You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Home Front: WoT
US govt refuses to lift lid on drone strikes
2012-06-22
WASHINGTON: The US government has asked a federal court to reject lawsuits demanding the release of documents on CIA drone strikes targeting suspected militants abroad, saying the entire subject is “classified.” Shortly before a midnight deadline on Wednesday, US government lawyers filed a brief to the district court in New York defending the veil of secrecy around the drone campaign, which has killed numerous Al-Qaeda figures and associates in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia.

“Whether or not the CIA has the authority to be, or is in fact, directly involved in targeted lethal operations remains classified,” the government brief stated.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the New York Times had filed lawsuits after having requested papers on the drone bombing campaign under the Freedom of Information Act.
Why didn't the NYT just ask their favorite leaker for the documents? They could have offered to do a special Sunday edition for Champ and his campaign on the subject...
The organizations had requested documents explaining the legal basis for the raids and the killing of terror suspects who are US citizens, such as the US-born cleric Anwar Al-Awlaqi who was taken out last year in a drone strike.

The government not only ruled out releasing documents related to the drone strikes, but argued that merely referring to the number or categories of documents posed a threat to national security.

“Even to describe the numbers and details of most of these documents would reveal information that could damage the government’s counter terrorism efforts,” it said.

The ACLU called the government’s argument “absurd,” saying the drone war was an open secret that government officials have boasted about to reporters.

“Senior officials have discussed it, both on the record and off. They have taken credit for its putative successes, professed it to be legal, and dismissed concerns about civilian casualties,” Jameel Jaffer, deputy legal director of the ACLU, said in a statement. “The public is entitled to know more about the legal authority the administration is claiming and the way that the administration is using it.”
He's got a point. Once you start leaking secret information to score political points on the campaign trail, you really can't come back with an argument about national security. The proper thing for Champ and his administration would have been to keep their mouths shut from day one about the drones, and blame it all on the Ruritanians.
The Obama administration’s brief to the court acknowledged the use of lethal force is “undoubtedly of the utmost public concern” but said it had to take into account legal prohibitions against the release of classified information.
So when will you discipline the ones who leaked the rest of this to the press on behalf of your campaign?
Posted by:Steve White

#2  Why didn't the NYT just ask their favorite leaker for the documents?

He may have learned a lesson?
Posted by: gorb   2012-06-22 12:39  

#1  The NYT is looking for FOIA cover for documents it already has via Obama's "White House leadership and advisors"
Posted by: Frank G   2012-06-22 11:35  

00:00