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.
THIS BLOG WILL NOT POST ANY MAGA PROPAGANDA OR ANY MISINFORMATION REGARDLESS OF SOURCE.
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
-
So...for those of us who remain who were too chicken or unable to take the SSVSP for whatever reason .....regrets?
-
Did George W. Bush lie about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq ? Not looking for controversy here, just some facts from former LLNL/LANL e...
-
The end of LANL and LLNL? "After host Maria Bartiromo questioned whether the two plan to “close down entire agencies,” Ramaswamy said...
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