Đặc Tính Đạo Lý của "Chính Trị" - Hay Bản Sắc Chính Trị của Chúng Ta!

Đặc Tính Đạo Lý của "Chính Trị" - Hay Bản Sắc Chính Trị của Chúng Ta là gì? Phát nguyên từ đâu? Hình Thái Xã Hội chúng ta đang sống, Quyền Lực nằm ở đâu? Ai điều khiển? và Như Thế nào?
-
Tại sao bọn "chó đẻ chính trị gia" nói láo thường trực mà quần chúng vẫn gào thét vỗ tay, và nối đuôi nhau đi bỏ phiếu?
Tại sao quân đội an ninh thường xuyên dùng bạo lực chống lại quần chúng, nhưng quần chúng vẫn...tin vào "quân đội công an"?
Tại sao Chính phủ nhà nước gian dối lừa đảo và bạo lực chiến tranh, phí phạm hàng ngàn tỉ tài sản, hủy hại hàng triệu mạng người... nhưng quần chúng vẫn tin Nhà nước chính phủ tận thiện "lo lắng bảo vệ" cho quần chúng?

Disclose.tv - ETHOS Full Documentary

Chúng ta bị nhồi sọ và bị lừa đảo với hoang tưởng rằng chúng ta đang có Dân Chủ. Thật sự những đám quyền thế và quyền lực KHÔNG BAO GIỜ MUỐN DÂN CHỦ. Dân chủ thật sự- dân chủ trực tiếp-là một đe dọa lớn với những não trạng này. (Câu nói viện dẫn ta vẫn thường nghe là "xã hội phải có kẻ mạnh yếu giầu nghèo, mới có lực thúc đẩy (incentives). Kẻ giầu hưởng đặc quyền thì người ta mới ham làm giầu- Kẻ giầu hưởng đặc quyền vì có giới nghèo phục dịch. Chính vì vậy, giới nghèo cần phải được lưu giữ và bị khống chế để phục vụ. Nói một cách trần truồng là nhóm quyền bính lập luận rằng KHÔNG CÓ GIỚI NGHÈO KHÓ LAO ĐỘNG, thì  GIỚI ĐẶC QUYỀN SỐNG KHÔNG Ý NGHĨA vì sẽ không có người để SAI PHÁI và PHỤC DỊCH. Nền Dân Chủ thật sự sẽ phá vỡ "kỷ cương" lý tưởng này. Và đây chính là nguyên nhân KHÔNG MỘT AI trong bọn quyền bính tập đoàn đại bản, hay bọn hậu duệ của phong kiến muốn nền DÂN CHỦ thật sự hiện hữu.

Giải thuyết hàm ý của những chủ thuyết quyền lực cho rằng ĐẠI ĐA SỐ QUẦN CHÚNG  chỉ là đám cừu non ngu dại, không có khả năng tự chủ và điều hành. Cho nên không thể tin tưởng giới quần chúng bình đẳng được. Ngược lại quần chúng là đám đông có thực quyền và lực đa số, không thể đàn áp trực tiếp mãi. Cần phải có biệt pháp ru ngủ và ràng buộc đám đông nguy hiểm này. Tôn giáo, tín lý thần quyền, chủ nghĩa dân tộc, quốc  gia bản sắc, dân chủ gián tiếp v.v được tung ra cho mục tiêu CAI TRỊ TRÍ NÃO (mind control) này.  Chưa hết, đời sống còn bị bủa vây bằng một guồng máy phim ảnh giải trí miên tục -và một hệ thống giáo dục chính qui nhồi sọ không để bất cứ một ai có khả năng tư duy ngoài lề.

Từ đó, quần chúng bị sử dụng nhu những con tốt thí cho mọi âm mưu tranh chấp, mọi cuộc chiến tranh đoạt lợi.

Những cái gọi là xung đột căng thẳng quốc gia, quốc tế, chẳng qua chỉ là những bài kiểm tra xem "chủ nghĩa quốc gia nhà nước" có còn hiệu nghiệm và hiệu lực không. Và tái khích động chủ nghĩa quốc gia, củng cố niềm tin quần chúng vào nhà nước chính phủ với nỗi đe dọa ngoại xâm và một "kẻ thù" lởn vởn không định rõ được!

Đặc Tính Đạo Lý hay Bản Sắc Chính Trị của xã hội chính trị quốc gia với định chế Nhà Nước Chính Phủ là SỰ SỢ HÃI, cai trị bằng thủ đoạn TẠO NỖI SỢ THƯỜNG TRỰC trong xã hội dân chúng. Và tiến hành chiến tranh miên tục để củng cố quyền uy và tạo thêm quyền lợi!

Hệ thống chính trị và các định chế chính trị xã hội với những chức vụ hiện nay chỉ là những món hàng để cho thuê mướn và được đấu giá cho những ai có khả năng TRẢ CAO NHẤT! Đó chính là giới tập đoàn tài chính hiện nay!

NKPTC

Dân Chủ hay Thiểu Số Thống Trị (dân chủ gián tiếp) (Polyarchy or Democracy)

Dân Chủ hay Thiểu Số Thống Trị (dân chủ gián tiếp) hay Tập Đoàn Đại Bản Trị?  (Neo-Feudalism Polyarchy-Plutocracy- Corporatocracy  vs Democracy )



Polyarchy thuật ngữ do giáo sư chính trị học của Yale, Robert A. Dahl, dùng để nói về hệ thống chính trị tại Mỹ và Âu Châu. Môt hệ thống chính trị Quyền Lực nằm trong tay thiều số ĐẠI DIỆN cho nhóm THIỂU SỐ CÓ TÀI NGUYÊN THẾ LỰC trong xã hội. Hay nói một cách khác, hệ thống chính trị này mang những đặc tính của hệ thống phong kiến, nơi người có tiền của nắm quyền cai trị sinh sát xã hội, nhưng khác ở điển không có một Vua hay Giòng Vua cai trị, mà thay vào đó là nhiều đại diện của giới thế lực hợp tác cai trị xã hội. Theo Robert A. Dahl, nước Mỹ được thành lập theo định chế này chứ không phải là nền Dân Chủ, một nguyên lý quần chúng bình đẳng quyết định việc cai trị - đi ngược với nhóm quyền thế vá quyền lực xã hội.

Xã hội chúng ta đang sống là TÂN PHONG KIẾN (Neo-Feudalism) vì nó BAO GỒM TẤT CẢ NHỮNG ĐẶC TÍNH của PHONG KIẾN, chỉ thiếu vắng NGAI VUA- nhưng được sắp đặt thay thế bằng mỗi thế chế Đa Đầu Cai Trị Polyarchy) Hệ thống và định chế của nó không chỉ phục vụ nhóm nhỏ (1%) đặc quyền (Plutocracy) mà hoàn toàn cho giới tập đoàn đại bản (Corporatocracy)

Kỷ Nguyên Mới: Làm Thế nào để Tự Chủ và Tự Do sau Trò Chơi Tranh Giành- Độc Quyền

Kỷ Nguyên Mới: Làm Thế nào để Tự Chủ và Tự Do sau Trò Chơi Tranh Giành- Độc Quyền

James Corbett Trao Đổi với Đài Úc FairDinkum về Nhà Nước và Đạo Lý: Một Giả Thiết-Mê Tín bị Nhồi Sọ

James Corbett Trao Đổi với Đài Úc FairDinkum về Nhà Nước và Đạo Lý: Một Giả Thiết-Mê Tín bị Nhồi Sọ!


Nhà nước chính phủ không có đạo lý gì ngoài quyền lợi của chính bọn cầm quyền nhân danh ảo thể quốc gia nhà nước. Nó tùy tiện ăn cắp và giết người.

Với ý niệm Nhà Nước Quốc Gia:
Nếu giết 1 người bị gọi là TỘI PHẠM SÁT NHÂN.
Nhưng giết hàng trăm, hàng ngàn, hàng triệu người, là Anh Hùng Dân Tộc
Nếu ăn cắp một mẩu bánh mì, một trái táo, một gói thuốc lá sẽ bị kết án tội phạm trộm cắp.
Nhưng trấn lột từ thành quả lao động của từng người dân, lại gọi là "thuế", đoạt tài sản tư hữu đất đai của dân chúng cho phe nhóm cầm quyền- lại nhân danh phát triển quốc gia. Và xua quân chiếm đất giết người xứ sở khác là Anh hùng dân Tộc mở mang bờ cõi!!!

Nhà nước cai trị dựa trên một "ký kết" hay "giao ước xã hội", điều mà JJ Rousseau gọi là "khế ước xã hội"- na ná như vai trò "người chồng truyền thống" của "gia đình truyền thống", như bóng "tùng quân" mà "phận liễu" phải nương nhờ, hãy cứ giả thiết là như vậy, theo như Leon Pittard, một nông gia chủ trì đài này-  http://www.fairdinkumradio.com/ thú vị lý giải-

Rằng nếu là giao ước xã hội như hôn nhân- Như vậy khi kẻ vi phạm giao ước là người chồng đã không làm đúng làm tròn trách vụ "che chở cung cấp" cho người vợ, thì người Vợ có QUYỀN LY DỊ!

Nhưng ở định chế Nhà nước, dù hàng ngàn năm qua, đã minh chứng rằng Nhà nước KHÔNG HỀ BẢO VỆ và CUNG CẤP cho QUẦN CHÚNG, mà NGƯỢC LẠI, đã hành hạ, nô lệ hóa, sử dụng QUẦN CHÚNG, và chính QUẦN CHÚNG mới là người BẢO VỆ và CUNG CẤP cho bọn Nhà nước ăn hưởng và tồn tại.

Ngay sự hiện hữu của nước Mỹ (và trong một giới hạn Úc, Tân Tây Lan, Canada) đã LY DỊ dân tộc, nhà nước, đất nước, quốc gia Anh, khi nó không làm đúng giao ước xã hội, để tách ra lập đời sống tự chủ riêng- đấy chính là lý do đã được tuyên bố khẳng quyết  ngay trong lời mở đầu  bản TUYÊN NGÔN ĐỘC LẬP MỸ:

"Trong tiến trình phát triển của nhân loại, khi nó trở thành cần thiết cho một quần chúng phải xóa bỏ những mối liên kết chính trị giữa họ và một quần chúng khác để khẳng định vị thế biệt lập và bình đẳng cùng các thế lực trên trái đất này mà các quy luật của Thiên Nhiên và Thần Thiên Nhiên đã ban cho họ, thì với một sự tôn trọng đúng đắn các quan điểm của nhân loại đòi hỏi họ phải tuyên bố những nguyên nhân thúc đẩy họ đến sự biệt lập đó. ("" When, in the Course of human events , it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.)

Đó là vài  điểm chính trong cuộc trao đổi giữa đài FairDinkum của Úc và James Corbett.

Tuy nhiên trong cuộc trao đổi vì giới hạn thời gian, nên còn nhiều lãnh vực then chốt về vai trò gọi là Nhà Nước Quốc Gia và Chính phủ chưa được đề cập và mổ xẻ. Như thủ đoạn TẠO ĐỒNG TIỀN QUỐC GIA và ĐỘC QUYỀN IN TIỀN, trong khi lại TẠO RA HỆ THỐNG NGÂN HÀNG TƯ NHÂN, và THUẾ KHÓA.. Ba ĐỊNH CHẾ đối nghịch không cần nhau, nghĩa là CÓ CÁI NÀY  thì KHÔNG CẦN CÁI KIA!

1- Nhà nước đã có NGÂN HÀNG TRUNG ƯƠNG, ĐỘC QUYỀN IN và PHÁT HÀNH TIỀN để TRAO ĐỒI MUA HÀNG HÓA .. thì KHÔNG CẦN THUẾ, và càng KHÔNG CẦN NGÂN HÀNG TƯ (như thời Sô Viết)

2- Không có Ngân hàng trung ương, không có độc quyền in tiền nên mới cần phải ĐÁNH THUẾ DÂN để chi dụng (như trong thời phong kiến, quân chủ) và cần các Ngân hàng tư nhân để vay mượn trao chuyển cất giữ những khối lượng tiền lớn cho an toàn nhanh gọn .

Vậy tại sao HIỆN NAY cả  ba (3) định chế này lại ĐỒNG BỘ HIỆN HŨU và HOẠT ĐỘNG một cách dư thùa không cần thiết như vậy?
Chúng ta nhìn kỹ lại cái gọi là "cứu thoát" các ngân hàng tư nhân với gần 30 ngàn tỉ (trillions) và cái gọi là Nợ Quốc Gia (National Debt) chỉ có 15 ngàn tỉ KHÔNG TRẢ NỔI và ĐỊNH MỨC THUẾ HÀNG NĂM  (national tax revenues) theo con số chính thức từ nhà nước Mỹ, là khoảng 5.5 ngàn tỉ (5.5 trillions) .

2013  2014  2015  $ billion nom$ trillion nom$ million nom$ bln 2005$2005 per cappercent GDP  Federal Revenue 2.8 3.0 3.3   State Revenue 1.6 1.7 1.7   Local Revenue 1.1 1.2 1.2   Total Revenue 5.5 5.9 6.2  Revenue: actual budgeted guesstimated2

http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/federal_revenue

Thâm thủng (deficits) liên tục, cắt giảm liên tục... nhưng Chiến tranh với chiến phí hàng ngàn tỉ mỹ kim cũng liên tục- và những cuộc "cứu giúp" (Bail Out) các ngân hàng tập đoàn tư nhân hàng ngàn tỉ mỹ kim cũng... liên tục.. Một đứa trẻ nếu biết làm TOÁN SỐ HỌC (Arithmetic) căn bản, cũng nhận ra điều KHÔNG ỔN, KHÔNG HỢP LÝ trong SỔ SÁCH TÀI CHÍNH QUỐC GIA kiều này!!! Ấy thế mà cả nhân loại cho đến hôm nay, cứ mặc nhiên chấp nhận sự "vận hành phi lý" của nó! Đại học cứ tiếp tục đẻ ra hàng ngàn luận án kinh tế tài chính mỗi năm! Những ai nhìn ra một nửa vấn đề rồi tìm cách để tận dụng nó (dù biết sai trái) cho xã hộ, như nhà kinh tế G. F. Knapp từ năm 1895, rồi đến John Maynard Keynes đầu và giữa thế kỷ 20-v.v dần dần đều bị lên án, để thiết lập 3 định chế này CHẶT CHẼ HƠN. Những ai hiện nay lên tiếng, dù chỉ là một nửa vấn đề vì sợ hoặc vì bất cứ lý do nào không nói thẳng, như nhóm các chuyên gia quan chức như Bill Black, Hudson v.v được (sai lầm) gọi chung là  Giải Thuyết Tiền Tệ Hiện Đại (Modern Monetary Theorists) - thật ra đã có từ lâu! Nhưng ít nhất, họ cũng hiểu rõ được, và nói lên được sự "dư thừa lừa đảo của hệ thống tập đoàn ngân hàng tư nhân" và chủ trương củng cố hệ thống ngân hàng nhà nước chính phủ!

Hãy nhìn và nghĩ kỹ về đồng Bitcoin và Letcoin sẽ hiểu rõ TIỀN là gì? và Giá trị, tính ổn định của nó ở đâu ra. Chúng ta khi hiểu được điều này mới thấy rõ HỆ THỐNG CHÍNH TRỊ dựa trên HỆ THỐNG TÀI CHÍNH  hiện hành là một guồng máy LỪA ĐẢO, ĂN CẮP THÀNH QUẢ LAO ĐỘNG của CON NGƯỜI, và KHỐNG TRỊ. Và sự khiếm khuyết hay nói thẳng là SAI TỪ CĂN BẢN của chủ trương hệ thống tiền tệ do Nhà nước ĐỘC QUYỀN khi bản chất quyền lực của tính chính trị trong định chế bạo lực này còn đó!

Người viết (nkptc) xin tạm ngưng, để mong quí độc giả vận não tiếo tục SUY NGHĨ và LÝ GIẢI TỪ ĐIỂM NÀY!

Quí độc giả không cần đến đại học tiến sĩ để hiểu rõ lãnh vực này. Quí vị chỉ cần sự tự trọng, tính tự chủ, dám tự nghĩ, chất vấn, không ỷ lại cả tin vào sách vở báo đài, và khả năng toán số học cộng trừ nhân chia là đủ.

Chất vấn và chất vấn không ngừng, (Questioning and never stop questioning) Albert Einstein đã khuyến cáo chúng ta - Vì CHẤT VẤN- đây chính là khả năng đã biến loài vượn thành NGƯỜI, và trở thành đặc tính giữ vững Tính Con Người của chúng ta biến chuyển vô thường của vũ trụ, và trong mưu toan quyền lực bán khai của thiếu số nhưng thế lực và gian manh.

nkptc

CÁI CHẤM XANH MỜ NHẠT

Phi hành gia Carl Edward Sagan đã viết  cảm nghĩ của ông về tấm hình Trái Đất như "Cái Chấm Xanh Mờ Nhạt" do phi thuyền Voyager I chụp gửi về, từ một vị trí cách quả Đất khoảng 6 tỷ km (3,7 tỷ dặm) năm 1990, trong quyển sách của ông "Cái Chấm Xanh Mớ Nhạt : Một Viễn Kiến về  Tương Lai Nhân Loại trong Không Gian (Pale Blue Dot: A Vision of the Human) Future in Space, như sau:

""    Nhìn từ khoảng cách toàn diện này, Trái đất chẳng có vẽ gì là đặc biệt để đáng chú tâm đến. Nhưng đối với chúng ta, nó lại là khác. Hãy xem xét lại cái dấu chấm đó. Nó là nơi này đây. Cái chấm đó là nơi chốn mái nhà. Cái chấm Đó chính là chúng ta. Trên đó tất cả mọi người bạn yêu quý, tất cả mọi người bạn biết, tất cả mọi người bạn đã từng được nghe nói đến, tất cả mỗi mọi con người đã từng hiện hữu, đã từng sống hết cuộc đời của họ. Tổng hợp vui sướng và khổ đau của chúng ta, của hàng ngàn những tôn giáo quả quyết, những ý thức hệ khẳng định, và những giáo điều kinh tế, của mọi người thợ săn và mọi tên thổ phỉ, mọi vị anh hùng và mọi kẻ hèn nhát, mọi kẻ tác tạo và mọi kẻ phá hủy  văn minh, mọi vị vua chúa và tất cả thường dân, tất cả các cặp thanh niên nam nữ yêu nhau, tất cả các bà mẹ và người cha, mọi đứa trẻ đầy kỳ vọng, tất cả mọi nhà phát minh và thám hiểm, tất cả mọi thầy giáo mô phạm, tất cả các tên chính trị gia tham nhũng, tất cả các thần tượng "siêu sao", mọi kẻ "lãnh đạo tối cao", mọi vị thánh và tất cả kẻ tội đồ trong lịch sử của loài người chúng ta đều đã từng sống ở chính nơi đó - trên một hạt bụi nhỏ nhoi lơ lửng trong tia nắng mặt trời.

    Trái đất là một sân khấu rất nhỏ trong một khán đài vũ trụ rộng lớn. Hãy ngẫm nghĩ đến những con sông máu tuôn tràn bỏi những tên tướng lãnh và những tên hoàng đế, để trong vinh quang và chiến thắng bọn họ có thể trở thành những bậc bá chủ nhất thời của một phần cực nhỏ của một dấu chấm. Hãy suy nghĩ về những tàn ác không ngừng đến từ những cư dân của một góc của cái điểm ảnh cực tiểu trong tấm hình này lên trên các cư dân chẳng khác gì họ mấy  ở một cái góc khác nào đó.

    Mức thường xuyên nhầm lẫn của họ đến cỡ như vậy đấy, Họ giết nhau hăm hở đến mức như thế đấy , lòng hận thù của họ sôi sục  đến mức độ như vậy đấy . Những hành xử ra vẻ của chúng ta, sự tưởng tượng tự quan trọng về mình của chúng ta, cái ảo tưởng rằng chúng ta có một vị trí đặc quyền nào đó trong vũ trụ, bị cái dấu chấm mờ nhạt này thách thức.

    Hành tinh của chúng ta là một hạt bụi cô đơn trong vũ trụ lớn lao bao trùm bóng tối. Trong sự mờ nhạt tầm thường của chúng ta - nằm trong tất cả cái sự bao la vũ trụ này - không một dấu hiệu gì cho thấy sẽ có sự trợ giúp đến từ một nơi nào khác để cứu chúng ta khỏi chính mình.

    Cho đến tận ngày nay Trái đất là thế giới duy nhất được biết dung chứa sự sống. Không nơi nào khác có cả, ít nhất là trong tương lai gần kề, để loài người chúng ta có thể di chuyển tới. Tham quan qua thôi, thì có. Cư ngụ lại, thì chưa thể. Dù muốn hay không, trong lúc này, trái đất là nơi duy nhất mà chúng ta thiết lập nền tảng của chúng ta. Người ta cho đến nay vẫn nói rằng khoa thiên văn học là một tiến trình làm khiêm tốn và xây dựng nhân cách (người ta- vì hiểu biết thêm về vũ trụ sẽ nhận ra được sự nhỏ bé không chỉ của cá nhân mình mà của cả cái "thế giới tưởng là vĩ đại" của mình-NK chú thích). Có lẽ không còn minh chứng nào rõ rệt hơn về sự điên rồ tự phụ của con người bằng cái hình ảnh xa tít này của cái thế giới nhỏ xíu của chúng ta. Với tôi, nó nhấn mạnh trách nhiệm của chúng ta để đối xử tử tế với nhau hơn và giữ gìn và trân trọng cái dấu chấm xanh mờ nhạt đó, mái nhà duy nhất mà chúng ta từng biết đến.  ""

The Pale Blue Dot is a photograph of planet Earth taken in 1990 by the Voyager 1 spacecraft from a record distance of about 6 billion kilometers (3.7 billion miles) from Earth, as part of the solar system Family Portrait series of images. In the photograph, Earth is shown as a tiny dot (0.12 pixel in size) against the vastness of space.^[2

From this distant vantage point, the Earth might not seem of any particular interest. But for us, it's different. Consider again that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.

The Earth is a very small stage in a vast cosmic arena. Think of the rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors so that in glory and triumph they could become the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot. Think of the endless cruelties visited by the inhabitants of one corner of this pixel on the scarcely distinguishable inhabitants of some other corner. How frequent their misunderstandings, how eager they are to kill one another, how fervent their hatreds. Our posturings, our imagined self-importance, the delusion that we have some privileged position in the universe, are challenged by this point of pale light. Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity – in all this vastness – there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves.

The Earth is the only world known, so far, to harbor life. There is nowhere else, at least in the near future, to which our species could migrate. Visit, yes. Settle, not yet. Like it or not, for the moment, the Earth is where we make our stand. It has been said that astronomy is a humbling and character-building experience. There is perhaps no better demonstration of the folly of human conceits than this distant image of our tiny world. To me, it underscores our responsibility to deal more kindly with one another and to preserve and cherish the pale blue dot, the only home we've ever known.

Carl Edward Sagan (/ˈseɪɡən/; November 9, 1934 – December 20, 1996) was an Americanastronomer, astrophysicist, cosmologist,

In

Phỏng Vấn Mẹ bề Trên Mother Agnes Mariam of the Cross Người thu thập chứng liệu Tội Phạm của Anh Mỹ tại Syria

Nữ Tu Mẹ bề trên Mother Agnes Mariam of the Cross người đã thu thập bằng chứng bắt cóc và giết trẻ em của bọn tay sai Anh Mỹ nhân danh hồi giáo và dân chủ trong cái gọi là "Cuộc Thảm Sát Vũ Khí Hóa Học" tại Syria- Ngày 30-11-2013 đã được dân biểu Anh George Galloway phỏng vấn.

George Galloway Talks to Syrian Nun, Mother Agnes- 30th November 2013

Glenn Greenwald : Lại Quật Ngã bọn tay sai BBC về Báo Chí và An Ninh Quốc Gia

Glenn Greenwald "The Goal Of The U.S. Government Is To Eliminate ALL Privacy Globally!

Glenn Greenwald, nhà báo đang bị bọn nhà nước Âu Mỹ Úc tấn công và bôi nhọ, đặc biệt chúng dùng BBC, một cơ quan tay sai kỳ cụu và sừng sỏ- phỏng vấn với những thủ đoạn hạ cấp đề mong hạ gục Glenn Greenwald.. Nhưng trong lần này, qua sự trả lời tài tình và đanh thép- Glenn Greenwald cho biết mục tiêu của guồng máy nghe lén rình mò trộm cắp qua các hệ thống điện toán mạng toàn cầu là TRIỆT TIÊU TẤT CẢ TÍNH RIÊNG TƯ khắp TOÀN CẦU.

Khi ý niệm về sự riêng tư không còn trong đầu óc con người ta nữa, như phần lớn những người sống trong các xã hội độc tài chuyên chế, người ta trở thành nô lệ tự nguyện, mặc nhiên coi việc BỊ XĂM SOI RÌNH MÒ, NGHE LÉN là việc thường tình, với câu nói tự an ủi: "tôi chẳng có gì phải dấu cả =I have nothing to hide".

Vấn đề cái VÍ CỦA TÔI, dù không có gì trong đó, nhưng KHÔNG AI ĐƯỢC MỎ RA LỤC LỌI, chỉ vì NÓ LÀ CỦA RIÊNG TÔI.

Phòng ngủ của TÔI để trống, chỉ có một tấm nệm chẳng có gì đáng để "dấu", nhưng KHÔNG AI ĐƯỢC TÙY TIỆN MỞ VÀO-  vì nó là NƠI RIÊNG TƯ CỦA TÔI!!! chỉ có thế thôi!


Điều đáng chú ý, là lần này, BBC, sau khi thất bại nặng nề trong nỗ lực triệt hạ tăm tiếng Glenn, lại đưa ra một tên "sừng sỏ" của BBC trong chương trình HARD TALK (nói mạnh bạo thẳng thừng đến nơi đến chốn) nghĩ rằng sẽ GÀI ĐƯỢC Glenn vào thế bí... Nhưng Glenn đã minh chứng một lần nữa bản lãnh, sự bình thản, và  trình độ của một nhà báo đọc đúng nghĩa, đã trả lời với viện chứng đanh thép chặn cứng họng những tuyên truyền trơ trẽn của bọn báo chí truyền thông chính qui.

Tên nhà báo BBC tay sai gằn giọng đặt ra những câu hỏi khêu gợi "an ninh quốc gia- quyền năng chính phủ" để mong làm Greenwald lúng túng... như:

1- Việc làm của Glenn và Edward Snowden, làm tác hại khả năng BẢO VỆ THẾ GIỚI chống khủng bố của Anh Mỹ.

Glenn cho biết từ ngày SỰ THẬT ĐƯỢC CÔNG KHAI không có một ai bị giết vì những CÔNG KHAI đó. Ngay quốc hội Mỹ cũng thừa nhận thêm rằng, chính sự rình mò bí mật cũng ĐÃ KHÔNG KHÁM PHÁ hay NGĂN CHẶN được một vụ KHỦNG BỐ NÀO!

2- Có cái gọi là TÍNH VÔ TƯ KHÁCH QUAN trong BÁO CHÍ KHÔNG? -Hàm ý là không nên tấn công lên án Nhà nước chính phủ mà phải KHÁCH QUAN..

Glenn đã trả lời là KHÔNG CÓ CÁI KHÁCH QUAN TUYỆT ĐỐI KIỀU NHƯ VẬY, mà tất cả đều chủ quan theo định hướng của nơi họ sống làm việc và những ý niệm giá trị mỗi cá nhân tin tưởng, Tuy nhiên đây không phải là vấn đề. Vấn đề chính là CHÚNG TA CÓ THÀNH THẬT với những giả định mà mình tin hay giả vờ để lừa đảo người khác. Thí dụ nếu chúng ta thật sự nhân danh dân chủ và tự do báo chí, thì phải thành thật với niềm tin này TỰ DO BÁO CHÍ v.v

3-  Giả định "dân chủ" là phải TIN VÀO CHÍNH PHỦ để BẢO VỆ DÂN CHỦ và AN NINH QUỐC GIA- Và rằng  châm ngôn chủ trương của Glenn và các nhà báo như Glenn LUÔN LUÔN KHÔNG TIN TƯỞNG GIỚI CHỨC THẨM QUYỀN- như vậy nghĩa là sao (ý muốn nói Glenn là "phản động theo khủng bố"?

Glenn quật ngã luôn bằng chứng liệu lịch sử và nguyên lý dân chủ- Tại Mỹ, các nhà lập quốc và soạn Hiến Pháp đã đặt sự THƯỜNG TRỰC NGHI NGỜ CHÍNH PHỦ LÀM CĂN BẢN cho Hiến Pháp. Vì bản chất LẠM QUYỀN THƯỜNG TRỰC của CON NGƯỜI KHI NẮM QUYỀN TUYỆT ĐỐI.

4- Hắn lại dùng những tuyên bố của Bob Woodward, tên nhà báo tỉ phú, nhờ chuyên viết về những thâm cung bí sử của các chính trị gia, để chê bai Glenn là thiếu suy nghĩ cẩn trọng. Nhưng bị Glenn lật tẩy ngay tại chỗ rằng Bob Woodward được chính bọn "quyền thế hiện hành" cung cấp cho những thông tin đó đề hành sự như là cái LOA cho chính phủ và tập đoàn mà thôi.!!!

5- BBC gằn giọng rằng Glenn lấy tư cách gì mà NẮM GIỮ tất cả NHỮNG THÔNG TIN BÍ MẬT của NSA mà Edward Snowden đã trao, và lấy quyền gì để quyết định điều nào được công khai và không được công khai? tại sao không TRẢ NÓ VỀ CHO NSA, sau khi Glenn đã nghỉ việc với The Guardian v.v

Glenn kê thẳng tủ vào miệng BBC rằng chính NSA đã KHÔNG CÓ KHẢ NĂNG GIỮ BÍ MẬT AN TOÀN CHO CÁC THÔNG TIN "BÍ MẬT" này ngay từ đầu. Tất cả các cơ quan thông tin tư nhân hợp đồng làm việc với NSA  đều  biết và đều dùng nó để  rình mò trộm cắp bất cứ ai- như Snowden đã minh chứng. Và rằng những cái gọi là "Bí Mật" chẳng qua là vi phạm nhân quyền, cũng như chẳng giúp ích gì trong việc chống tội phạm- mà chính nó, NSA lại là tội phạm- và quan chức chính phủ đã THƯỜNG XUYÊN NÓI DỐI từ trước đến nay, điển hình là vụ VŨ KHÍ TOÀN DIỆT IRAQ v.v..

Cuối cùng Glenn chửi xéo BBC khi nêu ra cho tên phỏng vấn biết  rằng ít nhất tại Mỹ và các nước "dân chủ phương Tây" quyền TỰ DO BÁO CHÍ đều là HIẾN ĐỊNH, điều mà hắn KHÔNG ĐƯỢC CÓ tại ANH QUỐC (nước Anh không có Hiến Pháp thành văn- chỉ là tự hiểu theo qui ước truyền thống bằng MỒM từ bản văn Magna Carta năm 1215).

Và rằng những thông tin mà Snowden trao không chỉ riêng Glenn, nữ ký giả Laura Poitras nắm toàn bộ, mà các tòa báo chính qui khác như Newyork Time v.v cũng nắm một số ...Những thông tin mà hầu như ai CŨNG BIẾT RÕ, vấn đề là Gleen và Laura Poitras có CHỨNG CỚ CỤ THỂ từ Snowden.

Glenn cũng cho hắn biết rõ rằng NHÓM BÁO CHÍ mà Glenn đang làm việc đều là những người có kinh nghiệm và danh tiếng hàng đầu thế giới hơn cả BBC, thì đừng cố gắng bôi nhọ hạ thấp họ là những kẻ "vớ vẩn' không đáng tin tưởng!

Tầm cỡ "tăm tiếng" đến như BBC mà đã năm lần bảy lượt đều thất bại nặng nề. Các "đấng con cháu rồng teo Ngụy Phỉ" nên cẩn thận đừng giở trò trẻ con thờ nhà nước, kính chính phủ mà mang nhục!

nkptc tóm ý

An Ninh Tình Báo Mỹ và Các Trang Tìm Kết Bạn và Phim Tình Dục

Theo bản tiết lộ của Snowden, NSA dùng hệ thống điện toán mạng gom góp cất giữ vào kho thông tin những thói quen xem phim tình dục, trao đổi tình cảm thầm kín của tất cả mọi người trên mạng, để sau này dùng làm ÁP LỰC và TRIỆT TIÊU DANH TIẾNG cũng như ĐE DỌA HẠNH PHÚC GIA ĐÌNH của bất cứ ai nếu trở thành ĐỐI KHÁNG với Chính phủ nhà nước!

Chính phủ càng càng càng lộ mặt là một tổ chức tội phạm tồi bại và ti tiện bẩn thỉu hơn cả  Mafia. Nhà nước chính phủ không có luân lý hay bất kỳ mực thước hành xử nào trừ quyền bạo lực tuyệt đối  

NSA SEXINT is the Abuse You’ve All Been Waiting For

By Jennifer Granick
Friday, November 29, 2013 at 12:08 PM

160Print

In the latest news report based on documents revealed by Edward Snowden, we’ve learned that the NSA creates profiles of porn viewing, online sexual activity and more from its vast database of Internet content and transactional data as part of a plan to harm the reputations of those whom the agency believes are radicalizing others through speeches promoting disfavored—but not necessarily violent—political views. The report—by Glenn Greenwald, Ryan Gallagher and Ryan Grim in the Huffington Post—shows how the NSA proposes to use personal information gleaned from electronic surveillance to blackmail, silence and otherwise marginalize people for advocating “radical” beliefs.

I will assume for the sake of argument that there may be rare occasions where such a tactic is a good idea—where, in the words of former intelligence lawyer Stewart Baker, it’s better to “drop[] the truth” on someone than to drop a bomb.  But history and the current Huffington Post documents show that intelligence agencies, including the NSA, are utterly incapable of knowing when that is, or of deploying such a dangerous technique safely.

This NSA is an exceedingly aggressive spy machine, pushing—and sometimes busting through—the technological, legal and political boundaries of lawful surveillance.  Democratic values including individual liberty, the right to be left alone, and freedom of expression are subordinate to the agency’s apparent goal of collecting as much information as it possibly can. Protections, limitations or safeguards against intelligence misuse or abuse of collected information are absent or uncertain. Yet, the NSA presses on, even when the subject is a U.S. person.  Current law may very well allow spying even for extortion or blackmail purposes, and potentially even against U.S. persons as well foreign nationals abroad.  What that means is that, once again, the Snowden documents show us we need more protective laws.

The Huffington Post story does not show that the NSA ever actually blackmailed the targets or revealed the embarrassing information. Of course, this practice–and the identities of the people–are secret. We simply wouldn’t know whether the NSA ever carried out this plan.  In fact, the target would probably never know either.  As Julian Sanchez points out,

Often, the point [of intelligence work] is precisely to make use of information from intercepts in ways that can never be directly or publicly traced to government. A target whose reputation or career is torpedoed by embarrassing disclosures may never know whether they were the victim of an intelligence operation or simple bad luck.

There are only six targets discussed in the paper. These six are  worthwhile “exemplars,” according to the documents. But NSA profiles more than six people, we don’t know how many more, and we don’t know why.

These targets do not all advocate violence, nor are they notably connected to terrorists or other violent people. As Marcy Wheeler points out, “[The beliefs that these] so-called ‘radicalizers’ promote range from 9/11 trutherism to intolerance for non-Sunni Muslims to justifying the killing of non-Muslim invaders.”

One target’s offending argument is that “Non-Muslims are a threat to Islam,” … Another target, a foreign citizen the NSA describes as a “respected academic,” holds the offending view that “offensive jihad is justified,” … A third targeted radical is described as a “well-known media celebrity” based in the Middle East who argues that “the U.S perpetrated the 9/11 attack.” … A fourth target, … argues that “the U.S. brought the 9/11 attacks on itself” ….

I assume that our government would not even begin to contemplate dropping a bomb on any of these identified targets for any of these reasons, Stewart Baker’s quip notwithstanding. And guess what? Polls show a number hovering up to 40% of Americans think that one or more elements of the U.S. government were responsible for some portion of the death and damage on 9/11. 9/11 conspiracy theorists are not the kind of people whose sex lives we ought to spy on.

Further, these individuals ripe for discrediting had “minimal terrorist contacts.” According to the article:

 In particular, “only seven (1 percent) of the contacts in the study of the three English-speaking radicalizers were characterized in SIGINT as affiliated with an extremist group or a Pakistani militant group. An earlier communications profile of [one of the targets] reveals that 3 of the 213 distinct individuals he was in contact with between 4 August and 2 November 2010 were known or suspected of being associated with terrorism.”

Having examined the networks of these “radicalizers” for terrorists, and finding so few, one might think that the NSA should reconsider whether it was going after the right people. Instead, the agency cited the lack of terrorist connections as justification for focusing on these people: “[V]ery few of the [English-language radicalizers’] contacts noted were associated with terrorism, suggesting that the target audience includes individuals who do not yet hold extremist views but who are susceptible to the extremist message.”

Far more people hold extremist views than commit violence, and espousing even violent views is not the same as recruiting people for terrorist attacks. The NSA is betting resources, American values and the First Amendment on a huge and unproven assumption that there is a connection between advocating violence and convincing others to commit violence.

Further, when an individual holds views that are radical, but not necessarily violent, empirical studies have proven there is no predictable connection with terrorism. As the ACLU’s Mike German has pointed out, the concept that the adoption of a particular belief set is a precursor to violent action has been refuted in multiple empirical studies. One report published by the British think-tank Demos in 2010 found that:

“[c]ertain ideas which are sometimes associated with terrorism were, in fact, held by large numbers of people who renounced terrorism.” The authors pointed out that holding radical views and rebelling against the political and social status quo was a normal part of being young, and that “[r]adicalization that does not lead to violence can be a positive thing” when it leads to greater involvement in political and community affairs. It argued that censorship of radical ideas would be ineffective and counterproductive, and the government should ensure “that young people can be radical, dissenting, and make a difference, without it resulting in serious or violent consequences.

German says that another such study from think tank RAND showed that the “decision to engage in terrorist violence is a complex one involving a matrix of different environmental and individual factors, no one element of which is necessary nor sufficient in every case.”

Policing based on a theory that people are radicalized through listening to fiery speeches and reading incendiary texts is so very dangerous. People have a right to believe what they believe. The First Amendment protects this activity not only out of respect for personal dignity, but also because society may need to evolve over time, and evolution requires a citizenry who can think, speak and organize freely.  Civil rights, anti-war, women’s suffrage, the 40 hour work week, states’ rights, the environmental movement, gun ownership, medical self-determination, gay rights, abortion, the Tea Party, anti-commercialism—whatever the cause, and regardless of whether you agree with it, a fundamental precept of freedom is the right to advocate for it, and possibly to win the policy debate and have those views become mainstream.  The Constitution purposefully limits the power of entrenched interests, whether the government or the ideological majority, to squelch non-violent aspects of the process of social and political change.

For those who care only about the privacy and free speech rights of Americans, the document shows that while the NSA believes that all of the exemplars currently reside outside the United States, one of the six identified targets is a U.S. person, that is a citizen or someone with a green card.

Finally, we see that vast categories of information, no matter how intimate, personal, or seemingly mundane, might be labeled “foreign intelligence information” for their usefulness in discrediting “radicalizers.” For example, the document on which The Huffington Post story is based identifies “online promiscuity,” “publish[ing] articles without checking facts,” leading “a glamorous lifestyle,” and “deceitful use of funds” as bases for undermining these targets.

Remember, the NSA is allowed to collect foreign intelligence information, defined as information that is either relevant or necessary to particular U.S. national security goals, including not only counterterrorism, but also the conduct of foreign affairs.  Are “fact checking” or “overspending on lifestyle purchases” considered “foreign intelligence information,” and if so, is it only in connection with specific targets? Or does the NSA consider this personal stuff to be foreign intelligence information in general, and therefore open to NSA collection, use and dissemination more broadly, just in case?

The next question is, “under what legal authority is the NSA lawfully able to create a dossier of embarrassing factoids, including about Americans, who are not violent terrorists?”

Readers of this blog know that the agency can obtain Americans’ communications via FISA court orders based upon a showing that the target is an agent of a foreign power, or warrantlessly when we communicate with or about foreign targets about matters of foreign intelligence interest. Other suspicionless collection of information concerning Americans can come from overseas surveillance collecting things like address books and contact lists, unregulated overseas collection of Internet transactions, and warrantless domestic collection of business records, including but potentially not limited to, phone call records.  U.S. intelligence agencies also get information about Americans from foreign spying partners like the U.K.’s GCHQ. Collection on non-U.S. persons is far less regulated.

Where intelligence authorities collect information under the dictates of FISA, the statute governs use and disclosure as well.  According to David S. Kris and J. Douglas Wilson, authors of the bible on national security investigations law (and yes, this does make a great Christmas gift), there are four main limitations that may apply to the use of FISA information:

First, FISA information must be used or disclosed in accord with governing minimization procedures. Second, it may be used or disclosed only for lawful purposes. Third, … information disclosed for law enforcement purposes [cannot] be used in a criminal proceeding without the Attorney General’s permission. Finally, …privileged information acquired from electronic surveillance or production of tangible things … does not [] lose its privileged nature.

Only the first two are relevant here.

Minimization procedures are both incorporated into FISA Court orders authorizing electronic surveillance, physical searches, and the production of tangible things, and operate after the fact to govern use and disclosure of information “concerning any United States person.” None of the minimization procedures that have been leaked or declassified so far suggest that discrediting U.S. persons is a valid reason to use or disseminate collected information.  However, as Christopher Sprigman and I wrote earlier this summer, minimization procedures do not seem to prohibit abusive secondary uses of Americans’ information either. That is because:

First, the minimization procedures are themselves secret. Moreover, by law, purely domestic communications that the NSA inadvertently collects need be deleted only if they “could not be” foreign intelligence information – a provision that requires the NSA to delete very little. Some minimization procedures have been leaked to the public, and these show that the government may “retain and make use of ‘inadvertently acquired’ domestic communications if they contain usable intelligence, information on criminal activity, threat of harm to people or property, are encrypted, or are believed to contain any information relevant to cybersecurity.” Even otherwise privileged communications between individuals and their lawyers are not deleted. The agency merely stores those in a separate database so they are not sent to a law enforcement agency for use in a criminal case.

Still, Kris and Wilson say that because FISA authorizes use or disclosure only in accordance with minimization procedures, uses not specifically authorized should be considered forbidden.  Which minimization provisions authorize targeting a U.S. person, even one located overseas, on the basis of his or her political radicalism? This is an especially pertinent question since FISA prohibits certain intelligence activities affecting Americans based on First Amendment conduct alone.

Second, no FISA information “may be used or disclosed … except for lawful purposes.” Congress enacted this provision because use minimization procedures restrict information concerning only U.S. persons.  Apparently, Congress wanted to protect foreigners from illegal use as well.

Before our foreign friends say, “thanks for the favor!,” Kris and Wilson go on to report that FISA’s legislative history shows a debate directly relevant to today’s news about what would constitute illegal use.  Specifically, the 1978 Senate Judiciary Committee report says that the

Committee does not intend nor does the bill permit that information gathered about a foreign visitor be used to blackmail him into becoming an agent against his country.

However, the House report says that while the U.S. government

[s]hould not seek purely personal information [about a U.S. person] who is a suspected spy, merely to learn something that would be “compromising” [this] restriction might not be applicable to non-U.S. persons “because compromising information about their private lives may itself be foreign intelligence information.”

Case law on the subject lends little further guidance on whether using personal foibles to undermine “radicalizers” would be lawful, even if the target is a U.S. person. Kris and Wilson cite the case of U.S v. Singleton suggesting it implies that anti-blackmail laws do not apply to the federal government acting in its sovereign capacity.  Nor is it clear that the statute prohibiting official extortion applies to efforts to sway individuals away from even lawful political advocacy. The cases interpreting the law talk about the official obtaining money or something of value from the victim, not about dissuasion or even recruitment as a foreign agent.  (See also Kris and Wilson §28.3.)

Of course, much of the surveillance used to obtain information for undermining these sorts of targets may have been obtained overseas and outside of the parameters of FISA.  If so, then the minimization/lawful use restrictions in the statute would not apply at all.  The far less restrictive, and less policed, limitations in Executive Order 12333 would apply. Those give a nod to protecting the legal rights of U.S. persons (§1.1) and require covert intelligence to be evaluated for “consistency with applicable legal requirements” (§1.2) but not much else in the order appears to constrain uses of collected information.

Once again, there appear to be few, uncertain and inconsistent legal standards, no checks and balances or identified oversight for when NSA decides to use the information it collects via mass surveillance against someone, even an American citizen.

The public and policy makers may hear “foreign intelligence information” and think it means data which helps identify and neutralize people who want to kill Americans, and not that which identifies and undermines peaceable people who merely hold radical, violent or even revolutionary ideas in the eyes of those currently in power.

Of course, intelligence agencies have used embarrassing information against people for their political beliefs in the past. The Federal Bureau of Investigation used recordings it gleaned from bugging Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s private quarters to attempt to blackmail him into silence, despite the fact that King unwaveringly supported non-violent means. It was his revolutionary idea of social equality for all races, and his anti-war beliefs, that made him dangerous.

As Bret Max Kaufman, Legal Fellow at the ACLU National Security Project writes:

King was not alone on the government’s long list of targets; he shared marquee billing with boxer Muhammed Ali, humorist Art Buchwald, author Norman Mailer, and even Senator Howard Baker. But the greater scandal was that — as the Church Committee revealed in 1976 — these big names appeared alongside more than one million other Americans, including half a million so-called “subversives.”

Julian Sanchez at the Cato Institute points out another historical examples of actual and threatened blackmail:

[FBI Director J. Edgar] Hoover’s right hand Cartha DeLoach proudly reported that the Bureau had learned of a truculent senator caught driving drunk with a “good looking broad.”  The senator, DeLoach explained, was promptly made “aware that we had the information, and we never had trouble with him on appropriations since.”

These practices were disgusting, dangerous and abusive then, just as they are now. What’s new is that, in a mass surveillance ecosystem, the scale and scope on which this kind of activity can take place is unprecedented. Once it collects information about hundreds of millions of people in mass, “dossiers” of potentially embarrassing information—or blackmail quality secrets—dirt on anyone is just a few searches away. Intelligence operatives can secretly tar anyone, seemingly at will, since the NSA has the technological capacity, and no one has identified a law which would, if followed, intercede. These abilities, never mind the will to use them, are incompatible with individual freedom and democracy.

[For more posts like this one, follow Just Security on Twitter @just_security and on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/JSBlog]

Công Việc Truyền Thông là gì? (What is Journalism)

James Corbett tại Pháp, trong Đại Hội Báo Chí Mở Rộng:
Công Việc Truyền Thông là gì? (What is Journalism)
Nhà Báo là Ai? (What is  Journalist?)

Những Lý Cớ Giả Định Bất Lương và Bất Nhân của Đám Người An Phận Thấp Hèn, Ích Kỷ

Những Lý Cớ Giả Định Bất Lương và Bất Nhân của Đám Người An Phận Thấp Hèn, Ích Kỷ

Cô Sibel Edmond, chủ bút tờ http://www.boilingfrogspost.comvừa rồi đã giận dữ giải thích với độc giả mạng về những giả định bất nhân từ cửa miệng của đám người "độc giả" ích kỷ ti tiện (cũng có thể là bọn an ninh mật vụ nhà nước giả trang làm độc giả để phá thối, gây ngộ nhận và làm nản lòng những người khác).
Đây là lời "than thở" của một độc giả các trang đối kháng chính phủ:

Tôi  rất yêu quí việc các bạn đang làm. Đó là vận động quần chúng và xã hội rất cần việc này.  Tôi ước rằng tôi có thời gian để tham gia và góp sức với trang của các bạn. Nhưng vấn đề là cuộc sống tôi quá bận rộn... một việc toàn thời, gia đình con trẻ, và mẹ già sắp vào viện, và một đống chứng này bệnh nọ. Cho nên, thật là không may, Tôi không thể dùng bất cứ thời gian nào cho việc vận động quần chúng lúc này...(I love what you guys are doing. It is activism, and it is so badly needed. I wish I had the time to participate and contribute work to your site. But the thing is I have a very hectic life … a full-time job, family and kids, and elderly mother who is about to go to a care facility, and a bunch of health issues. So, unfortunately, I can’t afford spending any time on activism at this time.)

Lời "than thở" này đã khiến cô Sibel Edmond nổi giận và Nhân Chủ cũng không thể bỏ qua- vì bị xúc phạm. Đã đến lúc phải nói thẳng mặt với tất cả độc giả, tất cả mọi người đang sống ở kỷ nguyên băng hoại đầy thông nin này. Và cô Sibel Edmond đã viết một bài vừa trần tình với độc giả có trách nhiệm vừa chỉ thẳng mặt đám người ích kỷ hèn kém nhưng cứ nhởn nhơ viện cớ đểu cáng bất nhân bào chữa cho sự an phận hèn kém ích kỷ của họ.
Xúc phạm vì những hàm ý từ những lời "than thở" đó.  Nhũng lời "than thở" đó hàm ý cho rằng những "người viết bài vận động, hoặc đi vận động xã hội" - trên mạng hay dưới đất- đều ... rảnh rang, ăn không ngồi rồi, hoặc ngược lại giầu có sẵn tiền, sẵn của, không phải lo toan gia đình, vợ con, không trách nhiệm...không đủ thứ không có cả đến những vấn đề sức khỏe bản thân !!!  Và chỉ có họ, những kẻ "không thể làm gì hơn ngoài ngồi chép miệng chờ thời do người khác tận lực xoay vần" mới phải bận bịu vì đủ mọi thứ trách nhiệm gia đình, cơm áo v.v... nhưng lại dư giờ lang thang trên mạng; hoặc không bỏ sót một chương trình phim ảnh, giải trí, nhạc nhạnh, thể thao nào đó trên TV!!!
Thế đấy! Họ có biết đâu, hay thật sự họ thừa biết và vì mặc cảm hèn kém nên mới tìm cách biện minh cho sự thua tài kém trí và ích kỷ của chính họ- rằng những trang bài MIỄN PHÍ và TỰ DO đầy thông tin tài liệu dữ kiện giá trị -không có, không thể tìm được trong giới báo chí chính qui- mà họ được đọc thoải mái trên mạng, BÀI VỞ TỰ DO (free articles) vì những bài này  nói thẳng , nói thật - không bị ràng buộc, nộ lệ, điều khiển từ bất cứ ai, và  cũng không ràng buộc áp đặt  bất cứ ai: Ai thích thì đọc, quí thì chép, và chuyển gửi đi không bị ràng buộc bản quyền, cho bất cứ ai, đăng tải tái bản v.v  chứ đâu phải MIỄN PHÍ (như free bread) là không mất tiền tốn công!  
Vì để có một bài trên trang, (dĩ nhiên phải là bài giá trị) nó đòi hòi không chỉ thời gian nghiên cứu, tra khảo đối chiếu, mà phải suy tư phân tích- sau đó cặm cụi viết hàng ngày hàng giờ, lắm khi phải thức khuya dậy sớm- tranh thủ thời gian để vừa kịp thời điểm biến cố- vừa còn làm việc sinh hoạt căn bản khác cho đời sống cá nhân riêng tư như mọi người (ăn ngủ , tắm giặt vệ sinh- khách khứa v.v) .Cũng phải sinh hoạt cách này hay cách khác cho nợ cơm áo- trách nhiệm gia đình hoặc bản thân - cũng có vấn đề sức khỏe  cảm cúm, đường, mỡ máu cao v.v chẳng khác chi mọi người, nếu không muốn nói là chật vật hơn và tận tụy hơn đời sống "bình thường ích kỷ"- bởi họ thật sự không có giờ "giải trí, ăn nhậu", "làm thêm", hay lưu tâm chăm chút miếng ăn điều độ- thể thao -  ngoài thời gian cho công việc "đáng quí" đã không lợi nhuận lương bổng mà còn phiền nhiễu  tai hại kia. Trong nghịch cảnh CÔNG NHĨ VONG TƯ như Phan Bội Châu than thở, những người đối kháng, công dân tố cáo này, họ luôn cố gắng nâng cao việc CÔNG và cũng cố gắng giảm thiểu sự "VONG TƯ" sao cho tạm trọn vẹn đôi bề!
Thậm chí, chính cô Sibel Edmond dù sau khi bị mất việc với FBI, cô cũng phải bỏ bớt giờ làm việc chính thức (phiên dịch 5 thứ tiếng)  kiếm tiền của mình để cùng các thành viên làm việc vận động dân trí, cung cấp sự thật cho quần chúng. Có người phải bỏ cả nghề dạy học lương cao ổn định nhưng mất quá nhiều giờ để... làm việc lý tưởng công chúng, James Corbett bỏ hẳn dạy học ở Nhật, dù có gia đình vợ con, để dành nhiều giờ hơn cho việc nâng cao phẩm chất thông tin độc lập. Như ông Paul Craig Roberts sẵn sàng từ bỏ viết bài theo yêu cầu và cho  đám báo chí chính qui  với tài chính hậu đãi nhưng bị ràng buộc như tay sai - để lập trang riêng viết tự do, viết sự thật đến độc giả khắp nơi trên thế giới. Rất nhiều  người làm trang thông tin độc lập đúng đắn làm việc hữu hiệu cũng đã phải từ bỏ bớt giờ LÀM RA TIỀN và giờ GIA ĐÌNH của RIÊNG BẢN THÂN cho việc xã hội chính đáng, như Edward Snowden không chỉ từ bỏ nguồn lợi tiền bạc vật chất mà nhiều kẻ thèm thuồng ước mơ, chen chân cong lưng muốn có- 200 ngàn Mỹ Kim/1năm, bổng lộc nhà cửa, và ngay cả an nguy bản thân, để nói thật và bị săn đuổi sống lang bạt; như Thomas Drake, William Binney, Julian Assange, Sarah Harrison Daniel Ellsberg v.v và những người lặng lẽ âm thầm chưa cần ra mặt công khai đang phải gia giảm thời gian tiền của để hoàn thành công việc của lương tâm của nguyên lý tự do nhân phẩm. 
Tất cả những người này họ ĐI NGƯỢC CHIỀU VỚI LỜI THAN THỞ. Họ quyết định trái ngược hẳn với  "thói thường lẽ khôn ngoan" suy tính của mọi người. Họ không bỏ VIỆC Ý NGHĨA LƯƠNG TÂM dành giờ cho bản thân, gia đình, việc làm lo miếng cơm manh áo- Dù họ toàn là những người có trình độ  kiến văn, kiến thức, học vấn trung bình cao hơn mọi người- chưa muốn nói là nhiều trường hợp- hơn hẳn mọi người rất xa- họ là những người có dư khả năng kiếm tiền trung bình nhiều hơn mọi người nếu họ muốn...thế nhưng họ lại bỏ bớt việc bản thân gia đình, cơm áo để dành cho công việc ý nghĩa lương tâm nhân bản đáng làm. Họ và gia đình họ, chấp nhận khốn khó đủ mọi mặt - chỉ vì họ yêu quí tự do, nhân phẩm và chân lý hơn tất cả mọi thứ trên cõi đời này- họ thà sống TỰ DO NHÂN PHẨM tuy chật vật khốn khó nhưng xứng đáng làm CON NGƯỜI- hơn là đầy đủ vật chất nhưng bị ràng buộc nô lệ lầm lũi như loài gia súc. 
Họ "thiếu hẳn" cái "đức tính" "thức thời" của mọi người là chỉ mon men suy tính kể cả gian lận, săm soi đủ ngõ ngách... nhặt tiến - đêm nằm bỗng tự đắc thấy mình giỏi làm tiền! Dù chưa bằng Bill Gates ,Rockefeller, Ford hay Rothschild..!!!  Nói thẳng ra là để viết những bài có giá trị giúp ích thông tin, kiến thức cho độc giả quần chúng ... nó đòi hỏi tất cả năng lực từ mọi khía cạnh và lãnh vực của đời sống cá nhân của một người, và nhất là TÂM LỰC, điều mà không có nó, sẽ chẳng có những người như Edward Snowden, Sarah Harrision, Glenn Greenwald, Daniel Ellsberg, Chelsea Manning. Nó hoàn toàn khác hẳn- không giống như lối viết giải trí đú đởn như trên những Faceboook, hoặc các loại bài "rỗng ruột" hào nhoáng phiến diện của những "kẻ có tí của để ra" đủng đỉnh dư giờ khoe khoang làm dáng chữ nghĩa, sợ bị đời...quên. 
Thế nhưng "thiên hạ"  một đồng lẻ cũng đắn đo  do dự  tiếc của không ủng hộ-, một bài ý kiến ngắn nhỏ tham gia cũng ngần ngại tiếc công không muốn  viết... Nhưng  để biện minh cho nhân cách thấp, tài trí thua kém của họ, nhiều kẻ đã trở thành căm ghét những Con Người Chính Đáng như Snowden, Julian Assange, Sarah Harrison, James Corbett, Sibel Edmond, những trang như Nhân Chủ, The Boiling Frogs, PressForTruth v.v Họ nỗ lực đủ cách, đủ thủ đoạn để mình chứng rằng trên đời này không thể có những Con Người tốt lành, hơn hẳn họ xa đến vậy!!! Phải có "cái gì đó" bên trong những Con Người vượt trội đó, chẳng hạn như bị bệnh ái kỷ, bất mãn, điên khùng, bị mua chuộc v.v như bọn báo chí chính qui, loa đài chính phủ đang rền rỉ miên tục về những Con Người quả cảm. Nghĩa là cả bọn nhà nước, báo chí đĩ điếm chính qui và họ - đều muốn minh chứng một cách không cần thiết và tuyệt vọng rằng trong cuộc đời này không thể có những Con Người đặc biệt cao lớn hơn họ đến cỡ như thế đượ; rằng ai ai cũng phải thấp hèn như họ, cũng phải "an thân" lo miếng cơm manh áo, cũng phải thực dụng quan trọng ưu tiên tiền của lợi danh như họ- Như thế mới chính đáng thường tình "con người". Nói theo kiểu tiếng Anh là họ đang trong tình trạng "chống chế phủ nhận" (in the state of denial). 
Hệ thống Nhà nước chính phủ với guồng máy quyền lực bạo ngược và  thông tin tuyên truyền đồ sộ cố hữu nhất đã miên tục làm việc bôi nhọ hạ thấp những Con Người này hàng ngàn năm qua ...nhưng chỉ thất bại- Những Con Người yêu tự do, công lý, nhân phẩm và vô ưu vô úy này vẫn cứ còn đó, cứ xuất hiện, và càng ngày càng nhiều hơn, hiên ngang hơn như cả nhân loại hôm nay đang chứng kiến.
Không cần thiết và vô vọng, vì thật ra việc công lý công tâm, nhân quyền tự do là việc hoàn toàn tự nguyện. Chẳng ai ép buộc ai dấn thân. Không làm không dấn thân, thì thôi, ai o ép dí súng cưỡng chế mình phải dấn thân? Đân cần thiết phải biện minh cho việc không dám làm của mình bằng những thủ đoạn vặt vãnh bôi nhọ hạ thấp vô vọng những ngọn núi sừng sững như thế? Vô vọng, vì nỗ lực cỡ nào, đến như nhà nước chính phủ cũng chỉ là những cơn gió thoảng làm sao lay động được những ngọn núi đá sát cánh với nhau như thế! Edward Snowden, Sarah Harrison, Julian Assange, Daniel Ellsberg, Bradley Manning, Jesselyn Radack, Sibel Edmonds v.v (tham khảo danh sách những Công Dân Tố Cáo phần phụ lục)
Mà thôi, nói ra lại phí lời.
Ông Paul Craig Roberts vừa rồi trong bài viết nhân kỷ niệm 50 năm ngày ám sát Kennedy cũng đã chẳng viết về cái "thường tình" đó rồi sao:

""" Tôi không bao giờ hết kinh ngạc về cái tính bầy đàn cả tin của những người Mỹ, những kẻ đã không biết gì về sự việc nào cả, nhưng lại rất tự tin, dựa trên nền tảng niềm tin ngây ngô ấu trĩ rằng "Chính phủ chẳng thể dối trá những chuyện lớn như thế" hoặc là "nếu thế thì hẳn đã có ai đó lên tiếng tung hê rồi" v.v để gạt phắt đi những những chứng cớ cụ thể do các chuyên gia và sử gia đưa ra.  Như thế, phỏng đạt được gì nếu có ai đó  nói ra trong lúc cái đám ngu dại nhẹ dạ lại sẽ chẳng tin cả những chứng cớ rõ ràng trước mắt (I never cease to be amazed by the gullibility of Americans, who know nothing about either event, but who confidently dismiss the factual evidence provided by experts and historians on the basis of their naive belief that “the government wouldn’t lie about such important events” or “someone would have talked.” What good would it do if someone talked when the gullible won’t believe hard evidence?)

Rõ ràng điều này không chỉ ứng dụng với những người Mỹ hiện nay của ông Paul Craig Roberts.
Dư dục vô ngôn. Ôi! dư dục vô ngôn, từ cổ chí kim, tự Đông sang Tây. 
nkptc===
The Hidden Price of the Establishment Sugar Daddies-Backed Propaganda & Vulture Advertisers-Sponsored Free Content

The other day I was chatting with a man who was expressing his appreciation for our irate minority home-Boiling Frogs Post. Everything, all the brief communication, up to a certain point, was going well. Until … until he made the following comment:

I love what you guys are doing. It is activism, and it is so badly needed. I wish I had the time to participate and contribute work to your site. But the thing is I have a very hectic life … a full-time job, family and kids, and elderly mother who is about to go to a care facility, and a bunch of health issues. So, unfortunately, I can’t afford spending any time on activism at this time.

I was truly taken aback. I was offended. I was also offended on behalf of all my partners and activist friends here at BFP. Why? Here is why:

There is this assumption, not only by the man I was chatting with, but many others, that people who engage in activism, or those who work hard to further the truth and provide independent and solid needed information, are either:

A- Independently wealthy-as in millionaires
B- Have no family and children responsibilities, or loved ones to care for
C- Have no health issues or other difficult life circumstances to deal with
D- Are a bunch who have somehow forsaken and abdicated all their responsibilities, family, survival needs and health for the cause

I was offended because none of the above applies to either me or any of the people I work with. I, for one, am one of those jugglers who is handling family responsibilities, including a five-year old handful daughter, working to survive and have my family survive, handling health related emergencies and needs with bare-bones private insurance with a high deductible in order to keep monthly costs down, and … well, like all of you, so much more.

The decision to establish this amazing independent and nonpartisan information site did not come easy for me. Allow me to put it in perspective. I first had to turn my full-time job into a part-time one. And last year I gave up that job altogether to manage this website full-time (and overtime). The income difference between the two, my previous work and this work, is 70-%. This is a cost that is not only born by me but also my family. Is it hard? You bet it is. Can it be sustained? I don’t know for sure. But I am not the determinant of that- those who benefit from and appreciate what we are providing here will be determining that.

Over a year ago one of our partners here at BFP did the same thing. He quit his full-time teaching job, began dedicating all his time to producing needed independent information and news, and took a chance with not only himself but his family’s survival as well. And that includes a newly arrived baby.

There seems to be this highly absurd belief among the masses that everything on the Internet has to and must be free. That is nothing short of ridiculous. I marvel at that widely held absurd notion that says we are entitled to free information and content because it’s out there on the Internet and on our laptops, and the absurdity of the belief that there is a separation between information and analyses placed in a book and that on pages over the internet.

Information, whether it is a product of hours of research and writing, or hours spent producing and publishing video and podcast programs, isn’t free. Nor are music, movies, literature … housing, food and clothing. The people who report, analyze, write, and produce, need, like everyone else, to be paid for their work. It is a matter of survival. It is a matter of necessity. And there is no way around it.

Those who produce information of value have to take time, somehow, to think, research, write, create, produce and perform to bring to you an informative and significant product, whether it is a video report or a podcast show or an analysis of a current event. 

And somehow people, the same people who hold to this absurd notion that all information production should be free, seem to be in denial of the high price they are paying for free access. They don’t even consider the price of looking and clicking on ads that appear on many of these so-called free for all websites. And it doesn’t matter if you abstain from clicking or decide to ignore the pesky pop-ops, because the vultures capture your data and place their cookie-presence in your system anyway.

Likewise, these same people refuse to acknowledge the purpose behind free-for-all websites that are backed by establishment sugar daddies such as George Soros or Rockefeller Foundations. They are either unable to distinguish the difference between independent factual information and propaganda, or, they can, but don’t want to admit to themselves that they are being sold loads of cow manure and well-calculated and designed propaganda BS.

There is a reason you do not see a single advertisement here at Boiling Frogs Post. We are not a website backed by advertising money to sell you hot Asian women or Slim Fast concoctions. We do not capture and pass along your information to anyone, and by that we mean anyone. Period. I find that concept simply despicable. Disgusting. We will never ever choose that route. Period.

There is a reason we do not have a single foundation sponsoring, backing and or contributing to this website. Those foundations are extensions of the same very establishment we are fighting against. They can take their millions and shove it … to the sold-out presstitute pseudo alternatives. Their money comes with dirty strings. We are above that. And we will remain above that. Period.

There is a reason we are not established as a 501 (C) (3) tax-exempt entity. When the government, in this case, the criminal government, offers you a tax-free exemption, they make sure they put enough restraints and conditions on it to neuter one as a free and daring entity. No thank you, government. We are keeping our cohunes intact. Period.

During our first three years of operation we tried very hard to keep all our programs and content free and open to all by relying only on voluntary contributions. We tried, and tried and tried. But it didn’t work. For whatever reason. That’s why two years ago we began our subscription model for our multimedia productions. But still, we kept our other work open and free to all, thinking that between subscriptions and contributions we could offer both. I have to tell you, even that model hasn’t been dependable and reliable.

Think about it: In order for me to go out and recruit talented, independent and professional producers, I have to be able to confidently offer them regular modest compensation for their hard work. I cannot do that if I don’t know what the outcome of each quarterly contribution drive will be. Thus, the reason for our subscription model. With this model I can be reasonably confident enough to recruit additional reporters and producers. Some may call it highly ambitious, but I am still striving to expand this site to include our very own investigative journalists. I want to be able to go out and grab Ms. X who is currently working for Company Y, not very happily, but in order to pay her bills and survive. In order for me to do that I need the resources to provide timely compensation to reporters like her.

As I have been saying repeatedly, there is only one way, only one, for an untainted, independent, nonpartisan, reliable, daring, and yet professional news website to exist: One Hundred Percent Publicly Subsidized. Meaning; no sugar daddies, no foundations, no advertisers, no government subsidies in the form of tax exemptions, and no political party interference. And to make that a reality you come into the picture. You the people. People have to decide whether to seek free garbage brought to them by the garbage establishment, or, to help create and sustain one outside that garbage paradigm.

---
THAM KHẢO: DANH SÁCH CHƯA ĐẦY ĐỦ NHỮNG "CÔNG DÂN TỐ CÁO"

Prior to 1960[edit]

Year Image Name Organization Action

1777 Samuel Shaw United States Continental Navy Along with Third Lieutenant Richard Marven, midshipman Shaw was a key figures in the passage of the first whistleblower law passed in the United States by the Continental Congress.[1] During the Revolutionary War, the two naval officers blew the whistle on the torturing of British POWs by Commodore Esek Hopkins, the commander-in-chief of the Continental Navy.[2] The Continental Congress enacted the whistleblower protection law on July 30, 1778 by a unanimous vote.[3] In addition, it deeclared that the United States would defend the two against a libel suit filed against them by Hopkins [4]

1893 E.D. Morel.jpg Edmund Dene Morel Congo Free State English shipping clerk turned journalist who reported on the atrocities in the Congo Free State and became an anti-slavery campaigner. His revelations led to a strong campaign against Belgian King Leopold II's autocratic regime in his African territory, where the rubber plantations brutally exploited slave labor.[5]

1933 SmedleyButler.jpeg Smedley Butler United States Marine Corps Retired U.S. Marines Corps Major General, a two-time recipient of theMedal of Honor, who alleged to the McCormack-Dickstein Committee in the U.S. House of Representatives that business leaders had plotted a fascist coup d'état against the Franklin D. Roosevelt administration in what became known as the Business Plot. In his book War Is a Racket, Butler listed well-known US military operations that he alleged were not about protecting democracy as was told to the public but in furthering the business interests of U.S. banks and corporations. He compared these activities with Al Capone-style mob hits on behalf of American corporations and their respective business interests.[6]

1942 Jan Karski.jpg Jan Karski Nazi Germany Polish resistance fighter, who during World War II twice visited the Warsawghetto, and met with United States president Franklin Delano Roosevelt, with the UK Foreign Secretary, and with the Polish shadow government inLondon, to report what he had witnessed concerning conditions for Jewishpeople, and the extermination camps. His report was not taken seriously by any authority.[7][8]

1960s - 1970s[edit]

Year Image Name Organization Action

1963 Vann1.jpg John Paul Vann United States Army American colonel, who, during the Vietnam War, reported to his superiors that American policy and tactics were seriously flawed, and later went to the media with his concerns. Vann was asked to resign his commission, did so, but later returned to Vietnam.[9]

1966 Buxton media.jpg Peter Buxtun United States Public Health Service Exposed the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment.[10]

1971 Daniel Ellsberg 2006.jpg Daniel Ellsberg United States State Department Ellsberg was a former RAND Corp. military analyst who, along withAnthony Russo, leaked the Pentagon Papers, a secret account of theVietnam War to The New York Times. The Pentagon Papers revealed endemic practices of deception by previous administrations, and contributed to the erosion of public support for the war. The release triggered a legal case concerning government efforts to prevent the publication of classified information that was heard by the U.S. Supreme Court (New York Times Co. v. United States (403 U.S. 713)). Ellsberg himself was the subject of retaliation by the Nixon Administration.

1971 Frank Serpico New York Police Department Former New York City police officer who reported several of his fellow officers for bribery and related charges in front of the Knapp Commissionprobing police corruption in the NYPD. Serpico was the first police officer in the history of the NYPD to step forward to report and subsequently testify openly about widespread, systemic corruption payoffs amounting to millions of dollars.[11] The 1973 film Serpico is an account of his story.

1971 Perry Fellwock National Security Agency Former NSA analyst who revealed the existence of the NSA and its worldwide covert surveillance network in an interview with Ramparts (magazine) in 1971.[12] At the time, the NSA was a little-known organization. Because of the Fellwock revelations, the U.S. SenateChurch Committee introduced successful legislation to stop NSA spying on American citizens. Fellwock was motivated by Daniel Ellsberg's release of the Pentagon Papers.[13]

1972 MarkFelt.jpg W. Mark Felt Federal Bureau of Investigation Known only as Deep Throat until 2005, Felt was Associate Director of the FBI, the number-two job in the Bureau, when he leaked information about President Richard Nixon's involvement in the Watergate scandal.[14] The scandal would eventually lead to the resignation of the president, and prison terms for White House Chief of Staff H. R. Haldeman and presidential adviser John Ehrlichman.

1973 Stanley Adams Hoffmann-LaRoche A senior executive at Swiss pharmaceutical company Hoffman-LaRoche, Adams supplied evidence to European Economic Community regulators on the company's price fixing in the international vitamin market.[15] The EEC revealed his name during the resulting investigation and Adams was arrested for industrial espionage by the Swiss government and spent six months in jail. He fought for ten years to clear his name and receive compensation from the EEC.

1973 E. Fitzgerald.jpg A. Ernest Fitzgerald United States Department of Defense U.S. Department of Defense auditor who was fired in 1973 by President Richard M. Nixon[citation needed] for exposing to Congress the tidal wave of cost overruns associated with Lockheed's C-5A cargo plane. After protracted litigation he was reinstated to the civil service and continued to report cost overruns and military contractor fraud, including discovery in the 1980s that the Air Force was being charged $400 for hammers and $600 for toilet seats. Fitzgerald retired from the Defense Department in 2006.[16]

1973-1997 Henri Pezerat French National Centre for Scientific Research Henri Pezerat, working on the Jussieu Campus, detected asbestos fibres falling from the ceiling and created a committee to study and inform people about the dangers of asbestos.

1974 Karen Silkwood Kerr-McGee There have been a number of nuclear power whistleblowers who have identified safety concerns at nuclear power plants. The first prominent nuclear power whistleblower was Karen Silkwood, who worked as a chemical technician at a Kerr-McGee nuclear plant. Silkwood became an activist in the Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers International Union in order to protest health and safety issues. In 1974, she testified to theUnited States Atomic Energy Commission about her concerns. The 1983 film Silkwood is an account of this story.

1976 Gregory C. Minor,Richard B. Hubbard, and Dale G. Bridenbaugh General Electric Nuclear power whistleblowers. On February 2, 1976, (Gregory C. Minor,Richard B. Hubbard, and Dale G. Bridenbaugh (known as the GE Three) "blew the whistle" on safety problems at nuclear power plants, and their action has been called "an exemplary instance of whistleblowing".[17]The three engineers gained the attention of journalists and their disclosures about the threats of nuclear power had a significant impact. They timed their statements to coincide with their resignations from responsible positions in General Electric's nuclear energy division, and later established themselves as consultants on the nuclear power industry for state governments, federal agencies, and overseas governments. The consulting firm they formed, MHB Technical Associates, was technical advisor for the movie, The China Syndrome. The three engineers participated in Congressional hearings which their disclosures precipitated.[17][18][19][20]

1977 Frank Snepp Central Intelligence Agency CIA analyst at the US Embassy, Saigon who published Decent Intervalin 1977 about Operation Frequent Wind and the failures of the CIA and other American entities to properly prepare for the Fall of Saigon. Although he redacted all names, methods, and sources from the book, after it was published, CIA Director Stansfield Turner had Snepp successfully prosecuted for breach of contract for violating his non-disclosure agreement.[21] Snepp lost all income, including royalties, from publication of the book, a verdict upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court.

1980s[edit]

Year Image Name Organization Action

1984 Clive Ponting United Kingdom Ministry of Defence Senior civil servant in the UK Ministry of Defence who leaked classified documents to Labour Member of Parliament Tam Dalyell confirming that the General Belgrano was sunk by British forces during the Falklands Warwhile outside the total exclusion zone, contradicting statements by theThatcher Government.

1984 John Michael Gravitt General Electric Became the first individual in 40 years to file a qui tam lawsuit under theFalse Claims Act after the statute had been weakened in 1943.[22] Gravitt, a machinist foreman, sued GE for defrauding the United States Department of Defense when GE began falsely billing for work on the B1 Lancerbomber. Gravitt was laid off following his complaints to supervisors about the discrepancies. The case of Gravitt v. General Electric and Gravitt's deposition to Congress led to federal legislation bolstering the False Claims Act in 1986.[23][24] The amended Act made it easier for whistleblowers to collect damages. Gravitt's suit proceeded under the 1986 amendments and GE settled the case for a then record $3.5 million.[25]

1984 Duncan Edmonds Canadian Government Canadian civil servant who reported to his chief, the top Canadian civil servant, that Minister of Defence Robert Coates had visited a West Germanstrip club while on an official mission, with NATO documents in his possession, creating a security risk. Coates was asked to resign from Cabinet by Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, who also fired Edmonds and made him persona non grata in government circles.[26]

1984(?) Ingvar Bratt Bofors Engineer who revealed himself as the anonymous source in the Bofors Scandal about illegal weapon exports.[27] An act that led to a new Swedishlaw[28] concerning company secrets which commonly is referred to as Lex Bratt.

1985 Cathy Massiter MI5 Former MI5 officer who accused the British security service of having over-zealously interpreted which groups qualified as subversive, thus justifying surveillance against them. Massiter revealed that MI5 had spied on trade unions, civil liberty organisations and the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament.[29][30]

1985 Ronald J. Goldstein EBASCO Constructors Inc. Nuclear power whistleblower Goldstein was a supervisor employed by EBASCO, which was a major contractor for the construction of Houston Lighting and Power Company's South Texas Project (a complex of two nuclear power plants). In the summer of 1985, Goldstein identified safety problems to SAFETEAM, an internal compliance program established by EBASCO and Houston Lighting, including noncompliance with safety procedures, the failure to issue safety compliance reports, and quality control violations affecting the safety of the plant. SAFETEAM was promoted as an independent safe haven for employees to voice their safety concerns. The two companies did not inform their employees that they did not believe complaints reported to SAFETEAM had any legal protection. After he filed his report to SAFETEAM, Goldstein was fired. Subsequently, Golstein filed suit under federal nuclear whistleblower statutes. The U.S.Department of Labor ruled that his submissions to SAFETEAM were protected and his dismissal was invalid, a finding upheld by Labor Secretary Lynn Martin. The ruling was appealed and overturned by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, which ruled that private programs offered no protection to whistleblowers. After Goldstein lost his case, Congress amended the federal nuclear whistleblower law to provide protection reports made to internal systems and prevent retaliation against whistleblowers.[31]

1986 Mordechai Vanunu Headshot.jpg Mordechai Vanunu Israeli nuclear weapons program Revealed Israel's clandestine nuclear program to the British press. He spent seventeen and a half years in prison as a result, the first eleven of these in solitary confinement. After his release, sanctions were placed on him: among others, he was not allowed to leave Israel or speak to foreigners. The sanctions have been renewed every twelve months. At present, he is appealing a further six-month prison sentence imposed by an Israeli court for having spoken to foreigners and foreign press.[32][33]

1988 Peter Wright MI5 Former science officer of MI5 who claimed in his book, Spycatcher, that the UK Security Service plotted to remove Prime Minister Harold Wilsonfrom office and the Director General of MI5 was a Soviet spy. After its publication in Australia, which the Thatcher government tried to block, the government attempted to ban the book in Britain under the Official Secrets Act. Through litigation, it succeeded in imposing a gag order on English newspapers to prevent them from publishing Wright's allegations. The gag orders were upheld by the Law Lords.[34][35] Eventually, in 1988, the book was cleared for legitimate sale when the Law Lords acknowledged that overseas publication meant it contained no secrets.[36] However, Wright was barred from receiving royalties from the sale of the book in the United Kingdom. In November 1991, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the British government had breached the European Convention of Human Rights in gagging its own newspapers.[37][38] The British Government’s legal cost were estimated at £250,000 in 1987.[39]

1988 Roland Gibeault Genisco Technology Gibeault filed a qui tam lawsuit against defense subcontractor Genisco Technology Corp. after working undercover for 18 months with the FBI andDCIS to uncover the company's fraudulent test methods which were being used to pass key components off on the High-speed Anti-Radiation Missile (HARM) missile. The FBI and DCIS case resulted in a plea-bargained $725,000 fine and three Genisco executives being sent to federal prison.[40][41] Gibeault, who was fired from Genisco following revelation of whistleblowing, received $131,250 of the fine.[42] In 1989, Gibeault and fellow employee Inge Maudal also filed qui tam actions against Genisco's parent company, Texas Instruments.[43]

1989 Douglas D. Keeth United Technologies Corporation Filed a qui tam lawsuit against United Technologies Corp. (UTX) where he held the title vice president of finance. Mr. Keeth and others had investigated billing practices at UTX's Sikorsky Aircraft division, uncovering inflated progress billings going back at least as far as 1982. UTX offered Mr. Keeth a $1 million severance payment if he would keep quiet, but Keeth rejected the offer. In 1994, UTX paid $150 million to the government and Keeth was awarded a bounty of $22.5 million.[44]

1989 William Schumer Hughes Aircraft Filed a lawsuit January 1989 alleging fraud by Hughes Aircraft with respect to the B-2 bomber. In 1997 the Supreme Court held that the claim should have been dismissed as based on invalid retroactive legislation because the alleged fraud occurred in 1982-1984, before the 1986 amendments to the Fraudulent Claims Act which might have permitted it. The government did not support Schumer in his lawsuit as it had determined the alleged fraud had actually benefited the government by shifting costs from the cost-plus B-2 contract to the fixed-price F-15 contract.[45]

1989 Myron Mehlman Mobil A toxicologist, he warned managers at Mobil that the company's gasoline that was being sold in Japan contained benzene in excess of 5 percent, and that levels needed to be reduced. Upon his return to the United States, he was fired. He later successfully sued the company.[46]

1990s[edit]

Year Image Name Organization Action

1990 Arnold Gundersen Nuclear Energy Services Nuclear power whistleblower Arnold Gundersen discovered radioactive material in an accounting safe at Nuclear Energy Services (NES) in Danbury, Connecticut, the consulting firm where he held a $120,000-a-year job as senior vice president.[47] Three weeks after he notified the company president of what he believed to be radiation safety violations, Gundersen was fired. According to The New York Times, for three years, Gundersen "was awakened by harassing phone calls in the middle of the night" and he "became concerned about his family's safety". Gundersen believes he was blacklisted, harassed and fired for doing what he thought was right.[47] NES foled a $1.5 million defamation lawsuit against him that was settled out-of-court. A U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission report concluded that there had been irregularities at NES, and the Office of the Inspector General reported that the NRC had violated its own regulations by sending business to NES.[48]

1990s Joanna Gualtieri Canadian Government Canadian whistleblower[49] who exposed lavish extravagance in the purchase of accommodation abroad for staff in Foreign Affairs. The Inspector General and Auditor General of Canada later supported her allegations. Gualtieri claimed the Bureau seemed not to care, that her bosses harassed her for raising the concerns and that she was a given dead-end job after coming forward. Ms. Gualtieri sued her former bosses for harassment. This lawsuit has been vigorously defended by government lawyers and has dragged in the courts for over 10 years.[citation needed]

1992 Mark Whitacre (crop).jpg Mark Whitacre Archer Daniels Midland PhD scientist and former Divisional President with Archer Daniels Midland, who worked with the FBI as a secret informant, to blow the whistle on price-fixing cartel in his company. This story is featured in the film The Informant!.[citation needed]

1994 André Cicolella French Institute for Research and Security André Cicolella showed that malformation of foetus are associated with professional exposition of their mothers to glycol ethers. The French Institute for Research and Security decided not to allow him to chair or participate in a symposium that he was organising on health risks linked with ether glycols and fire him. In 1998, justice confirms that the researcher was right.

1994-95 William Sanjour United States Environmental Protection Agency Whistleblower at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for over 20 years who also wrote on whistleblower protection issues.[50] He won a landmark lawsuit against the federal government which established the First Amendment rights of federal employees to "blow the whistle" on their employer.[Sanjour v. EPA,56 F.3d 85 (D.C. Cir. 1995)(en banc)]

1996 George Galatis Nuclear power industry Nuclear power whistleblower George Galatis was a senior nuclear engineer who reported safety problems at the Millstone 1 Nuclear Power Plant, relating to reactor refueling procedures, in 1996.[51][52]The unsafe procedures meant that spent fuel rod pools at Unit 1 had the potential to boil, possibly releasing radioactive steam.[53] Galatis eventually took his concerns to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, to find that they had "known about the unsafe procedures for years". As a result of going to the NRC, Galatis experienced "subtle forms of harassment, retaliation, and intimidation".[52][54] The NRC Office of Inspector General investigated this episode and essentially agreed with Galatis in Case Number 95-771, the report of which tells the whole story.[55] George Galatis was the subject of a Time magazine cover story on March 4, 1996.[54] Millstone 1 was permanently closed in July 1998.

1996 Jeffrey Wigand (178631094).jpg Jeffrey Wigand Brown & Williamson Jeffrey Wigand had been recently fired from his position as vice president of research and development at tobacco company Brown & Williamson when, on February 4, 1996, he stated on the CBS news program 60 Minutes that the company intentionally manipulated the level of nicotine in cigarette smoke to addict smokers. Wigand claims that he was subsequently harassed and received anonymous death threats. He was portrayed by Russell Crowe in the 1999 film The Insider.

1996 Allan Cutler Canadian government The first whistleblower on the Canadian "AdScam" or sponsorship scandal. Without legal protection, he was fired by the Canadian government. As the case developed, federal legislation was passed to protect future whistleblowers in the Canadian civil service. Several convictions have been recorded to date with the case, with proceedings still in progress.

1996 Gary Webb In His Own Words 623.jpg Gary Webb Central Intelligence Agency Webb's "Dark Alliance," a 20,000 word, three-part investigative series alleged that Nicaraguan drug traffickers had sold and distributed crack cocaine in Los Angeles during the 1980s, and that drug profits were used to fund the CIA-supported Nicaraguan Contras. Webb never asserted that the CIA directly aided drug dealers to raise money for the Contras, but he did document that the CIA was aware of the cocaine transactions and the large shipments of cocaine into the U.S. by the Contra personnel. In 2004, Webb was found dead from two gunshot wounds to the head, which the coroner's office judged a suicide.

1996 David Franklin Parke-Davis Exposed illegal promotion of the epilepsy drug Neurontin for un-approved uses while withholding evidence that the drug was not effective for these conditions. Parke-Davis's new owners Pfizereventually pleaded guilty and paid criminal and civil fines of $430 million. The case had widespread effects including: establishing a new standards for pharmaceutical marketing practices; broadening the use of the False Claims Act to make fraudulent marketing claims criminal violations; exposing complicity and active participation in fraud by renowned physicians; and demonstrating how medical literature had been systematically adulterated by the pharmaceutical industry and its paid clinical consultants. Under the False Claims Act Dr Franklin receives $24.6m as part of the settlement agreement.[citation needed]

1996-1998 Nancy Olivieri Apotex Starting in 1996, Nancy Olivieri was part of a group conducting a clinical trial in order to evaluate the use of a drug of Apotex,deferiprone, in treating persons with a blood disorder, thalassaemia.[56]During the course of the trial, Olivieri became concerned about evidence that pointed to the toxicity of the study drug and to the drug being inefficacious. Olivieri informed both the research ethics board that was monitoring the study and Apotex, the drug maker. The research ethics board instructed Olivieri to inform participants about her concerns. Apotex responded by noting that Olivieri had signed a confidentiality agreement as part of the drug trial and that informing participants about her concerns, the validity of which Apotex disputed, would violate that confidentiality agreement. Apotex threatened to vigorously pursue all legal remedies against her if she disclosed her conclusions to patients. Olivieri disclosed her concerns to her patients and Apotex ended the portion of the study in which she was participating. In 1998, the New England Journal of Medicine published her paper suggesting that deferiprone led to progressive hepatic fibrosis.[57][58]

1997 Frederic Whitehurst Federal Bureau of Investigation A chemist at the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation who was the FBI Laboratory's foremost expert on explosives residue in the 1990s, and became the first modern-day FBI whistleblower. He reported a lack of scientific standards and serious flaws in the FBI Lab, including in the first World Trade Center bombing cases and the Oklahoma City bombing case. Whitehurst's whistleblower disclosures triggered an overhaul of the FBI's crime lab following a report by the U.S. Department of Justice Inspector General in 1997. Dr. Whitehust filed a federal lawsuit claiming whistleblower retaliation, and he reached a settlement with the FBI worth more than $1.16 million.[59] Whitehurst now directs the FBI Oversight Project of the National Whistleblower Center.

1997 David Shayler Axis for Peace 2005-11-18.jpg David Shayler MI5 Along with girlfriend Annie Machon, resigned from MI5 to expose alleged criminal acts by the UK Secret Services, including a failed assassination attempt on Muammar Gaddafi. Shayler also accused the Security Services of planting false stories in the press, substantiated in one example by a court.[60]

1997 Christoph Meili 1997.jpg Christoph Meili UBS A night guard at a Swiss bank, he discovered that his employer was destroying records of savings by Holocaust victims, which the bank was required to return to heirs of the victims. After the Swiss authorities sought to arrest Meili, he was given political asylum in theUnited States.[61][62]

1997 Alan Parkinson Australian Government Alan Parkinson is a mechanical and nuclear engineer who has written the 2007 book, Maralinga: Australia’s Nuclear Waste Cover-up, about the clean-up of the British atomic bomb test site at Maralinga in South Australia.[63] In 1993, Parkinson became the key person on theMaralinga clean-up project, representing the then federal Laborgovernment. By 1997, however, there was much cost-cutting involved which compromised the project, and personal differences about how the project should proceed, which led to the sacking of Parkinson by the new Howard government.[64] The clean-up was totally unsatisfactory according to Parkinson and he exposed the situation through the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, provoking a strong rebuttal and personal abuse from the government.[64]

1998 Shiv Chopra Canadian government

[icon] This section requires expansion.(January 2011)

A microbiologist and activist who was involved in one of the first major whistleblowing incidents in the Canadian public service.

1998 Paul van Buitenen European Commission Accused European Commission members of corruption. (SeeResignation of the Santer Commission).

1998 MHodler.jpg Marc Hodler International Olympic Committee IOC member who blew the whistle on the Winter Olympic bid scandal for the 2002 Salt Lake City games.

1998 Linda Tripp Clinton Administration Former White House staff member who disclosed to the Office of Independent Counsel that Monica Lewinsky committed perjury and attempted to suborn perjury, and President Bill Clinton committed misconduct, by denying the Clinton-Lewinsky relationship in the Paula Jones federal civil rights suit. A victim of retaliation by the Clinton Administration, Tripp successfully sued the Department of Defense and the Justice Department for releasing information from her security file and employment file to the news media in violation of the Privacy Act of 1974. In 2003, Tripp settled with the federal government for over $595,000. In addition, she received a retroactive promotion and retroactive pay for the years 1998, 1999, and 2000, a pension and was cleared to work for the federal government again.[65]

1998 Árpád Pusztai Rowett Research Institute Árpád Pusztai (1930-) is a biochemist and nutritionist, a world expert on plant lectins. In 1998, he publicly announced that the results of his research showed feeding genetically modified potatoes to rats had negative effects on their stomach lining and immune system. This led to Pusztai being suspended and his annual contract was not renewed. The resulting controversy became known as the Pusztai affair.

1999 Harry Markopolos Early whistleblower of suspected securities fraud by Bernard Madoff, tipping off the United States Securities and Exchange Commission(SEC) repeatedly.

1999 Youri Bandazhevsky In 1999, Youri Bandazhevsky released the results that he accumulated about the health problems of children in the contaminated area ofChernobyl. He is arrested in July 1999.

1990s-2000s Marlene Garcia-Esperat Philippines Department of Agriculture Former analytical chemist for the Philippines Department of Agriculture who became a journalist to expose departmental corruption, and was murdered in 2005. Her assailants later surrendered to police, and have testified that they were hired by officials in the Department of Agriculture.[citation needed]

1990s-2000s Janet Howard,Tanya Ward Jordan andJoyce E. Megginson United States Department of Commerce Exposed widespread systemic racism and retaliation within the Department of Commerce against African-American employees.[66]

2000s[edit]

Year Image Name Organization Action

2000s Karen Kwiatkowski on the farm.jpg Karen Kwiatkowski United States Air Force Retired lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Air Force who worked as a desk officer in The Pentagon and in a number of roles in the National Security Agency. She has written a number of essays on corrupting political influences of military intelligence leading up to the invasion of Iraq in 2003, and has said that she was the anonymous source for Seymour Hersh and Warren Strobel on their exposés of pre-war intelligence.[citation needed]

2000 Marsha Coleman-Adebayo.jpg Marsha Coleman-Adebayo United States Environmental Protection Agency Marsha Coleman-Adebayo was a Senior Policy Analyst in the Office of the Administrator at the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). She blew the whistle on the EPA for racial and gender discrimination in violation of Civil Rights Act of 1964 which began after she was removed from her position in South Africa where her "job was to essentially help the South African government to work on issues that impact public health".[67] In South Africa she brought to the attention of the EPA the dangerous conditions an American company was exposing African workers to who were mining vanadium, a dangerous substance. Her case eventually led to the passing of the No-FEAR Act in 2002 that makes federal agencies more accountable for employee complaints.[67]

2001 Joseph Nacchio Qwest /National Security Agency Nacchio was chairperson and CEO of Qwest when it refused to participate in NSA spying on its customers in February 2001. Qwest was the only telecommunications company to not require FISA court orders. Nacchio claims that in retaliation, Qwest subsequently was denied government contracts.[68]

2001 Pascal Diethelm.jpg

RIELLE J. C.-N° 10-24.02.2011-print.jpg

Pascal Diethelm (seeFrench Wikipedia),Jean-Charles Rielle (seeFrench Wikipedia) Philip Morris USA andUniversity of Geneva Swiss tobacco control advocates and alumni from the University of Geneva who revealed the secret ties of Ragnar Rylander (see French Wikipedia), professor of environmental health, to the tobacco industry. In a public statement made in 2001, Pascal Diethelm and Jean-Charles Rielle accused Rylander of being "secretly employed by Philip Morris" and qualified of "scientific fraud without precedent" the concealment of his links with the tobacco industry for a period of 30 years, during which he publicly presented himself as an independent scientist, while obeying orders given by Philip Morris executives and lawyers, publishing articles and organizing symposia which denied or trivialized the toxicity of secondhand smoke. After a long trial, which went up to the supreme court of Switzerland, all accusations were found to be true.[69] Following this judgment, the University of Geneva prohibited its members from soliciting research subsidies or direct or indirect consultancies with the tobacco industry.[70]

2001 J.Radack.jpg Jesselyn Radack United States Department of Justice Radack, a DOJ lawyer, told Newsweek that the DOJ both lied about and destroyed documents regarding John Walker Lindh's interrogation and his parent's attempts to get him a lawyer. The DOJ retaliated by pushing her out of the Department, getting her fired from her next job, trying to get her law licence revoked, & other means.

2002 Kathryn Bolkovac at the Genie Awards on March 8, 2012.jpg Kathryn Bolkovac United NationsInternational Police Originally hired by the U.S. company DynCorp as part of a $15 millionU.N. contract to hire and train police officers for duty in Bosnia. She eventually reported that such officers were paying for prostitutes and participating in sex-trafficking.[71] Many of these were forced to resign under suspicion of illegal activity, but none have been prosecuted, as they also enjoy immunity from prosecution in Bosnia.[72][73] Bolkovac filed a lawsuit[74] in Great Britain against DynCorp for unfair dismissal due to a protected disclosure (whistleblowing), and on 2 August 2002 the tribunal unanimously found in her favor.[75]

2002 Cynthia Cooper Worldcom Exposed corporate financial scandal. Jointly named Time's People of the Year in 2002.

2002 Sherron Watkins Enron Exposed corporate financial scandal. Jointly named Time's People of the Year in 2002.

2002 Coleen Rowley 17 Sep 2006.jpg Coleen Rowley Federal Bureau of Investigation Outlined the FBI's slow action prior to the September 11, 2001 attacks. Jointly named Time's People of the Year in 2002.

2002 William Binney-IMG 9040.jpg William Binney

J. Kirke Wiebe

Edward Loomis National Security Agency NSA officials initially joined House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence staffer Diane Roark in asking U.S. Department of Defense inspector general to investigate wasteful spending on the Trailblazer Project and the NSA officials eventually went public when they were ignored and retaliated upon. They claim that Thinthread was more focused thus more effective and lower cost than Trailblazer and subsequent programs, which automatically collected trillions of domestic communications of Americans in deliberate violation of the U.S. Constitution.

2002 Marta Andreasen European Commission Argentine-born Spanish accountant, employed by the European Commission as Chief Accountant, and notable for raising concerns about fraud potential within EU, neglected by the Commission.

2002 Glenn Walp

Steven L. Doran University of California

Los Alamos National Laboratory Glenn Walp and Steven L. Doran were hired to investigate allegations of fraud at the University of California's Los Alamos National Laboratory. They were fired after they exposed breaches of security as well as fraud and mismanagement to the Department of Energy. Their investigation resulted in congressional hearings. Walpo received a $930,000 settlement from the University of California (UC) for wrongful termination.[76] Doran accepted UC's offer of a position as security consultant.[77]

2002 Sibel edmonds on RT.png Sibel Edmonds Federal Bureau of Investigation Former FBI translator naturalized American citizen of Turkish descentwho was fired in 2002 by the FBI for attempting to report coverups of security issues, potential espionage, and incompetence. She has been gagged by the State Secrets Privilege in her efforts to go to court on these issues, including a rejection recently by the Supreme Court of the United States to hear her case without comment. She is now founder of the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition (NSWBC) that is looking to lobby congress and help other whistleblowers with legal and other forms of assistance.[citation needed]

2003 Diane Urquhart Canadian Government Former senior securities industry executive who revealed to theCanadian House of Commons's finance committee that Canadian frozen non-bank asset-backed commercial paper caused a loss of $7–$13 billion held primarily by government, corporation pension funds and treasuries.[78]

2003 Katharine Gun United Kingdom GCHQ Leaked top-secret information to the press concerning alleged illegal activities by the United States and the United Kingdom in their push for the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

2003 Robert MacLean Federal Law Enforcement Training Center graduation oath.jpeg Robert MacLean United States Transportation Security Administration U.S. Federal Air Marshal who exposed the TSA's agency-wide plan to remove Federal Air Marshals from nonstop, long distance flights for two months in order to avoid expenditures associated with air marshals lodging in hotels overnight. The plan was formulated in response to a budget shortfall due to overspending. The plan was formulated three days after the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued an Advisory that warned the airline industry and law enforcement of a suicide hijacking plot in which terrorists would exploit U.S. immigration and airport security loopholes. After outrage from U.S. Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton,[79] Charles Schumer,[80] Barbara Boxer,[81] and Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney,[82] TSA's plan was rescinded before becoming operational. MacLean was fired after DHS discovered he disclosed the plan.[83]

2003 Joseph Wilson United States Government Former U.S. ambassador, whose editorial in The New York Times, "What I Didn't Find In Africa",[84] showed reasons for the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

2003 Richard Convertino United States Department of Justice Former federal prosecutor who obtained the first conviction of a defendant in a terrorism case post-9/11. After Convertino testified before the U.S. Senate Finance Committee in September 2003 about the lack of Bush Administration support of anti-terrorism prosecutions post-9/11, Convertino alleges the Justice Department leaked information and violated a court order to publicly smear him in retaliation for his whistleblowing. Additionally, the Justice Department indicted Convertino for obstruction of justice and lying, which Convertino alleges is further whistleblower retaliation.[citation needed]

2003 Satyendra Dubey India National Highways Authority Accused his employer NHAI of corruption in highway construction projects in India, in letter to Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee. Assassinated on November 27, 2003. Enormous media coverage following his death may lead to Whistleblower Act in India.[citation needed]

2004 National Security whistleblower Julia Davis .jpg Julia Davis United States Department of Homeland Security Reported a breach of national security at the San Ysidro Port of Entry on 4 July 2004, related to the admission of 23 improperly-processed subjects from terrorist countries into the U.S. via the land border with Mexico.[85] In retaliation for her report to the FBI (JTTF), Julia Davis endured two malicious prosecutions, two false imprisonments, 54 investigations, years of warrantless surveillance and a Blackhawk helicopter raid of her home by the Department of Homeland Security. Files found[86] within Osama Bin Laden's compound in 2011 confirmed that 4 July/Independence Day was in fact a date of planned terrorist attacks on the United States,[86] potentially confirming the validity of Julia Davis' official reports to the FBI/JTTF that have been closed with "no action" and without any investigation.

2004 Joe Darby United States Army First alerted the U.S. military command of prisoner abuse in the Abu Ghraib prison, in Abu Ghraib, Iraq.

2004 Hans-Peter Martin European Parliament Accused Parliament members of invalid expense claims.[citation needed]

2004 Craig Murray.jpg Craig Murray United Kingdom Foreign and Commonwealth Office British Ambassador to Uzbekistan who opposed the Karimov regime's use of torture and its other violations of human rights, and British Government support for the use of torture.

2004 Gerald w brown.jpg Gerald W. Brown Nuclear power industry Nuclear power whistleblower Gerald W. Brown was a former firestopcontractor and consultant who uncovered the Thermo-lag circuit integrityscandal and silicone foam scandals in U.S. and Canadian nuclear power plants, which led to Congressional proceedings as well as Provincial proceedings in the Canadian Province of Ontario concerning deficiencies in passive fire protection.

2004 David Graham Food and Drug Administration Discovered that the pain-reliever Vioxx increased the risk of cardiovascular problems, spoke out against the policies of the Food and Drug Administration, and succeeded in convincing the FDA to require large warning labels on Vioxx packaging.

2004 Sergeant Provance.jpg Samuel Provance United States Army System administrator for U.S. Army Military Intelligence at the Abu Ghraib prison who publicly revealed the role of interrogators in the abuses, as well the general effort to cover-up the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse itself.

2004 The A2.JPG Peter Rost Pfizer Former vice president at the pharmaceutical company that reported about accounting irregularities and other irregularities to the US authorities. In response to his whistleblowing he was exiled internally by Pfizer and removed from all responsibilities and decision making. In 2004, he testified in Congress as a private individual in favour of drug reimportation, a position strongly at odds with the official policy of the pharmaceutical industry. In December 2005, Rost was fired from Pfizer. In September 2006 he published his experiences in the book “The Whistleblower: Confessions of a Healthcare Hitman.”[citation needed]

2005 Richard Levernier United States Department of Energy

Richard Levernier is an American nuclear power whistleblower. Levernier worked for 23 years as a nuclear security professional, and identified security problems at U.S. nuclear facilities as part of his job. Specifically, after 9/11, he identified problems with contingency planning to protect US nuclear plants from terrorist attacks. He said that the assumption that attackers would both enter and exit from facilities was not valid, since suicide terrorists would not need to exit. In response to this complaint, the U.S. Department of Energy withdrew Levernier's security clearance and he was assigned to clerical work. Levernier approached the United States Office of Special Counsel (OSC), which handles US federal whistleblower matters. It took the OSC four years to vindicate Levernier, ruling that the Department's retaliation was illegal - but the OSC could not reinstate Levernier's security clearance, so he was unable to regain work in nuclear security.[87][88]

2005 Toni Hoffman Queensland Health, Australia Toni Hoffman is an senior Australian nurse who exposed the medical malpractice of surgeon Jayant Patel. She originally began to raise doubts about the ability of Patel with hospital management and other staff. Both doctors and surgeons who were familiar with his work were also deeply concerned. Patel became the subject of the Morris Inquiryand later the Davies Commission. Eventually the matter was raised in the Queensland Parliament. Hoffman received the 2006 Australian of the Year Local Hero Award and an Order of Australia Medal, for her role as a whistleblower.[89][90]

2005 Russ Tice 2009.jpg Russ Tice United States Government Former intelligence analyst for the National Security Agency (NSA), theU.S. Air Force, the Office of Naval Intelligence, and the Defense Intelligence Agency. Tice first approached Congress and eventually the media about the warrantless surveillance of the US population by the NSA. Tice was a major source for the 2005 New York Times exposé and spoke out widely following subsequent disclosures by other NSA whistleblowers. He was the first to speak publicly and openly with allegations during the era beginning with the George W. Bush administration (which continues into the Obama administration). He had earlier been known for reporting suspicions that a DIA colleague of his might be a Chinese spy.[91]

2005 Maria do Rosàrio Veiga World Meteorological Organization Enquired about a fraud, wrote a final report in 2005. Chief IAIS 2002/nov2006, terminated by the WMO.,[92][93][94]

2005-2011 T.Drake.jpg Thomas Andrews Drake National Security Agency Thomas Drake worked at the NSA in various analyst and management positions. He blew the whistle on the NSA's Trailblazer project that he felt was a violation of the Fourth Amendment and other laws and regulations. He contacted The Baltimore Sun which published articles about waste, fraud, and abuse at the NSA, including stories about Trailblazer. In April 2010, Drake was indicted by a grand jury on various charges, including obstructing justice and making false statements. After the May 22, 2011 broadcast of a 60 Minutes episode on the Drake case, the government dropped all of the charges against Drake and agreed not to seek any jail time in return for Drake's agreement to plead guilty to a misdemeanor of misusing the agency’s computer system. Drake was sentenced to one year of probation and community service.

2005 Bunnatine "Bunny" H. Greenhouse Halliburton Former chief civilian contracting officer for the United States Army Corps of Engineers who exposed illegality in the no-bid contracts for reconstruction in Iraq by a Halliburton subsidiary.[95]

2005-2009 Brad Birkenfeld UBS An American banker who formerly worked for UBS, Switzerland's largest bank, he was the first person who exposed what has become a multi-billion dollar international tax fraud scandal over Swiss private banking.[96][97] He provided extensive and voluntary cooperation with the U.S. government, registering as an IRS whistleblower, Birkenfeld is the only U.S. citizen to be sentenced to prison as a result of the scandal.[98]

2005 Thomas Tamm United States Department of Justice Attorney for the DOJ's Office of Intelligence Policy and Review who initially informed The New York Times for the story that became a 2005 exposé on mass warrantless surveillance. His home was raided in 2007 during FBI investigation of the leaks and he began to openly speak out publicly in 2008.

2005 Shawn Carpenter Sandia National Laboratories Discovered that a sophisticated group of hackers were systematically penetrating hundreds of computer networks at major U.S. defense contractors, military installations and government agencies to access sensitive information. After informing his superiors at Sandia, he was directed not to share the information with anyone, because management cared only about Sandia's computers. He, however, went on to voluntarily work with the U.S. Army and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to address the problem. When Sandia discovered his actions, they terminated his employment and revoked his security clearance. His story was first reported in the September 5, 2005, issue of Time. On February 13, 2007, a New Mexico State Court awarded him $4.7 million in damages from Sandia Corporation for firing him. The jury found Sandia Corporation's handling of Mr. Carpenter's firing was "malicious, willful, reckless, wanton, fraudulent, or in bad faith."

2005 Rick S. Piltz National Aeronautics and Space Administration Exposed Philip Cooney, a White House official who edited a climate change report to reflect the administration's views without having any scientific background.[citation needed]

2005 Shanmughan Manjunath.jpg Shanmughan Manjunath Indian Oil Corporation Former manager at Indian Oil Corporation Ltd (IOCL), and spoke against adulteration of petrol. He was shot dead on November 19, 2005, allegedly by a petrol pump owner from Uttar Pradesh.[citation needed]

2005 Paul Moore HBOS Executive at the UK bank HBOS who in 2005 was fired, allegedly after warning his senior colleagues that the company's sales strategy was at odds with prudent management. In 2009 Moore spoke out about his warnings to the Treasury Select Committee of parliament during its investigation into the turmoil in the UK banking system.[99]

2006 Michael J. Nappe University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey

This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (January 2011)

The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's general notability guideline. Please help to establish notability by adding reliable, secondary sources about the topic. If notability cannot be established, the article is likely to be merged, redirected, or deleted.

Find sources: "List of whistleblowers" – news ·books · scholar · JSTOR · free images (November 2013)

Raised issues about the payment of millions of dollars of bills without purchase orders or supporting documentation by UMDNJ in New Jersey. He also exposed an internal billing scheme involving the use of "dummy invoices" to charge internal departments with a markup without their knowledge or approval.[Source: Newark Star Ledger and Associated Press, November 2006] Nappe also exposed his subordinate who was running a personal business with the University's cell phone account. [Source: Newark Star Ledger, January 2011] Nappe was also mentioned in a NY Times Best Seller, "The Soprano State, New Jersey's Culture of Corruption" for his efforts to institute reforms, and the retaliations he endured as a result of being honest and accountable for taxpayer money. To humiliate him, his employer assigned his office to a lunch room and stripped him of his staff. [Source: Newark Star Ledger, November 2006] He became known internationally as "The Man in the Lunch Room". Additionally, the director of UMDNJ's legal management ordered any department responsible for investigating Nappe's disclosures to not investigate them and submit them to his office, where they remained inactive. [Anonymous Sources: UMDNJ Compliance Department, UMDNJ Legal Department, UMDNJ Human Resources Department, UMDNJ Department of Informations Systems and Technology] Six months after the University "resolved the issue with Mr. Nappe", several of Nappe's allegations were proven to be true.[100]

2006 Gary J. Aguirre United States Securities and Exchange Commission Exposed the SEC's failure to pursue investigation of John Mack ininsider trading case involving Pequot Capital Management and Arthur J. Samberg. Aguirre was fired for complaining about special treatment for Mack, which prompted investigations by the Senate Finance Committeeand the Senate Judiciary Committee, culminating in a joint report vindicating Aguirre. Through his FOIA request filed to learn more about his wrongful termination, he uncovered the "smoking gun" that forced the SEC to re-open its case against Pequot, leading to a settlement of $28 million in 2009. A month later, the SEC settled Aguirre's lawsuit for wrongful termination, paying $755,000. Aguirre also won a lawsuit against the SEC filed in District Court.[101][102]

2006 Walter DeNino Student and lab technician who questioned Eric Poehlman'sintegrity.[103]

2006 Marco Pautasso World Intellectual Property Organization WIPO Senior Auditor blew the whistle on fraud and attempted fraud committed by WIPO Director-General Kamil Idris in November 2006[104][not in citation given].[105] Worked at WIPO from 2003 to 11/2006; now consultant.

2006 Mark Klein AT&T.jpg Mark Klein AT&T, National Security Agency Retired communications technician for AT&T who revealed the details of the secret 2003 construction of a monitoring facility in Room 641A of 611 Folsom Street in San Francisco, the site of a large SBC phone building, three floors of which are occupied by AT&T. The facility is alleged to be one of several operated by the National Security Agencyas part of the warrantless surveillance undertaken by the Bush administration in the wake of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.[106]

2006 Cate Jenkins United States Environmental Protection Agency Wrote memos to the EPA Inspector General, U.S. Congress, and FBI detailing the chemical composition of dust from the September 11 attacks and its hazards to responders. She alerted the The New York Times in 2006[107] and said in a 2009 CBS interview[108] that the EPAexplicitly lied about the danger of the dust which caused chemical burns in the lungs of responders, debilitating illnesses in many that included fatalities, and that it could have been prevented with proper safety equipment. Jenkins claims that the EPA has been misleading about evidence of debris inhalation hazards since the 1980s. She was fired and in 2012 successfully sued to be reinstated,[109] but in 2013 was again terminated.[110]

2006-07 Richard M. Bowen III Citigroup Starting in June 2006, Senior Vice President Richard M. Bowen III, the chief underwriter of Citigroup's Consumer Lending Group, began warning the board of directors about the extreme risks being taken on by the mortgage operation that could potentially result in massive losses. When Bowen first blew the whistle in 2006, 60% of the mortgages were defective. The amount of bad mortgages began increasing throughout 2007 and eventually exceeded 80% of the volume. Many of the mortgages were not only defective, but were fraudulent. Bowen attempted to rouse the board via weekly reports and other communications. On 3 November 2007, Bowen emailed Citigroup Chairman Robert Rubin and the bank's chief financial officer, chief auditor and the chief risk management officer to again expose the risk and potential losses, and claiming that the group's internal controls had broken down. He requested an outside investigation of his business unit that eventually confirmed his charges. In retaliation, Citigroup stripped Bowen of most of his responsibilities and informing him that his physical presence was no longer required at the bank.[111][112]

2006-13 Adam B. Resnick Omnicare Starting in 2006, Resnick sued the pharmaceutical company Omnicare, a major supplier of drugs to nursing homes, under federal whistleblower law, as well as the parties to the company’s illegal kickback schemes. Omnicare allegedly paid kickbacks to nursing home operators in order to secure business, which constitutes Medicare and Medicaid fraud. In 2010, Omnicare settled a False Claims Act suit filed by Resnick and taken up by the U.S. Department of Justice by paying $19.8 million to the federal government, while the two nursing homes involved in the scheme settled for $14 million.[113][114] A second whistleblower lawsuit filed against Omnicare it by Resnick and Total Pharmacy Services V.P. Maureen Nehls related to kickbacks that were part of its 2004 acquisition of Total Pharmacy Services was settled for $17.2 million by Omnicare and $5 million by the Total Pharmacy owners.[115][116]

2006- Julian Assange cropped (Norway, March 2010).jpg Julian Assange WikiLeaks Julian Assange (1971-) is an Australian editor, activist, publisher and journalist. In 2006, he founded WikiLeaks, which publishes submissions of secret information,[117] news leaks[118] and classified media from anonymous news sources and whistleblowers. [119]

2007 Justin Hopson New Jersey State Police During his first few days as a rookie New Jersey State Trooper, Hopson witnessed an unlawful arrest and false report made by his training officer. When he refused to testify in support of the illegal arrest, he was subjected to hazing and harassment by his fellow troopers. He uncovered evidence of a secret society within the State Police known as the Lords of Discipline, whose mission it was to keep fellow troopers in line. Trooper Hopson blew the whistle on the Lords of Discipline, which sparked the largest internal investigation in State Police history. Hopson filed a federal lawsuit alleging that after Hopson refused to support the arrest, he was physically assaulted, received threatening notes, and his car was vandalized while on duty. In 2007, the State of New Jersey agreed to a $400,000 settlement with Hopson.

2007 John Kiriakou Central Intelligence Agency In an interview to ABC News on December 10, CIA officer Kiriakou disclosed that the agency waterboarded detainees and that this constituted torture. He was convicted of releasing classified informationand sentenced, on January 25, 2013, to 30 months imprisonment. Having served the first months of his service he wrote an open letter describing the inhuman circumstances at the correction facility.[120]

2008 Anat Kamm 9.jpg Anat Kamm Israeli Defense Force Leaked documents to the media that revealed the IDF had been engaging in extrajudicial killings.[121] While serving as an assistant in the Central Command bureau, Kamm secretly copied classified documents that she leaked to the Israeli Haaretz journalist Uri Blauafter her military service was over. The leak suggested that the IDF had defied a court ruling against assassinating wanted militants in the West Bank who could potentially be arrested safely.[122][123] Kamm was convicted of espionage and providing confidential information without authorization.

2008 Rudolf Elmer Julius Bär A long-term employee of the Swiss bank whose final position entailed overseeing its Caribbean operations until he was terminated in 2002, Elmer blew the whistle on Julius Bär in 2008 when he gave secret documents to WikiLeaks. The documents detailed Julius Bär's activities in the Cayman Islands and alleged tax evasion. Convicted inSwitzerland in January 2011, he was rearrested immediately for having distributed illegally obtained data to WikiLeaks. Julius Bär alleges that Elmer has doctored evidence to suggest the tax evasion.[124][125][126][127][128]

2008-2012 Macoffice2.jpg Robert J. McCarthy United States Government Robert J. McCarthy served as Field Solicitor for the U.S. Department of the Interior and as General Counsel, U.S. Section, International Boundary and Water Commission. The Oklahoma Bar Association honored him in 2008 with its Fern Holland Courageous Lawyer Award for helping to expose the Interior Department’s mismanagement of $3.5 billion in Indian trust resources. In 2009, McCarthy disclosed massive fraud, waste and abuse by the IBWC, that imperiled the health and safety of millions of people on both sides of the U.S.- Mexico border and seriously damaged the border ecosystem. In both cases he was forced from government service, but continued to advocate for the victims of government abuse. In addition, his scholarly publications have revealed the fatal flaws in whistleblower protection laws, as well as the need for radical reform of specific government agencies.[129]

2009 Hervé Falciani HSBC's Swiss subsidiary HSBC Private Bank Since 2009 he has been collaborating with numerous European nations by providing information relating to more than 130,000 suspected tax evaders with Swiss bank accounts - specifically those with accounts in HSBC's Swiss subsidiary HSBC Private Bank

2009 Wendell Potter - Montrose Street - cropped.jpg Wendell Potter CIGNA Former head of corporate communications at CIGNA, one of the nation’s largest health insurance companies. He testified against the HMO industry in the US Senate as a whistleblower.[130][131]

2009 Michael Paul California Administrative Office of the Courts Former senior technical analyst of the Judicial Council of California, Administrative Office of the Courts publicly disclosed that tens of millions of dollars worth of overpriced construction work was being steered to unlicensed contractors in a bid rigging scheme that involved his employer and public funds. After Mr. Paul went public with his allegations as well as his previous requests to his employer for a qui tam release required under the state's false claims act, the California Administrative Office of the Courts filed suit to recover a fraction of the monies paid to the unlicensed contractors, demoted Mr. Paul and extended the terms of the underlying contracts, contracts that are deemed void under the California Business & Professions Code. In response, Mr. Paul filed a taxpayer lawsuit in San Francisco Superior Court to recover all of the false claims paid and to enjoin the California Administrative Office of the Courts from wasting taxpayer funds. He was promptly fired in violation of the California False Claims Act, the California Whistleblower Protection Act and the California Labor Code.[citation needed]

Cathy Harris United States Customs Service A former United States Customs Service employee who exposed rampant racial profiling against Black travellers while working atHartsfield International Airport in Atlanta, Georgia. According to Harris's book, Flying While Black: A Whistleblower's Story, she personally observed numerous incidents of Black travellers being stopped, frisked, body-cavity-searched, detained for hours at local hospitals, forced to take laxatives, bowel-monitored and subjected to public and private racist/colorist humiliation. The book also details her allegations of mismanagement, abuses of authority, prohibited personnel practices, waste, fraud, violation of laws, rules and regulations, corruption, nepotism, cronyism, favoritism, workplace violence, racial and sexual harassment, sexism, intimidation, on and off the job stalking, etc., and other illegal acts that occurs daily to federal employees especially female federal employees at U.S. Customs and other federal agencies.

2009 Donald Merino Stevens Institute of Technology Exposed the institute for abuse of the endowment, keeping multiple sets of books, misleading of the board and illegal low interest loans to the president.[citation needed]

2009 Ramin Pourandarjani Iranian Government An Iranian physician who reported on the state use of torture on political prisoners. He died of poisoning shortly thereafter.[132]

2009 Virgil-Grandfield-2010-Apr.jpg Virgil Grandfield Canadian Red Cross Virgil Grandfield is a Canadian whistleblower and international aid worker. In 1999-2000, he worked with a project evaluation unit for the Disasters Emergency Committee (the UK funding agency for disasters) in Central America after Hurricane Mitch. He became an Overseas Delegate for the Canadian Red Cross in 2002, after serving as Red Cross team leader on floods on the Blood Reserve in Standoff, Alberta. In 2003-2004 he researched a cover story on migrant worker issues on the U.S.-Mexico border for Red Cross Red Crescent magazine.

2009 John Kopchinski Pfizer Former Pfizer sales representative and West Point graduate[133] whose whistleblower (“qui tam”) lawsuit launched a massive government investigation into Pfizer’s illegal and dangerous marketing of Bextra, a prescription painkiller. Pfizer paid $1.8 billion to the government to settle the case, including a $1.3 billion criminal fine, which was the largest criminal fine ever imposed for any matter.[134] The Bextra settlement was part of a $2.3 billion global settlement – the largest healthcare fraud settlement in U.S. history.[135]

2009 Robert Rudolph,

Joseph Faltaous,

Steven Woodward,

Jaydeen Vincente Eli Lilly Four sales representatives for Eli Lilly filed separate qui tam lawsuits against the company for illegally marketing the drug Zyprexa for uses not approved by the Food and Drug Administration. Eli Lilly pled guilty to actively promoting Zyprexa for off-label uses, particularly for the treatment of dementia in the elderly. The $1.415 billion penalty included an $800 million civil settlement and a $515 million criminal fine—the largest criminal fine for an individual corporation in United States history.[136] The four whistle blowers shared in 18%, or $78,870,877, of the federal share of the civil settlement.[137]

2009 Alexander Barankov Belarus Ministry of Internal Affairs Claimed corruption among Belarusian police; charged with bribery and fraud in 2009; became a political refugee in Ecuador in 2010; as of August 2012, faces extradition back to Belarus.[138]

2010s[edit]

Year Image Name Organization Action

2010 Bradley Manning US Army.jpg Chelsea Manning(formerlyBradley Manning) United States Army US Army intelligence analyst who released the largest set of classified documents ever, mostly published by WikiLeaks and their media partners. The material included videos of the July 12, 2007 Baghdad airstrike and the 2009 Granai airstrike in Afghanistan; 250,000 United States diplomatic cables; and 500,000 army reports that came to be known as the Iraq War logs and Afghan War logs.[139] Manning was convicted of violating the Espionage Act and other offenses and sentenced to 35 years in prison.[140]

2010-2011 Samy Kamkar.jpg Samy Kamkar Apple, Microsoft, and Google Computer hacker who exposed the illicit, global mobile phone tracking of all users, regardless of GPS or Location Services settings, on the AppleiPhone, Google Android and Microsoft Windows Phone mobile devices, and their transmission of GPS and Wi-Fi information to their parent companies, which led to a series of class-action lawsuits and a privacy hearing on Capitol Hill.[141][142]

2011 Michael Woodford Olympus Corporation Corporate president, revealed past losses concealed and written off via excessive fee payments[143]

2011 M. N. Vijayakumar Indian Administrative Service Exposed serious corrupt practices at high levels.[144][145]

2012 Ted Siska Ward Diesel Filter Systems, Inc. of New York Ward Diesel Filter Systems Inc. has agreed to pay the United States $628,000 to resolve allegations that it knowingly submitted false claims to federal agencies under a contract to provide diesel exhaust filtering systems for fire engines through the General Services Administration’s (GSA) Multiple Award Schedule program, the Justice Department announced on June 26, 2012. The government’s investigation was initiated by a lawsuit, U.S. ex rel. Siska v. Ward Diesel Filter Systems, Inc., filed under the False Claims Act’s qui tam provisions, which permit private parties to sue for false claims on behalf of the United States and to share in any recovery. The whistleblower, Ted Siska, will receive $94,200 of the settlement.[146]

2012 Vijay Pandhare Chief Engineer, Irrigation Department,Government of Maharashtra Pandhare was a bureaucrat belonging to the Irrigation Department in the Indian state of Maharashtra. He blew the whistle on the Maharashtra Irrigation Scam of 2012 that led to the resignation of Maharashtra Deputy Chief MinisterAjit Pawar.[147]

2013 David P. Weber United States Securities and Exchange Commission Weber, an attorney and Certified Fraud Examiner, was the assistant inspector general of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. He learned of misconduct in the Bernard Madoff and Allen Stanfordinvestigations, and of suspected hacking by a unit of the Chinese military.[148][149] He insisted that agency management report the misconduct and hacking to Congressional Oversight Committees, but instead was terminated for supposedly unrelated reasons. Shortly after his lawsuit became public, news stories broke that the People’s Liberation Army compromised information technology at 160 U.S. corporations and government agencies.[150][151]

2013 Edward Snowden-2.jpg Edward Snowden National Security Agency Booz Allen Hamilton contractor Snowden released classified material on top-secret NSA programs including the PRISM surveillance program toThe Guardian and The Washington Post in June 2013.[152][153]