Quote of the day–Sarah Brady

We must prepare for a long hard battle. So much of what we have worked for in the past and everything we’re currently working on could be destroyed by the heinous decision of right-wing activist judges who chose to ignore more than 60 years of precedent in order to help the gun lobby accomplish in the courts what it has been unable to accomplish in Congress.

Sarah Brady
Email, July 20, 2007
Chair
Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence
[That is such music to my ears.–Joe]

A teaser on the PNNL story

I’ve been sending email around to people I knew wouldn’t really wait to know what happened with PNNL yesterday.  Here’s the basics of what happened. I’ll do the complete time-line with documentation later…

They finally gave us enough evidence that we could reasonably conclude they were incompetent rather than bigoted. It took a motion to compel before they finally gave us some of the information and then doing depositions on some people. I don’t understand why they didn’t turn this information over when we asked for it in our first interrogatory. It would have saved everyone a lot of time and money.

Some of the most basic unchallenged facts I had believed were false. I was told by Gina, on two different occasions, that both she and no one she knew on our team knew anything at all about the investigation. If this was true then the truth or falsity of my claim that I had not posted sensitive information was irrelevant to the investigators and the decision makers. It turns out that Newton, Wayne, and she had actually started the investigation. That Gina and Wayne knew anything at all about it was news to me yesterday. I didn’t know Newton had anything to do with it until my deposition in April of 2007. They should have told us all of this in their first response as we requested. I don’t know why they hid it and required us to go to the judge with a motion to compel to turn it over. Legally they had absolutely nothing to fear from releasing the information–it invalidated my theory of the case.

My lawyer said I could possibly still win the case–but for the wrong reason. Witnesses, Newton in particular, were extremely evasive (for example, refusing to agree, even in principle, to answer yes or no questions with a yes or no rather than a nod of the head and always quibbling about words such as “that depends on what your definition of ‘complain’ is”). Newton and others even gave testimony under oath that I had hard proof was false–all stuff that would look bad to the judge and jury. And Newton even had his own personal file he kept on me which sounds extremely suspicious. The court recorder thought we were joking we told her to pack up because we were done. She thought things were going very well for us. But the bottom line is that all the strange stuff, once we had the truthful critical information, didn’t matter in the big picture so I dropped it. Even if I would have pushed on, which my lawyer almost for certain would not have done had I be so inclined, and won simply because Newton appeared to be hiding information on nearly every response it would have been a hollow victory. Battelle/PNNL would have been screwed because Newton doesn’t know how or perhaps is even unable to be candid and believable. I believed him on the parts that were most important to me because I knew Newton was paranoid even when there wasn’t anything to be paranoid about. And the critical information he provided fit in with other information that that until that point didn’t make any sense.

We are pretty sure this is what happened:

Newton thought maybe I had posted classified (national security type) information on my blog. He talked to Wayne about it–what do we say to Joe? How do we approach him about this? But if it was classified they couldn’t just handle it in private–it would have to be reported. They asked Greg about it. He didn’t know so they went to Chris. Chris, Wayne and Newton debated it and decided just to be safe they should report it and the investigation expanded. It turned out it was not classified, as I knew–but they never asked me. Newton and Wayne were essentially out of the picture now. The bigger investigation which, only initially required Gina’s input, turned up things that looked suspicious and everyone assumed the worst and the process continued to snowball. Finally they fired me without ever asking me except in the most vague terms to which I responded in a somewhat defiant manner. They didn’t even ask people that would have known the truth about the suspicious things they found. They just assumed, perhaps willfully, if it looked bad it was bad. Just three examples:

  1. I was accused of “excessive personal Internet use” because I averaged about 2600 firewall transactions a month to things they believed were not work related – no one bothered to compare it to what other people did. It turned out company average was about 8000 non-work related transactions per month.
  2. They assumed anything gun or explosives related web browsing was not work—which was false. I was bringing my expertise from my hobbies to my work and the investigators didn’t know this.
  3. They found a complete copy of my website, JoeHuffman.org, on the government laptop computer and assumed I was hosting the site from there. Wrong and it doesn’t even make sense–the website would go down when I was traveling with the laptop if that were the case. What really happened was I hosted, at the request of Wayne, a bunch of PNNL project material on my own personal website, JoeHuffman.org for a few days when some material need to go on-line on such short notice that we didn’t have time to go through the usual paperwork to get it on the corporate site. I integrated the PNNL material with my website on the government laptop computer to make sure the cascading style sheets didn’t interfere with each other (I didn’t really understand CSS very well and needed to make sure things were working right together). I had lots of free disk space on the laptop and didn’t bother to delete it afterward.

These and lots of other cascading failures occurred during their investigation process and were completely out of my control and knowledge until the lawsuit and some the information only showed up yesterday. I was “walking on the fence” with my blogging and knew it. They couldn’t quite figure out if I had crossed over or not and Bryan McMillan, my supervisor, “built a new fence” and told me not to cross over that one… so I started “walking on his new fence” with my blogging instead of being submissive. That almost for certain pissed him and others off. That doesn’t really make sense to me with my world view. When I would tell one of our kids to clean their room and when they announced it was clean and I went to inspect found the room clean but the hallway three feet deep in their dirty clothes I couldn’t hold back my smirk–and I would require they help me put their dirty clothes in the laundry room. Then the next time I told them to clean their room I would make sure the requirement included getting all the dirty clothes all the way to the laundry room. I would be pleased that I had such a clever child, but then I’m not normal…

McMillan, Hevland, and others may have in fact “walked on the fence” in terms of Battelle policy during the termination procedure but unless that was due to an actionable item such as a race, gender, age, etc. and possibly gun ownership issue of some sort it just doesn’t matter in a legal sense. They could get away with it.

In regards to all the evidence from my web logs–such as indications they weren’t looking for information I blogged about work but instead about my political activism and that I was a firearms instructor–we explored that. All indications appear the investigation started for other reasons, invalid (some other day with the data to back it up–Newton was “walking a fence” in his testimony) but not legally actionable. The people that may have had a bias against my activism and gun activities apparently didn’t pass that bias on to the decision makers.

PNNL screwed up by not doing a good investigation and I got screwed, in part because I was in essence mocking them, but them being incompetent investigators isn’t actionable in a legal sense so I dropped the case.

Another way to look at it that is probably fair was this statement by someone familiar with nearly all the details but wishes to remain anonymous, “Joe, I see why they fired you now. You are so in control you are out of control. Until people get to know you scare them. They thought you were a loose cannon and were a risk.”

It took me a lot of time to understand what “You are so in control you are out of control” really meant. It means I parsed the rules very carefully. It was all very clear to me–simplifying some, there were four types of information, Classified, Official Use Only, Business Sensitive, and everything else which was Open. The first three were carefully defined which made Open well defined. Open stuff is subject to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests–which means anyone can get access if they ask for it. I was very much in control of what I said and chose my words carefully. But I said things in ways that made them more “interesting” than Battelle/PNNL was comfortable with. I was in control but appeared out of control.

There was, in essence, an unstated policy that they did not wish to honor FOIA. FOIA was a problem for them because it was so much easier to work on things that were in the open that they, and their customers preferred that operating environment. But even though it was technically open they preferred it remain “in the dark”. I honored the spirit of that but unless it were truly “not Open” I didn’t keep it as in the dark as “not Open” material were required to be kept. I think this pissed them off too–I was “Walking the Fence” again by not keeping FOIA-able material as dark as OUO material.

As I said here when I first found out about the investigation, my Push the Envelope Policy has it’s hazards.

As I talked to people about the results from yesterday I had one person tell me they couldn’t be like me but they were glad there were people like me out there. Extremists are usually right because they care about the issue and understand it. The moderates don’t care because they don’t know the issue. And if you are going to push the envelope you have to accept the risk and know that sometimes you are going to have to pay a price. You paid a heavy price. I hope it was worth it for you. I wouldn’t have been willing to pay that price.”

I don’t know the answer…I’m still thinking on it.

Quote of the day–Mac Johnson

“[T]his radical ruling will inevitably mean more people killed and wounded as keeping guns out of the city becomes harder,” the Post continued, sagely foreseeing a day in the near future when the district might not be the safe gunfree enclave of sanity that it now is. One wonders if D.C. might someday even become the murder capital of the United States without its protective cloak of gun control disarming its law-abiding citizens.

Mac Johnson
Court Rediscovers 2nd Amendment, Liberals Fear Other ‘Rights’ May Soon be Found
March 15, 2007

Quote of the day–James Huffman-Scott

So the quote about never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by stupidity is appropriate here.

James Huffman-Scott
July 18, 2007
[This was after I told him I had dropped the lawsuit against PNNL and why I had dropped it. I’ll write up a report on it this weekend. I’ve been running on four and five hours sleep for the last week preparing for the depositions that were to be today, tomorrow and the next. We did three of the four depositions scheduled and we had enough answers we could put the rest of the puzzle together on our own. I need to sleep tonight and the rest of the week I need to get a bunch of things done I felt guilty leaving undone at work. The basics are that what James said above overstates things just a little bit but its close enough. I got screwed but it wasn’t for any reason that is actionable. There are still unanswered questions but even if they were answered in the most favorable manner possible to me it just wouldn’t matter from a legal standpoint.–Joe]

Quote of the day–Machiavelli

Never do your enemy a minor injury.

Machiavelli
[At least it is attributed by some to be Machiavelli. I haven’t been able to verify it. I like it regardless of who proper credit belongs to. Especially today since I am preparing for the depositions of my enemies, the felons, at PNNL. They did me a relatively minor injury over two years ago. My intentions for them are more than a minor injury. By this time next week they will be painfully aware of how much “injury” I am capable of delivering.–Joe]

Quote of the day–Sandy Froman

Legislation like the Brady Bill ignores the fact that violence unfortunately has been a fact of life long before firearms were invented. Outlawing guns does not prevent violence, but it does prevent smaller, older, disabled or less powerful persons from effectively defending themselves against larger and stronger attackers.

[…]

Once the anti-gun left has a cause or celebrity to rally around, rational thought goes out the window as they push their proposed legislation.

[…]

Sarah Brady is still a leading figure in the anti-gun movement. Jim Brady is still an advertisement for gun control.

Sandy Froman
July 12, 2007
The history of gun control, part 3
Froman is immediate past president of the National Rifle Association of America and a longtime member of the NRA board of directors.
[There really should be three separate quotes but I couldn’t decide which of them I wanted to post first.–Joe]

Like It Or Not, You’re A Conservative

It’s been said before:  We tend to live our lives as conservatives, regardless of our political affiliations.  I’ve heard R. Limbaugh say it several times.  We don’t take our paycheck, decide we’re living on “more than we need” and give half of it away each payday.  We don’t confront our neighbors, telling them they must cut back on their consumption or we’re going to do something really bad to them.  You don’t believe that you, personally, have far too much freedom, then demand that someone take your freedom away from you.  Chances are you don’t feel you have the right to steal from someone on the basis that he has more than you.

Not exactly.  But we do often advocate such coercion against our fellow countrymen on a regular basis, through government.

If we define an American “conservative” as one who embraces the principles upon which this country was founded (Liberty, property rights, minimum to non interference by government)(and I do) then it is a fact that most people live as conservatives in their personal lives.  Its just that some of us are screaming hypocrites, like this Texas politician who fought against self-defense rights and ended up shooting a thief (the thief was, after all, merely practicing his own form of “Economic Justice” as the term is used by the Left).

Thanks to M. Malkin and K. du Toit.

Like a child

Robyn Ringler is probably close to my age. But despite having some very adult experiences she is like a child in some ways. She is so naive:

Let’s pass legislation that will have no effect on you but will stop irresponsible gun dealers.

You, in this case, refers to “legal gun owners”. What she does not realize is that no such legislation is possible. Any restriction, let along something that would “stop irresponsible gun dealers”, on gun dealers or owners will have a greater effect on “legal gun owners” than it will on the “illegal gun owners”. People that would use a firearm to commit a crime will have no reservation about breaking a law intending to prevent them from possessing a gun. Not so on those that obey laws simply because they are the laws. They will honor the waiting periods, the registrations, and licensing processes all of which are barriers to gun ownership and use.

But she is coming around. She apparently recognizes people have legitimate uses for defensive firearms:

So, legal gun owners, go ahead and own your guns for defensive use.

In this further display of naiveté I suspect she doesn’t realize is that she has stepped onto a slippery slope that the VPC, The Brady Campaign and many other anti-gun bigots avoid. Once you acknowledge firearms as legitimate self-defense tools you cannot help but admit restrictions on the purchase and carrying of these tools can cost lives.

But also like a child it appears she is learning. I have hope for her. It is very, very difficult to be an advocate for something then renounce that position even when all evidence for your position crumbles away into dust. If I am reading between the lines correctly she is reexamining some of her most dearly held beliefs in regards to firearms.

Iodine is now a controlled substance

Via Tamara and Oleg we find out that iodine is now a controlled substance. Apparently it can be used in the production of meth. I just want it to make explosives.

I have some very fond, as well as scary, memories of my first home-made explosives which were made with iodine crystals.

This is what you get when people start believing you can prevent crime. There is no end of what they can and will justify once they buy into that repulsive concept. Legitimate crime control consists of punishment of those who injure others.

Quote of the day–Eric Hoffer

What greater reassurance can the weak have than that they are like anyone else?

Eric Hoffer
(1902-83), U.S. philosopher.
The Passionate State of Mind, (1955).
[Perhaps reassurance isn’t what is in the best interest of weak, the strong, or those in between. But then those who reassure the weak are unlikely to have the best interests of anyone but themselves in mind anyway.–Joe]

Government corruption demands swift, sure action

This is how China does it:

China on Tuesday executed the former head of its food and drug watchdog who had become a symbol of the country’s wide-ranging problems on product safety.

Zheng Xiaoyu’s execution was confirmed by State Food and Drug Administration spokeswoman Yan Jianyang at a news conference held to highlight efforts to improve China’s track record on food and drug safety.

Such cases “have brought shame to our administration and revealed serious problems. We need to seriously reflect on what lessons we can draw from such cases,” Yan said about Zheng and a separate case involving Cao Wenzhuang, the administration’s former pharmaceutical registration department director.

Zheng was sentenced to death in May for taking bribes to approve an antibiotic blamed for at least 10 deaths and other substandard medicines. Cao was given a death sentence last month with a two-year reprieve for accepting bribes and dereliction of duty.

It is my opinion that government corruption should be treated more harshly that corruption of officials in private business but I wouldn’t contest someone’s claim that execution is perhaps a bit extreme in ordinary corruption cases. But if someone dies as a result then it should be considered.

Politicians that infringe on the rights of the people to keep and bear arms should be encouraged to carefully weigh the potential harm of gun-control as well as the potential benefits.

Synchronicity in the wedding

Trivia/synchronicity about Kim and her wedding:

  • When Kimberly Joe Huffman-Scott was born her mother, Barb, was the same age as Barb’s mom was when Barb was born (31 years-old)
  • When Kim was born her father, me, was the same as my mom was when I was born (30 years-old)
  • Kim was 172 days younger than her mother when she married and only 40 days older than her father
  • After the ceremony as Kim and I danced the boat sailed past the motel where Barb and I had our honeymoon and we celebrated our 25th wedding anniversary

Img_6705Web.jpg
Kim and I practicing our dance earlier in the day
(Photo by Xenia Joy)

IMG_6715Web.jpg
Xenia and I earlier on the day of the wedding
(Photo by Xenia Joy)

IMG_6744Web.jpg
Kim’s garter
(Photo by Xenia Joy)

IMG_6884Web.jpg
The bride and her parents
(Photo by Xenia Joy)

IMG_5808Web.jpg
Kim and Xenia prior to the ceremony

IMG_6926Web.jpg
Barb and I dance in the foreground, Kim and Caleb in the center background
(photo by Xenia Joy)

IMG_6954Web.jpg
Kim and I dancing for real
(photo by Xenia Joy)

IMG_6973Web.jpg
More of Kim and I dancing for real (can you tell what, if anything, I’m “packing”, how, and where?)
(photo by Xenia Joy)

IMG_5999Web.jpg
Dillon Precision Range Bag containing a video camera and accessories, a SureFire 6P flashlight, and a 22-round magazine loaded with 180 grain SXT Winchester Ranger .40 S&W

More photos on Xenia’s Live Journal here and here.