[iwar] Commiting the Truth

From: Fred Cohen (fc@all.net)
Date: 2001-09-06 20:12:34


Return-Path: <sentto-279987-1705-999832411-fc=all.net@returns.onelist.com>
Delivered-To: fc@all.net
Received: from 204.181.12.215 by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.1.0) for fc@localhost (single-drop); Thu, 06 Sep 2001 20:14:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 3387 invoked by uid 510); 7 Sep 2001 03:13:42 -0000
Received: from n31.groups.yahoo.com (216.115.96.81) by 204.181.12.215 with SMTP; 7 Sep 2001 03:13:42 -0000
X-eGroups-Return: sentto-279987-1705-999832411-fc=all.net@returns.onelist.com
Received: from [10.1.4.53] by hp.egroups.com with NNFMP; 07 Sep 2001 03:13:32 -0000
X-Sender: fc@big.all.net
X-Apparently-To: iwar@onelist.com
Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2_1); 7 Sep 2001 03:13:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 45494 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 03:12:41 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Sep 2001 03:12:41 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO big.all.net) (65.0.156.78) by mta1 with SMTP; 7 Sep 2001 03:12:38 -0000
Received: (from fc@localhost) by big.all.net (8.9.3/8.7.3) id UAA01326 for iwar@onelist.com; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 20:12:34 -0700
Message-Id: <200109070312.UAA01326@big.all.net>
To: iwar@onelist.com (Information Warfare Mailing List)
Organization: I'm not allowed to say
X-Mailer: don't even ask
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL1]
From: Fred Cohen <fc@all.net>
Mailing-List: list iwar@yahoogroups.com; contact iwar-owner@yahoogroups.com
Delivered-To: mailing list iwar@yahoogroups.com
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:iwar-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2001 20:12:34 -0700 (PDT)
Reply-To: iwar@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [iwar] Commiting the Truth
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Washington Times
September 5, 2001
'Committing The Truth'
By Martin E. Andersen
A few months ago I received the U.S. Office of Special Counsel's Public
Servant Award for protecting "important security interests" by blowing the
whistle on leaks of classified information, corruption and other national
security breaches at the Criminal Division of the Justice Department. I had
worked there as a senior adviser for policy planning in the department's
overseas training programs.
In a few months, if a bill being attached to the intelligence budget is
signed into law by President Bush, anyone imitating my example will not be
rewarded, but rather could go to jail, for "committing the truth" against
bureaucratic misdeeds.
Last fall President Clinton vetoed an effort by Sen. Richard Shelby, a
ranking member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, that would have
established America's first-ever "official secrets act" - a violation of
First Amendment free speech protections and a move that will stifle informed
public debate on critical national security issues.
Now the Alabama Republican has scheduled a perfunctory committee hearing
today for a clone bill that would criminalize the unauthorized disclosure by
federal employees of any type of classified information.
The most damaging leaks of secrets in recent years have not come from a
Fifth Column of federal workers meeting surreptitiously with members of the
press to divulge the nation's most closely held information. Rather it has
been the sloppy enforcement of security procedures (resulting in the
disappearance of laptop computers containing top secret data, for example),
as well as a dismaying number of traitors inside the security establishment
who remained undetected for years.
But the best defense is a good offense, and the security establishment finds
it is now able to deflect blame for its own record of lost secrets by
endorsing proposals that seriously threaten the free speech rights of the
more than 3 million Americans who currently possess job-related security
clearances.
And for all the breathless assurances made by the intelligence community
about the need for the remedies provided by the official secrets proposal,
those remedies are actually unnecessary. The law currently criminalizes
leaks of specific and narrowly defined information where there is
identifiable damage to national security. Prosecutors already have at their
disposal a legal arsenal that allows them to indict anyone who intentionally
harms national security, helps a foreign power or exposes U.S. intelligence
agents.

Finally, the potential for harm that would be created by this end-run around
the Constitution is mind-boggling. It allows almost any revelation by a
public official to be a cause for criminal prosecution. No longer will the
government bear the burden of proving that an individual intended to breach
national security - it is the individual who will be forced to prove he or
she is innocent. While reporters would not be prosecuted for publishing
secrets, journalists could be compelled to either reveal their sources or
face indefinite jail sentences. It's hard to think of something with more of
a chilling effect on legitimate exchanges between public officials and the
public on vital issues of national security policy.
Bureaucratic wrongdoers who thrive behind the comforting wall of official
secrecy will also be delighted if the criminal leaks bill is made law. For
example, my own whistle-blower disclosures to Congress and the media
included evidence of leaks of highly classified information to people
seeking the documents for their own personal purposes. I also complained
about visa fraud committed in Russia by a top adviser to then-Attorney
General Janet Reno on behalf of a Moscow girlfriend who had previously been
denied entry into the United States. According to the department's own
Inspector General's report released last September, the conduct of the
department's top troubleshooter in Russia made him vulnerable to blackmail
or extortion by foreign spies or international mafiosi.
However, under the criminal leaks proposal, the next person who dares to
protect national security information by confronting their bosses' criminal
misconduct could face prosecution for his efforts.
Ironically, President Bush issued an executive order on ethical behavior in
January that requires federal employees to combat waste, fraud and abuse of
power. Passage of the official secrets bill will make it a crime under many
circumstances to obey the president's good government directive.
Martin E. Andersen is media director for the Government Accountability
Project, a Washington-based whistle-blower protection organization. 

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Secure your servers with 128-bit SSL encryption! Grab your copy of VeriSign's FREE Guide: "Securing Your Web Site for Business." Get it Now!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/n7RbFC/zhwCAA/yigFAA/kgFolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

------------------
http://all.net/ 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 2001-09-29 21:08:40 PDT