Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: zonkie who wrote (37480)	7/24/2004 10:49:21 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 81568

I didn't ignore your question. I said you were wrong. Classified drafts of documents are documents in and of themselves and should be protected just as the "original" or "master" is. You do see the difference between taking original documents and copies of documents don't you? No! Particularly not when the drafts contain hand-written notes not preserved elsewhere. Furthermore, the drafts undoubtedly contain most of the same material found in the "master" document and it is the information they contain which makes the documents classified. You need to rethink the distinction you're trying to make between "copies" and "original documents". To repeat the point - Documents are classified because of the information in them. The same information is in the "copies" or drafts. You do understand that, don't you? They don't even allow people to copy down material from classified documents and take that away.