TBO.com - TBO is Tampa Bay Online

Highlands Today

Guarding Secrets

ADVERTISEMENT

Donald W. Gallagher

Published: December 4, 2007

Regarding Randy Ludacer's comments in the Nov. 19 Highlands Today:

Far left liberals enjoy flaunting their hatred for Bush with their attacks on every possible front, but that seems to be their way.

I disagree with much that the administration has brought on but it is ludicrously deceptive to attack the secrecy issue with such zest as the left does. It is reflective of their defeatism for this or any other war.

The fallacy of these attacks is the fact that there have been zero cases of any form of intimidation of our citizens for the seven years we've had the Patriot Act. I do challenge you to present one.

Would the left like to say that their party would not have enacted some similar form of control over terrorist activity if they were in power? But then, they just may do that, being trapped by their own tirades against secrecy of any kind while the Republicans were at the helm. Do they dare say the Democrats have no history of secrecy in wartime? There are many such occurrences, including the FDR order to not reveal the number of deaths during World War II operations, and would anyone really dare to say that the Democrats did not then have secret operations. How dare they make plans concerning an enemy and not tell us all about it?

The Clintons had many secrets and they sent Sandy Berger to steal the proof of them from the archives so they wouldn't be discovered. Then there was the Clinton theft of more than 300 FBI files on "enemies." Even I wonder how they ended up in the Clintons' bedroom. Certainly our good president and the first lady wouldn't have had them brought there. You don't believe that in 350 files there were no classified notes? Was Mrs. Clinton cleared to read them?

I also wonder what "classification" there was on the rocket guidance systems the Clintons sold to the Chinese communists and on their own at that, certainly not with "the approval of the American citizenry. The list goes on and on and you have the gall to attack an act that has no design except to monitor the activities of known, or those with good potential, for terrorist activity!

As for the Public Interest Declassification Act and Amendments, it is likely oversimplified to note it as coming into being when needed to centralize the responsibility for determining when a document's confidentiality level could be reduced and made available to the general populace. Would you tell me that a Democratic president would not have had a similar power accomplished?

There are many sources available on this act. One is Steven Aftergood's statement to the Committee on Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate. Aftergood is director of Project on Government Secrecy, Federation of American Scientists. Parts of it make the point that with governmental agencies being rife with leaks (and which party would you think is more than likely responsible for these leaks?) that frequently allows the dissemination of still classified information, greatly reducing the act's effectiveness.

Your politics are as obviously strong left as mine is conservative, but I do not let my hate of someone overwhelm my objectivity. You make an accusation that could easily be said of Chavez but not of our government. Your party does not enjoy a secrecy-free past and will certainly engage in it when you regain a position of power in government, and I would hope your politicians use it as carefully as has the current administration.

Donald W. Gallagher
Sebring

Share this:

Loading Comments...

Email Print

ADVERTISEMENT