Reports have surfaced about a new book on the Bin Laden raid by an anonymous Navy Seal who, according to the book's publisher, "was one of the first men through the door on the third floor of the terrorist leader’s hideout and was present at his death."

This latest book (titled No Easy Day: The Firsthand Account of the Mission That Killed Osama bin Laden and due out next month) did not go through the pre-publication review process. From WaPo:

Officials indicated Wednesday that neither the author nor the publisher had cleared the book’s contents with the Defense Department or the CIA, a step ordinarily required by former service members or spies seeking to write about classified operations.

The Obama administration ought to look in the mirror before expressing too much anger about the book considering the administration is the biggest "leaker" of all, especially when it comes to the Bin Laden raid, a point not lost on WaPo:

It could also raise legal and political issues for the Obama administration, which has carried out an aggressive crackdown on leaks even while it has also been accused of offering access to journalists and moviemakers to exploit the success of the bin Laden operation.

The pre-publication review processes, particularly at intelligence agencies, are notoriously favorable to pro-government publications and unfavorable toward critical writings. Worse, even authors who go through the pre-publication review process – like my clients John Kiriakou and Peter Van Buren – are not protected from retaliation for their books.

CIA whistleblower John Kiriakou submitted his 2009 book, The Reluctant Spy: My Secret Life in the CIA's War on Terror, for pre-publication review and worked with the CIA for years negotiating to get his book approved. Now Kiriakou has been indicted under the Espionage Act - the sixth person to be indicted in the Obama administration's record-braking war on whistleblowers - and is facing decades in prison. One of the charges against him despite his cooperation with the pre-publication review process: lying to the CIA's pre-publication review board. More specifically, Kiriakou is charged with trying to trick the CIA's board, but being unsuccessful – meaning CIA approved the book in its entirety. The charge is based upon an e-mail Kiriakou allegedly sent not to the CIA's board, but to his co-author. (If you find it baffling that the Justice Department has used this as the basis for a felony charge, you are not alone.)

Slaughterhouse Suspension Shows Undercover Video Still Important for Humane Handling Whistleblowers

Summary: A California slaughterhouse has been suspended in light of undercover video footage exposing inhumane handling of cattle. GAP's Food Integrity Campaign discusses the importance of undercover video for whistleblowers in the meat industry who lack adequate protection against retaliation when raising concerns.

Associated Press: Advocates Decry Court Ruling as Causing Far-Reaching Impact on Civil Service Protections

Summary: Associated Press coverage of the recent circuit court ruling that will limit the rights of federal employees under the guise of “national security.” GAP Legal Director Tom Devine is quoted.

Key Quote: Tom Devine, legal director of the Government Accountability Project, a whistle-blower advocacy group, said Tuesday that the appeals court has given agencies “a blank check to cancel all government accountability in civil service law.”

Bloomberg News: SEC Pays $50,000 in First Dodd-Frank Whistleblower Reward

Summary: The SEC has finally given out its first whistleblower reward for $50,000. The agency’s whistleblower program was created last year to compensate whistleblowers who come forward with tips on securities fraud. The award was 30 percent of the total collected so far in that particular case.

Related Articles: Los Angeles Times, Wall Street Journal

Washington Post: Court Limits Federal Employee Appeal Rights

Summary: Last Friday, a Federal Circuit court ruled that national security procedures will replace civil service appeals and merit system rights – such as the Whistleblower Protection Act – for employees removed from “noncritical sensitive” positions. This decision could have a very negative impact on future whistleblowers, and effectively nullifies the merit system for federal employees. GAP issued a press release yesterday condemning the decision. 

Key Quote: Tom Devine, legal director of the Government Accountability Project, a whistleblower advocacy organization, said a “noncritical sensitive” label “can be applied to virtually any federal job.” He noted that the employees in the case were lower-level — an accounting technician and a commissary worker — and said that the designation also has been applied to positions including paralegals, and employees of agency inspector general offices.

“The Federal Circuit has given agencies a blank check to categorize almost any federal job as ‘sensitive’ — demoted from the civil service merit system to a national security world of secret law,” he said.

Related Articles: Find Law

RT: Government Spies on Federal Agencies’ Staffers

Summary: This RT segment focuses on the recent scandal of the FDA’s surveillance of its own employees and the revelation that the FDA is not the only agency to do this. GAP National Security & Human Rights Director Jesselyn Radack appears as a guest on the show to comment on these events.

Ruling 'Nullifies' Civil Service Rights

(Washington, D.C.) –  Today, the Government Accountability Project (GAP) harshly criticized a ruling last Friday from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit that, according to the decision's dissent, “nullifies” the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, and the merit system. The ruling potentially affects all federal employees.

In Berry v. Conyers & Northover, the court overruled a previous decision by the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB). The Federal Circuit, on Friday, held that national security procedures will replace civil service appeals and merit system rights –such as the Whistleblower Protection Act – for employees removed from “noncritical sensitive” positions. Previously, such national security procedures were limited to removal of security clearances for access to classified information.

As dissenting Judge Timothy B. Dyk pointed out:

The majority… holds that hundreds of thousands of federal employees—designated as holding national security positions—do not have the right to appeal the merits of adverse actions to the Board simply because the Department of Defense has decided that such appeals should not be allowed.

GAP Legal Director Tom Devine warned the longer term consequences may be worse. “The Federal Circuit has given agencies a blank check to categorize almost any federal job as 'sensitive’ – demoted from the civil service merit system to a national security world of secret law.”

Sensitive positions, according to the court majority, are any that could “implicate national security,” whether or not they involve access to classified information. Technically, that means that an employee holds a sensitive position if they are officially eligible to apply for a security clearance anytime in the future.

The New York Times: Assange Accuses US of a ‘Witch Hunt’

Summary: Yesterday, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange stood on the balcony of the Ecuadorian embassy to give a speech, one condemning the US government and its prosecution of intelligence whistleblowers. Assange has been holed up in the embassy since mid-June. Ecuador has granted him political asylum, but the British government has denied the country’s request for Assange to relocate there. A video of the speech can be seen here. 

This morning, GAP National Security & Human Rights Director Jesselyn Radack blogged about Assange’s statements on the government’s crackdown on whistleblowers. Assange listed GAP clients and whistleblowers as examples of whistleblowers experiencing retaliation for disclosing federal waste, fraud, or abuse: NSA whistleblowers Thomas Drake and William Binney, and former CIA agent and torture whistleblower John Kiriakou.

Truthout: Whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg – I Congratulate Ecuador for Standing Up to British Empire to Protect Julian Assange 

Summary: Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg was on Democracy Now! last week, praising Ecuador “for standing up to the British Empire” and granting asylum to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.

New Era (Namibia): Whistleblowers Should Be Protected

Summary: This op-ed argues the importance of Namibian whistleblowers being able to report corruption and abuse without fear of retaliation. The country currently lacks any legislation protecting whistleblowers.

Whatever your opinion of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, he was right when he called for an end to the war on whistleblowers in his speech outside the Ecuadorian Embassy in London yesterday:

The U.S. administration's war on whistleblowers must end. Thomas Drake, William Binney, John Kiriakou, and other heroic whistleblowers must be pardoned or compensated for the hardships they have endured as servants of the public record.

While my clients' stories differ greatly from Assange's, the Obama administration has threatened to criminally prosecute all of them with the same draconian Espionage Act, a law meant to go after spies not whistleblowers. And the effect of the Obama administration's policy – if not the goal – is the same for my clients and Assange - to silence dissent.

Despite that Assange is often attacked for only looking out for himself (who could blame him considering London police were waiting outside the Ecuadorian embassy to arrest him?), he took time in his minutes-long speech to reach out to others who have been prosecuted. He also correctly identified the Obama administration's war on whistleblowers as a war on journalists and the media, a connection made by myself, Glenn Greewald, and the US main stream media itself.

The United States must pledge before the world that it will not pursue journalists for shining a light on the secret crimes of the powerful.There must be no foolish talk about prosecuting any media organisations, be it Wikileaks or the New York Times.

Assange calls for an end to U.S.'s "witch hunt" against Wikileaks called to mind Supreme Court Louis Brandeis:

Fear of serious injury cannot alone justify suppression of free speech and assembly. Men feared witches and burnt women.

The Big Picture with Thom Hartmann: Assange Granted Asylum

Summary: GAP National Security & Human Rights Director Jesselyn Radack appeared on The Big Picture with Thom Hartmann yesterday to talk about the ongoing Julian Assange saga. After holing up in the Ecuadorian embassy in London for two months, Assange was granted political asylum by Ecuador yesterday, but the British government has refused the request to allow him to relocate to the Latin American country.

Antiwar: How Not to Reconstruct Iraq, Afghanistan – or America

Summary: State Department whistleblower and GAP client Peter Van Buren writes at Antiwar on how the government has failed in its reconstruction efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan – and here at home – particularly through overspending.

FoodNavigator: Fonterra Firm Against Removing Permeate

Summary: One of New Zealand's largest dairy companies has refused to end its use of permeate – a waste product from the ultra-filtration of milk – that it adds back into milk products, a practice banned in some countries.

GAP's Food Integrity Campaign recently blogged about a dairy industry whistleblower who exposed the controversial use of permeate as an additive in Australian milk, as well as the implications for industry whistleblowers in the United States.

NPR: When This Oil Spills, It’s ‘a Whole New Monster’

Summary: Michigan is dealing with the aftereffects of a major oil spill and, as one whistleblower tells it, the Kalamazoo River is still not clean two years later. According to the whistleblower, he and other cleanup workers were just told to bury the oil. Instead, he took cell phone photos of the wrongdoing and went to the Environmental Protection Agency. He was fired shortly after, but later settled with the contractor. Now, he’s suing the company that runs the pipeline.