Revoke my security clearance, too, Mr. President

The Washington Post ^ | 8/16/2018 | William H. McRaven

[Shethink13]

See my post 34. Serving the government may include being a contractor. Consider my post. Like all other resources, we need a healthy pool of cleared people who want to continue to contribute to the nation, even if they are no longer in uniform.

Why does a contractor need security clearance? Not being sarcastic, just would really like to know. Why would a contractor need to have access to top secret intelligence?

[mad_as_he$$]

Roger that.

[cynwoody]

Why does a contractor need security clearance?

Ask Eddie from Security. He was a contractor.

[trebb]

Most keep the clearances until they naturally expire - lack of need to know means access is removed and under normal conditions a person is "read out" and signs another set of non-disclosure forms that spell out the potential punishments for trying to gain access to unauthorized info or to spill the beans about anything they learned while on the job..

Many enlisted/civilian employees with clearances end up moving to contractor type jobs that also require a clearance - if it has been under a certain time frame since the last investigation for the current clearance, it can be "turned back on" w/o overloading the investigative folks who, for many years were understaffed which caused a lot of other problems.

IOW - there is valid reason to leave the clearance intact and just let it expire naturally while removing access.

[Magnum44]

That’s a fair question. The answer is there are hundreds of defense contractors (ie Boeing, Lockheed, General Dynamics, Raytheon, Sperry, etc,etc) who employ thousands of workers on defense contracts developing and supporting all sorts of military systems that require clearances because either the system itself is classified or the data it handles is classified. It’s not all about the raw intel you think of in spy stories. It’s about protecting the systems and information that give us the edge against our adversaries. Hope this answers your question.

[TangledUpInBlue]

I’ll go against the trend here. I have a close friend who knows Admiral McRaven personally. The man is a life long SEAL with a reputation beyond reproach.

I don’t think we should take his dissatisfaction with this precedent very lightly. One is still free to disagree around here right? Or is it fine as long as we don’t post about it?

I don’t think this is a very good thing to see at all.

[TangledUpInBlue]

Front page Yahoo

[Trump Girl Kit Cat]

This is EXACTLY what should happen you leave your government job and you NO LONGER have a security clearance, NO EXCEPTIONS, this means EVERYONE!!! Someone on one of the shows the other night I think it was Joe Digeniva said there are 4 million people out there STILL HOLDING their clearances I am FLABERGASTED!!! If these folks leave the government to work for a government contractor the NEW employer should be responsible for them getting a NEW clearance!!! What in the HELL is so difficult to understand about this, seems like simple common sense to me AND MANY OTHERS!!!

[Excuse_My_Bellicosity]

By saying this, the admiral is showing that he shouldn’t have a clearance. It would be a real shame if something were to happen to it.

You made your rank, retired, and you’ve got your cushy contractor job. It’s time to shut your ass up and don’t push your luck, Shirley.

[Excuse_My_Bellicosity]

I guess that’s the contractor job he got after the military. This guy is one who needs to be sentenced to restaurant busboy and dishwasher for a grouchy restaurant owner, he’s clearly forgotten where he came from.