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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KLP who wrote (56478)	7/27/2004 1:21:39 PM
From: unclewest	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 794001

I would not be surprised by any changes in classification of information. It is done everyday. Surely the National Security Archive director knows that as well. There are a number of reasons to classify information and to increase the classification. Some of them: To protect information on operations and planned operations. To protect data on our weapons systems and platforms. To preclude exposure of secret sources. To deny an opponent the mere fact that we know. Etc. Etc. It is not unusual for operational data to be classified after the fact. This is especially true if the data has been expanded by another source, or if it becomes obvious a secret source may be compromised, or if the current tactical situation demands that the info not be readily available to an opponent. The statement by the National Security Archive director that there is no reason to maintain a document's classification is quite naive. He did not generate the documents and does not know the sources used that might be compromised. Nor will he be aware of on-going operations related to the data.