One unamed blogger says that George Tarburton did not report the problems to the proper authorities, but I have it otherwise; George, to my knowledge, DID officially report wrong-doings and (in fact) that is likely the reason for his undoing. George complied with policy and SOP in as much as he reported the problems and thus was targeted and undone in discovery. To his further credit, HE also DID not drag down fellow officers who had also spoken to the press. His integrity and personal behavior should not be placed at the same level as those who have told tales of weaknesses that could place us all in jeopardy. From personal conversations (after many long years) and from personal knowledge of George from years past as a sentry under my command I believe that he continues to be a man of integrity who did the right thing despite pressure or temptation to do otherwise. George is no loose cannon. He saw the bigger picture and fell on his sword. Maryland may rest easier knowing that some such as George Tarburton will do the right thing despite the harsh personal consequences. "When an officer finds a security breach they are bound to resolve it and report it. If it is beyond their capacity to resolve they must report it." Tarburton was chosen, in 1982, for the Personnel Reliability Program which meant that he was hand-picked for special duty guarding special weapons overseas. His training and behavior were exemplary. All this being said, I did not bias my pupils to write what they wrote and what they wrote really tells of the larger problem. Lest we ignore the elephant in the corner, she is called GAG...shut up or get out... That's not the same nation that my grandfather came to from Poland and THAT IS to the detriment of us all. There is a time to remain silent and secret and there is a time to speak out, to yell out what is wrong, despite constraints placed mostly to protect power positions. "Your silence will not protect you," once wrote Audre Lorde. I hold (unless otherwise proven wrong) that the man did a deed worthy of praise and his reinstatement would be a commendation to all who have done the same, but then, let's face it...it would ne'er be so interesting nor controversial. Perhaps my students' idealism is naive, but I'd far prefer such naivity to the cinical nature of those who simply believe and never question or risk what George Tarburton questioned and risked to his own detriment and for our national security. What I fear most is that we begin to call unity conformity and lest we forget, that is what happened in Nazi Germany. In times of trouble, "a loose lip may sink ship," but I say that in blind loyalty we all lose a "grip" on those freedoms that make us most fit to defend against the foes of liberty. Still, my pupils in education and not indoctrination said it best - a good man thrown to the wolves because those in power must keep their grip and never be seen to falter. Machiavelli would be proud. In closure, thank God for all those (including many former pupils) who serve to keep us safe and may THEY ever feel safe to find safe new ways to speak out in due measure to protect and preserve freedoms so hard acquired.

Bill posts that George lies. I would ask what the lies are and what the rest of the story is. Since he terms him Georgie, it sounds like Bill knows him. I have not seen George in years and thus would like to know what Bill seems to know.
The other concept I adhere to, directly taken from "A Man for All Seasons" is that of "quietem consentare" - meaning that silence is consent (an old English common law practice). Thus Edmund Burke (in stating that, "All it takes for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing.") was deriving his ideas from an already established ideal that George also adhered to and that we ALL KNOW as important. Sometimes we must risk ourselves for the greater good and, in so doing, oft take the fall. This, to me, is true courage - knowing that pressure and/or temptation to do otherwise is far more safe and still listening to the voice inside that says, "Do the right thing." If you read Roderick's blog you'll find a post that somehow notes that George did not follow the proper channels and I still believe in chain of command and also know from talking with George that HE DID state his concerns and go through the proper channels, but was ignored. Per G. Tarburton directly, he FINALLY felt it necessary to speak out to those delving into security and to George's credit (adding to his problem with superiors) he would not give up the names of others who did the same. Commendable by my opinion. In fact, George offered that his lawyer was told that George could keep his job if he turned in the others who commented to the news. I will not use the two (harsh) words that George demanded his lawyer use on the telephone to the superior, but it was firm that he would not bend to it.
Admirable qualities from one who was trained in admirable qualities.
Please let me know if I and others have been taken a fool; where's the beef? Or perhaps these bloggers are the ones who were protected by "Georgie" and/or who stood against him? If the man was wrong, bring forth your proof or bow out and hide.
Yours,
Paul

Dan i need some assistance placing ex-offenders can you be of any help?