-Caveat Lector- Further legitimization of guvmint dysfunctionality... ========================== http://www.cnn.com/2000/US/10/31/leak.penalties/index.html Anti-leak bill awaits president's action Major news organizations oppose measure October 31, 2000 Web posted at: 8:59 p.m. EST (0159 GMT) WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A controversial piece of legislation sitting on President Clinton's desk would turn the willful disclosure of classified information into a felony. Opponents say the measure would violate the First Amendment guarantee of free speech, while supporters say the proposed law is aimed at protecting American lives. The anti-leak provision is part of the spending bill for intelligence agencies. The president has until Friday to sign or veto it. Penalties in the bill include up to three years in prison and a $10,000 fine. Several news agencies are opposed to the legislation, which they consider too broad. 'People have been killed' The CIA sought the provision after losing agents and sophisticated surveillance methods because of newspaper articles based on leaks of classified information. When describing why they favor the bill, some U.S. officials cite the example of a leak involving accused terrorist Osama bin Laden. The officials say a news report that U.S. intelligence was monitoring bin Laden's satellite telephone calls caused him to switch to other channels of communication, cutting off that method of U.S. surveillance of his activities. That reaction to the leak may have cost American lives, perhaps even in the bombing of the USS Cole, the officials said. Bin Laden's organization is on the list of possible suspects behind the terrorist attack. "People have been killed," said Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Alabama, who is chairman of the House Select Intelligence Committee. "Men and women that have operated with our agency and with other countries dealing with national security issues, when they are compromised, generally their lives are compromised." Measure is 'overkill' But news organizations such as the Washington Post, the New York Times, and CNN sent a letter to the White House urging the president to veto the measure. "For the first time in our nation's history, a law would criminalize all unauthorized disclosures of classified information -- in effect creating an "official secrets act" of the sort that exists elsewhere but that has always been rejected in this country," the letter said. The letter also noted that it took leaks of classified information to unravel the Iran-Contra affair and to reveal how the U.S. deliberately misled the U.S. public during the Vietnam War. "We are taking a hard look at it. We have certainly heard from a number of news organizations around the country about their concerns about the bill and we will take those seriously," White House spokesman Jake Siewert told reporters. A prominent Republican also opposes the bill. "To put a three year -- up to a three year -- felony sentence for leaking information that doesn't affect our national defense, our national security is overkill," said Rep. Henry Hyde (R-Illinois.) Hyde also noted that the leaker of the bin Laden satellite phone information could have been prosecuted under existing law. Under current U.S. law, it is a crime to release classified information if it helps a foreign power, exposes intelligence agents or relates to national defense. The new bill appears to go beyond this, extending to virtually all classified information. Republican supporters of the legislation warned that if the president does veto the anti-leak bill, then Democrats can expect to be called weak on national security in the last days before next week's election. Defense Department appears divided In a recent appearance before the private Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, Defense Secretary William Cohen said the biggest disappointment in his four years at the Pentagon was the constant leaks of top secret government information to Washington newspapers. The secretary lamented that he even read personal memos to him in the newspaper before they reached his desk. Cohen has warned in recent speeches that militant anti-Western guerrilla groups could begin striking targets in the United States and that Americans could be pressured to give up some cherished personal freedoms as the intelligence community probes for advance warning of such attacks. But in an interview with the New York Times, Pentagon spokesman Kenneth Bacon strongly criticized the bill and said that by answering a simple question, a government spokesman ran the risk of violating the law. "It's disastrous for journalists. It's disastrous for any official who deals with the press in national security, whether at State, the NSC (National Security Council) or the Pentagon," Bacon was quoted as saying. Bacon cited, as an example, being asked about the movement of Iraqi troops. To answer this question, he said, he had to rely on classified information. At his regular briefing later Tuesday, Bacon said the defense secretary's general counsel was looking at the bill. Bacon said he was not at odds with Cohen over the bill, but said there was a "a lot of room for confusion on what this provision would mean and what it wouldn't mean." "What it does say is that people who reveal classified information, whether wittingly or unwittingly, if they're caught doing that, could be imprisoned and pay a fine of up to $10,000," he said. CNN National Security Correspondent David Ensor and Reuters contributed to this report. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ http://www.cnn.com/2000/US/10/19/safe.secrets.ap/ State Department employees pressed to protect secrets October 19, 2000 Web posted at: 9:38 PM EDT (0138 GMT) WASHINGTON (AP) -- Paper shredders, State Department employees are told, must trim classified documents down to slices no larger than 1/32 inch by 1/2 inch. Disposal can also be achieved, they are advised, with machines that that can "pulverize" secrets into powder. Safes storing sensitive materials must weigh at least 500 pounds -- too heavy to be carted off. James D. Tromatter makes these points tirelessly in briefing after briefing as part of the State Department's intensified efforts to keep employees security conscious -- and secret materials away from unauthorized eyes. Since May, about 9,000 employees have heard the message from the amiable yet no nonsense Tromatter, who gave up his Army career four years ago to become a security expert at State. Attendance is mandatory. The goal of Secretary of State Madeleine Albright is to end a string of security lapses plaguing the department, the result, many in Congress believe, of a culture that is inattentive to security requirements. There was the case of the Russian spy operation a year ago that involved use of a sophisticated eavesdropping device planted in a seventh-floor conference room. The Russian who got caught listening to the device outside the State Department was sent packing last December. Who planted the device remains a mystery. More significant is the case of the laptop computer with highly classified information that disappeared around Feb. 1 from a conference room in the department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research. It was alleged to have contained highly classified information about arms proliferation issues and about sources and methods of U.S. intelligence collection. The lapses left Albright feeling "humiliated." At a meeting of State Department employees, she dispensed with the ambiguities so common to her trade. "I don't care how skilled you are as a diplomat, how brilliant you may be at meetings, or how creative you are as an administrator, if you are not a professional about security, you are a failure," she said. Less than three weeks later, Tromatter began his briefings, which consist largely of reminders: Top secret material is always covered by a special sheet that identifies it as such. Use red "secret" labels on computer disks that have been used on classified computers. To hand-carry top secret information requires a top-secret clearance. Copying of top secret materials must be carried out by a "top-secret control officer." Secret and confidential materials can only be copied on designated machines. Since the briefings began, Tromatter says, reports of infractions are down by about 20 percent. Tromatter, a native of Williamsburg, Virginia, says the most common security infraction involves leaving a classified document uncovered on a desk. He says that of the various threats the State Department faces, none is greater than what he calls "sigint," or signals intelligence. It involves the intercept by unauthorized persons of classified materials sent by facsimile or telephone. The security lapses did not go unnoticed on Capitol Hill. "It is obvious that the department lacks a professional environment that is sensitive to security concerns," said House International Relations Committee Chairman Benjamin Gilman, R-New York. Said Porter Goss, R-Florida, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, "There is not sufficient awareness, or sufficient attention, to security" at the department. It hasn't been easy for Albright to overcome these perceptions. Not long after her speech to department employees, Sen. Rod Grams, R-Minnesota, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, complained that six foreign service officers nominated for ambassadorships had committed a total of 62 security infractions, including one with 22 on his record. To Grams, it seemed hard to reconcile Albright's warnings about the need for vigilance with coveted promotions for people not always attentive to security issues. Grams held up the nominations for months but then allowed them to clear the Senate after extracting further concessions from the State Department on employee accountability for infractions. In September, the quest for increased security consciousness suffered another setback. The U.S. ambassador to Israel, Martin Indyk, was stripped of his security clearance after he was alleged to have removed classified briefing books from his office, among other infractions. Three weeks later, the security clearance was reinstated because Albright felt Indyk was needed to deal with the ongoing violence between Israelis and Palestinians. But there was no halt to an investigation into his supposed wrongdoing. Congress kept up the heat on the administration this week by approving a bill that subjects government employees to up to three years in prison for willfully disclosing nearly any classified information. The bill was passed despite warnings that it gives the government a blank check to criminalize any leaking it does not like. Copyright 2000 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
