Government Accountability Project

This post also appears on GAP Homeland Security Director Jesselyn Radack's Daily Kos blog.

UPDATED 12:23 PM: Earlier today I argued that, in light of the Obama administration going after reporters and sources, Wikileaks is the only avenue left.  In the comments I stated that Wikileaks is not ideal because it lacks the fact-checking and at-least-the-pretense-of-balance of journalism.  I stand corrected.  In Mr. Assange's own words, BREAKING:

This idea is spin by those connected to the abuses we have revealed, however, it is simply not true.

1. There has never been a documented case of WikiLeaks misattributing a document.  We have a perfect record over three years of publishing.  Compare this record with any other publisher of political materials.
2. In the U.S. a lot of the anti-Wikileaks propaganda comes from military apologists attempting to undermine the strength of http://collateralmurder.com/ by attacking its messenger.  However, read that website carefully and all statements made in the video itself.  You will see that even after other details have come to light, none require corrections.  Why? Because we fact-checked--to the degree of sending people to the most dangerous part of Baghdad during election time to do it.  Who else has such demanding standards?
3. We push the ideal of "scientific journalism"--all primary sources for every article made available.  It's our invention because we love fact-checking and want others to check our facts to prove our good work.
4. On the balance issue.  You're right.  We don't believe in "balance"--we believe in accuracy and fairness.  That is an important difference and higher standard.  The truth is not revealed by balancing the lies of competing powergroups--that is a job for politicians.  We, as servants of the historical record, have a higher standard.

I can't argue with that, Julian Assange.  THANK YOU for what you are doing and for your bravery in contacting me.

In many cases, like that of Bradley Manning, we end up slamming "leakers" for going to Wikileaks instead of questioning why American soldiers used an Apache helicopter to shoot unarmed Iraqi civilians, journalists, and children, while egging each other on like they were playing Call of Duty.

If the Obama administration so despises disclosures to the media or Wikileaks, giving protections and options to national security whistleblowers should be priority one.  In the meantime, I submit that it is the government officials who engaged in torture, warrantless wiretapping, and "collateral murder" who have endangered our national security, and not those who exposed the wrongdoing.

-----------------

Jon Stewart's monologue on The Daily Show should be required watching for any doubters about Obama and civil liberties (he discusses Thomas Drake and whistleblowing at 7:00):

On Obama's watch, national security whistleblowers find themselves exempt from the Whistleblower Protection Act, crippled by the inaptly-named "Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act" (which provides zero real protections for employees) and now, thanks to Obama's recent crackdown on "leakers", whistleblowers--fearing criminal prosecution should they turn to the media (often the only real check on government abuse of power)--can only go to Wikileaks.

Wikileaks may be the only option left for employees who see waste, fraud, abuse or illegality in the national security realm. This is certainly not ideal, as Wikileaks lacks the fact-checking and at-least-pretense-of-balance of journalism.

I appeared on two recent shows on NPR and Pacifica Radio that detail the debate over Wikileaks and Obama's stance on so-called "leakers." (Remember, we called them whistleblowers during the Bush administration). The radio shows are available here and here.

I've chronicled the Obama administration's recent dedication to criminalizing whistleblowing to a greater extent than any other president in history:

Thomas Drake (former senior National Security Agency official)- Stemming from a Bush leak investigation into the warrantless wiretapping program, recently indicted for allegedly retaining classified information that led to a series of newspaper articles about NSA's billion-dollar mismanagement of a program to conduct secret surveillance with maximum privacy intrusion.

James Risen (New York Times reporter)- Justice Department reissued Bush-era grand jury subpoena for his sources for a chapter of his 2006 book, State of War, which focuses on a CIA-led ruse to disrupt Iranian nuclear weapons research.

Shamai Leibowitz (FBI linguist)- sentenced to 20 months in prison for giving classified information to a blogger.

Bradley Manning (Army Intelligence Analyst)- arrested for allegedly disclosing to Wikileaks classified video footage [titled "Collateral Murder"] of an apache helicopter attack that killed unarmed Iraqi civilians, including two Reuters reporters, and injured two children.The crackdown has received support from giddy conservatives like Gabriel Schoenfeld, author of Necessary Secrets, and supporter of prosecuting under the Espionage Act not only leakers, but - much to the chagrin of the First Amendment - also the journalists and newspapers who help get the truth out. . .and by logical extension, anyone who reads the articles and further disseminates them by discussing or e-mailing them on.

As much as Schoenfeld would like us to believe in some mythical state of whistleblower protections for national security employees where employees can easily blow the whistle and merrily go about their careers, the reality for national security whistleblowers is tragically different.

The New York Times detailed Drake's frustrating whistleblowing ordeal to stop the NSA from wasting hundred of millions on program that even former NSA director Gen. Michael Hayden admitted was a failure:

[Drake] took his concerns everywhere inside the secret world: to his bosses, to the agency’s inspector general, to the Defense Department’s inspector general and to the Congressional intelligence committees. But he felt his message was not getting through.

So he contacted a reporter for The Baltimore Sun.

And now, that Drake is facing 35 years in prison, whistleblowers will fear ever turning to the media--the "Fourth Estate"--an action recognized as a valid way to blow the whistle in Federal Circuit case law construing the Whistleblower Protection Act.

Wikileaks is all that is left. And, yet, in many cases, like that of Bradley Manning, we end up slamming "leakers" for going to Wikileaks instead of questioning why American soldiers used an Apache helicopter to shoot unarmed Iraqi civilians, journalists, and children, while egging each other on like they were playing Call of Duty.

If the Obama administration so despises disclosures to the media or Wikileaks, giving protections and options to national security whistleblowers should be priority one. In the meantime, I submit that it is the government officials who engaged in torture, warrantless wiretapping, and "collateral murder" who have endangered our national security, and not those who exposed the wrongdoing.

--------------------