The agency’s associate deputy director for analysis had posted an image depicting a man waving a Palestinian flag that is sometimes used in commentary critical of Israel.
Isn’t that kind of expected for senior or public officials in pretty much any organization. Most people in those positions avoid publicly discussing controversial topics aside from politicians. Even as a regular employee I make sure my public social media that is linked to my actual name is mostly professional lest someone decides to give me a search, basic common sense.
Much different thing for private industry to have such a regulation than for a government employer to do so because first amendment considerations are at play here.
Is the CIA under the UCMJ or normal civilian law? I genuinely don’t know, but I do remember them telling us in The Navy that we had signed away most of our rights by joining, and warned us against posting certain things online, pretty regularly.
Hello there. Government agencies, including the CIA government employees and private contractors are not under UCMJ. In situations like this the scariest legal action for CIA employees and contractors to worry about is often the Hatch Act.
Thanks. I was pretty sure that The UCMJ only applies to the 6 various branches, used to be 5 but now we have a Space Force, of The Military, but I’m not JAG, so I wasn’t sure.
Reading through the article on The Hatch Act, it seems that only material that attempts to influence the result of an election, or directly influence government policy is affected here.
I can see how that may spill over into a lot of governmental activities, but I don’t see how that would apply to something that is happening outside our borders, in this specific case. The person in question has no influence on those policies, they should be allowed to voice their opinion.
The point is that if it’s the government telling you that you can’t talk, there has to be a very strong reason for it. This doesn’t happen in the private world.
Isn’t that kind of expected for senior or public officials in pretty much any organization. Most people in those positions avoid publicly discussing controversial topics aside from politicians. Even as a regular employee I make sure my public social media that is linked to my actual name is mostly professional lest someone decides to give me a search, basic common sense.
Much different thing for private industry to have such a regulation than for a government employer to do so because first amendment considerations are at play here.
Is the CIA under the UCMJ or normal civilian law? I genuinely don’t know, but I do remember them telling us in The Navy that we had signed away most of our rights by joining, and warned us against posting certain things online, pretty regularly.
Hello there. Government agencies, including the CIA government employees and private contractors are not under UCMJ. In situations like this the scariest legal action for CIA employees and contractors to worry about is often the Hatch Act.
Thanks. I was pretty sure that The UCMJ only applies to the 6 various branches, used to be 5 but now we have a Space Force, of The Military, but I’m not JAG, so I wasn’t sure.
Reading through the article on The Hatch Act, it seems that only material that attempts to influence the result of an election, or directly influence government policy is affected here.
I can see how that may spill over into a lot of governmental activities, but I don’t see how that would apply to something that is happening outside our borders, in this specific case. The person in question has no influence on those policies, they should be allowed to voice their opinion.
The point is that if it’s the government telling you that you can’t talk, there has to be a very strong reason for it. This doesn’t happen in the private world.
Ummm… NDA’s have entered the chat.
That being said, please look at my other reply to u/Mojave one comment above this one.
I don’t agree with either thing, but they do exist.
NDAs are really a private sector thing.