Intelligence Community Paints Grim Future

November 6th, 2008 | No Comments | Posted in Intelligence

seal of the director of national intelligenceThe world economy is failing, U.S. forces remain tied up in Iraq, Afghanistan is on a downward spiral — one might wonder why anyone would want to be U.S. president during these trying times. Recently, the nation’s chief intelligence officer weighed in, painting an even more somber picture of a far more complicated world. National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell looked beyond the immediate future, focusing on what his analysts are telling him about the challenges the world community is likely to face by 2025. It isn’t pretty. Speaking to an annual conference of intelligence officials and contractors, McConnell said demographics, competition for natural resources and climate change will increase the potential for conflict. President-elect Barack Obama may get a glimpse of some of those challenges on Thursday. McConnell is expected to lead Obama’s first top-secret intelligence briefing, according to U.S. officials familiar with the process.

A team of intelligence briefers has been named and is ready to discuss with Obama the Presidential Daily Brief, similar to the one provided to President Bush, says a message from CIA Director Michael Hayden to CIA employees obtained by CNN.

According to McConnell’s outlook, economic and population growth will strain resources. “Demand is projected to outstrip the easily available supplies over the next decade,” he said at the annual conference.

The intelligence community’s forecast indicates oil and gas supplies will continue to dwindle and production will be concentrated in unstable areas, he said. And there appears to be no relief at hand.

McConnell said studies have shown that new energy technologies — such as biofuels, clean coal and hydrogen — generally take 25 years to become commercially viable and widespread.

The lack of access to safe, reliable water will reach unprecedented levels over the next 20 years, he said, and 1.4 billion people in 36 countries are likely to face water shortages that will have a substantial impact on food production.

“Climate change is expected to exacerbate those resource scarcities,” he said.

McConnell spoke of the unprecedented transfer of global wealth from West to East. By 2025, China is projected to be the second-largest economy and on its way to becoming the largest. India will grow to be the second- or third-largest economy.

All of this adds up to an unstable future. “Given the confluence of factors from a new global international system, increasing tension over natural resources, weapons proliferation … we predict an increased likelihood for conflict,” McConnell concluded.

Among the problems that aren’t going away is terrorism — an issue that did not get as much play as it initially appeared it would during the presidential campaign. McConnell said the descendants of long-established terrorist groups “will inherit organizational structures, the command and control processes and the training procedures necessary to conduct sophisticated attacks.”

He said he is particularly concerned that a terrorist group will acquire and use biological agents to create casualties greater than the September 11, 2001, attacks.

In addition, he warned that a nuclear-armed Iran would “sow the seeds of instability and potential conflict” in that region on a scale that could affect the entire world.

Although the risk of a nuclear attack is “very low” over the next 20 to 30 years, McConnell said, “That possibility is grayer in the future than it is today.”

So what does this mean for the new president?

“After the new president-elect’s excitement subsides after winning the election, it is going to be dampened somewhat when he begins to focus on the realities of the myriad of changes and challenges we are going to face in the future,” McConnell said.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Failed Covert Nuclear Attack on Iran

September 8th, 2008 | 1 Comment | Posted in Intelligence, Military

Was a Covert Attempt to Bomb Iran with Nuclear Weapons ruined by a Military Leak?

Vice President Dick Cheney

U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney.

Critically exploring whether or not there was a covert attempt to instigate a catastrophic nuclear war against Iran is illuminated through an introduction using the recent B-52 Incident. On August 30, a B-52 bomber armed with five nuclear-tipped Advanced Cruise missiles travelled from Minot Air Force base, North Dakota, to Barksdale Air Force base, Louisiana, in the United States. Each missile had an adjustable yield between five and 150 kilotons of TNT which is at the lower end of the destructive capacities of U.S. nuclear weapons. For example, the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima had a yield of 13 kilotons, while the Bravo Hydrogen bomb test of 1954 had a yield of 15,000 kilotons. The B-52 story was first covered in the Army Times on 5 September after the nuclear armed aircraft was discovered by Airmen. LINK

What made this a very significant event was that it was a violation of U.S. Air Force regulations concerning the transportation of nuclear weapons by air. Nuclear weapons are normally transported by air in specially constructed planes designed to prevent radioactive pollution in case of a crash. Such transport planes are not equipped to launch the nuclear weapons they routinely carry around the U.S. and the world for servicing or positioning.

The discovery of the nuclear armed B-52 was, according to Hans Kristensen, a nuclear weapons expert at the Federation of American Scientists, the first time in 40 years that a nuclear armed plane had been allowed to fly in the U.S. LINK. Since 1968, after a SAC bomber crashed in Greenland, all nuclear armed aircraft have been grounded but were kept on a constant state of alert. After the end of the Cold War, President George H. Bush ordered in 1991 that nuclear weapons were to be removed from all aircraft and stored in nearby facilities.

Recently, the Air Force began decommissioning its stockpile of Advanced Cruise missiles. The five nuclear weapons on the B-52 were to be decommissioned, and were to be taken to another Air Force base. An Air Force press statement issued on 6 September 2007, claimed that there “was an error which occurred during a regularly scheduled transfer of weapons between two bases.”

Furthermore, the statement declared: “The Air Force maintains the highest standards of safety and precision so any deviation from these well established munitions procedures is considered very serious.” The issue concerning how a nuclear armed B-52 bomber was allowed to take off and fly in U.S. air space after an ‘error’ in a routine transfer process, is now subject to an official Air Force inquiry which is due to be completed by September 14.

Three key questions emerge over the B-52 incident. First, did Air Force personnel at Minot AFB not spot the ‘error’ earlier given the elaborate security procedures in place to prevent such mistakes from occurring? Many military analysts have commented on the stringent security procedures in place to prevent this sort of mistake from occurring. Multiple officers are routinely involved in the transportation and loading of nuclear weapons to prevent the kind of ‘error’ that allegedly occurred in the B-52 incident.

According to the U.S. Air Force statement, the commanding officer in charge of military munitions personnel and additional munitions airmen were relieved of duties pending the completion of the investigation. According to Kristensen, the error could not have come from confusing the Advanced Cruise Missile with a conventional weapons since no conventional form exists. So the munitions Airmen should have been easily able to spot the mistake. Other routine procedures were violated which suggests a rather obvious explanation for the error. The military munitions personnel were acting under direct orders, though not through the regular chain of military command. This takes me to the second question

Who was in Charge of the B-52 Incident?

Who ordered the loading of Advanced Cruise missiles on to a B-52 in violation of Air Force regulations? The quick reaction of the Air Force and the issuing of a public statement describing the seriousness of the issue and the launch of an immediate investigation, suggests that whatever occurred, was outside the regular chain of military command. If the regular chain of command was violated, then we have to inquire as to whether the B-52 incident was part of a covert project whose classification level exceeded that held by officers in charge of nuclear weapons at Minot AFB.

The most obvious governmental entity that may have ordered the nuclear arming of the B-52 outside the regular chain of military command is the last remaining bastion of neo-conservative activism in the Bush administration.

Vice President Cheney has taken a very prominent role in covert military operations and training exercises designed for the “seamless integration” of different national security and military authorities to possible terrorist attacks. On May 8, 2001, President Bush placed Mr. Cheney in charge of “[A]ll federal programs dealing with weapons of mass destruction, consequence management within the Departments of Defense, Health and Human Services, Justice, and Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency, and other federal agencies”. LINK. Mr. Cheney subsequently played a direct role in supervising training exercises that simultaneously occurred during the 911 attacks.

According to former Los Angeles Police Officer Michael Ruppert, Mr. Cheney had a parallel chain of command that he used to override Air Force objections to stand down orders that grounded the USAF during the 911 attacks, LINK.

Mr. Ruppert learned that the Secret Service had the authority to directly communicate presidential and vice presidential orders to fighter pilots in the air thereby circumventing the normal chain of command. (Crossing the Rubicon, pp. 428 - 429). Furthermore: “It is the Secret Service who has the legal mandate to take supreme command in case of a scheduled major event - or an unplanned major emergency - on American soil; these are designated “National Special Security Events”.LINK.

Mr. Ruppert and others have subsequently claimed that 911 was an “inside job;” and alleges Mr. Cheney through the Secret Service, played a direct leadership role in what occurred over 911. Consequently, it is very possible that Mr. Cheney could have played a similar role in circumventing the regular chain of military command in ordering the B-52 incident. The B-52 incident could be part of a contrived “National Special Security Event” directly controlled by Cheney by virtue of the alleged authority granted to him by President Bush, and through the Secret Service which at least theoretically, has the technological means to by pass the regular chain of military command. I now move to my third key question.

Why was the nuclear armed B-52 sent to Barksdale AFB?

If initial reports that the weapons were being decommissioned, but were mistakenly transported by a B-52 bomber, then the weapons should have been taken to Kirtland Air Force Base. According to Kristensen, this is “where the warheads are separated from the rest of the weapon and shipped to the Energy Department’s Pantex dismantlement facility near Amarillo, Texas”. LINK.

However, it has been revealed that Barksdale AFB is used as a staging base for operations in the Middle East, LINK.

This is circumstantial evidence that the weapons were being deployed for possible use in the Middle East.

There has been recent speculation concerning a possible attack against Iran given reports that the Pentagon has completed plans for a three day bombing blitz of Iran according to a Sunday Times report, LINK. The Report claims that 1200 targets have been selected and this will destroy much of Iran’s military infrastructure. Such an attack will devastate Iran’s economy, create greater political instability in the region, and stop the oil supply. A disruption of the oil supply from the Persian Gulf could trigger a global economic recession and lead to the collapse of financial markets.

In a rather disturbing synchronistic development, there have been reports of billion dollar investments in high risk stock options in both Europe and the U.S. that would only be profitable if a dramatic collapse of the stock market were to occur before September 21. Similar stock options were purchased weeks before the 911 attack in 2001, and investigated by the Securities and Exchange Commission for possible insider trading. The combination of the Sunday Times report and the Stock market option purchases is circumstantial evidence that plans for a concerted military attack against Iran have been secretly approved and covert operations have begun, LINK.

Seymour Hersh in May 2006 reported the opposition of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to the use of nuclear weapons against Iran.

In late April, the military leadership, headed by General Pace, achieved a major victory when the White House dropped its insistence that the plan for a bombing campaign include the possible use of a nuclear device to destroy Iran’s uranium-enrichment plant at Natanz, nearly two hundred miles south of Tehran. .. “Bush and Cheney were dead serious about the nuclear planning,” the former senior intelligence official told me. “And Pace stood up to them.

Then the world came back: ‘O.K., the nuclear option is politically unacceptable.’ LINK.

Given earlier opposition by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, it is likely that the present attack plans for Iraq drawn up by the Pentagon don’t involve the use of nuclear weapons. In order to circumvent the regular chain of command, opposed to a nuclear attack, it is very likely that Vice President Cheney contrived a “National Special Security Event” that involved a nuclear armed B-52. This would have given him the legal authority to place orders directly through the Secret Service to the Air Force officers responsible for the B-52 incident.

Conclusion: Exposing those Responsible for the B-52 Incident

Consequently, there is considerable circumstantial evidence to argue that the nuclear armed B-52 was part of an apparent covert operation, outside the regular chain of constitutional military command. The alleged authority responsible for this was Vice President Cheney. He very likely used the Secret Service to take charge of a contrived National Special Security Event involving a nuclear armed B-52 that would be flown from Minot AFB. The B-52 was directed to Barksdale Air Force base where it would have conducted a covert mission to the Middle East involving the detonation of one or more nuclear weapons most likely in or in the vicinity of Iran. This could either have occurred during a conventional military strike against Iran, or a False Flag operation in the Persian Gulf region.

Apparently, the leaking and discovery of the nuclear armed B-52 at Barksdale was not part of the script. According to a confidential source of Larry Johnson, a former counter-terrorism official from the State Department and CIA, the discovery of the nuclear armed B-52 was leaked. Johnson concludes: “Did someone at Barksdale try to indirectly warn the American people that the Bush Administration is staging nukes for Iran? I don’t know, but it is a question worth asking.” LINK.

While the general public is likely to be given a watered down declassified report by the Air Force over the B-52 incident on September 14, the real investigation will reveal that it was part of a covert operation that intended to bypass the regular chain of command in using nuclear weapons in the Middle East. This will likely result in a furious backlash by key figures in the regular military chain of Command such as Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, and the Commander of Central Command, Admiral William Fallon, who have direct responsibility for the conduct of military operations in the Middle East. The US. Air Force, the Secretary of Defense and Commander of Central Command, is now aware of what was likely going to be the true use of the B-52 and the responsibility of the Office of the Vice President.

It is very likely that the exposure of the B-52 incident will lead to an indefinite hold on plans to attack Iran given uncertainty whether other nuclear weapons have been covertly positioned for use in the Middle East. Significantly, public officials briefed about the true circumstances of the B-52 incident will almost certainly place enormous pressure on Vice President Cheney to immediately resign if it is found that he played the role identified above. It is therefore anticipated that in a very short time, the public will learn that Cheney has resigned for health resigns.

The forthcoming September 14 U.S. Air Force report will likely describe the B-52 incident as an “error” and an “isolated incident” as foreshadowed in the September 6 Press Statement. This will create some difficulty in exposing the actual role played by Cheney and any other government figures that supported him. There will be a need for continued public awareness of the true events behind the B-52 incident in order to expose the actual role of Mr. Cheney. Only in that way can Cheney be held accountable for his actions, and other government figures that supported his neo-conservative agenda be exposed. Regardless of whether Cheney’s role as the prime architect of the B-52 incident is exposed to the public, the official backlash against his covert operation should force his resignation. In either case, a very dangerous public official would be removed from a powerful position of influence. More importantly, the world has been spared a devastating nuclear war by courageous American airmen who revealed the true contents of an otherwise routine B-52 landing at Barksdale, AFB headed for a covert nuclear mission to the Middle East.

Tags: , , , , , ,

Requirements for Top Secret Clearances

August 30th, 2008 | 1 Comment | Posted in Uncategorized

United States SECRET security clearances.  Costs, time required, and disqualifying conditions

 Top Secret This is an online review of the costs and procedures for civilians obtaining a U.S. CONFIDENTIAL, SECRET or TOP SECRET security clearances.Those with prior military service can get a security clearance far faster than someone from the general public.  This document covers:

  • Processing time
  • Cost
  • Disqualifying conditions

How long does the process take?

http://www.taonline.com/securityclearances/#SCREQ

In the past three years, DoD has had a significant backlog of security clearances and reinvestigations pending, most especially for TOP SECRET level access. In general, expect a CONFIDENTIAL or SECRET clearance to take between 1 and 3 months. A TOP SECRET clearance commonly takes more than a year.

What is the cost of a U.S. security clearance?

http://www.taonline.com/securityclearances/#SCREQ

Civilian companies who do classified work for the Dept. of Defense (DoD), or a national security related contract, must bear the cost of security clearances for their employees and clearance investigations can cost several thousands of dollars.

Disqualifying conditions for a U.S. Security Clearance:

From Federal Regulations, PART 710—CRITERIA AND PROCEDURES FOR DETERMINING ELIGIBILITY FOR ACCESS TO CLASSIFIED MATTER

Disqualifying conditions for a security clearance may include but are not limited to:

  • arrest and/or conviction of a felony;
  • frequent involvement with authorities even as a juvenile;
  • DWI/DUI;
  • having been a patient in an institution primarily devoted to the treatment of mental, emotional, or psychological disorders;
  • A history of not meeting financial obligations.  A pattern of financial irresponsibility (bankruptcy, debt or credit problems, defaulting on a student loan);
  • membership in any organization that advocates the commission of acts of force or violence to deny other persons their rights under the Constitution of the United States;
  • having petitioned to be declared a conscientious objector to war;
  • moving violations with fines over $200;
  • illegal drug use (to include any use of cocaine, heroin, LSD, and PCP); and the illegal purchase, possession, or sale of any such narcotics.
  • Deceptive or illegal financial practices, such as embezzlement, employee theft, check fraud, income tax evasion, expense account fraud, filing deceptive loan statements, and other intentional breaches of trust
  • Inability or unwillingness to satisfy debts
  • Unexplained affluence
  • Financial problems that are linked to gambling, drug abuse, alcoholism, or other issues of a security concern.
  • Deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification of a material fact in any written document or oral statement to the government when applying for security processing

http://www.dss.mil/nf/adr/percon/perconT.htm

  • Vulnerability to Coercion: Any omission, concealment, or falsification of material information increases an individual’s vulnerability to coercion, exploitation, or pressure.
  • Problems in Work Performance: The work environment offers many opportunities to exhibit behavioral or psychological problems associated with unreliability, untrustworthiness, or poor judgment. These problems include: rebellious attitude toward supervisors, habitual cutting of corners or failure to comply with regulations or procedures, lying to cover up mistakes, overreaction to real or imagined criticism, lack of commitment to the organization, pattern of attendance or tardiness problems, careless operation of equipment.
  • Employment History: Depending upon an individual’s age and circumstances, frequent changes of employment without advancement raise the possibility of unsatisfactory work performance due to dishonesty, irresponsibility, drug use, emotional/mental problems, or other issues of security concern. For more information, see Inability to Form a Commitment under Emotional, Mental, and Personality Disorders. It is often difficult for investigators to determine the true circumstances under which an individual terminates employment. Fearing law suits, many employers refuse to provide derogatory information about a former employee.
  • Conditions of Military Discharge: Applicants often claim “honorable discharge” from military service when, in fact, they were given a “general discharge under honorable conditions.” The latter means the individual was discharged for cause. The cause is often inability to adapt to military life or some other form of unsuitability, such as a drug, alcohol, criminal, or emotional/mental problem. The personnel security questionnaire contains one easily recognized clue that a so-called “honorable discharge” may actually be something else. If the applicant served less than the minimum time of service (e.g., only 18 months of a four year enlistment), or was discharged on a date other than the anniversary date of his or her enlistment, it may be a general discharge under honorable conditions. In this case, adjudicators may wish to evaluate the reasons for the subject’s early discharge.
  • Multiple Traffic Offenses: Multiple traffic citations for reckless or high-speed driving, including driving with a suspended license, are examples of high-risk, antisocial behavior that may be a security concern. Many such offenses are actually arrests for driving while intoxicated that have been plea-bargained down to a lesser offense. A person with a large number of unpaid parking tickets may be considered a scofflaw. A large number of minor offenses raises concerns about a person’s attitude toward authority and responsibility. A person who feels above the law in this respect may also feel that some security regulations are picky and unnecessary and do not merit his or her compliance.
  • Arguing/Fighting/Uncontrolled Anger: There are questions of judgment and reliability if an individual has offenses for disorderly conduct, shows anger or argues at inappropriate times, or has fits of temper. A pattern of violent or aggressive reactions during adolescence is a rather stable personality trait that is unlikely to be outgrown with age. Ref 4
  • Civil Litigation: A number of crimes are now pursued through civil actions rather than criminal proceedings. Spouse abuse and child abuse are often pursued as civil litigation requesting damages, because pressing criminal charges could cause the offender to lose his job and jeopardize his ability to pay spousal or child support. New laws make it much easier and faster for merchants to pursue shoplifting charges in civil rather than criminal court. Some people who file numerous lawsuits have problems in interpersonal relations.
  • Weapons Issues: Carrying a concealed handgun without a permit or any other weapons violation is a concern. The belief that one has specific enemies against whom one must be armed is also a concern.
  • Gang Membership: Gang membership, by itself, is not a security concern. In some cases, the goals and objectives of the gang, or illegal activities in which the gang engages, do make membership a concern. Gang efforts to recruit military personnel raise questions about gang objectives. In questionable cases, local criminal investigative agencies may be able to provide relevant information.

http://www.dss.mil/nf/adr/emotion/emoteT1.htm#Behavior%20Patterns%20Associated%20with%20Espionage

  • Behavior Patterns Associated with Espionage: There is no single profile of the employee who is likely to betray an employer’s trust. However, clinical assessment of Americans arrested for espionage Ref 3 and academic research findings on white collar criminals in general Ref 4 do identify behavior patterns commonly found among such persons.

Individuals who betray their employer’s trust tend to possess certain personality disorders or personal weaknesses. They may be impulsive or immature, and likely to do whatever feels good at the moment. They may engage in high risk activities without thinking about the consequences. They may have a propensity for violating rules and regulations. They may have drifted from one relationship or job to another, with little sense of purpose or loyalty to anyone or anything. They may have a grossly inflated view of their own abilities, so that disappointment and bitterness are inevitable.

These three disorders are the ones most likely to be found in individuals who commit espionage, although not necessarily with a degree of severity to qualify as a disorder.

· Antisocial Personality Disorder

· Narcissistic Personality Disorder

· Paranoid Personality Disorder

In many cases, the pattern of observed behavior or of test results might be better described as indicating a personal weakness or undesirable character trait rather than a “disorder.” These personal characteristics are associated with high risk, irresponsible, or emotionally unstable behavior:

· Impulsiveness/Immaturity

· Inability to Form a Commitment

· Vindictiveness

· Risk-Seeking

Borderline Personality Disorder:

http://www.dss.mil/nf/adr/emotion/emoteT2.htm

The principal characteristics of borderline personality disorder are:

  • Unwarranted fear of rejection or abandonment, usually associated with low self-esteem. Such persons are uncomfortable alone. Examples of such behavior include inappropriate anger when someone important to them must cancel an appointment, or panic at a temporary separation.

  • A pattern of unstable relationships with friends, lovers, or bosses. Such persons need a great deal of nurturing and support from any relationship. They may initially idolize someone who provides that nurturing, but then shift suddenly and dramatically to view that same person as hostile or cruel if they do not care enough or are not “there” enough for them.

  • Suicide, threats of suicide, or self-mutilation precipitated by fears of separation or rejection, such as fear of abandonment by a lover.

  • Unstable self-image leading to sudden changes in career goals, values, or types of friends.
    Potentially damaging impulsive behavior in several areas such as substance abuse, unsafe sex, gambling, spending money irresponsibly, reckless driving, or binge eating.

  • Inappropriate expressions of anger, or difficulty controlling anger; chronic feelings of emptiness or boredom; or short but intense periods of irritability or anxiety.

Tags: , , , , ,

Top Secret Information Leaks

August 26th, 2008 | 1 Comment | Posted in Intelligence, Security

How Our Secrets get Leaked

Information Leaks

Information Leaks

Classified Information is defined as data, regardless of form that includes sensitive information that its disclosure is restricted by law or regulation to particular group of people. Information is classified at one of three levels based on the amount of danger that its unauthorized disclosure could reasonably be expected to cause to national security.

The highest basic level of classified information is Top Secret. Top Secret information is defined as information that if disclosed would reasonably be expected to cause “exceptionally grave damage” to national security. The next to highest level of classified information is Secret. Secret information is defined as information that if disclosed would cause “serious damage” to national security. The third level of classified information is Confidential. Confidential is defined as information that if disclosed could cause “damage” to national security.

There are other restrictions on information such as NTK - need to know and SSI - sensitive security information. In these dangerous times, a slip or accidental disclosure of classified information can easily result in loss of life and billions of dollars of damage.

The extraordinary sensitivity of our intelligence and defense organizations’ mission requires the extraordinary protection against possible unauthorized disclosure of classified information. Any information coming to your attention concerning the loss or unauthorized disclosure of classified information should be reported immediately to proper government officials. Due to a number of recent security incidents involving the unauthorized disclosure of classified information training programs like “Handling Classified Information” has seen a significant increase in demand according to Spy-Ops. Organizations are taking additional steps to inform employees and contract workers of their responsibilities when handling sensitive information.

The most widely known case of leaking classified information came when the identity of a secret agent was disclosed. CIA covert operative Valerie Plame, the wife of Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson, had her identity publicly disclosed in multiple newspapers back in July of 2003. Since then, disclosures of classified information seem be become known monthly.
A Few Examples:
Jul 15, 2008 The U.S. Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is exploring into how confidential and extremely sensitive information on airline security and the state of airports were leaked to the press.
April 2008 A Defense Department official who worked as a weapons policy analyst pleaded guilty to disclosing classified military information that was later passed on to China.
August 2007 A Congressman revealed a budget cut in the classified portion of the 2008 Intelligence Authorization Bill dealing with the human intelligence programs.
July 2007 Millions of documents containing sensitive and sometimes classified information have been floating about freely on file sharing networks after being inadvertently exposed by individuals downloading P2P software on systems that held the data. Among these documents were the Pentagon’s classified (secret) network infrastructure diagrams, complete with IP addresses as well as information on five separate Department of Defense information security system audits.
October 2006 A report published on the front page of the New York Times included a classified one-page slide “Iraq: Indications and Warnings of Civil Conflict” from an Oct. 18 military briefing.
August 2006 A Navy lawyer could be put behind bars for 30 years after Navy officials charged him with passing along secret information while he was stationed at Guantanamo Bay.

April 2006 The CIA fired an officer who acknowledged, after failing a polygraph examination, giving classified information to a reporter.

April 2005 The Justice Department launched an investigation into leaks to the media about the National Security Agency’s classified domestic surveillance program.

These incidents and many others have triggered multiple ongoing investigations by the FBI and many other federal entities. One would think that the people who have been authorized to handle classified information would take divulging this information more seriously. We should all be outraged when our country’s secrets are disclosed for whatever reason. After all, it puts all of us at risk.

Also See: http://www.darkgovernment.com/news/requirements-for-top-secret-clearances/

Tags: , , ,