Wallew,
I'm pretty frustrated with some things I'm seeing on this forum of late and that probably led to my post being a little less diplomatic than it could have been. I could have posted skeptically without resorting to ridicule.
It's not so much your claim that it takes more than one head shot to take a person down with a .223 that got me. Strange things happen sometimes--there was a railroad worker many years ago who got a tamping rod blown through his brain and survived with relatively minor problems.
What really torqued me was all the BS about the clearance. Maybe you have HAD one and maybe you haven't. But you certainly don't HAVE one now if you can't quote the contract that you're working on or the organization that is sponsoring your clearance. Just because you HELD a clearance at one time and might be able to get it again if you need to doesn't mean you HAVE one now.
I didn't dispense that little bit of information for you--you were debriefed when you left your last job requiring access to classified information--which means that YOU already know you don't currently hold a clearance.
I'm not going to pick apart your posts to determine if you interacted with your "buddies" during the time you actually might have held a clearance, but again, that's not the big issue. If they could tell me something (in person or otherwise) then so can you. I don't care who you (or your buddies) are, no-one can downgrade classified to satisfy an argument with someone. Even if I could prove that I had adequate security clearances, you and your buddies couldn't tell me anything unless you could validate my need-to-know. An internet argument doesn't qualify as need-to-know. Not by any twisted stretch of the imagination.
Besides, the one thing that I find is nearly universal among people who actually hold clearances is that they don't generally mention them to strangers. There's no point--you can't discuss any details--about all it's good for is to gull the gullible and impress the easily impressed.
You sound like a pretty interesting and knowledgeable fellow, and also quite even-tempered--those are all good things, and for what it's worth, your posts usually seem well-informed. I appreciate your offer, and would gladly take you up on it--although it seems unlikely that we will cross paths--I'm guessing you're somewhere on the east coast.
Good shooting,
John
I'm pretty frustrated with some things I'm seeing on this forum of late and that probably led to my post being a little less diplomatic than it could have been. I could have posted skeptically without resorting to ridicule.
It's not so much your claim that it takes more than one head shot to take a person down with a .223 that got me. Strange things happen sometimes--there was a railroad worker many years ago who got a tamping rod blown through his brain and survived with relatively minor problems.
What really torqued me was all the BS about the clearance. Maybe you have HAD one and maybe you haven't. But you certainly don't HAVE one now if you can't quote the contract that you're working on or the organization that is sponsoring your clearance. Just because you HELD a clearance at one time and might be able to get it again if you need to doesn't mean you HAVE one now.
I didn't dispense that little bit of information for you--you were debriefed when you left your last job requiring access to classified information--which means that YOU already know you don't currently hold a clearance.
I'm not going to pick apart your posts to determine if you interacted with your "buddies" during the time you actually might have held a clearance, but again, that's not the big issue. If they could tell me something (in person or otherwise) then so can you. I don't care who you (or your buddies) are, no-one can downgrade classified to satisfy an argument with someone. Even if I could prove that I had adequate security clearances, you and your buddies couldn't tell me anything unless you could validate my need-to-know. An internet argument doesn't qualify as need-to-know. Not by any twisted stretch of the imagination.
Besides, the one thing that I find is nearly universal among people who actually hold clearances is that they don't generally mention them to strangers. There's no point--you can't discuss any details--about all it's good for is to gull the gullible and impress the easily impressed.
You sound like a pretty interesting and knowledgeable fellow, and also quite even-tempered--those are all good things, and for what it's worth, your posts usually seem well-informed. I appreciate your offer, and would gladly take you up on it--although it seems unlikely that we will cross paths--I'm guessing you're somewhere on the east coast.
Good shooting,
John
Last edited:
:barf: