Military trying to intimidate general reader?
https://firstlook.org/
It sounds like the usual tortured military rinky dink: Military people may not read The Intercept, where Glenn Greenwald is a staff writer, because it is the military's responsibility to safeguard classified documents.
The problem is, the documents are public. Doesn't matter, says the military. You may endanger your security clearance if you read a classified document on a news site via an "unclassified" computer.
This "reasoning" is associated with the idea that, in addition to Edward Snowden, there may be a second leaker. It is not explained why this possibility is relevant.
Aside from silly bureaucratism, we may have a case here of the military trying to send a psyops message that there is some inherent wrong in Americans reading documents that have not been declassified. The securocrats, I speculate, wish to get the message out via the outraged media that the government takes a very dim view of any American reading a classified document without its permission -- even if it is published in the press.
This suspicion is bolstered by the curious phrasing found in the military prohibition, as quoted by The Intercept:
Viewing potentially classified material (even material already wrongfully released in the public domain) from unclassified equipment will cause you long term security issues. This is considered a security violation.
https://firstlook.org/
It sounds like the usual tortured military rinky dink: Military people may not read The Intercept, where Glenn Greenwald is a staff writer, because it is the military's responsibility to safeguard classified documents.
The problem is, the documents are public. Doesn't matter, says the military. You may endanger your security clearance if you read a classified document on a news site via an "unclassified" computer.
This "reasoning" is associated with the idea that, in addition to Edward Snowden, there may be a second leaker. It is not explained why this possibility is relevant.
Aside from silly bureaucratism, we may have a case here of the military trying to send a psyops message that there is some inherent wrong in Americans reading documents that have not been declassified. The securocrats, I speculate, wish to get the message out via the outraged media that the government takes a very dim view of any American reading a classified document without its permission -- even if it is published in the press.
This suspicion is bolstered by the curious phrasing found in the military prohibition, as quoted by The Intercept:
Viewing potentially classified material (even material already wrongfully released in the public domain) from unclassified equipment will cause you long term security issues. This is considered a security violation.
No comments:
Post a Comment