Political correctness and security clearances

Investors Business Daily is reporting that the London Daily Telegraph has found that Bradley Manning, the 22 year old defense analyst who allegedly released the 90,000 piece WikiLeaks leak, has been posting his emotional upset about a former homosexual lover on Facebook, actions inconsistent with keeping a top security clearance. And there were more red flags. IBD states:

"These are the kinds of alarm bells that FBI investigators have routinely listened for before approving security clearances for all sorts of government officials. If, for instance, you were undergoing a background check to become a political adviser to the president in the White House, and agents were told by an old high school chum of yours that you were prone to depression, you can be sure it would be some months before you got a permanent top-secret clearance.

"So why is it that Manning kept his clearance after military charges related to his allegedly making a 2007 Iraq battle video public, and for obtaining sensitive computer documents? Why was he allowed to handle secrets when during training to become an intelligence analyst two years ago he was disciplined by commanders for breaking some as-yet-to-be-disclosed rules at Fort Huachuca, Ariz.? [....]

"Not long before being arrested, Manning was disciplined yet again over a fight with a fellow soldier, resulting in his being demoted in rank - but not, apparently, in the revocation of his clearance."
As the IBD Editorial concludes about Manning - and Nidal Hasan, the Ft. Hood shooter:

"What do military security risks have to do to be dealt with? Manning and Hasan were allowed to do their dirty deeds for a common reason: because politicians have pressured the U.S. military to place political correctness over the battle-tested rules of discipline."

Obviously, this is no way to run a nation's military security -- as a function subordinate to political correctness.


Investors Business Daily is reporting that the London Daily Telegraph has found that Bradley Manning, the 22 year old defense analyst who allegedly released the 90,000 piece WikiLeaks leak, has been posting his emotional upset about a former homosexual lover on Facebook, actions inconsistent with keeping a top security clearance. And there were more red flags. IBD states:

"These are the kinds of alarm bells that FBI investigators have routinely listened for before approving security clearances for all sorts of government officials. If, for instance, you were undergoing a background check to become a political adviser to the president in the White House, and agents were told by an old high school chum of yours that you were prone to depression, you can be sure it would be some months before you got a permanent top-secret clearance.

"So why is it that Manning kept his clearance after military charges related to his allegedly making a 2007 Iraq battle video public, and for obtaining sensitive computer documents? Why was he allowed to handle secrets when during training to become an intelligence analyst two years ago he was disciplined by commanders for breaking some as-yet-to-be-disclosed rules at Fort Huachuca, Ariz.? [....]

"Not long before being arrested, Manning was disciplined yet again over a fight with a fellow soldier, resulting in his being demoted in rank - but not, apparently, in the revocation of his clearance."
As the IBD Editorial concludes about Manning - and Nidal Hasan, the Ft. Hood shooter:

"What do military security risks have to do to be dealt with? Manning and Hasan were allowed to do their dirty deeds for a common reason: because politicians have pressured the U.S. military to place political correctness over the battle-tested rules of discipline."

Obviously, this is no way to run a nation's military security -- as a function subordinate to political correctness.


RECENT VIDEOS