{"id":3016,"date":"2011-10-19T10:41:42","date_gmt":"2011-10-19T10:41:42","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/wemeantwell.com\/blog\/?p=3016"},"modified":"2011-10-19T10:41:42","modified_gmt":"2011-10-19T10:41:42","slug":"heres-how-it-works-an-open-appeal-for-reason-and-free-speech","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/wemeantwell.com\/blog\/2011\/10\/19\/heres-how-it-works-an-open-appeal-for-reason-and-free-speech\/","title":{"rendered":"Here’s How It Works: An Open Appeal for Reason and Free Speech"},"content":{"rendered":"

When you offend the State Department by exercising free speech, albeit speech that is unkind to the Department, here’s what they do:
\n
<\/p>\n

\n

1) State will take a blog link, to something already on the web, and pretend it is a “disclosure<\/a>.” They will ignore the reality that several media sources already wrote about the link. They will ignore the fact that al Qaeda can read the document online. They alone determine what is a disclosure within their closed world. They won’t care of their accusations actually drive thousands more people to look at the link. It is not about the link, it is about YOU<\/em>.<\/p>\n

2) State will then accuse you publicly, without giving you a means to defend yourself, of publishing more classified material<\/a>. Unless some third party shows you the fax, you won’t even know State made the accusations behind your back. You’ll be held responsible for not complying with an order you never received.<\/p>\n

3) State will then take their own self-created accusation(s) and use them as “evidence<\/a>” to suspend your security clearance, effectively torpedoing your career. They’ll suspend, rather than revoke the clearance, because a suspension can’t be challenged, questioned or appealed. They simply label you a security risk… and you are one.<\/p>\n

4) State then uses the lack of a security clearance to take away your job<\/a>.<\/p>\n

5) Circle is complete. Sleep well America. You are safe now.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n


<\/p>\n

For those too busy to click on the link in item Number 3, above, here is the money paragraph State is using as justification:<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

DS\/SI\/PSS has been notified that you have shown an unwillingness to comply with Department rules and regulations regarding writing and speaking on matters of official concern, including by publishing articles and blog posts on such matters without submitting them to the Department for review, and<\/strong> that your judgement in the handling of protected information is questionable. This raises serious security concerns…<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

<\/em>
\n
<\/p>\n

Note the word “and<\/strong>” hilighted in the passage. An “and” statement is used traditionally to link two logical operations, A and B make C true. How does blogging and writing about unclassified information logically link to “your judgement in the handling of protected information is questionable.” Trick question– it does not. <\/p>\n

People in the government with access to classified information, like me for the past two decades, routinely process class and unclass info differently. As in “I’m in a secure space with another cleared person, I can talk about XYZ.” Or, “I am at a dinner party with strangers, I will not bring up classified info.” You get used to it in our line of work.<\/p>\n

The usual thing Diplomatic Security does with someone who has had a clearance for two decades is look to their handling of classified material; there is a track record to assess. Any close calls? Any questionable incidents? (Nope, clean record since 1988.) Next, they look to life circumstances that may have changed– a recent divorce (no, happily married for 24 years), huge debts (nope, just a mortgage), sudden interest in hanging around the Chinese Embassy (nah, prefer a good sports bar).<\/p>\n

What is not done is look at someone’s simple expression of free speech, all clearly unclassified, and extrapolate from that to say suddenly that person cannot be trusted. I wrote the book 14 months ago, have been blogging since April, was first interrogated on September 1 and only today those actions added up to insecurity.<\/p>\n

That is what makes this unfair, twisting things around, hiding behind security procedures, to piss on someone you don’t like. Ain’t right, just ain’t right.
\n

\n
<\/p>\n

\n

Related Articles:<\/h4>\n