Re: US Navy could be crippled by software backdoors.

Fred J. McCall wrote:
> Vince <firelaw@firelaw.us> wrote:
>
> :Fred J. McCall wrote:
> :> Vince <firelaw@firelaw.us> wrote:
> :>
> :> :Fred J. McCall wrote:
> :> :> Vince <firelaw@firelaw.us> wrote:
> :> :>
> :> :> :Fred J. McCall wrote:
> :> :> :> Vince <firelaw@firelaw.us> wrote:
> :> :> :>
> :> :> :> :Fred J. McCall wrote:
> :> :> :> :> Mxsmanic <mxsmanic@gmail.com> wrote:
> :> :> :> :>
> :> :> :> :> :Fred J. McCall writes:
> :> :> :> :> :
> :> :> :> :> :> You might want to look at some classified documents and read the
> :> :> :> :> :> statement regarding under what authority they are classified.
> :> :> :> :> :
> :> :> :> :> :With a few exceptions, all classified material in the U.S. is
> :> :> :> :> :classified under direct or indirect authority of the President. Thus,
> :> :> :> :> :the President can authorize its disclosure. (A notable exception is
> :> :> :> :> :certain information on atomic weapons, which is classified under
> :> :> :> :> :Congressional authority; I don't know if the President has authority
> :> :> :> :> :to allow disclosure of this material or not.) Military classification
> :> :> :> :> :proceeds directly from an Executive Order of the President, which is
> :> :> :> :> :periodically updated.
> :> :> :> :>
> :> :> :> :> Precisely the point. Hence the President, by definition, cannot
> :> :> :> :> 'leak' non-nuclear weapons related classified information.
> :> :> :> :
> :> :> :> :Actually he can. He can declassify it and then "leak" it.
> :> :> :>
> :> :> :> But then he isn't leaking classified information.
> :> :> :
> :> :> :if he has declassified it sure
> :> :> :But he says "here this is classified, so dont tell anyone I gave it to
> :> :> :you " its a leak
> :> :>
> :> :> Not even then, actually, since as President he can simply decide
> :> :> you're 'cleared' for that particular piece of info and it is therefore
> :> :> no longer a leak.
> :> :>
> :> :> :> :But, to use
> :> :> :> :an analogy, the presidents pardon power does not give him the authority
> :> :> :> :to order the release of a convicted criminal without exercising it
> :> :> :>
> :> :> :> It's not quite the same thing unless you postulate that the convicted
> :> :> :> criminal was convicted and imprisoned by the direct authority of the
> :> :> :> President.
> :> :> :
> :> :> :The presidents pardon power is constitutional. It has no limits but he
> :> :> :has to actually exercise it.
> :> :>
> :> :> The President's classification power is regulatory. He can either
> :> :> declassify by mere declaration or declare the recipient as cleared for
> :> :> the data by mere declaration. No 'exercise' required. By definition
> :> :> the President cannot 'leak' classified information, since if he shows
> :> :> it to you he has automagically cleared you for it (as is his right).
> :> :
> :> :Provide a cite for this interpretation please.
> :>
> :> Investigate where the whole classification scheme originates from.
> :>
> :> :You are conflating "authorizing the individual" with "declassifying
> :> :the material".
> :> :They are not the same.
> :>
> :> No, they are not. If you actually read what I wrote you will see that
> :> I am doing no such thing and am quite explicit about these being two
> :> separate things.
> :>
> :> :If he shows a reporter a classified document but does not declassify it.
> :> : the reporter is under criminal penalties if he uses or discloses it.
> :>
> :> True, but once gain the President has not 'leaked' it because, by
> :> definition, that is impossible. He has merely disclosed it to another
> :> individual whom he has cleared on the spot.
> :>
> :> The person he showed it to may 'leak' it, but the President cannot (by
> :> definition). If the President shows it to you, you are authorized to
> :> see it (by definition). Hence it is not a 'leak'.
> :
> :Why did he show it to the reporter? If he intended the reporter to
> :report it, its a leak
>
> Nope. Cannot be a leak BY DEFINITION. It's not a leak until the
> reporter reports it (if it is still classified) and at that point the
> REPORTER is leaking it (having been an authorized person BY DEFINITION
> when they saw it).
>
> The President CANNOT LEAK CLASSIFIED INFORMATION BY DEFINITION.
>
> Which part of that is unclear to you, Vinnie?
>
The US President can be an accessory to the leak.

Andrew Swallow
Received on Mon May 1 01:58:23 2006