Latest Breaking News

MADem

(135,425 posts)

40. Sorry--I continue to vociferously disagree with your argument. And I have first-hand experience

Reply to boppers (Reply #38)

Wed Jul 18, 2012, 07:27 AM

Jul 2012

with this issue and how government IT oversight is applied, so I will have to take my view over yours.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

65 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

In Vast Effort, F.D.A. Spied on E-Mails of Its Own Scientists [View all] choie Jul 2012 OP

Are those bowling balls or...wait, wait...HEADS ROLLING? MADem Jul 2012 #1

Damn I hope so..... DeSwiss Jul 2012 #2

Well, one thing about Congressmen--they aren't at all short of hubris. MADem Jul 2012 #4

In what way is using a public resource, to send a public message, over a public network.... private? boppers Jul 2012 #8

These people were whistleblowing. You're seriously thinking that anyone, for any reason, should be MADem Jul 2012 #9

Not their network, not their computers, not their email. boppers Jul 2012 #10

The keyloggers were abusing their Privacy Act oversight duties. MADem Jul 2012 #12

The networks are public property. The emails can be FOI'ed. boppers Jul 2012 #28

You can FOIA them, but you might not get them. MADem Jul 2012 #30

Was the software installed on private, personal, computers? boppers Jul 2012 #31

I don't mean to be rude, but when you keep repeatedly insisting that you are right, and you are not, MADem Jul 2012 #32

I read it. boppers Jul 2012 #38

Sorry--I continue to vociferously disagree with your argument. And I have first-hand experience MADem Jul 2012 #40

I have a bit of first hand experience, myself. boppers Jul 2012 #43

FDA has no "security issues" -- and the HHS IG said as much. MADem Jul 2012 #47

No, the IG and Federal Prosecutors said there was no criminal case. boppers Jul 2012 #50

What part of crossing the legal line is unclear here ? MADem Jul 2012 #55

"may have" boppers Jul 2012 #59

Maybe not if Obama gets his way. woo me with science Jul 2012 #45

To emphasized and convoluted for me to follow right now. boppers Jul 2012 #49

Sorry that was too difficult, woo me with science Jul 2012 #62

Mea culpa. boppers Jul 2012 #64

Okay, now I have myself put together. boppers Jul 2012 #65

"specifically protected under the law, including attorney-client communications, whistle-blower complaints to Congress and workplace grievances filed with the government. bananas Jul 2012 #16

So, all bitching to congress and lobbying should be protected? boppers Jul 2012 #29

Who's talking about lobbyists? You are being deliberately obtuse. nt MADem Jul 2012 #34

They were lobbying congress over FDA regulations. boppers Jul 2012 #39

You don't, quite apparently, understand what lobbying means. MADem Jul 2012 #41

Journalists are government representatives? boppers Jul 2012 #44

Last time I checked, journalists weren't members of Congress. MADem Jul 2012 #48

Read the OP. boppers Jul 2012 #51

I did read it--I understand what the scientists did. It's called whistleblowing, not "lobbying." MADem Jul 2012 #52

They saw a problem/solution which might affect their monetary interests. boppers Jul 2012 #56

No--you don't. And you've demonstrated that here very clearly. nt MADem Jul 2012 #60

Google "Dr. Andrew Wakefield". boppers Jul 2012 #61

You are wrong, you didn't read the article carefully at all. MADem Jul 2012 #53

Oh, "radiation" fear? boppers Jul 2012 #57

You didn't read the article, and now you are being rude, so yeah, we are done. nt MADem Jul 2012 #58

Wow - and then it was posted on a public website by a private document-handling contractor. nt bananas Jul 2012 #3

Yep--blazingly stupid. There's always some little fart digging around here! nt MADem Jul 2012 #5

Good one judesedit Jul 2012 #24

Too funny judesedit Jul 2012 #25

How does one send email "privately" from an employer- (i.e. government-) owned laptop computer? slackmaster Jul 2012 #6

Precisely! judesedit Jul 2012 #23

They sent emails from government accounts, on government computers, over government networks. boppers Jul 2012 #7

It's safe to assume they signed a computer usage agreement that explicitly says their activity... slackmaster Jul 2012 #11

specifically protected under the law,including attorney-client communications,whistle-blower complaints to Congress andworkplace grievances filed with thegovernment. bananas Jul 2012 #17

Anything you do on your employer's IT system is not private. FarCenter Jul 2012 #13

For those for whom the nuance of this story was lost..... sendero Jul 2012 #14

If you send to [email protected] the email belongs to EatNoFat FarCenter Jul 2012 #15

"specifically protected under the law, including attorney-client communications, whistle-blower complaints to Congress and workplace grievances filed with the government. bananas Jul 2012 #18

So the senders should put "whistle blower complaint" or "attorney client" in the Subject line FarCenter Jul 2012 #20

The "bosses" should not be keylogging the employees. MADem Jul 2012 #26

These asshole managers committed multiple felonies and should be thrown in jail for a long time. nt bananas Jul 2012 #27

Exactly! judesedit Jul 2012 #22

The other nuance is that their bosses in the criminal investigation division at Health and Human MADem Jul 2012 #36

The IG at HHS told them that the scientists and researchers were doing NOTHING WRONG. MADem Jul 2012 #33

When the IG of the agency above you says the scientist/researchers were doing NOTHING WRONG, I think MADem Jul 2012 #35

This appears to have been done by FDA IT security people with the advice of FDA counsel. FarCenter Jul 2012 #37

transparency you can believe in ? may3rd Jul 2012 #19

Sent privately? If they were on company computers that is standard practice really. That's what IT judesedit Jul 2012 #21

more kick.. n/t annabanana Jul 2012 #42

Sucks but isnt it legal if they were on government owned computers? nt cstanleytech Jul 2012 #46

The Inspector General did not authorize the spying. MADem Jul 2012 #54

Interesting. Someone may soon wish that they hadnt done this then. .nt cstanleytech Jul 2012 #63