Classified Government Material
Aug 29, 2015 13:42:07 #
Having participated in the drafting of two EO's, administrations want to refine the classification policy adjusted to their philosophy and policy. Sometime political pressure is vastly applied.
DaveO wrote:
Funny how each president has to provide an executive order for "Classified National Security Information." Guess I don't get it.
Aug 29, 2015 13:43:17 #
DaveO wrote:
I expected as much from you. Tough when you're wrong, huh?
Sorry, you're right. I meant to say ho ho hum.
Aug 29, 2015 13:49:10 #
toma1940 wrote:
Having participated in the drafting of two EO's, administrations want to refine the classification policy adjusted to their philosophy and policy. Sometime political pressure is vastly applied.
So, a little tweaking in certain areas. You would think that there would be a standing "law" defining the various sections and a little more definition and explicit penalties.
I don't know about what "1940" means, but that's around the time the presidents theoretically took control of the formal establishment of classified guidelines, is it not? :lol:
Aug 29, 2015 13:50:29 #
Espionage laws and classification policy are different. Violating classification rules doesn't necessarily interpret to "espionage". The National Security Act, 1947 is for espionage, leaking information is vastly different. The CFR is more comprehensive than Wickipedia.
DaveO wrote:
"Who usually violates proper protocol?" ... (show quote)
Aug 29, 2015 13:56:44 #
toma1940,
I realize the Wiki reference is just a cursory selection. I wanted at least a few not to jump to conclusions that a leak of classified material, besides being common, is vague and not necessarily a hanging offense.
Got a few years in the nuclear area, so I'm a little familiar with CFR's. :roll:
I realize the Wiki reference is just a cursory selection. I wanted at least a few not to jump to conclusions that a leak of classified material, besides being common, is vague and not necessarily a hanging offense.
Got a few years in the nuclear area, so I'm a little familiar with CFR's. :roll:
Aug 29, 2015 13:57:04 #
I believe President Truman began to shape the terms "loyalty" and "trustworthy" for background investigations of potential government employees and that help shape determine the investigative process still in use today. The "1940" is YOB
DaveO wrote:
So, a little tweaking in certain areas. You would think that there would be a standing "law" defining the various sections and a little more definition and explicit penalties.
I don't know about what "1940" means, but that's around the time the presidents theoretically took control of the formal establishment of classified guidelines, is it not? :lol:
I don't know about what "1940" means, but that's around the time the presidents theoretically took control of the formal establishment of classified guidelines, is it not? :lol:
Aug 29, 2015 13:58:10 #
DaveO wrote:
toma1940,
I realize the Wiki reference is just a cursory selection. I wanted at least a few not to jump to conclusions that a leak of classified material, besides being common, is vague and not necessarily a hanging offense.
Got a few years in the nuclear area, so I'm a little familiar with CFR's. :roll:
I realize the Wiki reference is just a cursory selection. I wanted at least a few not to jump to conclusions that a leak of classified material, besides being common, is vague and not necessarily a hanging offense.
Got a few years in the nuclear area, so I'm a little familiar with CFR's. :roll:
:lol:
Aug 29, 2015 13:58:48 #
Aug 29, 2015 14:04:11 #
toma1940 wrote:
:lol:
Not funny as I remember! I was DOE at the time and the boys in Syracuse, NY, would visit and clarify any questions or perceptions you might have. :lol: :lol:
Aug 29, 2015 14:08:53 #
Well most DOE regulation on classified were enacted by statute not Executive Order and the penalties could be more severe.
DaveO wrote:
Not funny as I remember! I was DOE at the time and the boys in Syracuse, NY, would visit and clarify any questions or perceptions you might have. :lol: :lol:
Aug 29, 2015 14:19:17 #
I was only referring to the executive order because I believe it sets the standards for classifying/declassifying and handling classified material.
There is a certain disconnect in that the rules and penalties for violations are left to the discretion of congress, whatever that means, I guess. I'm just a layman!
I don't want to beat this to death, it just seems like a lot of grey areas. :-)
CFR Title 10.
There is a certain disconnect in that the rules and penalties for violations are left to the discretion of congress, whatever that means, I guess. I'm just a layman!
I don't want to beat this to death, it just seems like a lot of grey areas. :-)
CFR Title 10.
Aug 29, 2015 14:36:35 #
Ok, sound good. Enjoyed the dialogue.
DaveO wrote:
I was only referring to the executive order because I believe it sets the standards for classifying/declassifying and handling classified material.
There is a certain disconnect in that the rules and penalties for violations are left to the discretion of congress, whatever that means, I guess. I'm just a layman!
I don't want to beat this to death, it just seems like a lot of grey areas. :-)
CFR Title 10.
There is a certain disconnect in that the rules and penalties for violations are left to the discretion of congress, whatever that means, I guess. I'm just a layman!
I don't want to beat this to death, it just seems like a lot of grey areas. :-)
CFR Title 10.
Aug 29, 2015 14:47:48 #
It was really a fortunate experience to hear from someone who has valuable first hand knowledge and exposure. Things are not always so perfectly structured and easily defined as one would think, particularly in the "classified" world! Thank you! Dave.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.