Comments on: Reforming the State Secrets Privilege: Two Views http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2008/04/reforming_the_state_secret.html Secrecy News from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy Mon, 09 Nov 2009 16:03:51 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: Craig Jones http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2008/04/reforming_the_state_secret.html/comment-page-1#comment-1295 Craig Jones Tue, 15 Apr 2008 22:02:50 +0000 http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/?p=1719#comment-1295 I agree with Stu. There is a logical limit to anything man-made, and executive secrecy is no different. Without a compromise, there will be no progress. Thanks, Stu, for putting it so eloquently. I agree with Stu. There is a logical limit to anything man-made, and executive secrecy is no different. Without a compromise, there will be no progress.

Thanks, Stu, for putting it so eloquently.

]]> By: Stu Wilde http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2008/04/reforming_the_state_secret.html/comment-page-1#comment-1254 Stu Wilde Sat, 05 Apr 2008 18:40:34 +0000 http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/?p=1719#comment-1254 I've been following this issue since I read about Sibel Edmonds and other whistleblowers who have never had the opportunity for a Court to examine their claims against our criminal government. The Administration seems to hide behind the "state secrets" privilege, and has used this defense an inordinate amount of times in recent years. I think everyone is cognizant of the need to protect information that would damage our ability to procure intelligence and fight the war on terror, BUT -- the Government cannot simply apply this strong, blanket privilege every time someone comes forward with damaging information about how our government operates or some of the more shady dealings that happen behind closed doors. I think this legislation is a great compromise -- well-written with plenty of safeguards in place. Courts have long viewed classified information "in camera" and we must all remember the Judiciary is the 3rd co-equal branch of government. I’ve been following this issue since I read about Sibel Edmonds and other whistleblowers who have never had the opportunity for a Court to examine their claims against our criminal government. The Administration seems to hide behind the “state secrets” privilege, and has used this defense an inordinate amount of times in recent years.

I think everyone is cognizant of the need to protect information that would damage our ability to procure intelligence and fight the war on terror, BUT — the Government cannot simply apply this strong, blanket privilege every time someone comes forward with damaging information about how our government operates or some of the more shady dealings that happen behind closed doors.

I think this legislation is a great compromise — well-written with plenty of safeguards in place. Courts have long viewed classified information “in camera” and we must all remember the Judiciary is the 3rd co-equal branch of government.

]]>