Espionage Lite: Talking about secrets becomes a crime--WaPo

[Demeter]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/14/AR2006081401124_pf.html

Espionage Lite
Talking about secrets becomes a crime.

Tuesday, August 15, 2006; A12



THE UNITED STATES has never had an Official Secrets Act -- a statute forbidding private citizens from disclosing and discussing information the government wants to keep quiet. Last week it got one. The change didn't come from Congress but from a federal judge in Virginia. At the urging of the Bush administration, Judge T.S. Ellis discovered it in an old and vague law that prohibits disclosure of information related to the national defense.

Judge Ellis's dangerous decision comes in the case of two former executives of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) -- Steven J. Rosen and Keith Weissman -- who are accused of conduct that skirts the legal line between legitimate advocacy and illicit espionage. The decision has far-reaching implications; if it stands, it will greatly augment governmental authority to compel Americans to keep quiet about what they know.

The government alleges that Mr. Rosen and Mr. Weissman conspired with a Pentagon employee to receive sensitive information from him and then give it to people not entitled to receive it -- including Israeli government officials, a reporter for The Post and colleagues at AIPAC. Prosecutors have not accused them of spying, a charge the alleged facts do not comfortably support. Instead, it has moved under a related provision of law that prevents people in possession of national defense information from disclosing it to others.

This law, murky in its scope since Congress passed its predecessor statute during World War I, would, on its face, ban anyone from giving sensitive information, itself not defined, to any other person. Judge Ellis conceded that it can't reach as far as its plain meaning would seem to indicate; the First Amendment surely limits the government's authority to prosecute people for gathering and reporting information.

I HATED TO CUT THE REST--WELL-REASONED, FAIRLY SHORT, AND INFINITELY IMPORTANT--PLEASE READ!!!!

[acmejack]

1. This is very important, First Amendment Alert!!!

Ever closer we creep to the Police State.

[Kagemusha]

2. I truly, truly tire of this garbage, and for one simple reason.

There's a lot of stuff that shouldn't be shared with intelligence agents of foreign countries who you KNOW are intelligence agents, even though publishing them in a newspaper would be perfectly legal. And frankly, publishing such things in a newspaper would be by far the more ethical option.

Edit: In other words, if the first amendment "must" protect people gathering and reporting information, then they should REPORT it, TO THE PUBLIC.

[enough]

3. k&r