Excising NSA Spokesperson's Information
Boatwrite at aol.com
Boatwrite at aol.com
Fri Jul 2 09:16:34 EDT 2004
I must raise a question about the moderator's making edits to Mr. Ennis'
much needed questioning of the National Security Agency about its returning
VENONA documents to its website. The moderator's apparent blue
the surname of the NSA spokeswoman who replied to Mr. Ennis. I would
sincerely wonder why the moderator felt it necessary to do this.
Has the moderator
decided to set up his own security standards? Is there something about outing
an NSA employee like CIA officer Plame was outted?
Yes those questions are tinged with a tad of sarcasm. In this writer's
humble opinion, the signing of a letter by a government employee
there is no reason that said employee's name should not be made public (unelss
otherwise stated). I think the moderator needs to explain further whatever
standards he uses for such edits.
MODERATOR'S Response (Mike Dravis):
I thank Mr. McNiff for his inquiry, and will explain my reasoning.
First, it seems to me that the removal of the NSA spokesperson's last
name and e-mail address does not alter the substance, meaning, or
interpretation of the e-mail in question.
Second, the primary reason I removed the NSA spokesperson's
information is because as far as I am aware, she did not give
permission for her information to be publicly distributed or
permanently archived on the IntelForum web site. There is a
difference between e-mailing one individual privately and having an
e-mail distributed to a large group of people (and then having the
e-mail placed in a permanent, public archive). Previously, in
similar situations people have requested ("demanded" might be a
better word) that their information be removed from the IntelForum
archive. Removing specific e-mails from the IntelForum archive is
not a simple procedure, or so our Internet Service Provider has
Overall, in this case removing the NSA spokesperson's information
seemed like the prudent thing to do, but I am certainly open to
hearing differing views on this matter. What is the compelling case
for including the name and e-mail address of the NSA spokesperson?
Does that information lend credibility to the proffered explanation
of the NSA's actions? Would a spokesperson for NSA (a.k.a. "No Such
Agency," "Never Say Anything") acting in this capacity use her real
name in any case?
Intelligence Forum (http://www.intelforum.org) is sponsored by Intelligence
and National Security, a Frank Cass journal (http://www.frankcass.com/jnls/ins.htm)
More information about the IntelForum