Name: 美國是如何辜負了它的舉報人的？ (How America fails its whistleblowers)
Uploaded: 2020-09-18T18:05:45.000Z
Duration: 8 min 22 s

In the United States, around 3 million people work with classified information as part of their job.

在美國，約有300萬人在工作中接觸機密信息。

That includes people who work in the military, for government agencies like the CIA,

包括在軍隊工作的人，為中情局等政府機構工作的人。

or for private companies hired by those agencies.

或為這些機構僱用的私營公司。

And you learn something that bothers you.

你就會學到一些困擾你的東西。

Because this is your job, you know that the laws around classified information are serious.

因為這是你的工作，你知道圍繞機密信息的法律是嚴肅的。

But let's say the thing you learn is really bad.

但是，假設你學的東西真的很差。

Maybe a government program is wasting billions of taxpayer dollars.

也許一個政府項目正在浪費數十億納稅人的錢。

Or a federal agency is spying on millions of ordinary Americans.

或者一個聯邦機構正在監視數百萬普通美國人。

Or, the head of your government is making shadowy deals with foreign leaders for personal gain.

或者，你的政府首腦為了個人利益，與外國領導人進行暗中交易。

A sort of “choose your own adventure.”

But behind each door is a different set of risks.

但每一扇門背後都有不同的風險。

If you decide to expose what you've learned, that's called whistleblowing.

如果你決定揭發你所瞭解到的情況，這就叫告密。

And in the US, it's often regarded as a brave, patriotic thing to do.

而在美國，這往往被認為是一件勇敢、愛國的事情。

But the reality, for the 3 million people who work with classified information,

但現實中，對於300萬與機密信息打交道的人來說。

This is Daniel Ellsberg, an American military analyst in the 1960s.

這是丹尼爾-埃爾斯伯格，美國60年代的軍事分析家。

Ellsberg learned that the US government had lied to the public about why the US was at war in Vietnam,

埃爾斯伯格得知美國政府在美國為何在越南開戰的問題上對公眾撒了謊。

In 1971, he gave 7,000 classified documents that exposed those lies to the New York Times,

1971年，他提供了7000份機密文件，將這些謊言暴露給了《紐約時報》。

Ellsberg took door #1: leaking your evidence of government wrongdoing, directly to the media.

埃爾斯伯格採取了第一道門：把你的政府不法行為的證據，直接洩露給媒體。

His leak became known as the “Pentagon Papers.”

他的洩密事件被稱為 "五角大樓文件"。

Three years later, the US pulled out of the war.

But leaking classified information to the media is illegal.

但向媒體洩露機密資訊是違法的。

And in Ellsberg's case, the government made him a target.

而在艾爾斯伯格的案子裡，政府把他當成了目標。

“We've got to keep our eye on the main ball, the main ball is Ellsberg.

"我們得盯著主球，主球是埃爾斯伯格。

The federal government charged Ellsberg under the Espionage Act, a law from 1917,

聯邦政府根據1917年頒佈的《間諜法》指控埃爾斯伯格。

originally written to go after spies working with foreign governments.

原本是為了追捕為外國政府工作的間諜而寫的。

It turned out that the government had broken the law by spying on him, and a judge threw out the charges.

原來政府監視他是犯法的，法官把罪名推翻了。

但其他洩密者就沒有這麼幸運了。

Chelsea Manning, an American soldier, leaked classified documents to Wikileaks in 2010,

切爾西-曼寧，一名美國士兵，在2010年向維基解密洩露了機密文件。

including evidence that the US had committed war crimes in Iraq.

包括美國在伊拉克犯下戰爭罪的證據。

In 2013, the cybersecurity expert Edward Snowden leaked evidence

2013年，網絡安全專家愛德華-斯諾登洩露了證據。

of a massive government surveillance program to international newspapers.

的大規模政府監控計劃，向國際報。

He fled the United States to avoid being prosecuted for espionage.

他為避免因間諜罪被起訴而逃離美國。

Leaking classified information to the media is one common kind of whistleblowing.

向媒體洩露機密資訊是常見的一種舉報方式。

But it's also illegal, so it's treacherous for those that risk it.

但這也是違法的，所以對於那些冒險的人來說，這是很奸詐的。

Fortunately, in the US there's another option: to go through official, internal channels

幸運的是，在美國，還有另一種選擇：通過官方的內部管道

In 1998, the US created a process for people who work with classified information to file complaints:

1998年，美國為從事機密信息工作的人設立了一個投訴程序。

First to an inspector general, and then to the director of national intelligence, and

首先是監察長，然後是國家情報局局長，和

This is someone who worked in national security at the time.

Shortly after September 11th, Drake learned that the National Security Agency was part

9月11日之後不久，德雷克瞭解到國家安全局的一部分。

of an unprecedented program inside the federal government, called “Stellar Wind.”

聯邦政府內部的一個史無前例的計劃，叫做 "恆星風"。

The program collected emails, phone conversations, financial transactions, and the web activity

該程序收集了電子郵件、電話交談、金融交易和網絡活動。

of millions of American citizens, without a warrant.

數百萬美國公民的，沒有搜查令。

What are we doing violating the Constitution?

我們在做什麼違反憲法的事情？

I knew that if I remained silent that I would be complicit in a crime.

我知道，如果我保持沉默，我將成為犯罪的同謀。

Drake considered taking what he knew to the press, but knew it would put him at risk.

德雷克考慮過把他所知道的事情告訴媒體，但他知道這會讓他面臨風險。

I knew that that was fraught with enormous peril.

我知道那是充滿了巨大的危險。

I was extremely familiar what happened to Daniel Ellsberg.

我對丹尼爾-埃爾斯伯格的遭遇極為熟悉。

Luckily, he had a legal route he could follow.

幸運的是，他有一條合法的路線可以走。

He brought his concerns to his supervisor, to his own agency's inspector general's office,

他把自己的擔憂帶給了他的上司，帶給了自己機構的監察長辦公室。

But his agency told him that no matter what the Constitution said,

但他的機構告訴他，不管憲法怎麼說。

the White House said the program was legal, and that that was good enough for them.

白宮說這個項目是合法的，這對他們來說已經足夠了。

"I could feel the hair standing up on the back of my neck, because I was thrown back to the 70s, and Nixon.”

"我能感覺到我脖子後面的頭髮都豎起來了，因為我被扔回了70年代，還有尼克松。"

Drake's next problem was that the 1998 law he had been following

德雷克的下一個問題是，他一直遵循的1998年的法律。

didn't do anything to protect him against retaliation.

沒有做任何事情來保護他免受報復。

Drake's identity became public within his agency, and he was gradually pushed out of his job.

德雷克的身份在他的機構內部公開了，他也逐漸被推掉了工作。

They finally removed me from all positions, all responsibilities, all programs.

他們終於把我從所有的崗位、所有的職責、所有的項目中撤走了。

There's no recourse, and no penalty if the agency decides to retaliate against you.

如果機構決定對你進行報復，沒有追索權，也沒有懲罰。

Finally, after Drake's complaints went nowhere, he chose a different path.

最後，在德雷克的投訴無果後，他選擇了另一條路。

And because he remembered what happened to Ellsberg,  he chose to share unclassified information,

因為他想起了艾爾斯伯格的遭遇，所以他選擇了分享非機密信息。

But then, in 2010, the Obama administration accused him of violating the Espionage Act,

但後來，在2010年，奧巴馬政府指控他違反了《間諜法》。

the same as Ellsberg, who had leaked classified information.

和洩露機密資訊的埃爾斯伯格一樣。

"Thomas Drake is charged with violating espionage laws."

"托馬斯-德雷克被控違反間諜法"

"Prosecutors claimed that Drake had betrayed his country."

"檢察官聲稱，德雷克背叛了他的國家。"

Drake's case was only the fourth time in history that the Espionage Act

德雷克的案件只是歷史上第四次出現《間諜法》。

had been used to prosecute a whistleblower.

But since the Obama administration, it's become a lot more common.

但自奧巴馬政府以來，這種情況變得更加普遍。

Eventually the case collapsed because Drake did nothing illegal.

最終，這個案子因為德雷克沒有做任何違法的事情而告吹。

But his career in the government was over.

如今，他在一家蘋果商店工作。

You lose your entire social network, in terms of work.

你失去了整個社交網絡，在工作方面。

There's people who lost their jobs because of their association with me.

有人因為和我的關係而失去了工作。

Those are burdens that I will carry with me the rest of my life.

這些都是我餘生都要揹負的負擔。

In August 2019, an officer in the CIA filed a whistleblower complaint

2019年8月，中情局的一名官員提出了舉報投訴。

saying that President Trump was trying to pressure Ukraine to investigate one of his political rivals.

說，特朗普總統正試圖向烏克蘭施壓，調查他的一個政治對手。

Just like Drake, the officer followed the process laid out in the law.

就像德雷克一樣，這位警官也是按照法律規定的程序進行的。

He took the complaint to the inspector general.

The inspector general took it to the director of national intelligence.

監察長把它交給了國家情報局局長。

字幕列表影片播放

美國是如何辜負了它的舉報人的？ (How America fails its whistleblowers)

eventually

process

enormous

evidence