Loki

I want to thank you Mr. Melson for mentioning my pseudonym on CNN. Mr. Melson, you should hold your executives accountable and responsible for their adverse personnel actions and/or acts of vengeance. It is unfortunate that this situation has deteriorated to this. I look forward to the day that ATF rebuilds its credibility with its employees and the rest of the American public. If a statement is taken out of context or slanted, in what context or non-slanted manner was it said? What exactly was said? Do you have that information? Would you be willing to share this with us? Due to the culture of retaliation, the nature and the premise on which this website was developed, it is okay not to reveal your identity, if you choose not to. Most of the participants on this website have chose not to reveal their identities and it is okay. I believe that there are some that would like to know what location to point the nuclear missiles at or what target to direct the drone kill to. Although as tempting as your offer to come and talk to you may be, I must decline, at this time. How do you know that I have not met with you already? I hope that at some point there is an environment where I can meet with you again. Until then, verifying something is more than just asking a Special Agent in Charge or Assistant Director (Field Operations)or a Chief in HQ, you need to start asking and meeting with the employees directly. Especially, if it is something as significant as to cause you to have to answer charges on CNN. You have already found yourself that some of your trusted advisers are not to be and can not be trusted.

Any answers?

Corrections 1 you are very distracting and a nuisance!

This from a Doc Holiday post....just because they give you what you want, if you allege retaliation, they are still liable. This is the case in the Supreme Court decision below... BURLINGTON NORTHERN AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY, PETITIONER v. SHEILA WHITE on writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the sixth circuit [June 22, 2006] No. 05-259.?Argued April 17, 2006--Decided June 22, 2006 Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 forbids employment discrimination based on "race, color, religion, sex, or national origin," 42 U. S. C. §2000e-2(a), and its anti-retaliation provision forbids "discriminat[ion] against" an employee or job applicant who, inter alia, has "made a charge, testified, assisted, or participated in" a Title VII proceeding or investigation, §2000e-3(a) It CLEARLY states that just because the agency reverses its bad acts when the complainant is nipping at their heels, does not negate the fact that they took the act in the first place. Please research this case and read in its entirety.

Exellent Thor! ATF won't move in a postive way into the future by ignoring or failing to fix the past.

The injuries of the past shall never heal unless confronted and medicated!

This organizational chart is also missing the "Ladies in Waiting". The ladies waiting to get (#@!$%#$% so that they can get promotions, awards and more promotion, awards from these predators. This Ladies in Waiting club is nothing new. Brad Buckles John McGaw Carl Truscott ....are a few of the Directors that had their ladies in waiting....so why should we be surprise if others like Krenshaw, Ford, Hoover, Gillette and Stankiewicz attempt to get their lady in waiting. I am not saying that it is right or that I agree with it. I am not gonna call the ladies out but you know who you are! YEA YOU!!!