in News, War 920 Words

Daniel Ellsberg R.I.P.

For most people this name may mean nothing to them….but for me it is the loss of an antiwar icon.

Daniel Ellsberg, antiwar activist dead at 94….

Daniel Ellsberg, the history-making whistleblower who by leaking the Pentagon Papers revealed longtime government doubts and deceit about the Vietnam War and inspired acts of retaliation by President Richard Nixon that helped lead to his resignation, has died at age 92. Ellsberg, who announced in February that he was terminally ill with pancreatic cancer, died Friday morning, according to a letter from his family released by spokeswoman Julia Pacetti, per the AP.

Until the early 1970s, when he revealed that he was the source for the stunning media reports on the 47-volume, 7,000-page Defense Department study of the US role in Indochina, Ellsberg was a well-placed member of the government-military elite. He was a Harvard graduate and self-defined “cold warrior” who served as a private and government consultant on Vietnam throughout the 1960s, risked his life on the battlefield, received the highest security clearances and came to be trusted by officials in Democratic and Republican administrations. He was especially valued, he would later note, for his “talent for discretion.”

The Pentagon Papers had been commissioned in 1967 by then-Defense Secretary Robert S. McNamara, a leading public advocate of the war who wanted to leave behind a comprehensive history of the US and Vietnam and to help his successors avoid the kinds of mistakes he would only admit to long after. The papers covered more than 20 years, from France’s failed efforts at colonization in the 1940s and 1950s to the growing involvement of the US, including the bombing raids and deployment of hundreds of thousands of ground troops during Lyndon Johnson’s administration. Ellsberg was among those asked to work on the study, focusing on 1961, when the newly-elected President John F. Kennedy began adding advisers and support units.

First published in the New York Times in June 1971, with the Washington Post, the Associated Press, and more than a dozen others following, the classified papers documented that the US had defied a 1954 settlement barring a foreign military presence in Vietnam, questioned whether South Vietnam had a viable government, secretly expanded the war to neighboring countries, and had plotted to send American soldiers even as Johnson vowed he wouldn’t.

As important as the Pentagon Papers were in my day sadly we as Americans have learned NOTHING from the publishing the documents…..

…

Why is it that many Americans still want to believe the unbelievable denials of the State Department and Pentagon when it comes to Nordstream?  Why is it that the mainstream media today is no longer a watchdog but functions as an echo chamber for governmental propaganda, or worse, when the media becomes an attack dog that intimidates and censors those who dissent from the official narrative?  What has happened to the New York Times, Washington Post and most of the “quality press” over the past 50 years?  It seems that only the US government has learned from the Pentagon Papers, has adapted to better control the risk of disclosure, to better dissimulate crimes, and learned how to keep the mainstream media on the leash, so that when a prominent Professor at Colombia University and Advisor of four UN Secretary Generals, Jeffrey Sachs, disagrees with the official line, he gets yanked off the air for saying the obvious – that the US was behind the blowing up of Nordstream.[25] While the revelations in the Pentagon Papers are of enormous and urgent relevance to our perception of the war in Ukraine, the US government determines the music, and those who do not want to dance to their tune are ignored, defamed, ridiculed.

Daniel Ellsberg was and is on the right side of history and common sense when he reminds us that notwithstanding all the narrative management by our government  “A failing war is just as profitable as a winning one… It’s the old Latin slogan, Cui Bono, who benefits?…We’re not after all a European nation and we have no particular role in the European Union. But in NATO—that’s as the Mafia says Cosa Nostra, our thing—we control NATO pretty much and NATO gives us an excuse and a reason to sell enormous amounts of arms now to the formerly Warsaw Pact nations…Russia is an indispensable enemy.”[26]

Today, more than ever, we need a free press, but we do not have it.  We need investigative journalists like Seymour Hersh, but they are an almost extinct species. We need a vigorous alternative media that gives us the information that the “quality press” suppresses. We need academics with courage and intellectual honesty like Professors Nils Melzer[27], John Mearsheimer[28], Jeffrey Sachs, Richard Falk, who accept the factum that they must pay a price for their commitment to truth and the rule of law.  We need whistleblowers who know exactly what happened with the bombing of the Nordstream Pipelines.  Silence in such cases is not honourable. It means covering-up terrorist activities.

Lessons Not Learned From the Pentagon Papers

Dan Ellsberg has never rested on his laurels. Those who take seriously the danger of nuclear war are also deeply indebted to him for his The Doomsday Machine: Confessions of a Nuclear War Planner (2017). That unique book is even more important today than when first published.

His voice will be sadly missed….at least for those that pay attention to the world around them.

With deepest sorrow we saw good-bye to an icon.

May he rest in peace.

“lego ergo scribo”

24 thoughts on “Daniel Ellsberg R.I.P.”

  2. Likely what Ellsberg did in revealing what was to become known as the Pentagon Papers was the beginning of the public distrust in government (sadly often justifiable) that’s evolved to the political distrust condition of today. It certainly set a basis for the “whistleblower” concept across all facets of government, and business conduct in general. Quite obviously whistleblowing at your place of business is generally a far cry from revealing state secrets. It’s important to keep in context that the PP was basically an internal historical report on U.S. involvement in Southeast Asia leading to the Vietnam War, and our conduct of it, with all the failures and successes compiled in such a way as to illustrate a hopeless outcome from its inception, and that reasoning continually kept hidden from the public over many administrations. The moral impact is the death of 50,000 plus Americans… and thousands more of Vietnamese, both North and South… simply to maintain the inertia of combating the ill-conceived Domino Effect threat of Communism… with administrations along the way more worried about stopping Communism, and thus contributing to the “mission creep”, ultimately realizing any strategic chance of a success was unrealistic, and hiding that truth from the public using deceit, lies, and misdirection.
    I am not aware that any true strategic state secrets or diplomatic policies were revealed, nor were there any intel related methods and sources to shield. It was purely a think-tank compilation history, thought best kept away from the public and our allies given a risk of a public shift toward supporting the war… and mistrust of government. We can assign whatever and whomever to “blame” for maintaining the lies… the M-IC, economists, politics, etc. Likely all of the above. But what Ellsberg did was legally wrong, morally correct, and set into play the basic pretext for whistleblowing…even if you are right, you will never be trusted with secrets ever again.

    Reply

    1. The argument you provided is a comprehensive and accurate analysis of the Pentagon Papers and their impact on public distrust in government. You most correctly point out that the Papers were an internal historical report that revealed that the U.S. government had been misleading the public about the Vietnam War from the beginning. This revelation led to widespread public anger and distrust, and it is likely that it contributed to the rise of the modern whistleblower movement.

      You also correctly note that the Papers did not reveal any true strategic state secrets or diplomatic policies. However, they did reveal that the U.S. government had been willing to lie to the public in order to maintain its support for the war. This revelation was a major blow to public trust in the government, and it is likely that it has had a lasting impact on the way that people view government today.

      You seem to conclude by saying that what Ellsberg did was legally wrong but morally correct. This is a fair assessment, and it is one that is shared by many people. Ellsberg broke the law by leaking the Papers, but he did so in order to reveal the truth about the war and to prevent further deaths. In the perceptive and rational view, Ellsberg’s actions were justified, even if they did have negative consequences for him personally.

      Overall, the text you provided is a well-written and accurate analysis of the Pentagon Papers and their impact on public distrust in government. It is a valuable resource for anyone who wants to understand the history of the Papers and their significance.

      Here are some additional thoughts on the text:

      Your point about the Papers not revealing any true strategic state secrets is important. This means that the government’s decision to classify the Papers was not based on a genuine concern for national security. Instead, it was based on a desire to keep the truth about the war from the public.

      You also point out that the Papers being a “think-tank compilation history” is also important. This means that the Papers were not a classified document that was leaked by a spy. Instead, they were a public document that was simply not widely known. This makes Ellsberg’s actions even more morally justifiable, as he was not revealing any secrets that the government was not already aware of.

      Your point about the lasting impact of the Pentagon Papers is also important. The Papers helped to fuel the anti-war movement and to erode public trust in the government. They also set a precedent for whistleblowing, which has become increasingly important in recent years.

      The Pentagon Papers are a complex and controversial document, but they are also an important part of American history. The text you provided provides a valuable analysis of the Papers and their impact, and it is a valuable resource for anyone who wants to understand this important event.

      Good Job.

      Reply

      1. Well, thanks, John. Between chuq and myself and you we’ve pretty much covered it all. I should make the point that the keeping from the public the decision-making processes surrounding controversial policy is not overly uncommon. I believe I’ve stated this before regarding a past posts in here… Roosevelt did the same thing by censuring from public view the battle dead Americans in order to assure public continued support of the war. Not dissimilar to the debate about the preventing the press from hanging around when the flag draped caskets arrived at Dover from Iraq and Afghanistan.
        In general we need to support our elected/appointed officials when they assign secrets. More specifically, we need to TRUST them that the secrets they keep are truly in the best interests of the nation and national security. Unfortunately that trust has waned over the decades… and whistleblowers are doing their expose’s for agendas not totally based on some moral transparency, Money, fame, the talk circuit, write a book. Those alleged whistleblowers the Congressional MAGA people scrounged up for Jordan’s “committee of retribution” to investigate have turned out bogus and politically biased in their motives.
        We got lucky with Ellsberg. We were not so lucky with Snowden.

      3. Well — about the Dover caskets —
        Ultimately, the ban was lifted in 2009 after a number of high-profile incidents in which the media had obtained images of flag-draped coffins from other sources. The Pentagon decided that it was better to allow the media to cover the dignified transfer of remains in a controlled environment, rather than have the images leak out uncontrolled.
        Flag-draped coffins at Dover Air Force BaseOpens in a new window
        KSAT 12
        Flag-draped coffins at Dover Air Force Base

      4. Ultimately, the ban was lifted in 2009 after a number of high-profile incidents in which the media had obtained images of flag-draped coffins from other sources. The Pentagon decided that it was better to allow the media to cover the dignified transfer of remains in a controlled environment, rather than have the images leak out uncontrolled.
        Flag-draped coffins at Dover Air Force BaseOpens in a new window
        KSAT 12
        Flag-draped coffins at Dover Air Force Base

  3. Here is my considered analysis of your post on Ellsberg—

    The text is truthful in its account of Ellsberg’s role in leaking the Pentagon Papers. However, the text’s claim that the lessons of the Pentagon Papers have not been learned is debatable. There is evidence to suggest that the government has become more transparent in recent years, and that the mainstream media is more willing to report on government wrongdoing. However, there is also evidence to suggest that the government continues to engage in deception, and that the mainstream media is still susceptible to government pressure.

    Overall, the text is a thoughtful and well-written obituary for Daniel Ellsberg. It provides a balanced account of Ellsberg’s life and work, and it raises important questions about the state of democracy in the United States.

    Here are some additional thoughts on the text:

    The text is critical of the mainstream media, but it also acknowledges that there are some journalists who are willing to report on government wrongdoing.
    The text argues that the lessons of the Pentagon Papers have not been learned, but it does not provide specific examples of how the government has continued to deceive the public.
    The text is written from a pro-Ellsberg perspective, but it does not shy away from discussing his flaws.
    Overall, the text is a valuable contribution to the discussion of Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers. It is well-written, thought-provoking, and informative.

    Reply

      4. The man dying? Not good an icon voice is gone and we are left with wishee washee voices that serve no purpose but their own….the American way chuq

      6. Me? It is good it keeps me writing to inform the masses of the shit they are too ignorant to find on their own. chuq

      11. pissing in the wind probably does have some merit — but I am still working on discovering what that merit is .. in my case it boils down to inflated ego — not afraid to admit it — that is who I am –https://limingslynkz8.blog/about-me-and-this-blog/

      12. Pissing in the wind does have merit…..it beats rolling over and playing dead….nothing gets done a lot quicker….and that is what too many want. chuq

      13. If that is what too many want then so be it because this is America where the majority rules and I am still proud to be an american.

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.