I see your point. In a hypothetical situation where a long list of wrongs is being perpetrated, and it's so crucial to stop an action, that the cost of sabotaging your own side is justified, that you roll the dice. No one takes issue with the German officers that tried to kill Hitler.

You write a good bit about concessions, and I agree with your stance that we don't need to make any. You write that there are many that are likely to pass a TA, and I agree with you. It may be a disappointment that this is so, but it is so. The MEC directs the NC, they get us a TA, and we vote.

In these last few weeks, some have made the argument that there is some force at work within the MEC, a “slim majority”, that wants to do certain things. I think they’re mostly fictional accounts, and designed to market/discredit reps after the TA passes, but regardless, they’re allegations about what the majority wants to do. Let’s say they’re true, for argument’s sake, and since the majority runs the show, these represent our true intentions. When someone leaks true intentions, they’re undoubtedly costing us money. They’re taking a gamble that they are so correct about the actions of the majority, and the rest of us are so ignorant of the truth, that the risks of taking costly steps that lower the value of a deal, or kill it altogether, are less important than stopping the majority.

They have in effect decided to supplant their judgment, over the judgement of the pilots, who are providing input, and standing by to vote on the result.

I just want to know if they’re adding the insult of lying, to the cost of the leak.