Ronald Goldfarb, writing in The Hill, points out that 90 percent of the 16 million classified documents generated each year should be open in the first place. “The burden,” he writes, “ought to be on those classifying confidentially to make the clear case for secrecy, and the presumption should be for openness.”
Ronald Goldfarb in The Hill:
Presently, over 4,000 federal government officials have the power initially to classify documents. The classification system costs us $7 billion a year to classify 17,000 documents a day, 16 million per year. In addition, over 3 million employees have the power to declare a derivative classification if they use, excerpt or paraphrase a classified document — they do so 5,000 instances a day, 50 million documents a year. The natural tendency is to err on the side of safety and overdo it. Categories of classification are subjective, and different classifiers draw different conclusions. With no sunset provision to undo these classifications, and an uncertain, slow and expensive FOIA system, documents tend to stay classified.
The Wiki experience shows how silly some of the secrecy has been shielding idiosyncratic behavior of eccentric officials, and how enlightening some of the disclosures have been — our wasting money by giving it to corrupt officials in Afghanistan.
We are launching a major overhaul of our comments section.
In addition to more robust spam filtering and moderation, new features include the ability to rate other comments, sort how they are displayed and respond directly via e-mail or in a thread.
Unfortunately, commenters will lose their existing Truthdig identities. It's a pain, we know, but on the plus side you will now be able to log in with a plethora of options, including Google, Twitter, Facebook and Disqus accounts.
Before launching this system we spent months in discussion with our top commenters. We listened to the feedback and we hope you like what we've come up with.
Please direct any problems or concerns to us via our contact page.
By james bain, December 8, 2010 at 11:25 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
I agree with Gerard; but how can those who know no shame understand the shamelessness?
Automatic thinking, as illustrated by Chris Hedges’column, Happy as a Hangman. But who of any funcioning intellect thinks we can turn the tide, when it is clear the oligarchs hold all the cards…as foreseen by Jack London in Iron Heel.
I don’t know about anyone else, but I’m not especially anxious to be buried alive.
Having held a Top Secret level clearance in the Air Force, I can say unequivocally that Goldfarb’s 90% figure is low. As a sideline specialty, I used to give intel briefings where my only sources were Janes’ and Aviation Week and Space Technology. The briefings were classified “secret”! I gave secret briefings on the Lebanese civil war in the ‘70s using cables between military attaches as source material. Completely banal, cocktail party gossip stuff, but classified as a matter of habit rather than necessity. I was required to stamp all my briefing notes with a “Classified” rubber stamp!
Having said all this, I do believe that the reason the vast majority of stuff is classified is NOT because the “secret” itself might be embarrassing, but because the source of the information needs to be protected. (Which doesn’t explain the classification of my briefings sourced from public documents, I know.) Who cares if the Sultan of Lilliput is gay- the point is, if the only person who knows that is his butler, a CIA informant planted there because the Sultan hates the US, then to expose the fact is to expose the source.
There are serious secrets and Assange doesn’t know them. All he has done is upset the cozy, cloistered, but, in the grand scheme of things, harmless, world of “I know something you don’t know.”
Wow. The ultimate hypocrisy. But not a first. Pick a topic, any topic, and you’ll see we have always been King of the Hill, Top of the Heap, A number 1, in the ancient art of hypocricy.
America is even better at it than religions. Well, maybe I’m getting carried away.
From today’s London Guardian: “5.30pm: With perfect timing an email arrives from Philip Crowley at the state department:
The United States is pleased to announce that it will host Unesco’s World Press Freedom Day event in 2011, from 1-3 May in Washington, DC.
Ironic? Read the next paragraph from the press release:
The theme for next year’s commemoration will be 21st Century Media: New Frontiers, New Barriers. The United States places technology and
innovation at the forefront of its diplomatic and development efforts. New media has empowered citizens around the world to report on their circumstances, express opinions on world events, and exchange information in environments sometimes hostile to such exercises of individuals’ right to freedom of expression. At the same time, we are concerned about the determination of some governments to censor and silence individuals, and to restrict the free flow of information. We mark events such as World Press Freedom Day in the context of our enduring commitment to support and expand press freedom and the free flow of information in this digital age.
By james bain, December 8, 2010 at 11:25 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
I agree with Gerard; but how can those who know no shame understand the shamelessness?
Report thisAutomatic thinking, as illustrated by Chris Hedges’column, Happy as a Hangman. But who of any funcioning intellect thinks we can turn the tide, when it is clear the oligarchs hold all the cards…as foreseen by Jack London in Iron Heel.
I don’t know about anyone else, but I’m not especially anxious to be buried alive.
By rico, suave, December 7, 2010 at 6:10 pm Link to this comment
Having held a Top Secret level clearance in the Air Force, I can say unequivocally that Goldfarb’s 90% figure is low. As a sideline specialty, I used to give intel briefings where my only sources were Janes’ and Aviation Week and Space Technology. The briefings were classified “secret”! I gave secret briefings on the Lebanese civil war in the ‘70s using cables between military attaches as source material. Completely banal, cocktail party gossip stuff, but classified as a matter of habit rather than necessity. I was required to stamp all my briefing notes with a “Classified” rubber stamp!
Having said all this, I do believe that the reason the vast majority of stuff is classified is NOT because the “secret” itself might be embarrassing, but because the source of the information needs to be protected. (Which doesn’t explain the classification of my briefings sourced from public documents, I know.) Who cares if the Sultan of Lilliput is gay- the point is, if the only person who knows that is his butler, a CIA informant planted there because the Sultan hates the US, then to expose the fact is to expose the source.
There are serious secrets and Assange doesn’t know them. All he has done is upset the cozy, cloistered, but, in the grand scheme of things, harmless, world of “I know something you don’t know.”
Report thisBy tomack, December 7, 2010 at 3:32 pm Link to this comment
Wow. The ultimate hypocrisy. But not a first. Pick a topic, any topic, and you’ll see we have always been King of the Hill, Top of the Heap, A number 1, in the ancient art of hypocricy.
America is even better at it than religions. Well, maybe I’m getting carried away.
Report thisBy gerard, December 7, 2010 at 2:38 pm Link to this comment
From today’s London Guardian: “5.30pm: With perfect timing an email arrives from Philip Crowley at the state department:
The United States is pleased to announce that it will host Unesco’s World Press Freedom Day event in 2011, from 1-3 May in Washington, DC.
Ironic? Read the next paragraph from the press release:
The theme for next year’s commemoration will be 21st Century Media: New Frontiers, New Barriers. The United States places technology and
innovation at the forefront of its diplomatic and development efforts. New media has empowered citizens around the world to report on their circumstances, express opinions on world events, and exchange information in environments sometimes hostile to such exercises of individuals’ right to freedom of expression. At the same time, we are concerned about the determination of some governments to censor and silence individuals, and to restrict the free flow of information. We mark events such as World Press Freedom Day in the context of our enduring commitment to support and expand press freedom and the free flow of information in this digital age.
Shameless. You really could not make it up.”
Report this