Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
News & Current Events (Articles Required)
Details of Pentagon secret document Discord leaker emerge
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="RDKirk" data-source="post: 77227630" data-attributes="member: 326155"><p>Yeah, that should have bought at the very least a formal letter of admonishment, which is a stern talking-to from his commander placed into his record. An LOA is a presumption that he was just young and dumb and was capable of doing the right thing once pointedly counseled.</p><p></p><p>It's the "putting them into his pocket" part that rings the alarm. We commonly took written notes (no tablets allowed in a SCIF). In fact, when I was at SAC heaquarters, our general would pointedly nail anyone who didn't take notes ("Don't you think what I have to say is important enough to write down?"). But those notes went into properly marked folders that also never left the SCIF. </p><p></p><p>Into his pocket? Oh, heck no.</p><p></p><p></p><p>If he had gotten that formal letter of admonishment earlier, that would have triggered an investigation, probably an Article 15 investigation, with these additional issues.</p><p></p><p>I had a troop get a DUI, and my colonel and I had to argue vigorously with the commander that she be allowed to keep her clearances while the commander otherwise gave her an official slapping-around (she also lost a stripe). Obviously, the DUI had nothing to do with her security practices, but losing the clearance and being assigned to "weeds and seeds" or handing out towels in the gym was just something that normally came automatically with disciplinary action.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="RDKirk, post: 77227630, member: 326155"] Yeah, that should have bought at the very least a formal letter of admonishment, which is a stern talking-to from his commander placed into his record. An LOA is a presumption that he was just young and dumb and was capable of doing the right thing once pointedly counseled. It's the "putting them into his pocket" part that rings the alarm. We commonly took written notes (no tablets allowed in a SCIF). In fact, when I was at SAC heaquarters, our general would pointedly nail anyone who didn't take notes ("Don't you think what I have to say is important enough to write down?"). But those notes went into properly marked folders that also never left the SCIF. Into his pocket? Oh, heck no. If he had gotten that formal letter of admonishment earlier, that would have triggered an investigation, probably an Article 15 investigation, with these additional issues. I had a troop get a DUI, and my colonel and I had to argue vigorously with the commander that she be allowed to keep her clearances while the commander otherwise gave her an official slapping-around (she also lost a stripe). Obviously, the DUI had nothing to do with her security practices, but losing the clearance and being assigned to "weeds and seeds" or handing out towels in the gym was just something that normally came automatically with disciplinary action. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
News & Current Events (Articles Required)
Details of Pentagon secret document Discord leaker emerge
Top
Bottom