Now that we have been moved ...
into the right pew, we can address this:
After reading all prior posts, please tell me:from Elevation
God help that guy with whats coming for him.
1. What's coming for him ?
2. But, far more important, your reasoned analysis of why.
First class assignment Intel Law 101
Thats a tough questionOriginally Posted by jmm99
into the right pew, we can address this:
After reading all prior posts, please tell me:
1. What's coming for him ?
2. But, far more important, your reasoned analysis of why.
First class assignment Intel Law 101
My professor in my history of Intel class had to have his lecture notes vetted before he could teach the course and I know all current members have to do the same thing whenever they want to write a book or speak in public about the Agency, due to agreements they sign. I imagine that applies to former Agency members as well, but I'm not completely sure. However, I would imagine they definitely have to go through vetting if they want to talk or publish any information regarding classified information or procedures.
I know that the case against Frank Snepp is a landmark case in terms of establishing legal precedent for the government to go after those who publish secrets without agency permission. However, it will probably be worse for Ishmael because he was even told beforehand by the Agency that he couldn't publish about 98% of the things inside the book
At the very least all profits Ishmael makes from the book will be seized and he'll potentially be facing jail time as well.
Am I on the right track at least?
What I'm also not sure about Mike, are the penalties the same for writing about classified things in a book as they are for stealing a classified document and distributing it?
Am I on the right track at least?
Perhaps
Hint: Break down subject into two categories:
1. PRB (some refs in links on page 1) and agency's civil remedies per Snepp case. Google - lots of open source stuff.
2. Fed Criminal Statutes re: classified data - case of alleged Israeli spies in DC is recent. You will find that area something of a quagmire - where outright espionage is not involved. Same Google idea.
Answer is in links - along with known exceptions. Sources and methods can be deadly to some of our own people or their agents, even if the data is 30-40 years old. X > Y > Z.I imagine that applies to former Agency members as well, but I'm not completely sure.
Not necessarily; agency GC may elect not to go civil - DoJ may decide not to prosecute. What's the criteria ?At the very least all profits Ishmael makes from the book will be seized and he'll potentially be facing jail time as well.
You tell me.What I'm also not sure about Mike, are the penalties the same for writing about classified things in a book as they are for stealing a classified document and distributing it?
JMM,Perhaps
Hint: Break down subject into two categories:
1. PRB (some refs in links on page 1) and agency's civil remedies per Snepp case. Google - lots of open source stuff.
2. Fed Criminal Statutes re: classified data - case of alleged Israeli spies in DC is recent. You will find that area something of a quagmire - where outright espionage is not involved. Same Google idea.
Answer is in links - along with known exceptions. Sources and methods can be deadly to some of our own people or their agents, even if the data is 30-40 years old. X > Y > Z.
Not necessarily; agency GC may elect not to go civil - DoJ may decide not to prosecute. What's the criteria ?
You tell me.
I'll do a little research and get back to you in a day or two, I got a few other things on my plate at this second. In the meantime I'll be sure not to expose any state secrets.
JMM,
Here are some things I've learned about the vetting process and penalties from the following sources that have answered some questions I had and have led me a little closer to giving you a complete response. The link you provided on the first page is outstanding by the way.
http://www.fas.org/sgp/eprint/hedley.html
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washing...py-books_N.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelli...Protection_Act
http://www.firstworldwar.com/source/espionageact.htm
http://abcnews.go.com/images/TheLaw/..._Complaint.pdf
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7361446.stm
1- All former CIA employees are indeed required to go through the PRB before publishing. The process is mandatory because sources and methods are to be protected as established by the National Security Act of '47 and CIA Act of '49.
2- The PRB only serves to vet that material to eliminate classified things from being published, but isn't supposed to stop publishing on the basis of the material being critical.
3- I believe this paragrapgh answers the question about whether the CIA and DoJ should go forward with the case. It explains how court action isn't necessary mandatory:
"If an author seeks to publish without having obtained PRB approval, the Agency can go to court to block publication or can seize the profits if publication already has occurred, even if there is no classified information involved.(5) In deciding to recommend litigation to the Office of the General Counsel (OGC), the Board must be convinced that the Agency can articulate harm to national security flowing directly from the disclosure. And the Board must weigh the risk of going to court, which not only may result in an adverse ruling but which also means identifying and calling attention to damaging information and providing publicity for the book that contains it. Each review thus requires a policy judgment that weighs damage and the prospect of litigation, with judicial precedent in mind. "
4- Its a crime to publicize identities and information about CIA sources, operatives, agents and assests due to the "Intelligence Identities Protection Act". If succesfully convicted, the guility party will serve about 5 years in prison. The only person to be succesfuly found guilty was Sharon Scaranage. She served 5 years and 8 months in jail.
5- The Espionage Act of 1917 makes it illegal for people to publish information with "intent to interfere with the operation or success of the armed forces of the United States or to promote the success of its enemies. This was punishable by death or by imprisonment for not more than 30 years" It seems like some of the sensative material in Jones' book fall in line with this law.
5- Stealing classified information will land you in jail for life, as in the case of Jonathan Pollard, the guy spying for Israel. The above copy of the warrant for Ben Ami Kadish lay out all the laws that people who get caught stealing classified info are breaking. The BBC link is where I learned what Pollard was actually sentenced to.
Thats all I got for now.
OK, Speedy ....
it gets you an A - with a bonus for answer #3
Perhaps true as to some data (Jones denies anything he wrote was classified); but the devil is in proving what you quote:from Elevation
It seems like some of the sensative material in Jones' book fall in line with this law.
So, a specific intent crime - and if Jones' bio is even half true that intent seems skinny to me. We need more facts."intent to interfere with the operation or success of the armed forces of the United States or to promote the success of its enemies"
Some comments - which illustrate why there are agency contracts, the PRB and other bothersome "stuff".
--------------------------------
Sharon Scranage (Operations Support Assistant) - Wiki Bio
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharon_Scranage.... Soussoudis [her Ghanian intel officer boyfriend] was later exchanged for a number of Ghanaian CIA agents who had been arrested following their exposure by Scranage. ....
One wonders if she wasn't "honey-trapped". In any event, one network down the tubes from pillow talk.
She was prosecuted under the "Agee Act" - brief ref. to Agee here - elsewhere, there is lots of stuff on that saatana.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...id=chix-sphereWhat Can You Say About A Spy?
Monday, Jul. 25, 2005
....
What was the original impetus behind creation of the act?
In two words, Philip Agee. ... CIA officer who spent most of his 11-year career in Latin America ... resigned in 1969... Agee wrote a 1975 memoir, Inside the Company: CIA Diary, featuring a 24-page appendix made up of agents' names and operations. Later that year Richard Welch, a CIA station officer in Athens, was assassinated....
Welch's death was not caused by Agee's book; but his death illustrated one of the dangers of disclosing the identity of officers and agents - Welch's identity was well known to terrorists in Greece.
----------------------------------------
And, leave it to the Telegraph to give us a catchy headline:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/portal/ma...t/ftcia107.xmlThe spies who loved. . . and lost their jobs
Last Updated: 12:01am BST 07/06/2007
James Bond may always get his girl, but when the women who spy for the CIA get their man they get sacked. Now they are suing the Agency for discrimination, they tell Toby Harnden ...
And a long article (7 pp.) in US News on the "pillow talk" class action filed with EEOC by attorney Janine Brookner representing the plaintiffs. Draw your own conclusions.
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/ar...0422/30cia.htmForeign Affairs
Does the CIA have a double standard when its spies cozy up to foreigners? Veteran female officers speak out.
By David E. Kaplan
Posted 4/22/07
Didn't find a url to the EEOC case file - it is getting too late.
Sex, Sin - and I Spy - an unbeatable combo.
--------------------------------------------------
And, since you nailed Pollard and Kadish, I can't dock you points for not reading my mind - I was thinking of the "AIPAC Case" - US v. Rosen, which can be found here:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/jud/aipac/index.html
Many pleadings - showing you what happens step by weary step in a Federal espionage case - starting at bottom with Larry Franklin's plea bargain.
If you have some time, they all would be worth reading - original docs beat what people say original docs say.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks