Whistle-Blowers...motovations & numbers

[Leifer]

I had intended to begin a thread on the motivations of whistle-blowers and compare the apparent lack of them, given the vast amount of proposed conspiracy theories, but....I found the subject too large to cover just here.

(realizing that, read on.......)


If whistle-blowers state that their reasons for coming forward are ethical decisions (not all do), then it would seem statistically plausible that there ought to be many, many more such persons with equal (or stronger) ethical values coming forward......in relation to the much more severe (impact) conspiratorial theories.

For example in the recent case of Snowden......he claims ethical reasons of public privacy violations, and his contempt for what he believes is blatant gov't wrongdoings and deception.
He knows the possible and probable consequences of his actions.....(and it looks like these will be personally severe to him.)....yet he felt it was important enough to accept those consequences.

I don't want to make his cause seem "too" small, but compare his "cause", his reasoning , his level of "enough is enough".....to the even greater ethical and moral perpetude claimed by conspiracy theorists in ideas such as: 911, "chemtrails", depopulation, vaccines, etc... These would have a far greater effect on any individuals' "threshold of silence", ethics, and morals,....than those of Snowden's.
These conspiracies would also involve a greater number of involved people.
So where are they ?....where are these vast numbers of people with even greater weights on their shoulders ? ...where are "any" of them ?

Here are some (certainly not all) influential whistle-blowers in the last 4.5 decades....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_whistleblowers

Some of these scandals most certainly caused loss of life, but most not. And none of them approach anything like what is claimed in current extreme conspiracy theories.

Remember I said this subject was too big for one thread ?
Here is more info....

qui tam pro domino rege quam pro se ipso in hac parte sequitur

Civil actions maintained by private persons on behalf of both themselves and the government to recover damages or to enforce penalties available under a statute prohibiting specified conduct. The term qui tam is short for the Latin qui tam pro domino rege quam pro se ipso in hac parte sequitur, which means "who brings the action for the king as well as for himself."

Qui tam actions are unusual in that the plaintiffs do not allege injuries to themselves but rather claim injuries to the government. In a successful qui tam action, the plaintiff, who is known as a relator or informer, shares any monetary recovery with the sovereign (the government)

Content from External Source

Here is a very interesting read,......
WHISTLEBLOWER NARRATIVES: THE EXPERIENCE OF CHOICELESS CHOICE, by C. Fred Alford, 2007

While I devoted considerable time to interviewing whistle-blowers, a majority was spent attending a whistle-blowers support group, listening to whistle-blowers tell their tales. In addition, I stayed several days and nights at a retreat on a farm for stressed-out whistle-blowers. The farm had been purchased by a retired psychologist with a large clientele of whistle-blowers (not the best way to get rich in the mental health field) who had graciously opened his farmhouse door to almost any whistle-blower who needed a place to get away for a few days (or even longer in several cases). Stories heard there for the third or fourth time at three in the morning took on a whole new dimension as some of the defensive walls came tumbling down--not just for the teller of the tale, but for the listener as well.

Content from External Source

Whistle-Blowers' Experiences in Fraud Litigation against Pharmaceutical Companies

From their vantage point at the center of the process, whistle-blowers have valuable insights. Popular portrayals of whistle-blowers vary widely: some anecdotes paint them as heroes struggling against corporate greed, emphasizing the hardships and retaliation they must endure; other accounts question their motives and the “excessive” rewards they receive.9-14

The goal of this study is to shed light on the motivations and experiences of whistle-blowers in cases of major health care fraud. We conducted interviews with whistle-blowers who were key informants in recent prosecutions brought against pharmaceutical manufacturers. Enforcement actions against pharmaceutical manufacturers have become the most lucrative type of health care fraud litigation on the basis of recovery amounts (average and gross).

Content from External Source

 

[mynym]

I wouldn't mix 911 in with those other conspiracy theories. 911 produced more than its share of whistle blowers each "blowing their whistle" based on their perspective, anyone from the janitor to FBI and CIA agents and so forth. Just because you don't hear about them in the corporate media doesn't mean that they don't exist.

There again, the fact that you mix 911 in may go to show that there's something wrong with your view of other "conspiracy theories" too. Although I don't "believe" in any of those or know of much evidence* to support them, like the existence of whistle blowers.

*Other than the fact that there are a few advocates for depopulation by means other than war and there are plans to weaponize the weather more than it already has been in the future.

 

[David Fraser]

Outside of conspiracy theories and among professional circles whistle blowing is discouraged, at least in the UK. While many organisations may have procedures in place to allow complaints to address failures or abuses they are often inept or seek to hide an issue. For a person to then go out of an organisation will often leave themselves isolated within their own profession at the very least.

An example would be with a UK hospital in Stafford. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stafford_Hospital_scandal The hospital was found to have high rates of mortality as well as providing sub standard care. As an outsider looking in it seems hard to see how such a state of affairs could exist, but knowing a bit about nursing it is easy to see. While complaints are encouraged to managers there are never any mechanisms to go over their heads. Also many of the professions involved in hospitals rely on trust and people feel they may betray that. So what happened over time is that standards slipped and morale dropped and people left. Management do everything to cover things up and make it look like business as normal. No one wanted to be the person that came out and said "WTF!!!" Who wants to possibly make their friends unemployable??

Such scenarios are probably rife through health/social care as well as industry but as with the hospital there is only so long you can cover things up.

 

[Leifer]

.......911 produced more than its share of whistle blowers each "blowing their whistle" based on their perspective, anyone from the janitor to FBI and CIA agents and so forth. Just because you don't hear about them in the corporate media doesn't mean that they don't exist.......

This is basically the same stance held by A&E for 911 Truth, where their reason is summed-up by claiming....

So, why have no 9/11 insiders blown the whistle? In short, no effective way to reach the public, no one in a position of authority to turn to, and no assurance of adequate protection from retaliation.

Content from External Source

http://www.ae911truth.org/en/news-section/41-articles/758-faq-12-where-are-the-911-whistleblowers.html

A&E knows there are no credible informants to support their theories/accusations, so they have to defend how it would be impossible.
But Snowden did all the things they claim can't be accomplished by a whistle-blower, on a topic much less devastating.

He found a reporter ("no effective way to reach the public" ??)
He brought documents with him.
He did it from a country where he could seek refuge. ("and no assurance of adequate protection from retaliation." ??)
He didn't need to go through a "legal court".
And....the "corporate media" did cover it.

( "Just because you don't hear about them in the corporate media doesn't mean that they don't exist." )
"Just because you’re paranoid, doesn’t mean they’re not out to get you"

 

[Mick West]

I wouldn't mix 911 in with those other conspiracy theories. 911 produced more than its share of whistle blowers each "blowing their whistle" based on their perspective, anyone from the janitor to FBI and CIA agents and so forth. Just because you don't hear about them in the corporate media doesn't mean that they don't exist.

Would you consider this list to be comprehensive and accurate?
http://www.corbettreport.com/articles/20100305_911_whistleblowers.htm

 

[Pete Tar]

... 911 produced more than its share of whistle blowers each "blowing their whistle" based on their perspective, anyone from the janitor to FBI and CIA agents and so forth. ...

I think the definition of a 'whistle blower' is someone who produces incontrovertible inside evidence that directly proves something hidden from public view, not just someone sharing their opinion.

 

[lee h oswald]

I think the definition of a 'whistle blower' is someone who produces incontrovertible inside evidence that directly proves something hidden from public view, not just someone sharing their opinion.

The lies are out there; the truth is in your head.

 

[Pete Tar]

What?

 

[Oxymoron]

Of course, then you have the whistle blower demonisation machine.

http://reason.com/blog/2013/06/11/the-demonization-machine-cranks-up-again

 

[Cairenn]

Let's compare Snowden to Daniel Ellsberg I am aware that Ellsberg is supporting Snowden. Ellsberg had integrity, Snowden has an EGO.

Ellsberg surrendered to authorities in Boston and admitted that he had given the papers to the press. He was later indicted on charges of stealing and holding secret documents by a grand jury in Los Angeles.[12] Federal District Judge William Matthew Byrne, Jr. declared a mistrial and dismissed all charges against Ellsberg [and Russo] on May 11, 1973, after several irregularities appeared in the government's case, including its claim that it had lost records of illegal wiretapping against Ellsberg conducted by the White House Plumbers in the contemporaneous Watergate scandal.[5] Byrne ruled: "The totality of the circumstances of this case which I have only briefly sketched offend a sense of justice. The bizarre events have incurably infected the prosecution of this case."

I felt that as an American citizen, as a responsible citizen, I could no longer cooperate in concealing this information from the American public. I did this clearly at my own jeopardy and I am prepared to answer to all the consequences of this decision.
— Ellsberg on why he released the Pentagon Papers to the press

Content from External Source

 

[lee h oswald]

Let's compare Snowden to Daniel Ellsberg I am aware that Ellsberg is supporting Snowden. Ellsberg had integrity, Snowden has an EGO.

Everyone has an ego.

 

[Cairenn]

But some are the size of Rhode Island and others are the size of Russia