TOO MANY SECRETS ARE REAL SECURITY RISK

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP91-00587R000100710066-3
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 1
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: March 16, 2011
• Sequence Number: 66
• Publication Date: April 11, 1986
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/16: CIA-RDP91-00587R000100710066-3
ARTICLE APPEARED
USA TODAY
11 April 1986
OPINION
The Debate:
THE LISA'S SECRETS
Today's debate includes our opinion that too many secrets
and spies, not leaks or aggressive reporting, are the real
threat to our national security, an opposing view from
Rhode Island, other views from Illinois, Wisconsin, and the
District of Columbia, and voices from across the USA.
Too many secrets
are real security risk
"The White House," President Reagan says, "is the leaki-
est place I've ever been in."
The president wasn't talking about the White House roof.
In his speech to newspaper editors this week, he deplored a
leak most editors love - the disclosure of information. He
said it's such a serious problem that planning for U.S. opera-
tions off Libya was limited to a "few people."
CIA Director William Casey went further. He said the
publication of secrets has destroyed intelligence sources
and cost taxpayers "millions and even billions of dollars."
Leaks are nothing new. After all, George Washington
leaked the news that the British would surrender at York-
town to a Philadelphia newspaper.
Today, it's no secret that our government keeps far too
many secrets. There are nearly 20 million government re-
cords that are classified, and 4 million government employ
ees have clearances to see classified information.
It's ludicrous to think 40 people can keep a secret. How
can 4 million? If they were seeing it for the first time, some
bureaucrats would classi:y the Constitution.
Consider some of the "secrets" the media have reported
through the years:
^ A report that the space shuttle carried a spy satellite.
The Pentagon complained about the leak, but an Air Force
official said later little was reported that was not already
public information.
^ The Watergate scandal. Without leaks, the public
would never have known the extent of White House involve-
ment in the burglary and the subsequent cover-up.
^ The publication of the Pentagon Papers. The govern-
ment claimed printing the leaked details of how we got into
the Vietnam War would endanger U.S. lives. Courts dis-
agreed, and the knowledge we gained may have saved lives
later.
Instead of harming us, most disclosures help us better un-
derstand what government is up to. We are entitled to know
what our federal government is doing, just as we deserve to
know how much the school board will pay teachers or
whether the city council will raise taxes.
There are those who cry that journalists are unpatriotic.
They claim reporters would sacrifice national security for a
hot story. That's nonsense. Journalists frequently withhold
sensitive information if it would be dangerous or irresponsi-
ble to reveal it. Even CIA Director Casey admits that.
The real disclosures that have damaged our national se-
curity have not come from the media. No, those disclosures
came from quislings and traitors - the Johnny Walkers
and the other spies - who sold secrets to the Soviets.
Sure, sometimes leaks embarrass public servants. And
they've caused a bureaucratic flap or two. Because we live
in freedom, not under the thumb of a totalitarian state, our
democracy is messy. And to a great degree, our freedom
depends on how much we know about our government.
Yes, the White House leaks. But it would be a mistake to
fix it.
STAT
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/16: CIA-RDP91-00587R000100710066-3