Dear Editor,

Contractor General Greg Christie just doesn't get it. He takes great exception to even the mildest advice offered by your editorial of January 31.

In his response to you he claims that it is "imperative" that he publicly lays out the unsubstantiated allegations against citizens even before he investigates these claims of alleged misconduct. He doesn't say why it is "imperative" to unnecessarily destroy someone's reputation even before his office determines whether there is any merit to the allegations.

Christie enjoys the broad support of a public frustrated by years of misconduct and injustice. He runs the risk of losing public support by his thin-skinned rejection of the Observer's wise, albeit belated, advice.

Errol WA Townshend

Canada

ewat@rogers.com

  0 comments

  2 comments

  0 comments

  0 comments

  0 comments

  0 comments

  1 comments

  0 comments

  3 comments

  2 comments

  0 comments

  0 comments

  0 comments

  0 comments

  0 comments

  2 comments

  0 comments

  0 comments

  1 comments

  0 comments