Blog purpose
This BLOG is for LLNL present and past employees, friends of LLNL and anyone impacted by the privatization of the Lab to express their opinions and expose the waste, wrongdoing and any kind of injustice against employees and taxpayers by LLNS/DOE/NNSA.
The opinions stated are personal opinions. Therefore,
The BLOG author may or may not agree with them before making the decision to post them.
Comments not conforming to BLOG rules are deleted.
Blog author serves as a moderator.
For new topics or suggestions, email jlscoob5@gmail.com
Blog rules
- Stay on topic.
- No profanity, threatening language, pornography.
- NO NAME CALLING.
- No political debate.
- Posts and comments are posted several times a day.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts you viewed tbe most last 30 days
-
Good article in Nature News on progress on Z with a mention of NIF's problems http://www.nature.com/news/triple-threat-method-sparks-h...
-
Actual post from Dec. 15 from one of the streams. This is a real topic. As far as promoting women and minorities even if their qualification...
-
" ...If there were damning factual evidence of anything untoward, it would obviously have been brought forward with great fanfare......
11 comments:
LLNL makes you sign loyalty agreements, but we cannot make them sign one to us.
Really, they make you sign a loyalty agreement? Or is this sarcasm?
Assume that everything you read on this blog is anti-lab BS, and you'll be right 95% of the time.
This is one of those times.
5:47 isn't a Lab employee or he would know that we were told to sign a loyalty agreement in 2005.
OK, I'll bite. How about some more details, or a link to it?
I think at the time the loyalty oath was called, "a revised code of ethics". Moral relativism aside, I refused to sign it and was told that Nanos was taking names and if I valued my job I should get on board with the former Vice Admiral and his fictional agenda for the Good Ship Lollipop.
As I thought. Not a "loyalty agreement" by any normal definition.
Did you read it? I did, asshole.
That's nice.
Still not a loyalty agreement, as you originally asserted.
Liar.
So that wasn't llnl, it was LANL, if it was Nanos. That aside, post the "oath".
So back to the 3rd post in this thread:
Assume that everything you read on this blog is anti-lab BS, and you'll be right 95% of the time.
This is one of those times.
Post a Comment