The NSA slide you haven’t seen

Re:The NSA slide you haven’t seen by count on Wednesday July 10, 2013 @01:12PM (#6021221)

So, if you're under oath, you're not allowed to lie. And if you're read into an SCI program that controls the disclosure of the existence of such access, you're most definitely not allowed to say anything about it (or, in many cases, even acknowledge that such a thing exists).

There is no way someone would risk perjuring themselves OR disclosing classified information under oath.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The NSA slide you haven’t seen by betterunix on Wednesday July 10, 2013 @03:04PM (#6022048)

"So, if you're under oath, you're not allowed to lie"

Yeah but what stops you from doing so? I mean, not lying, just giving the "least untruthful" statement you can:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/james-...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The NSA slide you haven’t seen by btipling on Wednesday July 10, 2013 @01:22PM (#6021334)

Not saying anything would say a lot. It would be enough to affect consumer confidence in that products are not being accessed by the NSA.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The NSA slide you haven’t seen by count on Thursday July 11, 2013 @10:45AM (#6026311)

I wonder if it could be construed as disclosing classified info by taking the 5th when asked. You didn't say anything, but did you say anything without saying anything?

[ Parent | on HN ]