> He then got out a blank form and handed it to me, saying ``Here, fill it out again and don't mention that. If you do, I'll make sure that you never get a security clearance.''
That sentence perfectly sums up my experience with the security clearance process and demonstrates clearly how broken it is.
In all fairness this was a particularly special case. And from a long time ago, way past the time anyone would be worried if he really had been a spy for Imperial Japan.
Les Earnest's anecdotes have been a real inspiration for me over the years. His Japanese Spy story is pretty good. But if you want a real laugh, read his Mongrel Race stories: http://yarchive.net/risks/mongrel.html
Also well worth reading is his "My analog to digital conversion" (http://www.stanford.edu/~learnest/digital.pdf), which despite its title is actually a bildungsroman about some terrifying engineering errors in 1950s military technology.
NOT the best way to vouch for someone: "'Yes, we just celebrated Guy Fawkes Day together.'"
Note also the author is an example of "oh, that's easy" WRT to the programming required to fix the real problem. I can well believe it was worth their while trying to get him to change his official race instead of trying to modify a program when no one on their IT staff was familiar with it and he was the only exception (so far).
Note WRT to Linus Pauling, a) he was indeed an inspiring chemist (his books are still very useful) and is considered to be the best of the 20th century. b) He was also willing Communist/Soviet tool.
"The lesson was clear: if you want a clearance in a hurry, put something on your history form that will make the investigators suspicious but that is not damning. They get so many dull backgrounds to check that they relish the possibility of actually nailing someone. By being a bit provocative, you draw priority attention and quicker service."
There was another one of these stories saying that it looks suspicious if you've never been convicted of a crime or done anything illegal, so if that's the case just say you tried weed once.
I would not lie on security clearance applications. Being honest and truthful is a big factor is the security clearance process. It's OK if you have incidences like this in the past, as long as there are mitigating factors such as passage of time and circumstances in which the incident occurred. The investigators just want to make sure you cannot be blackmailed in exchange for secret information.
For example, say John has a drug addiction, but he failed to disclose this on his application. He is eventually granted the clearance, but now he has to keep this secret for the rest of his life. Someone could easily blackmail him for secret government information. If he is caught lying, his clearance will be revoked and he will lose his job, and more than likely he will never be hired for a position that requires a clearance ever again (many US gov't jobs require a clearance).
Honesty is a sign of your loyalty to the U.S. Depending on the type of clearance, you are sometimes required to take multiple polygraph tests, and you will more than likely be caught lying.
So at the airport to the 'have you left your bags unattended, has anyone given you anything to carry on'
Do you answer, yes - the bags have been unattended in the cupboard for most of the year, and on the incoming flight and my company gave me this laptop to carry on?
Incidentally if you fly El-Al they do ask you if you were given a new laptop for this trip and even if it has been out for repair since you knew you were taking this trip.
The question of what to reveal on official documents comes up fairly often. On the on hand, telling the truth can cause unnecessary trouble, on the other hand, lying is technically illegal. I'm amazed at how often people are strongly incentivized to choose the latter.
I have lied on the security it forms, but with approval of the agent. As I recall the question read something like:
Have you ever used or abused <<giant list of drugs, chemicals, and substances that goes on for a good 2 inch tall paragraph in small type>>, or glue?
Right there at the end… glue. I had to confess that I not only used glue on a regular basis, but I had just showed my preschool daughter how to use glue and we had a grand time using glue together.
In a decision to pain logicians everywhere the agent deemed that my "use of glue" was not "use of glue".
It sounds like the security officer was just some low-level grunt who didn't want to go to the trouble of filing extra paperwork. Rather than someone with the power to "make sure that you never get a security clearance".
There is actually some controversy over using the term "concentration camp" to refer to the internment. From wikipedia:
"Concentration camp" is the most controversial descriptor of the camps. This term is criticized for suggesting that the Japanese American experience was analogous to the Holocaust and the Nazi concentration camps.[90] For this reason, National Park Service officials have attempted to avoid the term.[88] Franklin D. Roosevelt, Dwight D. Eisenhower and Secretary of the Interior Harold L. Ickes each referred to the American camps as "concentration camps," at the time.[91] When the nature of the Nazi concentration camps became clear to the world, and the phrase "concentration camp" came to signify a Nazi death camp, most historians turned to other terms to describe Japanese internment.
We did go there after 9-11, we just outsourced the actual camps to other countries.
What do you think the Maher Arar case was about? And that was just the tip of the iceberg. As a nation we have decided that lawlessness and torture are alright if they are inflicted on suspected terrorists. The continued public silence on this issue does not speak well of the moral qualities of the average american.
And yet, people who don't trust the census and refuse to answer unnecessary questions are considered nutters, even with relatively recent historical evidence that the government can't be trusted.
Have you seen or heard how (some/most?) illegal aliens are detained, today? The main difference between that and concentration camps is the illegals have good chance of relatively short stay.
I heard some people talk about the 9/11 thing, but I have not been able to find a good article that describes the hole thing, so I only know bits and pieces.
It's amazing how much American law enforcement has changed in the last 70 years. It's the most interesting part of this article IMO. When something like this happens today they serve a no-knock warrant and shoot the kid's dog (well, after shooting the neighbor's dog because they got the wrong house). Zero-tolerance and all.
[+] [-] eob|16 years ago|reply
That sentence perfectly sums up my experience with the security clearance process and demonstrates clearly how broken it is.
[+] [-] hga|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] chr15|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Sukotto|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] trop|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hga|16 years ago|reply
Note also the author is an example of "oh, that's easy" WRT to the programming required to fix the real problem. I can well believe it was worth their while trying to get him to change his official race instead of trying to modify a program when no one on their IT staff was familiar with it and he was the only exception (so far).
Note WRT to Linus Pauling, a) he was indeed an inspiring chemist (his books are still very useful) and is considered to be the best of the 20th century. b) He was also willing Communist/Soviet tool.
[+] [-] noonespecial|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ericlavigne|16 years ago|reply
http://yarchive.net/risks/mongrel.html
"The lesson was clear: if you want a clearance in a hurry, put something on your history form that will make the investigators suspicious but that is not damning. They get so many dull backgrounds to check that they relish the possibility of actually nailing someone. By being a bit provocative, you draw priority attention and quicker service."
[+] [-] Alex3917|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bonzoesc|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] chr15|16 years ago|reply
For example, say John has a drug addiction, but he failed to disclose this on his application. He is eventually granted the clearance, but now he has to keep this secret for the rest of his life. Someone could easily blackmail him for secret government information. If he is caught lying, his clearance will be revoked and he will lose his job, and more than likely he will never be hired for a position that requires a clearance ever again (many US gov't jobs require a clearance).
Honesty is a sign of your loyalty to the U.S. Depending on the type of clearance, you are sometimes required to take multiple polygraph tests, and you will more than likely be caught lying.
Author did the right thing by being truthful.
See http://www.rjhresearch.com/ADR/index.htm for more information.
[+] [-] jugtfghjkuhyg|16 years ago|reply
Do you answer, yes - the bags have been unattended in the cupboard for most of the year, and on the incoming flight and my company gave me this laptop to carry on?
Incidentally if you fly El-Al they do ask you if you were given a new laptop for this trip and even if it has been out for repair since you knew you were taking this trip.
[+] [-] jrockway|16 years ago|reply
The market is clearly not efficient.
[+] [-] rdtsc|16 years ago|reply
I would say that knowing how to lie well is a big factor in the clearance process. Being too honest can hurt you as we read in the article.
> Honesty is a sign of your loyalty to US.
That is why one should appear to be honest if they want to appear to be loyal.
As far as polygraph tests -- they only work if those who administer convince you that they work.
[+] [-] bkrausz|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jws|16 years ago|reply
Have you ever used or abused <<giant list of drugs, chemicals, and substances that goes on for a good 2 inch tall paragraph in small type>>, or glue?
Right there at the end… glue. I had to confess that I not only used glue on a regular basis, but I had just showed my preschool daughter how to use glue and we had a grand time using glue together.
In a decision to pain logicians everywhere the agent deemed that my "use of glue" was not "use of glue".
[+] [-] avar|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ck2|16 years ago|reply
We almost went there again with arabic Americans after 9/11 via census data.
[+] [-] brown9-2|16 years ago|reply
"Concentration camp" is the most controversial descriptor of the camps. This term is criticized for suggesting that the Japanese American experience was analogous to the Holocaust and the Nazi concentration camps.[90] For this reason, National Park Service officials have attempted to avoid the term.[88] Franklin D. Roosevelt, Dwight D. Eisenhower and Secretary of the Interior Harold L. Ickes each referred to the American camps as "concentration camps," at the time.[91] When the nature of the Nazi concentration camps became clear to the world, and the phrase "concentration camp" came to signify a Nazi death camp, most historians turned to other terms to describe Japanese internment.
[+] [-] olefoo|16 years ago|reply
What do you think the Maher Arar case was about? And that was just the tip of the iceberg. As a nation we have decided that lawlessness and torture are alright if they are inflicted on suspected terrorists. The continued public silence on this issue does not speak well of the moral qualities of the average american.
[+] [-] DavidSJ|16 years ago|reply
Can you source this, please? I don't recall this being suggested by anyone serious.
[+] [-] amh|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kilps|16 years ago|reply
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_American_internment
[+] [-] Dobbs|16 years ago|reply
That would be within the last 6-8 years if you are curious.
[+] [-] njharman|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Hoff|16 years ago|reply
http://sundown.afro.illinois.edu/liesmyteachertoldme.php
Worthy read.
[+] [-] tomjen3|16 years ago|reply
Does anybody know where I can learn more?
[+] [-] wglb|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] raintrees|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bluedanieru|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ars|16 years ago|reply
In the real world that doesn't much happen.