On 7/15/13 9:59 PM, Steve Smith wrote:
Nobody I ever worked with who had various high clearances seemed to
be able to acknowledge that their honor might *require* them to break
their oath? Is it that hard of a concept or did they not understand
the nature of "honor" in the first place?
No one is going to go on the record over a subjective concept like
honor. They're probably afraid to respond if the question is posed in
non-specific way and they aren't sure if its treatment would be
clearly treated by classification rules; they don't want people to get
the impression they don't take it seriously.
Yeh... like that... exactly...
I'm pretty sure there is no statute of limitations for treason, and I am
incriminating myself when I say that I once broke my oath and
effectively told a moderately important (but obscure) nuclear secret.
Our friend Steve Younger made me painfully aware of my transgression the
next day in an all-hands speech (collective berating?) he gave.
He reminded us (before Admiral Peter G. Nanos brought us
butthead/cowboy) that to divulge (nuclear) secrets was punishable by
death and that even to "confirm or deny" something stated in the open,
among uncleared individuals (or even cleared? individuals without a need
to know) was equal to telling the secret.
I had been sitting in a hot tub the night before with some uncleared
folks who had plenty of (uninformed) bones to pick with LANL, the DOE
and pretty much all of science and maybe even logic itself. There was a
totally uninformed, inane conversation, but at one point someone said
something acutely inane and I couldn't help myself, I *SNORTED* and the
tub went quiet. People knew I was in a position to potentially know the
factuality of what they were talking about.
Listening to Younger berate us for something we hadn't done, I realized
I had just done exactly that. I had confirmed a nuclear secret by
denying an inane comment about it in a totally informal setting.
Factually, I don't think anyone else in the hot-tub had the background
to have a clue of the import of my snort, only that I very viscerally
and directly announced something that if they'd been clue-full in those
ways, might have been meaningful if not particularly useful to "our
enemies".
This sobered me on several fronts. First, I realized I had
thoughtlessly and frivolously betrayed my oath and honor (albeit
unintentionally). Second, I realized that while I made a good salary,
there was no "hazard pay" associated with the threat to my life (capital
punishment) implied by my work. Third, the secret in question was
pretty obscure and in some ways inane itself.
All in all, I did not worry that in practice I would ever be held
accountable. I knew that nobody there knew what I was snorting about
really. I knew that nobody who cared knew that I'd snorted. I trusted
that if they did, they would recognize point 1) and that it was
"innocent" on my part. I trusted that even if they got a little bent
about it, it would be a reprimand, not even a loss of clearance much
less job, liberty or life.
Nevertheless, it made me acutely aware of where I was, what those things
I knew meant, etc. I'm sure I wasn't the first or only one to do such a
thing. I wonder what would have happened if I'd had to go under
polygraph and I was asked if I'd ever divulged a secret?
And I was *still* willing to ask the questions... (refer to my to-fro
with Glen about "hard knocks").
I admit it is easier to answer (think about) if you in fact have not
made such oaths (with such stakes involved). Maybe my willingness to
talk (think?) about such things makes me a security risk. I gave up the
job 5 years ago and the clearance 3... I don't miss either (well, that
regular paycheck was kinda handy... but ...)...
- Steve
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
