A top secret security clearance...

paflyer said:
With the current witchuntery, can't say I blame him if he did refuse.
Click to expand...
Prerequisite for the job. The policy is that some surrendering of privacy is necessary for advanced clearances...including medical and financial data. One's choice is to accept the loss of privacy, or forego the clearance. Same rules should apply to everybody.

I once had a clearance review held up due to "unexplained affluence." They thought I was living a higher life-style than my salary should allow, my wife was unemployed, but we weren't in debt. Gave them the explanation (wife had been an early Amazon employee), and things moved on.

More fun came later, when the investigation also looked into contacts with the news media. I have lots, of course, and receive royalties from McGraw-Hill, the publisher of Aviation Leak.....

Ron Wanttaja
 
Sac Arrow said:
But, if you want an instant DQ for a top secret clearance, just have a solicitation charge on your record. Capital murder would be preferable.
Click to expand...

Only if it's within the disclosure period, around 10 years.

murphey said:
Great second paragraph! BTDT same type of tickets.

One of the BIG reasons clearances take so long these days is the process. 90% foot traffic. The other reason is the 2014 hacks of OPM and the Navy. If priority, such as needed for anything nuclear it will be fasttracked. But otherwise you're in the FIFO queue.
Click to expand...

There is something like 1/2 million folks waiting for clearance right now. The folks that are high-level all n the administration (appointees) get fast-tracked. Likewise nuclear. The others take a year or more.

Part of the problem is that the process isn't much changed from the 1950s, when classified info was sent by telex, fax, and courier. Part of the problem is that everything and it's brother is now being classified so everyone and their sister need clearances. It's almost out of hand.
 
Quickest was to get clearance revoked and your career terminated is break the wrong nuke cookie. We received a training message and the Captain on duty (Army O-3) broke a real world cookie, not a training one. Knowing which was which and understanding when and which to break was a big thing. I think he was out of the unit with a week. Don't know where he ended up, but it sure wasn't anywhere requiring a clearance of any sort.
 
hindsight2020 said:
Another topic near and dear to my heart. And yes, they will give anyone a TS these days. The fact Jared Kushner can't get one is a yuge statement.
Click to expand...

A huge statement of politics.


Ahh the security theatre.
With one hand we "need" to subject Americans to invasive background checks and polygraphs and other crap, on the other hand well sell weapons and uranium to the most violent and unamerican / evil people on earth lol
 
wsuffa said:
Only if it's within the disclosure period, around 10 years.



There is something like 1/2 million folks waiting for clearance right now. The folks that are high-level all n the administration (appointees) get fast-tracked. Likewise nuclear. The others take a year or more.

Part of the problem is that the process isn't much changed from the 1950s, when classified info was sent by telex, fax, and courier. Part of the problem is that everything and it's brother is now being classified so everyone and their sister need clearances. It's almost out of hand.
Click to expand...
There was a televised panel last year at the Wilson Institute discussing this problem. The panelists emphasized with the social media and other electronic tools available, so much of the crap can be identified using automated methods to scan, prioritize and flag those elements that need additional investigation by a human being, and that a background investigation shouldn't take more than 30-60 days.

I was dumbfounded when it took 4 months to get an interim Secret in '16, when I've had a variety of DOD & DOT clearances, one as recent as '13.

I am so happy I'm no longer in that world, and it's unlikely I'll be back there.
 
N3368K said:
Quickest was to get clearance revoked and your career terminated is break the wrong nuke cookie. We received a training message and the Captain on duty (Army O-3) broke a real world cookie, not a training one. Knowing which was which and understanding when and which to break was a big thing. I think he was out of the unit with a week. Don't know where he ended up, but it sure wasn't anywhere requiring a clearance of any sort.
Click to expand...

I prefer conventional oven baked cookies. Never cared for ones that were nuked.
 
N3368K said:
Quickest was to get clearance revoked and your career terminated is break the wrong nuke cookie. We received a training message and the Captain on duty (Army O-3) broke a real world cookie, not a training one. Knowing which was which and understanding when and which to break was a big thing. I think he was out of the unit with a week. Don't know where he ended up, but it sure wasn't anywhere requiring a clearance of any sort.
Click to expand...

That wasn't my experience in the USAF. The irony of that statement is that being on nuke duty is considered a calamity, at least amongst aircrew. IOW, what the military thinks of reward, members consider punishment, and the inverse is also true. Being "punished" by being de-certified, while embarrassing and potentially railroading, would still be considered a reward. In addition, nobody gets paid extra for nuke duty in the aircrew world, which adds to the morale and retention problems.

Jest aside, nobody lost their clearance over surety training violations or ground handling security breaches. Ah the stories I could tell you about nuke BUFFoonery, but for the sake of OPSEC I'll digress. All the folks guilty of breaches that I knew during my time in that purgatory were merely de-certified and re-trained. Sure, they were scolded, but nobody lost their membership in the military nor their paycheck over it. Matter of fact, the only people I know of who should have lost their careers over it (aircrew of the bent spear 2007 incident) actually promoted 2 BTZ to O-5 and quietly PCS'd to a cush OT&E job in sunny NW Florida. The military can't discern the difference between punishment and reward if it hit them on the forehead with a large purple male genital. Which is why they constantly punish their competent, by leaning on them until their failure point, while sidelining the incompetent, allowing them the same pay for less responsibility. Just like in civilian life, 10% of the people do 90% of the work.
 
denverpilot said:
The “other” common way to “turn” people. Money and sex.
Click to expand...

Very common tactic in cold war Germany. The MI agents used to give company wide briefings on how to avoid getting trapped in a blackmail scheme on a regular basis. Sex for the married guys, and that to get the single guys to use drugs.

Edit: I just saw my grammatical error. But I'll leave it because it's funny.
 
Sac Arrow said:
Very common tactic in cold war Germany. The MI agents used to give company wide briefings on how to avoid getting trapped in a blackmail scheme on a regular basis. Sex for the married guys, and that to get the single guys to use drugs.

Edit: I just saw my grammatical error. But I'll leave it because it's funny.
Click to expand...

Yeah, getting caught in one on a regular basis is not too good. Once or twice is ok.
 
murphey said:
There was a televised panel last year at the Wilson Institute discussing this problem. The panelists emphasized with the social media and other electronic tools available, so much of the crap can be identified using automated methods to scan, prioritize and flag those elements that need additional investigation by a human being, and that a background investigation shouldn't take more than 30-60 days.
Click to expand...

Those scanners are crap. I once had a friend call and beg me not to post anything related to Snowden on my Facebook account. Not even just sharing a news link.

Because he and “friends” were warned in a briefing back when Snowden was a newish thing and the powers that he were still freshly ****ed off by him, that even seeing Snowden commentary by their friends on online media was going to be a problem for them.

He said if I was going to post any news links about the guy, he’d have to “unfriend” me. I laughed and decided not to post anything else there.

But no. I wouldn’t put $20 against those scanners finding real problems more than just being another expensive financed security toy for someone to make work out of. Like forever “making it better” and calling a 10% success rate something they’ll shoot for. 1% better each year means a few billion more bucks in funding, right? LOL.
 
denverpilot said:
Those scanners are crap. I once had a friend call and beg me not to post anything related to Snowden on my Facebook account. Not even just sharing a news link.

Because he and “friends” were warned in a briefing back when Snowden was a newish thing and the powers that he were still freshly ****ed off by him, that even seeing Snowden commentary by their friends on online media was going to be a problem for them.

He said if I was going to post any news links about the guy, he’d have to “unfriend” me. I laughed and decided not to post anything else there.

But no. I wouldn’t put $20 against those scanners finding real problems more than just being another expensive financed security toy for someone to make work out of. Like forever “making it better” and calling a 10% success rate something they’ll shoot for. 1% better each year means a few billion more bucks in funding, right? LOL.
Click to expand...

Snowden Snowden Snowden Snowden Snowden
 
denverpilot said:
Those scanners are crap. I once had a friend call and beg me not to post anything related to Snowden on my Facebook account. Not even just sharing a news link.

Because he and “friends” were warned in a briefing back when Snowden was a newish thing and the powers that he were still freshly ****ed off by him, that even seeing Snowden commentary by their friends on online media was going to be a problem for them.

He said if I was going to post any news links about the guy, he’d have to “unfriend” me. I laughed and decided not to post anything else there.

But no. I wouldn’t put $20 against those scanners finding real problems more than just being another expensive financed security toy for someone to make work out of. Like forever “making it better” and calling a 10% success rate something they’ll shoot for. 1% better each year means a few billion more bucks in funding, right? LOL.
Click to expand...

GIGO.

As for Snowden, when it came out folks with a clearance were warned to not read any of the info released - even in the MSM - because it would be a violation of the rules of their clearances and they might be subject to discipline or revocation of the clearance.

Yes, that's right - it was "illegal" for someone with a clearance to read the stuff, even stuff that the General Public could read. And the higher clearance you had, the more risky it was. Catch 22 still exists.

But, yes, there is no reason that a clearance should take so long today. Had breakfast with a friend that's been waiting since August for a Secret. And advised someone else to find a company to "park" their clearance when they retire later this year (or simply do a bit of consulting work for them).
 
wsuffa said:
GIGO.

As for Snowden, when it came out folks with a clearance were warned to not read any of the info released - even in the MSM - because it would be a violation of the rules of their clearances and they might be subject to discipline or revocation of the clearance.

Yes, that's right - it was "illegal" for someone with a clearance to read the stuff, even stuff that the General Public could read. And the higher clearance you had, the more risky it was. Catch 22 still exists.

But, yes, there is no reason that a clearance should take so long today. Had breakfast with a friend that's been waiting since August for a Secret. And advised someone else to find a company to "park" their clearance when they retire later this year (or simply do a bit of consulting work for them).
Click to expand...
I seem to recall that the military even blocked Wikileaks site from being accessed on government computers.
 
hindsight2020 said:
That wasn't my experience in the USAF. The irony of that statement is that being on nuke duty is considered a calamity, at least amongst aircrew. IOW, what the military thinks of reward, members consider punishment, and the inverse is also true. Being "punished" by being de-certified, while embarrassing and potentially railroading, would still be considered a reward. In addition, nobody gets paid extra for nuke duty in the aircrew world, which adds to the morale and retention problems.

Jest aside, nobody lost their clearance over surety training violations or ground handling security breaches. Ah the stories I could tell you about nuke BUFFoonery, but for the sake of OPSEC I'll digress. All the folks guilty of breaches that I knew during my time in that purgatory were merely de-certified and re-trained. Sure, they were scolded, but nobody lost their membership in the military nor their paycheck over it. Matter of fact, the only people I know of who should have lost their careers over it (aircrew of the bent spear 2007 incident) actually promoted 2 BTZ to O-5 and quietly PCS'd to a cush OT&E job in sunny NW Florida. The military can't discern the difference between punishment and reward if it hit them on the forehead with a large purple male genital. Which is why they constantly punish their competent, by leaning on them until their failure point, while sidelining the incompetent, allowing them the same pay for less responsibility. Just like in civilian life, 10% of the people do 90% of the work.
Click to expand...

In the Army, it was simply part of being Field Artillery back in those days. With the exception of light artillery (105mm), all other weapons systems were nuke capable. The above mentioned incident occurred in Germany before the end of the Cold War. Unfortunately, the Army had a more zero defect attitude about most things, but nuke surety was an absolute zero defect environment. I think, however, what toasted this young Captain was we were in Europe and he broke a contingency "real" cookie instead of the training cookie. It resulted in a compromise and all of USAEUR (US Army, Europe) having to change the real world cookies.

For us, in the Artillery, being assigned to a Lance or Pershing II unit was punishment. I once had orders to a Pershing II unit and was lucky enough to avoid it by taking advantage of local assignments office. They cut me orders to another unit (conventional howiters) and I beat feet over and signed in and talked to the Adjutant of the assigned unit and he ensured I was locked in. Pershing duty was deadly to careers. I commanded a nuke capable unit in Germany. It was a happy day when we turned our NRAS materials and the program ended.
 
@N3368K when and where were you in Germany? I was at Zweibrucken AB in 70-71. We had uploaded F4s w/ tactical nukes on them on alert, 5 of 'em I think. Had an Army unit on base w/ Chapparals, something like these I think:

images
 
I was there 90-93, not far from Zweiburcken at Baumholder in 8th Infantry Division. We always were somewhat jealous of the Air Defense folks assigned to AF bases. :D
 
N3368K said:
I was there 90-93, not far from Zweiburcken at Baumholder in 8th Infantry Division. We always were somewhat jealous of the Air Defense folks assigned to AF bases. :D
Click to expand...

Bunch of good guys, drank beer with them. Interesting though to see how they were bunked compared us Air Force weenies. Took me along when they switched out a Chapparal with one on alert. Thought man, if they catch me in this thing....young and foolish.
 
paflyer said:
But everyone knew she was CIA. Some "covert."
Click to expand...
First of all there is, of course, no way that's even remotely true. And even if it were it doesn't change the fact that she was a covert operative.
 
The media (partially because the various government organizations do downplay the details) doesn't really understand security clearance. A simple "TOP SECRET" clearance isn't the highest clearance. Upon that ride a whole plethora of "special investigations" that put even more restrictions on things. A TS just involves you filling out a background form and them following up on what you said (and potentially didn't say). Some of the special investigations get quite involved. Delving into you describing your sex life and other vices while hooked up to a polygraph, for example.
 
I know a guy with 2 divorces, 2 bankruptcies, and a foreclosed house he stopped paying on get a top secret clearance.
 
JB1842 said:
I know a guy with 2 divorces, 2 bankruptcies, and a foreclosed house he stopped paying on get a top secret clearance.
Click to expand...
They're less concerned about it if everything is public. The worry is that someone might be prone to blackmail if they're, for instance, involved in an adulterous affair.

And like Ron N. pointed out, there's "Top Secret" and REALLY, REALLY, REALLY Top Secret. The Air Force might not balk at something the TLAs might reject someone for.

In addition, there's the "old boy" network that comes up with excuses why people like Aldrich Ames can flunk the investigations but still retain their clearances.

Ron Wanttaja
 
wanttaja said:
They're less concerned about it if everything is public. The worry is that someone might be prone to blackmail if they're, for instance, involved in an adulterous affair.

And like Ron N. pointed out, there's "Top Secret" and REALLY, REALLY, REALLY Top Secret. The Air Force might not balk at something the TLAs might reject someone for.

In addition, there's the "old boy" network that comes up with excuses why people like Aldrich Ames can flunk the investigations but still retain their clearances.

Ron Wanttaja
Click to expand...

I've learned in my agency if they want you have a TS you will get one.
 
flyingron said:
The media (partially because the various government organizations do downplay the details) doesn't really understand security clearance. A simple "TOP SECRET" clearance isn't the highest clearance. Upon that ride a whole plethora of "special investigations" that put even more restrictions on things. A TS just involves you filling out a background form and them following up on what you said (and potentially didn't say). Some of the special investigations get quite involved. Delving into you describing your sex life and other vices while hooked up to a polygraph, for example.
Click to expand...
Yeah, like I'd ever want a job so badly that I'd put up with that level of intrusion.
 
Also, the terms used here refer to the DOD. Each of the federal depts have their own version and names for various security clearances.
 
murphey said:
Also, the terms used here refer to the DOD. Each of the federal depts have their own version and names for various security clearances.
Click to expand...
And they don't all transfer from one to another.
 
murphey said:
Also, the terms used here refer to the DOD. Each of the federal depts have their own version and names for various security clearances.
Click to expand...

wsuffa said:
And they don't all transfer from one to another.
Click to expand...

When I told DOE I had a DOD clearance, they rolled their eyes, stuck up their noses and acted like "that will make the process more difficult."
 
in truth, I don't think you are supposed to talk about your clearances.
 
I hope my re-investigations are over. I remember OSI tails periodically to check up on what I was doing. They tried to be invisible but I knew them all from their frequent trips to the Comm Center I maintained. It was a bit of a game with them trying to not be seen and me waving at them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top