On Jun 8, 2013, at 10:11 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote: > Well, ok, they don't actually *say* that, but it's the underlying idea behind > their own piece, which says that the listed companies didn't really give NSA > quite such unfettered access
There's another potential explanation: from <http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/08/technology/tech-companies-bristling-concede-to-government-surveillance-efforts.html?pagewanted=all> ----- 'Tech companies might have also denied knowledge of the full scope of cooperation with national security officials because employees whose job it is to comply with FISA requests are not allowed to discuss the details even with others at the company, and in some cases have national security clearance, according to both a former senior government official and a lawyer representing a technology company.' ----- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Roland Dobbins <rdobb...@arbor.net> // <http://www.arbornetworks.com> Luck is the residue of opportunity and design. -- John Milton
