
DANGER, the Defense Department intelligence program that may or may
not have identified Mohamed Atta and other September 11 hijackers a
year or more before they struck.

The hearing ended inconclusively after the Pentagon refused to
permit several witnesses to testify, citing classification
concerns.

"That looks to me as if it may be obstruction of the committee's
activities," said Judiciary Committee chair Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa).

"The Senate Intelligence Committee, as I understand it, has
jurisdiction over this matter and is looking into it," Defense
Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told reporters in response.

"Second, the department, I'm told, offered a classified briefing
because the subject matter was classified," Rumsfeld said. "And as
I understand it, the Judiciary Committee preferred to have an open
hearing on a classified matter, and therefore the department
declined to participate in an open hearing on a classified matter."

The prepared testimony from the September 21 Judiciary Committee
hearing is available here:

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

A September 1 Pentagon press briefing on ABLE DANGER is available
here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/news/2005/09/dod090105.html


A CITIZEN'S GUIDE TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT

The House Committee on Government Reform has published a new edition
of its popular "Citizen's Guide on Using the Freedom of Information
Act and the Privacy Act of 1974 to Request Government Records."

The Guide, first published in 1977, "is one of the most widely read
congressional committee reports in history," the new edition says.

A copy of the updated Guide, House Report 109-226, September 20,
2005, is available here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/foia/citizen.html



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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 92
September 26, 2005


** WAS KATRINA A CATASTROPHIC EVENT?
** RESTORING CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE AFTER KATRINA
** CHALLENGE TO 1953 STATE SECRETS CASE BLOCKED


WAS KATRINA A CATASTROPHIC EVENT?

On August 30, Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff
designated Hurricane Katrina "an incident of national
significance," and thereby activated the National Response Plan
(NRP).

But did the Secretary also designate the Hurricane as a
"catastrophic event," a special sub-category of emergency
situations that entails the expedited deployment of emergency
response capabilities?

The answer to this question is mysteriously hard to find.

Catastrophic events permit "an accelerated, proactive national
response" and may include "mobilizing and deploying assets before
they are requested via normal NRP protocols," according to the
Catastrophic Incident Annex to the National Response Plan.

"A catastrophic event is any natural or manmade incident, including
terrorism, that results in extraordinary levels of mass
casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the
population, infrastructure, environment, economy, national morale,
and/or government functions."

"All catastrophic events are Incidents of National Significance."
However, not all Incidents of National Significance are
"catastrophic events."

So did the Secretary designate Katrina a catastrophic event, or not?

DHS won't say.

"When asked if Chertoff exercised his catastrophic incident
authority in response to Hurricane Katrina, DHS spokesman Russ
Knocke said it was too early to make a determination," wrote Chris
Strohm in Government Executive Daily Briefing on September 8 in
perhaps the only news story to address the issue. See:

http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0905/090805c1.htm

The answer to this question would help clarify whether the faulty
government response to Katrina was a failure of planning or of
personnel, or some combination of the two.

Meanwhile, President Bush appeared to suggest that his Department
of Homeland Security was incapable of coping with a catastrophic
natural disaster and that increased military authority was needed.

"Is there a circumstance in which the Department of Defense becomes
the lead agency [for emergency response]?" the President asked at
a September 25 press briefing. "Clearly, in the case of a
terrorist attack, that would be the case, but is there a natural
disaster which -- of a certain size that would then enable the
Defense Department to become the lead agency in coordinating and
leading the response effort. That's going to be a very important
consideration for Congress to think about."

Some related issues are discussed by the Congressional Research
Service in "Hurricane Katrina: DOD Disaster Response," September
19, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33095.pdf

See also "The Use of Federal Troops for Disaster Assistance: Legal
Issues," CRS, September 16, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RS22266.pdf


RESTORING CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE AFTER KATRINA

A Department of Homeland Security memo presents guidelines to
assist in restoring critical infrastructure systems that were
damaged or destroyed by Hurricane Katrina, and to help secure such
systems against attack.

"The loss of major critical infrastructures and associated control
systems in the Gulf Coast Region has created cascading impacts
across multiple critical infrastructure sectors," the memo states.

"During the aftermath of this natural disaster, threat agents with
malicious intent may attempt to exploit new vulnerabilities or
take advantage of existing vulnerabilities as significant focus
and resources are directed to those in need. It is important for
the control systems community to be cognizant of threats that may
attempt to take advantage of personnel and systems likely to be
more vulnerable to both physical and cyber attacks as a result of
Hurricane Katrina."

See "Hurricane Katrina Control System Assistance," DHS United
States Computer Emergency Readiness Team -- Control Systems
Security Center, September 16, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/dhs/katrina-csa.pdf


CHALLENGE TO 1953 STATE SECRETS CASE BLOCKED

A federal appeals court last week upheld the dismissal of a lawsuit
alleging that the government fraudulently invoked the state
secrets privilege in a case that went to the Supreme Court fifty
years ago.

The landmark 1953 Supreme Court ruling in Reynolds v. United States
ratified the state secrets privilege as a way for the government
to prevent discovery by a plaintiff in litigation.

A half century after that case was decided, the surviving
plaintiffs and their families obtained the now declassified
records that had been withheld from them under the state secrets
privilege. To their surprise, they saw nothing sensitive in the
records to justify the use of the privilege, and they returned to
court alleging fraud.

But the appeals court wasn't buying it.

"The concept of fraud upon the court challenges the very principle
upon which our judicial system is based: the finality of a
judgment," the ruling stated.

A layman might have supposed that "the very principle upon which
our judicial system is based" is justice, or fairness to the
parties, or an accurate record. But a layman would be wrong.

"The presumption against the reopening of a case that has gone
through the appellate process all the way to the United States
Supreme Court and reached final judgment must be not just a high
hurdle to climb but a steep cliff-face to scale," the ruling
declared, foreshadowing its rejection of the plaintiffs' claims.

A copy of the September 22 ruling is here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/jud/herring0905.pdf

See also "3rd Circuit Finds No 'Fraud on the Courts' in 50-Year-Old
Case" by Shannon P. Duffy, The Legal Intelligencer, September 26:

http://www.law.com/

The application of the state secrets privilege to block a patent
infringement case involving an underwater fiber optic coupler was
neatly reported in "Secrecy Power Sinks Patent Case" by Kevin
Poulsen in Wired News, September 20:

http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,68894,00.html



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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 93
September 28, 2005


** ISOO REPORTS ON AUTOMATIC DECLASSIFICATION PLANS
** A BILL TO TELEVISE SUPREME COURT PROCEEDINGS
** COMMAND AND CONTROL OF DETAINEE OPERATIONS


ISOO REPORTS ON AUTOMATIC DECLASSIFICATION PLANS

Most executive branch agencies are on track to meet the deadline
for automatic declassification of their 25 year old classified
documents by December 31, 2006, the Information Security Oversight
Office (ISOO) said in a new report submitted to President Bush
this week.

But "a handful of agencies still remain at risk of not meeting the
deadline," ISOO director J. William Leonard wrote.

Automatic declassification of historically valuable classified
records as they become 25 years old was originally mandated (with
certain specified exceptions) by President Clinton in his 1995
executive order 12958.

The principle of automatic declassification was also affirmed by
President Bush in the 2003 executive order 13292 though he
deferred the effective date until the end of next year to permit
agencies more time to assess their classified collections and plan
for declassification.

Now the December 2006 deadline is looming and an estimated 155
million pages of textual records await agency review for
declassification, authorized exemption, or referral to another
agency.

"Any such records not acted upon will be automatically declassified
subject to the limitations and conditions set forth in the
Order," the ISOO report stated.

Properly understood, declassification is not a compromise with
national security requirements or a concession to critics. It is
an integral part of the national security classification process.

As the ISOO report explained, "The classification system... cannot
be depended upon to protect today's sensitive national security
information unless there is an ongoing process to purge it of
yesterday's secrets that no longer require protection."

Yet declassification activity has declined steadily over the past
several years, while spurious classification appears to be on the
rise.

The implementation of automatic declassification next year will
therefore be a test of the continued viability of the
classification system.

"It is important to recognize that December 31, 2006, represents
not an end unto itself but rather the beginning of integrating
automatic declassification into the fabric of the security
classification framework."

"We have emphasized to each agency head that automatic
declassification is an ongoing program that begins, not ends, on
December 31, 2006, and thus requires their personal commitment as
you called for in the Order," ISOO told the President.

See "An Assessment of Declassification in the Executive Branch,"
Report to the President from the Information Security Oversight
Office, September 21, 2005 (transmitted September 26):

http://www.fas.org/sgp/isoo/2005declass.pdf


A BILL TO TELEVISE SUPREME COURT PROCEEDINGS

Bipartisan legislation introduced in the Senate this week would
permit television coverage of open sessions of the U.S. Supreme
Court.

"The purpose of this legislation is to open the Supreme Court doors
so that more Americans can see the process by which the Court
reaches critical decisions of law that affect this country and
everyday Americans," said Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA), chairman of
the Senate Judiciary Committee.

"Justice Felix Frankfurter perhaps anticipated the day when Supreme
Court arguments would be televised when he said that he longed for
a day when the news media would cover the Supreme Court as
thoroughly as it did the World Series," Sen. Specter said in his
introductory statement.

"Allowing the public greater access to [Supreme Court] proceedings
will allow Americans to evaluate for themselves the quality of
justice in this country, and deepen their understanding of the
work that goes on in the Court," added Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT),
who cosponsored the bill along with Senators Cornyn, Allen,
Grassley, Schumer and Feingold.

See the introduction of S.1768, a bill to permit televising of
Supreme Court proceedings, September 26:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2005/s1768.html

"Justices on the Supreme Court oppose the televising of their
proceedings," according to a recent Congressional Research Service
report, "in part because the cameras might alter decision making
and intrude on the privacy of the justices, making them public
celebrities."


COMMAND AND CONTROL OF DETAINEE OPERATIONS

The U.S. Army has issued a new interim field manual to clarify
command and control responsibilities in the handling of detainees,
acknowledging that existing military doctrine on the subject is
deficient.

"As a result of recent events and investigations into detainee
operations in Iraq, it was determined there was a need to clarify
command and control," the Interim Field Manual states, or
understates.

The new manual defines the command structure and discusses "the
flow of detainees... at each echelon of command."

"It is important to note that there is a single officer at every
echelon overall responsible for detainee operations."

See "Command and Control of Detainee Operations," Field Manual
Interim (FMI) 3-63.6, September 2005:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fmi3-63-6.pdf

In an extraordinary letter to Senator John McCain published by the
Washington Post today, Capt. Ian Fishback wrote that the military
chain of command failed to provide clear guidance on treatment of
detainees.

"I have been unable to get clear, consistent answers from my
leadership about what constitutes lawful and humane treatment of
detainees," Capt. Fishback wrote.

"I am certain that this confusion contributed to a wide range of
abuses including death threats, beatings, broken bones, murder,
exposure to elements, extreme forced physical exertion,
hostage-taking, stripping, sleep deprivation and degrading
treatment. I and troops under my command witnessed some of these
abuses in both Afghanistan and Iraq."




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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 94
October 3, 2005


CONGRESS PUSHES BACK ON "SENSITIVE SECURITY INFORMATION"

In a rare defense of public access to government information, Congress
has instructed the Department of Homeland Security to clarify and
tighten its procedures for generating so-called "sensitive security
information" (SSI), to reduce subjective factors in marking documents
as SSI, and to provide Congress with the titles of all documents that
are so designated.

SSI refers generally to transportation security information that is
exempt by law from public disclosure. It includes airport security
plans, vulnerability assessments, and related airline security data,
but also undefined "other" information that may be considered too
sensitive for public release.

"Because of insufficient management controls, information that should
be in the public domain may be unnecessarily withheld from public
scrutiny," members of Congress wrote in the new conference report on
the 2006 Homeland Security Appropriations Act.

The congressional conferees directed DHS to "promulgate guidance that
includes common but extensive examples of SSI" so as to "eliminate
judgment ... in the application of the SSI marking."

See the report language here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2005/dhs-ssi.html

SSI has been a source of controversy because it has been invoked in
seemingly arbitrary ways to deflect public requests for information.

For examples of some SSI disputes and for further background, see my
article "The Secrets of Flight" in Slate, November 18, 2004:

http://slate.msn.com/id/2109922/

SSI is only one of several dozen types of controls on unclassified
information, and not the most common. Because they are mostly
informal and discretionary, such controls are also more susceptible to
abuse than the comparatively rigorous classification system.

Lately, the Centers for Disease Control has been criticized for
withholding data needed for flu vaccine production and for adopting
aggressive controls on "sensitive but unclassified" information.

See "CDC locks up flu data" by Rebecca Carr, Cox News, in the Atlanta
Journal-Constitution, October 3:

http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/stori...5/03natcdc.html


THE FRANKLIN/AIPAC CASE AND THE PRESS

The recent indictment of two former employees of the American Israel
Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) for mishandling classified
information is an abrupt departure from established practice because
it treats members of the public as if they were cleared government
employees who are obliged to protect classified secrets.

For the same reason, it poses an extraordinary challenge to the ability
of the press to report on national security affairs.

"Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman repeatedly sought and received
sensitive information, both classified and unclassified, and then
passed it on to others in order to advance their policy agenda and
professional standing," said U.S. attorney Paul McNulty at a press
conference announcing their indictment (along with former defense
official Larry Franklin, who will reportedly plead guilty).

"But," writes Eli Lake in The New Republic, "if it's illegal for Rosen
and Weissman to seek and receive 'classified information,' then many
investigative journalists are also criminals."

"While most administrations have tried to crack down on leaks, they
have almost always shied away from going after those who receive
them--until now."

"At a time when a growing amount of information is being classified,
the prosecution of Rosen and Weissman threatens to have a chilling
effect--not on the ability of foreign agents to influence U.S. policy,
but on the ability of the American public to understand it," writes
Lake.

See "Low Clearance" by Eli J. Lake, The New Republic, October 10
(subscription required):

http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20051010&s=lake101005

See also "Israeli lobby spy case suggests new push to keep leaks from
reporters" by John Byrne, Raw Story, September 30:

http://rawstory.com/admin/dbscripts/prints....php?story=1250


SSCI MARKUP OF 2006 INTEL AUTHORIZATION ACT

The authority of the Director of National Intelligence over U.S.
intelligence policy would be further consolidated under the 2006
intelligence authorization act as marked up by the Senate Select
Committee on Intelligence.

Among other notable provisions, the new bill would assign authority to
the DNI to manage access to human intelligence information (sec. 403),
previously a function of the Director of Central Intelligence.

The bill would authorize defense intelligence officers to conduct
intelligence "assessment contacts" within the United States without
disclosing their own identity (sec. 431).

The bill would exempt "operational files" of the Defense Intelligence
Agency from the Freedom of Information Act (sec. 434). Such an
exemption was rejected by a less compliant Congress when it was first
requested by DIA in 2000.

The 2006 intelligence authorization act, S. 1803, as marked up by the
Senate Intelligence Committee, is available here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2005_cr/s1803.html


COURT ORDERS RELEASE OF ABU GHRAIB IMAGES

In a decision full of ruminative commentary on the pitfalls of
unchecked secrecy, a federal judge last week ruled that photographic
images of abuses committed by American military personnel at Abu
Ghraib prison in Iraq are not exempt from the Freedom of Information
Act.

Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein decided in favor of the ACLU, which had
sought the images, and against the Department of Defense, which
opposed their release.

"Suppression of information is the surest way to cause its significance
to grow and persist," the judge opined. "Clarity and openness are the
best antidotes, either to dispel criticism if not merited or, if
merited, to correct such errors as may be found."

"The fight to extend freedom has never been easy, and we are once again
challenged, in Iraq and Afghanistan, by terrorists who engage in
violence to intimidate our will and to force us to retreat. Our
struggle to prevail must be without sacrificing the transparency and
accountability of government and military officials. These are the
values FOIA was intended to advance, and they are at the very heart of
the values for which we fight in Afghanistan and Iraq."

The 50 page ruling includes discussions of the Glomar response (i.e.
neither confirming nor denying the existence of requested
information), the consequences of unwarranted secrecy, and the state
of FOIA law. A copy of the decision, which is likely to be appealed,
is posted here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/jud/aclu092905.pdf


SELECTED CRS REPORTS

Some recent reports of the Congressional Research Service obtained by
Secrecy News include the following:

"The Middle East Peace Talks," updated September 29, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/IB91137.pdf

"Air Force Aerial Refueling," updated September 19, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/RS20941.pdf

"Material Support of Terrorists and Foreign Terrorist Organizations:
Expiring Amendments in Brief," August 16, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/RS22222.pdf

"Material Support of Terrorists and Foreign Terrorist Organizations:
Sunset Amendments," August 11, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/RL33035.pdf

"Free Mail for Troops Overseas," July 22, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS22203.pdf

"Detainees at Guantanamo Bay," updated July 20, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RS22173.pdf



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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 95
October 6, 2005


** SENATE VOTES TO PROHIBIT CRUEL TREATMENT OF DETAINEES
** SSCI REPORT ON 2006 INTEL AUTHORIZATION ACT
** OPEN SOURCES GET CLOSED AT CIA
** SELECTED CRS REPORTS
** SABO ON SSI
** SECURITY CONTROLS ON FOREIGN SCIENTISTS
** HANS BETHE IN WAR AND PEACE


SENATE VOTES TO PROHIBIT CRUEL TREATMENT OF DETAINEES

Defying a White House veto threat, a large majority of the United
States Senate voted in favor of an amendment offered by Sen. John
McCain that would establish uniform standards for the interrogation
of detainees held by the Department of Defense and prohibit "cruel,
inhuman or degrading treatment" of prisoners in U.S. custody.

In spite of White House opposition, the amendment won the support of
90 Senators. It was also endorsed in letters from 29 former
high-ranking military leaders and former Secretary of State Colin
Powell that were entered into the congressional record.

Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), one of the nine Senators who opposed
the measure, explained his position: "I think there is a place in
our operations against individuals involved in the war on terrorism
where we deal with them as they deal with us."

See the October 5 Senate floor debate here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2005_cr/mccain100505.html


SSCI REPORT ON 2006 INTEL AUTHORIZATION ACT

The newly released Senate Intelligence Committee report on the 2006
intelligence authorization act presents several initiatives that
would alter the landscape of both foreign and domestic intelligence
collection. See Senate Report 109-142:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2005_rpt/srpt109-142.html

The Committee noted in passing that "Improper classification of
information -- the disclosure of which would not harm national
security -- prevents the public from considering national issues in
light of all publicly available facts." It did not provide any
examples of such information. The Committee further "strongly
recommend[ed]" that the Director of National Intelligence "examine
the guidelines and rules for classification, and, as necessary,
propose standards for the modernization and simplification of the
classification system."

Dissenting views appended to the report exposed some of the tensions
that have divided the Committee.

Committee Democrats harshly criticized the failure to complete an
investigation of pre-war intelligence on Iraq. "The Committee's
delinquency in addressing an issue that it unanimously voted to
address over a year and a half ago has diminished the Committee's
credibility as an effective overseer of the Intelligence
Community," they wrote.

They also noted the Committee's failure to examine the handling of
detainees. "Despite repeated attempts to initiate a detailed
review of fundamental legal and operational questions surrounding
the detention, interrogation and rendition of individuals held in
U.S. custody, the Committee majority has refused to conduct such an
investigation."


OPEN SOURCES GET CLOSED AT CIA

The CIA this month will establish a new unit devoted to analysis of
"open source" intelligence, referring to unclassified information
that is openly and legally collected, Time magazine reported on
August 15.

But at the CIA, even open source material is often treated as
secret.

Last week, the CIA denied a request for a copy of a compilation of
published statements made by Osama bin Laden between 1994 and 2004
on grounds that release of the material would compromise
"intelligence sources and methods" (FOIA exemption b(3)) and that
the material was obtained on a privileged basis (exemption b(4)).
See:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2005/09/cia092705.pdf

But as it happens, the same material will be published next month
under the title "Messages to the World: The Statements of Osama bin
Laden" edited by Bruce Lawrence and published by Verso
(www.versobooks.com).

"Over the last ten years, bin Laden has issued a series of carefully
tailored public statements, from interviews with Western and Arabic
journalists to faxes and video recordings. These texts supply
evidence crucial to an understanding of the bizarre mix of Quranic
scholarship, CIA training, punctual interventions in Gulf politics
and messianic anti-imperialism that has formed the programmatic
core of Al Qaeda," according to the publisher's announcement.

"In bringing together the various statements issued under bin
Laden's name since 1994, this volume forms part of a growing
discourse that seeks to demythologize the terrorist network. Newly
translated from the Arabic, annotated with a critical introduction
by Islamic scholar Bruce Lawrence, this collection places the
statements in their religious, historical and political context."

Meanwhile, "In a move mirroring the recruitment process at the
Central Intelligence Agency," an Al Qaeda website is openly
soliciting applicants who can serve as researchers and linguists,
according to a report in the London-based Al Sharq al Awsat. See
"Al Qaeda Website Openly Hiring New Recruits" by Mohammed Al
Shafey, October 3:

http://www.asharqalawsat.com/english/news....ction=1&id=1987

Open Source Solutions (www.oss.net), a proponent of open source
intelligence, reported that Dr. James Billington, the Librarian of
Congress, had rejected an invitation from the Director of National
Intelligence to serve as the first Director of the new Open Source
Agency.


SELECTED CRS REPORTS

Reports of the Congressional Research Service recently obtained by
Secrecy News include the following:

"The Cost of Iraq, Afghanistan and Enhanced Base Security Since
9/11," October 3, 2005:

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

"Strategic Mobility Innovation: Options and Oversight Issues," April
29, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/RL32887.pdf


SABO ON SSI

The successful enactment of new limitations on the use of the
"sensitive security information" control marking stems from an
initiative by Rep. Martin Olav Sabo (D-MN), who raised the issue in
the House last spring.

See this May 10 news release on the Sabo amendment which led to the
conference agreement to tighten controls on SSI in the 2006
Homeland Security Appropriations bill (SN, 10/03/05):

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2005/05/sabo051005.html


SECURITY CONTROLS ON FOREIGN SCIENTISTS

For many foreign scientists and engineers, new post-9/11 security
controls have created "the perception -- and too often the reality
-- that the United States was becoming an unwelcoming and
increasingly hostile destination," according to a new White Paper
from the Commission on Scientific Communication and National
Security.

"The White Paper explains the importance to the United States
scientific and technical base -- and to U.S. national security and
economic vitality -- of ensuring that foreign students, scholars,
researchers, and technical professionals are able to visit the
United States. It outlines problems that have been experienced with
visa approval and border security processes as a result of
post-9/11 reforms and makes a number of recommendations for
improvement." See:

http://www.csis.org/hs/051005_whitepaper.pdf


HANS BETHE IN WAR AND PEACE

The October issue of Physics Today is devoted to the achievements of
the late physicist Hans Bethe.

In one article, Richard Garwin and Kurt Gottfried recall Bethe as a
scientist-activist.

"Hans Bethe spent a lifetime enhancing the security of his adopted
homeland--initially designing its nuclear bombs, but ultimately
warning presidents and the public to guard against the hazards of
such bombs."

See "Hans in War and Peace" by Richard L. Garwin and Kurt Gottfried,
Physics Today, October 2005:

http://www.physicstoday.org/vol-58/iss-10/p52.html



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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 96
October 11, 2005


** ISOO SYMPOSIUM ON CLASSIFICATION POLICY
** Q AND A WITH NEGROPONTE
** AMICUS BRIEF URGES SCRUTINY OF SECRECY CLAIMS
** SELECTED CRS REPORTS
** THE ART OF SECRECY


ISOO SYMPOSIUM ON CLASSIFICATION POLICY

The Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO) will hold a
public symposium at the National Archives on October 18 to mark
the tenth anniversary of an executive order that initiated
significant changes in the national security classification
system.

Executive Order 12958, which took effect in October 1995,
triggered an avalanche of declassification of historically
valuable records that surpassed one billion pages last year. It
also created bureaucratic innovations like the Interagency
Security Classification Appeals Panel that has served as an
alternate venue for members of the public to challenge agency
classification decisions.

But the executive order did little or nothing to combat the
systemic overclassification that the 9/11 Commission and others
identified as a flaw in the nation's security.

In fact, the order, amended by President Bush in 2003, has
permitted a massive expansion of classification activity in
recent years. This, in turn, has contributed to the erosion of
government accountability and the impoverishment of public
deliberation on matters of war and peace, humane treatment of
enemy prisoners, and government surveillance, among other
topics.

The ISOO symposium brings together representatives of government
agencies, journalists, academics and public interest groups to
assess the state of classification policy today. For more
information, see:

http://www.archives.gov/press/press-releas...06/nr06-01.html


Q AND A WITH NEGROPONTE

The record of the confirmation hearing of John D. Negroponte to
be Director of National Intelligence, which has just been
published, provides some new scraps of information about his
understanding of the Director's role and his views on various
intelligence policy issues.

Since taking office, DNI Negroponte has kept a low profile as he
quietly consolidated power over the massive U.S. intelligence
bureaucracy. The record of his April 12, 2005 hearing before
the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence provides a large
fraction of his oral and written public statements on
intelligence, including answers to pre-hearing questions and
post-hearing questions for the record.

What happens if the DNI wishes to terminate a national
intelligence program that the Secretary of Defense wants to
preserve? (In the case of a DoD program, the President
decides.) Where does the DNI stand on disclosure of the
aggregate intelligence budget, as recommended by the 9/11
Commission and endorsed last year by the Senate? (He would be
willing to study it, but "The President made clear his
opposition to declassification.")

These and many other such matters are discussed in "Nomination of
Ambassador John D. Negroponte to be Director of National
Intelligence," Senate Intelligence Committee, S. Hrg. 109-79,
April 12, 2005:

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


AMICUS BRIEF URGES SCRUTINY OF SECRECY CLAIMS

The Supreme Court should critically examine government claims
that national security secrecy requires the dismissal of the
lawsuit brought by FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds, several
public interest groups argued in an amicus brief filed with the
Court on October 10.

Citing the growing consensus within the government that too much
information is classified, the brief argues that simple judicial
deference to classification claims is inappropriate.

"We are asking courts to take a harder look," said Meredith
Fuchs, General Counsel at the National Security Archive and
principal author of the amicus brief.

See "Archive and Openness Advocates Urge Supreme Court: Tell
Lower Courts to Scrutinize Government Secrecy Claims":

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20051010/index.htm


SELECTED CRS REPORTS

Some new or newly acquired reports of the Congressional Research
Service obtained by Secrecy News include the following:

"Renditions: Constraints Imposed by Laws on Torture," updated
September 22, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32890.pdf

"U.S. Military Operations in the Global War on Terrorism:
Afghanistan, Africa, the Philippines, and Colombia," August 26,
2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32758.pdf

"Presidential and Vice Presidential Succession: Overview and
Current Legislation," updated September 27, 2004:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL31761.pdf

"High-Threat Chemical Agents: Characteristics, Effects, and
Policy Implications," updated September 9, 2003:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/RL31861.pdf


THE ART OF SECRECY

Among the more peculiar artifacts of the culture of secrecy are
the wall posters produced and distributed by government agencies
in order to instill security awareness and promote compliance
with security requirements.

Many of these wall posters are simple-minded to an extreme, based
on weak puns or failed attempts at humor and combined with
mediocre production values. Occasionally, they achieve such a
intense concentration of stupidity that the viewer is helplessly
transported to another plane of existence.

A representative sample of security posters was collected and
introduced by Dan Dupont of InsideDefense.com who was
guest-blogging on DefenseTech.org here:

http://www.defensetech.org/archives/001862.html



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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 99
October 21, 2005


** FAILURE TO DECLASSIFY INTEL BUDGET TERMED "UNSATISFACTORY"
** LEE HAMILTON ON SECRECY
** F-16 FIGHTER AIRCRAFT FOR PAKISTAN
** DOD ON CONTRACTORS AND ARMED FORCES
** ZAWAHIRI TO ZARQAWI: THE ASPENS ARE TURNING


FAILURE TO DECLASSIFY INTEL BUDGET TERMED "UNSATISFACTORY"

In a progress report on the status of the recommendations made by
the 9/11 Commission, the former Commissioners rated Congress
"unsatisfactory" for failing to declassify the intelligence budget
total.

The final report of the bipartisan Commission last year had singled
out budget declassification as best place to begin combating the
excessive secrecy that has degraded the performance of U.S.
intelligence agencies (at page 416).

But not even the national catastrophe of September 11 proved
sufficient to dislodge the official prejudice in favor of
unfettered secrecy.

Ironically, the intelligence community has probably suffered more
than anyone from budget secrecy, as significant cuts to classified
intelligence spending were imposed in the 1990s without public
awareness or even the possibility of debate.

("In the 1990s, we suffered deep cuts in intelligence funding,"
DCIA Goss recalled on June 29, 2005.)

The proponents of budget secrecy thus bear a heavy burden of
responsibility for the steadily eroding quality of U.S.
intelligence.

Last year, the full Senate voted in favor of intelligence budget
disclosure, but the measure was opposed by the Bush White House
and rejected by most House Republicans. It was abandoned in a
House-Senate conference.

Now, the 9/11 Commission members urge in their new report,
"Congress should pass a separate appropriations act for
intelligence, making public the overall amounts being appropriated
from national intelligence and being assigned to the various
components of the intelligence community."

See "Report on the Status of 9/11 Commission Recommendations" from
the 9/11 Public Discourse Project, October 20:

http://www.9-11pdp.org/press/2005-10-20_report.pdf

A new critique of the Silberman-Robb Commission on WMD Intelligence
written by David Isenberg and published by the British American
Security Information Council is available here:

http://www.basicint.org/pubs/Research/05WMD.pdf


LEE HAMILTON ON SECRECY

"At a time when the U.S. intelligence community is under intense
scrutiny in the aftermath of 9/11 and the failure to find weapons
of mass destruction in Iraq, we only increase public skepticism
about our government by denying the public information," said Lee
H. Hamilton, the distinguished former Congressman and vice chair
of the 9/11 Commission.

Mr. Hamilton was the keynote speaker this week at a remarkable
symposium sponsored by the Information Security Oversight Office
(ISOO) to commemorate the tenth anniversary of Executive Order
12958 on national security classification.

Under other circumstances, many of Mr. Hamilton's remarks would be
considered truisms, e.g. "Information must be made available -- to
the maximum extent possible -- to the American people." But
today, such sentiments practically amount to a radical critique of
government policy.

See the text of his presentation here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/eprint/hamilton.pdf

The superb ISOO symposium offered genuinely diverse and strongly
argued perspectives, unresolved disagreements, and even a few
laughs.

For a partial account of one of the symposium panels, see
"Official: Secrecy decisions 'subjective'," by Shaun Waterman,
UPI, October 18:

http://www.upi.com/inc/view.php?StoryID=20...18-070909-6371r


F-16 FIGHTER AIRCRAFT FOR PAKISTAN

The United States may offer to sell Pakistan "up to 55 new and 25
used F-16" fighter aircraft, a newly updated Congressional
Research Service study says, citing unspecified "reports."

See "Pakistan-U.S. Relations, Congressional Research Service,
updated October 13, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/IB94041.pdf


DOD ON CONTRACTORS AND ARMED FORCES

A new Department of Defense Instruction defines "DoD policy and
procedures concerning DoD contractor personnel authorized to
accompany the U.S. Armed Forces."

Contractors deployed alongside U.S. military forces in Iraq and
elsewhere have assumed increasing responsibilities for military
tasks up to and including prisoner interrogation, but in doing so
they have also created legal, administrative and procedural
problems.

The new DoD Instruction attempts to bring some order to what has
occasionally been a chaotic situation and addresses, for example,
the conditions under which contractors may be armed.

The issuance of the Instruction earlier this month was first
reported by InsideDefense.com.

See DoD Instruction 3020.41, "Contractor Personnel Authorized to
Accompany the U.S. Armed Forces," October 3, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/dod/i3020_41.pdf


ZAWAHIRI TO ZARQAWI: THE ASPENS ARE TURNING

The letter purportedly written from Al Qaeda's Ayman al Zawahiri to
Abu Musab al Zarqawi and released October 11 by the Director of
National Intelligence has met with continuing skepticism and has
now entered the domain of spoofery.

The anomalous fact that the supposed letter to Zarqawi advises the
recipient, if in Fallujah, to "send greetings to Abu Musab Al
Zarqawi," noted last week in Secrecy News, was elaborated in a
Reuters story by David Morgan.

See "US Cannot Explain Suspicious Zawahri Letter Passage," October
14:

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N1460892.htm

The story was picked up appreciatively by Harry Shearer in his
satirical broadcast "Le Show" on October 16. An audio clip can be
found here (thanks to A):

http://tinyurl.com/ajtep

Taking it to the next level, T.A. Frank wrote his own letter from
Zawahiri to Zarqawi in the The New Republic:

"Please remember that here in Waziristan, out East, where you
train, the aspens will already be turning. They turn in clusters--
partly because their roots connect them, partly because a recent
volley of daisy-cutters has reduced them to charred stumps."

http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20051031&s=frank103105

U.S. intelligence analysts are not completely oblivious to the
peculiarities of the proffered Zawahiri letter.

A national security reporter who was briefed by senior intelligence
officials told Secrecy News:

"One hypothesis from the analysts is that the last line--about
giving regards to Zarqawi if in Fallujah--was a note to one of the
couriers who would have carried or transmitted the letter-- and
not, therefore, part of the letter addressed to Zarqawi. The
senior official said that he has 'rarely been more confident' that
the letter was indeed authored by Zawahiri, based on intelligence
from 'multiple' sources."


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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 101
October 31, 2005


** WHITE HOUSE NAMES NEW PFIAB MEMBERS
** FITZGERALD ON LEAKS AND THE ESPIONAGE ACT
** SECRET DHS TRANSPORTATION STRATEGY DRAWS FIRE
** SASC REPORT ON THE 2006 INTEL AUTHORIZATION ACT
** MISCELLANEOUS RESOURCES


WHITE HOUSE NAMES NEW PFIAB MEMBERS

President Bush has announced the names of a dozen individuals
whom he will appoint to the President's Foreign Intelligence
Advisory Board (PFIAB), the White House intelligence oversight
body.

Stephen Friedman, an investment banker and a previous PFIAB
member, will serve as the next PFIAB chairman. Other appointees
include former congressman Lee Hamilton and former National
Reconnaissance Office director Martin Faga. See the full list
in this October 27 White House announcement:

http://www.fas.org/irp/news/2005/10/wh102705.html

PFIAB "provides advice to the President concerning the quality
and adequacy of intelligence collection, of analysis and
estimates, of counterintelligence, and of other intelligence
activities. The PFIAB, through its Intelligence Oversight
Board, also advises the President on the legality of foreign
intelligence activities," according to a description on the
White House web site.

As an intelligence oversight mechanism, PFIAB is inherently
flimsy. It provides no public accountability to speak of.

Yet given the diminished state of congressional intelligence
oversight today, PFIAB has arguably become more important than
ever.

Recently, for example, the Electronic Privacy Information Center
(EPIC) was able to uncover a series of investigative violations
committed by the FBI because of a provision requiring agencies
to report such violations to the PFIAB's Intelligence Oversight
Board. There is no requirement that the violations be reported
to Congress.

"It's because of section 2.4 [of executive order 12863, requiring
reports to the PFIAB IOB] that we got the recent documents of
alleged abuse by the FBI under the Patriot Act," said Marc
Rotenberg of EPIC. See the documents here (3.1 MB PDF file):

http://www.epic.org/privacy/terrorism/usap...ot/foia/iob.pdf


FITZGERALD ON LEAKS AND THE ESPIONAGE ACT

The section of the Espionage Act that prohibits the unauthorized
disclosure of national defense information is "a difficult
statute to interpret," said Special Prosecutor Patrick
Fitzgerald. "It's... a statute you ought to carefully apply."

Mr. Fitzgerald, who announced the indictment of Vice Presidential
chief of staff I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby on perjury and other
charges last week, acknowledged widespread concerns about using
the Espionage Act to punish leaks to the media of classified
information, such as the identity of CIA officer Valerie Plame.

"I think there are people out there who would argue that you
would never use that [i.e. the Espionage Act] to prosecute the
transmission of classified information because they think that
would convert that statute into what is in England, the Official
Secrets Act."

"I don't buy that theory, but I do know you should be very
careful in applying that law because there are a lot of
interests that could be implicated in making sure that you pick
the right case to charge that statute," Mr. Fitzgerald said at
his October 28 press briefing on the Libby indictment.

Although the Espionage Act has not been invoked in Fitzgerald's
ongoing investigation, using it to punish leaks remains a live
issue in the prosecution of two former officials of the American
Israel Public Affairs Committee for allegedly mishandling
classified information. (See Secrecy News, 10/19/05).

The potential use of the Espionage Act to punish leakers was
addressed lately by Morton Halperin, myself and Larry Johnson in
"Complexity of Prosecuting Leakers Stirs Concern" by Larry
Abramson, NPR Morning Edition, October 28:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4979174


SECRET DHS TRANSPORTATION STRATEGY DRAWS FIRE

In an increasingly familiar complaint, the Department of Homeland
Security was criticized for classifying its National Strategy
for Transportation Security, a move which rendered it
inaccessible to state and local governments, emergency
responders and the public.

"What use is it if the people who have to adapt to it don't know
anything about its existence or what it says?" asked former Sen.
Slade Gorton (R-WA) in testimony before a subcommittee of the
Senate Judiciary Committee last week.

"Are there elements in an overall transportation plan that we
shouldn't broadcast to the world?" Sen. Gorton continued. "I'm
sure there are."

"But the existence of the plan and what people who are in the
private sector need to know about the plan in order to carry out
its recommendations-- of course they shouldn't be classified."

"The difficulty here in the United States... is the ease with
which information is classified; the temptation once it's
classified not to share it, often even with other agencies and
the like; and the extreme difficulty of getting declassified.
This is just a particular example," Sen. Gorton said.

The controversy was reported in "U.S. in dark on security plan"
by Lisa Friedman, Los Angeles Daily News, October 27:

http://www.dailynews.com/news/ci_3154426


SASC REPORT ON THE 2006 INTEL AUTHORIZATION ACT

The pending intelligence authorization act for fiscal year 2006
was reviewed and modified by the Senate Armed Service Committee
in a new report on the bill.

Most of the Committee's changes are classified, but the
unclassified report describes several actions that generally
reflect Defense Department interests.

The amended bill would specify that the authority of the Director
of National Intelligence over human intelligence does not extend
to tactical intelligence; would limit the authority of the
inspector general of the intelligence community with respect to
matters within the jurisdiction of the Pentagon inspector
general; and would advance a controversial freedom of
information exemption for operational files of the Defense
Intelligence Agency. It would also shorten the duration of a
pilot program permitting intelligence agency access to official
Privacy Act records from four years to two years.

See the Senate Armed Services Committee report on the 2006
intelligence authorization act, Sen. Rept. 109-173, October 27,
2005, here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2005_rpt/srpt109-173.html


MISCELLANEOUS RESOURCES

A variety of noteworthy publications, some widely reported and
some not, have been issued in recent days, including these:

The National Intelligence Strategy of the United States, which
incongruously proposes "the growth of democracy" as an
intelligence objective, was issued by the Director of National
Intelligence on October 25:

http://www.fas.org/irp/news/2005/10/dni102505.html

The indictment of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby on perjury,
obstruction of justice and other charges was announced in an
October 28 news release:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2005/10/libby.pdf

A copy of the indictment itself is here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/jud/libby_indict.pdf

U.S. policy towards Africa during the Nixon Administration is the
subject of a new volume of declassified government records
published in the State Department's official Foreign Relations
of the United States series. The full text, published only
online, is here:

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/frus/nixon/e5/

Foreign language capability and regional expertise shall "be
considered critical competencies essential to the DoD mission,"
a new Department of Defense Directive states. See DoD Directive
5160.41E, "Defense Language Program," October 21, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/dod/d5160_41.pdf

Government access to criminal history records to determine an
individual's suitability for participation in highly classified
special access programs is addressed in DoD Instruction 1304.23,
"Acquisition and Use of Criminal History Record Information for
Military Recruiting Purposes," October 7, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/dod/i1304_23.pdf

The pilots and support personnel who engaged in paramilitary
operations as part of the CIA "proprietary" known as "Civil Air
Transport" and "Air America" from 1946 through 1976 are not
considered to have been "active duty" military personnel for
purposes of benefits provided by the Department of Veterans
Affairs, the Secretary of the Air Force has determined. See
this October 18 Federal Register notice:

http://www.fas.org/irp/news/2005/10/fr101805.html



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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 102
November 2, 2005


** SECRECY NEWS NEEDS YOUR HELP
** SENATE MOVES INTO RARE CLOSED SESSION
** A LEXICON OF SECRECY
** AIR FORCE GLOSSARY
** A MILITARY GUIDE TO TERRORISM IN THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY


SECRECY NEWS NEEDS YOUR HELP

The Federation of American Scientists Project on Government Secrecy
needs your support.

The FAS government secrecy web site was cited repeatedly yesterday on
Cable News Network after the Senate went into secret session.

You can "learn more about the secret sessions we've been talking
about," reporter Jacki Schechner told CNN's Wolf Blitzer two or
three times throughout the afternoon, "through this website --
FAS.org. This is the Federation of American Scientists. On the left
hand side of the page, there's a link for government
secrecy....It'll tell you everything you need to know about secret
sessions."

It's no secret. On a normal weekday (without prompting from CNN),
more than 70,000 distinct visitors come to the FAS web site to view
hundreds of thousands of archived documents. Over 11,000
individuals now subscribe to Secrecy News directly, and innumerable
others receive it through secondary distribution.

But the future of this enterprise is not assured.

Several of the philanthropic foundations that have provided the
principal support for the FAS Project on Government Secrecy for the
past 15 years have reduced or withdrawn their funding of our work,
or redirected their support for open government advocacy to other
organizations.

If you derive value from our publications and our web site, and if
you wish to do so in the future, please help to sustain our work.

Tax-deductible donations may be made online here:

http://www.fas.org/static/contrib_sec.jsp

Checks (payable to Federation of American Scientists, earmarked for
Secrecy News) may also be mailed to FAS Secrecy News, 1717 K Street
NW, Suite 209, Washington, DC 20036.


SENATE MOVES INTO RARE CLOSED SESSION

In an extraordinary procedural maneuver that exposed partisan
tensions over intelligence oversight, Senate Democrats forced the
Senate into a rare closed session for more than two hours until they
won agreement from the majority to get a progress report on the
status of the Senate Intelligence Committee's long-deferred review
of pre-war intelligence on Iraq.

The Senate floor debate preceding and following the closed session
featured unusually blunt statements on the quality of intelligence
oversight of a sort not usually voiced in official proceedings.

Sen. Jay Rockefeller, Vice Chair of the Intelligence Committee, said
the Bush White House had orchestrated a deliberate evasion of
oversight responsibilities by the Republican majority.

"It is apparent to me that the White House has sent down the edict to
the majority... that the Congress is not to carry out its oversight
responsibilities in detention, interrogation, and rendition matters,
... as it would bring uncomfortable attention to the legal decisions
and opinions coming from the White House and the Justice Department
in the operation of various programs," Sen. Rockefeller said.

"We have agreed to do what we already agreed to do," replied Sen. Pat
Roberts, the Intelligence Committee Chair, "that is, to complete as
best we can phase II of the Intelligence Committee's review of
prewar intelligence in reference to Iraq."

A task force of six Senators will report by November 14 on the
anticipated completion date of the Intelligence Committee review.

See the full text of the November 1 Senate floor debate before and
after the historic closed session here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2005_cr/s110105.html

"Since 1929, the Senate has held 53 secret sessions, generally for
reasons of national security," according to a 2004 report on the
subject by the Congressional Research Service, whose availability on
the FAS web site was noted repeatedly on CNN during the course of
the secret Senate session.

See "Secret Sessions of Congress: A Brief Historical Overview,"
updated October 21, 2004:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/RS20145.pdf


A LEXICON OF SECRECY

The very words by which official secrecy policy is formulated and
carried out are often obscure to the outsider. They embody a latent
knowledge of statute and regulation, policy and practice that cannot
be inferred from the words themselves.

An excellent new publication helps "the outsider," i.e. the ordinary
citizen of the United States, to comprehend the vocabulary of
government information policy, and to discover its genealogical
roots in official documents.

From "access" and "accountability" to "Yankee White" and "Xn," author
Susan Maret, an adjunct professor of library science at the
University of Denver, provides a concise definition of terms as well
as links to official sources.

Dr. Maret's Lexicon is published for the first time on the FAS web
site.

See "On Their Own Terms: A Lexicon with an Emphasis on
Information-Related Terms Produced by the U.S. Federal Government"
by Susan Maret, Ph.D., November 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/library/maret.pdf


AIR FORCE GLOSSARY

Another notable contribution to the understanding of official
government language is a newly updated glossary of Air Force
terminology.

"Airmen should be able to clearly articulate their thoughts, ideas,
and commands to each other by using a common operational language,"
according to the glossary, which is published by the U.S. Air Force.

Roger that.

See "Air Force Glossary," Air Force Doctrine Document 1-2, 6
September 2005:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/usaf/afdd1-2.pdf


A MILITARY GUIDE TO TERRORISM IN THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY

A comprehensive military textbook on terrorism has just been reissued
by the U.S. Army.

Based on open sources, the 280 page volume (with four large
supplements), provides a synthetic account of the nature and history
of terrorism, its operational characteristics, the threat it poses
to U.S. military forces, and the future of terrorism.

The publication was prepared "under the direction of the U.S. Army
Training and Doctrine Command, Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff for
Intelligence-Threats."

A copy was obtained by Secrecy News.

See "A Military Guide to Terrorism in the Twenty-First Century,"
version 3.0, 15 August 2005:

http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/terrorism/index.html



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

Court Won't Hear Anonymous Sources Case

Updated 9:10 AM ET November 4, 2005
http://dailynews.att.net/cgi-bin/news?e=pr...8dlmo2o1&src=ap

WASHINGTON (AP) - A divided federal appeals court for a second time has rejected four journalists' appeal of a judge's order directing them to testify about their confidential sources as part of nuclear scientist Wen Ho Lee's lawsuit against the government.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit refused, by a 4-4 vote, to grant a rehearing of the journalists' case before the full court. A majority of the court's 10 judges was required to grant a rehearing; two judges recused themselves.

One who favored hearing the case, Judge David S. Tatel, wrote in his dissent that Lee's claim for compensation pales in importance to people's right to know about what was believed to be nuclear espionage.

"It's hard to imagine how his (Lee's) interest could outweigh the public's interest in protecting journalists' ability to report without reservation on sensitive issues of national security," Tatel wrote.

There were no written rulings from the judges who voted against hearing the case.

U.S. District Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson held the reporters in contempt of court for refusing to identify their sources for stories about Lee, who in 1999 was suspected of spying while he worked at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico.

A three-judge appellate panel upheld Jackson's ruling in June.

Lee is seeking the identity of the sources for his lawsuit against the departments of Energy and Justice. He alleges the agencies gave reporters private information about him and suggested he was a suspect in the investigation into possible theft of nuclear secrets.

All but one of 59 counts against Lee eventually were dismissed and then-President Clinton apologized for Lee's treatment. He was never charged with espionage. He pleaded guilty to one felony count of mishandling nuclear weapons information.

The reporters are H. Josef Hebert of The Associated Press, James Risen of the New York Times, Robert Drogin of the Los Angeles Times and Pierre Thomas, formerly of CNN and now of ABC. The court's decision was released Thursday.

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 103
November 4, 2005


** REGULATING DETAINEE INTERROGATION (CRS)
** WORLD LAW BULLETIN
** THANKS
** PHILIP AGEE ON AGENT IDENTITIES
** NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION PLAN (DHS)
** A HISTORY OF U.S. ARMY BANDS


REGULATING DETAINEE INTERROGATION: A CRS ANALYSIS

The amendment introduced by Senator John McCain to regulate
the interrogation of enemy detainees and to prohibit their
"cruel, degrading and inhuman treatment," which was
overwhelmingly approved in the U.S. Senate on October 5 and
awaits a House-Senate conference, is analyzed by the
Congressional Research Service in a new report.

See "Overview and Analysis of Senate Amendment Concerning
Interrogation of Detainees," November 2, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/RS22312.pdf

Concern over U.S. policy on detainees has been galvanized
worldwide most recently by a Washington Post story by Dana
Priest on November 2 that revealed the existence of secret
prisons operated by the Central Intelligence Agency in
Eastern Europe and elsewhere.

"We are told that not a single member of the Appropriations
Committee and not a single member of the staff have been told
by the CIA that that had been going on," said Rep. David Obey
in a statement on the House floor November 3.


WORLD LAW BULLETIN

The World Law Bulletin is a monthly publication of the
Directorate of Legal Research at the Law Library of Congress.
It provides "over 500 updates on foreign law developments
annually."

But it only provides them to members of Congress and their
staff. Like that other Library of Congress organization, the
Congressional Research Service, the Directorate of Legal
Research does not provide the public with direct access to
its products.

This ought to change. But such a change will require the
permission and the direction of the Joint Committee on the
Library of Congress.

The Joint Committee has been notoriously reluctant to permit
direct public access to CRS reports, forcing the public to
adopt other means to acquire them.

But the products of the Law Library such as the World Law
Bulletin are closer to pure research and typically possess
even less advisory content than do CRS reports, and it may
therefore be easier to win official approval for their broad
publication.

In the meantime, a recent copy of the World Law Bulletin, from
May 2005, may be found here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/wlb0505.pdf

On rare occasions, the LOC Directorate of Legal Research has
received permission to publish some of its other reports.
The most recent case was an exhaustive 400 page study on the
Hague Convention on International Child Abduction, dated June
2004, and available here (2.5 MB):

http://www.loc.gov/law/public/reports/child_abduction.pdf


THANKS

Thanks to those Secrecy News readers who responded to our
appeal in the last issue with financial support and
heartening words. We'll persevere.


PHILIP AGEE ON AGENT IDENTITIES

Philip Agee, the renegade CIA officer whose efforts to
publicly expose CIA employees working under cover around the
world in the 1970s led to the enactment of the Intelligence
Identities Protection Act of 1982, says he now opposes such
activities and specifically disdains the disclosure of CIA
officer Valerie Plame's name by senior White House officials.

"I had my reasons for revealing the identities of agents and
the White House had different ones," Agee said. "However, I
am now categorically opposed to making their names public."

Agee's remarks were quoted in the Greek newspaper To Vima tis
Kiriakis on November 2, as translated by the CIA's Foreign
Broadcast Information Service.


NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION PLAN (DHS)

The Department of Homeland Security has issued a draft
National Infrastructure Protection Plan for public comment by
December 5.

The 175 page document, announced in the Federal Register on
November 3, is intended to provide a "comprehensive,
integrated national plan for the protection of critical
infrastructures and key resources."

A copy of the draft Plan, with instructions and a form for
submitting comments, may be found on this page:

http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/dhs/index.html

The document is fairly dense and its precise import is a
little hard to discern.

Rick Blum of the advocacy coalition OpenTheGovernment.org
pointed to a table on page 65 where, under the heading
"Privacy and Constitutional Freedoms," it reads "No actions
under this category."

"I think that sums it up," he quipped.


A HISTORY OF U.S. ARMY BANDS

Several months ago (05/19/05), Secrecy News published an item
about military bands that some readers considered to be
insufficiently enthusiastic.

"I have just two words for you," wrote one gentleman. "Glenn
Miller."

By way of penance, we offer a newly revised and astonishingly
detailed History of U.S. Army Bands, published for use in
courses offered by the U.S. Army.

"The first mention of a military musical organization used in
the connection of battle in the United States Army occurred
at the celebration held after Ethan Allen and his Green
Mountain Boys captured Fort Ticonderoga on 10 May 1775."

"A fife and Drum Corps performed at this celebration."

See "A History of U.S. Army Bands," U.S. Army Element, School
of Music, Norfolk, VA, updated October 2005:

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



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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 104
November 7, 2005


** LEVIN: NEW INFO SHOWS WHITE HOUSE MISSTATED IRAQ INTEL
** LATEST ISSUES OF WORLD LAW BULLETIN
** INADVERTENT DISCLOSURES OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS INFO
** LEAK OF THE WEEK
** MILITARY MEDICINE


LEVIN: NEW INFO SHOWS WHITE HOUSE MISSTATED IRAQ INTEL

Even as the Bush Administration was claiming that Iraq aided
al Qaeda's chemical and biological weapons efforts, the source
for those claims was deemed unreliable by U.S. intelligence,
according to a release from Senator Carl Levin.

"Newly declassified information from the Defense Intelligence
Agency (DIA) from February 2002 shows that, at the same time the
Administration was making its case for attacking Iraq, the DIA did
not trust or believe the source of the Administration's repeated
assertions that Iraq had provided al-Qaeda with chemical and
biological weapons training," the November 6 news release said.

"Additional newly declassified information from the DIA also
undermines the Administration's broader claim that there were
strong links between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda."

A copy of Senator Levin's release and the supporting documents,
which were reported in the New York Times and the Washington Post
on November 6, may be found here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/news/2005/11/levin110605.html

Pentagon spokesman Lawrence DiRita, quoted on CNN, said that the
DIA report Levin cited was taken "out of context, without the
analysis or any other indication as to how it may have factored
in."

Democratic members of the Senate Intelligence Committee outlined
their expectations for the conduct of an investigation into the
Administration's handling of pre-war intelligence at a November 4
press briefing. See this release:

http://www.fas.org/irp/news/2005/11/rock110405.html


LATEST ISSUES OF WORLD LAW BULLETIN

The three most recent issues of World Law Bulletin, produced by the
Law Library of Congress but not publicly disseminated, have been
obtained by Secrecy News.

Topics addressed include "Israel's Construction of a Barrier in the
West Bank and the Impact of the International Court of Justice
Advisory Opinion" (October 2005), "Women's Rights Under Shari'ah
(Islamic Law)" (August 2005), "Recent Developments in the European
Union," and much more. See:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/wlb/index.html


INADVERTENT DISCLOSURES OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS INFO

Between May and August 2005, Department of Energy reviewers
examined approximately 2.9 million pages that had been
declassified and made publicly available at the National Archives,
and they found 140 pages containing classified nuclear weapons
information that should not have been disclosed.

DOE described its findings in general terms in an August 2005
report to Congress that has just been released in declassified
form. See:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/doe/inadvertent18.pdf

DOE expects to complete its review of publicly released records at
the National Archives next year, officials told historians at a
meeting in College Park last week.


LEAK OF THE WEEK

Speaking at a conference in San Antonio, Deputy Director of
National Intelligence Mary Margaret Graham said that the total
U.S. intelligence budget is now $44 billion, U.S. News and World
Report wrote in its November 14 Washington Whispers column.

See "This Time We Know Who the Leaker Is" (the third item):

http://tinyurl.com/b92e5

According to the CIA, disclosure of such aggregate budget
information causes serious damage to U.S. national security and
compromises intelligence sources and methods.

But it hard to find anyone who seriously believes that. The
bipartisan 9/11 Commission recommended that the aggregate and
individual agency intelligence budgets be routinely disclosed
each year.


MILITARY MEDICINE

A selection of military manuals on emergency medicine and related
topics, from war psychiatry to emergency childbirth, can now be
found on the FAS web site.

Most of this material replicates standard first aid literature, but
it has also has some features that are unique to the military or
otherwise distinctive.

"Army Field Manual 8-50 ('Bandaging and Splinting') is almost 50
years old, but it is the most comprehensive reference on applying
bandages and splints that I know of," said Paul Schumacher, who
shared his copy of the document.

"Only a 4000 year old Egyptian mummy maker could have written a
better manual on this subject," he said.

See:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/milmed/index.html



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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 105
November 9, 2005


** LEAK INQUIRY SOUGHT IN SECRET PRISON STORY
** NO LEAK INQUIRY SOUGHT IN INTEL BUDGET DISCLOSURE
** CIA RESISTS RELEASE OF JFK ASSASSINATION RECORDS
** DOD DIRECTIVE ON INTELLIGENCE INTERROGATION
** NAVY DIRECTIVE ON WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTION
** A BRIEF HISTORY OF US COMMUNICATIONS INTELLIGENCE


LEAK INQUIRY SOUGHT IN SECRET PRISON STORY

Republican leaders of Congress yesterday called upon the congressional
intelligence committees to conduct a joint inquiry into the disclosure
that the CIA is detaining and interrogating prisoners at secret
locations abroad, as reported November 2 by Dana Priest of the
Washington Post.

"As you know, if accurate, such an egregious disclosure could have
long-term and far-reaching damaging and dangerous consequences, and
will imperil our efforts to protect the American people and our
homeland from terrorist attacks," wrote Senate Majority Leader Bill
Frist and Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert.

"The leaking of classified information by employees of the United
States government appears to have increased in recent years,
establishing a dangerous trend that, if not addressed swiftly and
firmly, likely will worsen," they wrote.

See their November 4 letter (signed November 8) here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2005/11/leaklet.pdf


NO LEAK INQUIRY SOUGHT IN INTEL BUDGET DISCLOSURE

As far as could be determined, no official inquiry has been initiated
into the public disclosure of the total size of the classified U.S.
intelligence budget by a senior intelligence official, first reported
by U.S. News and World Report this week.

No complaints have been filed, no polygraph exams will be administered,
no one will be fired.

Far from causing "serious damage to the national security," which is
the standard for Secret-level classification, this leak just doesn't
matter -- which is another way of saying that this information should
not be classified.

The secrecy of the total intelligence budget figure is widely viewed as
a charade that has nothing to do with real national security concerns.
As such, it is the foremost example of a large but unquantified
volume of needlessly classified information that is wrongly withheld
from the public.

See "Official Reveals Budget for U.S. Intelligence" by Scott Shane, New
York Times, November 8:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/08/politics/08budget.html

See also "Intelligence Budget is $44 Billion" by Stephen Losey, Federal
Times, November 8:

http://federaltimes.com/index2.php?S=1227613


CIA RESISTS RELEASE OF JFK ASSASSINATION RECORDS

More than 40 years after the JFK assassination, the Central Intelligence
Agency is refusing to release certain assassination-related records
that it holds.

"We are asking for discovery of JFK assassination records related to
the late George Joannides, chief of the Psychological Warfare Branch
of the CIA's Miami Station in 1963," said Jefferson Morley, a
researcher and Washington Post writer who is pursuing the CIA records.

"The CIA has acknowledged that it has an unspecified number of
documents about Joannides' activities in the summer and fall of 1963
but says it will not release any of them for reasons of 'national
security'," he explained.

A conference on the matter will be held at DC District Court next
Wednesday.

The case has garnered significant outside support.

"As published authors of divergent views on the assassination of
President John F. Kennedy, we say the agency's position is spurious
and untenable," wrote some two dozen assassination specialists in a
joint letter on the Morley case.

("It's probably the first time ever that George Lardner and Oliver
Stone agreed on a JFK question," Morley told Secrecy News.)

The CIA refusal "defies the will of Congress. It obscures the public
record on a subject of enduring national interest. It encourages
conspiracy mongering. And it undermines public confidence in the
intelligence community at a time when collective security requires the
opposite."

See "Blocked," New York Review of Books, August 11, 2005:

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/18193


DOD DIRECTIVE ON INTELLIGENCE INTERROGATION

"All captured or detained personnel shall be treated humanely, and all
intelligence interrogations, debriefings, or tactical questioning to
gain intelligence from captured or detained personnel shall be
conducted humanely, in accordance with applicable law and policy."

So states a new Department of Defense Directive issued last week.

The directive applies to all DoD personnel and contractors, but not to
other agencies such as the CIA.

It was first reported by the New York Times.

See "DoD Intelligence Interrogations, Detainee Debriefings, and
Tactical Questioning," DoD Directive 3115.09, 3 November 2005:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/dod/d3115_09.pdf


NAVY DIRECTIVE ON WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTION

"No person may take, or threaten to take, an unfavorable personnel
action (including a referral for mental health evaluation), or
withhold, or threaten to withhold, a favorable personnel action in
reprisal against any member of the Armed Forces for making or
preparing to make a protected communication, including an allegation
of sexual harassment or unlawful discrimination, to one authorized to
receive the communication."

This is U.S. Navy policy as defined in a new Instruction from the
Secretary of the Navy.

See "Military Whistleblower Reprisal Protection," SecNavInst 5370.7C,
14 October 2005:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/navy/secnavinst/5370_7c.pdf


A BRIEF HISTORY OF US COMMUNICATIONS INTELLIGENCE

The National Security Agency has reviewed and declassified most -- but
not all -- of a 1952 history of communications intelligence.

"Prior to 1917 United States activity in the field of Communications
Intelligence was sporadic, and there is little record of it," begins
the study, which was originally classified TOP SECRET SUEDE.

A newly declassified version was released by NSA to FOIA requester
Michael Ravnitzky on October 27.

See "A Brief History of Communications Intelligence in the United
States" by Capt. Laurance F. Safford, USN (Ret.), March 1952:

http://www.fas.org/irp/nsa/safford.pdf



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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 106
November 14, 2005


** EPA PROPOSES TO REDUCE TOXIC RELEASE REPORTING
** PANDEMIC INFLUENZA: DOMESTIC PREPAREDNESS EFFORTS (CRS)
** THE MOSAIC THEORY AND THE FOIA
** AIR FORCE INSTRUCTION ON INFORMATION SECURITY
** THE TUPAC SHAKUR RECORDS COLLECTION ACT
** NSA AFFIDAVIT ON UFO SECRECY (1980)


EPA PROPOSES TO REDUCE TOXIC RELEASE REPORTING

The Environmental Protection Agency would sharply curtail public
reporting of releases of toxic chemicals into the environment
under a proposal published in the Federal Register on October 4.

The EPA's Toxic Release Inventory (TRI), which was created in the
wake of the 1984 Bhopal disaster in India, is a landmark
achievement of the community "right to know" movement that
pressed for improved public reporting of toxic chemical hazards.

It has functioned successfully for nearly two decades, leading to
significant reductions in releases of toxic chemicals.

But now EPA proposes to drastically reduce the data collected and
reported in the Toxic Release Inventory, beginning with a move to
eliminate the current annual reporting requirement in favor of
reporting every other year.

Environmentalists and open government advocates decry the
proposal.

The shift to every-other-year reporting alone "would cut the TRI
program in half," said Sean Moulton of OMB Watch.

Other changes to the threshold for reporting, he said, would mean
that "pollution information from almost 4,000 facilities would
essentially disappear."

In its October 4 Federal Register notice, the EPA said these
changes are needed "to reduce the reporting burden associated
with TRI reporting requirements."

Critical background on the EPA proposal may be found in this
Action Alert from OMB Watch:

http://www.ombwatch.org/article/articleview/3117/1/396

The web site of the EPA's Toxic Release Inventory Program is here:

http://www.epa.gov/tri/


PANDEMIC INFLUENZA: DOMESTIC PREPAREDNESS EFFORTS (CRS)

A new report from the Congressional Research Service discusses
preparedness for pandemic influenza, the impact of previous
pandemics, and the possibility of a pandemic caused by the H5N1
avian flu strain.

"If a flu pandemic were to occur in the next several years, the
U.S. response would be affected by the limited availability of a
vaccine (the best preventive measure for flu), as well as by
limited availability of certain drugs used to treat severe flu
infections, and by the general lack of surge capacity within our
healthcare system."

At the direction of Congress, CRS does not make its reports
directly available to the public. A copy of the new report was
obtained by Secrecy News.

See "Pandemic Influenza: Domestic Preparedness Efforts," November
10, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/RL33145.pdf


THE MOSAIC THEORY AND THE FOIA

A new law review article examines the increasing use of the
"mosaic theory" by government agencies to circumvent the
disclosure requirements of the Freedom of Information Act.

The "mosaic theory" refers to the notion that a compilation of
unclassified items of information may, in the aggregate, tend to
disclose a sensitive or classified fact, and that restrictions on
disclosure of the compilation of unclassified information may
therefore be warranted.

"After years of doctrinal stasis and practical anonymity, federal
agencies began asserting the [mosaic] theory more aggressively
after 9/11, thereby testing the limits of executive secrecy and
of judicial deference," writes David E. Pozen in the forthcoming
issue of the Yale Law Journal.

"Though essentially valid, the mosaic theory has been applied in
ways that are unfalsifiable, in tension with the text and purpose
of FOIA, and susceptible to abuse and overbreadth."

The author reviews the development of the mosaic theory and its
application in recent Freedom of Information Act litigation,
concluding with a call for increased judicial scrutiny of mosaic
claims.

See "The Mosaic Theory, National Security, and the Freedom of
Information Act" by David E. Pozen, Yale Law Journal, Vol. 115,
No. 3, 2005 (preprint):

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=820326


AIR FORCE INSTRUCTION ON INFORMATION SECURITY

The U.S. Air Force has updated its information security program to
reflect the provisions of the amended executive order on national
security classification and other policy changes.

The new Air Force Instruction "prescribes and explains how to
manage and protect unclassified controlled information and
classified information."

See Air Force Instruction 31-401, "Information Security Program
Management," 1 November 2005 (87 pages, 1.9 MB PDF):

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/usaf/afi31-401.pdf


THE TUPAC SHAKUR RECORDS COLLECTION ACT

A bill modeled on the John F. Kennedy Assassination Records
Collection Act would require the U.S. National Archives to
establish a "Tupac Amaru Shakur Records Collection."

The bill, introduced by Rep. Cynthia McKinney, is based on the
premise that "all Government records related to the life and
death of Tupac Amaru Shakur should be preserved for historical
and governmental purposes."

Tupac Shakur "was a highly influential, best-selling American hip
hop artist, considered by many to be one of the greatest and most
legendary rappers of all time," according to an entry in
Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia. He was killed in a drive-by
shooting in Las Vegas in 1996.

Rep. McKinney's bill, which has no co-sponsors and no identifiable
support, is unlikely to become law.

A copy of the "Tupac Amaru Shakur Records Collection Act of
2005," H.R. 4210, introduced November 2, 2005, is posted here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2005/hr4210.html


NSA AFFIDAVIT ON UFO SECRECY (1980)

A classified affidavit originally filed by the National Security
Agency in a 1980 lawsuit to justify the withholding of records on
unidentified flying objects has now been largely declassified.

In response to the lawsuit filed by Citizens Against Unidentified
Flying Objects Secrecy for records pertaining to UFO phenomena,
the NSA sought to withhold numerous records.

The majority of these records, explained NSA official Eugene F.
Yeates in 1980 in his affidavit, were communications intelligence
reports that "are the product of intercept operations directed
against foreign government controlled communications systems
within their territorial boundaries."

"Revealing the contents of these reports would disclose the
capability of NSA to target these government controlled
communication systems."

The affidavit, originally classified Top Secret Umbra, was
released in redacted form on November 3 in response to a Freedom
of Information Act request from researcher Michael Ravnitzky.

See "In Camera Affidavit of Eugene F. Yeates," Citizens Against
UFO Secrecy v. National Security Agency, October 9, 1980
(redacted), here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/nsa/yeates-ufo.pdf



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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 107
November 17, 2005


** "LEAKED" INTELLIGENCE BUDGET FIGURE MAY BE WRONG
** AIR INTELLIGENCE AGENCY 2004 BUDGET DISCLOSED
** SECRET SESSIONS OF THE HOUSE AND SENATE (CRS)
** US MILITARY OVERSEAS BASING (CRS)


"LEAKED" INTELLIGENCE BUDGET FIGURE MAY BE WRONG

The public disclosure of the total intelligence budget figure
by Deputy Director of National Intelligence Mary Margaret
Graham at a conference two weeks ago produced outrage from
some legislators who favor budget secrecy and triggered an
official inquiry by the Office of the DNI.

But the squabble over the disclosure is doubly odd since the
reported $44 billion intelligence spending figure, which would
be harmless if accurate, may be incorrect.

"You can read these numbers a lot of different ways," one
intelligence official told United Press International. "But I
cannot put together any set of budgets in any configuration
that comes to that ($44 billion) number."

See "Leak Probe on Intelligence Budget Slip" by Shaun Waterman,
UPI, November 14:

http://www.upi.com/inc/view.php?StoryID=20...08-070926-9450r

It is possible that the actual source of Deputy Director
Graham's "disclosure" was a recent Washington Post story.

The 2006 intelligence authorization act "carries about $44
billion for the 15 [intelligence] agencies and Office of the
Director of National Intelligence," wrote Walter Pincus in
"GOP Senators Look to Shift Spy Management From CIA,"
Washington Post, October 1, 2005.

The Post figure refers to the 2006 intelligence budget
authorization, not the amount of money actually appropriated,
which is likely to be different.


AIR INTELLIGENCE AGENCY 2004 BUDGET DISCLOSED

Aside from formal secrecy, some intelligence agency budgets are
shielded from prying eyes by baroque bookkeeping practices
that nearly defy comprehension.

For example, the budget of the US Air Force Air Intelligence
Agency was nearly $1.3 billion in 2004, according to a newly
disclosed Air Force briefing.

But this total budget figure melded funding streams from
multiple external sources, the briefing explained.

"Two-thirds of our funding comes from non-Air Force
congressional appropriations," including three National
Foreign Intelligence Programs: the Consolidated Cryptologic
Program (NSA), the General Defense Intelligence Program (DIA),
and the National Imagery and Mapping Agency (now NGA).

A copy of the unclassified briefing was provided to Secrecy
News by William M. Arkin, who writes the Early Warning blog
for the Washington Post (blogs.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning).

See "AIA Mission Briefing," Air Intelligence Agency, February
2004 (PowerPoint file):

http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/usaf/aia2004.ppt


SECRET SESSIONS OF THE HOUSE AND SENATE (CRS)

The Congressional Research Service has updated its accounts of
secret sessions of Congress to reflect the secret session of
the Senate on November 1 that addressed pre-war intelligence on
Iraq.

See "Secret Sessions of Congress: A Brief Historical Overview,"
updated November 3, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/secrecy/RS20145.pdf

And "Secret Sessions of the House and Senate," updated November
3, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/secrecy/98-718.pdf


US MILITARY OVERSEAS BASING (CRS)

Another new Congressional Research Service report considers
plans for relocating U.S. military bases abroad, and political
developments that might affect those plans.

"Host nations such as South Korea have begun to voice limits on
the use of forces based in their country. Uzbekistan, one of
the test cases for the new strategy, recently evicted U.S.
forces from the base in that Central Asian nation. Some
analysts argue this eviction was prompted from Russia and
China, who have begun to express concern with U.S. expansion of
influence in the region."

See "U.S. Military Overseas Basing: New Developments and
Oversight Issues for Congress," October 31, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33148.pdf



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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 108
November 28, 2005


** DECLASSIFICATION OF CAPTURED IRAQI DOCUMENTS URGED
** USE OF FOIA EXEMPTIONS RISES
** MEASURING PROGRESS AGAINST TERRORISM (CRS)
** MUSLIMS IN EUROPE: INTEGRATION POLICIES (CRS)
** CHINA: NAVAL MODERNIZATION (CRS)
** CHINA: INTERNET DEVELOPMENT AND INFORMATION CONTROL (CRS)
** THE ORIGINS OF NSA


DECLASSIFICATION OF CAPTURED IRAQI DOCUMENTS URGED

In an unusual expression of support for public access to official
records, the chairmen of the House and Senate intelligence
committees have asked the Director of National Intelligence to
process millions of pages of documents captured in Iraq for
declassification and public release.

The request, in a November 18 letter from Rep. Pete Hoekstra and
Sen. Pat Roberts, is focused exclusively on foreign documents
obtained during military operations in Iraq from Desert Storm to
the present.

But the two legislators implicitly present a critique of
classification practices that is broadly applicable throughout
the national security classification system.

The chairmen explained that the standard practice of classifying
the Iraq documents in an attempt to avoid all risk from disclosure
is self-defeating and sharply diminishes the intelligence value of
the records.

"The current approach by the Intelligence Community requires that
only cleared individuals look at this vast amount of data, and
nearly guarantees that exploitation will take decades, if ever, to
complete," they wrote.

Conversely, they argued, publication of the records could
"dramatically" increase their intelligence value by harnessing the
expertise of the interested public.

Such publication "would serve to allow the entrepreneurial,
linguistic and analytic talents of the general public to
dramatically assist the Intelligence Community in understanding
the contents of these materials," the Committee Chairmen wrote.

A copy of their letter, which was previously reported by the
Associated Press, is here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2005/11/hpsci111805.pdf

Unfortunately, the clarity of their message was compromised when
they added uncritically that "Without question, intelligence
sources and methods would have to be protected."

If the protection of "sources and methods" is unconditional and
cannot be questioned, no matter how obvious or trivial the sources
or methods may be, then even unclassified records cannot be
released without prior translation and review. The chairmen
failed to confront the fact that their call for document
disclosure is inconsistent with absolute protection of
intelligence sources and methods.

"I would like to get these documents into the public domain in
hopes that academics, journalists, bloggers and other interested
people can help clear this backlog," said Chairman Hoekstra in a
news release. "In the end, I think the government, and the
public, will benefit from having all these documents translated."

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2005/11/hpsci111805-release.pdf

The House and Senate intelligence committees are effectively
fractured along partisan lines, and the letter from the Republican
committee chairmen was not co-signed by the committees' Democratic
leaders.

To date, there has been no formal response from the DNI, a
committee staff member said.


USE OF FOIA EXEMPTIONS RISES

Government agencies are making increased use of exemptions from the
Freedom of Information Act to withhold information that would have
been released in the past, according to a new study.

The study by the Coalition of Journalists for Open Government
compared FOIA responses and denials in 2000 and 2004. It found
that unclassified information was increasingly being withheld from
FOIA requesters using exemptions for intra- or interagency
memoranda, internal personnel rules and practices, and proprietary
information.

See "When Exemptions Become the Rule," Coalition of Journalists for
Open Government, November 22, 2005:

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

The study was reported in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution on
November 23.


MEASURING PROGRESS AGAINST TERRORISM (CRS)

There is a temptation to evaluate progress in the war on terrorism
by using parameters that lend themselves to numerical measurement:
the number of terrorists killed or detained, the quantity of enemy
assets confiscated, the growth in budgets for homeland security,
etc.

But because terrorism is a complex and multi-dimensional problem,
such simple quantitative measures may be misleading, according to
a new report from the Congressional Research Service. Some
attacks on terrorists may exacerbate the threat and enhance
terrorist recruitment, while increased resources devoted to
security could be considered a self-imposed economic injury.

The new CRS report, which was first disclosed in the Wall Street
Journal, explains the problem and describes some alternatives.

See "Combating Terrorism: The Challenge of Measuring
Effectiveness," November 23, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/RL33160.pdf


MUSLIMS IN EUROPE: INTEGRATION POLICIES (CRS)

The efforts of four European governments to integrate their growing
Muslim populations are explored in a new report from the
Congressional Research Service.

See "Muslims in Europe: Integration Policies in Selected
Countries," November 18, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL33166.pdf


CHINA: NAVAL MODERNIZATION (CRS)

The rapid growth of Chinese naval capabilities is the subject of a
major new Congressional Research Service report.

See "China Naval Modernization: Implications for U.S. Navy
Capabilities -- Background and Issues for Congress," November 18,
2005:

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


CHINA: INTERNET DEVELOPMENT AND INFORMATION CONTROL (CRS)

Another new CRS report describes Chinese government censorship of
online content and the options for circumventing such censorship.

See "Internet Development and Information Control in the People's
Republic of China," November 22, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL33167.pdf


THE ORIGINS OF NSA

The evolution of the U.S. signals intelligence capability from
Pearl Harbor to the establishment of the National Security Agency
in 1952 is the subject of a newly declassified NSA history volume.

The internal history traces "the struggle between centralized and
decentralized control of SIGINT, interservice and interagency
rivalries, budget problems, tactical versus national strategic
requirements, the difficulties of mechanization of processes, and
the rise of a strong bureaucracy."

The document was originally produced in classified form in 1990
under the title "The Origins of NSA" (which is also the title of
an unclassified NSA public affairs brochure).

The declassified version, published by the NSA Center for
Cryptologic History earlier this year in hard copy only, is now
entitled "The Quest for Cryptologic Centralization and the
Establishment of NSA: 1940-1952."

A scanned copy of the 129 page volume is available here in a large
6.6 MB PDF file:

http://www.fas.org/irp/nsa/quest.pdf

A hardcopy original may be obtained while supplies last by sending
a request with mailing address to history@nsa.gov.


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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 109
November 30, 2005


** PUBLIC ACCESS TO AERONAUTICAL DATA WILL BE BLOCKED
** DOMESTIC MILITARY INTELLIGENCE ON THE RISE
** HEARING: FOIA IN THE 21ST CENTURY
** CIA RECRUITMENT FLOURISHES


PUBLIC ACCESS TO AERONAUTICAL DATA WILL BE BLOCKED

Extensive databases of aeronautical information that have long been
publicly available will be withdrawn from public access next year, a
U.S. intelligence agency said yesterday.

"The National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) will go forward
with its previously announced proposal to remove its Flight
Information Publications (FLIP) and Digital Aeronautical Flight
Information File (DAFIF) from public access," according to an NGA
news release issued on November 29.

NGA said that copyright concerns raised by foreign data sources were
the driving factor for the decision to withhold the information from
the public.

Proponents of public access argued that the move was unnecessarily
restrictive in its scope.

It sets "a very bad precedent" when "the introduction of any
copyright-protected material renders a massive public-domain
database off-limits to the public," said one subject matter expert
who requested anonymity because he works with NGA. "Many, many
other databases are at stake."

"The decision that NGA should have taken, in my view, was to have
offered a redacted version of the databases for public sale. DAFIF
-- a really big database -- could easily have been stripped of its
Australian-supplied [copyrighted] data and kept public and
available," he told Secrecy News.

The data withdrawal will be begin in January 2006 and will be
completed in October 2007.

The NGA did not approve another proposal to withdraw certain paper
maps from public access.

"NGA has decided not to withdraw paper map products to a scale of
1:250,000 to 1:5,000,000. These products will continue to be
available to the public," the news release stated.

The industry expert welcomed that decision. But he said that "the
unstated reality is that NGA has mostly turned off the oxygen to
cartographic production, so few new maps are being prepared as
digital masters and even fewer are being sent to the printing
press."

The NGA proposal to withdraw public access to aeronautical data,
which was originally announced in November 2004, drew "numerous
comments ... from private citizens and special interests groups."

See "NGA to Go Forward with Proposal to Remove Aeronautical Data from
Public Access," NGA news release, November 29:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2005/11/nga112905.html


DOMESTIC MILITARY INTELLIGENCE ON THE RISE

The military role in domestic intelligence collection appears to be
rapidly shifting in subtle and profound ways, as new missions are
assigned to little-known military organizations and most
congressional overseers are silently acquiescent or actively
supportive.

One of the public manifestations of the changing landscape is a new
Defense Department Instruction that "establishes procedures, and
assigns responsibilities ... for the conduct and administration of
DoD counterintelligence (CI) collection reporting activities."

See "DoD Counterintelligence Collection Reporting," DoD Instruction
5240.17, October 26, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/dod/i5240_17.pdf

The Instruction was issued by Stephen A. Cambone, the Under Secretary
of Defense for Intelligence. His authorities and responsibilities
are themselves defined in the updated DoD Directive 5143.01, dated
November 23, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/dod/d5143_01.pdf

The expansion of domestic military surveillance was reported in the
Washington Post on November 27, and was elaborated with new details
by William M. Arkin in his Washington Post blog. See "Domestic
Military Intelligence Is Back," November 29:

http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/


HEARING: FOIA IN THE 21ST CENTURY

The strengths and weaknesses of the Freedom of Information Act were
explored in a May hearing of the House Government Reform Committee,
the transcript of which has just been published.

The lead witness was Allen Weinstein, the Archivist of the United
States, who recalled that long before he became Archivist, he sued
the FBI under the Freedom of Information Act, which is indeed an
excellent credential. Other witnesses included representatives of
the Justice Department, the Government Accountability Office, media
and public interest groups.

See "Information Policy in the 21st Century: A Review of the Freedom
of Information Act," hearing before a subcommittee of the House
Government Reform Committee, May 11:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2005/foia.html


CIA RECRUITMENT FLOURISHES

The Central Intelligence Agency is in several respects a wounded
agency. Its authority is diminished, and its credibility on
everything from weapons of mass destruction to information
classification policy is in tatters, leaving it an object of
derision.

See, for example, "CIA Realizes It's Been Using Black Highlighters
All These Years," which is intended to be a satire, in The Onion,
November 30:

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/43014

But there are still plenty of people who are eager to work there,
more than the Agency can even consider hiring.

See "It's no secret: CIA scouting for recruits" by John Diamond, USA
Today, November 23:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2005-11...a-recruit_x.htm

In recent years, "We had 100,000 applicants for CIA," said Rep. Randy
"Duke" Cunningham (R-CA) at an October 19 hearing of the House
Intelligence Committee. "You know how many got looked at? Thirty
thousand. Seventy thousand never even got a letter back. That's
bad."

Speaking of bad, Rep. Cunningham, who was an intelligence
subcommittee chairman, resigned in disgrace from Congress on
November 28 after admitting that he accepted millions of dollars in
bribes and evaded taxes.

The public policy consequences of such gross corruption at the
highest levels of the intelligence oversight process have barely
begun to be assessed.

Rep. Cunningham was a reliable advocate of unbending secrecy in
intelligence matters. On at least two occasions, in 1997 and 2000,
he voted against public disclosure of the aggregate intelligence
budget figure-- since that would damage national security.



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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 110
December 6, 2005


** A FAILING GRADE ON SECRECY REFORM
** NRO DEFENDS FOIA EXEMPTION FOR OPERATIONAL FILES
** DOD DOCTRINE ON PUBLIC AFFAIRS
** OVERSIGHT OF NAVY INTELLIGENCE
** DOD STABILITY OPERATIONS
** CRS ON SPACE POLICY


A FAILING GRADE ON SECRECY REFORM

Congress deserves an "F" for failing to declassify the amount of the
overall intelligence budget, members of the 9/11 Commission said in a
final report on the status of their recommendations.

"The Congress cannot do robust intelligence oversight when funding for
intelligence programs is buried within the defense budget.
Declassifying the overall intelligence budget would allow for a
separate annual intelligence appropriations bill, so that the
Congress can judge better how intelligence funds are being spent."

See the Final Report on 9/11 Commission Recommendations, December 5:

http://www.9-11pdp.org/

The Commission recommendation to declassify the intelligence budget
was intended not merely to produce public disclosure of a particular
number. It was the beginning of an attempt to reform the entire
edifice of unnecessary secrecy that, the Commission said, undermines
the performance of U.S. intelligence.

But the Commission initiative, opposed by the Bush White House and
blocked by House Republicans, was stopped in its tracks.

Several news stories have suggested that the secrecy of the
intelligence budgeting process may have facilitated or exacerbated
the admitted corruption of House Intelligence Committee member Rep.
Randy "Duke" Cunningham.

See "Pentagon's 'Black Budget' Veils Contracting Shenanigans" by David
Wood, Newhouse News, November 30:

http://www.newhousenews.com/archive/wood113005.html


NRO DEFENDS FOIA EXEMPTION FOR OPERATIONAL FILES

The National Reconnaissance Office told a federal court yesterday that
it should not have to process a Freedom of Information Act request
for unclassified portions of its congressional budget justification
book because the document is contained in "operational files" that
are exempt from search and review under the FOIA.

That contention was challenged in a lawsuit by the Federation of
American Scientists, which told the court that the budget book cannot
be considered an operational file because it is disseminated inside
and outside of the agency, and that records that have been
disseminated are excluded by statute from the definition of
operational files.

Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR), a member of the Senate Intelligence
Committee, confirmed the fact that his Committee is in possession of
the requested budget justification document, and said it should be
processed under FOIA.

"It would seem appropriate for this document to be subject to review
under the Freedom of Information Act," Senator Wyden wrote. "Of
course large portions of the document will be exempt from disclosure
as they are properly classified."

In the past, more than 100 pages out of approximately 300 pages in the
NRO budget justification book have been partially or completely
declassified under the FOIA.

See the latest case files from Aftergood v. National Reconnaissance
Office here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/foia/nro-cbjb/index.html

The case is before the Honorable Reggie B. Walton, who is also the
presiding judge in USA v. I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby.


DOD DOCTRINE ON PUBLIC AFFAIRS

The role of Department of Defense Public Affairs (PA) officers in
disseminating public information and their relationship to
psychological operations and military deception targeted at enemy
forces and populations were set forth in a DoD doctrinal publication
earlier this year.

News reports in the Los Angeles Times and elsewhere recently revealed
that a Pentagon contractor had paid to have favorable news stories
planted in the Iraqi press. The practice was widely criticized as
inconsistent with efforts to build democracy and a free press in Iraq.

Yet such "information operations," like military deception, are an
established part of the military toolkit.

"PA [public affairs] and information operations (IO) activities
directly support military objectives, counter adversary
disinformation and deter adversary actions. Although both PA and IO
require planning, message development and media analysis, the efforts
differ with respect to audience, scope and intent, and must remain
separate," according to the DoD doctrinal publication.

"PA capabilities are related to IO, but PA is not an IO discipline or
psychological operations (PSYOP) tool.... PA activities affect, and
are affected by, PSYOP, and are planned and executed in coordination
with PSYOP planning and operations. PA must be aware of the practice
of PSYOP, but should have no role in planning or executing these
operations."

Likewise, "PA activities affect, and are affected by, military
deception (MILDEC) operations. PA operations should be planned,
coordinated and deconflicted with MILDEC operations consistent with
policy, statutory limitations, and security. PA must be aware of the
practice of MILDEC operations, but should have no role in planning or
executing these operations."

See "Public Affairs," Joint Publication 3-61, U.S. Department of
Defense, 9 May 2005 (97 pages, 1.5 MB):

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/dod/jp3_61.pdf


OVERSIGHT OF NAVY INTELLIGENCE

Oversight of Navy intelligence activities is the subject of a recently
issued Instruction from the Secretary of the Navy.

The Instruction helpfully includes an "updated definition of DON
[Department of the Navy] intelligence components, to include new and
reorganized DON intelligence organizations."

"Under no circumstances shall any DON personnel condone, support,
encourage, engage in, or conspire to engage in the assassination of a
specific individual or individuals," the Instruction states in
passing.

See "Oversight of Intelligence Activities Within the Department of the
Navy," SECNAVINST 3820.3E, 21 September 2005:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/navy/secnavinst/3820_3e.pdf


DOD STABILITY OPERATIONS

"Stability operations are a core U.S. military mission that the
Department of Defense shall be prepared to conduct and support,"
according to a new Pentagon directive. "They shall be given priority
comparable to combat operations...."

The new directive, which was first reported in the New York Times,
evidently reflects and responds to defects in military efforts to
stabilize Iraq following the U.S. invasion.

See "Military Support for Stability, Security, Transition, and
Reconstruction (SSTR) Operations," DOD Directive 3000.05, 28 November
2005:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/dod/d3000_05.pdf

See, relatedly, "Peacekeeping and Related Stability Operations: Issues
of U.S. Military Involvement," Congressional Research Service,
updated October 27, 2005:

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


CRS ON SPACE POLICY

Recent reports of the Congressional Research Service on space policy
include the following:

"Military Space Programs: Issues Concerning DOD's SBIRS and STSS
Programs," updated November 25, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/RS21148.pdf

"Space Exploration: Issues Concerning the 'Vision for Space
Exploration'," updated November 18, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/space/RS21720.pdf

"The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's FY2006 Budget
Request: Description, Analysis, and Issues for Congress," updated
November 17, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/space/RL32988.pdf

"The National Aeronautics and Space Administration: Overview, FY2006
Budget in Brief, and Key Issues for Congress," updated November 17,
2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/space/RS22063.pdf

"U.S. Space Programs: Civilian, Military, and Commercial," updated
November 17, 2005:

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

"Space Stations," updated November 17, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/space/IB93017.pdf

"The International Space Station and the Iran Nonproliferation Act
(INA): The Bush Administration's Proposed INA Amendment," updated
November 14, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/space/RS22270.pdf

"China's Space Program: An Overview," updated October 18, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/space/RS21641.pdf



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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 111
December 8, 2005


** OPEN SOURCE INTELLIGENCE DIRECTOR NAMED
** NATSIOS AND THE COST OF IRAQ RECONSTRUCTION
** CQ RESEARCHER ON GOVERNMENT SECRECY
** ALTERNATIVE COVER SHEETS FOR CLASSIFIED INFO


OPEN SOURCE INTELLIGENCE DIRECTOR NAMED

Eliot A. Jardines has been named Assistant Deputy Director of
National Intelligence for Open Source. In that post, he will
provide policy guidance to the recently established Open Source
Center, which is responsible for deriving intelligence from
unclassified, open source information that can be legally acquired
without resorting to espionage.

"We must establish OSINT [open source intelligence] as an equal
partner with human intelligence (HUMINT), signals intelligence
(SIGINT), imagery intelligence (IMINT) and measurement and
signatures intelligence (MASINT)," Mr. Jardines said at a June 21
congressional hearing.

"For too long, open source exploitation has been delegated as merely
an additional duty for intelligence analysts. This is simply a
ridiculous notion."

"No one would seriously propose that intelligence analysts be
required to collect their own signals or imagery intelligence.
However, that is precisely what we do with open source
intelligence," he said.

See his June 21, 2005 testimony on "Using Open-Source Information
Effectively" before a House Homeland Security Subcommittee here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2005_hr/062105jardines.pdf

Mr. Jardines, a fairly junior figure, was previously the president of
Open Source Publishing, a commercial enterprise that provided open
source intelligence support to government and industry.

A December 7 news release from the Office of the Director of National
Intelligence, announcing the appointment of Mr. Jardines, as well as
a Civil Liberties Protection Officer and a Procurement Executive,
may be found here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/news/2005/12/odni120705.html

The rise of open source intelligence does not necessarily imply
increased public access to analytical products of U.S. intelligence.
To the contrary, the use of copyrighted source materials may pose a
new obstacle to public disclosure.


NATSIOS AND THE COST OF IRAQ RECONSTRUCTION

Andrew Natsios, who announced his resignation as administrator of the
Agency for International Development (AID) on December 2, played a
memorable role in misinforming the American public about the costs
of post-war reconstruction in Iraq.

The cost to the American taxpayer of rebuilding Iraq will be $1.7
billion, Mr. Natsios confidently told ABC Nightline on April 23,
2003. The actual number, which continues to grow, is at least an
order of magnitude higher.

"You're not suggesting that the rebuilding of Iraq is gonna be done
for $1.7 billion?" asked ABC's Ted Koppel incredulously.

"Well, in terms of the American taxpayers contribution, I do, this is
it for the US," Mr. Natsios said.

The transcript of that interview, originally posted on the AID web
site, was quietly removed later in the year, as reported in the
Washington Post on December 18, 2003 ("White House Web Scrubbing;
Offending Comments on Iraq Disappear From Site" by Dana Milbank).

A copy of the deleted AID transcript of the Natsios Nightline interview
is here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/temp/natsios042303.html

Iraq war-related expenditures, including costs of reconstruction
programs, are notoriously difficult to track.

But a reasonably lucid account was provided by the Congressional
Research Service in "The Cost of Iraq, Afghanistan and Enhanced Base
Security Since 9/11," October 7, 2005:

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


CQ RESEARCHER ON GOVERNMENT SECRECY

An unusually comprehensive account of current issues in government
secrecy policy has been published by Congressional Quarterly's CQ
Researcher.

The growth in classification, the state of the Freedom of Information
Act, the declining culture of openness, and the problem of leaks are
among the topics explored by CQ writer Kenneth Jost.

A copy of the 24 page publication is available here through January
2006, courtesy of CQ Press (1.1 MB PDF file) (For permission to
distribute or to purchase hardcopies, contact Julie Miller at
JMiller@CQPress.com.):

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2005/12/cqr1205.pdf


ALTERNATIVE COVER SHEETS FOR CLASSIFIED INFO

While underlying questions of secrecy and disclosure carry a potent
primeval charge, the actual implementation of government secrecy
policy is about as boring as it could be.

In a rare attempt to leaven the subject with humor, some unidentified
person has produced spoofs of the colored cover sheets that are
often used on classified documents (Standard Forms 703, 704, and 705
for Top Secret, Secret and Confidential, respectively).

Three previously published bogus cover sheets (for Futile, Stupid and
B*ll**** Information) have been augmented by three new ones.

The collection was circulated this week at the Pentagon.

See the set here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/coversheets.pdf



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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 112
December 9, 2005


** LARGER MILITARY ROLE IN DISASTER RESPONSE DRAWS FLAK
** CONFERENCE REPORT ON THE USA PATRIOT ACT
** HABEAS CORPUS AND GUANTANAMO DETAINEES (CRS)


LARGER MILITARY ROLE IN DISASTER RESPONSE DRAWS FLAK

The idea that the U.S. military should take a greater role in
responding to disasters such as Hurricane Katrina, as proposed by
President Bush and others, has elicited strong opposition among state
leaders and national guard officials, one of whom suggested that it
amounted to "domestic regime change."

Critics were exercised by a recent statement from Adm. Timothy Keating
of U.S. Northern Command (NORTHCOM) who recommended that the Department
of Defense be given "complete authority" for response to disasters
like Hurricane Katrina.

"Although usually couched in terms of 'support for governors', the
NORTHCOM proposals would bring about a fundamental change in the
emergency governance of states impacted by large scale disasters,"
complained Major General Timothy Lowenberg of the Washington state
National Guard.

"Some might liken this to a policy of domestic regime change," he
wrote in an October 31 email message to National Guard colleagues.

A copy of the email message from Maj. Gen. Lowenberg, a portion of
which was quoted by the Associated Press on November 4, was obtained
by Secrecy News and is available here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2005/12/lowen103105.html

The growing domestic role of the U.S. military is prompting anxiety in
other quarters as well, as described in "Warriors, rescuers, spooks"
by Terje Langeland, Colorado Springs Independent, December 8:

http://www.csindy.com/csindy/2005-12-08/cover.html


CONFERENCE REPORT ON THE USA PATRIOT ACT

House and Senate conferees reached agreement on legislation to extend
and reauthorize the USA Patriot Act, but the conference agreement
immediately drew opposition from Democratic members, who were
excluded from key negotiations over the bill, and others.

A copy of the conference report, which appeared in the Congressional
Record, may be found here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2005_rpt/hrpt109-333.html

Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), who said he would seek further
modifications of the bill, explained his view of its defects here:

http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200512/120805.html


HABEAS CORPUS AND GUANTANAMO DETAINEES (CRS)

The impact of controversial legislation sponsored by Sen. Lindsey
Graham (R-SC) to deprive suspected enemy combatants of habeas corpus
rights in favor of a more limited appeal mechanism is examined in a
new report from the Congressional Research Service obtained by
Secrecy News.

See "Guantanamo Detainees: Habeas Corpus Challenges in Federal
Court," December 7, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33180.pdf

A dozen retired federal judges this week urged Congress to reject the
Graham measure, which is co-sponsored by Senators Levin and Kyl.

"In cases of executive detention, district court review of habeas
petition is central to fulfilling the Great Writ's historic purpose:
to ensure that individuals are not unlawfully detained," they wrote,
in a December 7 letter coordinated by the Brennan Center at NYU Law
School. See:

http://brennancenter.org/programs/download...tter12.7.05.pdf



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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 113
December 12, 2005


** THE DEMISE OF SENSITIVE HOMELAND SECURITY INFO (SHSI)
** LOS ALAMOS TECHNICAL REPORTS ON THE FAS WEB SITE
** WSJ ON DISASTER RESPONSE
** JUDICIAL WATCH ON OPEN GOVERNMENT


THE DEMISE OF SENSITIVE HOMELAND SECURITY INFO (SHSI)

Three years after Congress directed the President to develop
government-wide procedures for protecting sensitive homeland security
information (SHSI), no such procedures are in place and the effort to
produce them has been all but formally abandoned, Secrecy News has
learned.

The Homeland Security Act of 2002 required the President to prescribe
and implement procedures by which agencies would "identify and
safeguard homeland security information that is sensitive but
unclassified" (Section 892).

In his July 2003 executive order 13311, President Bush assigned the
Secretary of Homeland Security responsibility for complying with this
requirement.

But "as is true with so many other subjects, they have done nothing
with it," said one U.S. Government official with subject matter
expertise. He spoke on condition of anonymity.

A government-wide policy on protecting SHSI "has been periodically
discussed, pushed close to some action, and then sent back for
further study. There are a dozen hard and fast deadlines that have
been missed on this whole subject."

"I think it's fair to say it's dead. The concept is not dead but it's
highly unlikely anything will come of it."

Because Congress failed to define the statutory meaning of
"sensitive," critics including the Federation of American Scientists
were concerned that the establishment of the "Sensitive Homeland
Security Information" (SHSI) category was an invitation to formalize
the indiscriminate withholding of information.

"I think this is a case where no news is good news from your point of
view," said the official, referring to the lack of progress on SHSI.

Meanwhile, however, he said that a separate interagency initiative was
underway to define and regulate the even broader category of
"sensitive but unclassified" information.

But "that is far too big a task to come to fruition," the official
predicted.

Given that agencies were unable to reach consensus on the definition
of terrorism-related SHSI, it will be "exponentially more difficult"
to come to agreement on the vastly larger and more amorphous domain
of "sensitive but unclassified" information, he said.


LOS ALAMOS TECHNICAL REPORTS ON THE FAS WEB SITE

Thousands of unclassified technical reports that were published on the
Los Alamos National Laboratory web site and then removed from public
access have now been reposted on the Federation of American
Scientists web site.

The Los Alamos reports were archived by researchers Carey Sublette and
Gregory Walker, who made them available to FAS (SN, 02/19/04).

Over the past year we have incrementally added more and more of the
collection, which comprises an enormous 8.5 gigabytes of data, to our
website. That process is now complete.

Many of the documents have enduring if narrow scientific value,
judging from the requests we regularly receive for various titles.
Others are principally of historical value. Still others hold both
scientific and historical interest.

For example, the 1947 study entitled "Blast Wave" (LA-2000) includes
original scientific papers by Hans Bethe, John von Neuman and Rudolph
Peierls -- but also by Klaus Fuchs, who would be convicted in 1950 of
spying for the Soviet Union.

The 300 page volume was originally for sale to the public for $6.50,
according to the inside cover. Now it is available for free on the
FAS web site, with thousands of other such documents.

See Los Alamos Technical Reports and Publications:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/doe/lanl/index.html


WSJ ON DISASTER RESPONSE

On December 9, Secrecy News published an extraordinary email message
from a National Guard official, Maj. Gen. Timothy Lowenberg, who
warned against military control of disaster response activities.

That email message was discussed and placed in context in a deeply
reported front page story in the Wall Street Journal on December 8.

See "Local and Federal Authorities Battle to Control Disaster Relief"
by Robert Block and Amy Schatz, Wall Street Journal, December 8 (sub.
req'd.):

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB113401254148017116.html


JUDICIAL WATCH ON OPEN GOVERNMENT

It is obvious why an opponent of the present Administration would be
critical of its secretive ways. And yet such opponents are not the
only ones who favor increased transparency and disclosure. Nor do
perspectives on openness and secrecy correspond predictably to
partisan affiliations.

The avowedly conservative Judicial Watch is hosting a panel discussion
at the National Press Club December 13 on "The Case for Open
Government," with the rather ecumenical participation of the Heritage
Foundation, the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, the
Federation of American Scientists, and the Society of Professional
Journalists. See:

http://www.judicialwatch.org/opengov-panel.shtml



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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 114
December 15, 2005


** PENTAGON WILL REVIEW DOMESTIC SURVEILLANCE PROCEDURES
** BUSH ISSUES EXECUTIVE ORDER ON FOIA
** FOIA EXEMPTIONS FOR OPERATIONAL FILES CONTESTED
** HOUSE VOTES TO REJECT CRUEL TREATMENT OF DETAINEES
** ARMY PSYOP PLANNING GUIDE
** OPEN SOURCE CENTER ANALYSIS: A SAMPLE


PENTAGON WILL REVIEW DOMESTIC SURVEILLANCE PROCEDURES

In response to mounting concern over the conduct of domestic
military surveillance, the Department of Defense said that it will
review its database of domestic threat reports to ensure that
information regarding U.S. citizens is not illegally retained.

The announcement followed the disclosure by NBC News and The
Washington Post that lawful political activities of American
citizens had been archived in a Department of Defense database and
cited as a "threat."

"There is nothing more important to the U.S. military than the trust
and good will of the American people," according to the December 14
Pentagon statement.

"The Department of Defense values that trust and goodwill and
consequently views with the greatest concern any potential
violation of the strict DoD policy governing authorized
counter-intelligence efforts and support to law enforcement." See:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2005/12/dod121405.html

Significantly, the Pentagon was moved to respond by an unauthorized
disclosure in the press, not by congressional oversight, which
seems inert or even complicit in expanding domestic surveillance.

See "Is the Pentagon spying on Americans?" from NBC News, December
14:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10454316/

The threat database document which triggered the Pentagon response
was obtained by Washington Post blogger William Arkin.

http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/


BUSH ISSUES EXECUTIVE ORDER ON FOIA

President Bush issued an executive order yesterday to improve the
processing of Freedom of Information Act requests.

The order would require executive branch agencies to name a Chief
FOIA Officer, and to establish FOIA Requester Service Centers to
assist members of the public in gaining information about the
status of their requests.

The order provides some positive reinforcement to the FOIA process,
but fails to come to grips with the underlying defects of Bush
Administration information policy.

"The effective functioning of our constitutional democracy depends
upon the participation in public life of a citizenry that is well
informed," the President said. "For nearly four decades, the
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) has provided an important means
through which the public can obtain information regarding the
activities of Federal agencies."

But it is dumbfounding to say, as the President does in the Order's
first requirement, that "in responding to a FOIA request, agencies
shall respond courteously and appropriately." A lack of courtesy
has never been the problem.

FOIA processing has bogged down in the Bush Administration for
several more substantive reasons. One is that many agencies now
require members of the public to file formal FOIA requests rather
than simply providing the information upon request.

Another problem is that there has been a wholesale removal of
information from many government web sites, so that it is necessary
to file FOIA requests in order to recover that information.

In most cases, records that have been withdrawn from the web (like
the U.S. Army Weapons System Handbook, for example) are eventually
released when requested under FOIA. But their initial removal from
online access typically adds months of delay and hundreds of
dollars to the disclosure process in each case.

The Bush order does not address these root issues of disclosure
policy.

See Executive Order 13392 (as it will be designated upon publication
in the Federal Register) on "Improving Agency Disclosure of
Information," December 14, 2005:

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


FOIA EXEMPTIONS FOR OPERATIONAL FILES CONTESTED

Congress is poised to carve out a new exemption from the Freedom of
Information Act for so-called "operational files" of the Defense
Intelligence Agency.

That would be a mistake, argued Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA), in a
letter to the chairmen of the House and Senate Armed Services
Committees.

DIA has demonstrated over the years that valuable intelligence
records can be released under the FOIA without compromise of secret
intelligence sources, Rep. Waxman observed.

"New [FOIA] exemptions should not be created lightly, especially in
the absence of a hearing record that demonstrates the need for an
exemption," he wrote.

http://www.democrats.reform.house.gov/story.asp?ID=985

Meanwhile, the National Security Archive petitioned a federal court
for leave to file an amicus brief in the FOIA lawsuit Aftergood v.
National Reconnaissance Office, in which the NRO has refused to
disclose unclassified budget files, claiming that they are exempted
"operational files."

The court's decision in this case "will have implications for a
broad swathe of the public," argued Meredith Fuchs, general counsel
of the National Security Archive, and "this is a case of first
impression." See:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/foia/nro-cbjb/nsa121205.pdf

The court granted the Archive's motion, and ordered that an amicus
brief be filed by January 9.


HOUSE VOTES TO REJECT CRUEL TREATMENT OF DETAINEES

The House of Representatives voted to endorse a provision advanced
by Sen. John McCain that would prohibit "cruel, inhuman, or
degrading treatment or punishment of persons under custody or
control of the United States Government."

The measure was approved by a veto-proof majority of 308-122.

Among the 122 Representatives who opposed the anti-torture provision
were Rep. Pete Hoekstra, the chairman of the House Intelligence
Committee, and Rep. Duncan Hunter, the chairman of the House Armed
Services Committee. They did not explain their opposition during
the December 14 floor debate. See:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2005_cr/torture121405.html


ARMY PSYOP PLANNING GUIDE

The nuts and bolts of conducting tactical psychological operations
(PSYOP) are set forth in a new Army guide for military planners and
commanders.

"PSYOP Soldiers may require an interpreter to effectively
communicate with the local populace. Guidance on how to select an
interpreter, what to do and not do when using an interpreter, and
how to work with the interpreter is provided on pages 28 through
31."

See "Psychological Operations Leaders Planning Guide," November
2005:

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


OPEN SOURCE CENTER ANALYSIS: A SAMPLE

The Director of National Intelligence Open Source Center is busily
churning out products for government consumers who care to make use
of them.

"Many OSC products are purely internal analyses, not simply
translations," one registered user told Secrecy News. "Now they
even have a bunch of blogs. I have no time to look at any of it
anymore, but the system obviously has received an infusion of money
lately."

One recent publication, styled an "OSC Analysis," is a profile of Al
Manar, the Lebanese Hizballah television station.

"Al-Manar continues its negative treatment of the United States but
has dropped the more incendiary anti-US material seen in the
past.... Al-Manar's reporting on Iraq adopts a critical tone toward
US policies and actions but [also] condemns insurgent bombings
targeting Iraqi civilians.... Al-Manar refers to Iraqis killed by
both American forces and insurgents as 'martyrs' and highlights
popular Iraqi opposition to such acts."

See "OSC Analysis: Al-Manar Promotes 'Resistance,' Tones Down
Anti-US Material," Open Source Center, December 8, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/irp/news/2005/12/osc120805.html

Eliot A. Jardines, the new Assistant Deputy Director of National
Intelligence for Open Source, will speak January 17 at the annual
conference of Open Source Solutions (www.oss.net/iop).



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

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/anniversary/moyers.htm

In The Kingdom of the Half-Blind
Bill Moyers

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20051209/index.htm

National Security Archive Releases Pre-9/11 Warning to Saudis that Osama Bin Laden Might Target Civilian Airliners

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FAS Note: A Pentagon spokesman provided the following statement to Secrecy News on December 14, 2005 in response to queries about a DoD counterintelligence database.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There is nothing more important to the U.S. military than the trust and good will of the American people. The Department of Defense values that trust and goodwill and consequently views with the greatest concern any potential violation of the strict DoD policy governing authorized counter-intelligence efforts and support to law enforcement.

DoD policy for intelligence and counterintelligence organizations prohibits the reporting, processing or storing of information on individuals or organizations not affiliated with the DoD, except in limited circumstances that are defined and codified in law. The Department has procedures to implement this policy throughout DoD.

DoD entities enter unfiltered information into the Threat and Local Observation Notice (TALON) reporting system gathered by concerned citizens, DoD personnel charge with responsibilities for the security of DoD installations i.e., - gate guards, or other DoD personnel reporting suspicious activities, as well as law enforcement, intelligence, security and counterintelligence organizations, to provide analysts data on which to estimate possible threats. It is in effect, the place where DoD initially stores "dots," which if validated, might later be connected before an attack occurs.

Under existing procedures, a "dot" of information that is not validated as threatening must be removed from the TALON system in less than 90 days. If the "dot" is validated, the information is moved to law enforcement entities.

In addition to a review of the TALON system begun in October by the Counterintelligence Field Activity (CIFA), the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence has directed several actions after an initial assessment of the Talon database reporting procedures.

First a thorough review of the TALON reporting system to ensure it complies fully with DoD and U.S. laws;

Second, a review whether those policies and procedures are being properly applied with respect to any reporting and retention of information about any US persons;

Third, a review of the TALON data base to identify any other information that is improperly in the data base;

Finally, all Department counterintelligence and intelligence personnel will receive immediate refresher training concerning the laws, policies and procedures that govern collection, reporting and storing of information related to the warning of potential threats to DoD personnel, facilities or national security interests.

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 115
December 19, 2005


** UNAUTHORIZED DOMESTIC SURVEILLANCE THREATENS RULE OF LAW
** 2004 FOREIGN MILITARY SALES DETAILED
** PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE ON RECONSTRUCTION AND STABILIZATION
** GAO INVENTORY OF AGENCY AUTOMATED INFO SYSTEMS (1991)
** POSTSCRIPTS
** TIME OUT


UNAUTHORIZED DOMESTIC SURVEILLANCE THREATENS RULE OF LAW

In an extraordinary move that undermines the legal foundation for
the conduct of intelligence activities, President Bush ordered the
National Security Agency to conduct electronic surveillance of U.S.
persons outside of the statutory framework that was established to
authorize such surveillance, the New York Times revealed last week.

Although the President insisted that his action was "consistent with
U.S. law and the Constitution," the surveillance operation was not
conducted in accordance with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
Act of 1978, the statute that permits domestic intelligence
surveillance with the approval of a specially designated federal
court.

"Domestic intelligence collection is governed by the Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act, known as FISA," explained Sen.
Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), a member of the Senate Intelligence and
Judiciary Committees. "FISA is the exclusive law in this area."

"We have changed aspects of that law at the request of the
administration in the USA PATRIOT Act to allow for a more
aggressive but still lawful defense against terror. So there have
been amendments," Sen. Feinstein noted.

But to conduct domestic intelligence surveillance outside of the
FISA framework "calls into question the integrity and credibility
of our Nation's commitment to the rule of law," she said December
16. See:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2005_cr/s121605.html

The FISA process is not unduly burdensome or time-consuming.
"Urgent requests that meet the criteria and requirements of FISA
are handled as emergency or expedited matters," said the Attorney
General in a written response to questions from the Senate
Judiciary Committee, transmitted October 20, 2005.

"The fact of the matter is, FISA can grant emergency approval for
wiretaps within hours and even minutes, if necessary," said Sen.
Feinstein.

In a 2000 statement describing oversight of NSA activities, then-NSA
Director Lt. Gen. Michael V. Hayden said "The American people must
be confident that the power they have entrusted to us is not being,
and will not be, abused."

NSA "operates within detailed, constitutionally-based, substantive,
and procedural limits under the watchful eyes of Congress, numerous
institutions within the Executive Branch, and -- through the FISA
-- the judiciary."

"The privacy framework is technology neutral and does not require
amendment to accommodate new communications technologies," he said.

"The regulatory and oversight structure, in place now for nearly a
quarter of a century, has ensured that the imperatives of national
security are balanced with democratic values," Gen. Hayden said then.
See:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2000_hr/hayden.html

Under mounting pressure, the Bush Administration has groped for some
legal justification for its departure from statutory requirements.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales proposed today that the 2001
congressional resolution authorizing the use of "all necessary and
appropriate force" against terrorists encompassed the right to
conduct domestic wiretapping.

But that resolution plainly pertains to the use of military force,
not intelligence collection.

Nor do the President's inherent authorities as commander in chief
extend without limitation to warrantless surveillance of Americans.

"A state of war is not a blank check for the president when it
comes to the rights of the nation's citizens," wrote Justice Sandra
Day O'Connor in a ruling last year on the legal rights of
detainees.

For background on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, see:

http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/doj/fisa/index.html


2004 FOREIGN MILITARY SALES DETAILED

The United States sold more than $12.6 billion worth of military
equipment to foreign countries in 2004, according to a July 2005
report to Congress released in declassified form last week.

Items sold are broken down by country. Details of sales to several
countries, including Australia, Japan and Taiwan, were blacked out
in the declassified version.

The document was obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by
Matthew Schroeder of the Federation of American Scientists Arms
Sales Monitoring Project.

See the 2004 report to Congress on Foreign Military Sales here:

http://www.fas.org/asmp/profiles/655-2004/6552004.html#DOD


PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE ON RECONSTRUCTION AND STABILIZATION

On December 7, President Bush issued National Security Presidential
Directive 44 on "Mananagement of Interagency Efforts Concerning
Reconstruction and Stabilization."

"The purpose of this Directive is to promote the security of the
United States through improved coordination, planning, and
implementation for reconstruction and stabilization assistance for
foreign states and regions at risk of, in, or in transition from
conflict or civil strife," the Directive states.

The full text of the Directive is posted here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/nspd/nspd-44.html

The use of presidential directives as an instrument of executive
authority is discussed in "Presidential Directives: Background and
Overview" by Harold C. Relyea, Congressional Research Service,
updated January 7, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/irp/crs/98-611.pdf


GAO INVENTORY OF AGENCY AUTOMATED INFO SYSTEMS (1991)

A descriptive inventory of more than one hundred automated
information systems and databases used by government agencies in
support of counter-drug law enforcement activities was compiled by
the General Accounting Office in 1991 at the request of Congress.

The surprisingly expansive 75 page account is mainly of historical
interest, though it may also be useful in focusing Freedom of
Information Act requests and other research activities.

"Because the agencies consider the information contained in this
report to be sensitive," the GAO wrote in 1991, "we have marked the
report For Official Use Only."

It is still not included in GAO's public database. But a copy was
obtained by Secrecy News.

See "War on Drugs: Inventory of Federal Agencies' Automated
Information Systems," U.S. General Accounting Office,
GAO/IMTEC-91-28FS, April 1991 (1.8 MB PDF file):

http://www.fas.org/sgp/gao/ais-1991.pdf


POSTSCRIPTS

** Presidents have previously claimed authority over domestic
communications, observed intelligence historian David Kahn, but
they have done so with congressional sanction:

"On 16 July 1918 a congressional resolution gave the president the
power to assume control of wire communications during the war (40
Statutes at Large 904). A presidential proclamation of 22 July 1918
took that control and devolved the power on the postmaster general
(40 Statutes Part 2, 1807-8). A law of 29 October 1918 (40 Statutes
1017-18) prohibited anybody from divulging the contents of those
communications. The resolution was repealed in 41 Statutes 157."

** In the 1990s, intrepid researcher Glenn Campbell probably did
more than any other individual to make "Area 51" the most famous
secret military base in the world. Now he has turned his peculiar
talents to the even more challenging proceedings of family court in
Las Vegas. See his web site www.familycourtchronicles.com and a
profile of his activities in the Las Vegas Sun, "An eccentric's
struggle for truth," December 18:

http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/.../519837904.html

** While the DNI Open Source Center monitors Lebanese Hizballah's
unsavory Al Manar television broadcasts (Secrecy News, 12/15/05),
Americans are effectively blocked from doing the same, observed
Jack Shafer in Slate last year. See "Who's Afraid of Hezbollah TV?
Not me":

http://www.slate.com/id/2111527/


TIME OUT

Secrecy News will resume publication after January 1, 2006.



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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2005, Issue No. 116
December 20, 2005


** AGENCIES TOLD TO STANDARDIZE "SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED"
** NSA SURVEILLANCE OPERATION CONTROVERSY BUILDS
** DESTRUCTION OF AIRCRAFT TO PREVENT ENEMY USE
** TIME OUT, REALLY


AGENCIES TOLD TO STANDARDIZE "SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED"

In an initiative with potentially significant implications for
public access to government information, the White House has told
executive branch agencies to develop standard procedures for
handling of "sensitive but unclassified" information.

"To promote and enhance the effective and efficient acquisition,
access, retention, production, use, management, and sharing of
Sensitive But Unclassified (SBU) information, including homeland
security information, law enforcement information, and terrorism
information, procedures and standards for designating, marking, and
handling SBU information must be standardized across the Federal
Government," according to a December 16 White House memorandum.

Agencies are required to assess their procedures for handling SBU
and report on them to the Director of National Intelligence within
90 days.

Within a year, the DNI, with other agency heads, is to present
recommendations for the President's approval on standardized SBU
procedures.

As a result of the White House initiative, the category of
"sensitive but unclassified" is poised to become the government's
largest single information control category.

Yet there is no generally accepted definition of "sensitive."

The President's directive does not acknowledge the reality that
agencies often consider information sensitive for political or
bureaucratic reasons unrelated to legitimate security or privacy
concerns. Nor does the new White House memorandum consider that
some kinds of admittedly sensitive information should nevertheless
be publicly disclosed to promote government efficiency and
accountability.

The complexity of these issues may in fact be insurmountable.

The development of uniform government-wide procedures for SBU is
"far too big a task to come to fruition," a senior government
official who first disclosed the interagency effort told Secrecy
News (12/12/05).

The President's December 16 memorandum, "Guidelines and Requirements
in Support of the Information Sharing Environment," including
Guideline 3 on Standard Procedures for SBU, is available here:

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


NSA SURVEILLANCE OPERATION CONTROVERSY BUILDS

The controversy over reported domestic surveillance activity by the
National Security Agency has continued to build, as some new
details and some nuances that were previously missed (by Secrecy
News, at any rate) became apparent.

For one thing, as we should have noted yesterday, the operation is
limited to communications in which one party is outside the U.S.

"The authorization given to NSA by the President requires that one
end of these communications has to be outside the United States. I
can assure you, by the physics of the intercept, by how we actually
conduct our activities, that one end of these communications are
always outside the United States of America," said Deputy Director
of National Intelligence Michael V. Hayden at a press briefing
yesterday. See:

http://www.fas.org/irp/news/2005/12/ag121905.html

Meanwhile, the President's assertion that he possesses inherent
constitutional authority to conduct such surveillance, while
objectionable to some, is not made up out of whole cloth (though
its full scope is uncertain).

A November 2002 FIS Court of Review decision acknowledged "the
President's inherent constitutional authority to conduct
warrantless foreign intelligence surveillance." See that decision
here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/doj/fisa/fiscr111802.html

But the President's claim that members of Congress had somehow
signed off on the action was exposed as hollow.

"Leaders in the United States Congress have been briefed more than a
dozen times on this program," the President said yesterday.

Yet one of those leaders, Sen. Jay Rockefeller, released a
handwritten note he sent to Vice President Cheney in 2003 recording
his dismay at the program and his inability to endorse it. See:

http://www.fas.org/irp/news/2005/12/rock121905.pdf


DESTRUCTION OF AIRCRAFT TO PREVENT ENEMY USE

When capture or abandonment of a U.S. military aircraft is imminent,
"any classified documents, notes, instructions, or other written
material... must be destroyed in a manner to render them useless to
the enemy."

Apropos of nothing in particular, the Army has republished a 1971
technical manual on "Procedures for the Destruction of Aircraft and
Associated Equipment to Prevent Enemy Use."

A copy is available here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/tm750-244-1-5.pdf


TIME OUT, REALLY

This is really, almost certainly the last issue of Secrecy News for
2005. Happy holidays.



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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2006, Issue No. 1
January 3, 2006


** CONFRONTING DOMESTIC NSA SURVEILLANCE
** DEFERRAL OF INTEL AUTHORIZATION ACT CRITICIZED
** HPSCI TO CONDUCT CUNNINGHAM INQUIRY
** WORLD LAW BULLETIN - NOVEMBER 2005
** CRS ON CONCENTRATED CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE
** LANDSAT DATA CONTINUITY STRATEGY (OSTP)
** PAUL ROAZEN, HISTORIAN OF PSYCHOANALYSIS
** INTRODUCTION TO OUTER SPACE (1958)


CONFRONTING DOMESTIC NSA SURVEILLANCE

The chances that the average American would be victimized by the
National Security Agency's domestic counterterrorism surveillance
operation appear to be minuscule.

And yet the controversy over such domestic surveillance demands the
attention of every alert citizen since it raises fateful questions
about the American form of government.

What are the boundaries of Presidential authority? Can the President
ignore the law or unilaterally reinterpret it into irrelevance? Can
constitutional protections endure pervasive official secrecy? Would
Americans rather have a "strong leader" or a strong system of laws?

These questions retain their urgency even though the facts of the
controversy, and the underlying law, are matters of dispute.

In a December 22 letter, Assistant Attorney General William E.
Moschella elaborated on the Administration's claim that the NSA
surveillance operation is consistent with the President's
constitutional authority as commander in chief, and with the 2001
congressional authorization for use of force to combat terrorism.
See:

http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/doj/fisa/doj122205.pdf

That is simply wrong, argued Kate Martin of the Center for National
Security Studies.

"When Congress enacted the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act in
1978, it expressly rejected the President's claim of inherent
authority to conduct warrantless wiretaps," she wrote. "It then went
further and made it a crime to conduct such wiretaps." See (an MS
Word file):

http://www.cnss.org/NSA%20Spying%20Memo.doc

In a particularly illuminating exchange, two members of the
conservative Federalist Society who hold opposing views of the
legitimacy of the President's warrantless surveillance operation
questioned each other on the scope of Presidential authority, and
related matters (flagged by beSpacific.com):

http://www.fed-soc.org/pdf/domesticsurveillance.pdf


DEFERRAL OF INTEL AUTHORIZATION ACT CRITICIZED

Three months into Fiscal Year 2006, the FY 2006 intelligence
authorization act has still not been passed by Congress.

According to Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA), the delay is due to Republican
opposition to a proposed amendment that would require the Bush
Administration to provide the Intelligence Committees with copies of
the President's Daily Brief pertaining to Iraq from 2001-2003.

"An unidentified Republican has a hold on the bill to prevent Senate
action unless the amendment is withdrawn along with two other
amendments on secret detention facilities," Sen. Kennedy said.

"If we do not act on this legislation, it will be an unprecedented
failure," said Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), who observed that an
intelligence authorization bill has been enacted each year for nearly
three decades.

Senate Democrats discussed the impasse on the Senate floor on December
20. See:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2005_cr/s122005.html


HPSCI TO CONDUCT CUNNINGHAM INQUIRY

The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence will conduct an
inquiry into the activities of former Committee member Rep. Randy
Cunningham (R-CA), who resigned from Congress after admitting that he
had accepted millions of dollars in bribes.

Committee chair Rep. Pete Hoekstra and ranking member Rep. Jane Harman
said the inquiry was necessary "to ensur[e] the integrity and security
of the House Intelligence Committee is maintained."

"This inquiry will be thorough to be certain his taint did not spread
to this committee," they said in a December 21 news release. See:

http://www.fas.org/irp/news/2005/12/hpsci122105.pdf


WORLD LAW BULLETIN - NOVEMBER 2005

What is the punishment for espionage in Islamic law? That is not a
simple question. But a reasonably concise answer is provided in an
essay in the latest issue of World Law Bulletin. It is one of several
interesting items in the monthly journal produced by the Law Library
of Congress.

Unfortunately, the current Congressional leadership does not permit the
Law Library to provide direct public access to the World Law Bulletin.

But a copy of the latest issue, dated November 2005, was obtained by
Secrecy News and is posted here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/wlb/200511.pdf

Other recent issues dating back to May 2005 are available here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/wlb/index.html

The Washington Office of the American Library Association is
coordinating an effort to persuade Congress to change its policy so as
to permit public access to the Bulletin. Until such a change occurs,
we aim to provide that service.


CRS ON CONCENTRATED CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE

A new report from the Congressional Research Service considers the
problem of critical infrastructure assets that are located in a
concentrated area.

"Critical infrastructure is often geographically concentrated, so it
may be distinctly vulnerable to events like natural disasters,
epidemics, and certain kinds of terrorist attacks. Disruption of
concentrated infrastructure could have greatly disproportionate
effects, with costs potentially running into billions of dollars and
spreading far beyond the immediate area of disturbance."

See "Vulnerability of Concentrated Critical Infrastructure: Background
and Policy Options," December 21, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/RL33206.pdf


LANDSAT DATA CONTINUITY STRATEGY (OSTP)

The U.S. Government will have to modify its strategy in to preserve the
collection of Landsat data, according to a recent memorandum from the
director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy.

"After careful consideration in interagency discussions, all parties
agreed that adjustments to the current near-term strategy and
development of a new long-term strategy are required in order to
ensure the continuity of Landsat-type data," wrote Dr. John H.
Marburger III.

See his December 23 memo on Landsat Data Continuity Strategy Adjustment
here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/news/2005/12/ostp122305.pdf


PAUL ROAZEN, HISTORIAN OF PSYCHOANALYSIS

"All I can say is that Roazen is a menace whatever he writes," wrote an
exasperated Anna Freud, referring to Paul Roazen, the historian of the
psychoanalytic movement who died November 3.

In fact, Roazen was an exemplary scholar who opened up new avenues of
inquiry regarding the founding and development of psychoanalysis. He
posed questions that had never been asked before and, by dint of
scholarly fact-checking, he corrected errors in the historical record,
and in his own early works.

Based in Cambridge, Roazen could periodically be found at the Library
of Congress in Washington, DC, examining newly opened records in the
Library's Freud collection, portions of which remain sealed for years
to come. And his traces are all over the occasionally fierce
historical debates over psychoanalysis in the last three decades.

"Real work entails, in my view, a willingness to engage in
controversy," he once wrote. "Although acrimony in itself should seem
undesirable, it is often necessary to combat what one genuinely
regards as mischievous." (On the Freud Watch, 2003, p. 123).

Links to several obituaries for Paul Roazen may be found here:

http://roazen.net/Paul.html


INTRODUCTION TO OUTER SPACE (1958)

Shortly after the 1957 launch of the Soviet Sputnik satellite, the
President's Science Advisory Committee prepared a brief "Introduction
to Outer Space" to set forth the possibilities and the objectives of a
U.S. space program.

"I have found this statement so informative and so interesting that I
wish to share it with all the people of America and indeed with all
the people of the earth," wrote President Eisenhower in an
introduction.

The pamphlet was originally for sale to the public for fifteen cents.
But the Federation of American Scientists is making it available for
free.

See "Introduction to Outer Space," The White House, March 26, 1958
(thanks to Allen Thomson for a scanned copy of the pamphlet):

http://www.fas.org/spp/guide/usa/intro1958.html

The Star Trek injunction to "boldly go where no man has gone before"
must have derived from similar language in this very document, Dwayne
A. Day neatly conjectured.

See his "Boldly going: Star Trek and spaceflight," The Space Review,
November 28, 2005:

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/506/1




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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2006, Issue No. 2
January 5, 2006


** STATE SECRETS: REVISITING U.S. V. REYNOLDS
** AN OPERATIONAL FILES EXEMPTION FOR DIA
** A MILLION FOR THE PUBLIC INTEREST DECLASS BOARD
** CRS ON NATIONAL SECURITY WHISTLEBLOWERS
** PUBLIC ACCESS TO WORLD LAW BULLETIN URGED


STATE SECRETS: REVISITING U.S. V. REYNOLDS

The 1953 Supreme Court ruling in United States v. Reynolds
enshrined the "state secrets privilege" in U.S. jurisprudence,
entitling the executive branch to withhold information about
"military matters which, in the interest of national security,
should not be divulged."

"Yet United States v. Reynolds... rests on a lie," according to a
petition filed with the Supreme Court last month.

Fifty years ago, Air Force officials asserted under oath that
documents at issue in the case contained state secrets pertaining
to an Air Force plane that crashed, and refused to disclose them
to the plaintiffs, widows of the fallen Air Force crew members.

But a half century later, when the documents were eventually
released, no such secrets concerning the plane's mission or
onboard equipment were to be found.

The petitioners, heirs to the original plaintiffs in Reynolds, are
now asking the Supreme Court to review the case and to permit them
to argue that they were defrauded by the government.

The petitioners were rebuffed by the Court in 2003 when they first
sought reconsideration of the 1953 ruling, and their arguments
have subsequently been rejected by the lower courts as well.

Still, the case raises interesting questions not only about the
integrity of the original Reynolds decision, which is a
cornerstone of national security law, but also about the judicial
system's capacity to acknowledge and correct its errors.

A copy of the Petition for a Writ of Certiorari in the case now
captioned Herring v. U.S., filed at the Supreme Court on December
21, 2005 is posted here (252 pages, 500 kb):

http://www.fas.org/sgp/jud/herring1205.pdf


AN OPERATIONAL FILES EXEMPTION FOR DIA

Congress granted the Defense Intelligence Agency an exemption from
the Freedom of Information Act for its "operational files," but
only for the next two years.

DIA is the fifth intelligence agency -- after CIA, NSA, NRO and NGA
-- to receive such an exemption, which permits it to exclude from
searching or reviewing for release under FOIA files "that document
the conduct of foreign intelligence or counterintelligence
operations."

Opponents of the measure were concerned that the exemption could be
used indiscriminately to withhold intelligence records that would
otherwise be eligible for disclosure under FOIA.

So it was a partial victory for critics when Congress imposed an
unprecedented "sunset"on the exemption, such that it will be
terminated at the end of December 2007.

The final language of the provision, contained in the FY 2006
Defense Authorization Act, and the accompanying report language,
may be found here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2005/dia-opfiles.html


A MILLION FOR THE PUBLIC INTEREST DECLASS BOARD

Congress finally appropriated $1 million for the Public Interest
Declassification Board (PIDB), a White House advisory body that
has been dormant for the past five years. The money was allocated
without comment in the final version of the FY 2006 Defense
Appropriations Act (H.R. 2863).

For PIDB membership and related information, see:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2005/pida.html


CRS ON NATIONAL SECURITY WHISTLEBLOWERS

The statutory framework that governs national security
whistleblowers -- government employees who disclose malfeasance
involving classified information or activities -- is examined in a
new report from the Congressional Research Service.

"Whistleblowers have helped uncover agency wrongdoing,
illegalities, waste, and corruption," the 43 page CRS report
finds.

"The interest of Congress in maintaining an open channel with
agency employees is demonstrated through such statutes as
Lloyd-LaFollette, the appropriations riders on the nondisclosure
policy, the Military Whistleblower Protection Act, and the
Intelligence Community Whistleblower Act."

See "National Security Whistleblowers," December 30, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33215.pdf

Political pressure is growing to provide improved protection for
national security whistleblowers, who are often vulnerable to
official retaliation.

"Under today's failed protection regimen, whistleblowers are forced
to go to the national news media which often does a better job of
protecting their identities than the Congress does," said Danielle
Brian, Executive Director of the Project On Government Oversight
(POGO), which circulated the CRS report today.

"National Security employees' highest duty is to the Constitution,
and they should not have to sacrifice their careers or financial
security in doing what is right," said Sibel Edmonds, president of
the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition, which advocates
stronger whistleblower protections.

"A former National Security Agency official wants to tell Congress
about electronic intelligence programs that he asserts were
carried out illegally by the NSA and the Defense Intelligence
Agency," writes Bill Gertz in the Washington Times today.

See "NSA Whistleblower Asks to Testify," January 5:

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20060104-114052-6606r.htm


PUBLIC ACCESS TO WORLD LAW BULLETIN URGED

Dozens of public interest organizations, librarians, attorneys and
others have written a letter to Congress asking for "unrestricted
public access" to the congressional publication World Law
Bulletin.

"The World Law Bulletin, produced monthly by the Law Library of
Congress, is a unique and uniquely valuable publication. It
provides an unparalleled survey of legal developments abroad,
along with focused analysis on topics of special interest. It is
based entirely on open, published sources."

"We respectfully urge you to help the interested public to gain
access to this exceptional congressional resource."

See the January 3, 2006 letter to the congressional Joint Committee
on the Library here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2006/01/wlblet-010306.pdf

Recent back issues of World Law Bulletin, published without
congressional authorization or approval, are available from the
Federation of American Scientists here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/wlb/index.html




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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2006, Issue No. 3
January 6, 2006


** CRS ON WARRANTLESS SURVEILLANCE
** INFORMATION SHARING POLICY FAULTED
** KEEPING CURRENT ON GOVERNMENT SECRECY


CRS ON WARRANTLESS SURVEILLANCE

The Congressional Research Service has prepared a detailed
evaluation of Bush Administration legal claims regarding
Presidential authority to conduct warrantless electronic
surveillance within the United States.

The CRS authors sift through each of the statutory, constitutional
and other arguments that have been presented in defense of the
reported NSA surveillance activity, and ultimately find them
wanting.

A final determination on the matter is impossible, they note,
"without an understanding of the specific facts involved and the
nature of the President's authorization, which are for the most
part classified."

In the end, however, "the Administration's legal justification, as
presented in the [December 22, 2005] summary analysis from the
Office of Legislative Affairs, does not seem to be as
well-grounded as the tenor of that letter suggests," they
cautiously conclude.

See "Presidential Authority to Conduct Warrantless Electronic
Surveillance to Gather Foreign Intelligence Information,"
Congressional Research Service, January 5, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/m010506.pdf


INFORMATION SHARING POLICY FAULTED

Government initiatives to promote information sharing among and
between federal and state agencies have failed to achieve their
objectives, a new congressional staff report finds.

"Despite numerous directives, exhortations, and invitations to do
so, federal policymakers have failed to develop uniform standards
for converting classified intelligence into an unclassified or
'less classified' format that can be disseminated rapidly to
appropriate state, local, and tribal authorities to thwart
terrorist attacks," the report says.

The reports recounts in unblinking detail each new announcement of
a bold innovation in information sharing policy, and its
subsequent failure.

"This distressing lack of leadership has persisted for more than
four years."

The authors propose a law enforcement-driven approach to
information sharing based on a model adopted in the United
Kingdom.

The report was prepared by Democratic staff for Rep. Bennie G.
Thompson, ranking member of the House Committee on Homeland
Security.

See "Beyond Connecting the Dots: A VITAL Framework for Sharing Law
Enforcement Intelligence Information," House Committee on
Homeland Security Democratic Staff Report, December 28, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2005_rpt/vital.pdf


KEEPING CURRENT ON GOVERNMENT SECRECY

A sizable inventory of organizations, web sites, and publications
concerned in some way with government secrecy was presented in a
recent survey.

"In the interest of sharing information, here is a list of Web
sites, blogs, listservs, and newsletters that could help clients
needing access to government documents but who might experience
difficulty locating that information. The list is arranged by
government watchdog sites, sites that provide access to
government documents, sites that document government secrecy, and
advocacy groups that report on FOIA news."

See "Shhh!!: Keeping Current on Government Secrecy" by Laura
Gordon-Murnane, Searcher: The Magazine for Database
Professionals, January 2006:

http://www.infotoday.com/searcher/jan06/Gordon-Murnane.shtml



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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2006, Issue No. 4
January 9, 2006


** CRS ON AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE
** CRS ON DECLARATIONS OF WAR AND AUMFS
** MORTON HALPERIN ON WARRANTLESS NSA SURVEILLANCE
** STEPHEN CAMBONE ON DOD FACILITY SECURITY


CRS ON AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE

The legislative history of the September 14, 2001 Congressional
resolution authorizing the use of force in response to the
September 11 attacks is concisely examined in a new report of the
Congressional Research Service.

The 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force, or AUMF, has been
in the news lately because the Bush Administration has claimed that
it provided statutory authority for the National Security Agency to
conduct warrantless surveillance within the United States, a claim
that has been disputed by some in Congress and elsewhere.

The new CRS legislative history notes that the White House had
initially sought legislative authority "to deter and pre-empt any
future acts of terrorism or aggression against the United States."

But "This language would have seemingly authorized the President,
without durational limitation, and at his sole discretion, to take
military action against any nation, terrorist group or individuals
in the world without having to seek further authority from the
Congress."

"It would have granted the President open-ended authority to act
against all terrorism and terrorists or potential aggressors
against the United States anywhere, not just the authority to act
against the terrorists involved in the September 11, 2001 attacks,
and those nations, organizations and persons who had aided or
harbored the terrorists.

"As a consequence, this portion of the language in the proposed
White House draft resolution was strongly opposed by key
legislators in Congress and was not included in the final version
of the legislation that was passed," the CRS explained.

A copy of the new CRS publication was obtained by Secrecy News.

See "Authorization For Use Of Military Force in Response to the 9/11
Attacks (P.L. 107-40): Legislative History," January 4, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RS22357.pdf


CRS ON DECLARATIONS OF WAR AND AUMFS

The distinction between a formal declaration of war and an
authorization for use of military force was addressed in an
exceptionally informative report of the Congressional Research
Service in 2003.

"With respect to domestic law, a declaration of war automatically
brings into effect numerous standby statutory authorities
conferring special powers on the President with respect to the
military, foreign trade, transportation, communications,
manufacturing, alien enemies, etc."

"In contrast, no standby authorities appear to be triggered
automatically by an authorization for the use of force."

The history of both categories is delineated, including the texts of
the eleven formal declarations of war and the most important
authorizations for use of military force, along with an itemization
of the various statutes that are triggered directly or indirectly
in each case.

The 112 page CRS report is not generally available in the public
domain. A copy was obtained by Secrecy News.

See "Declarations of War and Authorizations for the Use of Military
Force: Historical Background and Legal Implications," updated
January 14, 2003:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL31133.pdf


MORTON HALPERIN ON WARRANTLESS NSA SURVEILLANCE

"The warrantless National Security Agency (NSA) surveillance program
is an illegal and unnecessary intrusion into the privacy of all
Americans," writes Morton H. Halperin in a new assessment of the
controversial program.

Halperin, a leading civil libertarian and former Pentagon and State
Department official, played an influential role in the enactment of
the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978, which
subjected intelligence surveillance within the United States to
a measure of judicial oversight. He also has the distinction of
having his phone tapped at the direction of Henry Kissinger, who
eventually apologized for the action.

"Congress must conduct hearings to determine exactly what is being
done in the new NSA program and why the administration concluded
that it could not use FISA," he urged.

"Then it should determine what needs to be done to insure that, in
the future, Presidents obey the law."

See "A Legal Analysis of the NSA Warrantless Surveillance Program"
by Morton H. Halperin, January 6, 2006:

http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.as...J8OVF&b=1334469


STEPHEN CAMBONE ON DOD FACILITY SECURITY

Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence Stephen A. Cambone has
issued a new Department of Defense Instruction on the subject of
DoD facility security.

"The authority of a DoD commander to take reasonably necessary and
lawful measures to maintain law and order and to protect
installation personnel and property ... shall not be exercised in
an arbitrary, unpredictable or discriminatory manner."

See DoD Instruction 5200.08, "Security of DoD Installations and
Resources," December 10, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/dod/i5200_08.pdf




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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2006, Issue No. 5
January 12, 2006


** REMOTE SENSING TUTORIAL
** NRO USE OF OPERATIONAL FILES EXEMPTION CHALLENGED
** THE COST OF THE IRAQ WAR
** DOE INSPECTOR GENERAL REPORT ON THE WEN HO LEE CASE


REMOTE SENSING TUTORIAL

The principles and practice of remote sensing, including the various
applications of satellite imagery, are introduced in a newly updated
Remote Sensing Tutorial that was originally prepared for NASA.

An unusual educational product that is designed for the interested
non-specialist, the Tutorial features an abundance of sample satellite
images and self-test exercises.

It was principally authored by Dr. Nicholas M. Short, Sr., a geologist
and former NASA employee.

The most recent edition of the Tutorial is dated November 2005. It is
published on the website of the Federation of American Scientists
with Dr. Short's kind permission. See:

http://www.fas.org/irp/imint/docs/rst/index.html

Remote sensing generally refers to instrument-based data collection
directed at a target area, and is often used in connection with
orbital surveillance of the Earth's surface.

"The term 'remote sensing' was coined by Ms. Evelyn Pruitt in the
mid-1950's when she, a geographer/oceanographer, was with the U.S.
Office of Naval Research," the Tutorial notes.


NRO USE OF OPERATIONAL FILES EXEMPTION CHALLENGED

In the past, the National Reconnaissance Office, which builds and
operates intelligence satellites, has released unclassified portions
of its budget justification materials under the Freedom of
Information Act.

But lately, the NRO has refused to process FOIA requests for such
unclassified budget information, claiming that it is contained in
"operational files" that are exempt from the FOIA.

That NRO claim is the subject of a pending lawsuit filed by the
Federation of American Scientists. The parties exchanged a volley of
legal motions this week.

The NRO "has misconstrued the operational files exemption and invoked
it in a manner that is contrary to the statute and the legislative
history," FAS contended in its January 9 filing.

For its part, the NRO insisted that FAS's "interpretation of the
statute contradicts the plain language of the statute and nothing in
the case law ... supports such a strained interpretation."

The National Security Archive contributed a carefully argued amicus
curiae ("friend of the court") brief recounting the history of the
operational files exemption and its treatment in prior cases. The
Archive brief, written by Meredith Fuchs, concluded with FAS that
"the Court should order the NRO to search for, review and otherwise
process the requested record under the terms of the FOIA."

All three briefs, filed in D.C. District Court January 9, may be found
here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/foia/nro-cbjb/index.html


THE COST OF THE IRAQ WAR

Among the mistakes and misrepresentations that led to the U.S. war in
Iraq, one of the most shocking is the failure to correctly assess the
financial costs of the war.

Never mind the low comedy of AID Administrator Andrew Natsios, who
told Americans in 2003 that Iraqi reconstruction would cost taxpayers
no more than $1.7 billion (Secrecy News, 12/08/05).

Now it appears that even estimates in the hundreds of billions of
dollars may "underestimate the War's true costs to America by a wide
margin," according to a new study by economists Linda Bilmes and
Joseph Stiglitz, the Nobel laureate.

The authors survey the direct and indirect costs of the Iraq war and
its aftermath, acknowledging the methodological difficulties
involved.

"Even taking a conservative approach, we have been surprised at how
large [the costs] are. We can state, with some degree of confidence,
that they exceed a trillion dollars," Bilmes and Stiglitz write.

"Would the American people have had a different attitude towards going
to war had they known the total cost? Would they have thought that
there might be better ways of advancing the cause of democracy or
even protecting themselves against an attack, that would cost but a
fraction of these amounts?"

"In the end, we may have decided that a trillion dollars spent on the
War in Iraq was better than all of these alternatives. But at least
it would have been a more informed decision than the one that was
made. And recognizing the risks, we might have conducted the War in
a manner different from the way we did," the authors conclude.

Their paper was reported in the Boston Globe on January 8.

See "The Economic Costs of the Iraq War: An Appraisal Three Years
After the Beginning of the Conflict" by Linda Bilmes and Joseph E.
Stiglitz, January 2006:

http://www2.gsb.columbia.edu/faculty/jstig...War_in_Iraq.htm


DOE INSPECTOR GENERAL REPORT ON THE WEN HO LEE CASE

The Department of Energy has released a declassified version of a 1999
report by its Inspector General on the case of Wen Ho Lee, the former
Los Alamos scientist who was suspected of espionage and who
eventually pled guilty to one count of mishandling classified
information.

The declassified document is so severely redacted that it is often
unintelligible. Even the name "Wen Ho Lee" has been censored,
perhaps due to his ongoing pursuit of Privacy Act litigation
against the government and various members of the press who reported
on his case.

A copy of the document was released in response to a Freedom of
Information Act request from David Armstrong of the National Security
News Service.

One apparently new assertion, Mr. Armstrong noted, is that the Unnamed
Person who is the subject of the Inspector General report may have
improperly assisted private companies by "employ[ing] classified
techniques" in order to solve "certain technical problems that
various companies were having in the commercial world."

This was problematic because "the companies involved could possibly
work backwards on the unclassified solution to determine the
classified process used...." (at page 100).

A copy of the redacted DOE Inspector General Report, dated July 27,
1999, and released in November 2005 is available here (161 pages in a
very large 6.9 MB PDF file):

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

The pressure on journalists to disclose their sources in the Wen Ho
Lee litigation and other cases was discussed in "Name That Source" by
Jeffrey Toobin, The New Yorker, January 16, 2006:

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060116fa_fact



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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2006, Issue No. 6
January 17, 2006


** DOD ISSUES DIRECTIVE ON SPECIAL ACCESS PROGRAMS
** WAXMAN CHALLENGES MINE INSPECTION SECRECY
** DEFENDING AGAINST CLANDESTINE NUCLEAR ATTACK
** THE 9/11 COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS: A POST-MORTEM


DOD ISSUES DIRECTIVE ON SPECIAL ACCESS PROGRAMS

The Department of Defense has issued an updated directive governing
the conduct of Special Access Programs, or SAPs.

SAPs are highly classified programs involving heightened security
measures -- such as access control lists, special non-disclosure
agreements, polygraph tests, etc. -- that go beyond those of ordinary
("collateral") programs that involve classified information.

Within the Department of Defense, there are Acquisition SAPs for
classified military procurement, Intelligence SAPs dealing with
particularly sensitive intelligence collection activities, and
Operations and Support SAPs that cover sensitive military operations.

SAPs range in sensitivity from "acknowledged SAPs," the existence of
which may be publicly admitted, to "unacknowledged SAPs," whose very
existence is classified, to "waived SAPs," a subset of unacknowledged
SAPs for which normal congressional reporting requirements are limited
to eight senior members of Congress.

Almost by definition, assigning SAP status to a program impedes
independent and congressional oversight. In the wake of the collapse
of several large DoD acquisition SAPs in the early 1990s, internal
DoD controls on SAPs were increased.

It is possible that the recently disclosed NSA domestic surveillance
operation was a "waived SAP," but this has not been confirmed.

See DoD Directive 5205.07, "Special Access Program (SAP) Policy,"
January 5, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/dod/d5205_07.pdf

In 2001, Congress prohibited the creation of new SAPs except where 30
day prior notice was given to the congressional defense committees.

But in an early display of its controversial use of presidential
signing statements to undercut legislative action, the Bush White
House issued a statement reserving the right to defy this
notification requirement (Secrecy News, 01/11/02):

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2002/01/gwb011002b.html

Meanwhile, Pentagon program managers have devised a way to impose
"SAP-like" security measures without even the limited oversight
involved in an actual SAP, observed Washington Post blogger William
Arkin last week.

ACCMs, or "Alternative or Compensatory Control Measures," are
quasi-SAPs that are "easier to establish [than SAPs] and the program
doesn't have to be reported to Congress!" wrote Arkin, who notes that
hundreds of ACCMs have been initiated since 9/11.

See "More Compartmented Programs," Early Warning, January 13, 2006:

http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/


WAXMAN CHALLENGES MINE INSPECTION SECRECY

Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) asked the Department of Labor last week to
reverse the policy of withholding reports of mine safety inspections
from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.

"This unwarranted secrecy may protect the mining industry from
embarrassing disclosures, but it undermines accountability and mine
safety," Rep. Waxman wrote.

"Prior to 2004, [the Labor Department's Mine Safety and Health
Administration (MSHA)] publicly disclosed both the results of mine
safety inspections and the reports and notes filed by inspectors that
provided the documentation of any violations found," he recalled.

"The inspectors' reports and notes were particularly important. Not
only were they used by mine safety organizations, mine workers, and
the public to identify dangerous mines and practices, they were also
useful to mine operators implementing needed improvements in mine
safety."

"In 2004, MSHA reversed its interpretation of the Freedom of
Information Act, deciding that the inspectors' reports and notes did
not need to be disclosed under FOIA."

"It would be impossible to draw a direct connection between the new
FOIA policy and the recent fatal disaster at the Sago mine. But the
agency's secrecy policy certainly limited public disclosure about the
mine's violations."

See "Labor Department Policy Suppressing Mine Inspection Reports
Impedes Reform," January 11:

http://www.democrats.reform.house.gov/story.asp?ID=989


DEFENDING AGAINST CLANDESTINE NUCLEAR ATTACK

"Since the 1950s, there has been sporadic concern about the threat of
clandestine nuclear attack" -- involving nuclear weapons delivered by
means other than missile or aircraft -- "but little has been done,"
the Defense Science Board observed in a June 2004 study on the topic.

A series of National Intelligence Estimates dating back to 1951 on the
subject of clandestine WMD attacks against the U.S. has been compiled
from declassified CIA records along with the 2004 DSB report and may
be found here (thanks to Allen Thomson):

http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/wmd.htm#clan


THE 9/11 COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS: A POST-MORTEM

The 9/11 Commission could hardly have delivered a more forceful
presentation to a more receptive public audience than it did in its
best-selling 2004 report.

Yet 17 of its 41 recommendations have been largely or completely
ignored by the government. Why?

The reasons "fall into six categories," according to an assessment in
the latest National Journal: "a Congress resistant to institutional
change; a bureaucracy that bucks new ideas; lack of money; lack of
leadership; special interests that have the ear of Congress or the
White House; and, finally, an inability to accurately see how the
United States is perceived abroad."

See "Miles to Go," by Shane Harris and Greta Wodele, National Journal,
January 14, reprinted here as "Bureaucracy hinders 9/11 commission
recommendations":

http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0106/011306nj1.htm




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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2006, Issue No. 7
January 19, 2006


** GUIDELINES FOR ACCESS TO CLASSIFIED INFO REVISED
** CRS ON CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATION OF INTEL ACTIVITIES
** LIBYAN NUCLEAR BIBLIOGRAPHY
** A TALLY OF UNPUBLISHED CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS
** ARMY UPDATES REGULATION ON MILITARY EXECUTIONS


GUIDELINES FOR ACCESS TO CLASSIFIED INFO REVISED

Last month President Bush approved a revision of U.S. Government
standards for granting security clearances and permitting access
to classified information.

The revised standards address all of the previous considerations
for approving access to classified information -- allegiance to
the United States, foreign influence, drug and alcohol abuse,
criminal behavior, psychological instability, and so forth.

But in each case the criteria have been elaborated, both in terms
of the actions that could raise security concerns and the factors
that could mitigate such concerns.

The many acts that could disqualify a person from access to
classified information include "training to commit, or advocacy
of... terrorism," as well as "disclosure of classified or other
protected information... to the media."

At some points, the guidelines seem to offer officials wide
latitude for withholding or revoking a security clearance by
citing, for example, "inappropriate behavior in the workplace."
At other points, they show a surprising understanding of human
weakness and they admit the possibility of personal change.

The December 29 transmittal memo from National Security Adviser
Stephen J. Hadley to Information Security Oversight Office
director William Leonard states the new guidelines are "for
immediate implementation."

But "an internal dispute has arisen among the various national
security agencies as to whether implementation requires a notice
and comment period, which could lead to a delay as long as 18
months," said Mark S. Zaid, a Washington, D.C. attorney who
regularly handles security clearance cases.

Mr. Zaid added that there is an unresolved question regarding
whether the revised guidelines would apply to pending security
clearance cases.

See "Adjudicative Guidelines for Determining Eligibility for Access
to Classified Information," December 29, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/isoo/guidelines.html

For purposes of comparison, the prior set of Adjudicative
Guidelines adopted by the Clinton Administration in March 1997 may
be found here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/spb/class.htm

The White House Office of Management and Budget last month issued a
related memorandum to executive branch agencies on "Reciprocal
Recognition of Existing Personnel Security Clearances," which
addresses the often violated requirement that agencies recognize
each other's security clearances. A copy of the memo, first
published on the ISOO web site, is posted here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/reciprocal.pdf


CRS ON CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATION OF INTEL ACTIVITIES

A new memorandum report from the Congressional Research Service
examines the legal requirements that the congressional
intelligence committees be "fully and currently informed" of U.S.
intelligence activities.

The CRS memo notes the exceptional status of covert actions, which
must be disclosed only to the Gang of Eight, i.e, the leaders of
the two intelligence committees as well as the leaders of the
House and Senate.

The limited congressional notification of the recently disclosed
NSA domestic surveillance operation more closely resembled that of
a covert action than the normal disclosure of an authorized
intelligence activity, the CRS explained.

As such, it "would appear to be inconsistent with the law, which
requires that the 'congressional intelligence committees be kept
fully and currently informed of all intelligence activities,'
other than those involving covert actions."

The CRS memorandum was requested by Rep. Jane Harman, ranking
member of the House Intelligence Committee, and authored by CRS
intelligence specialist Alfred Cumming. A copy was obtained by
Secrecy News.

See "Statutory Procedures Under Which Congress Is To Be Informed of
U.S. Intelligence Activities, Including Covert Actions," January
18, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/m011806.pdf


LIBYAN NUCLEAR BIBLIOGRAPHY

Scientific publications by Libyan scientists on nuclear physics,
nuclear engineering and related topics were compiled in an open
literature bibliography by independent researcher Mark Gurwitz.

The Libya bibliography is part of an ongoing, informal
investigation by Mr. Gurwitz into the worldwide propagation of
nuclear science and technology.

See "Libyan Nuclear Bibliography: Open Literature Citations" by
Mark Gorwitz, January 2006:

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/libya/gorwitz.pdf


A TALLY OF UNPUBLISHED CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS

Almost every day that Congress is in session, multiple committees
hold hearings. But not every hearing, not even every important
hearing, finds it way into print.

The U.S. Congressional Bibliographies project at North Carolina
State University has tallied the numbers of hearings held by each
Senate committee from 1993-2001, and reported the percentage of
hearings that have been published by the Government Printing
Office.

Thus, only 38% of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearings
in 2001, many of which involved confirmation hearings of Bush
appointees, have been published.

Unpublished hearings also addressed topics such as anthrax exposure
(Appropriations), aviation competition (Commerce), "club" drugs
(Narcotics), E-911 compliance (Commerce), internet privacy
(Commerce), unsolicited commercial e-mail (Commerce), and veterans
programs (VA), observed NCSU Social Science Reference Librarian
John A. McGeachy.

See Statistical Reports of Printed Hearings on this page:

http://www.lib.ncsu.edu/congbibs/senate/


ARMY UPDATES REGULATION ON MILITARY EXECUTIONS

The U.S. Army this week issued a newly updated regulation on
military executions. The move may portend a resumption of capital
punishment in the military after a hiatus of more than 40 years.

"Only the President of the United States can approve and order the
execution of a death sentence," the regulation states. Death is
by lethal injection.

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

See U.S. Army Regulation 190-55, "U.S. Army Corrections System:
Procedures for Military Executions," January 17, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/r190_55.pdf

The last time that the Army performed a military execution was in
April 1961. It involved an Army Private who was convicted of rape
and attempted murder.

135 people have been executed by the Army since 1916, according to
the Death Penalty Information Center (www.deathpenaltyinfo.org).

Half a dozen military inmates are on death row at Fort Leavenworth,
Kansas, and by last May two of them had nearly exhausted their
final appeals, according to the Houston Chronicle ("U.S. Military
Executions Draw Closer" by Andrew Tilghman, May 1, 2005).



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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2006, Issue No. 8
January 20, 2006


** JUSTICE DEPT ISSUES WHITE PAPER ON NSA SURVEILLANCE
** THE LEGAL SIGNIFICANCE OF PRESIDENTIAL SIGNING STATEMENTS
** NSA: REDACTING WITH CONFIDENCE


JUSTICE DEPT ISSUES WHITE PAPER ON NSA SURVEILLANCE

The Department of Justice renewed its legal defense of warrantless
domestic intelligence surveillance by the National Security
Agency in a 42 page white paper transmitted to Congress
yesterday.

The white paper essentially reiterates at greater length the
previous defenses articulated by the Bush Administration: (1)
the NSA surveillance action was authorized by Congress when it
passed the 2001 resolution on use of military force against al
Qaeda; and (2) the President has inherent authority to conduct
such surveillance in any case. Both assertions are widely
disputed.

"The President -- in light of the broad authority to use military
force in response to the attacks of September 11th and to
prevent further catastrophic attack expressly conferred on the
President by the Constitution and confirmed and supplemented by
Congress in the AUMF [authorization for use of military force]
-- has legal authority to authorize the NSA to conduct the
signals intelligence activities he has described. Those
activities are authorized by the Constitution and by statute,
and they violate neither FISA nor the Fourth Amendment," the
document concludes.

See "Legal Authorities Supporting the Activities of the National
Security Agency Described by the President," Department of
Justice White Paper, January 19, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/irp/nsa/doj011906.pdf


THE LEGAL SIGNIFICANCE OF PRESIDENTIAL SIGNING STATEMENTS

When he signed the 2006 Defense Appropriations Act, which
included a prohibition against torture of detainees in U.S.
custody, President Bush issued a signing statement implying that
he could disregard the new prohibition in his capacity as
commander in chief.

"The executive branch shall construe [the statute], relating to
detainees, in a manner consistent with the constitutional
authority of the President to supervise the unitary executive
branch and as Commander in Chief," he wrote in the December 30,
2005 statement on H.R. 2863.

The use of Presidential signing statements to create a kind of
quasi-legislative history intended to influence future judicial
rulings is a relatively new and increasingly controversial
phenomenon.

"So far as we have been able to determine, Presidential signing
statements that purported to create legislative history for the
use of the courts was uncommon -- if indeed it existed at all --
before the Reagan and Bush Presidencies," according to a 1993
memorandum from the Department of Justice Office of Legal
Counsel.

"The Reagan and Bush Administrations made frequent use of
Presidential signing statements, not only to declare their
understanding of the constitutional effect of the statutory
language, but also to create evidence on which the courts could
rely in construing such language."

Among other problems with this practice, "it is arguable that 'by
reinterpreting those parts of congressionally enacted
legislation of which he disapproves, the President exercises
unconstitutional line-item veto power'."

See "The Legal Significance of Presidential Signing Statements,"
prepared by Assistant Attorney General Walter Dellinger,
November 3, 1993:

http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/signing.htm


NSA: REDACTING WITH CONFIDENCE

The National Security Agency has issued new guidance to assist
officials in redacting (censoring) documents in Microsoft Word
format and producing unclassified Adobe Portable Document (PDF)
files without inadvertently disclosing sensitive information.

"MS Word is used throughout the DoD and the Intelligence
Community (IC) for preparing documents, reports, notes, and
other formal and informal materials. PDF is often used as the
format for downgraded or sanitized documents."

"There are a number of pitfalls for the person attempting to
sanitize a Word document for release."

For example, "As numerous people have learned to their chagrin,
merely converting an MS Word document to PDF does not remove all
[sensitive] metadata automatically."

"This paper describes the issue, and gives a step-by-step
description of how to do it with confidence that inappropriate
material will not be released."

See "Redacting with Confidence: How to Safely Publish Sanitized
Reports Converted From Word to PDF," National Security Agency,
December 13, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/dod/nsa-redact.pdf



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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2006, Issue No. 9
January 23, 2006


** CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT IN THEORY AND IN PRACTICE
** PATRIOT ACT REAUTHORIZATION: A LEGAL ANALYSIS (CRS)
** KINETIC ENERGY KILL FOR BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE (CRS)
** PROTECTION OF CLASSIFIED INFORMATION BY CONGRESS (CRS)
** CIA LIMITS WEB PUBLICATION OF CRITICAL REPORTS


CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT IN THEORY AND IN PRACTICE

The rudiments of Congressional oversight -- its legal basis, its
functions, and the diverse forms it takes -- are concisely described
in a newly updated report from the Congressional Research Service.

"Congressional oversight refers to the review, monitoring, and
supervision of federal agencies, programs, activities, and policy
implementation.... Congress's oversight authority derives from its
'implied' powers in the Constitution, public laws, and House and
Senate rules. It is an integral part of the American system of
checks and balances."

See "Congressional Oversight," updated January 3, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/97-936.pdf

Integral though it may be, there is a widespread perception that
congressional oversight has atrophied in recent years.

"Everyone recognizes that the failure of congressional oversight was
one of the reasons why we have some of the problems in the
intelligence community today," said Sen. John McCain on NBC Meet the
Press on November 21, 2004.

"We really don't have, still don't have, meaningful congressional
oversight," McCain said.

Last week, Rep. Henry Waxman released two reports that compare
Congress' relentless probing of the Clinton Administration with the
anemic oversight of the present Administration.

"On issue after issue, the Congress has failed to conduct meaningful
investigations of significant allegations of wrongdoing by the Bush
Administration," Rep Waxman wrote. "This approach stands in stark
contrast to the breadth and intrusiveness of congressional
investigations of the Clinton Administration."

See "Congress' Abdication of Oversight," January 17, 2006:

http://www.democrats.reform.house.gov/story.asp?ID=990


PATRIOT ACT REAUTHORIZATION: A LEGAL ANALYSIS (CRS)

The existing controversy over reauthorization of the USA Patriot Act
-- portions of which will "sunset" if they are not renewed --
acquired a new dimension with the disclosure last month of an NSA
domestic surveillance operation.

Some now argue that the Patriot Act should not be reauthorized before
the Bush Administration's claims of inherent presidential authority
to conduct domestic intelligence surveillance outside of the
framework of law (FISA) are confronted and clarified.

"The extensive new powers requested by the executive branch in its
proposal to extend and enlarge the Patriot Act should under no
circumstances be granted unless and until there are adequate and
enforceable safeguards to protect the Constitution and the rights of
the American people against the kinds of abuses that have so
recently been revealed," said former Vice President Al Gore in a
January 16, 2006 speech.

Much of the Patriot Act is unobjectionable to anyone, and some of it
is positively sensible. But it also has controversial provisions on
"national security letters" as well as several totally extraneous
provisions inserted by House Republicans.

A detailed assessment of the entire piece of legislation was prepared
by the Congressional Research Service. A copy was obtained by
Secrecy News.

See "USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005 (H.R.
3199): A Legal Analysis of the Conference Bill," January 17, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/RL33239.pdf


KINETIC ENERGY KILL FOR BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE (CRS)

A new report from the Congressional Research Service presents a
skeptical overview of the development of kinetic energy interceptors
-- anti-missile missiles -- for defense against incoming ballistic
missiles.

"The data on the U.S. flight test effort to develop a national
missile defense (NMD) system are mixed and ambiguous. There is no
recognizable pattern to explain this record nor is there conclusive
evidence of a learning curve over more than two decades of
developmental testing."

A copy of the new CRS report was obtained by Secrecy News.

See "Kinetic Energy Kill for Ballistic Missile Defense: A Status
Overview," January 18, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/RL33240.pdf


PROTECTION OF CLASSIFIED INFORMATION BY CONGRESS (CRS)

The rules and procedures for protecting classified information in
Congress -- which differ in the House and the Senate -- are
described in another new CRS report.

See "Protection of Classified Information by Congress: Practices and
Proposals," updated January 11, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/secrecy/RS20748.pdf


CIA LIMITS WEB PUBLICATION OF CRITICAL REPORTS

The Central Intelligence Agency has selectively declined to publish
on its web site at least three unclassified reports produced by the
Center for the Study of Intelligence that present an unflattering
picture of the Agency, US News reported this week.

See "A Tangled Web Woven," by David E. Kaplan, US News and World
Report, January 30, 2006:

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/060130/30cia.htm




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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2006, Issue No. 9
January 23, 2006


** CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT IN THEORY AND IN PRACTICE
** PATRIOT ACT REAUTHORIZATION: A LEGAL ANALYSIS (CRS)
** KINETIC ENERGY KILL FOR BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE (CRS)
** PROTECTION OF CLASSIFIED INFORMATION BY CONGRESS (CRS)
** CIA LIMITS WEB PUBLICATION OF CRITICAL REPORTS


CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT IN THEORY AND IN PRACTICE

The rudiments of Congressional oversight -- its legal basis, its
functions, and the diverse forms it takes -- are concisely described
in a newly updated report from the Congressional Research Service.

"Congressional oversight refers to the review, monitoring, and
supervision of federal agencies, programs, activities, and policy
implementation.... Congress's oversight authority derives from its
'implied' powers in the Constitution, public laws, and House and
Senate rules. It is an integral part of the American system of
checks and balances."

See "Congressional Oversight," updated January 3, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/97-936.pdf

Integral though it may be, there is a widespread perception that
congressional oversight has atrophied in recent years.

"Everyone recognizes that the failure of congressional oversight was
one of the reasons why we have some of the problems in the
intelligence community today," said Sen. John McCain on NBC Meet the
Press on November 21, 2004.

"We really don't have, still don't have, meaningful congressional
oversight," McCain said.

Last week, Rep. Henry Waxman released two reports that compare
Congress' relentless probing of the Clinton Administration with the
anemic oversight of the present Administration.

"On issue after issue, the Congress has failed to conduct meaningful
investigations of significant allegations of wrongdoing by the Bush
Administration," Rep Waxman wrote. "This approach stands in stark
contrast to the breadth and intrusiveness of congressional
investigations of the Clinton Administration."

See "Congress' Abdication of Oversight," January 17, 2006:

http://www.democrats.reform.house.gov/story.asp?ID=990


PATRIOT ACT REAUTHORIZATION: A LEGAL ANALYSIS (CRS)

The existing controversy over reauthorization of the USA Patriot Act
-- portions of which will "sunset" if they are not renewed --
acquired a new dimension with the disclosure last month of an NSA
domestic surveillance operation.

Some now argue that the Patriot Act should not be reauthorized before
the Bush Administration's claims of inherent presidential authority
to conduct domestic intelligence surveillance outside of the
framework of law (FISA) are confronted and clarified.

"The extensive new powers requested by the executive branch in its
proposal to extend and enlarge the Patriot Act should under no
circumstances be granted unless and until there are adequate and
enforceable safeguards to protect the Constitution and the rights of
the American people against the kinds of abuses that have so
recently been revealed," said former Vice President Al Gore in a
January 16, 2006 speech.

Much of the Patriot Act is unobjectionable to anyone, and some of it
is positively sensible. But it also has controversial provisions on
"national security letters" as well as several totally extraneous
provisions inserted by House Republicans.

A detailed assessment of the entire piece of legislation was prepared
by the Congressional Research Service. A copy was obtained by
Secrecy News.

See "USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005 (H.R.
3199): A Legal Analysis of the Conference Bill," January 17, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/RL33239.pdf


KINETIC ENERGY KILL FOR BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE (CRS)

A new report from the Congressional Research Service presents a
skeptical overview of the development of kinetic energy interceptors
-- anti-missile missiles -- for defense against incoming ballistic
missiles.

"The data on the U.S. flight test effort to develop a national
missile defense (NMD) system are mixed and ambiguous. There is no
recognizable pattern to explain this record nor is there conclusive
evidence of a learning curve over more than two decades of
developmental testing."

A copy of the new CRS report was obtained by Secrecy News.

See "Kinetic Energy Kill for Ballistic Missile Defense: A Status
Overview," January 18, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/RL33240.pdf


PROTECTION OF CLASSIFIED INFORMATION BY CONGRESS (CRS)

The rules and procedures for protecting classified information in
Congress -- which differ in the House and the Senate -- are
described in another new CRS report.

See "Protection of Classified Information by Congress: Practices and
Proposals," updated January 11, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/secrecy/RS20748.pdf


CIA LIMITS WEB PUBLICATION OF CRITICAL REPORTS

The Central Intelligence Agency has selectively declined to publish
on its web site at least three unclassified reports produced by the
Center for the Study of Intelligence that present an unflattering
picture of the Agency, US News reported this week.

See "A Tangled Web Woven," by David E. Kaplan, US News and World
Report, January 30, 2006:

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/060130/30cia.htm




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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2006, Issue No. 10
January 25, 2006


** WHITE HOUSE REBUFFED 2002 EFFORT TO RELAX FISA STANDARD
** CLASSIFICATION LAWS APPLY TO EVERYONE, JUDGE SAYS
** HANDBOOK ON MAKING INTELLIGENCE ACCOUNTABLE
** NSA DECLASSIFICATION PLAN


WHITE HOUSE REBUFFED 2002 EFFORT TO RELAX FISA STANDARD

The Bush Administration rejected a Congressional initiative in 2002
that would have lowered the legal threshold for conducting
surveillance of non-US persons under the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act from "probable cause" that the target is a
terrorist or agent of a foreign power to "reasonable suspicion."

Administration officials said at the time that the legislative
proposal was unnecessary and possibly unconstitutional.

Yet in a speech this week on the NSA domestic surveillance program,
Deputy Director of National Intelligence Gen. Michael V. Hayden
indicated that the executive branch had unilaterally adopted a
similar "reasonable suspicion" standard.

Instead of FISA's more stringent "probable cause" requirement, the
presidentially-directed NSA surveillance operation applied to
international calls that "we have a reasonable basis to believe
involve al Qaeda or one of its affiliates," Gen. Hayden said on
January 23.

The unexplained contradiction between the Administration's public
rejection of the "reasonable suspicion" standard for FISA, and its
secret adoption of that same standard was noted yesterday by
attorney and blogger Glenn Greenwald.

See "The Administration's New FISA Defense is Factually False,"
January 24:

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/

The 2002 legislative proposed, S. 2659 introduced by Rep. Michael
DeWine (R-OH), "raises both significant legal and practical issues
[and] the Administration at this time is not prepared to support
it," said James A. Baker of the Justice Department.

Among other concerns, Mr. Baker said, "If we err in our analysis and
courts were ultimately to find a 'reasonable suspicion' standard
unconstitutional, we could potentially put at risk ongoing
investigations and prosecutions."

See Mr. Baker's prepared statement from the July 31, 2002 hearing of
the Senate Intelligence Committee here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2002_hr/073102baker.html

The transcript and other prepared statements from that Senate
Intelligence Committee hearing on "Proposals to Amend the Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act" are available here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2002_hr/index.html#fisa


CLASSIFICATION LAWS APPLY TO EVERYONE, JUDGE SAYS

In a startling pronouncement that can only heighten tensions between
the press and the government, a federal judge said last week that
the laws governing classified information apply to anyone who is in
receipt of such information, including reporters who are the
recipients of "leaks."

"Persons who have unauthorized possession, who come into
unauthorized possession of classified information, must abide by
the law," said Judge T.S. Ellis III. "That applies to academics,
lawyers, journalists, professors, whatever."

Judge Ellis's statement came at the conclusion of a sentencing
hearing for Lawrence Franklin, the former Pentagon analyst who was
charged along with two former officials of the American Israel
Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) with felony violations of the
Espionage Act.

The extraordinary claim that mere possession of classified
information triggers legal obligations leads to absurd conclusions,
particularly since anyone who reads the daily newspaper comes into
"unauthorized possession of classified information."

More importantly, it serves to discourage investigative reporting of
illegal government activities that happen to be classified.

The provisions of the Espionage Act to which Judge Ellis was
referring are "in many respects incomprehensible," wrote Harold
Edgar and Benno C. Schmidt, Jr. in their definitive1973 study "The
Espionage Statutes and Publication of Defense Information,"
Columbia Law Review, May 1973, vol. 73, pp. 929-1087 (Secrecy News,
10/19/05).

Judge Ellis's statement was first reported in "Sentence in Franklin
case sends chill through free-speech community" by Ron Kampeas,
Jewish Telegraphic Agency, January 24:

http://www.jta.org/page_view_story.asp?intarticleid=16239

Lawrence A. Franklin was sentenced January 20 on three felony
counts: conspiracy to communicate national defense information to
persons not entitled to receive it; conspiracy to communicate
classified information to an agent of a foreign government; and the
unlawful retention of national defense information. See this
January 20 news release from the Department of Justice:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2006/01/doj012006.pdf

The prosecution of the two former AIPAC officials who were charged
with Franklin, Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman, raises press freedom
issues with even greater urgency since neither of them, unlike
Franklin, held a security clearance.

Their attorneys last week filed motions to dismiss the case, but
those motions are sealed pending a security review.


HANDBOOK ON MAKING INTELLIGENCE ACCOUNTABLE

To promote intelligence accountability in new democracies and
elsewhere, a new publication addresses the principles of
intelligence oversight and presents draft legal provisions to
govern intelligence. The document is being published in seven
languages from Albanian to Ukrainian.

See "Making Intelligence Accountable: Legal Standards and Best
Practice for Oversight of Intelligence Agencies" by Hans Born and
Ian Leigh, Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed
Forces (DCAF):

http://www.dcaf.ch/handbook_intelligence/_index.cfm


NSA DECLASSIFICATION PLAN

The National Security Agency has 46 million pages of historically
valuable classified records more than 25 years old that are subject
to automatic declassification by the end of December 2006,
according to a new NSA declassification plan.

Another 4.5 million pages of 25 year old records have been
categorically exempted from automatic declassification because they
"contain information relating to our core capabilities and
vulnerabilities."

The millions of pages that are subject to "automatic
declassification" this year "will require close and careful
review," the NSA said.

But NSA "is committed to declassifying national security information
as instructed in Executive Order 12958, as amended. The Agency
will use all available resources to successfully accomplish the
provisions of the E.O. within the required time."

A copy of the new NSA declassification plan was obtained under the
Freedom of Information Act by researcher Mike Ravnitzky.

See "NSA/CSS Declassification Plan for Executive Order 12958,"
Memorandum for Deputy Under Secretary of Defense
(Counterintelligence & Security), January 5, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/irp/nsa/declass.pdf




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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2006, Issue No. 11
January 30, 2006


** THE MYSTERY OF THE TWO JAMES BAKER STATEMENTS
** WHEN IS INTELLIGENCE CONSIDERED "COLLECTED"?
** DO EMBEDDED REPORTERS SIGN NON-DISCLOSURE AGREEMENTS?
** SECRECY NEWS: THE BLOG


THE MYSTERY OF THE TWO JAMES BAKER STATEMENTS

In a 2002 statement presented to the Senate Intelligence
Committee, James A. Baker of the Justice Department Office of
Intelligence Policy and Review questioned the constitutionality
and the necessity of a proposal by Senator Mike DeWine to lower
the legal threshold for domestic intelligence surveillance of
non-U.S. persons from "probable cause" to "reasonable
suspicion."

But for yet unknown reasons, Mr. Baker's remarkable statement is
found in two distinct versions.

"If we err in our analysis and courts were ultimately to find a
'reasonable suspicion' standard unconstitutional, we could
potentially put at risk ongoing investigations and
prosecutions," Mr. Baker said in the more expansive version of
his statement.

Moreover, "If the current standard has not posed an obstacle,
then there may be little to gain from the lower standard and,
as I previously stated, perhaps much to lose."

Yet even as Mr. Baker was expressing concerns about lowering the
probable cause threshold, the government was doing precisely
that in the NSA domestic surveillance activity.

Baker's testimony was highlighted last week by blogger Glenn
Greenwald and cited in the Washington Post and the New York
Times.

Strangely, however, the testimony in which Mr. Baker presented
those concerns cannot be found anywhere on the public record
except for the Federation of American Scientists web site:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2002_hr/073102baker.html

The testimony that is posted on the Senate Intelligence
Committee web site does not contain the three paragraphs in
which Mr. Baker questions the propriety of going beyond the
probable cause standard as proposed by Senator DeWine.

http://intelligence.senate.gov/0207hrg/020731/baker.pdf

Likewise, only the truncated version of Mr. Baker's testimony
was archived in the Nexis database and published by the
Government Printing Office in its printed hearing record.

"I am going to check into this," a Justice Department official
told Secrecy News on January 27. "Maybe we can clear this
mystery up."

No one has suggested that the FAS version of the Baker statement
is inauthentic.

In fact, an Associated Press story from the day of the hearing
(July 31, 2002) includes this sentence: "Baker said the Justice
Department is still reviewing that [DeWine] proposal and hasn't
decided whether such a change would be needed or if it would be
constitutional."

This sentence, by AP reporter Ken Guggenheim, does not
correspond to anything in the truncated Baker statement or in
his transcribed remarks at the hearing. But it does reflect
the contents of the full version of his statement that was
posted on the FAS web site, indicating that the AP had the same
document.

Citing Mr. Baker's testimony, Sen. Dianne Feinstein asked the
Senate Intelligence Committee to investigate the apparent
contradiction between his remarks and the conduct of the NSA
surveillance program.

"I hope that the Committee's review of this entire matter will
include inquiring whether the failure to brief the Committee as
required by law was compounded by testimony which was at best
misleading, and at worst, false," Sen. Feinstein wrote.

In a second letter, she noted the discrepancy between the Baker
testimony on the FAS web site and the official Committee
version. "I do not know why the two transcripts are different,
and I have asked my staff to investigate."

Both letters from Senator Feinstein are posted here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2006_cr/feinstein012606.pdf


WHEN IS INTELLIGENCE CONSIDERED "COLLECTED"?

A layman might suppose that in the United States a telephone
conversation cannot be intercepted by an intelligence agency
such as the NSA except in compliance with the laws and
guidelines governing intelligence collection.

But it's more complicated than that because "interception" is
not considered "collection," according to a Department of
Defense regulation.

"Information shall be considered as 'collected' only when it has
been received for use by an employee of a DoD intelligence
component in the course of his official duties."

"Data acquired by electronic means is 'collected' only when it
has been processed into intelligible form."

See DoD 5240.1-R, "Procedures Governing the Activities of DoD
Intelligence Components that Affect U.S. Persons," December
1982, at paragraph C2.2.1:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/dod/d5240_1_r.pdf

"This would suggest that automated speech recognition software,
creating records on US persons for purposes of pattern
recognition to detect sleeper cells, would not be prohibited,"
said John Pike of GlobalSecurity.org, who first called
attention to this provision.

In other words, defining "collection" in the peculiar way that
the DoD regulation does appears to permit the NSA to conduct
automated surveillance without violation of strictures on
unauthorized domestic collection.

"And by the time a US person became a 'person of interest' as a
result of this process, there would be reason to believe
[probable cause] they were an agent of a foreign power," he
proposed.

"So why did NSA not take this approach?" Mr. Pike asked. "Why
not just claim this, rather than making the rather more heroic
legal claims they are making?"


DO EMBEDDED REPORTERS SIGN NON-DISCLOSURE AGREEMENTS?

Puzzled by references to non-disclosure agreements signed by
reporters who are embedded with U.S. military forces, Secrecy
News requested a copy of such a non-disclosure agreement from
the Pentagon. But there isn't one.

"The Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public
Affairs has advised this Office that there is no non-disclosure
agreement for access to classified material for embedded
reporters," wrote Chief DoD FOIA officer Will Kammer in
response to our Freedom of Information Act request.

What there is, however, is a somewhat informal process of
negotiation by which access is granted to a reporter in
exchange for an agreement to conduct a security review.

"The [unit] commander may offer access if the reporter agrees to
a security review of their coverage. Agreement to security
review in exchange for this type of access must be strictly
voluntary and if the reporter does not agree, then access may
not be granted," according to February 2003 public affairs
guidance on embedded reporters.

"If a security review is agreed to, it will not involve any
editorial changes; it will be conducted solely to ensure that
no sensitive or classified information is included in the
product. If such information is found, the media will be asked
to remove that information from the product and/or embargo the
product until such information is no longer classified or
sensitive."

"This paragraph does not authorize commanders to allow media
access to classified information."

See Mr. Kammer's letter and the February 2003 public affairs
guidance on embedded reporters here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/dod/embed.html


SECRECY NEWS: THE BLOG

Secrecy News is available beginning today in blog format, for
those who prefer to consume their information that way.

For the near future, the contents of the blog and the email
newsletter will be close to identical. (The blog will permit
comments.) Over time, the two may diverge. We'll see.

The Secrecy News blog, which still has a few kinks to be worked
out, may be found here:

http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/



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

web: www.fas.org/sgp/index.html

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2006, Issue No. 12
January 31, 2006


** US ARMY: COLLECTING INFORMATION ON U.S. PERSONS
** NRO OPERATIONAL FILES EXEMPTION IN DISPUTE
** THE STATUS OF THE DCI FOLLOWING INTEL REFORM
** INADVERTENT DISCLOSURES OF CLASSIFIED NUCLEAR INFO
** NOTABLE RULES AND REGS


US ARMY: COLLECTING INFORMATION ON U.S. PERSONS

Military regulations offer wide latitude in the gathering of
domestic intelligence information.

"Contrary to popular belief, there is no absolute ban on [military]
intelligence components collecting U.S. person information," according
to a 2001 Army intelligence memo.

What's more, military intelligence agencies can provisionally
"receive" domestic intelligence information that they may not be
legally permitted to "collect."

"MI [military intelligence] may receive information from anyone,
anytime."

That point was stressed in the November 5, 2001 memo issued by Lt. Gen.
Robert W. Noonan, Jr., the Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence.

DoD and Army regulations "allow collection about U.S. persons
reasonably believed to be engaged, or about to engage, in
International terrorist activities."

"Remember, merely receiving information does not constitute
'collection' under AR [Army Regulation] 381-10; collection entails
receiving 'for use'," Gen. Noonan wrote.

"Army intelligence may always receive information, if only to
determine its intelligence value and whether it can be collected,
retained, or disseminated in accordance with governing policy."

The distinction between "receiving" information (always permitted)
and "collecting" it (permitted only in certain circumstances)
appears to offer considerable leeway for domestic surveillance
activities under the existing legal framework.

This in turn makes it harder to understand why the NSA domestic
surveillance program departed from previous practice.

"It seems to me that there is enough ambiguity in the language that
with a bit of creativity in managing the US persons files there
would have been not too much trouble" applying existing rules to the
NSA program, said John Pike of GlobalSecurity.org, who pointed
Secrecy News to the 2001 Army memo.

See "Collecting Information on U.S. Persons," Office of the Deputy
Chief of Staff for Intelligence, November 5, 2001:

http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/army/uspersons.html

Army Regulation 381-10, "U.S. Army Intelligence Activities," was
reissued on November 22, 2005, but up to now it has not been
publicly disclosed.

The previous edition of AR 381-10, dated July 1, 1984 (and in effect
until December 22, 2005), is available here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/r381_10.pdf


NRO OPERATIONAL FILES EXEMPTION IN DISPUTE

In the past, the National Reconnaissance Office, the agency that
develops spy satellites, has released unclassified portions of its
budget request documents. But last year, the NRO refused to do so,
claiming that these unclassified materials fall under the
"operational files" exemption to the Freedom of Information Act.

A lawsuit brought by the Federation of American Scientists is
challenging that claim. The two parties have just finished briefing
the case with replies to each other's opposing motions.

"The defendant [NRO] has shown by a sworn declaration which is clear,
specific, and reasonably detailed that the requested records are
properly designated as operational," the NRO concluded.

No, "since all parties agree that the requested record has been
disseminated beyond its originating operational file, the conclusion
is inescapable that the requested record must be processed under
FOIA," we argued.

At this point, the parties are largely talking past each other, and
it will be up to the judge, the Hon. Reggie B. Walton, to resolve
the dispute.

The latest pleadings in Aftergood v. NRO may be found here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/foia/nro-cbjb/index.html


THE STATUS OF THE DCI FOLLOWING INTEL REFORM

The intelligence reform legislation of 2004 abolished the position of
Director of Central Intelligence, transferring many of its functions
to the new Director of National Intelligence.

This raised a technical legal question as to whether the DCI who was
serving at the time, Porter J. Goss, would need to be formally
reappointed to the position of Director of the Central Intelligence
Agency (DCIA).

The question was analyzed at length by the Justice Department Office
of Legal Counsel (OLC) in a January 2005 memo that has just been
released.

To cut to the chase, the OLC concluded "that when the Intelligence
Reform Act takes effect the then-current DCI would not require a new
appointment to serve as DCIA."

See "Status of the Director of Central Intelligence Under the
National Security Intelligence Reform Act of 2004, Justice
Department Office of Legal Counsel, January 12, 2005 (published
January 23, 2006):

http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/doj/olc011205.pdf


INADVERTENT DISCLOSURES OF CLASSIFIED NUCLEAR INFO

The Department of Energy has released a sanitized version of its
nineteenth report to Congress on inadvertent releases of classified
nuclear weapons information through the declassification process.

Out of more than 150,000 pages at the National Archives that were
reviewed by DOE, 16 pages contained Restricted Data, and another 99
pages contained Formerly Restricted Data (which is also classified).

As in the past, the most common type of inadvertent release concerned
the locations of historical nuclear weapons storage depots.
However, some design-related information was also inadvertently
released. All of this material has now been withdrawn from public
access.

See "Nineteenth Report to Congress on Inadvertent Releases of
Restricted Data and Formerly Restricted Data Under Executive Order
12958," November 2005 (released in declassified form January 2006):

http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/doe/inadvertent19.pdf


NOTABLE RULES AND REGS

Some notable rules and regulations on security policy that have
recently been published include the following:

"National Industrial Security Program Directive Number 1,"
Information Security Oversight Office, January 27, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2006/01/fr012706.html

"International Interchange of Patent Rights and Technical
Information," Department of Defense Instruction 2000.03, January 17,
2006:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/dod/i2000_03.pdf

"Naturalization of Aliens Serving in the Armed Forces of the United
States and of Alien Spouses and/or Alien Adopted Children of
Military and Civilian Personnel Ordered Overseas," Department of
Defense Instruction 5500.14 January 4, 2006:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/dod/i5500_14.pdf

"Department of the Navy Policy for Content of Publicly Accessible
World Wide Web Sites," Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5720.47B,
December 28, 2005:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/navy/secnavinst/5720_47b.pdf




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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2006, Issue No. 14
February 5, 2006

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


* MAU-MAUING THE CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE


MAU-MAUING THE CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE

Congressional Research Service (CRS) analyses of the Bush
Administration's domestic surveillance activity have been
exceptionally influential, and their influence has been magnified
by media coverage that has sometimes overstated the rather nuanced
conclusions of CRS analysts.

But now the CRS faces a backlash from Republican leaders in
Congress who apparently resent the agency's high profile and
independent judgment, and seek to rein it in.

There has probably never been a CRS report that was cited as
frequently as the January 5, 2006 CRS memorandum which delicately
concluded that the NSA surveillance operation "does not seem to be
as well-grounded" as the Administration contends.

Another CRS memorandum on January 18 observed that since the NSA
operation was not a "covert action," the decision to limit
congressional notification to eight members of Congress as is done
in the case of covert actions "would appear to be inconsistent
with the law."

Though some would consider these findings tentative or even timid,
their broad acceptance has enraged the President's allies in
Congress.

"CRS's work on these matters has not been 'free of partisan or
other bias'," wrote House Intelligence Committee chair Rep. Pete
Hoekstra in a February 1 letter to CRS Director Daniel P.
Mulhollan.

"I ask for immediate action on your part to ensure that CRS truly
provides 'comprehensive and reliable' legislative research that is
'free of partisan or other bias'." See:

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2006_cr/hoekstra020106.html

In his letter, Rep. Hoekstra specifically disputed the suggestion
by CRS analyst Alfred Cumming in the January 18 CRS memo that
there was any legal obligation to inform all members of the
intelligence committees of the NSA surveillance operation. "It is
clear that such reporting is not mandated by the law," he wrote.

By Rep. Hoekstra's lights, the statute that limits congressional
notification of covert action to eight members of Congress would
be redundant or meaningless, since the President would have no
obligation to inform other Members of the intelligence committees
anyway.

But that has not been the conventional reading of the law, and Rep.
Hoekstra's interpretation has been contested by his Committee's
Ranking Member, Rep. Jane Harman.

http://www.house.gov/harman/press/releases...nsaprogram.html

The restricted congressional notification policy on the NSA
surveillance program, endorsed by Rep. Hoekstra, has produced an
absurd result, said Sen. Jay Rockefeller at a February 2 hearing
of the Senate Intelligence Committee.

"Director Negroponte, consider this fact," said Sen. Rockefeller. "The
only NSA program the White House had authorized senior intelligence
officials to discuss publicly is the only NSA program all members
of the congressional Intelligence Committees are prohibited from
knowing about."

"I hope you are struck by this paradox and troubled by its
implication."

But Rep. Hoekstra was neither struck nor troubled.

"I would appreciate your assistance in ensuring that CRS refrain
from speculating with respect to highly sensitive national
security matters on which it has no authoritative knowledge," Rep.
Hoekstra thundered to CRS Director Mulhollan (whom he mistakenly
addressed as Mulholland).

CRS analyst Cumming is a former staff director of the Senate
Intelligence Committee with many years of experience in
intelligence oversight. Rep. Hoekstra is a relative newcomer to
the field.

Although U.S. intelligence is embroiled in public controversy over
the NSA activity, the House Intelligence Committee under Chairman
Hoekstra has had little to contribute to public understanding. He
has held no public hearings, and has left it to Ranking Member
Rep. Harman to represent and articulate public concerns.

Rep. Hoekstra's letter to CRS, which was first noted approvingly by
the conservative web site Powerline (powerlineblog.com), was copied
to three congressional Republican leaders, but to no Democrats.

Since the January 5 CRS memo was published on the Federation of
American Scientists web site on January 6, it has been downloaded
thousands of times each day, and as many as forty thousand times
in a single 24 hour period.


_______________________________________________
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

OR email your request to saftergood@fas.org

Secrecy News is archived at:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.html

Secrecy News is available in blog format at:
http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/

SUPPORT Secrecy News with a donation here:
http://www.fas.org/static/contrib_sec.jsp

_______________________
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

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2006, Issue No. 15
February 6, 2006

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


** SECRECY OF MINE INSPECTIONS REDUCED
** SUNSHINE WEEK ON THE WAY
** PENTAGON ABANDONS REVISION OF NUCLEAR DOCTRINE
** CIA ON REMOTE MEDICAL DIAGNOSIS (1979)


SECRECY OF MINE INSPECTIONS REDUCED

In a rare relaxation of mounting restrictions on disclosure of
government information, the Labor Department has agreed to
reverse its policy of withholding notes taken by mine safety
inspectors from prompt release under the Freedom of Information
Act.

In a January 11 letter written in the wake of the Sago mine
disaster, Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) had urged the Secretary of
Labor to permit disclosure of these notes (Secrecy News,
01/17/06).

"This unwarranted secrecy may protect the mining industry from
embarrassing disclosures, but it undermines accountability and
mine safety," Rep. Waxman wrote:

http://www.democrats.reform.house.gov/story.asp?ID=989

On January 20, three House Republicans, including Rep. John
Boehner (R-OH), the new House Majority Leader, wrote to Labor
Secretary Elaine Chao to make the same request.

"We share the concern expressed by some that ... this blanket
policy has had the effect of denying important information about
mine safety to the public."

In a January 30 reply to Majority Leader Boehner, a Labor
Department official wrote that the disclosure policy would be
revised to permit release of mine inspector notes "effective
immediately."

Rep. Boehner applauded the move. "Our request to Secretary Chao
was made for one simple reason: to get more information, more
quickly into the hands of Congress, the families impacted by the
tragedies, and all those with a stake in mining and these
investigations," he said.

In a January 31 news release, Rep. Boehner and his colleagues took
credit for the step. See "In Response to House Republican
Request, Labor Department Makes Key Policy Change Impacting Mine
Investigations":

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2006/01/edwork013106.html


SUNSHINE WEEK ON THE WAY

Sunshine Week is a broad-based initiative intended to focus public
concern over the growth of official secrecy.

During the week of March 13, 2006, there will be a series of
events exploring the diverse and increasing barriers that
obstruct public access to government information.

Details and educational resources are available on the Sunshine
Week web site here:

http://www.sunshineweek.org/


PENTAGON ABANDONS REVISION OF NUCLEAR DOCTRINE

The Department of Defense has abandoned plans to revise its
Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations.

The draft revision became controversial when it was disclosed last
year because of its unusually frank discussion of preemptive use
of nuclear weapons.

The decision to cancel the revision was discovered by Hans
Kristensen of the Federation of American Scientists. He
described the move last week and provided relevant links in the
new blog of the FAS Strategic Security Project here:

http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2006/02/pentag...ntroversial.php


CIA ON REMOTE MEDICAL DIAGNOSIS (1979)

A noteworthy article from the CIA's Studies in Intelligence
Journal, published in 1979 and declassified last year, describes
the use of "remote medical diagnosis" for foreign intelligence
purposes.

"Remote medical diagnosis is defined as the identification of the
illnesses affecting a person without the benefit of a formal
medical examination."

The authors provide capsule accounts of CIA medical diagnoses of
various world leaders, including French President Georges
Pompidou, Algerian President Houari Boumediene, Soviet Premier
Leonid Brezhnev, and Israeli Prime Minister Menahem Begin.

The technique, such as it is, is far from infallible, the authors
note. Although Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir suffered from
malignant lymphoma for more than 12 years, "We had been entirely
unaware that she had this lethal disease."

See "Remote Medical Diagnosis: Monitoring the health of Very
Important Patients," Studies in Intelligence, Spring 1979 (1.2 MB
PDF file) (thanks to AT):

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



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

Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy

SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2006, Issue No. 16
February 7, 2006

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


** HISTORY OF HIGHLY ENRICHED URANIUM RELEASED
** CRS, NSA AND THE QUESTION OF CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATION
** DOD ON IMPROVING FOIA IMPLEMENTATION
** AIR FORCE SPECIAL OPERATIONS


HISTORY OF HIGHLY ENRICHED URANIUM RELEASED

After nearly a decade of pressure from openness advocates inside
and outside of government, the Department of Energy has finally
released its landmark history of the production of highly enriched
uranium (HEU).

"The effort was commissioned [in 1996] to facilitate discussions of
HEU storage, safety, and security with stakeholders, to encourage
other nations to declassify and release similar data, and to
support the national policy on transparency of nuclear materials."

The newly released report "contains details of the U.S. HEU
inventory as of September 30, 1996, and provides a historical
material balance that summarizes over 50 years of U.S. activities
that produced, acquired, and utilized HEU."

"This report combines previously released data along with newly
declassified information that has allowed DOE to issue, for the
first time, a comprehensive report on HEU."

"From 1945 through 1996, a total of 1,045.4 metric tons of uranium
containing 859.2 metric tons of uranium-235 was produced in the
United States at three facilities utilizing two different
production technologies."

"As of September 30, 1996, the total U.S. inventory of HEU was
740.7 MTU containing 620.3 MTU-235."

Rich in detail, the 173 page report has been only minimally
redacted (sanitized).

The report was released in response to a Freedom of Information Act
request from the Federation of American Scientists.

See "Highly Enriched Uranium: Striking A Balance," U.S. Department
of Energy, January 2001:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/doe/heu/index.html


CRS, NSA AND THE QUESTION OF CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATION

Last week, Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-Mich.) lashed out at the
Congressional Research Service for asserting that the Bush
Administration may have had a legal responsibility to notify more
than just eight members of Congress regarding the NSA surveillance
activity.

Rep. Hoekstra, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee,
did not merely suggest that the CRS might be wrong; he claimed that
the agency was actually biased against Bush Administration policy
(Secrecy News, 02/05/06).

In fact, however, it is increasingly clear that Rep. Hoekstra is
the one who misunderstood and misrepresented the requirements of
the law.

Sen. Mike DeWine (R-OH) put the matter plainly at a February 6
Senate hearing on the NSA surveillance program, explaining that
the statute which permits limited notification to eight members of
Congress is relevant only to covert actions, and not to the NSA
program.

"When you look at that section [50 USC 413(], the only thing this
references as far as what this Group of Eight does is receive
reports in regard to covert action. So that's really all it is. It
does not cover a situation like we're talking about here at all,"
Sen. DeWine said.

"We all have a great deal of respect for these eight people...
They're leaders of the Congress. But there's no statutory
authority for this group, other than the section that has to do
with covert operation, and this [the NSA activity] is not a covert
operation as defined in this specific section."

"I don't mean to be impolite... I guess I'm just kind of a strict
constructionist, kind of a conservative guy, and that's how I read
the statute," Sen. DeWine said.

See, relatedly, "Hoekstra blasts CRS for 'bias'" by Jackie
Kucinich, The Hill, February 7:

http://www.hillnews.com/


DOD ON IMPROVING FOIA IMPLEMENTATION

The Department of Defense is moving ahead smartly in response to
President Bush's executive order (EO) 13392 directing agencies to
improve the processing of Freedom of Information Act requests.

Many outside observers were puzzled by the issuance of the December
14, 2005 order, since the current Administration has been no
friend of FOIA or of public access to government information
generally.

But even a perfunctory gesture from the President of the United
States can have policy consequences, and agencies are now sorting
through those consequences.

"Recent heightened interest in the FOIA from the public, the media,
watchdog organizations, and the Congress has resulted in the need
for the Federal Agencies to re-examine their FOIA programs," wrote
Michael B. Donley, DoD Director of Administration and Management.

"Historically, DoD Component FOIA programs have been
under-emphasized, resulting in inadequate staffing and funding,"
he wrote.

"To comply with the provisions of the EO, DoD Components must
ensure that proper procedures are established and adequate
resources are applied to their FOIA programs."

The Project on Government Oversight (www.pogo.org) obtained the DoD
memorandum and provided a copy to Secrecy News.

See "Executive Order 13392 on the Freedom of Information Act -- DoD
Implementation," memorandum for senior Department officials,
February 1, 2006.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/dod/dod020106.pdf

Meanwhile, however, the Pentagon public affairs office has been
playing secrecy games with reporters, withholding budget documents
from the press until the last possible moment.

See "DOD denies reporters budget prep time" by Pamela Hess, United
Press International, February 6:

http://www.postchronicle.com/news/security...e_2125851.shtml


AIR FORCE SPECIAL OPERATIONS

U.S. Air Force doctrine on special operations is presented in a new
Air Force publication.

"This publication provides the overarching doctrinal guidance for
the conduct of Air Force special operations across the full range
of military operations. It describes the characteristics,
capabilities, United States Special Operations Command (USSOCOM)
core tasks, Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC) core
missions, typical organization, and command and control of AF
Special Operations Forces."

"The doctrine in this document is authoritative, but not
directive.... Airmen should read it, discuss it, and practice it."

See "Special Operations," Air Force Doctrine Document 2-7, 16
December 2005:

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/usaf/afdd2-7.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