The Army Is Investigating The Pro-Communist West Point Grad In This Viral Photo

[Theinquisition]

Officers are generally required to maintain a security clearance in order to be able to perform their functions. The requirements for security clearances aren't an open welcoming world that just takes every possible life circumstance and viewpoint equally. The fact is, we are still strategic adversaries if not outright enemies with many current and former communist nations. They can't afford to entrust sensitive government secrets to someone who might sympathize with the enemy.

pretty much

https://www.state.gov/m/ds/clearances/60321.htm

(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification of relevant facts from any personnel security questionnaire, personal history statement, or similar form used to conduct investigations, determine employment qualifications, award benefits or status, determine security clearance eligibility or trustworthiness, or award fiduciary responsibilities;
(b) deliberately providing false or misleading information concerning relevant facts to an employer, investigator, security official, competent medical authority, or other official government representative;
(c) credible adverse information in several adjudicative issue areas that is not sufficient for an adverse determination under any other single guideline, but which, when considered as a whole, supports a whole-person assessment of questionable judgment, untrustworthiness, unreliability, lack of candor, unwillingness to comply with rules and regulations, or other characteristics indicating that the person may not properly safeguard protected information;
(d) credible adverse information that is not explicitly covered under any other guideline and may not be sufficient by itself for an adverse determination, but which, when combined with all available information supports a whole-person assessment of questionable judgment, untrustworthiness, unreliability, lack of candor, unwillingness to comply with rules and regulations, or other characteristics indicating that the person may not properly safeguard protected information. This includes but is not limited to consideration of:

Boom

[Theinquisition]

Yeah, stop with this.

A mod doing their job, good to see.

[Theinquisition]

Well I don't know about you, but I don't remember being asked if I was a Nazi or Communist when I joined. IF the military was that concerned then they should probably ask.

Membership in extremeist organizations is enough, thats why you are asked about gang affiliation and the military takes pictures of tattoos to check them against law enforcement gang databases.

- - - Updated - - -

He never served, so he wouldn't know.

Compelling argument, please tell me more.

[Orange Joe]

The article quotes the UCMJ (Article 88):

"Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct."

How does saying communism will win violate that?

[Taso]

So why is this story about his political views, and how they're insufficiently in lockstep with the American right wing?

Because there's absolutely nothing wrong with him being a communist.

I speculate that’s it’s because he maybe a member of the same communist party that was funded by soviet Russia. Remember how everyone in the USA is Russian paranoid. Communism being affiliated with it.
It would not surprise me if we still have archaic laws that prevent certain affiliation with groups despite the past being well the past.

[Crissi]

How does saying communism will win violate that?

Think he also posted disparaging remarks against his commanders.

Also, communistic beliefs are likely a security clearance Nono from what I understand

[Machismo]

pretty much

https://www.state.gov/m/ds/clearances/60321.htm




Boom

It can definitely hinder a clearance investigation (it would be stalled indefinitely), but only his words against a command would be the real issue when it comes to actual behavior. Being an officer means he has more-stringent rules to go by, especially if a clearance is involved.

Simply being a communist shouldn't be a major problem, especially for an enlisted person (he's not enlisted). After all, I'm about as libertarian as they come, and the military is full of libertarians. You can't get much further from the United States military mentality, than libertarianism.

[Theinquisition]

I just wonder why even bother going into the US Army in that case. Pretty sure his beliefs alone would disqualify from security clearances

It does, communism is in oppisinion to constitutional values

[Nathreim]

Nazis and Communists are not allowed to serve in the US Military if you lie about not being one to get in its a felony. They are considered combative ideologies. Also this individual has made comments about subverting the US Government its more than just a uniform violation.

[Orange Joe]

Think he also posted disparaging remarks against his commanders.

I must have missed that. It only mention him wearing clothing and the sign in his hat that I seen.

Also, communistic beliefs are likely a security clearance Nono from what I understand

That maybe, but it isn't a violation of what you posted.

[Machismo]

The article mentions: "And the DoD’s longstanding policy on service members’ politicking, Directive 1344.10, bars “partisan political activity” — which includes serving “in any official capacity or [being] listed as a sponsor of a partisan political club."

Here is the regs on that:
http://ogc.osd.mil/defense_ethics/re...vities_ppt.pdf

I don't his comment violates that particular rule, unless he was also "sponsoring" a political group.

[Machismo]

It does, communism is in oppisinion to constitutional values

How so?

One can be a communist (really, a socialist), and stil believe in the freedoms guaranteed by the United States Constitution.

[Theinquisition]

Yeah there are very few circumstances where you can carry on a career as an officer without an active clearance. Maybe supply, but even they have to do disassociation tours and branch out into things that require them to know a little bit more than counting peanuts.

Well, there are certain fates worse than discharge.

I could see the military ordering him to Ft. Greely AK to count snowflakes.

IDK how many of you been to FT. Greely, but its about as barren a area as you could ever be stationed.

[Orange Joe]

The article mentions: "And the DoD’s longstanding policy on service members’ politicking, Directive 1344.10, bars “partisan political activity” — which includes serving “in any official capacity or [being] listed as a sponsor of a partisan political club."

Here is the regs on that:
http://ogc.osd.mil/defense_ethics/re...vities_ppt.pdf

page 9-4.

He can say his political believes in personal capacity.

page 13 outlines what they can't do. A picture with a caption is not one of them.

[Machismo]

Yeah there are very few circumstances where you can carry on a career as an officer without an active clearance. Maybe supply, but even they have to do disassociation tours and branch out into things that require them to know a little bit more than counting peanuts.

I'd have to do research to see if all officers get clearances. I never really checked, but most officers I knew had at least a secret clearance when I was in.

- - - Updated - - -

Well, there are certain fates worse than discharge.

I could see the military ordering him to Ft. Greely AK to count snowflakes.

IDK how many of you been to FT. Greely, but its about as barren a area as you could ever be stationed.

Attu AK, been there, had a good time whilst I was there for the week. Do you know what there is to do in Attu?

Drink.

Drink.

Drink.

[Theinquisition]

How so?

One can be a communist (really, a socialist), and stil believe in the freedoms guaranteed by the United States Constitution.

The Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution includes a provision known as the Takings Clause, which states that "private property [shall not] be taken for public use, without just compensation."

- - - Updated - - -

I'd have to do research to see if all officers get clearances. I never really checked, but most officers I knew had at least a secret clearance when I was in.

- - - Updated - - -



Attu AK, been there, had a good time whilst I was there for the week. Do you know what there is to do in Attu?

Drink.

Drink.

Drink.

Well, they can give you a lawful order that you are not allowed to drink alcohol. The military can make duty so boring and unenjoyable you would wish to die lol.

[Heladys]

Actually there is when in the military.

No there isn't. The military demands that he follow orders and defend the constitution, not that he ascribe to a particular economic theory.

[Orange Joe]

The Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution includes a provision known as the Takings Clause, which states that "private property [shall not] be taken for public use, without just compensation."

So if a communist nation paid all owners for their businesses and then made them all state ran they wouldn't be communist?

[Theinquisition]

No there isn't. The military demands that he follow orders and defend the constitution, not that he ascribe to a particular economic theory.

Communism isn't just a economic theory.

[Orange Joe]

Yes, but he was in uniform.

It doesn't sate he can't be.