The major story a few weeks ago was the War Department leak and the arrest of a National Guardsman for that leak.
Apparently the War Department is using its clout with the MSM to have the story slowly die and be replaced with nonsense like the Correspondents Party.
Many have asked just how could this part-time soldier have access to such sensitive info and how did he get a security clearance?
I am glad you asked.
Jack Teixeira, 21, had a top-secret security clearance which gave him access to sensitive and highly classified government documents. The case has prompted questions about the clearance process and the subsequent red flags that seem to have gone unnoticed after it was granted.
In 2018, a year before he joined the Massachusetts Air National Guard, Mr Teixeira was suspended from high school after being overheard making threats and discussing weapons.
The same year, he made an application for a firearms identification card which was denied over police concerns about his remarks.
Neither incident prevented him from passing the background checks needed to get security clearance for his job as an IT specialist in an intelligence unit.
In the US, security clearances are issued by a wide array of government agencies ranging from the CIA to the Department of Energy. The vast majority are issued by the defence department, according to ClearanceJobs.com, a job portal focused on government jobs that require clearances.
Most agencies have four main levels of security clearance: confidential, secret, top-secret, and “sensitive compartmented information”, which has been called “above top secret”, and can include material from intelligence sources.
The process of obtaining a security clearance begins with a suitability check to determine eligibility for the job, and applicants then have to fill in an exhaustive form. Standard Form 86, or SF86, includes personal data such as education and employment history, details of family and associates, and foreign travel and connections. It also asks about criminal history, military service, and financial issues.
…..read on….
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65415971
Personally I think there are too many ‘security consultants’ with access to sensitive info….this will not stop the abuse and as long as there are more ‘consultants’ than military it will continue to be a problem.
And the beat goes on.
I Read, I Write, You Know
“lego ergo scribo”
In Saner Thought 
Wouldn’t you also berate the media for flogging a story that has had no new developments? Such as the Teixeira case?
The media almost always gets details wrong, and this is no exception….prompting people from across the spectrum to wonder why this Airman could have had such a security clearance and access to these documents.
A Top Secret/SCI clearance is the default for nearly any intelligence analyst, in almost every intelligence discipline. The documents in question, were largely daily situation updates. They may seem like some sort of holy grail to the layman, but they’re rather routine, standard pieces of information, generally available to anyone who has the clearance and the system which that information resides on.
More sensitive information has additional control measures that require additional limitations of access. If anything, the intelligence community tends to overclassify information, simply because it’s easier than maneuvering through one’s foreign disclosure office.
I won’t get into the nuances and context of why we use Contractors (as I am one of), because I don’t really think most people care.
Wouldn’t you also berate the media for flogging a story that has had no new developments? Such as the Teixeira case?
The media almost always gets details wrong, and this is no exception….prompting people from across the spectrum to wonder why this Airman could have had such a security clearance and access to these documents.
A Top Secret/SCI clearance is the default for nearly any intelligence analyst, in almost every intelligence discipline. The documents in question, were largely daily situation updates. They may seem like some sort of holy grail to the layman, but they’re rather routine, standard pieces of information, generally available to anyone who has the clearance and the system which that information resides on.
More sensitive information has additional control measures that require additional limitations of access. If anything, the intelligence community tends to overclassify information, simply because it’s easier than maneuvering through one’s foreign disclosure office.
I won’t get into the nuances and context of why we use Contractors (as I am one of), because I don’t really think most people care.
So nothing in the leaked papers is anything to worry about? The media is in the dark as much as the person.. I think the media is as much the enemy of the truth as us the government.. chuq
Of course it’s worrying, it is classified information after all…….but it’s not the drama that the media and their enablers want it to be. Nor ironically, we’re the “assault weapons” found in his bedroom…..actual weapons (the photo that CNN ran anyway).
Forgive my skepticism….but there is more there. chuq
Based on what? You’re not even getting the basic facts correct, from the media. They’re spinning the story (no surprise) for the sake of sensationalism. If there actually was ‘more’ there, that wouldn’t be as necessary.
Sorry but facts you present are real? You work for the very organization few trust…..so again forgive my skepticism…..chuq
If you feel anything that I’ve posted is incorrect or mischaracterized…..m happy to address them. I’m all about healthy skepticism, thought such skepticism usually has a defined target. And I don’t mind sharing unclassified context when the media and pundit class get the facts wrong.
And of course, be never identified where I work, nor will I. So you’re referring to the larger professional community that I belong to. An entity often the target of mis/disinformation by the media and a certain political candidate and his minions. Neither party being a paragon of truth and virtue.
I never said that you were misleading only that I am skeptical of most ….I know how it works I was in an intel unit in the Army…..I guess my major point is that there is little truth and facts these days. chuq
Maybe. It also bears noting that things change over the span of time.
True that but not always for the better. chuq
In my last job, (Metropolitan Police Special Operations in London) I had a high-level security clearance that was supposedly due to being ‘vetted’ by the Security Servces in London. But at no time did they ask me a single question about anything, including my well-known past political affiliations. There was no contact my previous employer, my friends and family, or anyone else who had ever met me. I had daily access to some very ‘sensitive information’. I chose not to reveal it of course, but could easily have done so.
Best wishes, Pete.
When I was in the military I was thoroughly vetted before I was accepted. chuq