Cheney interviewed in retaliation investigation

A grand jury investigation into the public disclosure of a C.I.A. officer's name reached out to Vice President Cheney, who was recently questioned on the subject. (New York Times, June 5) The circumstances of the interview, including time and place, are shrouded in mystery, as things involving Mr. Cheney typically are. However, he reportedly was not under oath during the questioning and has not been asked to appear before the grand jury, writes the New York Times. Both the Vice President and President Bush have retained or sought private legal counsel in the matter.

It has been proposed that the name of Valerie Plame, a C.I.A. intelligence officer, was provided for publication to columnist Robert Novak by a White House official in retaliation for statements by Plame's husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson. Wilson, who has been described in the press as a whistleblower, had publicly disputed the validity of evidence cited by the Administration as a basis for invading Iraq.

Retaliatory disclosure of Ms. Plame's identity, if proven, could be a criminal violation of federal law protecting the identities of intelligence agents. Whether there is sufficient evidence to pursue prosecution of the matter will be determined by the grand jury.

Tenet resigns; Al-Qaeda whistleblower comes forward

The Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), George Tenet, has resigned. (New York Times/Seattle P-I, June 4.) Thursday, President George Bush announced that he had accepted Tenet's resignation, which will become effective in July. Tenet's stated motivation rigidly adhered to Washington tradition: He said he needs to spend more time with his family. Tenet did not say that he wished to avoid further accounting for a series of monumental intelligence failures. But, that is what many listeners surely were thinking.

And, what could better illustrate the failures of U.S. intelligence than another story broadcast the same day.(MSNBC News, June 3) A year before September 11, NBC News reports, an al-Qaeda whistleblower told the FBI he had been trained to hijack passenger planes for use in a U.S. attack. But, the FBI failed to follow up on the disclosure.

According to the NBC report, Niaz Khan says he was deep in debt and feeling hopeless when Bin Laden operatives recruited him in London. They took him to Pakistan and trained him to hijack passenger planes. Then, they gave him thousands of dollars and flew him to the United States, where he was to wait for further instructions. But, Khan got cold feet, gambled away most of the money and, fearful for his life, went to the FBI and told them everything.

During questioning, Khan passed two FBI polygraphs. NBC reports that 'a former FBI official says Newark agents believed Khan and tried to aggressively follow every lead in the case, but word came from headquarters saying, “return him to London and forget about it” -- which, critics say, is exactly what the FBI did.' Instead, the FBI turned Khan over to British authorities. New Scotland Yard released Khan after a two hour interview.

Hopefully, other government officials will be inspired by Tenet's example and will also experience a sudden, irresistible urge to spend more time with their families. Unlike many who were in the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on September 11, 2001, they have that option.

Bush seeks legal representation for retaliation case

Late yesterday, CBS and Reuters reported that President Bush has sought legal representation in the current grand jury investigation into the leak of a CIA operative's name, apparently in retaliation for a disclosure by the operative's spouse, Joseph Wilson. CBS reports this morning that the White House is in contact with Washington attorney Jim Sharp.

Wilson, a former U.S. diplomat, had informed the Bush administration that claims Iraq had tried to buy uranium from Niger were unfounded. But, the information was included, anyway, in Bush's 2003 State of the Union address. Then, last July, the identity of Wilson's wife was revealed by a newspaper columnist who reportedly obtained the information from someone in the Bush administration. Wilson addressed the subject in his recent book, "The Politics of Truth." Reuters reports that it is "illegal under U.S. law to disclose the name of a covert agent who has served outside the country in the previous five years."

The Wilson case puts a high profile face on a long-standing problem, whistleblower reprisal. Federal agencies typically subject whistleblowers to a laundry list of reprisals, ranging from economic sanctions to emotional abuses. Fearing similar treatment, many more federal employees remain silent about misconduct, even when speaking out is important to national security.

Because the President heads the Executive Branch, which includes federal agencies, he wields ultimate authority and responsibility for sending the message to agency officials that retaliation will not be tolerated. Under the Whistleblower Protection Act, retaliation is illegal. However, whistleblower experts have pointed out that agencies and federal judges have made a mockery of the WPA.

Senate bill will determine direction of war on terror

Not many know it, but a bill being reviewed today in a Senate committee meeting will have critical impacts on the effectiveness of government efforts to stop, and prepare for, terrorist attacks. The bill is S.1358, the Federal Employee Protection of Disclosures Act. As described in Deep Harm yesterday, the bill is urgently needed to address existing weaknessness that leave honest federal employees vulnerable to agency retaliation. Those who attempt to report problems that leave U.S. citizens vulnerable to terrorist attack, currently risk their careers if they do so.

The text of the proposed legislation is available on the website of the Government Accountability Project (GAP), which is expected to present the Senate Committee on Government Affairs with a letter, in support of the legislation, signed by national security whistleblowers. In addition, a coalition of faith-based whistleblowers has organized to bring the bill to the attention of the faith community.

GAP, the National Whistleblower Center, the Project on Government Oversight and other good government groups have long attempted to convince Congress of the need to reform the WPA. At an earlier Congressional hearing, GAP's legal director outlined deficiencies in the law, and their impacts on employees who keep the public's trust. (WPA review)

Congress looks at Whistleblower Protection Act reform

On June 2, the Senate Committee on Government Affairs is scheduled to review S.1358, the Federal Employee Protection of Disclosures Act. The bill was introduced last June to amend the Whistleblower Protection Act, or WPA, (Chapter 23 of title 5, United States Code) which has proved a dismal failure in stopping retaliation against federal employees who report mismanagement and abuses in federal programs.

At this time, particularly, the importance of such protections is clear. Whistleblowers have helped identify many weaknesses in federal preparedness for terrorist attacks and in intelligence gathering. But, agencies continue to ignore the WPA. At an earlier hearing on the subject, Tom Devine, Legal Director at the Government Accountability Project, described the problems whistleblowers face.

At tomorrow's meeting, the Committee will consider revising S.1358. If the revisions weaken the bill, as some anticipate, the effect for Americans could be tragic. Whether federal employees feel safe to report dangerous vulnerabilities could very well determine the outcome of reported al Qaeda plans to attack the United States in the months leading up to the national elections. It is not too late for citizens to call the Committee to urge stronger protections for those charged with protecting all of us.

Two who kept the public's trust pass on

Over the weekend, two key figures in the Watergate scandal died, ironically on the same day. At this time in the nation's history, particularly, the lessons of Watergate and the contributions of these two men bear remembering. (Toronto Star)

Archibald Cox was the special prosecutor fired by President Richard Nixon for demanding access to tape recordings of White House conversations. The tape recordings documented Nixon's involvement in the cover up a break-in by Republic Party operatives at Democratic campaign headquarters in the Watergate hotel. Sam Dash was the chief counsel of the U.S. Senate select committee that held televised hearings on the Watergate investigation. Dash was remembered on National Public Radio's program, All Things Considered, May 29 (audio file).

On October 20, 1973, known as the "Saturday Night Massacre," Nixon ordered Attorney General Elliot Richardson to fire Cox. Instead, Richardson resigned. The assignment fell next on Asst. Attorney General Ruckelshaus, who also resigned. Cox was dismissed, anyway, by Solicitor General Robert Bork. The news was reported the next day in the Washington Post.

Afterward, Cox described his dismissal as a test, "Whether ours shall be a government of laws and not of men is now for Congress and ultimately the American People." His daughter, Phyillis Cox, describes the Harvard Law School graduate and professor as a man who "believed in the importance of ethics and integrity and justice." (Boston Herald)

The scrupulous investigation conducted by Cox and Dash ultimately confirmed that government officials at all levels, including the President himself, could be held accountable for illegal actions. It was a resounding victory for the Constitution and its core concept, the separation of powers. It was also a victory for a whistleblower named Daniel Ellsberg.

Investigation of the Watergate break-in implicated Nixon and other White House officials in a second break-in, at the office of Ellsberg's psychiatrist. Ellsberg had publicly disclosed evidence that government leaders had long known the Viet Nam war was hopeless but had continued to send thousands of Americans to their deaths. That evidence became known as the Pentagon Papers, published in the New York Times on June 13, 1971. Subsequently, the White House created a group called the "Plumbers," assigned to fix the "leak" by attempting to find information to discredit Ellsberg. In a recent article for Salon, Ellsberg alleged there are echoes of the Nixon administration in the current Bush administration.

The nation first became aware of the Watergate scandal through the efforts of Washington Post reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein. The Post maintains an archive of Watergate material, including original articles. The website rotten.com offers mature readers a more informal review. A just-published book by Woodward, "Plan of Attack," provides a similarly shocking expose of the Bush administration in its handling of the war on terror.

In later years, Cox served as chairman of the nonprofit Common Cause, an organization dedicated to government reform. Common Cause President Chellie Pingree said of Cox, "Archie epitomized what one citizen could do to serve his country. He always stood up for what was right. He will be deeply missed." Indeed.

Needed: worldwide whistleblower protection

It has been reported that al Qaeda has 18,000 operatives around the globe. Thus, many nations potentially could become a home base for terrorists. Many of those nations also potentially have information that could be helpful to the United States in preventing attacks on our soil. Clearly, the cooperation of every nation is needed to monitor and sharing information, and to prosecute terrorist activities.

However, the effectiveness of international cooperation depends greatly on the competence of law enforcement, intelligence and other agencies in each nation. Congressional hearings on the September 11 attacks have shown us how government incompetence can erode a nation's ability to monitor and control terrorism. Many times, the person who revealed incompetence was a government whistleblower.

Clearly, whistleblower protection is a critical element in the war on terror, in the United States and elsewhere. it is important, therefore, to ensure that government officials who observe mismanagement or corruption feel safe to report it. But, just the opposite occured after September 11, 2001. The United States and other countries made whistleblowing even more difficult and perilous by passing laws that severely control information and severely punish those who release information.

The issue is under debate currently in Canada, where a new whistleblower law has been proposed but has come under criticism. The London Free Press (5/27) quotes Anne Kothawala, a representative of a newspaper trade group, who said, "This whistle-blowing protection law that the Martin government has pledged to push through Parliament should really be called a whistleblower prevention law. As written, it would actually increase deterrence to public servants who want to denounce wrongdoing and corruption."

Whether Canadians pass this law, or a stronger one, will affect the security of Americans as well as Canadians. Likewise, pending whistleblower legislation in the United States Congress, potentially affects Canadian citizens.

The protection of whistleblowers is a worldwide concen. Citizens, professional organizations, public interest groups and religious communities need to call upon government representatives to safeguard whistleblowers, a small but powerful force in the war on terror.