They can't all be Cox!

Watergate Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox

Here is a link to a letter I recieved in the mail today from the OSC:

http://www.canvs.com/CANVS-V-USA/OSC-01JUN12-Hardcopy.pdf

I would like to point out a detail about "Consent Ststement 1"

Consent Statement 1

I consent to OSC's communication with the agency involved in my complaint. I agree to allow OSC to disclose my identity as the complaintant and information from or about me, to the agency if OSC decides that such disclosure is needed to investigate the allegation(s) in my complaint (for example to request information from the agency, or seek a possible resolution through mediation or corrective action). I understand that regardless of the Consent Statement I choose, OSC may disclose infoormation from my complaint file when permitted by the Privacy Act (including circumstances summerized in Part 5 below).

I would like to quote Major Valentina Koslova (a character in the movie The Jackel): "The Good Guys Don't Hide"

What I mean is that I have no reason to be anonymous because I know who and what they did to me and my company, and so do they. And the law (in theory) is on my side. I have yet to see experimental evidence of the last by the way. What I am getting at is why is this a one way street? The folks on the other side can say things like "four hours were spent looking for the requested materials" but no information about who did the looking and where were they looking. If the Janitor looked in an empty trash can for four hours that would be the same as the Director of an Agency searching the Security Authorization Archives based on the non-specific information coming from the other side on most of these transactions.

I think it is time for me to either warm up some milk or open a bottle of Single Malt Scotch, OR BOTH!