(Note: Removed some mailing lists that I am not subscribed to.) On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 5:38 AM, John Young <j...@pipeline.com> wrote: > > Cryptome's searing critique of Snowden Inc. > > http://timshorrock.com/?p=2354
One thing that I'm not quite getting here that perhaps you can explain. Ms. Natsios made this comment in the partial interview transcript posted to http://timshorrock.com/?p=2354: But these are taxpayer-paid documents belonging in the public domain. What authority does he have to open the spigot where he is now controlling in a fairly doctrinaire and authoritarian way what happens to this trove, this cache?… I am not disputing the rather dubious handling by Snowden and others of this all being somewhat self-serving. However, I would question that these documents (legally speaking) "belong in the public domain" simply because they were paid for by US taxes and have been leaked in part. It is a fair question of whether they _should_ be regarded in this manner, but I am sure that the USG would dispute that since most of these documents were classified as Secret or Top Secret and thus never intended for public viewing. It's not like had we known that these documents existed pre-Snowden disclosure that we would have had any prayer getting them released via a FOIA request even if there were prior proof of their existence. After all, if you believed that, you could make a FOIA request for the missing pages of the PRISM report and obtain them that way. Yeah, good luck with that. -kevin -- Blog: http://off-the-wall-security.blogspot.com/ | Twitter: @KevinWWall NSA: All your crypto bit are belong to us. _______________________________________________ cryptography mailing list cryptography@randombit.net http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography