http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2008/07/nyt_disclosure.html Secrecy News from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy Thu, 24 May 2012 10:04:11 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2008/07/nyt_disclosure.html/comment-page-1#comment-1639 T.C. Carlstrom Tue, 22 Jul 2008 16:37:12 +0000 http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/?p=1841#comment-1639 No well-trained cop in the country would have the chutzpah to assert that the identity of an arresting or interrogating officer must be kept secret. Police may not always like it but they very well understand that their efforts with witnesses and suspects occurs successfully only when it occurs within a constitutional framework which must at some point (usually very early) be open if it is truly to be in the public interest and if it is to conform to the rights of "persons," whether the persons be citizens or aliens in custody. Moreover, cops are, throughout this land, exposed to constant daily risks. Their risk-taking, their injuries, fatalities and heroism undertaken for the safety of our home towns demonstrates a level of commitment that ought to shame those at the Langley fortress who do not want to be accountable as public servants for what they do or who they are, even when they get it right. The cloak of "national security" which the ODNI invokes has, of course, been invoked successfully with deferential federal courts who apply the judge-made "state secrets privilege." It is the means by which the intelligence "community" has regularly defeated justice and accountability with impugnity. While judges may hew to the ugly anomaly of the state secrets privilege in our system of government -- even as some judges apologize for it -- the same result is surely not even slightly binding upon the press. As the judiciary abdicates its Article III powers to the "state secrets privilege," the press (so far) holds to the First Amendment. Let us hope that, unlike the courts, the "fourth estate" will not "fold." The ODNI should stop whining and get back to work in a way that is truly consistent with our founding principles. No well-trained cop in the country would have the chutzpah to assert that the identity of an arresting or interrogating officer must be kept secret. Police may not always like it but they very well understand that their efforts with witnesses and suspects occurs successfully only when it occurs within a constitutional framework which must at some point (usually very early) be open if it is truly to be in the public interest and if it is to conform to the rights of “persons,” whether the persons be citizens or aliens in custody. Moreover, cops are, throughout this land, exposed to constant daily risks. Their risk-taking, their injuries, fatalities and heroism undertaken for the safety of our home towns demonstrates a level of commitment that ought to shame those at the Langley fortress who do not want to be accountable as public servants for what they do or who they are, even when they get it right.
The cloak of “national security” which the ODNI invokes has, of course, been invoked successfully with deferential federal courts who apply the judge-made “state secrets privilege.” It is the means by which the intelligence “community” has regularly defeated justice and accountability with impugnity. While judges may hew to the ugly anomaly of the state secrets privilege in our system of government — even as some judges apologize for it — the same result is surely not even slightly binding upon the press. As the judiciary abdicates its Article III powers to the “state secrets privilege,” the press (so far) holds to the First Amendment. Let us hope that, unlike the courts, the “fourth estate” will not “fold.”
The ODNI should stop whining and get back to work in a way that is truly consistent with our founding principles.

]]> http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2008/07/nyt_disclosure.html/comment-page-1#comment-1635 Ed Stone Mon, 21 Jul 2008 22:38:52 +0000 http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/?p=1841#comment-1635 Joel Brenner can cry crocodile tears about this invasion of privacy in releasing the name of an interrogator if he chooses. When ODNI, HomeSec and the rest of the Intel community start worrying about my privacy, I'll worry about theirs. Since they are sharing the fruits of mining/wiretapping on me and other Americans with thousands of local, state and federal agencies (not to mention foreign governments), they can just be hoist on their own petard. Joel Brenner can cry crocodile tears about this invasion of privacy in releasing the name of an interrogator if he chooses. When ODNI, HomeSec and the rest of the Intel community start worrying about my privacy, I’ll worry about theirs. Since they are sharing the fruits of mining/wiretapping on me and other Americans with thousands of local, state and federal agencies (not to mention foreign governments), they can just be hoist on their own petard.

]]>