![]() “The NSA main switchboard put The Observer through to extension 6727 at the agency which was answered by an assistant, who confirmed it was Koza’s office. Vulliamy is depicted as actually speaking with “Frank Koza,” but that’s not what he originally reported : ![]() There do seem to be subtle but potentially serious deviations from reality in the film. Observer reporter Ed Vulliamy is energetically depicted getting tips from former CIA man Mel Goodman. blackmail of foreign governments to get UN votes or for other purposes? How is it leveraged? Does it fit in with allegations made by former NSA analyst Russ Tice about the NSA having massive files on political people? We know virtually nothing about the apparent author of the NSA document that she leaked - one “Frank Koza.” Other questions persist, such is how prevalent is this sort of U.S. Observer reporter Martin Bright, whose strong work on the original Gun story was strangely followed by an ill-fated stint at the Tony Blair Faith Foundation, has recently noted that very little additional work has been done on Gun’s case. ![]() The film also portrays the work of her lawyers who helped get the Official Secrets charge against her dropped, as well as the drama at The Observer, which published the NSA document after much internal debate. Other than Gun herself, the film focuses on a dramatization of what happened at her work as well as her relationship with her husband, a Kurd from Turkey who the British government attempted to have deported to get at Gun. Gun’s revelations showed before the invasion that people on the inside, whose livelihood depends on following the party line, were willing to risk jail time to out the lies and threats. and British governments went to get other governments to go along with it. The trendy AV Club review leads : “Virtually everyone now agrees that the 2003 invasion of Iraq was a colossal mistake based on faulty (at best) or fabricated (at worst) intelligence.” “Mistake” is a serious understatement even with “colossal” attached to it when the movie details the diabolical, illegal lengths to which the U.S. Mainstream reviews of “Official Secrets” still seem to not fully grasp the importance of what they just saw. and British governments were not only lying to invade Iraq, they were violating international law to blackmail whole nations to get in line. policy and media coverage makes a strong case for trying to reach government workers by handing out fliers and books and putting up billboards outside government offices to encourage them to be more critically minded. Gun’s immediate action after reading critiques of U.S. In early 2003, they were poised to threaten, bribe or blackmail their way to get formal United Nations authorization for the invasion. and Britain had successfully forced through a trumped up resolution, 1441in November 2002. Security Council delegations in an effort to manipulate them into voting for an Iraq invasion resolution. government memo showing it was mounting an illegal spying “surge” against other U.N. Gun was charged for exposing- around the time of Colin Powell’s infamous testimony to the UN about Iraq’s alleged WMDs – a top secret U.S. Espionage Act, which in recent years has been used repeatedly by the Obama administration against whistleblowers and now by the Trump administration against WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange. ![]() For doing that she was prosecuted under the Official Secrets Act - a juiced up version of the U.S. Bush and Tony Blair in their claims about that country. She tried to stop the impending invasion of Iraq in early 2003 by exposing the deceit of George W. Katharine Gun worked as an analyst for Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), the British equivalent of the secretive U.S.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |