It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Cosmic Clearance Classification.....What it is and what it isn't .

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 01:59 PM
link   
Please do not get me wrong. I love reading about UFOs, watching Disclosure Project videos. I myself have had two sightings both of which I have reported to MUFON. I even have a pretty good photo of a day time sighting I had less than 3 months ago with a total of 12 witnesses. All of which were either Active duty military or DOD Contractors. I want to believe.
What I am posting about is the use of the term “Cosmic” security clearance level often used by many whistle-blowers in UFO interviews. The term “Cosmic” is not a level of security clearance any higher than Top Secret. If you refer to the “Transatlantic Armament Cooperation-Report of Military Research Fellows” dated August 2000, Appendix B, pg.B-3, paragraph A, B, and C. You will see the classification “Cosmic” is only referring to Top Secret information being shared between NATO Allies. It is not anything more than that. It is just information being shared over a separate classification registry system because it is going to between separate allied countries with different classification systems. When the information reaches the intended NATO recipient it is then re-classified/renamed to the receiving country’s appropriate classification level. People issued this type of clearance would be briefed on this during their security expectations and non-disclosure agreement signing. It makes me doubt the credibility of witnesses and whistle-blowers using this term to validate their story. Many of them alluding that it is something more than it is. With so many self proclaimed “experts” and “insiders” and "skeptics" trolling this forum; I assumed this would have been covered before. I apologize in advance if this information has already been posted. . GlobalSecurity.org has the document for public viewing.


A. NATO has four levels of security classification: 1. COSMIC TOP SECRET (CTS) 2. NATO SECRET (TS) 3. NATO CONFIDENTIAL (NC) 4. NATO RESTRICTED (NR)
read the document for full explanation.

www.globalsecurity.org...://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/europe/mrf_rpt2000.pdf|||

edit on 11-10-2011 by smoke screen because: Link added

edit on 11-10-2011 by smoke screen because: Added source quote.




posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by smoke screen
 


Actually Top Secret being shared with NATO is KRONOS Top Secret.

2nd.



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 02:06 PM
link   
So what does this mean for ATS and their designation of Above Top secret and finally Cosmic? Does this mean I have nothing more to attain to?



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 02:09 PM
link   
Ufo's exist as much as lights in the night sky exist.

Well done!



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 02:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by BIGPoJo
2nd.


2nd is worse that a one liner
Isn't that a PHAGE in your avatar?



@OP

Simply paste the link into the post will do

www.dau.mil...

Or use the
button

Paper Here .mil site PDF



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 02:24 PM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


Its a cold virus I believe...


Also regarding COSMIC TOP SECRET, I think its real purpose is a temporary classification when sharing nuclear secrets among NATO countries. At least that's what my Google machine is telling me.



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 02:27 PM
link   
reply to post by BIGPoJo
 


Perhaps. Sounds like a foreign name for essentially the same information sharing program. It doesn't ring any bells, that doesn't mean that you are not correct. Do you perhaps have a source document for your information?



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by BIGPoJo
 


It doesn't have to be nuclear. It IS a temporary classification for all TS info coming from the U.S. to an Allied Nation. According to the document.

I am just trying to shed light on some creditability issues when it is used out of context ambiguously.



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 02:34 PM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


Thanks for posting the links. I was planning on going to bed soon but I am excited to see where this thread goes.



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 02:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by BIGPoJo
Also regarding COSMIC TOP SECRET, I think its real purpose is a temporary classification when sharing nuclear secrets among NATO countries. At least that's what my Google machine is telling me.

Your Google machine is wrong, or you are doing it wrong. NATO nuclear secrets get the ATOMAL control marking. See page 34 of the CAPCO Implementation Manual. CTS is on page 29.
edit on 11-10-2011 by FurvusRexCaeli because: specify NATO



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 03:09 PM
link   
Very good post, and a valid point. Honest skepticism requires further review.

You are correct to call the NATO security clearance level known as, "Cosmic Top Secret," an interface between different classification systems. That is precisely how all four levels of security clearance under the authority of NATO function.

However I might add that there is one distinction that sets this level of access apart from the others and that is that it is the primary level within the European theater that deals with information regarding nuclear weaponry. On its surface this may seem benign, however it is only at this level that ALL information is accessible.

Cosmic Top Secret is only assigned to a certain number of individuals at any given time. It is temporary, and the user will be decommissioned upon completion of the project that required its assignment. Could be anything that either the politicians or the generals do not wish to share.

To outright disbelieve what someone states based upon their past assignment at the Cosmic Top Secret security clearance level is just as wrong as wholeheartedly accepting what someone has to say in the same regard. One must be cautious and employ a skeptical attitude toward any information received blindly, always allowing a method for validation.

The only way to validate that an individual was assigned to this level would be a copy of the original orders. The only other method would be a copy of their DD-214 discharge form (assuming they are already discharged from military service - and their service record reflects this assignment [NATO nuclear]).

The point is - if you are going to trust the individual who hands you blind information (this is the internet - remember?) that trust should be based upon a foundation of verifiable truth. Otherwise it is just so much cattle fodder.

And you can find that just about everywhere...









reply to post by smoke screen
 



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by FurvusRexCaeli
 


You are correct. There is a separate classification for NATO Nuclear. That information is also available in the document I cited. Why do you think Robert Lazar and others speak about "Cosmic" as being 12 levels higher than TS? It makes no sense that someone "with a need to know" would be so unfamiliar with basic security classifications when the information is unrestricted and publicly available. Not to mention he would have been briefed on this information?



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 03:38 PM
link   
reply to post by blasphemous
 


Thank you for such a well written and thought out response. The point of this thread is simply to provoke some sort of discussion about the use of "Cosmic" classification during interviews. I will keep using Robert Lazar as my example. I don't mean to pick on him, off the top of my head he is the only name I can remember. He states that it is 12 levels above ts. He should know better should he not? Not only that but in some of the most convincing and awe inspiring UFO documentaries the same information is stated.



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 04:11 PM
link   
Cosmic Top Secret is not a classification level.

To be written properly it should be "Top Secret Cosmic"

This makes it a Top Secret codename need to know system for Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI).

This it the system used by the military and the NSA/NRO. for special need to know projects.

"Top Secret Gamma" was spy operation in/on the Soviet Union.
"Top Secret Gamma Gupy" was the eavesdropping on soviet leaders by intercepting there scrambled radiotelephone conversations. any gamma codename dealt with Russia.
www.designation-systems.net...



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 04:42 PM
link   
reply to post by smoke screen
 


On a common sense side of things why would they label a mundane cross-nation security clearance "cosmic"...

What is "cosmic" about cross-nation security clearance?

Im honestly curious.



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 06:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by BIGPoJo
Its a cold virus I believe...


No its a Phage




We already have one Phage here


Don't need that many antiseptic skeptics



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 06:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by ANNED
Cosmic Top Secret is not a classification level.

To be written properly it should be "Top Secret Cosmic"

Not in the US. I posted a link to a CAPCO document hosted by the ODNI proving this. The OP also provided a reference. Other countries might write it in this fashion. We don't.


This makes it a Top Secret codename need to know system for Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI).

COSMIC is not an SCI control system. Not a published system, anyway. If it's an unpublished system, you should probably ask your security manager to give you another briefing on the consequences of spilling classified information.



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 06:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by smoke screen
reply to post by FurvusRexCaeli
 


You are correct. There is a separate classification for NATO Nuclear.

Technically, it's a control marking, not a classification. The four NATO classifications are COSMIC TOP SECRET, NATO SECRET, NATO CONFIDENTIAL, and NATO RESTRICTED. Information in one of these categories can have additional control markings like ATOMAL (US RD or FRD), BALK, and BOHEMIA (US SI). The recipe for Nuclear Death Soup might be TS//RD in the US; it would be //CTS//ATOMAL if released to NATO. But you can't have information that's just //ATOMAL. It needs CTS, NS, or NC.


That information is also available in the document I cited. Why do you think Robert Lazar and others speak about "Cosmic" as being 12 levels higher than TS?

I guess Bob Lazar is a liar who wants attention, and there are credulous people who believe what he says and give him attention. The most incredible claim I've seen associated with Lazar is this:


Bob called a number out of the newpaper and happened upon a 40 to 45 year old madam/hooker who ran 2 to 4 girls out of a condominium project in the southeast part of town. This was an upper line condo project so don't envision some dark sleezy place engulfed in red lights. Bob went there and did his business, but before he left, the hookers were having some problems with a stereo or something like that and, naturally, Bob came to the rescue. He fixed it for them and they invited him back for a freebie.


Freebies? From a hooker? Never happen!



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 09:56 PM
link   


Technically, it's a control marking, not a classification.


That 's what I meant to say.




Freebies? From a hooker? Never happen!


Hilarious.


Lazar's creditability is lost. To me anyway. Now that I have really thought about this. I hate having to debunk but his use of the cosmic clearance and badges just doesn't make sense. If cosmic is just as the documents state a control marking. It's wouldn't be used on badges. It would be used on electronic documents when shared over the network. Not to mention restricted/cleared area badges are usually color coded.



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 10:30 PM
link   
Robert Dean often says he had a "Cosmic Top Secret" clearance, as in this video at 1:29:

www.youtube.com...



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join