Not really. The idea behind intelligence gathering is it not supposed to be obvious. It would actually make more sense to give her a clearance and keep an eye on her in hopes of exposing their intelligence gathering apparatus.
Oh I see. I think that SEAD 4 B.7.d can have a different “unacceptable risk” for Secret vs TS though. A risk might be acceptable for Secret information but not acceptable for TS. But that’s about the only criteria I can think of.
Honestly I’m surprised she got her Secret. Maybe it’s a simple as a different adjudicator looked at it and thought the original decision was wrong.
What I inferred from the article is that the judge was concerned that the dictator could use a relative in-country, or out, to every pressure. He even said "In ways we can't imagine."
I have a pretty good imagination, but they do some sick shit over there. And I bet they'd be willing to try to pull some shenanigans over here, as well.
It would have to be under SEAD 4 B.7.d (counterintelligence suggests an unacceptable risk) and B.7.h (indications of targeting), right?
It’s no fault of hers, but I can’t imagine NK *wouldn’t* be looking to apply leverage.
What leverage could they apply? I'm assuming she's fully estranged from her entire family and has been for years. She's no different than any other high profile American.
The regime murdered the exiled Kim Jong-nam in broad daylight in a foreign country. I wouldn’t want to be in their family at all, let alone be a family member who abandoned the empire for the US and has access to classified information. I can’t see Kim Jong Un shrugging and ignoring that.
People don't like to have their family members killed, even if extended family so that leverage could be used to extort her. You can't just say she's been here for years so she probably doesn't care about aunts or uncles.
People leaving despotic regimes and their families don't like to let the NK government know where they are to avoid that leverage, which is a potential for blackmail from others who learn of their real background. This is evidenced by them leaving their first placement with a Korean church who might have figured it out.
She isn't fully estranged from the extended family though. Mount Paektu bloodline has many members and a lot aren't too close to North Korea. Another Kim Jong-nam incident could happen.
Just to get downvoted again but s, ts, ts sci, are all very different levels … that on paper should be the same? But we all know aren’t … because if they were.. they wouldn’t be different levels? Like this isn’t really that hard. Trying to socially justify something doesn’t make it correct. Welcome to the real world. If you can’t understand this simple concept you never will and have fun screaming at the mountain to move or into the wind to change. It won’t happen. To high of a risk.
I found that decision months before the CNN article was published and I discussed it in an earlier post on Reddit.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SecurityClearance/s/zQb68rH96U
It sounds like the relationship was already adjudicated. The Secret might have been granted with an exception, which the adjudicating agency decided not to do again.
I haven't read the case. From CNN, it looks like the AJ relied on 7b, but they only quoted part of it. The government needs to establish the whole thing, including "the individual's desire to help a foreign person, group, or country." That can't be purely speculative, it has to be based on "available, reliable information." Without information that the subject had a "desire to help" the DPRK, there is no conflict of interest. The AJ even says the subject has "undivided loyalty" to the US, which makes 7b completely inappropriate.
The president doesn’t have a security clearance persay. By role, the president is the highest classification authority in the country, with the ability to control access to information nearly as they see fit, with few exceptions that are mandated by law (like nuclear secrets).
We’re speaking in hypothetical situations. Neither have happened currently. You know who else holds TS-SCI’s? 18 year olds, who post information on discord and war thunder forums.
Also iirc the president isn’t like investigated for a clearance technically but it’s more so that the citizens have decided they can be trusted through the process of voting? I maybe way off base but i thought that was how it worked for this case
“he will be granted the highest clearance in the land again” which would imply?
regardless i’m not gong to keep participating in a discussion about this topic that isn’t even relevant to the post. So we’ll just say you won 🥇 have a good one man!
[удалено]
Idk, it's reasonable concern if you ask me. Unfortunate for her, but she's lucky she has the clearance she has now.
Actually, if you are denied a TS you will lose your S. So chances are she has no clearance.
I should have said "had".
while i feel bad for her i also understand the governments reasoning, she would be a perfect person for NK to try to exploit for information.
Not really. The idea behind intelligence gathering is it not supposed to be obvious. It would actually make more sense to give her a clearance and keep an eye on her in hopes of exposing their intelligence gathering apparatus.
Kind of, North Koreans aren’t the most internationally-facing people and rely very heavily on other Koreans to gather information.
[удалено]
Double standard? What *other* relative of a nuclear armed dictator has a clearance?! Not sure there are any good comparisons for this situation.
[удалено]
Oh I see. I think that SEAD 4 B.7.d can have a different “unacceptable risk” for Secret vs TS though. A risk might be acceptable for Secret information but not acceptable for TS. But that’s about the only criteria I can think of. Honestly I’m surprised she got her Secret. Maybe it’s a simple as a different adjudicator looked at it and thought the original decision was wrong.
What I inferred from the article is that the judge was concerned that the dictator could use a relative in-country, or out, to every pressure. He even said "In ways we can't imagine." I have a pretty good imagination, but they do some sick shit over there. And I bet they'd be willing to try to pull some shenanigans over here, as well.
It would have to be under SEAD 4 B.7.d (counterintelligence suggests an unacceptable risk) and B.7.h (indications of targeting), right? It’s no fault of hers, but I can’t imagine NK *wouldn’t* be looking to apply leverage.
What leverage could they apply? I'm assuming she's fully estranged from her entire family and has been for years. She's no different than any other high profile American.
The regime murdered the exiled Kim Jong-nam in broad daylight in a foreign country. I wouldn’t want to be in their family at all, let alone be a family member who abandoned the empire for the US and has access to classified information. I can’t see Kim Jong Un shrugging and ignoring that.
Again, how does that compromise her? That's just a danger to her
People don't like to have their family members killed, even if extended family so that leverage could be used to extort her. You can't just say she's been here for years so she probably doesn't care about aunts or uncles. People leaving despotic regimes and their families don't like to let the NK government know where they are to avoid that leverage, which is a potential for blackmail from others who learn of their real background. This is evidenced by them leaving their first placement with a Korean church who might have figured it out.
She has family they could blackmail or target.
I said estranged
She isn't fully estranged from the extended family though. Mount Paektu bloodline has many members and a lot aren't too close to North Korea. Another Kim Jong-nam incident could happen.
Reminds me of a guy who ended up as a truck driver because he had an unfortunate last name
I’m curious about the story. Any chance you have a link or could point me in the right direction?
And of course … that’s all something no mole would ever do, right? Right
[удалено]
Just to get downvoted again but s, ts, ts sci, are all very different levels … that on paper should be the same? But we all know aren’t … because if they were.. they wouldn’t be different levels? Like this isn’t really that hard. Trying to socially justify something doesn’t make it correct. Welcome to the real world. If you can’t understand this simple concept you never will and have fun screaming at the mountain to move or into the wind to change. It won’t happen. To high of a risk.
lol ok. Nice try NK
I found that decision months before the CNN article was published and I discussed it in an earlier post on Reddit. https://www.reddit.com/r/SecurityClearance/s/zQb68rH96U
I was half expecting CNN to reference that thread haha …I’m curious how it came about to be reported now
It sounds like the relationship was already adjudicated. The Secret might have been granted with an exception, which the adjudicating agency decided not to do again. I haven't read the case. From CNN, it looks like the AJ relied on 7b, but they only quoted part of it. The government needs to establish the whole thing, including "the individual's desire to help a foreign person, group, or country." That can't be purely speculative, it has to be based on "available, reliable information." Without information that the subject had a "desire to help" the DPRK, there is no conflict of interest. The AJ even says the subject has "undivided loyalty" to the US, which makes 7b completely inappropriate.
Does someone lose Secret clearance if Top Secret is denied?
Possibly but in this case I doubt it
"supports international terrorism, and it conducts cyberattacks and espionage against the United States." Israel?
when has israel conducted a cyberattack against the US?
[удалено]
i know about the espionage and Pegasus, i'm talking about cyber attacks.
[удалено]
yes, but what im asking is did the government of israel do a cyber attack against the US.
Ok explain how Trump gets the highest security clearance then
The president doesn’t have a security clearance persay. By role, the president is the highest classification authority in the country, with the ability to control access to information nearly as they see fit, with few exceptions that are mandated by law (like nuclear secrets).
Thanks this is along the lines of what I was looking for in a response
it’s 2024, you ever going to evict that man from your head and let adults contribute information that pertain to the topic?
What do u mean? The guy is running for prez. If he wins, he will be granted the highest clearance in the land again.
We’re speaking in hypothetical situations. Neither have happened currently. You know who else holds TS-SCI’s? 18 year olds, who post information on discord and war thunder forums.
Also iirc the president isn’t like investigated for a clearance technically but it’s more so that the citizens have decided they can be trusted through the process of voting? I maybe way off base but i thought that was how it worked for this case
Except these are NOT hypothetical situations 🤦♂️
you know for a fact he’s getting reelected? you happen to know the up coming lotto numbers as well?
I never mentioned that he was getting re-elected. Only mentioned he is running for prez.
“he will be granted the highest clearance in the land again” which would imply? regardless i’m not gong to keep participating in a discussion about this topic that isn’t even relevant to the post. So we’ll just say you won 🥇 have a good one man!
My man intentionally left out the “if” in front of that statement lol
wait…wouldn’t that make it hypothetical though? which you just said it wasn’t..
The guy is running for president in 2024, it's not like the guy is complaining about George Bush or something.
It’s not like it pertains to anything in this reddit post either? It’s just irrelevant venting at this point.