From: Larry Hatch <email@example.com> Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2002 08:38:46 -0800 Fwd Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2002 17:46:17 -0500 Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Hatch >Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2002 09:56:15 -0600 >Subject: Re: New Year Agenda - Stacy >From: Dennis Stacy <firstname.lastname@example.org> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <email@example.com> >>Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 21:38:23 -0600 >>Subject: Re: New Year Agenda >>From: Dennis Stacy <firstname.lastname@example.org> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <email@example.com> >>Maybe Friedman or Randle could weigh in here? The obvious answer >>would seem to be Gen. Lesley Grove and the Manhattan Project. >>But that could have been a case of personal fiat and project >>structure for all I know, not necessarily established operating >>policy. >>Dennis Stacy >List, >I found this, which is pretty interesting, by doing a Google >search using the words compartmentalization and need to know. >http://www.hanford.gov/docs/rl-97-1047/site_security/role.htm >It's a fairly good summary of those subjects, so some of you >might want to bookmark it or make a copy. >Dennis Hello Dennis, all: The entire article is a good read. I have a thick book here someplace, at least one chapter is devoted to just those security concerns. As I recall, at least one case was discussed where a Hanford worker opened his yap a little to wide and was promptly sacked. It appears to me that compartmentalization and need-to-know were clearly and uniformly enforced... even if those same policies had somewhat different names back then. Best wishes - Larry Hatch PS: I have a pet peeve with certain auto-repair shops which seem to believe the customer has no need-to-know about the finer details of the work done. They will kick you right out of the shop for Insurance Reasons.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp