Comments on: CIA Regulations on Pre-Publication Review Posted http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2006/09/cia_regulations_on_pre-publica.html Secrecy News from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy Tue, 24 Nov 2009 18:23:26 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: Allen Thomson http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2006/09/cia_regulations_on_pre-publica.html/comment-page-1#comment-643 Allen Thomson Tue, 03 Oct 2006 19:14:41 +0000 http://fasweb.beacontec.com/blog/secrecy/2006/09/cia_regulations_on_pre-publication_review_posted.html#comment-643 Another question: These regulations purport to apply to all current and former employees. Unless an employee signs an agreement to abide by all future regulations pertaining to publications, even if they are issued years after separation from the CIA and even if the CIA takes affirmative action to keep the former employee unaware of them (by making them AIUO), what possible legal force can the regulations have? Another question: These regulations purport to apply to all current and former employees. Unless an employee signs an agreement to abide by all future regulations pertaining to publications, even if they are issued years after separation from the CIA and even if the CIA takes affirmative action to keep the former employee unaware of them (by making them AIUO), what possible legal force can the regulations have?

]]> By: Allen Thomson http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2006/09/cia_regulations_on_pre-publica.html/comment-page-1#comment-642 Allen Thomson Tue, 26 Sep 2006 17:12:39 +0000 http://fasweb.beacontec.com/blog/secrecy/2006/09/cia_regulations_on_pre-publication_review_posted.html#comment-642 I gotta question about the pre-pub reg: It was originally issued "Administrative -- Internal Use Only" and the FOIAed version has various redactions, including PRB contact information (why?). So how am I, a loyal former CIA person whose last access to CIA stuff is years in the past supposed to know what regulations to follow? Overall, incidentally, the regulation seems to have been written by someone with severe delusions of omnipotence. <i>[Indeed. I believe the redactions are due not to national security classification but because they were deemed "not relevant" to the lawsuit for which they were disclosed. --SA]</i> I gotta question about the pre-pub reg:

It was originally issued “Administrative — Internal Use Only” and the FOIAed version has various redactions, including PRB contact information (why?). So how am I, a loyal former CIA person whose last access to CIA stuff is years in the past supposed to know what regulations to follow?

Overall, incidentally, the regulation seems to have been written by someone with severe delusions of omnipotence.

[Indeed. I believe the redactions are due not to national security classification but because they were deemed "not relevant" to the lawsuit for which they were disclosed. --SA]

]]>