 Jamming777$Time Is Running OutPremium
join:2001-07-25
USA | reply to Anon
Re: Let's get a few facts straight Thanks for getting the story out!!! Each of us owe you a debt of gratitude. Sometimes, getting a knock on the door at 3am is more than just a wake-up call. I think you can cut yourself a little slack about "the embarrassing thing on my part". After all it is hardly was expected that some sniveling AV vendor rep and "his joined at the hip" government bureaucrat would be motivated to do that. It is sometimes hard having to work for those three letter agencies.
--
Jamming
EL/MS with 1294 down/324 up |
|
Anon | Oh, you don't owe me a debt of gratitude! (blush) I appreciate it, though.
If I'd raised First Amendment issues, then my original column would've come out in addition to the replacement column. But think of it this way: "be careful what you wish for..." They wanted the original column to go away, and I obliged them. God knows I tried to talk them out of it.
If you know your WWII history, you know the White House begged photographers not to depict Roosevelt in his wheelchair. The nation needed a "strong" president for national security reasons, they claimed -- and the media's help contributed to his unprecedented [some would say unwarranted] fourth election. Some people now make the same argument for the antivirus industry. We need our cyber-saviors to look strong in the face of adversity, even if unwarranted.
I hid the First Amendment up my sleeve when the vendor threatened to call the feds and I made my stand on national security.
(For those of you with military backgrounds, let me fill you in on a little secret. The U.S. National Command Authority blindly trusts a group of experts who never filled out a DD form 398-2. Some of these experts carry Russian or Chinese passports. They regularly deliver virus technology to an oppressive Chinese government. And they place the needs of their cartel above the needs of the U.S. National Command Authority. Our government blindly trusts them like an addict blindly trusts his pusher. I don't make these claims lightly.)
Going back to one interesting comment -- true: I haven't divulged everything. I keep some things in the dark for reasons beyond the scope of this incident. Wheelert knows enough about me to speculate...
Rob |
|
Jamming777$Time Is Running OutPremium
join:2001-07-25
USA | said by rsnbrgr:
If I'd raised First Amendment issues, then my original column would've come out in addition to the replacement column. But think of it this way: "be careful what you wish for..." They wanted the original column to go away, and I obliged them. God knows I tried to talk them out of it.
Sounds like you would be completely protected by the Whistleblower's Act, if they wanted to push things. This is not to say, that you should not want to act as a responsible member of the press, there are not very many of them these days, good to know there is at least one. If anything, this has given me a good chance to get to know who is reporting the news about an issue I see as important.
--
Jamming
EL/MS with 1294 down/324 up |
|
Anon | Nah, the whistle-blower act has nothing to do with it. It's just a case of an embarrassed vendor who called the feds. Everyone in the U.S. seemed on edge for a couple of weeks after the attacks.
Heck, I quit boinking Saddam's wives because I thought they might be spies. But then I apologized to them... (I hope I chose the right emoticon for that joke!) |
|
