Comments on: Sniper Training Manual Remains Offline (at FAS) http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2009/04/sniper_training_manual.html Secrecy News from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy Mon, 13 Feb 2012 21:51:01 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: jeff http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2009/04/sniper_training_manual.html/comment-page-1#comment-6797 jeff Fri, 12 Feb 2010 17:27:17 +0000 http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/?p=2438#comment-6797 The manuals are limited in distribution for a reason. If you want access to these manuals, raise your right hand, enlist, and volunteer to try out for the Special Forces. Otherwise, continue to complain from your cozy couch. The manuals are limited in distribution for a reason. If you want access to these manuals, raise your right hand, enlist, and volunteer to try out for the Special Forces. Otherwise, continue to complain from your cozy couch.

]]> By: Daniel Shostak http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2009/04/sniper_training_manual.html/comment-page-1#comment-3384 Daniel Shostak Thu, 16 Apr 2009 20:02:53 +0000 http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/?p=2438#comment-3384 Steven: I would like to ask you to reconsider your decision on not publishing the sniper's manual. FAS is one of few sources to obtain military manuals and thus the public is dependent upon you making them available as you obtain them. I appreciate that there is a gray area between policy documents (which you regularly make available), and technical materials of less policy relevance. However, it should be the public and researchers who evaluate these materials for distribution. Furthermore, military discipline should be in the public view. What makes sense today, may not make sense tomorrow. For example, the use of snipers instead of the use of non-lethal force is a question that the recent pirate incident raises. Finally, I don't recall you ever with holding documents and telling us about it. I am sure that you regularly decide not to publish documents, but you don't editorialize about it. You do regularly publish military manuals and I think that is the appropriate approach. Steven:

I would like to ask you to reconsider your decision on not publishing the sniper’s manual. FAS is one of few sources to obtain military manuals and thus the public is dependent upon you making them available as you obtain them.

I appreciate that there is a gray area between policy documents (which you regularly make available), and technical materials of less policy relevance. However, it should be the public and researchers who evaluate these materials for distribution.

Furthermore, military discipline should be in the public view. What makes sense today, may not make sense tomorrow. For example, the use of snipers instead of the use of non-lethal force is a question that the recent pirate incident raises.

Finally, I don’t recall you ever with holding documents and telling us about it. I am sure that you regularly decide not to publish documents, but you don’t editorialize about it. You do regularly publish military manuals and I think that is the appropriate approach.

]]>