But it has not answered many basic questions, beginning with why it chose to entrust management of the address space to a company that seems not to have existed until September.
That sounds like "standard practice" to me. If you want to keep something really secret you hive it off to a private company where everything will be "propietary information" that is FOIA-proof.
OK, but the answer is the same. All the employees could be CIA for all we know but they do it to hide what is going on.
They did it to MK Ultra, for instance. They carried out the initial research in the US as a government-funded project then when it showed promise it was moved to the private sector in Canada. No-one can then launch a Congressional inquiry into what they are doing or how government funds are being used etc.
From the linked article:
That sounds like "standard practice" to me. If you want to keep something really secret you hive it off to a private company where everything will be "propietary information" that is FOIA-proof.
Though I think the point of the question is why such a task was entrusted to a company that was four months old at that time.
OK, but the answer is the same. All the employees could be CIA for all we know but they do it to hide what is going on.
They did it to MK Ultra, for instance. They carried out the initial research in the US as a government-funded project then when it showed promise it was moved to the private sector in Canada. No-one can then launch a Congressional inquiry into what they are doing or how government funds are being used etc.
Works every time.
(Apologies if my cynicism is showing!)