1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

A MEANS TO THE TRUTH??

Discussion in 'Off Topic Threads' started by gdbabin, Oct 20, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. gdbabin

    gdbabin TS Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2006
    Messages:
    2,461
    All of the accusations, rhetoric, biased opinion, misrepresented facts and plain lies about EACH of the presidential candidates truly upsets and demoralizes me.


    How do I know what to believe is true? I have no confidence in the rhetoric submitted by either party as each spins, word smiths and slants what they say to manipulate my feelings and ultimately my actions on election day. They both have a self-serving agenda.


    The media, my friends and family, and the clergy all spew statements they believe true. I begin to wonder if I may be the only one who is unsure of what is real.



    While reading a particularly virulent posting on this forum we share, I wondered how I might be able verify with some modicum of certainty if any given individual is who they represented themselves to be--to wit the candidates, or anyone else for that matter...


    I believe the answer, to a large extent, is that we simply can't for sure. All we have is historical and anecdotal evidence that a person is true to their word by their past actions. Unfortunately is too easy to slight the record to produce a desired effect, especially in this age of instant world access via technology. The lazy copy and paste their collaborating evidence, without regard for verification of truth.


    I served for twenty-four years in the Naval Security Group as a cryptologist and held the nations highest-level security clearance and special access during my entire tenure. To obtain said clearance, I was subjected to a through background investigation, and then recertified every five years for continued access to our military's most sensitive data.


    Those who hold high-level clearance are required to provide detailed information on personal and professional associations, financial history, criminal history both misdemeanor and otherwise. Our friends, classmates, past co-workers, family, ex-wives all must attest to our character. Our spouses and family are also investigated. Teachers, past employers, and the countries extensive data bases are all examined. We are subjected to lifestyle and counter-intelligence polygraph testing on periodic intervals also. All of this costs tens of thousands of dollars to complete per individual.


    Do we require the same level of vetting of our presidential candidates? Does the President of the United States ever go through the security clearance adjudication? I'm not sure.


    Granted even this extensive process is not fool proof. If it were there would never have been the likes of Aldrich Ames, Robert Pelton, Jonathan Pollard, or the Walker family. I do think though that the process does weed out the flaws and lies in most.


    Why not subject our highest government officials to this screening process before we make the final decision? It seems that most of the accusations could be either verified, or dispelled once and for all.



    The bottom line is that no matter what processes we put in place, it really comes down to trust. Trust in our government--therein lies the heart of my problem. It'd be easier however if I knew those who aspire to the highest office of our land were at least as well checked-out as my intelligence community comrades and I are.



    Respectfully,

    Guy Babin
     
  2. chipking

    chipking TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,761
    Guy
    The simple truth is that MOST politicians could not pass a CI Poly let alone the Full Lifestyle or the background investigations that we were required to go through. Hell most would fail the piss test. They are granted access to information as need to know even though most don't. When an investigation is performed on a politico and something is found it becomes a political hot potato or a bargaining chip instead of being pursued.


    --- Chip King ---
     
  3. Grayson Mayne

    Grayson Mayne Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    357
    It's time for Atlas to shrug!
     
  4. halfmile

    halfmile Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    15,649
    Location:
    Green Bay Wisconsin
    Mr. Babin, one candidate lies now about his words and associations from years past.

    You can find out which one easily enough. The records are there.

    HM
     
  5. hoggy

    hoggy TS Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2006
    Messages:
    1,261
    The only advise I can give is in the old saying "Where there's smoke there's fire".
     
  6. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    25,254
    Location:
    Deplorable Bitter Clinger in Liberal La La Land
    It's simple. Go study their voting record, and quotes of their own words.
     
  7. turmite

    turmite Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2008
    Messages:
    519
    You know as bad as I hate to say this, I have to. Currently with me, it isn't about the truth! It is about survival and McCain/Palin gives us a much better chance at survival than the Muslim does!

    Mike
     
  8. CalvinMD

    CalvinMD Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,854
    Location:
    Northeastern MD @ the top o the Bay
    You're on the money GB...it ought to be a job pre-requisite
     
  9. gdbabin

    gdbabin TS Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2006
    Messages:
    2,461
    Chip King,


    I agree. It is the chance of political bias entering in to the adjudication process that excludes the president (or candidates thereof).


    It seems hypocritical to me. The president ultimately establishes policy for the granting of clearance to those deemed necessarily credentialed; while he and others in high office are exempt, but possess access to the most sensitive of information.


    It's the lack of accountability that breeds deceit and corruption within the powerful. The constitution is an eloquent attempt to document accountability, and ratified by the blood of our countrymen.


    The unfortunate truth is however, you can't legislate honor.

    Guy B.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.