So, how far ahead can you see — when you leave on the lens caps?
The Pentagon has stopped processing security clearances for military contractors. They say they can’t afford it.
The shock decision by the Defense Security Service — the Pentagon agency that handles applications from contractors who need clearances to do classified work for the U.S. government — was announced late last month, but has attracted surprisingly little notice, perhaps because the armed services committees of both chambers of Congress were busy last week marking up their gargantuan authorization bill.
in 2001, [the Defense Security Service] received 105,000 applications for the whole year. The demand for clearances for private sector contractors has grown hugely since the Sept. 11 attacks, driven by the tsunami of spending that Congress has approved for U.S. military operations and the broader war on terror.
By 2005, officials said, the agency was receiving 142,000 applications a year, and the backlog was well over a quarter million. The agency received 103,000 applications in the six months between October 2005 and March 2006
When Bush signed the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, he was still trying to convince everyone the mission was accomplished. The bill created the Director of National Intelligence and he turned the job over to NSA honcho, John Negroponte. Individual budgets were cut because the new system was going to save time and money.
Market analysts said the cut would likely turn out to be a false economy. The Department of Defense “is probably paying multiple times in salary costs what it saves in starving (the Defense Security Service’s) budget,” Teal Group aerospace analyst Joel Johnson told MarketWatch News last week.
He said the bottleneck in getting new clearances distorted the labor market by driving up wages for those who already have them. Many companies in the sector already offer large signing bonuses to new hires with clearances.
“Like with oil, scarcity leads to speculation and high commodity prices — e.g. salaries,” Johnson said.
In December 2004, Bush thanked Senators Collins and Lieberman, Porter Goss, Condi Rice and others for their help with this law — because “our vast intelligence enterprise will become more unified, coordinated and effective”.
It’s a viewmaster!
Lense cap – my guess is that the Secret Service requires that the lense caps remain on for the safety of the president’s vision (eg. prevent laser burns of the retina, etc.).
There were almost an identical pictures of Clinton with the lense caps on while he was in office. I find it hard to believe that Clinton who had very media savvy staff would have made this mistake. I also doubt that Bush would have made the same mistake given that many joked about Clinton doing the same thing a few years earlier.
You may recall in the past few years airline pilots while on approach for landing had lasers directed at the cockpit (eg. source of laser was miles away) There was also a US Naval officer aboard a helicopter monitoring a Russian spy ship (eg. commercial fishing vessel in US waters) who had permanent eye damage from a laser from that ship (eg. moving object more difficult to hit than stationary president)
Ah that photo. The Clinton one was actually a fake, but this one is real – but out of context. About half a second later he realises and then takes them off. Its a mistake anyone can make.
Dubya isn’t dumb, which makes a whole lot of what he does even more scary.
George isn’t the most well verse speaker; however, he is a very intelligent man.
This picture has been on the internet for three years. Get some new Bush bashing material!
#6 – Why? I say keep on bashing. Use the truth, use lies, make em up as you go along. Its what the neocons and right wing repubs did to Clinton.
http://www.snopes.com/photos/binoculars.asp
Whether real or manipulated, these photographs demonstrate nothing beyond the trivial. As much as we may enjoy poking fun at our politicians, they aren’t so clueless that they don’t know binoculars don’t work with the lens caps in place, or would stand confusedly staring through capped binoculars at total blackness for several minutes at a time. Hardly anyone among us hasn’t accidentally raised a capped pair of binoculars to his eyes for a few moments before realizing the problem; the difference is that most of us don’t have a crowd of photographers hanging around us all day long just waiting to snap such a picture of the moment. Also, there are reasons why binoculars (especially types used by the military) shown in a photograph might appear to be capped when they really aren’t: the lenses could be coated with a non-reflective material to cut down on glare and prevent gleams of light from reflecting off the lens and revealing one’s position to the enemy, or the binoculars could be NVD (night vision devices) which also work in daylight (provided they have caps with small holes in place to block out most of the light).
Idgets…
We all know the photo is a fake (I hope) but it still makes a good metaphorical point.
#10 A cheap shot is better than none at all.
Why don’t all you liberals quit complaining. This man is saving this country. IF you don’t like it move to Canda or what I’ll do if Hilary ever becomes President … move to Iceland
One can only presume — Bryan K — you’re saying this just to further pique the right wingy dingys. Since Iceland, in fact, elected the 1st woman president in the democratic West.
She held office for 16 years and at present is Chair of the Council of Women World Leaders at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University — 1996 to present. She makes Hillary look like the fence-sitting copout she is.
#7….sounds the alarm…..Lets face it buddy, the neo-cons and nasty repubs didn’t have to make up to much about Clinton, he did manage(like this President) to keep them well supplied with real stuff.
Why make Bush look like an idiot? You are right, it is unnecessary. He does just fine on his own.
How many times have I endured the trolling by the neo-cons suggesting everything is Clinton’s fault. Yet, never did Clinton’s approval rating fall below 50%, no matter how many false stories were planted by the right. On the other hand, Bush has gone from 89% in September 2001 to 30% in May 2006, mostly because of the lies he told, the nefarious crap he pulled, and the thousands of American lives lost to serve his own personal agenda.
May that 30% sleep well at night knowing their hero has no clothes.
#13 – I am not saying I don’t want a woman president. I just don’t want the spawn of Satan rulling this country for another 8 years.
I can’t stand another recession ….
What was funny was in 2000 Al Gore’s campaign website ahd up a photo of him in Vietnam- looking right down the barrel of the gun.
Thats because Gore was/is an idiot. He had more bodyguards in Vietnam than Westmorland.
The 200 election was the *competeing phoney accents*, Gore faked Southern, Bush faked West Texas. But at least Bush actually lived in West Texas during his childhood. Gore only saw Tennessee at Christmas break.
Those are not lens caps, they are a non reflective material cover that is used by spotters, sniper spotters and surveillance personell. They are used in the military and civilian world. The reason is that they trap reflections from the lenses so you won’t be noticed by the target. They also act as dust covers on binoculars in Iraq, and for the same reason.
I can’t stand the Shrub, but this time he is not seeing his own vision of Amerika just scenery.
“Yet, never did Clinton’s approval rating fall below 50%,” – Yes it did. Personal approval rating was in the 20’s, however, job approval rating was in the 60’s. There’s a difference…and one that the media isn’t reporting on with our current president. However, that being said, Clinton, like him or not (no, not in a Monica sort of way), was an excellent politician who could spin almost anything. No denying that.