Comment by gwright

Analogies are dangerous, but I'll give it a shot.

In your 2003 scenario, an analogous concern would be if someone pointed out that Saddam Hussein was indeed violating some UN provisions and the response was for that person to be fired because that observation was evidence that they were "pro-war" or not sufficiently "anti-war".

My observation wouldn't be there was no "right" to fire the person but instead would be that the logical inference that triggered the firing was faulty and ill-informed. If managers everywhere we reacting that way I might suggest that there was no space to discuss the topic without undo consequences.

I can be fired by an boss who thinks I'm being insubordinate, they have that right. But it would be helpful if that boss had some evidence that I was being insubordinate and didn't use my request to clarify my insubordination as evidence that I was being insubordinate.