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

Thursday, September 18, 2014

Charlie has some explaining to do!

 Anonymous said...
Looks like Charlie "GQ" McMillan has some explaining  to do about his retaliatory actions against LANL staff who don't follow the LANS LLC party line:

*****
DOE official seeks probe of dissident analyst’s dismissal by nuclear weapons laboratory

A senior Energy Department official has requested a special probe of claims by a U.S. nuclear weapons analyst that one of the nuclear weapons laboratories canceled his security clearances and fired him as punishment for publishing a critique of longstanding U.S. weapons policy.

The request by Under Secretary for Nuclear Security Frank Klotz for an inquiry by the DOE Inspector General into the dismissal in July of James E. Doyle by Los Alamos National Laboratory was disclosed in a Sept. 15 letter from another department official to Doyle’s attorney, Mark Zaid.

In the letter, Poli Mamolejos, director of the DOE’s Office of Hearings and Appeals, wrote that DOE’s “senior leadership takes the issue you raise seriously, and will not tolerate retaliation or dismissals of employees or contractors for the views expressed in scholarly publications.”

news.yahoo.com/doe-official-seeks -probe-dissident-090000858.html
September 16, 2014 at 7:53 PM
 Delete
Anonymous Anonymous said...
,,, the "bombshell" paragraph in that article:

"That message (Doyle's) conflicted with the laboratory’s principal work developing nuclear weapons, but the laboratory’s security experts cleared it for publication. Then, after hearing complaints from a Republican staff member of the House Armed Services Committee, more senior laboratory officials opted to classify the article retroactively, dock Doyle’s pay, and cancel his clearances." (News Article)


So they appear to have retroactively decided something was classified and then punished Doyle for something lab security people had previously OK'd for him to publish? He followed the security policy rules and then got clobbered for it?

Amazing! What type of low-life scum do these things at the NNSA labs and why are they allowed to keep THEIR clearances? This story stinks to high heaven! Has the corruption and rot at the top of the NNSA management chain become this evil?
September 16, 2014 at 8:12 PM
 Delete
Anonymous Anonymous said...
Much more to this story than has been known to date. All press reports are wrong to a degree. No one will know the true story, even after whatever happens in the courts, just like Wen Ho Lee. Sad.

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

If you don't look, walk, talk, act, breathe, dress, behave, eat, and have the same technical position as does McMillan, Leasure, Benner, Knapp (when he was at LANL), and do as they direct you to do, etc., then your "TOAST"!

Anonymous said...

Another useful comment. Do you actually know any facts?

Anonymous said...

Another useful comment. Do you actually know any facts?

September 19, 2014 at 9:25 PM

Really? Did you ever meet Brian Aubert, former Weapon Analysis Group Leader? How about David Trujillo, former B61 and W80 Program Manager? How about the 25 Weapon Engineers tossed out of W and WT-division (i.e. Knapp's Empire) in 2008-2009?

Anonymous said...

Really? Did you ever meet...

September 22, 2014 at 4:57 PM

Yep, I knew most of them before I retired in 2007. Most (not all) ran their programs like little fiefdoms, not reporting to anyone but possibly the Director in the case of a really big screwup. It was a situation of no accountability, and any manager taking over that menagerie had to assert some control. It was resisted, and so the bloodletting. Ugly, but necessary, if you want to establish lines of authority and accountability. As an example, I (as a non-participant in the program but a colleague of the program manager in another context) was offered foreign travel paid for by the program, just "for the fun of it."

Anonymous said...

" I (as a non-participant in the program but a colleague of the program manager in another context) was offered foreign travel paid for by the program, just "for the fun of it."

from September 22, 2014 at 7:27 PM

Which, I'm sure, you must have dutifully reported to GAO and/or DOE IG as fraud. Oh, you didn't? Then they will be coming after your ass, with a little help from their friends over at NSA.

Anonymous said...

they will be coming after your ass, with a little help from their friends over at NSA.

September 29, 2014 at 5:29 PM

Yeah, that happens (not).

Anonymous said...

Did they offer you a paid ticket to an obscure location, one way?

Blog Archive