What whistleblower protection laws protect you when you see what they have done with Wikileaks owner Julian Assange.
Whistleblower Protection Laws & Wikileaks
Today I want to talk about the whistleblower protection laws and why they could not help and use the best example of this I can find. One example is Wikileaks and why they are now having problems for basically showing people the truth. The phrase WikiLeaks’ founder Julian Assange uses is “Scientific journalism” to describe what he does.
Using Wikileaks as a posting source, they can share the real documents online with the public, meaning no more lies from the media or any more covering things up.
The question is, does this form of whistleblowing come with a price?
The Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989, 5 U.S.C. 2302(b)(8)-(9), Pub.L. 101-12 as amended, is a United States federal law that protects federal whistleblowers who work for the government and report the possible existence of an activity constituting a violation of law, rules, or regulations, or mismanagement, gross waste of funds, abuse of authority or a substantial and specific danger to public health and safety.
A federal agency violates the Whistleblower Protection Act if agency authorities take (or threaten to take) retaliatory personnel action against any employee or applicant because of disclosure of information by that employee or applicant.
The U.S. state that you become a witness, not a criminal if you have information about the governments or the agencies that work with the U.S. Government. The whistleblower protection laws state that you work for the government not if you are a journalist though, even if the things posted was the truth!
WikiLeaks (/ˈwɪkiliːks/) is an international non-profit organisation that publishes news leaks and classified media provided by anonymous sources. Its website, initiated in 2006 in Iceland by the organisation Sunshine Press, claimed in 2015 to have released online 10 million documents in its first 10 years. Julian Assange, an Australian Internet activist, is generally described as its founder and director. Since September 2018, Kristinn Hrafnsson has served as its editor-in-chief.
According to the WikiLeaks website, its goal is “to bring important news and information to the public … One of our most important activities is to publish original source material alongside our news stories so readers and historians alike can see evidence of the truth.”
Another of the organisation’s goals is to ensure that journalists and whistleblowers are not prosecuted for emailing sensitive or classified documents. The online “drop box” is described by the WikiLeaks website as “an innovative, secure and anonymous way for sources to leak information to [WikiLeaks] journalists”.
If anything the people of Wikileaks should be part of the whistleblower protection laws. Due to releasing government details about things that the public of that country needed to know about the people running the stings at the top countries governments.
There was a film that came out in 2013 a documentary of Wikileaks its called “We Steal Secrets: The Story of WikiLeaks”.
It did disappear, but I found it!
Wikileaks showed things that the U.S. government and also, Iceland’s Governments hiding things that should have been public knowledge. These people were sending this information to WikiLeaks, and they were making sure the people meaning we knew the truths.
Wikileaks was created in Iceland in 2006 after the banking system fell apart and someone told the owner of Wikileaks that there was indeed a cover-up happening with the reasons why it collapsed. In another part of the film, they show U.S. soldiers say they confirmed that the people had weapons and when in fact they were journalists working for Reuters. These soldiers were on video enjoying shooting innocent children up when it was a camera they mistaken the as an RPG.
The soldiers were too scared to use the whistleblower protection laws due to knowing that nothing would come about, and this is why they started using Wikileaks. Wikileaks would do something, and that is what the whistleblower protection laws should have been doing in the first place.
They were exposing people if they committed crimes!
This incident went unpunished by the U.S. Government and other things that the soldiers shared with Wikileaks.
Whistleblower Protection Laws & 2016 U.S. Presidential Election Campaign
When the 2016 U.S. presidential election campaign began, WikiLeaks released emails and other documents from the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager, John Podesta. These were separate from the #Pizzagate one’s. These were showing that Hillary Clinton had rigged the DNC votes so that she could then run for president. Wikileaks knew that if she won, then she would put a stop to anyone speaking the truth for GOOD!
In further leaked correspondence with the Trump campaign on election day (8th November 2016), WikiLeaks encouraged the Trump campaign to contest the election results as being “rigged” should they lose.
Whistleblower Protection Laws & PizzaGate
The clip of the text on Wikipedia stated that these people were under whistleblower protection laws if people who worked in government were doing wrong. In 2017 a DNC leak to Wikileaks got emails from people that were running to be the president of the United States. The things that the emails uncover is of a genuinely sinister culture. These people were Hillary Clinton, James Alefantis, John Podesta and his brother Tony Podesta.
I have written posts about this already:
The short story is this was labelled as a conspiracy theory, yet the emails are real. They are in code that represents paedophile behaviours and however, the people that should have been able to use the U.S. whistleblower protection laws felt they couldn’t use them to tell there own government.
But they couldn’t!
People felt they had to use Wikileaks again, and this is why Julian Assange became the USA no.1 target for basically embarrassing the U.S. Governments, time and time again.
Whistleblower Protection Laws & Assange’s Health Conditions
Earlier this year, a crazy claim took the Internet by the storm made by a retired USAF lieutenant colonel Karen Kwiatkowski who wrote that they are “treating Assange with the Zombie drug B.Z. (3-quinuclidinyl benzilate) to kill his brain cells” according to an insider source. Whereas at the time that statement sounded insane, the display in court by Assange may warrant looking at that claim again with a fresh view.
This information may be shocking to some, but journalist Danny Casolaro who stood against The Octopus (DEEP STATE) was killed by a toxic poison that was injected into his spine, then his wrists were sliced 12x on each hand. We also know from former CIA employee Mary Embree that the infamous heart attack gun exists and the agency was researching other silent assassination slow kill methods, so that possibility isn’t as crazy as it all may sound.
A source who claims to have seen the WikiLeaks founder described Assange as “out of it and in a zombie-like state.” Russian news station R.T. corroborated this claim, showing Assange in a police transportation van appearing to show a weakened state of health in just his physical appearance.
— RT (@RT_com) October 21, 2019
Whistleblower Protection Laws and do They Need Changing Pro’s & Con’s
These are my Pros and Cons of whistleblower protection laws and whether we should look to change them or not.
Pros of whistleblower protection laws.
- You can sleep at night
- You empower other honest people
- The law is on your side
- Could get Financial reward
- Your relationships get stronger
Cons of whistleblower protection laws.
- You could get labelled if they find out who you are
- You may face retaliation
- Your lawsuit will take forever
- Your career could now suffer
- Your Relationships May Suffer
By posting source documents directly on the Internet, readers no longer need to rely on the journalists’ interpretations. Instead, they can read the evidence for themselves and draw their conclusions. The digital age may have changed the way we exchange information. But one thing that blogs, Facebook, and Twitter have not changed is the centrality of storytelling in making that information meaningful.
This is where the newspapers collaborating with WikiLeaks played their role. They made meaning out of the documents by providing context and interpretation. Each publication provided a different emphasis and narrative arc–depending on its politics, national affiliation, and overall worldview. What emerged was not one, but many stories, about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and about U.S. and world diplomacy more generally.
The WikiLeaks phenomenon of 2010 is not just a crucial moment in the evolution of the mainstream press. It is also a vital moment in the development of the hybrid form of journalism Assange represents. Assange is changing his approach and is no longer letting the “raw data” speak for itself.
One performance artist/political commentator Robert Foster, who has recounted the story of WikiLeaks in a series of satirical news videos, said: “The history of these events will be written.” Over the coming months and years, such histories will continue to be written. But, as Foster concludes, “what they say is up to us.”
Watch: We Steal Secrets: The Story of WikiLeaks
We will leave the options for you to consider whether we need to change the whistleblower protection laws or do you feel safe in your governments to keep your identity hidden and you SAFE! Make sure you share the film and the post if you like the content, please share to social media!