Friday, October 18, 2013
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Labels
- accountability (1)
- Allende (1)
- black bag operations (1)
- Central Intelligence Agency (14)
- Chile (1)
- CIA (17)
- civil liberties (1)
- code of conduct (1)
- covert action (1)
- diplomacy (1)
- diplomatic cover (1)
- domestic intelligence (1)
- drones (1)
- drug experiments (1)
- economic espionage (2)
- economic intelligence (1)
- embassies (1)
- encryption (2)
- enhanced interrogation methods (4)
- espionage (3)
- ethical standards (2)
- FISA (3)
- FISA Court (2)
- FOIA (1)
- Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (1)
- Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (4)
- Freedom of Information Act (2)
- GCHQ (2)
- Government Communications Headquarters (1)
- human intelligence (1)
- human rights (2)
- HUMINT (3)
- intelligence sharing (1)
- interrogation (3)
- Iran (1)
- Japan (1)
- Middle East (1)
- military intelligence (1)
- Mossadegh (1)
- National Security Agency (16)
- National Security Council (1)
- NSA (17)
- NYPD (1)
- Operation Ajax (1)
- Operation TPAJAX (1)
- oversight (1)
- Phillipines (1)
- Pine Gap (1)
- politicization of intelligence (1)
- Prism (3)
- privacy (6)
- rendition (2)
- secrecy (6)
- security clearance (2)
- SIGINT (12)
- Signals Intelligence (3)
- spying (2)
- Stellar Wind (1)
- surveillance (11)
- targeted killings (1)
- torture (3)
- undersea cables (1)
- undersea tappng (1)
In some cases, estimating the damage to individuals and individual operations is relatively easy. Releasing the names of operatives and agents working clandestinely in foreign nations can put their lives in jeopardy and dismantle operations which may have taken decades to put in place. It is believed that the information that Aldrich Ames gave to the Soviets led directly to the execution of a number of U.S. agents working in the Soviet Union. However, would the damage done to these operations measure up to the "exceptionally grave damage to the national security" standard as required for a Top Secret designation?
ReplyDelete