Jump to content





Photo
- - - - -

Another Gunman on the Loose


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
79 replies to this topic

#73 Anybodyhome

Anybodyhome

    USN Retired

  • Joined: 07-July 10
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 7,895
  • Reputation: 2,652
HUDDLER

Posted 17 September 2013 - 09:24 AM

Here are the requirements to obtain a security clearance.

 

  • A National Agency Check, during which investigators review records held by federal
    agencies such as the Federal Bureau of Investigations and OPM.
  • A Local Agency Check, which calls in criminal history records held by local law
    enforcement agencies such as police departments and sheriffs with jurisdiction over
    the areas where you have lived, gone to school or worked.
  • Financial checks.
  • Field interviews of individuals including co-workers, employers, friends, educators
    and neighbors. The candidate provides a list of contacts, though the investigator may
    and often does) talk with others beyond the names submitted.
  • Checks of records held by employers, courts and rental offices.
  • A personal interview.

The fourth one only applies to those who hold top secret or SCI (access to Sensitive Compartmented information) which the shooter did not apparently.  I would think that the local agency check would uncover the incidents.

 

But I had access to SCI and that is about the hardest access to obtain.  But I had a few incidents on my record, and they said as long as I was honest and able to explain them, it wouldn't be a big deal and it wasn't.  None of them were violence or gun related, but the same might apply in this case.   

 

The difference being this is how the military goes about getting your clearance. I went through all of this as well with my TS clearance.

 

The issue here is how deep the Hewlett-Packard subcontractor, The Experts, went with their background clearance checks. The Navy did not grant this guy's clearance, it was the responsibility of the contractor and the subcontractor. 

 

And I guarantee there will be a review of this entire process as well.

 



#74 Guest_Spider Monkey_*

Guest_Spider Monkey_*
Guests

Posted 17 September 2013 - 09:37 AM

How many people at the top have you actually known? In my experience, most of the people at the top in the military (or most corporation for that matter) are intelligent, with some that are extremely bright. Doesn't mean they always make the right decision, but making a incorrect decision doesn't mean they aren't bright.


Probably a dozen or so. Having a college degree doesn't make you intelligent. It just means you were dedicated. Most book smart people seem to have no common sense.

Do you use the same logic to defend Rivera?

#75 venom

venom

    oneinfiniteconsciousness

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 7,931
  • Reputation: 536
HUDDLER

Posted 17 September 2013 - 09:53 AM

Perfect timing to take the spotlight off Syria and Benghazi while resurrecting the gun control rhetoric.

 



#76 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 18,133
  • Reputation: 1,529
HUDDLER

Posted 17 September 2013 - 10:03 AM

The difference being this is how the military goes about getting your clearance. I went through all of this as well with my TS clearance.

 

The issue here is how deep the Hewlett-Packard subcontractor, The Experts, went with their background clearance checks. The Navy did not grant this guy's clearance, it was the responsibility of the contractor and the subcontractor. 

 

And I guarantee there will be a review of this entire process as well.

 

 

Unless its changed dramatically, the Navy grants the clearance, albeit based on information provided by the contractor thru the national agency checks.  When I worked as a IS, I did some of the admin for the office that granted the clearance because we didn't have a CTA or a yeoman to do it.  Of course, that was back in the 80's, and it could have changed. 



#77 Anybodyhome

Anybodyhome

    USN Retired

  • Joined: 07-July 10
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 7,895
  • Reputation: 2,652
HUDDLER

Posted 17 September 2013 - 10:11 AM

Unless its changed dramatically, the Navy grants the clearance, albeit based on information provided by the contractor thru the national agency checks.  When I worked as a IS, I did some of the admin for the office that granted the clearance because we didn't have a CTA or a yeoman to do it.  Of course, that was back in the 80's, and it could have changed. 

 

Yes, this began changing not long before I retired in '93. As a matter of fact, I think a lot of the process was changed to accommodate the huge number of civilian contractors employed during and after the Gulf War in '91. The Navy began requiring contractors to obtain the clearances for their employees as the cost of trying to obtain clearances was just ridiculous as well as the amount of time and the backlog as a result of the ever-increasing number of civilian contractors grew.

 

Wouldn't surprise me in the least if some of these contractors took some short cuts in the clearance process to save some money themselves



#78 BBQ&Beer

BBQ&Beer

    The good actor

  • Joined: 20-April 10
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 3,965
  • Reputation: 716
HUDDLER

Posted 17 September 2013 - 11:45 AM

Here are the requirements to obtain a security clearance.

 

  • A National Agency Check, during which investigators review records held by federal
    agencies such as the Federal Bureau of Investigations and OPM.
  • A Local Agency Check, which calls in criminal history records held by local law
    enforcement agencies such as police departments and sheriffs with jurisdiction over
    the areas where you have lived, gone to school or worked.
  • Financial checks.
  • Field interviews of individuals including co-workers, employers, friends, educators
    and neighbors. The candidate provides a list of contacts, though the investigator may
    and often does) talk with others beyond the names submitted.
  • Checks of records held by employers, courts and rental offices.
  • A personal interview.

The fourth one only applies to those who hold top secret or SCI (access to Sensitive Compartmented information) which the shooter did not apparently.  I would think that the local agency check would uncover the incidents.

 

But I had access to SCI and that is about the hardest access to obtain.  But I had a few incidents on my record, and they said as long as I was honest and able to explain them, it wouldn't be a big deal and it wasn't.  None of them were violence or gun related, but the same might apply in this case.   

 

Oh I know. I was just making the point that from the way she told it, they just took her company's word.

 

ETA: What Anybodyhome said.

 



#79 venom

venom

    oneinfiniteconsciousness

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 7,931
  • Reputation: 536
HUDDLER

Posted 17 September 2013 - 04:47 PM

This crap is getting so predictable anymore. You'd think they'd at least change the script to keep their cover from being blown. I guess they really do take us for being that stupid.



#80 google larry davis

google larry davis

    fleet-footed poster

  • Joined: 06-August 12
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 4,846
  • Reputation: 1,430
HUDDLER

Posted 17 September 2013 - 10:35 PM

#1, fug you gospodin shithole, I got something fat you can suck on.   :)

 

whether it's your tits or your turkey neck, i assure you i'm not interested

 

please stop propositioning me on the internet, tia