Image-In

FROM THE DESK OF CLEARANCEJOBS.COM

1.  Call me crazy, but . . . .  Lindy Kyzer explains, “While you are required to give approval for a security clearance investigator to contact your doctor, you will not likely have to disclose your full medical records, unless issues arise during the investigation.”  Also see, “Mental Health and Final Security Clearances,” by William Henderson.

2.  Too talented (my problem).  Erica Wonn warns, “Overqualified candidates tend to make some employers squeamish about taking on an employee that is seemingly too talented.”

3.  Deep dive.  Marc Selinger reports, “The U.S. Navy needs to proceed with replacing its aging fleet of Ohio-class ballistic missile submarines even though the Department of Defense faces ‘significant budget pressures,’ according to the head of U.S. Strategic Command.”

4.  Why do you ask?  “Is the Security Clearance Investigation Process Broken?”  Senator Claire McCaskill fires, “the security clearance investigations process costs over $1 billion annually, yet is ‘fraught with abuse.’”  Lindy Kyzer reports on Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee’s security clearance investigation process hearings:  “McCaskill ended the hearing by questioning why the U.S. government paid $252 million in Fiscal Year 2012 to obtain security clearances for contractors.”   (More on McCaskill, below, in Potomac Two-Step #2, below.)

THE FORCE AND THE FIGHT

1.  The party’s over.  In a detailed examination, Donna Miles of the American Forces Press Service studies “the largest logistical drawdown since World War II”: challenging geography, ongoing security threats, risky weather – complications that often mean “shipping it home costs more than it’s worth.”  Also see, “Before Pullout, A Scrap Project,” featured in Thursday’s Daily Intelligence and on the now famous (among troops) Manas, “Kyrgyzstan Votes To Close US Base In 2014.”

2.  Radio silence.  Focusing on MEDEVAC, US News’ Paul D. Shinkman explains how Afghan National Security Forces’ reliance on allied enablers will start to hurt:  “The fledgling Afghan security forces have enjoyed knowing for more than a decade that an allied helicopter is only a radio call away. But when the U.S. pulls most of its forces from Afghanistan in the coming months, those calls will increasingly go unanswered.”  For more, also see Shinkman’s report, “Afghans Take on Country’s Security While U.S. Takes Down Bases.”

3.  Bowe knows home.  Nate Rawlings, Time, continues his story on Bowe and the Bergdahl family:  “For now, Bowe’s fate remains in limbo, but there have been optimistic developments. Earlier this month, the Bergdahls received a handwritten letter through the International Committee of the Red Cross. According to Colonel Tim Marsano, the public-affairs officer for the Idaho National Guard, Bowe’s parents were very confident it was written by their son. . . . As they wait for new negotiations to start, the Bergdahl family undoubtedly hopes that this time, the political calculus will offer a different resolution, one that will eventually bring their son home.”

CONTRACT WATCH

1.  Off with their heads!  Washington Post’s Tim Craig reports, “U.S. and other foreign contractors owe Afghan workers and companies potentially tens of millions of dollars, heightening security risks for Westerners living and working in Afghanistan, according to a government report released Thursday. . . . a growing number of Afghan subcontractors are threatening street justice.”  Also see Government Executive’s “Federal Contractors Failing to Pay Afghan Subcontractors.”

2.  Cap it:  reimbursement for reimbursables.  Charles S. Clark at Government Exec tracks GAO’s math:  “The Government Accountability Office on Wednesday released results of a study of 27 major contractors showing that capping the reimbursement rate for reimbursable contractor salaries at the level of the president ($400,000) — a rate proposed recently by the Office of Management and Budget — would save the government $180 million per year, and setting the cap at the vice president’s salary ($230,700) would save at least $440 million per year. . . . ‘This stunning GAO report shows that thousands of government contractors are raking in taxpayer-funded salaries that are significantly more than what the vice president of the United States and members of the president’s Cabinet make . . . .’”

3.  Public vs PrivateBooz Allen Hamilton reps outline the real and practical differences between government and industry:  “Agencies and Congress not only must be cognizant of these differences, but they also must have a strategy for managing them. It’s not so much a matter of government’s unique objectives, processes or expected results, but rather the context. Sometimes this complexity presents challenges, but it also can be positive.”

TECH, PRIVACY, & SECRECY

1.  Some are surprised.  “The United States has filed espionage charges against Edward Snowden, a former U.S. National Security Agency contractor who admitted revealing secret surveillance programs to media outlets, according to a court document made public on Friday,” report Reuters Tabassum Zakaria and Mark Hosenball in an excellent rollup of developments so far.  Also see, “Snowden’s Resumé Raised Questions, but Booz Allen Hired Him Anyway.”

2.  Friend me.  “Facebook Inc has inadvertently exposed 6 million users’ phone numbers and email addresses to unauthorized viewers over the past year, the world’s largest social networking company disclosed late Friday,” reports Gerry Shih in San Francisco.

3.  Creating monstersTime’s Courtney Subramanian points out, “Even as officials criticize Snowden, they’re encouraging programmers with similar skill sets”:  “in March, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) head Janet Napolitano also set out to recruit an army of high school- and college-aged ‘cyber warriors’—most of whom would otherwise be drawn to the private sector—to help the National Security Agency. It’s also why both the NSA and the Department of Homeland Security routinely sponsor ‘capture the flag’-style hacking competitions, encouraging programmers to break into secure systems to test their reliability.”

POTOMAC TWO-STEP

1.  He didn’t just say that, did he?  Reuters reports, “U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel has expressed regret to an Indian-born college professor for jokingly asking, ‘you’re not a member of the Taliban, are you?’ seconds before the professor rose to ask a question. . . . Hagel’s spokesman said the joke was not directed at anyone in particular.”

2.  McCaskill’s crosshairs:  DanzigL.A. Times’ David Williams reports, “In letters sent this week to the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security, Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) noted that Danzig wrote in a 2003 Pentagon-funded report that a drug to combat antibiotic-resistant anthrax should be produced ‘as soon as possible’ and that stockpiling such a product would deter a biological attack.  Danzig served then and for the next decade as a consultant to both federal departments — and as a member of the board of directors of Human Genome Sciences Inc., a company that was developing such an anthrax drug.”

OPINIONS EVERYONE HAS

1.  An Afghan wayGuardian editorial well-argues, “If there is to be an end to this war, it has to be brought about by Afghans dealing with each other”:  “One thing should concentrate the minds of parties to the peace talks announced by the Taliban on Tuesday: the very real prospect of the reprise of the civil war in Afghanistan if they fail. The stakes are so high that every symbol matters. That any diplomat, US or Qatari, whose stock in trade is protocol, should have allowed the Taliban to raise their flag in front of a sign declaring the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, appearing as the government in exile, and not expect a reaction from the head of state of the country the US has spent so much effort in buttressing, stretches credulity. For once, Hamid Karzai was not being quixotic in his fury at his chief ally; he was representing what many Afghans felt seeing those pictures. Sacrificing little of substance, the Taliban had been handed a propaganda coup on a plate.”

2.  Meager success, maybe.  In National Journal, Mike Hirsh examines POTUS’ tightrope as Afghanistan winds down: “after the American and NATO withdrawal of most combat troops at the end of 2014, the country could hold together after all, even with a minimal U.S./NATO presence. And that the U.S.-led ‘counterinsurgency’ scheme could see some meager success after all. The Taliban’s fitful willingness to talk would appear to bear out claims from senior Afghan officials that I heard during a trip to Afghanistan in May: that the Taliban are ‘confused’ about their goals, beset with worries about whether they can sustain a successful ‘spring offensive,’ and second-guessing themselves about the wisdom of fighting Afghan forces directly, as opposed to ‘foreign occupiers’ — the U.S. and NATO.”

3.  Proliferation of proliferationWall Street Journal predicts, “The legacy of the President who dreams of nuclear disarmament is likely to be a world with far more weapons and more nuclear powers.”

4.  BFFs strained.  “Obama And Kerry Fail To Mask Foreign Policy Strains,” writes Financial Times:  “after five months in office, it is becoming clearer that the principal dividing line in the Obama administration’s foreign policy, from Syria to the Israel-Palestinian peace process, is between the president and Mr Kerry.”

THE FUNNIES

1.  Fairy tales.

2.  Drone-inator.

3.  Invisible man.

4.  Peace talks.

Related News

Ed Ledford enjoys the most challenging, complex, and high stakes communications requirements. His portfolio includes everything from policy and strategy to poetry. A native of Asheville, N.C., and retired Army Aviator, Ed’s currently writing speeches in D.C. and working other writing projects from his office in Rockville, MD. He loves baseball and enjoys hiking, camping, and exploring anything. Follow Ed on Twitter @ECLedford.