O RLY?
I'm with you until the part about not believing that this kind of nonsense is going on.
Ever hear of ACS? It was the biggest Lockmart program aside from Deepwater that the company gave any publicity to in the past two years. It was just canned a little while ago. Why? Because LM built a plane that couldn't fly due to the excessive weight requirements. Their people knew it, warned about it, and yet executive management kept saying that all was well to the rest of the program and the customer.
I am willing to bet that there was a customer acceptance of the risk, or a planned fix during the next spiral of development. That program is far too much of a public face for Lockheed to let something that simple go for long. That said, I can easily see where his frustrations with the company itself led to this (there is still not enough info on what happened to make a stong opinion IMHO). To say that the company is outmoded would be an understatement. Most of this guys complaints would have to go through his functional chain... which do not work on the program (and are often referred to as "short bus management" due to their incompetence). Not to be confused with program management, functional management are a group of managers... most of whom no project in their right mind would ever hire for a position. So what do these managers with little technical skill or comprehension do? Oh... just the little stuff, like control your salary, all of your promotions (you can't even get promoted or move to a new position without a program bending over for the demands of functional management), taking your complains if there is an issue or whistleblower event or an ethics issue. You know the "non-critical" aspect of your career. I mean, according to their own public documents, you can't even get a pager through them without having an executive VP review and sign-off on it. Instead of doing their jobs, you have an executive being paid 1M or more doing the work of an admin, just so they can put a tighter control on things. We had a term for that when I was in school... micromanagement
These are also the guys who managed to be singled out for the mind shattering levels of employee loss that the company is currently enjoying (45% in some facilities, 90%+ in some departments alone). I don't mean retiring, employee deaths, transfers, or the like. I mean, flat out leaving the company. It was bad enough that they had to publically admit that they are having "attrition workshops" (has a nice ring, eh?) to deal with the problem.
While we don't actually know for certain what has happened, I can probably make a fair guess that this guy was frustrated by the bureaucracy of the company. When your needs and concerns for every aspect of your job is in the hands of people you wouldn't hire as retail cashiers, it doesn't take much to push someone towards an action like this. Due to the contract requirements, the customer probably wasn't even allowed to talk with him and had to deal with the functional management. So you have a less than competent, non-technical person trying to relay to a customer rep a technical issue.
Considering all the factors, I can easily see the frustration that this person had with the company.
Well I was thinking of the half KG of radioactive material that was found at one of Iraqi universities.
Or the airplanes and converted missles that were found, but he and the UN said that he didn't have.
Or the last few pages of the Wilson report that stated that while that regime might not currently have the capacity for nuclear weapons, that they were actively seeking it.
And wow, how quickly some of us have forgotten that information, but I guess since the media didn't feed it to you it didn't happen, right?
Oh yeah, if we're going to kvetch about the poor intelligence, can we kvetch about how Billary decided to slash their budgets during his admin and restricted their capacity?
But that's okay, because we have so brave people in those agencies who are all too willing to violate their oaths and several laws so that they can chat with the newspapers regarding whatever items they might not totally agree with. You can complain about the biased system used to report whistleblower concerns, however my question is this: if they're willing to do all that just to make public some stuff and embarass the administration, how many are willing to give that information to "level the playing field" with other countries?
And yeah maybe some of his chemical weapon supply did drop off in potency, but they were still there and the UN didn't find them. Wonder what else they'll find in time.
wow, that's a great amount of FUD
please actually check the charter of the NSA, as you are confusing it with that of another agency
and you are now stating the the Bush admin. caused the 9/11 attacks
much as I respect all points of view, I have to say that this one is getting old, especially without good evidence to support it. It's like the ID of theories behind what happened that day. Where is the FSM when I need it?
Oh yeah, turns out that all of Wilson's neighbors knew she was a CIA agent LONG before she was "outed". Her damn grocer knew... so I'd say that her cover was pretty well blown at that point.
Or... the strong possibility that Wilson himself outed her to a member of the press long beforehand.
Now, let's look at the report itself. Anyone else do so as of yet? Willing to bet not. You know, the last few pages are really, REALLY interesting. Especially the part that details how Iraq was doing everything in it's power to get materials needed to create some very bad stuff.
You know, this isn't conspiracy theory stuff. It's what is in the documents.
Let me guess... the Bush admin. changed that, right? Especially before Wilson hit the radar screen (it was FOIA long beforehand, so it's kind of pointless to change it AFTER it was in the public domain)
As for the NSA thing. IF they are listening in, then yeah, they're breaking the law. Let's forget the sheer magnitude of a network they'd need to pull it off, which would have hit the radar screen a while back. Think about how they could hide that kind of HW procurement without someone getting curious. But nevermind that, let's talk about them having access to the caller logs.
IT WAS MADE LEGAL IN 1994! Yes folks, it's coming out now, but where the hell were any of you then? I know I fought it, because while it does help LEO, it was pretty clear what it was intended for in the long run. Didn't it dawn on anyone as to why you started getting all these nifty records concerning your calls at that time? The technology has been around a LOT longer than that (hell, they used it to catch some boys from LOD/MOD back in the late 80s, early 90s). I'm no fan of having anyone looking at my calling record, but I'd rather the NSA have that info than any jackass with $100 pretending to me and calling the phone company (and yes folks that is currently happening).
So... where was the outrage then? At this point in time, I am more comfortable with it, then I was back then. I don't like giving up any freedoms, but compared to 10-12 years ago, I trust these agencies more now than I did then (and anyone paying attention to what they were doing then would have a hard time arguing otherwise in my eyes).
But the press is up in arms, and like most folks, we're going for it, right?
What kills me is this... I don't like what the Bush admin is doing whatsoever, but since people have little idea what they are speaking about and willing to believe MSM, I get stuck having to be in this position.
Slashdot Mirror
O RLY? I'm with you until the part about not believing that this kind of nonsense is going on. Ever hear of ACS? It was the biggest Lockmart program aside from Deepwater that the company gave any publicity to in the past two years. It was just canned a little while ago. Why? Because LM built a plane that couldn't fly due to the excessive weight requirements. Their people knew it, warned about it, and yet executive management kept saying that all was well to the rest of the program and the customer. I am willing to bet that there was a customer acceptance of the risk, or a planned fix during the next spiral of development. That program is far too much of a public face for Lockheed to let something that simple go for long. That said, I can easily see where his frustrations with the company itself led to this (there is still not enough info on what happened to make a stong opinion IMHO). To say that the company is outmoded would be an understatement. Most of this guys complaints would have to go through his functional chain... which do not work on the program (and are often referred to as "short bus management" due to their incompetence). Not to be confused with program management, functional management are a group of managers... most of whom no project in their right mind would ever hire for a position. So what do these managers with little technical skill or comprehension do? Oh... just the little stuff, like control your salary, all of your promotions (you can't even get promoted or move to a new position without a program bending over for the demands of functional management), taking your complains if there is an issue or whistleblower event or an ethics issue. You know the "non-critical" aspect of your career. I mean, according to their own public documents, you can't even get a pager through them without having an executive VP review and sign-off on it. Instead of doing their jobs, you have an executive being paid 1M or more doing the work of an admin, just so they can put a tighter control on things. We had a term for that when I was in school... micromanagement These are also the guys who managed to be singled out for the mind shattering levels of employee loss that the company is currently enjoying (45% in some facilities, 90%+ in some departments alone). I don't mean retiring, employee deaths, transfers, or the like. I mean, flat out leaving the company. It was bad enough that they had to publically admit that they are having "attrition workshops" (has a nice ring, eh?) to deal with the problem. While we don't actually know for certain what has happened, I can probably make a fair guess that this guy was frustrated by the bureaucracy of the company. When your needs and concerns for every aspect of your job is in the hands of people you wouldn't hire as retail cashiers, it doesn't take much to push someone towards an action like this. Due to the contract requirements, the customer probably wasn't even allowed to talk with him and had to deal with the functional management. So you have a less than competent, non-technical person trying to relay to a customer rep a technical issue. Considering all the factors, I can easily see the frustration that this person had with the company.
Going for the troll points here =-)
Well I was thinking of the half KG of radioactive material that was found at one of Iraqi universities.
Or the airplanes and converted missles that were found, but he and the UN said that he didn't have.
Or the last few pages of the Wilson report that stated that while that regime might not currently have the capacity for nuclear weapons, that they were actively seeking it.
And wow, how quickly some of us have forgotten that information, but I guess since the media didn't feed it to you it didn't happen, right?
Oh yeah, if we're going to kvetch about the poor intelligence, can we kvetch about how Billary decided to slash their budgets during his admin and restricted their capacity?
But that's okay, because we have so brave people in those agencies who are all too willing to violate their oaths and several laws so that they can chat with the newspapers regarding whatever items they might not totally agree with. You can complain about the biased system used to report whistleblower concerns, however my question is this: if they're willing to do all that just to make public some stuff and embarass the administration, how many are willing to give that information to "level the playing field" with other countries?
And yeah maybe some of his chemical weapon supply did drop off in potency, but they were still there and the UN didn't find them. Wonder what else they'll find in time.
neener, neener
wow, that's a great amount of FUD please actually check the charter of the NSA, as you are confusing it with that of another agency and you are now stating the the Bush admin. caused the 9/11 attacks much as I respect all points of view, I have to say that this one is getting old, especially without good evidence to support it. It's like the ID of theories behind what happened that day. Where is the FSM when I need it? Oh yeah, turns out that all of Wilson's neighbors knew she was a CIA agent LONG before she was "outed". Her damn grocer knew... so I'd say that her cover was pretty well blown at that point. Or... the strong possibility that Wilson himself outed her to a member of the press long beforehand. Now, let's look at the report itself. Anyone else do so as of yet? Willing to bet not. You know, the last few pages are really, REALLY interesting. Especially the part that details how Iraq was doing everything in it's power to get materials needed to create some very bad stuff. You know, this isn't conspiracy theory stuff. It's what is in the documents. Let me guess... the Bush admin. changed that, right? Especially before Wilson hit the radar screen (it was FOIA long beforehand, so it's kind of pointless to change it AFTER it was in the public domain) As for the NSA thing. IF they are listening in, then yeah, they're breaking the law. Let's forget the sheer magnitude of a network they'd need to pull it off, which would have hit the radar screen a while back. Think about how they could hide that kind of HW procurement without someone getting curious. But nevermind that, let's talk about them having access to the caller logs. IT WAS MADE LEGAL IN 1994! Yes folks, it's coming out now, but where the hell were any of you then? I know I fought it, because while it does help LEO, it was pretty clear what it was intended for in the long run. Didn't it dawn on anyone as to why you started getting all these nifty records concerning your calls at that time? The technology has been around a LOT longer than that (hell, they used it to catch some boys from LOD/MOD back in the late 80s, early 90s). I'm no fan of having anyone looking at my calling record, but I'd rather the NSA have that info than any jackass with $100 pretending to me and calling the phone company (and yes folks that is currently happening). So... where was the outrage then? At this point in time, I am more comfortable with it, then I was back then. I don't like giving up any freedoms, but compared to 10-12 years ago, I trust these agencies more now than I did then (and anyone paying attention to what they were doing then would have a hard time arguing otherwise in my eyes). But the press is up in arms, and like most folks, we're going for it, right? What kills me is this... I don't like what the Bush admin is doing whatsoever, but since people have little idea what they are speaking about and willing to believe MSM, I get stuck having to be in this position.