Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
Personally, I'd probably want to verify in some way that the
document has actually been published. That could have been a leaked
draft, for example.
If it were a leaked draft it would say "DRAFT" or "Do not circulate."
This has a document number assigned, an "UNCLASSIFIED" status
notification, and a release date of 13 November 2009. That means it
is finished.
I have no idea whether it will ever be "published" meaning "made
available at a DIA website." The government generates millions of
documents and only a small number are put on websites or routinely
made available to people outside the government. All those unseen
documents are legitimate and complete, and they represent the
consensus of opinions at the agencies that generate them. This
document was reviewed by dozens of experts in a wide range of fields,
in the agencies listed on p. 6. This document means what it says. It
is not some lone individual's view, and it would not be circulated
with cover letter saying "feel free to forward it to whomever you
think would be interested . . ." if it was not complete and approved,
signed and sealed (literally with the Agency seal).
It may have been "leaked" in the sense that normally this agency does
not circulate unclassified reports to the public. I wouldn't know
about that. But in Washington DC, in addition to the millions of
documents in computers and file cabinets, there are on any given day
thousand of documents being passed around to outside experts for
evaluation, to special interest groups, lobbyists, Congressman,
industry people and so on. There is nothing wrong with that. We are
supposed to have an open government. Even if a document is not
intended to be published in the normal sense, it is public property
and the freedom of information act makes it clear that if citizens
want to see something like this they have every right to do so. That
is what "UNCLASSIFIED" means.
It was bad form that I uploaded first and informed them a few hours
later. It was impolite, and they had a right to be miffed. I
apologized. But anyone familiar with the government knows that I have
the right to distribute an unclassified, non-copyright document from
the Federal government. It would be ridiculous and contrary to the
traditions of the U.S. for anyone to complain about this. Leaked or
not, a document of this nature can always be published or circulated.
You will only believe the above if you assume this is a faithful
copy, and Krivit and I did not forge the thing or erase part of it,
or change "CLASSIFIED" to "UNCLASSIFIED." As I said, if we had done
that we would be in a heap of trouble. I don't know about Steve but I
would prefer not to serve time in a minimum security facility as a
guest of Uncle Sam.
Note also that the CIA and other intelligence agencies have been
providing large amounts of information freely to the public for
decades. The CIA Factbook has been published for decades. So there is
nothing unusual about unclassified intelligence reports being freely
circulated. See:
https://www.cia.gov/library/index.html
They even have a kid's page:
https://www.cia.gov/kids-page/index.html
Here is an interesting sidebar about open government. In Japan over
the last few weeks there has been a completely open, public review of
the national budget, with members of Parliament sitting at long
tables with experts and citizens deciding whether to cut back or
eliminate budget items. About 1000 unrelated members of the public
are allowed in on a first-come first serve basis to watch from the
sidelines, on folding chairs. The whole thing is being broadcast on
the Internet. This is featured on the seven o'clock news every night.
This adventure in open government is unprecedented in Japan where
such decisions are usually made by elderly guys behind closed doors
in smoke-filled rooms. See:
http://www.asahi.com/english/Herald-asahi/TKY200911120136.html
- Jed
