Back in the day, a Superintendent level manager at LLNL, set himself up for lab paid business related trips. His legally blind wife, decided to surprise him by adding herself on to his hotel reservation. To her surprise, the reservation desk, said to the wife, the second occupancy for the room was aleady registered, that being a subordinate administrative female assistant within the superintenden’s sphere of influence. Well, the blind wife’s coworkers in HR from that point forward, thought Mr. Superintendent was basically a low life scum bag.
But, after this low mark, could anything occur worse? Yes. And again, a free pass in terms of security clearance, and future advancement.
21 comments:
What is your point?
What is your point?
It looks like there are a few of them.
The adjudicative guidelines to acquire or maintain a security clearance are very clear. If you have an extramarital affair and take steps to CONCEAL it, you are ripe for coercion or exploitation, independent of one’s belief of right or wrong, or
acceptable ethical behavior.
Sounds like the story of the young lady intern at NIF that was taken to a conference some years ago.
If any past or present lab employee has witnessed this kind of behavior directly, it might be best to anonymously (if needed) contact the authorities in DOE, even for past events. Why? Past or current, offenses like those described above, “scum level” or not, need to be reported
to maintain your OWN security clearance, and to uphold security clearance criteria.
Didn't Oppenheimer cheat on his wife?
Didn't Oppenheimer cheat on his wife?
Thinking these LLNL superintendent good old boys, 40+ years after Oppenheimer, weren’t of Oppenheimer’s intellectual significance or even close. More importantly, security clearance requirements have evolved and adapted from the 1940s,
if you actually didn’t know that. “Scum bag” LLNL dude, just sanctioned the way for more of the same unacceptable lab behavior for his division level or below successors. Not the reply you were hoping for?
6:35 -- Actually I was hoping you would say Teller was right about him. And he didn't have the "intellectual significance" you claim, I think, compared to Fermi, Teller, Wigner, Feynman, von Neumann, Bethe, etc.
Notice that nobody is saying LLNL scumbag Superintendent behavior did NOT happen? Instead, we get a reference to Oppenheimer. Telling.
The sad thing is that when someone comes forward this organization has fired those for trivial things such as $4.30 in phone calls or charging the wrong P/T , witnesses also have fallen victim to this behavior as well.
Thanks for this blog to keep these things out from under the rug.
Given the clear ethical standards and behavior expectations a Q Clearance requires, LLNL has its own version of Harvey Weinsteins around, that conduct themselves with immunity.
Yes, this blog helps shine a light.
Still, no “this is not true” and “did not occur” comments. Unacceptable LLNL behavior eventually gets exposed. LLNL Management swinging d_cks don’t get a free pass at some point.
This is just another example of LLNL’s Perpetrator Promotion Plan
Well, it's worth pointing out that many marriages do allow various forms of non-monogamous behavior by one or both partners, by mutual agreement:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/talking-apes/202004/are-open-marriages-happier
In fact, I know DEI is no longer a thing, but it was a traditional Tibetan practice for a woman to marry two brothers:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyandry_in_Tibet
8:16 -- it is a little known fact that the Tibetan Buddhists were the spiritual advisors for the Mongols
https://www.mdpi.com/2409-9252/4/4/29
Furthermore, the leaders of the Mongol Empire felt endowed with the legitimacy to conquer the world after being blessed by Tibetan Buddhism as Mahakala, the dark incarnation of Avalokiteshvara.
“Well, it's worth pointing out that many marriages do allow various forms of non-monogamous behavior by one or both partners, by mutual agreement..”
An orange comment to an apple topic. If you ever held a security clearance, you’d know extramarital affairs as described in the adjudicative guidelines for security clearances, are very clear. It appears you are carrying water or trying to protect one or more of the aforementioned LLNL swinging d_cks.
“Furthermore, the leaders of the Mongol Empire felt endowed with the legitimacy to conquer the world after being blessed by Tibetan Buddhism as Mahakala, the dark incarnation of Avalokiteshvara.”
Scooby, this commenter is purposely off topic, and serving as a red herring in the attempt to pivot away from this very serious topic.
Hired bottom tier LLNS Staff Relations attorneys (LLC protectors), must be very busy trying to squelch this topic, like the saying goes, “a cat trying to bury its sh_t into a marble floor”.
The fact that this happened to someone at HR doesn’t give much hope to the employees of the lowest levels of classifications. Kind like the treatment of people that worked under this and received a DUI vs top senior management. The llnl version of the Caste system.
If the alleged extramarital affair is not timely communicated to the Local Security Office (LSO), as a potential clearance violation necessitating a review, the problem does not exist in the security clearance system record. So either a particular extramarital behavior activity impacting multiple parties never existed, or lab management colluded to cover it up. Based on the Kotla’s 1997 experience, the Lab protects its managers at all costs.
https://fullmeasure.news/news/cover-story/legal-swindle
“…Based on the Kotla’s 1997 experience, the Lab protects its managers at all costs.”
Yes, but more specifically, at all TAXPAYER funded costs. Sounds ripe for the Federal DOGE team to investigate the pervasiveness of this tax payer rip off “legal swindle”.
Post a Comment