A response to Kim du Toit

Kim du Toit posted about both his and my adverse experiences because of our websites.  Kim made a comment about PNNL being “a company of skunks”.  I posted a comment in response and I think the same posting here is justified.  I fixed a few typos and grammar errors but otherwise the following posting is the same as my comment there:

My “model” for what happened to me was that there were a few people that had big anti-gun biases and no checks and balances for the power they held.  None of my co-workers, my project manager, nor none of the people in the projects I managed were ever asked anything about me.  Some of them first found out I had been fired, after not being able to make contact with me for a couple weeks, by reading my blog!  I suspect “Safeguards and Security” gets raises based on how many people they get fired or disciplined.  In that situation they look for whoever has the highest “profile”–me in this case.  And the process apparently doesn’t allow for presentation of the evidence to the accused and a chance for the accused to present evidence or witnesses in their favor.  For example: They asked me if there was any Official Use Only (OUO) material on a laptop when my wife and daughter used it.  I said no, I didn’t think so.  A few days later I remembered there were some documents that were marked OUO.  But those documents were old.  All the OUO restrictions had been removed but the documents on the computer had not been updated and the OUO markings removed.  They did not ask me or any one that might have known that.  I suspect, but can’t say for certain, that is one instance of how they claimed I violated policy.  There were numerous other things that I suspect they may have discovered that at first glance looked bad but had innocent or even praiseworthy justification.  They never asked anyone who would have known the truth.

So… my summation of the situation is: The Process is Broken.  For the most part I believe the lab and the people there are doing a decent job and are decent people.  Some of the projects really should be done in the private sector rather than on taxpayer money but that isn’t the fault of the lab.  That is the fault of our congress critters.

In my particular case management is in a tough position.  A couple of jerks screwed me over.  I suspect management has done their own investigation by now and know my case has at least some merit.  Now what do they do?  Their main function is the make the company money.  If they fire the jerks, as they should be, then I can use that against them in my wrongful termination suit–costing the company money.  If they come to me and say, “We have a couple of bad eggs and a bad process, we want to make it right with you.”  then they put themselves in the position of giving away money they didn’t have to.   What they have to do, in my opinion, is wait for me to file my lawsuit then evaluate their chances of winning and the cost of doing so versus settling with me.  Throw in the bad publicity they will have to deal with while the event is going on and afterwords, if I win, and come up what gives them the best odds financially.  One cannot expect them to “do the right thing”.  It would be unethical from the standpoint of the company finances.   They must be forced to do the right thing.

So… I tend to disagree with Kim’s assessment.

My “job” at this point is to help them realize the truth coming out will be more financially painful than fixing the problems a bad process and a couple of “bad eggs” created.  The FOIA requests, the Privacy Act Information Requests, and the publicity around my experience will be a festering boil for them.  The lawsuit will just be the lance that forces it to drain and heal with as little scaring as possible–for everyone except the couple of jerks.  Those people need to be held personally responsible and there is a fair chance I may be able to accomplish that.

Quote of the day–Alphan Oumar Konare

The political, economic and social consequences of the anarchic proliferation of light weapons are well known.  They are the millions of victims, most of them civilians, the displaced populations with their tears and suffering, the phenomena of child soldiers, terrorism and wide-scale banditry in urban areas. This belief in disarmament does not proceed from idealism, or from naivete. The best strategy for prevention of armed conflict is to eliminate the means of violence.

Alphan Oumar Konare
President of Mali
Oslo, April 1998
From http://www.prepcom.org/low/index.html

I must have gotten their attention

I got a call from daughter Xenia this afternoon.  A letter from Battelle came in the mail today.  She said, “It looks like a report card.”  What she meant was that each side had to be ripped off before you could open it.  “Oh, I’ll bet it’s my last paycheck”, I said.  I didn’t expect one because I just had two days of vacation left and they had paid me for two days that I was suspended without pay.  I asked Xenia to open it.  It was a check.  A check for $0.00.

I laughed for quite a while about that.  I have my speculation as to why it would show up over two months after my last day on the job and why they bothered to send me a check for $0.00.  I think it has something (and I have my suspicions about the exact reason) to do with the new website about bigotry at PNNL (PNNL is operated by Battelle who issues the paychecks) I put up last weekend.

I think I’ll frame that check–although I will always wonder what the bank would have said if I deposited it.

Update: By popular demand:

Click on the image for a high resolution version.

Doubt

Every once in a while I have doubt.  Maybe I did do something wrong.  Maybe I did step over the line and deserve to get fired.  When I was in the first meeting I thought maybe there was something that I got carried away with.  The next day I reviewed everything I could find on my blog.  There was nothing that should have been a problem.  I felt better in some ways but things still didn’t make sense.  Why were they making it into a problem?

I was required to talk with the HR people and I thought it went really well.  They asked factual questions that were not judgment calls.  “Did you know this was a rule?”  “Yes.”  “Did you ever break this rule?”  “No.”  Almost all the questions were easy stuff.  Virtually nothing was ambiguous–which was a problem for me with the first meeting.  Immediately after the meeting I was suspended without pay–which was a shock.  As I drove home the doubt crept in.  What had I done that was so bad?  Maybe I had done something but couldn’t remember it.  I had time to think about things and to try and make sense of it.  They weren’t giving me any more information but I had another source–my web access log files.  I did a quick scan of them and I could see a pattern.  And I could see they had lied to me in that first meeting.  Why lie?  What in the world did they have to gain by that lie?  And they were still looking HARD for stuff in my websites during and after the HR meeting.  I felt better.  There were people out to get me and if there was something I had actually done they should have found it by now and they wouldn’t have to lie about little things.

When I got the call and was told I was fired I was certain.  There had not been any further questions of me.  I knew there was stuff that looked bad but had completely innocent explanations.  They didn’t ask about anything so I knew they weren’t interested in the truth about me.  My web access logs were my only real hope of learning the truth about them.  More reviewing of the logs seemed consistent with my first impression.  But as I continued looking and annotating the logs I began to have doubts.  Maybe it was just a random search through things and it just happened that the firearms stuff was what they looked at first and last.  Then I looked at the times when PUCK would have been preparing for the first meeting.  I was enraged. And I had no doubt.

In the last few days I came to doubt again.  I would look at the preparation time and wonder if maybe there was another explanation.  It’s easy to believe what you want to believe.  Then last night I got a call from someone.  A completely independent source confirmed something I had suspected.  It’s not a “smoking gun”.  It’s not something that is irrefutable proof on it’s own.  It’s like “fingerprints at the crime scene” and there is no contraindicating evidence.  I have no doubt.

Quote of the day–National Crime Prevention Council

Don’t carry a weapon. You lose, whether you use it or it’s used on you.

National Crime Prevention Council
10 things you can do.  Tip number 8.
From: http://www.weprevent.org/your10.htm (as of March 10, 1999)

PNNL Info update

While I am still many hundreds of miles away from home (are the black helicopters gone yet?) I do have a reliable Internet connection now.  I’ll be staying here until tomorrow morning and hope to be home by the weekend.  Since we are driving that means I many not get connected again until I get home.

I have spent the last several hours reviewing the referrals to my www.pnnl.info site, doing an interview with a gun rights organization, and making terse comments on numerous gun forums and blog sites.  There are just so many that I can’t begin to keep up.  I am running a report generator on the log file but I expect it will take a several hours.  I’ll post an update here with a link to the report when it’s done.

I have enough donations now that I was able to pay off the previous visits to the lawyers.  More news on that front when it is appropriate to do so.

Thanks so much to everyone for all they work they put in.  I just don’t have enough time to thank everyone individually.  But some deserve special recognition–in particular “S” has been a huge help.  Ry of course has contributed time and ideas and offered to contribute a lot more work.  My daughter Xenia took care of the Quote of the Day for the last several days while I was going in and out of Internet connectivity.

All the bloggers that have linked and commented have contributed a great deal as well.  Michelle Malkin’s post in particular was a huge boost.

Here are some interesting things Ry has to say about what is going on:

Update: Here is the log report on referrals.  Lots of people talking about the PNNL Bigotry website.

Quote of the day–SA OBERFUHRER OF BAD TOLZ, GERMANY

The associations of the nation revival, SA [Storm Troopers], SS [para-military adjunct of the Gestapo], and Stahlhelm [a non-Nazi lunatic fringe para-military organization], give every responsible citizen the opportunity of campaigning with them.  Therefore anyone who does not belong to one of the above-named organization and who unjustifiably nevertheless keeps his weapon . . . must be regarded as an enemy of the national government and will be brought to account without compunction and with the utmost severity.

SA OBERFUHRER OF BAD TOLZ, GERMANY
Quoted in Richard Munday
“The Monopoly of Power”
(paper presented to the annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, 1991)

The closet

I’ve posted about this in the past:

Some may ask, “So what do you think now?  Don’t you see that we can’t come out of the closet?  Look what happened to you!”

Yes, it’s risky.  Yes, if you stick your head up high enough it’s likely to get “wacked.”  But what’s the alternative?  If you won’t fight now when the worst they can do is get you fired (I have evidence a political opponent gave PNNL a tip about me–and I think I know who it was) then who among you will take a stand when they are going door-to-door taking your guns?  Or when they are rounding up the Jews/Christians/homosexuals/whoever?  Taking a stand now is far, far less risky and far more likely to succeed than if you wait until the thugs are knocking down your door.

Get out of the closet and do something today.  If nothing else support me as I fight the bigots who demand we stay in the closet.

Termination report released

As predicted there was no repsonse from PNNL.  They (both Richland and Battelle in Columbus) spent a lot of time reviewing the site but in the end they did not have any factual corrections to make.

Check out http://www.pnnl.info.  There is a link on the main page to What You Should Do.  Check it out.

Barb and I are going hiking now.  Internet and cellphone access again tonight sometime.

In other news–the NRA got back to me

I sent an email to the NRA about their recent article and got back a response directing me to their “General Counsels Office”.  I sent them a link to my Terminate Report website.

I love it when the timing of things works out just as if you had actually planned it that way.

Termination report

A few minute ago the last of the FOIA requests went out and I sent the following email to my former employer:


Subject: Corrections?

 
I have created a new website, XXXX, that might be of interest to you.  Before the news releases are sent out on Monday afternoon I am giving you an opportunity to make any factual corrections.

Please send all corrections, complete with documentation, to XXXX before 12:00 PM PDT Monday July 25th.  Only email to that address will be accepted.  All responses will be posted on the web site.

 
And since the picture below seemed to play a significant role in the investigation that lead to my termination I am including a copy:
 
—-
Joe Huffman

A few people have seen a preview of the site.  Here are some of their comments:

I’m shaking with rage. Bastards.

-Kim du Toit-

Jesus H. Christ.

-Neaderpundit-

I thought PNNL’s mission was to support the Constitution–not destroy the lives of those who exercise the rights it guarantees.

-Lyle Keeney-

 

You can get canned for practicing free speech in support of one’s right to self-defense. What’s next? Get canned for blogging about the war? Gay marriage? Religious freedom?

-Stephanie Sailor-

New Jersey gun rights activist

 

This is the point in the story where the audience comes to understand, if not condone, the antagonist turning into a mad scientist.

-Sean Flynn-

And then head off on vacation. Good move. Pay cash. Watch out for Black Helicopters.

-Sean Flynn-

 

Does your life insurance cover getting knocked off by your former bosses?

-Lyle Keeney-

 

Be careful. Don’t get shot in some dark alley.

-James Huffman-Scott-

 

They honestly had no clue that you are so fastidious in your operation. This kind of evidence is very clear and easy for even a layman to understand.

-Permission Pending-

Postal pistol match

Here is a link to Match #1.  Swatting flies, standing, un-supported, at 30 feet with your handgun.  Results due August 8th.

I’ll be on vacation a lot of this time and not sure I be able to participate.  But I’m going to try.

Quote of the day–Jeff Cooper

The media insist that crime is the major concern of the American public today. In this connection they generally push the point that a disarmed society would be a crime-free society. They will not accept the truth that if you take all the guns off the street you still will have a crime problem, whereas if you take the criminals off the street you cannot have a gun problem.

In the larger sense, however, the personal ownership of firearms is only secondarily a matter of defense against the criminal. Note the following from Thomas Jefferson:

The strongest reason for the people to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against the tyranny of government.

That is why our masters in Washington are so anxious to disarm us. They are not afraid of criminals. They are afraid of a populace which cannot be subdued by tyrants.

 

Jeff Cooper
From Jeff Cooper’s Commentaries
Vol. 2, No. 5
May 1994

Institutionalized bigotry

According to these guys I imagine I exhibited all the symptoms of someone about to go postal, except for one.  The one missing was supplied by PNNL–by firing me.  How many other civil rights activists exhibit the same “symptoms”? 

Some type of obsession, e.g., weapons, other acts of violence, romantic/sexual, zealot (political, religious, racial), the job itself, neatness and order

Performance Problems, including problems with attendance or tardiness [I am a night person and I, and others, would arrive late and leave late]

Access to and familiarity with weapons

Being fired, laid off or suspended; passed over for promotion

As I read this web page I and others who advocate for the rights of gun owners, should never be hired in the first place.  There is a word for this–bigotry.

Iraq “Bill of Rights”

Peenie Wallie sent me an email with his post about a draft of the Iraq “Bill of Rights”.  I finally got around to reading it this morning.  Yuck.  It’s not a “Bill of Rights”. It’s a list of things the government must provide–such as health care.  And it specifically says citizens may not own weapons except by permit.

It’s a draft.  It should be scrapped.  Rights are things that no government can give or take away–only infringe upon.  A Bill of Rights is a written promise to not infringe upon those rights.

Anti-freedom bias by employers

I’m doing some research on employers that enforce an anti-freedom bias on their employees.  I was inspired by the recent American Rifleman article and some other events.  I’m just getting started but I ran across this “Hiring Guide” and I would rather not pay the $20.00 for it.  Does anyone else have access to it?  If so can you tell we if it says anything about gun ownership or free speech advocates?  A sample of the description of the guide:

This guide presents valuable tools and approaches:

  • Critical Behavior Traits
  • Checklist for Evaluating Resumes
  • Important Questions to Include in the Employment Application
  • Interviewing Techniques
  • Reference and Background Checking
  • Employment Verification and Release Form

If not it, how about any similar hiring guides–even if they are specific to a particular company.

Thanks.

Quote of the day–William Rawle

The prohibition is general. No clause in the Constitution could by rule of construction be conceived to give the Congress the power to disarm the people.

William Rawle
1825
He was offered the position of the first U.S. Attorney General, by President Washington.

Quote of the day–Greg Hamilton

I heard a story the other day from a long time cop in New York City. The cops don’t give first aid to anybody when they arrive at the aftermath of a crime scene anymore.  They roll up their windows and yell at the victims to sit down on the curb and wait for the paramedics to arrive.

Well, this cop and a rookie went to the scene and several young blacks came out of an alley all cut up and shot up, one had blood squirting out of his chest.  The cops rolled up their windows as the victims approached the car and the victims said, “Hey! There was some niggers in there that was try’n to kill us”. This being almost entirely black area of town the cops yelled back, “You’ll have to be more specific. Which niggers were trying to kill you?”  The victims described them as best they could, standing there, blood dripping and squirting. All but one of them finally sat down on the curb to wait for the paramedics.  The long time cop finally asked the one still standing if he was feeling a little short of breath. The victim took a couple breaths and said, “Yeah!  I guess I am.”  “How about dizziness? Nausea? Anything like that?”, the cop asked. The guy, looked off in the distance and thought for a couple seconds. “Yeah, I suppose. Why you asking me all this?”   “Well”, said the cop, “Most people shot up as bad as you are, are already dead.”  The victims eyes rolled back to complete whites and he toppled straight backwards on the concrete.  The rookie cop turned to his partner and said, “Jesus!  I ain’t even HEARD of anybody killing someone that way.”

The point of the story is that you don’t stop fighting until the fight is over.  You don’t need to go down just because you have taken a few hits.  As long as you believe you can keep going you will.  If you do go down, you are still going to win because you are going to gnaw through his Achilles’ tendon and bring him down to where you can rip his head off.

Greg Hamilton
Self Defense Instructor
Nov. 19, 1995

American Rifleman article

I got a call from a fellow shooter about an hour ago.  He asked if had read the latest American Rifleman magazine.  “How recent?” I asked.  “I just got it in the mail today.”  “Definitely not.  What’s up?”  He told me and I ran out to the mailbox to find my copy of the magazine.

The article is titled “If You Hunt or Own a Gun… You’re Fired!”

The URL associated with this article http://www.nra.org/URfired is broken.  Does anyone have a URL that works?

Update: Here is a scanned version of the article:


Click on the picture to see the full sized article.

Update2: The related info just keeps coming in.  I just got an email with a link to this:

Guns in the Workplace:
State Laws v. Employer’s Rights
Duration: 3 hours
Cost: $169

Changes in state concealed weapon laws have created additional burdens on employers. Workplace shootings nearly doubled from 2002 to 2003, increasing from 25 to 45 incidents. The number of employees killed in these shootings rose from 33 to 69. A recent study found that workplaces with policies that permitted guns were five times more likely to experience homicides than those that prohibited weapons.

Get the information and resource you need to ensure a safe and weapon free workplace. Learn why your workplace needs to address weapons in the workplace, changes in state concealed weapon laws, model policy and guidelines and best practices for enforcement.

Update3: An email from a friend:

I seriously question this assertion;

“A recent study found that workplaces with policies that permitted guns were five times more likely to experience homicides than those that prohibited weapons.” Where can that be verified?

My response:

There is a pretty good chance it’s true. But almost for certain it includes armed robbers having their I.Q. reduced to zero from lead poisoning under the category of “experienced homicides” at a workplace. They aren’t lying, they just don’t distinguish being unjustified, justified, and praiseworthy homicide. Another point to be made is that workplaces at high risk are the ones that are most likely to allow firearms–hence it’s not the cause and effect they want to imply that results in homicides. Instead it’s homicides are likely hence firearms are allowed.

If I wanted to spend enough time on it I think I could find the statistics. But I don’t think it’s worth the effort at this point.

Update4: Another item from the August 2005 issue of American Rifleman:


And editorial by Wayne LaPierre.  Click on the picture to see the full sized article.

Quote of the day–Paul Smith

If a law containing the word “gun” or “firearm”, etc…. would still describe an illegal act regardless of that word, the word should be removed as being unnecessary.  Furthermore, laws that describe mere possession of an item (that can be safely controlled and maintained by the possessor) as the punishable “act” are not “reasonable” …

Paul Smith
Email Sept 3, 2001, 7:13 PM