Know all ye by these presents that Annie Machon is hereby honored with the traditional Sam Adams Corner-Brightener Candlestick Holder, in symbolic recognition of her courage in shining light into dark places.
“If you see something, say something.” Long before that saying came into vogue, Annie Machon took its essence to heart.
MI5, the British domestic intelligence agency, recognized how bright, enterprising, and unflappable Annie was and recruited her as soon as she completed her studies at Cambridge.
The good old boys in MI5 apparently thought she would have a malleable conscience, as well — such that she would have no qualms about secret monitoring of the very government officials overseeing MI5 itself, for example.
Annie would not be quiet about this secret abuse. Her partner, David Shayler, an MI5 colleague and — like Annie — a person of integrity and respect for law, became aware of an MI6 plan to assassinate Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi.
They decided to blow the whistle and fled to France. (Many years later, a woman of high station but more flexible integrity openly gloated over Gaddafi’s brutal assassination.)
After three years on the lam, hiding mostly in France, they returned to the UK, where Annie was arrested (but never charged with a crime). The powers-that-be, however, chose to make an example of Shayler (not unlike what they are now doing to Julian Assange).
Shayler’s whistleblowing case dragged on for seven years, during which he did a brief stint in the infamous high-security prison where Julian Assange still rots (having been denied bail, yet again). A strong mitigation plea by Annie helped reduce Shayler’s remaining prison time. All in all, though, what he was forced to endure took a hard toll on him.
More broadly, the issues that surfaced around whistleblowing at the time remain largely the same two decades later. Annie Machon has been a very prominent and strong supporter of Julian. She has also been a much admired mentor to less experienced women and men as they seek to become better informed on issues of integrity and courage, and take Annie up on her offer to “help them meet interesting people”, as she puts it.
We would be remiss today were we not to call to mind the courageous example of our first two awardees, Coleen Rowley (FBI) and Katharine Gun (GCHQ), who took great risks in exposing malfeasance and in trying to head off the attack on Iraq. And, as Julian Assange did when he won this award, we again honor his treasured source, Chelsea Manning, for her continuing courage and scarcely believable integrity.
Ed Snowden, our Sam Adams awardee in 2013, noted that we tend to ignore some degree of evil in our daily life, but, as Ed put it, “We also have a breaking point and when people find that, they act.”
Annie is still acting, as one can see as this World Ethical Data Forum unfolds.
Presented this 17th day of March at the World Ethical Data Forum by admirers of the example set by the late CIA analyst, Sam Adams.
Related Articles
The Courage from Whistle-blowing
Exclusive: Courage, like cowardice, can grow when an action by one person influences decisions by others, either toward bravery or fear. Thus, the gutsy whistle-blowing by some NSA officials inspired Edward Snowden to expose mass data collection on all Americans, recalls ex-CIA analyst Ray McGovern.
By Ray McGovern
When Edward Snowden in early June 2013 began to reveal classified data showing criminal collect-it-all surveillance programs operated by the U.S. government’s National Security Agency, former NSA professionals became freer to spell out the liberties taken with the Bill of Rights, as well as the feckless, counterproductive nature of bulk electronic data collection.
On Jan. 7, 2014, four senior retired specialists with a cumulative total of 144 years of work with NSA – William Binney, Thomas Drake, Edward Loomis, and Kirk Wiebe – prepared a Memorandum for the President providing a comprehensive account of the problems at NSA, together with suggestions as to how they might be best addressed.
The purpose was to inform President Obama as fully as possible, as he prepared to take action in light of Snowden’s revelations.
On Jan. 23, 2015 in Berlin, Binney was honored with the annual Sam Adams Award for Integrity in Intelligence. Ed Snowden was live-streamed-in for the occasion, and said, “Without Bill Binney there would be no Ed Snowden.” (Binney had been among the first to speak out publicly about NSA abuses; apparently that emboldened Snowden to do what he did.)
Snowden had already said when he fled to Hong Kong in June 2013 that he had learned an extremely important lesson from the four years of government persecution/prosecution of Tom Drake; namely, that he, Ed Snowden, had to leave the country in order to fulfill his mission – and to have some reasonable chance to avoid spending the rest of his life behind bars. (Eventually, all the felony charges against Drake were dismissed.)
An important take-away lesson from Binney’s and Drake’s boldness and tenacity is that one never knows what impetus courageous truth-tellers can give to other, potential whistleblowers – like Ed Snowden.
(full article here)
Chicago Police Adopt Israeli Tactics
Exclusive: The Chicago police slaying of 17-year-old Laquan McDonald, like other recent police killings of blacks, may resemble the actions of an occupation military, in part, because Chicago and other U.S. cities have learned from Israel’s occupation of Palestine, writes retired JAG Major Todd E. Pierce.
By Todd E. Pierce
After more than a year of stonewalling and what some might call obstructing justice, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel issued an apology for the horrific execution of Laquan McDonald by Chicago police officer Jason van Dyke. Laquan McDonald was the black 17-year-old who was shot 16 times by the police officer on Oct. 20, 2014. The video showing the shooting was only released by Chicago officials when they were ordered to do so by a judge in late November 2015.
But apology or not, the underlying substantive issue is that the summary execution of McDonald was the sort of atrocity that one would expect to see in what the U.S. once called “police states.” In fact, one can imagine a death squad execution in El Salvador in the 1980s looking very similar on video to McDonald’s slaying. (for full article, click here)
Editorial: Finding the truth at CentCom
Edmund D. Fountain, Times
Wednesday, November 25, 2015, in the Tampa Bay Times.
Sen. Bill Nelson is right. Those responsible should be fired if a Pentagon investigation of U.S. Central Command at MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa finds classified intelligence was manipulated to downplay setbacks in the fight against the Islamic State. The Obama administration and Congress have to be given the unvarnished truth about efforts to fight terrorism in order to make the most informed decisions about protecting the nation.
The Pentagon is investigating serious allegations by CentCom analysts who say supervisors have changed intelligence reports to make it appear the United States has been more successful fighting ISIS than the original assessments indicated. Investigators are reviewing electronic files that recount the rise of the terrorist group, and a congressional committee is widening its review to include CentCom reports about Afghanistan and other areas. The New York Times reported this week there are concerns that some emails and documents were deleted before the documents were given to investigators, and the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence is comparing CentCom’s reports to those generated by the Central Intelligence Agency and other government agencies. Anyone attempting to slant intelligence reports for political reasons or to protect the military or intelligence community from criticism should be rooted out and removed.
In an environment that requires secrecy and respect for the chain of command, the CentCom analysts who took their concerns to the Pentagon’s inspector general this summer performed an important duty. Lives can be lost when decisions about foreign policy and military strategy are made based on bad information, and it’s even clearer since the Paris attacks that the Obama administration and Congress were not anticipating the rapid rise of ISIS and its expanded reach. It would be one thing if intelligence information was off base; it’s another if those assessments by the analysts were altered by their superiors to create a false impression of success.
CentCom analysts say that supervisors changed some conclusions to minimize U.S. failures in training Iraqi troops and to enhance the result of bombing campaigns in Iraq and Syria. The New York Times reported, for example, that revisions were made to a report detailing the retreat of the Iraqi army battling ISIS fighters last year to suggest the Iraqis had just been “redeployed.” While military analysts should debate their findings and voice disagreements, their ultimate conclusions should not be rewritten by their superiors who may have ulterior motives.
Bad intelligence about weapons of mass destruction that turned out not to exist in Iraq led this nation into an unnecessary war that cost thousands of lives. It took decades for the American people to learn the full story of what happened in Vietnam, and a more accurate account of events from the government and the military at the time would have ended that war much sooner. With the situation changing quickly in the war on terrorism against a brutal and nimble foe, it is imperative that intelligence reports be as accurate and candid as possible.
The investigators for the Pentagon and Congress should conduct a thorough review of the allegations at CentCom, and anyone found to be rewriting intelligence reports to create a false sense of success or to minimize setbacks should be removed.
Obama’s drone war a ‘recruitment tool’ for Isis, say US air force whistleblowers
Four former service members – including three sensor operators – issue plea to rethink current airstrike strategy that has ‘fueled feelings of hatred’ toward US
Ed Pilkington in New York and Ewen MacAskill in London
Guardian, 18 November 2015
Four former US air force service members, with more than 20 years of experience between them operating military drones, have written an open letter to Barack Obama warning that the program of targeted killings by unmanned aircraft has become a major driving force for Isis and other terrorist groups.
The group of servicemen have issued an impassioned plea to the Obama administration, calling for a rethink of a military tactic that they say has “fueled the feelings of hatred that ignited terrorism and groups like Isis, while also serving as a fundamental recruitment tool similar to Guantánamo Bay”.
Related: Drones may predate Obama, but his resolute use of them is unmatched
In particular, they argue, the killing of innocent civilians in drone airstrikes has acted as one of the most “devastating driving forces for terrorism and destabilization around the world”.
The letter, addressed to Obama, defense secretary Ashton Carter and CIA chief John Brennan, links the signatories’ anxieties directly to last Friday’s terror attacks in Paris. They imply that the abuse of the drone program is causally connected to the outrages.
“We cannot sit silently by and witness tragedies like the attacks in Paris, knowing the devastating effects the drone program has overseas and at home,” they wrote.
(Read more here)
American dollars fuel Israel’s war crimes (by Philip Giraldi)
(Nov 10, 2015, American Herald Tribune)
Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has left Washington with a smile on his face. In spite of the fact that he has openly interfered in American politics, has denigrated President Barack Obama as well as other top U.S. officials and has fabricated a narrative to oppose sensible policies initiated by the White House to limit nuclear proliferation he will still wind up with billions of dollars in new money pledged from the U.S. Treasury as well as unfathomable blanket guarantees that Washington will “have Israel’s back” even when it behaves psychopathically.
How does the head of government of a country that is engaged in a 48 year illegal occupation, that operates as a de facto racist theocracy and that has been accused of numerous war crimes do it? Well, he does have the active support of a politically powerful and well-funded lobby that operates both domestically and internationally, coupled with a subservient media and a host of alphabet soup think tanks that invent and direct a favorable narrative no matter what Israel does. And he does have a subset of his own Likud that is a wholly owned entity oddly called the Republican Party, buttressed by accommodating and refreshingly ignorant politicians who rely on sometimes bizarre interpretations of the Old Testament to shape their foreign policy thinking.
But in spite of the drumbeat many Americans are beginning to ask how much the charade costs, both in terms of actual dollars and in terms of the damage to U.S. interests and credibility worldwide. And, at a more practical level, the close embrace with Israel has made the United States a prime terrorist target, endangering every American who travels internationally and every U.S. business that operates overseas. It has also earned the United States a well-deserved reputation for its hypocrisy, preaching human rights for everyone but the Palestinians.
By one estimate Israel has been the recipient of $233 billion in aid and assistance from the U.S. Treasury. But that number is actually only part of the largesse.
As is often the case, follow the money. By one estimate Israel has been the recipient of $233 billion in aid and assistance from the U.S. Treasury. But that number is actually only part of the largesse. Contributions by private Americans and corporations to Israel are regarded by the Internal Revenue Service as tax deductible charitable contributions, which would be fine if the intent were indeed charitable, but the reality is that a considerable part of that money goes to fund the illegal Israeli settlements that steal land from Palestinians and convert it into exclusive Jewish only colonies. This is accomplished through mechanisms to include Shuva Israel, the One Israel Fund, Christian Friends of Israeli Communities, the Friends of Ir David Foundation and the PEF Israel Endowment Fund, many of which are funded by American billionaires like Sheldon Adelson and Irving Moskowitz as well as by Jewish and fundamentalist Christian organizations. There are also numerous direct contributions from Americans who do not seek a tax deduction. Either way, funding the settlements is illegal under both U.S. and international law but the Treasury Department makes no effort to challenge the practice.
Other sources of hidden subsidy for Israel arranged for by Congress include its ability to bid on U.S. government contracts and also freely export its goods and services to the United States. Notoriously, Israeli communications and security companies that obtain lucrative contracts in the U.S. also find themselves well placed to spy. When President Bill Clinton commented to his paramour Monica Lewinsky that someone might be listening on the White House phones he was referring to Israel.
Israel also benefits from special projects where the U.S. pays the bills and Israel does much of the development work, benefiting its domestic arms industry, currently the seventh largest in the world. Washington is paying for the continued development of Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system and is also footing the bill for new ground penetrating radar. On joint projects Israel frequently seeks to have its technicians involved directly in work being done by U.S. defense contractors. It sometimes steals the technology involved and recycles it to support its own defense industry. The Python 3 air-to –air missile is one example of such technology theft with the missile eventually winding up in the Chinese arsenal. Israel’s U.S. funded $1.5 billion development of the Lavi jet fighter acquired technology that later appeared in China’s J-10 jet. More recently, Israel copied and sold the technical details of the Patriot Missile system and also sought approval to maintain the avionics of the new F-35 fighter plane but was initially denied access over concerns that it would steal the technology.
It is not implausible to suggest that the cash flow from the United States to Israel amounts to something like $10 billion per year, far more than the $3 billion in defense assistance that is usually cited. Either figure makes little sense in that Israel is a rich country that has a standard of living comparable to Western Europe, is militarily superior to all its neighbors combined and has a largely socialized economy that offers free medical care and higher education to its citizens, benefits that American taxpayers do not enjoy. As money is fungible, the U.S.’s picking up the tab for 20% of Israel’s defense budget frees up a lot of cash to support that country’s social programs.
Apart from the dollars and cents aspect, there are the intangible costs of the relationship with Israel. It has sometimes been noted that before the creation of Israel the United States had nothing but friends in the Arab world. Now it has nothing but enemies. Israeli brutality against the Palestinians plays out nightly on television sets all across the world, particularly in Muslim countries, even if it is nearly invisible in the U.S. media, and Washington is invariably seen as the Godfather that indulges Tel Aviv when it behaves as it does.
Washington is seen, correctly, as Israel’s enabler and accomplice in the occupation of the West Bank and the brutal suppression of Palestinian human rights. Former al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden noted that the U.S. support for Israel was one compelling reason why America had to be attacked, an attack that was in fact welcomed by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as it made the United States line up “on Israel’s side” against the Arabs.
And then there is the credibility issue. The United States fancies itself as an international force for stability and reason but when it vetoes resolution after resolution in the United Nations to protect Israel it loses the good will of most of the world. The disastrous invasion of Iraq by Washington in 2003 was largely in response to perceived Israeli interests and was engineered by neoconservatives entrenched in the Pentagon and White House. Everyone in the world, with the apparent exception of the experts in the White House, knows that the disastrous mess currently playing out in the Middle East is largely the fault of Washington and its Israel-centric policies.
So Netanyahu once again returns home smiling. But hopefully Americans and others will begin to count the real cost of his smile and his next peripatetic visits to lecture the world on how to behave will be met with a much more cold response.
WRITER
