National Guardsman Suspected of Documents Leak.

There’s a legit means for a whistle blower to expose things.

 

What on earth are you babbling about? Does this stuff actually make sense in your head, or do you just post in some stream of consciousness mode without even thinking about it?

 

From my understanding, there were both Ukrainians and Russians, in this group. Who knows, one of the Russians could easily have been an intelligence agent (or been under the management of one).

Regardless, this brings up the interesting question, should someone's being a part of the "alt Right" community, as this Guardsman reportedly was, automatically earn them a red flag, in security checks, affecting what information they will have access to?

 

A leaker, divulges information to the general public, whereas a whistleblower, initially, only shares it typically with an Inspector General, or similar official. Also, "whistleblowing" is, by its nature, about misdeeds by those in power. Not so, leaked information.

 

Part of the problem is people don't automatically start out with alt/hard right political views (or left for that matter). Instead they slide into extreme ends of the political spectrum over time. So someone can easily be radicalized after they join the armed forces, police or security services or whatever. And in the case of alt right viewpoints these type of organizations tend to be conservative leaning citizens to begin with so it's relatively easy to befriend like minded individuals over time. (Radical left wingers? At a guess the options would be schools and universities or human rights and charitable organizations.)

Apart form that people with extremist views also tend to keep it their views under their hats at work unless they're talking to colleagues they've worked with for a while and trust because they tend to view anyone who does not share their viewpoints with suspicion.

If it were legally possible to get members of the armed forces to sigh declaration saying they were not adherents of or involved with a list of specific conspiracy theories then it might be possible to identify at risk employees and reduce their security clearances or increase background supervision as required. I'm just not sure of the legalities or practicalities around that kind of thing.

 

And there are just as many far-left in the military as there are far-right.

However, very few of either tend to fall into the extremes that most tend to use for those terms.

Drive on pretty much any military base, and you will see about equal numbers of bumper stickers proclaiming views and parties on both ends of the political spectrum.

 

Maybe I am operating under the false presumption, that some sort of security clearance had been required for access to this info (which I presume would entail some independent investigation). But, yes, if just any Guard member would have the same access, then your points are well made. I would then switch my argument, to this probably indicating a problem of insufficient security protocols, protecting confidential information.

 

It's called the First Amendment.

 

You are wrong. But thats OK.

 

Funny, in mine everybody that worked in there had a clearance of Secret or higher. I have never heard of people working in a TOC, let alone a SCIF without at least a Secret clearance.

Oh, and it is mandatory that every 25B have as a minimum of a Secret clearance.

https://www.part-time-commander.com/army-25b-mos-information-technology-specialist/

Of course, that is for those that work on the non-secured NIPR side of the house. Those that work on the classified SIPR side have Top Secret.

So yes, he is indeed right. Of course, what would I know? I was only a 25B from 2012 until I retired last year.

 

I didnt say anything about clearance...I said in my era we didnt have IT working in the SCIF. We were all TS-SCI cleared. There were technicians that worked strictly on the AUTODIN modems...but they didnt key the modems or have access to readouts. The people working on the comm center floor had access...but no capacity to download and there were never fewer than 3 people in the room at any given time. As for IT...we were all trained on UNIX and when the SIPRNET started going to a MSoft base we were also trained as network admins.

No IT person would ever touch our equipment.

Pretty sure I made a distinction between ERAs. I retired in 2003. We were just converting SIPR to a windows based platform when I left.

IMO they should have never left the AUTODIN network.

 

The first amendment protects your right to believe the moon landings never happened or whatever. It doesn't necessarily protect serving members from being required to declare those beliefs on national security grounds (on the assumption of course that once declared the information remains confidential unless circumstances change). Nor does doing so necessarily effect their ongoing employment barring of course any actions that person might later take that potentially threaten their clearance. Instead it would simply allow the employer to decide if they needed to restrict the security level given to a particular employee or otherwise initiate greater oversight of their activities on official IT systems.

 

A Che Guevara T-shirt is hardly evidence of extreme left wing political views nor are bumper stickers supporting one or other side of politics or the other. Radical on-line activities, attendance at rallies, changes in behaviors at work, statements in support of 'direct action' etc etc, yes. The former stuff? No. Well not unless it's accompanied by some of the other stuff I just listed. In reality? There's very little alt left activity amongst serving members of the military (can't really talk about the civilian element). As I noted previously if someones views started drifting that way after enlisting the most likely course of action is to simply resign or fail to re-enlist. And then join whatever group or cause it is that floats their boat.

 

Oh my sweet child. That was a picture of 2nd Lieutenant Spenser Rapone on his graduation at West Point. And right afterwards he started making statements that he was indeed a Marxist Communist, and was planning on working on the Army from the inside to bring it down and help foster the revolution.

Yes, this guy was indeed about as far to the Left as you can get. And was kicked out of the Army not because of that, but his clearly stated intention to use his new position against the Army and the Country.

The Constitution guarantees us the right to believe what we wish. It is only if you act on beliefs that are against the country or the military that such becomes a conflict.

And oh yes, very little "Alt-Left". I guess Lt. Rapone, Edward Snowden, and Specialist Bradley Manning are not "Alt-Left" in your eyes?

No, your problem is that you are trying to approach this entirely through the veil of your own politics. And that is blinding you.

 

No, the problem is you didn't bother to read my post properly. To quote I specifically said this:

'A Che Guevara T-shirt is hardly evidence of extreme left wing political views nor are bumper stickers supporting one or other side of politics or the other. Radical on-line activities, attendance at rallies, changes in behaviors at work, statements in support of 'direct action' etc etc, yes. The former stuff? No.'

The problem is that you seem to be assuming I knew who the hell (former) Lt Rapone was. I didn't. But that said note the underlined section above. My point stands. The mere act of wearing a Che Guevara T-shirt does NOT make you a Communist or whatever. By your own admission Rapone wasn't sacked for wearing a T-shirt. He was sacked for making exactly what I referred to as 'statements in support of 'direct action'. In this case for a Marxist-Leninist cause.

For the rest? Your claims are just .... well whacko.

How does naming three people contradict what I posted earlier i.e. that the vast majority of serving US military tend towards the conservative side of politics? You've named three people out of what? Something like 1.3 million active duty service personnel! And Snowden wasn't even in the DoD, let alone serving in the military. How does that disprove anything I've posted previously.

 

Well maybe I'm not understanding what you're saying. If you have Secret and Top Secret and above classified systems in your SCIF, then your IT guy would have to have a TS clearance to work...on the TS systems. If you are saying that wasn't the case, who worked on the TS systems?

 

Where are you getting this? I've not seen any news coverage that describes him as alt right or that his discord group had Russians and Ukrainians in it. Big news if true but...I've not seen that.

 

Agree and I saw that occur in a private large corporation.

 

Legal defenses do not exist in this country. If the government says one is guilty, that's all there is to it. Julian Assange still sits in prison for exposing the lies and crimes of western governments.

 

Wow…. So we are still shooting the messenger while not addressing the information revealed… like we have Americans involved in fighting with the Russians…. Nothing here, move along.

 

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-documents-leak.609763/page-8#post-1074156152

 

That is a big issue but probably better covered in another thread. There were all kinds of interesting revelations other than the SF presence. What the governments of Egypt, South Korea, and Hungary were saying versus what they are actually doing is major (IMHO) news.

 

So no IT people ever touched your equipment?

Hmmm. I'm skeptical but if that's your memory...

 

Certainly when you expose the deep state's lies

 

The world of 'IT' didnt exist in our world then. We were 'IT'. I was a network administrator. Even when we began using the windows based version of the SIPRNET we set up the servers, we set up the accounts we maintained the servers. If you understand SCIFs you understand that at the time people came to the COMM Center to pick up classified traffic, every message that came across the computers was counted, every print message that was set up for distribution was documented, and every distribution was signed for. It took supervisor authorization to recall messages and print copies.

Under AUTODIN, life was simple and controllable...all you needed to go to work anywhere was a mobile satellite, a modem (and we are talking early 4.8k baud modems...there isnt that much need for bandwidth when you are only pushing text) and point to point encryption so every site had a link to the SCIF, no 2 sites had the same codes, and every code was used once and destroyed. AUTODIN was virtually impenetrable. At best, if you intercepted data packets all you were able to intercept was noise and if ever the same code was even accidentally used to key another modem it wouldnt work properly. We all knew the introduction of a Windows based SIPRNET would make things more vulnerable.

Even deployed, our SCIFs had more than 2 person integrity and any message traffic in or out had to be touched by at least 2 people.