Jed Rothwell
Fri, 20 Nov 2009 07:54:54 -0800
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
Personally, I'd probably want to verify in some way that the document has actually been published. That could have been a leaked draft, for example.
If it were a leaked draft it would say "DRAFT" or "Do not circulate." This has a document number assigned, an "UNCLASSIFIED" status notification, and a release date of 13 November 2009. That means it is finished.
I have no idea whether it will ever be "published" meaning "made available at a DIA website." The government generates millions of documents and only a small number are put on websites or routinely made available to people outside the government. All those unseen documents are legitimate and complete, and they represent the consensus of opinions at the agencies that generate them. This document was reviewed by dozens of experts in a wide range of fields, in the agencies listed on p. 6. This document means what it says. It is not some lone individual's view, and it would not be circulated with cover letter saying "feel free to forward it to whomever you think would be interested . . ." if it was not complete and approved, signed and sealed (literally with the Agency seal).
It may have been "leaked" in the sense that normally this agency does not circulate unclassified reports to the public. I wouldn't know about that. But in Washington DC, in addition to the millions of documents in computers and file cabinets, there are on any given day thousand of documents being passed around to outside experts for evaluation, to special interest groups, lobbyists, Congressman, industry people and so on. There is nothing wrong with that. We are supposed to have an open government. Even if a document is not intended to be published in the normal sense, it is public property and the freedom of information act makes it clear that if citizens want to see something like this they have every right to do so. That is what "UNCLASSIFIED" means.
It was bad form that I uploaded first and informed them a few hours later. It was impolite, and they had a right to be miffed. I apologized. But anyone familiar with the government knows that I have the right to distribute an unclassified, non-copyright document from the Federal government. It would be ridiculous and contrary to the traditions of the U.S. for anyone to complain about this. Leaked or not, a document of this nature can always be published or circulated.
You will only believe the above if you assume this is a faithful copy, and Krivit and I did not forge the thing or erase part of it, or change "CLASSIFIED" to "UNCLASSIFIED." As I said, if we had done that we would be in a heap of trouble. I don't know about Steve but I would prefer not to serve time in a minimum security facility as a guest of Uncle Sam.
Note also that the CIA and other intelligence agencies have been providing large amounts of information freely to the public for decades. The CIA Factbook has been published for decades. So there is nothing unusual about unclassified intelligence reports being freely circulated. See:
https://www.cia.gov/library/index.html They even have a kid's page: https://www.cia.gov/kids-page/index.htmlHere is an interesting sidebar about open government. In Japan over the last few weeks there has been a completely open, public review of the national budget, with members of Parliament sitting at long tables with experts and citizens deciding whether to cut back or eliminate budget items. About 1000 unrelated members of the public are allowed in on a first-come first serve basis to watch from the sidelines, on folding chairs. The whole thing is being broadcast on the Internet. This is featured on the seven o'clock news every night. This adventure in open government is unprecedented in Japan where such decisions are usually made by elderly guys behind closed doors in smoke-filled rooms. See:
http://www.asahi.com/english/Herald-asahi/TKY200911120136.html - Jed