Send a Tweet
Most Popular Choices
Poll Analyses
Share on Facebook 18 Share on Twitter 1 Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
OpEdNews Op Eds    H3'ed 2/8/20

OPCW Report Smears Whistleblowers

By       (Page 1 of 2 pages) (View How Many People Read This)   No comments
Author 513575
Message Kit Knightly
Become a Fan
  (3 fans)
Republished from OffGuardian

OPCW Report (Predictably) Smears Whistleblowers
OPCW Report (Predictably) Smears Whistleblowers
(Image by Off Guardian website)
  Details   DMCA

OPCW Report (Predictably) Smears Whistleblowers

Despite leaking credibility like a sieve, chemical weapons watchdog doubles down on Douma narrative.

The OPCW has released a briefing note summarising the recent "independent investigation" into their recent Titanic-sized leaks. (You can read the summary at the link above, or the full "independent" report here).

It's a fairly narrow statement, focusing entirely on the two unnamed inspectors (Inspector A and Inspector B) who worked with the Working Group on Syria, Propaganda and Media to leak the censored reports. (There is not a word about the e-mails later released by WikiLeaks).

You won't be surprised to know that the report finds the two leakers, Ian Henderson and "Alex", were wrong to leak the confidential information.

In that sense, it's entirely self-contradictory. Attempting to tell us the information is at once "sensitive", and also incomplete, incorrect and easily refuted.

Of course, none of that refutation is present here, because that wasn't the remit of this report. This is just an investigation into the "Possible Breaches of Confidentiality" and not the veracity of the leaks, or the pertinence of the information therein.

Sometimes an incredibly narrow purview is a sound defence against an undesirable reality.

There's really no new information here, just six pages of waffle telling us very little we didn't already know. It's not a report that really means anything at all. It's just something that the OPCW literally had to say. Institutions have immune responses, they simply must attack their critics. It's automatic.

If a CIA whistleblower were to announce the sky was blue, the CIA would release a memo claiming to have no official records concerning the visual appearance of our atmosphere and detailing the leaker's history of alcohol abuse.

Attacking whistleblowers is just a reflex of self-defence, the most base instinct of every lifeform.

In its content and tone, this report is a clear example of that behaviour. Far more a smear and hit piece than a refutation or investigation (at one point it even straight-up lies about Ian Henderson's career at the OPCW).

Essentially, it's just a series of attacks on the competence and motivations of the whistleblowers, even to the point of attempting to deny them that status:

Inspectors A and B are not whistle-blowers."

The head of OPCW bafflingly declares, before going on to explain:

They are individuals who could not accept that their views were not backed by evidence. When their views could not gain traction, they took matters into their own hands and breached their obligations to the Organisation. Their behaviour is even more egregious as they had manifestly incomplete information about the Douma investigation."

See - they're not "whistleblowers", they're just individuals who believed that some documents being kept secret should be made public, and "took matters into their own hands".

Next Page  1  |  2

(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).

 

Well Said 1   Supported 1  
Rate It | View Ratings

Kit Knightly Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

[Republished from Off-Guardian] 

Kit Knightly is co-editor of OffGuardian. The Guardian banned him from commenting. Twice. He used to write for fun, but now he's forced to out of a near-permanent sense of outrage.


Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Writers Guidelines
Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

STAY IN THE KNOW
If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEdNews Newsletter
Name
Email
   (Opens new browser window)
 

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Coronavirus Update: Following the Money

Coronavirus: The Only Thing Spreading "Exponentially" is Fear

Media Whipping Covid19 Panic to Unprecedented Heights

Three Leaks that Sink the Covid Narrative

The "Afghanistan Papers": Deep State Narrative Management

Covid19 Death Figures "A Substantial Over-Estimate"

To View Comments or Join the Conversation: