Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 76

Thread: Swinging general slipped past security screeners

  1. #1
    Senior Member Bos Mutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,543
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)

    Swinging general slipped past security screeners


    WASHINGTON — The Pentagon’s failure to detect the extramarital affair and “swinger lifestyle” of a top general despite background checks that likely included polygraph tests exposes flaws in vetting those entrusted with the nation’s most sensitive national security secrets, according to experts and a top senator.

    The Army fired Maj. Gen. David Haight from his job overseeing operations at European Command earlier this year after investigators uncovered his double life. Haight’s post required him to have access to the military’s classified capabilities to thwart Russian aggression, and his double life would have put him at risk of being blackmailed, several senior officials have said.


    But Haight’s dark secret came to light only after the military received anonymous tips about his 11-year extramarital affair and other sexual escapades and began investigating in December. Officials entrusted with the most sensitive information undergo background checks and lie-detector tests every five years, meaning Haight passed at least two while he was having an affair.



    http://www.militarytimes.com/article...rity-screeners

    I'm not sure I buy the great security risk if a General has kinky sex...
    The Voice of Reason

  2. #2
    Banned sandsjames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    6,983
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bos Mutus View Post
    I'm not sure I buy the great security risk if a General has kinky sex...
    Anything that has a possibility of creating a blackmail/extortion type scenario is a security risk, especially for someone with those clearances.

  3. #3
    Administrator Mjölnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Annapolis, MD
    Posts
    2,897
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by sandsjames View Post
    Anything that has a possibility of creating a blackmail/extortion type scenario is a security risk, especially for someone with those clearances.
    This. Especially since his swinging partner wasn't his wife (I got the impression his wife was unaware) ... he susceptible to blackmail.

    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.
    The most important six inches on the battlefield ... is between your ears.

  4. #4
    Senior Member Bos Mutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,543
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by sandsjames View Post
    Anything that has a possibility of creating a blackmail/extortion type scenario is a security risk, especially for someone with those clearances.
    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.
    The Voice of Reason

  5. #5
    Banned sandsjames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    6,983
    Mentioned
    18 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.
    It may be circular, but it's very clear logic. And it's only circular if, as you did, one assumes his primary fear is losing his job and NOT his wife finding out.

    It's really no different then having gambling debts, etc, and that denying you a clearance.
    Last edited by sandsjames; 08-30-2016 at 02:59 PM.

  6. #6
    Senior Member Bos Mutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,543
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by sandsjames View Post
    It may be circular, but it's very clear logic.

    It's really no different then having gambling debts, etc, and that denying you a clearance.
    It's a little different. Not sure how the General managed to keep this a secret from his wife for 11 years...but, let's say it wasn't that big of a secret. Let's say, on a personal level, the General wasn't at all ashamed or embarrassed by his lifestyle...say he was an open swinger.

    Then what's the risk other than the fact that he could lose his job?

    Is the risk that he was a swinger or that he had a secret from his wife? If it's the latter...then there are probably a lot more people that pose grave security risks...if we fired them all there wouldn't be many left to do the job. If it is the former, then the only risk is that his employer thinks it's a risk.

    Debts I think are a little different...but, on the other hand, anyone who "likes money" could then be theoretically as big a security risk...whether it's to get out of debt or to store stockpiles of money...the love of money is the root of all evil! Do we now say anyone who would like a nicer car is a security risk?

    We could go on and on...but, I think my point is his security risk is theoretical at best...and unless there is any evidence that he would actually be blackmailed, or succumb to the blackmail, then I think this is a stretch. Everyone can potentially be extorted.
    Last edited by Bos Mutus; 08-30-2016 at 03:05 PM.
    The Voice of Reason

  7. #7
    Senior Member Rainmaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    on a Marl Road
    Posts
    3,876
    Mentioned
    39 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bos Mutus View Post
    We could go on and on...but, I think my point is his security risk is theoretical at best
    If this scumbag would be willing to cheat on his wife and lie about it for 11 years, what do you think he'd be willing to do to you?

  8. #8
    Banned sandsjames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    6,983
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bos Mutus View Post
    It's a little different. Not sure how the General managed to keep this a secret from his wife for 11 years...but, let's say it wasn't that big of a secret. Let's say, on a personal level, the General wasn't at all ashamed or embarrassed by his lifestyle...say he was an open swinger.

    Then what's the risk other than the fact that he could lose his job?
    This is a lot of hypotheticals, and the policy needs to be a blanket policy. There can't be gray areas with someone who deals with the stuff a General deals with.

    Is the risk that he was a swinger or that he had a secret from his wife?
    The risk is the secret, the threat of embarrassment.

    If it's the latter...then there are probably a lot more people that pose grave security risks...if we fired them all there wouldn't be many left to do the job. If it is the former, then the only risk is that his employer thinks it's a risk.
    Yes, his employer does think it's a risk. That same "employer" does a background check on my 80 year old mother-in-law because she's on my Facebook page and she's Canadian. Is she a risk?

    Debts I think are a little different...but, on the other hand, anyone who "likes money" could then be theoretically as big a security risk...whether it's to get out of debt or to store stockpiles of money...the love of money is the root of all evil! Do we now say anyone who would like a nicer car is a security risk?
    We are all potential risks.

    I don't think that a situation with adultery is any different than a situation with debts. Since you want to ask "what if", what if the General's real fear was his wife finding out, divorcing him, and taking half of his retirement? We know that the "employer" finding out isn't going to hurt him, other than forcing him to retire a few months before he planned on, so I think that the loss of career threat is gone. That just leaves the wife finding out. That's a lot of money...50% of a General's retirement isn't chump change...and that would definitely leave him open to blackmail.

    We could go on and on...but, I think my point is his security risk is theoretical at best...and unless there is any evidence that he would actually be blackmailed, or succumb to the blackmail, then I think this is a stretch. Everyone can potentially be extorted.[/QUOTE]

  9. #9
    Senior Member Bos Mutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,543
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by sandsjames View Post
    Yes, his employer does think it's a risk. That same "employer" does a background check on my 80 year old mother-in-law because she's on my Facebook page and she's Canadian. Is she a risk?

    We are all potential risks.
    Yes...that's the point, we are all potential risks. I would think being an online racist troll is a security risk, too....maybe moreso.

    I don't think that a situation with adultery is any different than a situation with debts. Since you want to ask "what if", what if the General's real fear was his wife finding out, divorcing him, and taking half of his retirement?
    ...there are many many people that would fall into that...again, this is my point. The swinger thing is super-salacious so easy to single out...but, when it comes down to it...there are a lot of secrets out there that most people would prefer do not see the light of day.

    We know that the "employer" finding out isn't going to hurt him, other than forcing him to retire a few months before he planned on, so I think that the loss of career threat is gone. That just leaves the wife finding out. That's a lot of money...50% of a General's retirement isn't chump change...and that would definitely leave him open to blackmail.
    So...just about every married person is a security risk.
    The Voice of Reason

  10. #10
    Senior Member Bos Mutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,543
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Rainmaker View Post
    If this scumbag would be willing to cheat on his wife and lie about it for 11 years, what do you think he'd be willing to do to you?
    If one spends 6+ hours a day positing racist slurs online...who knows what else they would do?
    The Voice of Reason

Posting Permissions

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