Originally posted by anathema777
Bottom line is that those scientists most likely were killed for the following reasons which when examined it becomes clear as to why they were
1. They worked on Top Secret Defense Programs
2. Fear of them divulging said info to the public
3. Possibility of a foreign country using them to replicate said technology
4. Bottim line they must destroy any avenue of said info or tech getting out into the world weather by word of mouth or by replication of the tech
I know these are time-honored movie themes, which are patently bogus. I work in this sort of industry. No, I can't send you to a webpage that proves
it. So I'll try to explain it.
1) There are a LOT of people with TS or TS/SCI clearances of various levels, or DOE clearances of similar rank. I've had both. I no longer have Q
clearance because I don't work for DOE any more and haven't for some time. But I do have an SCI single scope at present. Depending on what you're
working on that can get jacked up to a poly.
I'm not that unique. I can tell you that there are other active posters on here that do as well, or have in the past. Given who the Amigos say visit,
we're way outnumbered by the visitors who lurk. According to DNI
, in 2010 about
667,000 people had TS, SCI or Q clearances. Every year, about 200,000 downgrade and about 220,000 more are cleared. That's not unusual either - you
can get there the hard way by losing it to a major derog, but mostly you complete the project, don't start another at that clearance level, and
shortly you downgrade to match the new requirement. Or you quit. Either way, it doesn't last forever. Heck, DOE bounces them up and down like jumping
beans - it's not unheard of for your sigma level to bounce up and down every few months. You see guys at LANL looking at their badges and saying "what
am I this week - hang on".
These people all have that level clearance because the job requires it at some level. Grant you, most of the 'secret', 'restricted' and 'confidential'
stuff I see is totally boring #. Someone gets off on classifying the damndest things. Then they don't classify other bits of info that are total
giveaways. Go figure. I have a declassed mechanical drawing of a screwdriver in a frame in the hall. Why was that ever secret? Beats me. Then you get
Ken Edwards running a freaking think tank traveling show the focus of which was "What would you do with [x]", which is maybe the biggest SCI/SAP EVAR
and he gets a slap on the wrist and a commendation for original thinking.
I've even got on my bookshelf (and I guess I could get in trouble for it - come get me coppers!) a restricted Army FM on how to PT new boots at boot
camp. At least in that case I can see why - if you knew the "secrets of the drill sergeant" you could conceivably increase your ability to screw off
and get away with it.
But by far, most of the stuff you see is just like that. There may be a good reason for it - for example, SERE-C is secret, you can't discuss it. That
makes sense - part of SERE-C is that you can't prepare for it. If you did, it wouldn't teach you anything. Then you've got secret screwdrivers. No one
says they have to be logical, I guess.
Once you get to TS, especially TS with SCI (or for DOE add on a sigma level above a certain point), you get into "knowing too much". I don't know too
many SCIs that weren't on for a good reason, some more good than others. There's hundreds of thousands of those guys current every year. And hundreds
of thousands moving onto and off of the list, often repeatedly as your job scope changes.
All those guys, depending on your point of view, probably "know too much" in bad movie parlance. The whole point of SCI is to keep you from knowing
TOO much. But depending on your job, that likely doesn't really work all that well when you really get down to it. A lot of places, you can't corral
knowledge all that tightly, because you sort of have to understand the whole thing to do anything.
edit on 6-7-2012 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)