FROM THE DESK OF CLEARANCEJOBS.COM
1. Buzz kill. Editor Lindy Kyzer explains, “Let’s just assume you’re smart enough to accept that using recreational drugs is a bad idea if you have or would like to get a security clearance. . . . For a public trust or secret security clearance, your investigation won’t dig much beyond your legal and credit background and listed references. But if you are obtaining a top secret security clearance, investigators will need to speak with you, as well as your friends. . . . if your inner circle includes frequent drug users you’ll want to outline that relationship and consider separating yourself from it.”
2. He has a great personality! Contributor Jillian Hamilton explains, “It is important to determine whether or not a candidate is a good fit for the organization or for a client. Especially when filling positions for the client site, it is vital to remember that the employees are the daily reminder of the organization’s brand. The wrong employee interacting with a client eight hours a day, five days a week can be the difference between winning or losing the recompete. . . . It is not bad to administer personality tests, but pay attention to the type of test and how it is administered. Some organizations have not carefully selected or properly administered personality tests, which has opened up the potential for a discrimination lawsuit.”
THE FORCE AND THE FIGHT
1. China’s tech edging U.S. military superiority. JapanTimes.Com.JP reports, “China poses an increasing challenge to the U.S. military’s technological edge while budget pressures are hampering Washington’s effort to stay ahead, a senior defense official warned Tuesday. Frank Kendall, the Pentagon’s chief weapons buyer, told U.S. lawmakers that when it comes to ‘technological superiority, the Department of Defense is being challenged in ways that I have not seen for decades, particularly in the Asia-Pacific region.’ Citing China’s major investments in anti-ship missiles, stealth fighter jets, hypersonic vehicles and other high-tech weaponry, Kendall said the United States could lose its dominant position if it failed to respond to the altered strategic landscape.”
2. Back in the game: U.S. aid to Syrian rebels resumes. WashingtonPost.Com’s Anne Gearan reports, “The Obama administration confirmed Wednesday that it has resumed delivery of nonlethal aid and equipment to rebel-held areas of Syria that had been suspended when Islamist forces raided a U.S. warehouse last year. Ambulances, garbage trucks, generators, school supplies and office equipment, among other items, are being delivered to civilian local governments and charity groups, State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said.” Also, “Syrian Government Has Razed Neighborhoods” and “Assad troops deliberately destroy Syria homes.”
3. Afghanistan – not to be trusted. NYTimes.Com’s Matthew Rosenberg and Azam Ahmed report, “With billions of dollars in American aid increasingly flowing straight into Afghan government coffers, the United States hired two global auditing firms three years ago to determine whether Afghanistan could be trusted to safeguard the money. The findings were so dire that American officials fought to keep them private. But the money has continued to flow, despite warnings from the auditors that none of the 16 Afghan ministries could be counted on to keep the funds from being stolen or wasted. . . . The problems unearthed by the auditors are detailed in a report . . . by the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction . . . .” Read all 243 pages of SIGAR’s Report. Also, “Influential cleric supporting Afghan Taliban shot dead in Pakistan.”
4. el Sissi – Egypt’s new Nasser. AP’s Maggie Michael and Lee Keath report from Cairo, “Unknown only two years ago, the head of Egypt’s military, Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi, is riding on a wave of popular fervor that is almost certain to carry him to election as president. Many Egyptians now hail him as the nation’s savior after he ousted the Islamists from power and as the only figure strong enough to lead. Still, if he becomes president, el-Sissi runs enormous risks. His presidency would enmesh the military even deeper into politics, putting the credibility of the powerful institution on the line if he fails to resolve the country’s woes. . . . Many el-Sissi fans tout him as a new Gamal Abdel-Nasser, who rose to the presidency after the 1952 coup that toppled the monarchy and became a charismatic strongman, inspiring the nation with grand projects like the building of the Aswan High Dam and his vision of Arab nationalism.”
5. Nuclear medicine. American Forces Press Service’s Jim Garamone reports, “Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel met with the leaders of the Defense Department’s nuclear enterprise today to discuss the health of the force. . . . Hagel called the meeting after revelations that 34 Air Force missile officers were implicated in cheating on qualification tests at Malmstrom Air Force Base, Mont, or knew about the cheating and did not report it. The number of officers being investigated has risen . . . .”
CONTRACT WATCH
1. Boeing’s $87 billion year. DoDBuzz.Com’s Brendan McGarry reports, “The Chicago-based firm said it had $86.6 billion in revenue in 2013, a 6 percent increase from 2012, on sales of commercial aircraft such as the 737 MAX and 787–9 and military equipment such as the KC-46A tanker and the P-8 maritime patrol aircraft. Profit also increased 20 percent to a record $7.07 earnings per share, it said. ‘2013 was a very successful year for Boeing,’ Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Jim McNerney said . . . . He also downplayed recent management changes at the company and said he doesn’t plan to step down. ‘I’m not planning on retiring anytime soon,’ he said.” DefenseNews.Com counters, “Boeing Profits Surge But Tougher 2014 Awaits.”
2. Cyber-secure acquisition – GSA’s 6 recommendations. FederalTimes.Com’s Nicole Blake Johnson reports, “A report released on Jan. 29 lays out six recommendations for incorporating security standards into the government’s acquisition process, including one that would ensure agencies do business only with companies that meet baseline security standards. Last February, President Obama tasked the General Services Administration and Defense Department with providing recommendations on the feasibility, security benefits and merits of aligning cybersecurity standards with the acquisition process. The executive order also called on the agencies to provide steps for making consistent the existing cyber-related requirements for procurement.” Read GSA’s Press Release. Read the report: “Improving Cybersecurity and Resilience through Acquisition.”
3. Booz Allen gets Stone. GovConWire.Com reports, “Richard Stone, a retired Army Reserve major general and a former director for medical operations at the Defense Health Agency, has been named a principal at Booz Allen Hamilton (NYSE: BAH). The 23-year military veteran officially joined Booz Allen on Jan. 21 and is responsible for advising customers on healthcare transactions in the defense, civil and industrial markets, Booz Allen said Thursday. ‘General Stone is a recognized leader in both patient care and medical administration, in both the military and civilian settings,’ said Judi Dotson, Booz Allen’s executive vice president.”
TECH, PRIVACY, & SECRECY
1. Snowden-rooted law suit on the docket. AP’s Donna Bryson reports, “Using evidence obtained under the National Security Agency’s warrantless surveillance program would violate a terror suspect’s constitutional protection against unreasonable search and seizure, the suspect argued Wednesday in a court document filed with help from the American Civil Liberties Union. In the motion filed in federal court in Denver, Jamshid Muhtorov also requested that prosecutors disclose more about how the surveillance law was used in his case. Muhtorov denies the terror charges he faces.”
2. No, they’re serious. DefenseOne.Com contributor Dustin Volz reports (with a straight face), “The National Security Agency has tapped a senior official within the Homeland Security Department to serve as its inaugural civil-liberties and privacy officer, NSA chief Keith Alexander announced Wednesday. Rebecca Richards worked as the director of privacy compliance at DHS and has been with the department since 2004, according to her LinkedIn page. In her role she will ‘serve as the primary adviser to the Director of NSA for ensuring that privacy is protected and civil liberties are maintained by all of NSA’s missions, programs, policies and technologies,’ according to the agency’s official job listing posted in September.”
3. Give it back! TheHill.Com’s Rebecca Shabad reports, “The United States’ director of national intelligence (DNI) on Wednesday called for Edward Snowden’s ‘accomplices’ to return the government documents they obtained from him. DNI Director James Clapper’s use of the term accomplices had many wondering if he was referring to the journalists who have published stories revealing Snowden’s secrets. Tensions between the press and government have intensified in both the U.S. and Great Britain over the publication of stories based on Snowden’s leaks. . . . Clapper did not say what he meant by accomplices, but DNI public affairs director Shawn Turner told The Hill that Clapper was referring to ‘anyone who is assisting Edward Snowden to further threaten our national security through the unauthorized disclosure of stolen documents related to lawful foreign intelligence collection programs.’”
POTOMAC TWO-STEP
1. Brother Grimm: “Rep. Michael Grimm (R-N.Y.) apologized Wednesday to the NY1 News reporter he physically threatened after the State of the Union address. ‘I was wrong. I shouldn’t have allowed my emotions to get the better of me and lose my cool. . . . Grimm became upset after Scotto asked him to comment on new revelations that have surfaced in the ethics investigation into his campaign finances. The two had already discussed the State of the Union address. . . . ‘Let me be clear to you: If you ever do that to me again, I’ll throw you off this f—ing balcony,” Grimm said to Scotto. Scotto replied that he had asked a ‘valid question,’ but the congressman said ‘I’ll break you in half.’”
2. Ruh-Roh: “Republicans reacted warily to President Obama’s declaration Tuesday night that he planned to act unilaterally to move his agenda if Congress is unwilling to go along with him. The GOP took Obama’s words as such a significant threat that it overshadowed other areas where the two parties have acknowledged they could perhaps work together on the agenda the president outlined in his State of the Union address, including tax reform, a plan to promote the use of natural gas, a job training proposal and pension reform. Instead, most GOP lawmakers emerged from the chamber focused on Obama’s promise to move his agenda ‘without legislation,’ if necessary.” Ruh-Roh.
OPINIONS EVERYONE HAS
1. “North Korea’s ‘peace offensive’: How should South Korea respond?” Aljazeera.Com’s Nile Bowie argues, “Pyongyang’s overtures can easily be written off as part of a cycle that begins with conciliatory rhetoric and ends in threats and provocation, but in order to move past the decades-long adversarial status quo, a greater degree of pragmatism, problem solving and engagement is needed. The legitimate grievances of both sides must be taken into account in such a process, as well as a willingness to put preconditions and moralising judgements aside to more effectively and straightforwardly engage in dialogue.”
2. “Less is Less in Foreign Policy.” USNews.Com’s Evan Moore argues, “During his State of the Union address Tuesday evening, President Obama said very little that was new on foreign policy. That is unfortunate because, in his sixth year in office, many of his foreign policy choices are having disconcerting repercussions that he likely did not anticipate. Time still remains for the commander in chief to change course, but doing so will require that he adopt a new national security agenda.”
3. “The State of the Union’s Most Despicable Moment.” Time contributor Nick Gillespie argues, “The government under Republican and Democratic presidents has spent virtually the entire 21st century sending young men and women to fight in ill-defined and unsuccessful elective wars. That’s bad enough, but then to use them as props in political speeches? That’s positively obscene. . . . There is no more serious decision that a government makes than to send its citizens a war. And there is nothing more disturbing than a president using soldiers’ sacrifices as a way of selling a grab-bag of domestic policy agenda items.”
THE FUNNIES
1. Friday’s coming.
