1) Ironically, the reply's 3rd paragraph stated "The FBI encourages timely, ...information-sharing with ... the general public." (emphasis added). It's so sad to see that the FBI's words contradicted the FBI 's actions in a short one-pager. Is a reply after 3 months timely?
2) The reply was decidedly NOT a form letter in that it refers to specific matters I mentioned. However, it was full of platitudes such as "... the FBI does not use ethnicity or national origin as the basis to open an investigation ..." To me, such bureaucratic answers reflect that the FBI higher ups are completely unaware of the general public's perception of the FBI's actions. Clickhere to read public statements from the academic, scientific and industrial pharmaceutical world about the FBI's actions and planned actions.SAD!
3) My letter to Dir. Wray directly confronted his advocacy to use a "whole-of-society approach (WOSA)" to catch Chinese spies. My letter mentioned "WOSA" or the equivalent 14 times pointing to the central and collateral damage of Wray's attempts to use a "Chinese totalitarian methodology to deal with an American challenge."
Ironically, Assistant Dir. Sullivan's reply mentioned WOSA or the equivalent ZERO times. How conspicuously un-usal! Is there a hidden message?
4) A tentative conclusion: The FBI might have backed off its "whole-of-society approach" to catch Chinese spies.
If so, that is GREAT NEWS! We appreciate Asst. Dir. Sullivan taking the time to understand our concerns. His reply is shown below for your examination: