Jamie Bowden wrote:
Hey now...the time from zero to TS/SCI has gone from over half a decade to a
mere quarter decade. You can totally pay these guys to sit around doing drudge
work while their skills atrophy in the interim. Of course, if you need a poly
on top, add some more time and stir continually while applying heat.
I didn't know what TS/SCI exactly stood for. So I did some thorough
research (read: wikipedia, so if I am wrong please correct me :-) and I
found this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._security_clearance_terms#SCI_eligibility
"In general, employees do not publish the individual compartments for
which they are cleared. While this information is not classified,
specific compartment listings may reveal sensitive information when
correlated with an individual's resume. Therefore, it is sufficient to
declare that a candidate possesses a TS/SCI clearance with a polygraph."
That sparked my interest. Did I miss something? One can lie about TS/CSI
clearance and be believed as long as one can fool a lie detector? How
safe is that? That strikes me as a bit odd.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygraph#Validity
"Polygraphy has little credibility among scientists.[22][23] Despite
claims of 90-95% validity by polygraph advocates, and 95-100% by
businesses providing polygraph services,[non-primary source needed]
critics maintain that rather than a "test", the method amounts to an
inherently unstandardizable interrogation technique whose accuracy
cannot be established"
--
Earthquake Magnitude: 4.7
Date: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 23:18:51 UTC
Location: Iran-Iraq border region
Latitude: 32.4895; Longitude: 47.1147
Depth: 10.20 km
