Posted on 01/12/2020 2:01:05 AM PST by wannabegeek
Did NYT tried to warn Suleimani?
In the 11th paragraph says,
What if the former commander of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, Qassim Suleimani, visits Baghdad for a meeting and you know the address? The temptations to use hypersonic missiles will be many.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
There is definitely a big problem here.
And there needs to be a high level national security investigation. And heads need to roll.
You are right on!
Noise needs to be loud over stuff like this.
Hypersonic Glide Vehicles (HGV’s), or hypersonic missiles, are simply not used for HVI’s (High Value Individuals). They are used for nuclear warhead delivery, targeting satellites, and missile shield purposes. They are large and far too heavy for loitering type ISR platforms, and they are some of the most expensive weapon systems ever developed, or being developed.
They would simply not be carried, launched or dropped, or their hypersonic speed useable or attainable, from a small, slow moving plane or networked ISR platform within the few miles of such an HVI target.
To try and hide a warning to our worst and deadliest enemies, behind such utter nonsense is beyond the bounds of “left wing stupid”.
However, such time sensitive (short suspense) travel schedule knowledge of one of the most valuable HVI’s in the world, would require a “read-in” minimum ts/sci/hcs-g individual. On something like this, they would be at least temporarily highly exclusive, but have access to multiple sci compartmented info, and high up the “food chain”.
Again, this NYT ping to our enemy, does indicates to me, whoever did this had knowledge of multiple sci access/knowledge, and is someone substantial.
At the very least, the leaker had HUMINT, GEOINT, and Executive level discussion access.
The phrase referencing a (theoretical) focused targeting of Soleimani on a visit to Iraq, (near BIAP) within a “write-up” of a totally unrelated weapon class system context, yet still clearly speaking of targeting Soleimani in Iraq (at BIAP) with missile targeting, and going further, speaking of the missile targeting within days of the actual missile strike on Soleimani, cannot even be a mistake in my opinion.
Think about this...
It indicates and exposes a known intel Soleimani travel timeline.
By doing so, NYT’s and illegal intel leaker potentially exposes either an Iranian perceived individual, or group of Iranian perceived individuals, who provided the rough Soleimani travel *TIMELINE*, by focussing intense Iranian investigations on who could have known and given up this info ahead of the NYT’s ping!
Iranian officials have to figure this out for their own safety going forward.
Puzzle pieces will be put together by the Iranians with this level of perceived life or death motivation.
His background puts him in a position to have lots of contacts in the current bureaucracy, and thus be a prime candidate for insiders to leak to.
Given that’s those are NOT what we used. That’s a big N O.
Letting individuals keep their security clearances after service is a clear danger to the nation. And it is nothing but a political favor to high ranking people so they can garner wealth and position from being “in the knowj.
It has to stop.
If this NYT POC leaker is not from the White House, my next choice would be someone near the top of CENTCOM Command.
Or another highly confused individual out of LangLang...
He also had his own private plane and flew private charter.
Reuters saud he flew Syrian Cham Wings airline that day due to concerns about security.
People can keep their clearance without having access, can’t they?
Another problem beyond identifying our HVI, a bounded timeline, and destination city, is the NYT reference to a “known address”!
So by deduction, this is also disclosure to the Iranians, of known routes covered by the U.S.!
It is likely “friendlies” are either dead already, or will be soon be dead over this.
I hope the NYT didn’t just kill critical idf...
All day long.
Not with compartmentalized clearances, they go with the job.
You don’t keep a clearance after you leave a job where there is a need for it. You do maintain a current background investigation for usually 5 years after your last investigation. A current BI is necessary to get a clearance and if you have one, getting the clearance is an easy process, given need to know. That’s why defense contractors look for new hires with current BI’s. That way the employee can start meaningful work right away, and not have to wait for up to 18 months to get a BI completed.
Thanks for the info and the zero journalists at NYT: Functionally all ICBMs and large ballistic missiles are hypersonic. Therefore, the answer to this question is the list of countries that possess ICBMs — U.S., UK, France, Russia, Israel, India, and China, with North Korea on the cusp of joining this club once their RV technology has been successfully tested.
So, let’s say person “A” has a very high compartmented clearance level, and works near Boston. With orders, “A” will be “read-in” by a security officer to carry out whatever specific INT duty (specialization) “A” is tasked to do.
Now, “B” also has the same exact clearance level as “A”, but “B” works near San Diego, and “B” has orders, and has been “read-in” to carry out their specific INT specialization.
Even though A & B have the same exact clearance level, unless “read-in” and working on the same exact project, they are segregated. So the clearance exists, and even the same clearance level, but they often would not have access to, or knowledge of what the other is even working on.
So you have the same clearance, but would not in many cases have access or see what I am working on.
There are many variations and cross sections of this.
This segregation also exists within the same phusical buildings (and even rooms sometimes), as well as commands, all day long, and every day.
The BI was already commented on. There is also CE (continuous evaluation) vs. the 5-6 year re-adjudication of clearances. Actually, the CE is becoming much more cmon now, but it often requires at least a CI poly.
Also, as was already commented on, especially with civilians and contractors they often fall back into a clearance “eligible” status, when not actively using their clearance. For example, lengthy prriods between jobs, or maybe a long period for school course work.
I probably just made that as clear as mud...
And I am using my phone, so probably a gazillion screw-ups...
Then they did it twice since there is a correction at the end also dated Jan 2.
Unfortunately, in this day and age, this illegal stuff just makes an anti-American leftists that much more eligible for public office.
My understanding about classified material is that you have to have the proper security clearance level, and a need to know. The clearance is not enough by itself.
I remember your post.
I strongly believe by taking out Soleimani our Prez destabilized Tehrans immediate military objectives enough to slow them down for a bit.
*This NYT piece likely is evidence, someone not only possibly exposes our ME intel, and tried to inform the Iranians, but at the same time, is evidence someone was trying to really hurt President Trump, and worse, willing to sacrifice American and Iranian lives (in a war) to do it.
Whoever it is a if they are not dealt with, it will happen again for sure.
or maybe it was the “go” signal for the attack...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.