Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 76

Thread: Swinging general slipped past security screeners

  1. #21
    Senior Member Rainmaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    on a Marl Road
    Posts
    3,883
    Mentioned
    39 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mjölnir View Post

    BT BT

    So the mistress met him when he was a LTC, thought he was cute and emailed everyone in the global directory with his name to find him ...

    C.R.A.Z.Y.


    Quote Originally Posted by sandsjames View Post
    hate to invoke this phrase, but we are required to teach "Risk Management" to our students on a daily basis.
    Last edited by Rainmaker; 08-30-2016 at 05:08 PM.

  2. #22
    Senior Member Rainmaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    on a Marl Road
    Posts
    3,883
    Mentioned
    39 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by sandsjames View Post
    "punk" is a great term. It makes me think of Clint Eastwood, who was the lead actor in "Gran Torino". He was a bigoted old white guy who constantly shouted racist slurs. Coincidence? I think not.
    As you may recall, that was the Original Rainmaker Avatar. We switched it up for the election cycle.

  3. #23
    Banned sandsjames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    6,984
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Rainmaker View Post
    As you may recall, that was the Original Rainmaker Avatar. We switched it up for the election cycle.
    I don't recall. I'm not that interested in what you do to pay attention.

  4. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Columbus, ohio
    Posts
    3,337
    Mentioned
    29 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bos Mutus View Post
    Circular logic.

    Q. Why does kinky sex pose a security risk?

    A. Because the member may be blackmailed

    Q. Why could the member be blackmailed?

    A. Because if found out, he could lose his career, job, etc.

    Q. Why would he lose his career, job, etc?

    A. Because it's a security risk.

    Repeat.
    No different than
    Why does having a gambling debt pose a security risk?
    Cause someone could be bribed or blackmailed into doing wrong stuff
    Why could said member be blackmailed or bribed?
    Cause if his debts got out his career is in jeopardy
    Why could his career be in jeopardy?
    Because its against the rules and is a security risk..

  5. #25
    Senior Member Rainmaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    on a Marl Road
    Posts
    3,883
    Mentioned
    39 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by sandsjames View Post
    I don't recall. I'm not that interested in what you do to pay attention.
    Well , You don't exactly have a keen eye for the obvious. Do you?
    Last edited by Rainmaker; 08-30-2016 at 05:33 PM.

  6. #26
    Banned sandsjames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    6,984
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Rainmaker View Post
    Well , You don't exactly have a keen eye for the obvious. Do you?
    What was my prior avatar?

  7. #27
    Senior Member Bos Mutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,575
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by garhkal View Post
    No different than
    Why does having a gambling debt pose a security risk?
    Cause someone could be bribed or blackmailed into doing wrong stuff
    Why could said member be blackmailed or bribed?
    Cause if his debts got out his career is in jeopardy
    Why could his career be in jeopardy?
    Because its against the rules and is a security risk..
    Being in debt over your head has repercussions in and of itself...could lose your house, your car, etc. It's not that it's against the rules to be in debt...it's that the member may be losing control of it and there be a financial incentive. Of course, having some debt that is manageable does not pose the degree of risk.... The risk is not so much blackmail or extortion, but simple financial payment. It's not "Hey, we'll expose that in debt if you don't give us secrets...and you might lose your clearance once the Army finds out you have debt", as it is "Hey, we'll take care of that debt if you give us secrets."

    Enjoying kinky sex in and of itself does not have those kinds of repercussion...now, if it's secretive and spiraling out of control...maybe, but no indication of that in this article...just the fact that the Gen. did some swinging with a girlfriend. I'm finding it likely his wife knew about it after 11 years...who knows. So, in the people calling this a risk of blackmail are also the ones who are creating the risk of blackmail.

    This is similar to the pre-DADT thing, I suppose. One of reasons for banning gays was that they could be blackmailed or risk lose everything...but, if you're the one threatening them with losing everything, you're creating the incentive to blackmail.
    The Voice of Reason

  8. #28
    Banned sandsjames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    6,984
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bos Mutus View Post
    Being in debt over your head has repercussions in and of itself...could lose your house, your car, etc. It's not that it's against the rules to be in debt...it's that the member may be losing control of it and there be a financial incentive. Of course, having some debt that is manageable does not pose the degree of risk.... The risk is not so much blackmail or extortion, but simple financial payment. It's not "Hey, we'll expose that in debt if you don't give us secrets...and you might lose your clearance once the Army finds out you have debt", as it is "Hey, we'll take care of that debt if you give us secrets."

    Enjoying kinky sex in and of itself does not have those kinds of repercussion...now, if it's secretive and spiraling out of control...maybe, but no indication of that in this article...just the fact that the Gen. did some swinging with a girlfriend. I'm finding it likely his wife knew about it after 11 years...who knows. So, in the people calling this a risk of blackmail are also the ones who are creating the risk of blackmail.

    This is similar to the pre-DADT thing, I suppose. One of reasons for banning gays was that they could be blackmailed or risk lose everything...but, if you're the one threatening them with losing everything, you're creating the incentive to blackmail.
    It wasn't the "kinky sex", as you keep saying, that is the issue; at least that's not what I'm getting from it. It's the affair itself which, by the way, still violates policy, doesn't it?

  9. #29
    Senior Member Bos Mutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,575
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by sandsjames View Post
    It wasn't the "kinky sex", as you keep saying, that is the issue; at least that's not what I'm getting from it. It's the affair itself which, by the way, still violates policy, doesn't it?
    Yes, it violates policy, I suppose...I'm saying I'm not convinced it should necessarily violate policy.
    The Voice of Reason

  10. #30
    Banned sandsjames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    6,984
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bos Mutus View Post
    Yes, it violates policy, I suppose...I'm saying I'm not convinced it should necessarily violate policy.
    That what shouldn't? Having an affair? It goes a long way towards detriment to good order and discipline. What happens when a guy hooks up with his coworkers wife, etc? It's not good for business, so there is a blanket policy. I'm really surprised that this view is coming from you. I'm sure, in the positions you've held, you've seen things become a serious pain in the ass and have an impact on the work center/unit.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •