Then you said:
Go back and read the sentence. It was general in nature to make it sound like it is common.
No one has a mission life history. It may get ignored, but it isn't missing. Bank that shit.
"Many" and "common" are not synonymous, first of all. Then, you assert, with a bit of irritation, that the original statement is nonsense. And therefore, if you know authoritatively it is nonsense, you must have and and/or currently have a VERY high position in the CIA and thus know the overall workings of the agency in every aspect. If you don't and/or have not held an extremely high position in the CIA, then you do not know for sure one way or the other.
Second, to assert that it isn't possible for the fed gov to hide, or otherwise change or make unavailable, someone's life history, is just infantile.
Listen newb. HUMNT or CI agents not adjudicate their background investigation. If something got missed, it was the investigators. And to be quite frank, having a father with ties to a adversary nation isn't an automatic disqualifier. It is the nature of the connection, and the lack of candor given on the questionnaire.
Also, a security clearance isn't going to disqualify someone whose ideology is anti-American. There are many in the government that are not patriots, but that isn't anything new.