Re: Area 52 Investigation
0006.0003.00002224.00.12.22:> display messages
1 new message...
**************
Department of Information
Eastern North American Subdivision
June 1st, 2224
______________________________________________________________________
Subject: Area 52 Investigation
From: Ambrose Evan Coward
To: Erica Susan Green
Erica,
I had thought our professional relationship was amicable, until I discovered through a third party today that you had authorized a contracted investigator under your direction to look into my Area 52 investigation.
For what reason did you authorize this without even notifying me, let alone requesting my permission? This operation is very sensitive and it cannot afford to be tarnished by external meddling in absence of all the information, much of which is classified to my department. Therefore, I have exercised my regional authority to cut off that information from his security clearance until I receive a sufficient reason explaining why access to that information should be shared with him.
Unless you have a truly remarkable reason for this, I must suggest that you recall your agent immediately.
Ambrose Evan Coward
Department of Information Director for Eastern North America
**************
0006.0003.00002224.00.12.25:> reply to message, reduce encryption to level 5
Ambrose,
I am disappointed that you are so willing to jump to such conclusions about my activities. External meddling? The contracted investigator that I am assuming you are referring to has not been directed to look into your area 52 investigation. He is currently pursuing an investigation into a SERIOUS security breach that has occurred, that members of the Board of Directors themselves have shown concern over. The traced location of the most recent breaches has been the Florida Sea. Therefore, the contracted investigator was given clearance to access the basic information regarding Area 52. He has no interest or direction to 'meddle' in your investigation in any way. He is a class 7 trust-authorized resource. I hope you can see fit to allow him periphery access.
Frankly, I assumed the mechanics of such an investigation was beneath your personal involvement and that with your investigation placing such a strain on your local resources you would not be so concerned with such a matter. I suppose I can understand your reaction given all the stress you are under from the Area 52 investigation though. I assumed this type of information exchange fell under the usual level of exchange our departments usually operate under. That was clearly my error. My department will not fail to request your permission for such access in the future.
Erica Susan Green
Department of Information Director for Western North America
1 new message...
**************
Department of Information
Eastern North American Subdivision
June 1st, 2224
______________________________________________________________________
Subject: Area 52 Investigation
From: Ambrose Evan Coward
To: Erica Susan Green
Erica,
I had thought our professional relationship was amicable, until I discovered through a third party today that you had authorized a contracted investigator under your direction to look into my Area 52 investigation.
For what reason did you authorize this without even notifying me, let alone requesting my permission? This operation is very sensitive and it cannot afford to be tarnished by external meddling in absence of all the information, much of which is classified to my department. Therefore, I have exercised my regional authority to cut off that information from his security clearance until I receive a sufficient reason explaining why access to that information should be shared with him.
Unless you have a truly remarkable reason for this, I must suggest that you recall your agent immediately.
Ambrose Evan Coward
Department of Information Director for Eastern North America
**************
0006.0003.00002224.00.12.25:> reply to message, reduce encryption to level 5
Ambrose,
I am disappointed that you are so willing to jump to such conclusions about my activities. External meddling? The contracted investigator that I am assuming you are referring to has not been directed to look into your area 52 investigation. He is currently pursuing an investigation into a SERIOUS security breach that has occurred, that members of the Board of Directors themselves have shown concern over. The traced location of the most recent breaches has been the Florida Sea. Therefore, the contracted investigator was given clearance to access the basic information regarding Area 52. He has no interest or direction to 'meddle' in your investigation in any way. He is a class 7 trust-authorized resource. I hope you can see fit to allow him periphery access.
Frankly, I assumed the mechanics of such an investigation was beneath your personal involvement and that with your investigation placing such a strain on your local resources you would not be so concerned with such a matter. I suppose I can understand your reaction given all the stress you are under from the Area 52 investigation though. I assumed this type of information exchange fell under the usual level of exchange our departments usually operate under. That was clearly my error. My department will not fail to request your permission for such access in the future.
Erica Susan Green
Department of Information Director for Western North America