Yes.

(1) Keeping the identities of spies secret.
(2) Keeping tactical battle plans (troop movements and the like) out of the hands of the enemy, because surprise is important in battle
(3) Keeping the design of certain weapons systems secret — those where the enemy would have difficulty copying them without the designs (but not those which are perfectly trivial to copy).

These should be kept encrypted. And as a consequence, the cipher keys should be secret too.

That’s *IT*. There is absolutely no other government business which can justifiably be kept secret for more than a few weeks. (Keeping things secret for a short period during negotiations is reasonable, but not for a long period. Privacy of private citizens is important, but the government shouldn’t even *know* about that sort of stuff, so it certainly has no justification to keep secret the fact that it does know stuff it shouldn’t.)

That’s a *really short list*. It’s *so* short a list that only a short list of agencies — the ones involved in those three topics — should be even *allowed* to generate secret information. As an aside, only topic (3) should ever exist outside the government — (1) and (2) shouldn’t be contracted out, ever.

The current practices of the Bush administration with secrecy have been, quite consistently, to make “secret” things which are either known or suspected by pretty much everyone — things where there is no value to keeping them secret whatsoever. Apart from that, they have been keeping “secret” the governmental commission of crimes which do not benefit the national security interest in any way. Like Abu Ghraib.

I think “Will” has bought into the national security fantasy — the idea that we need people like Jack Bauer and James Bond to keep us safe. This is a nice movie conceit, but here in the hard-nosed real world, it just doesn’t work that way.

Viewing Government secrecy as a front for deviant behavior is a very superficial and ill-conceived notion at best and smacks of cheap hollywood theatrics designed to instill fear and distrust.

Simply testifying before a slanted liberal and obviously pro-Aftergood group is no indication of any stamp of approval by the U.S. Government.

It is no great shock or revelation to any thinking person that Mr. Aftergood has been, and will no doubt continue to be, an alarmist, who blindly pokes in the dark, hoping to gain personal notoriety by casting conspiratorial glances and whipping the flames of disinformation for his own self-serving purposes.

Yes, there is a place for Government accountability, character, ethics and transparency to the extent that our national security and overall safety are not compromised. Take this disinformation and fear mongering to its logical extent, and you now have good old fashioned treason.

The bane of open and democratic societies is that we are open and available to allow even those within our ranks to harm us from within.

Nations, cities and real lives are in the balance, not just an individual’s perceived right to know that which he cannot.