INTELLIGENCE IDENTITIES ACT: WORDS, NO TEETH

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP90-00845R000100100003-3
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 1
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: June 8, 2010
• Sequence Number: 3
• Publication Date: August 18, 1984
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/06/08 :CIA-RDP90-008458000100100003-3
ARTICLE APPEARED
ON PAGE.~.__
HUMAN EVENTS
18 August 1984
Intelligence Identities Act: Words o eT
As a member of Congress, I fre-
quently witness legislative efforts that
aze long on symbolism but short on
substance. Sometimes these efforts are
so useless that they remind me of a
baseball pitcher with the stylish windup
of Hall of Famer Sandy Koufax but
who forgot to pick up the ball!
A case in point is the Intellligencc
Identities Protection Act that Congress
passed a couple of years ago: What trig-
gered this nobly intended-but ineffec-:
five-initiative was a relentless stream
of disclosures. Certain individuals, in-
cluding turncoat U.S. intelligence of-
fcer Philip Agee, were busily and sys-
tematically disclosing the names of
those clandestinely employed by the
var'ous U.S. intelligence agencies...
The CIA station chief in Athens was
killed after his cover was blown by the
magazine Counterspy. Subsequently,
in a near tragedy, the homes of the U.S.
Embassy's first secretary in 3amaica
and an AID employe were fired upon
shortly after the American editor of
Covert Action Information Bulletin
claimed in a press conference that those
U.S. afficials and 13 other Americans;
as ~vel! as Jamaicans, were associated
with the C1A.
In this instance; not only were the
names of these .individuals revealed,
but also their home addresses; .
telephone and auto license numbers.
Fortunately, the American officials
and families involved in this attack sur-
vived unscathed. -3i was a close call,
however, as -two' of"~Yhe bullets:
penetrated the bedroom window of one
of the children who was providentially
away at the time. Against this compell-
ingbackdrop, Congress finally attemp-
ted to remedy a situation that was
seriously undermining human in-
telligence collection efforts around the
world.
Lamentably, the legislation that
eventually emerged was so watered
" down that it has not really ac-
" complished its objective of deter-
_ring the exposure of undercover in-
telligence personnel.
After considerable debate, Congress
determined that for anon-government
indi~~dual to be convicted under this
legislation, the goverrtrnent would have -
to prove-that such a person had en-
-gaged in "a pattern of activities intend-
ed to identify and expose covert agents
and with reason to believe that such ac-
tivities would impair or impede the in-
telligence activities of the United
Sta'tcs."
Clearly not covered by this legislative
provision would be those ~ journalists
who; during the course of a story,
casually mention the name of a covert
intelligence operative. Particularly in-
structive in this regard is the conference
report to the Identities Protection Act
which offers the following interpre-
tation: "
"A journalist writing stories about
the CIA would not be engaged in the
requisite `pattern of activities,' even if
-the stories he wrote included the names
of~one or more covert agents, unless the
government proved that there was an
intent to identify and expose agents. To
meet the standard of the bill, s discloser
must be engaged in a purposeful enter-
prise of revealing identities-he must,
in short, be in the business of `naming
names.' "
Armed with this congressional
analysis and legislative history, many
journalists have no qualms abaut drop-
ping the name of an undercover agent
in order to make a story a little "sexier"
or seemingly more credible. For exam-
ple, the Washington Post ran an article
by correspondent John Laniigua in an
early July 1984 edition that illustrates
my point.
The thrust of the story concerned an
American citizen waiting to be tried in
Nicaragua for espionage. Among other
things, Lantigua reported that this in-
dividual declared that he sold intel-
ligence information to a U.S. diplomat
whom Lantigua named and claimed an
unnamed former U.S. State Depart-
ment official had revealed as having
been employed .by the CIA.
In my opinion, such a titillating
disclosure violates the spirit, if not the
letter, of the Identities Protection Act.
(Incidentally, it is interesting and
ironical to note that Lantigua took
pains to protect the anonymity of his
ex-State Department source while hav-
ing no compunction whatsoever about
revealing the alleged CLA ties of a U.S.
Embassy employe who may have been
fzlsel}? identified as can be the case in
leaks of this nature.) Continued
STAT
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/06/08 :CIA-RDP90-008458000100100003-3