summer1942
5-Year Member
- Joined
- May 19, 2010
- Messages
- 81
Since USCG is a part of Home Land Security Dept, Does USCGA graduate automatic receive the clearance security status ??
Since USCG is a part of Home Land Security Dept, Does USCGA graduate automatic receive the clearance security status ??
That being said, almost no one is denied the secret level, as you really can't function in the military, as an officer, without one.
In my humble opinion, we've diluted the meaning of "SECRET" now that almost everyone has it. If the entire military has clearance to SECRET, kind of kills the reason to even have it.
Not at all. It's the first level where we can truly, effectively restrict information from public distribution. You don't see it as much stateside, but we are logged in on red side for forward comms. The secret level, when overseen by a good information security/distribution officer is very effective. The breakdowns happen when leadership and oversight is lax, e.g. somebody "SNIPRS" a gun tape onto YouTube.
Secret is given out pretty lightly, every cadet will have one because as mentioned before you can't really operate as an officer without a clearance. Alcohol incidents are a main reason why someone might be denied or have a Secret clearance revoked. They also are weary of relationships with foreigners, especially family members.
Also, clearance and "need to know" are separate things. You are given a clearance because your job as a whole requires knowing classified material and the approval/denial of that clearance has nothing to do with your need to know any information. Once you have the clearance you get access to specific information at your clearance level if you have a "need to know."
Edit: When i say lightly i mean that its pretty automatic for cadets because for the most part cadets are responsible people. Lightly may not apply when looking at the U.S. population as a whole
I don't agree with this. The fact that nearly everyone (I realize that's a general statement) has secret means one of two things....either too much is classified secret and requires everyone in uniform to maintain that clearance OR too many people have the clearance and it needs to be cut back.
I have 76 people on a ship and a classified space. Independent of "need to know", why have a space that's secured for classified material if all 76 people on board have the clearance to access it?
We're either over-classifying information, or granting too much access. DOD already has a problem with over-classifying, for the reason, as it is often percieved, to keep it from the public's eyes "just because".
Nor can you keep operational graphics and pro-words from public knowledge unless they are classified. That's why a marked-up map is secret. It can't be taken out of country, and if it's lost then info has to be changed to protect certain operational facets.
So you would seem to agree that we DO over-classify then, and I would agree.
It's not that "hard" and I can assume if we're using secure comms for 6 months, that that might be "on par" with some field operations. I would also submit that the Army hasn't been as "close-hold" on that secret footage as you would have me believe. I won't got very far into that here.
Shoot, make it Confidential, make it FOUO/NATO or FOUO/Allied....I don't really care, but if everyone has Secret....why have anything designated as anything but Secret or higher?
A good chunk of the material cames from the same guys, whether you're on a Coast Guard cutter, Navy ship, or on the ground.
The Washington Post had an interesting article about this not too long ago. Everyone has access, then anyone who wants to can access SIPR and fire off some videos to Wikileaks.
And I assume that's being done on secure computers, and not sodliers personal computers....correct?
You may want to really consider that question before you answer it....there's a reason I'm asking.
Gee, really? I never imagined you'd be one to use your knowledge from cubicle-land to tilt a discussion.
Not unless they feel like losing their clearance and facing disciplinary action. There are instances where a personal computer can be declared secret by the appropriate authorities. But that's not really germane to the discussion. Obviously you're waiting for me to give you a blanket "no" so you can trot out something you gleaned from the cubicle farm, so I'll play your silly game. Have at it.
Though, at some point, we are going to get this closed. We both know that.
Actually, it's something trotted out by operational Army land. But since you and I are both in Cubicle-Land, sure. I would assume those personal computers were scrubbed before and after having classified material loaded on them....and I would assume wrongly.
So then I would follow up that question with....is the Army REALLY handling classified material correctly, or is it just being handled conviently in "the field". Since neither you nor I are currently "in the field" maybe someone who is could weigh in.
Obviously the leaked information to WIKILEAKS is a glaring example...but my question would be, why did that soldier have access to all of that information, and does that mishandling put anyone else in "danger" or less secured comms?
I assumed there weren't many SF missions on the Tennessee/Kentucky border...surely they have cubicles somewhere at Campbell.
Concur, for the most part....more training, and less access. I'm sure you would agree, when it comes to classified material, we should generally stick on the "less access" side of the conversation instead of the "more access".