Politico: Edward Snowden’s Prize
Yesterday afternoon, The Guardian US and Washington Post were awarded the prestigious Pulitzer Prize for Public Service, each for their “revelation of widespread secret surveillance by the National Security Agency.” These outlets’ news stories are a direct result of NSA whistleblower and GAP client Edward Snowden’s actions.
GAP Executive Director Bea Edwards stated that the award “represents undeniable validation of the significance of the Snowden disclosures.” GAP National Security & Human Rights Director Jesselyn Radack echoed the sentiment in news articles. Snowden himself stated the award was “a vindication for everyone who believes that the public has a role in government.”
Key Quote: Jesselyn Radack, one of Snowden’s attorneys, told POLITICO that the Pulitzer decision “is something to be celebrated” because it proves that his disclosures had as much value as the reporting.
“I think it validates that Snowden’s revelations were whistleblowing in the public interest,” said Radack, national security and human rights director at the Government Accountability Project, which represents whistleblowers. “It’s material that people have the right to know about.”
Radack noted that the Pulitzer judges never actually mentioned Snowden, saying only that the Washington Post and Guardian awards were for the “revelation of widespread secret surveillance by the National Security Agency” — without saying who was responsible for the revelations.
Still, everyone knows what the judges were talking about, Radack said: “That’s clearly a big elephant that’s missing, but I think everyone knows what that citation refers to.”
Last summer, news reports revealed the existence of the Obama administration’s “Insider Threat Program,” which seeks to stem “leaking” across most government agencies. This effectively silences whistleblowers before they act by forcing coworkers to monitor each other for “indicators” that they may pass information outside the agency. Such a program is an obvious direct threat to federal whistleblowers and government accountability.
Senate whistleblower champion Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) has followed up on the program for months with a particular interest in how the FBI is instituting the initiative. Grassley sought answers from the agency, including a request for copies of its program training materials. FBI officials responded that a Senate briefing would be the best course of action, in order to provide a full explanation. That hearing was held two weeks ago.
While the head of the program appeared, he failed to bring the requested materials to the hearing. Further, he asserted that if whistleblowers “registered” with the agency, they would not be perceived as threats under the program and left alone. After 10 minutes, the FBI personnel abruptly walked out of the hearing. Grassley, rightfully, has taken a strong stance against the notion of whistleblowers having to self-identify.
Key Quote: “Staff for both Chairman Leahy and I attended, and the FBI brought the head of their Insider Threat Program,” Grassley recounted. “Yet the FBI didn’t bring the Insider Threat training materials as we had requested.”
“The head of the Insider Threat Program told the staff that there was no need to worry about whistleblower communications. He said whistleblowers had to register in order to be protected, and the Insider Threat Program would know to just avoid those people.”
Grassley incredulously stated in his remarks on the Senate floor, “Now I have never heard of whistleblowers being required to ‘register’ in order to be protected.”
“The idea of such a requirement should be pretty alarming to all Americans,” he added. “Sometimes confidentiality is the best protection a whistleblower has. Unfortunately, neither my staff nor Chairman Leahy’s staff was able to learn more, because only about ten minutes into the briefing, the FBI abruptly walked out. FBI officials simply refused to discuss any whistleblower implications in its Insider Threat Program and left the room. These are clearly not the actions of an agency that is genuinely open to whistleblowers or whistleblower protection.”
Related Article: TechDirt
Human Trafficking, Climate Change Whistleblowers Coming to Stanford University
GAP’s American Whistleblower Tour concludes its season with two impressive stops next week. On Tuesday, April 22, the stop at Stanford University features whistleblower Kathryn Bolkovac discussing U.N. peacekeepers’ involvement in human trafficking and forced prostitution. White House whistleblower Rick Piltz will explain how the George W. Bush administration censored climate science reports intended for the public and Congress.
The next day, April 23, the Tour stops at West Chester University in Pennsylvania. NSA whistleblowers Bill Binney and Tom Drake will speak about the ongoing debate over constitutional privacy rights in the face of the growing national security surveillance state.
The 2013-14 Tour successfully brought whistleblowers to ten universities across the country. GAP is already planning for another iteration next year to further spread its message that one person can make a difference by speaking out. Additional coverage of last week’s events at USC’s Annenberg School can be found here.
Key Quote (Annenberg News): On Tuesday night, Ellsberg and fellow whistleblowers Jesselyn Radack and Thomas Drake spoke on a panel moderated by USC Annenberg Professor Robert Scheer about the importance of unveiling government wrongdoing.
…
The panel was part of a two-day stop at USC Annenberg on the Government Accountability Project’s American Whistleblower Tour, which aims to educate people on the “phenomenon and practice of whistleblowing.”
Dylan Blaylock is Communications Director for the Government Accountability Project, the nation’s leading whistleblower protection and advocacy organization.