Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: neverdem; jveritas; Chena; Valin; M. Thatcher; DocRock; Calpernia; Madame Dufarge; Txsleuth; ...
Thanks for the ping neverdem! I'm going to see if the other story linked within this story has been posted.

Unfounded Assumptions - DOCEX challenged the assumptions of the intelligence community and the...,

Release/Translation of Classified PreWar Docs ping. If you want to be added or removed to the ping list, please Freepmail me.

Please add the keyword prewardocs to any articles pertaining to this subject.

Operation Get The Truth Out

Operation Iraqi Freedom Documents

Documents from the Harmony Database

jveritas’s blog

An Interview With a Citizen Translator and American Hero

4 posted on 11/14/2006 5:40:48 PM PST by eyespysomething
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: eyespysomething; jveritas; neverdem

Because I don't know, I'll just ask: are the documents listed at the link below, the complete list of prewardocs that had already been made public that jveritas was working on translating? Just a partial list? Or were there more documents as yet unreleased that will never be released now?

http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://fmso.leavenworth.army.mil/products-docex.htm


6 posted on 11/14/2006 7:28:24 PM PST by cgk (I don't see myself as a conservative. I see myself as a religious, right-wing, wacko extremist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: eyespysomething; All

Bob Baer was one the few CIA operatives to aggressively pursue intelligence collection throughout the Middle East and other terrorist hotspots in the 1990's. Both of Baer's accounts of his decades on the job (Sleeping With The Devil and See No Evil) provide valuable insights into the workings of America's shadowy spook organization.

I've not read "Sleeping With The Devil" but have read "See No Evil" and highly recomend it, if you can still find it. If you can't and are interested freepmail me and we'll see what we can work out.


15 posted on 11/15/2006 5:43:27 AM PST by Valin (Rick Santorum 08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: eyespysomething

Rational Security Classifications?

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htintel/articles/20061115.aspx

November 15, 2006: After decades of complaints about the haphazard way in which documents were classified as secrets, the U.S. Army has a plan, to do it in a more systematic way. In the past, any of the many people with authority to "classify" documents, could use whatever criteria they saw fit to stamp a document "confidential", "secret" or "top secret". No more. Now, the classifier has to be able to justify, sort of, what level of secrecy is imposed. For example, "confidential" is for data that, if it got out, would result in some damage to national security. For a "secret" classification, there would have to be serious damage. A "top secret" designation would have to involve potential exceptionally grave damage. It's still a judgment call, but at least there are now some guidelines. Until now, over-classifying often had the effect of keeping useful information from your own people. It's why non-government analysts can often uncover "secret" information, and then discover that the troops who need it, do not have access to the official version. Happens all too often.


There are also unclassified secrets. Stuff like "for official use only" and "not for public distribution." These items, often training materials for the troops and civilians working for the military, now require some justification. That would not be too difficult to conjure up, but at least now you have to make an effort before you go crazy with the red stamp.


16 posted on 11/15/2006 6:14:51 AM PST by Valin (Rick Santorum 08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson