I think that this is an important point that should be taken up by the PUC-ers (and others!) ASAP:
Have you noticed that there is a subtle push by Thames and his supporters to "move on" and "let bygones be bygones"--we've heard it from Fraschillo (the leader of the band) and other pro-SFT letter writers. This must be exposed as an attempt to cover up past grievous sins (and the question it begs is: "What are we moving on FROM?").
Let's look at this example from history: when the new government of South Africa took over from the white supremacists, they announced a reconciliation policy that would give amnesty to all who completely and honestly confessed to all their atrocities. If persons were later found to have committed crimes which had not been disclosed, prosecution would follow. The idea was that until all of the past was revealed, healing could not take place.
This makes sense to me. Thames needs to be completely forthcoming on whose e-mail was monitored and the dates during which it was done. He needs to tell us whose computers were invaded and when. He needs to tell us if telephone records were consulted. He must fully disclose who was recommended for raises by deans and who actually got raises. You get the idea. Until the sins of the past are fully disclosed, moving on is just a cover up.
You are absolutely correct about the subtle "spin" which is taking place. Let's face it, the public (that's us, folks) have the attention span of gnats as it is. A lot of people on the board predicted the summer slowdown as a time when SFT would attempt to recoup and regroup, and you have identified one tactic.
Your idea is excellent -- tell all, make a clean breast of it, say ten "Hail Shelby's" or maybe he has to say "Hail Roy's" (no intention of being sacriligeous) and all is right. The word which keeps popping into my head, however, is "actionable" -- they can't sue about it if they don't know about it. He's not gonna 'fess up to anything, healing or no.
quote: Originally posted by: Robert Campbell "I think Full Disclosure is absolutely right. But by demanding this we are trampling the Administrative Code of Silence under foot. So resistance will be fierce, and not just from Shelby Thames. Robert Campbell"
Right, resistance WILL be fierce. But SFT's feet need to be held to the "fire of truth" 24/7 until he relents. The PUC-ers need to make this their main battle cry.
quote: Originally posted by: truth4usm/AH " Right, resistance WILL be fierce. But SFT's feet need to be held to the "fire of truth" 24/7 until he relents. The PUC-ers need to make this their main battle cry. NO QUARTER!"
Yes: and we need to be specific about what full disclosure means:
1. All of the outstanding FOIA requests
2. All requests for s list of who has been surveilled and supplying the material surveilled to each person.
Does anyone know the due date for the FOIA email info requested by the Hattiesburg American? Wouldn't be interesting if a story broke on that tomorrow?
quote: Originally posted by: bluegrass professor "Does anyone know the due date for the FOIA email info requested by the Hattiesburg American? Wouldn't be interesting if a story broke on that tomorrow?"
Gee . . . I think this has come in a recent conversation I had . . .?
It has got to be soon as I think they filed their request very close to the time the Senate filed its request . . . surely this week . . .