Daniel Ellsberg told the Washington Post the four documents he most wishes someone would release to WikiLeaks:
1. The official U.S. “order of battle” estimates of the Taliban in Afghanistan, detailing its size, organization and geographic breakdown — in short, the total of our opponents in this war. If possible, a comparison of the estimate in December 2009 (when President Obama decided on a troop increase and new strategy) and the estimate in June or July 2010 (after six or seven months of the new strategy). We would probably see that our increased presence and activities have strengthened the Taliban, as has happened over the past three years.
2. Memos from the administration’s decision-making process between July and December 2009 on the new strategy for Afghanistan, presenting internal critiques of the McChrystal-Petraeus strategy and troop requests — similar to the November 2009 cables from Ambassador Karl W. Eikenberry that were leaked in January. In particular, memos by Vice President Biden, national security adviser Jim Jones and others; responses to the critiques; and responses to the responses. This paperwork would probably show that, like Eikenberry, other high-level internal critics of escalation made a stronger and more realistic case than its advocates, warranting congressional reexamination of the president’s policy.
3. The draft revision, known as a “memo to holders,” of the National Intelligence Estimate on Iran from November 2007. This has been held up for the past several months, apparently because it is consistent with the judgment of that NIE that Iran has not made a decision to produce nuclear weapons. In particular, the contribution to that memo by the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR), since the INR has had the best track record on such matters. Plus, estimates by the INR and others of the likelihood of an Israeli attack on Iran later this summer. Such disclosures could arrest momentum toward a foreseeably disastrous U.S.-supported attack, as the same finding did in 2007.
4. The 28 or more pages on the foreknowledge or involvement of foreign governments (particularly Saudi Arabia) that were redacted from the congressional investigation of 9/11, over the protest of then-Sen. Bob Graham (D-Fla.).
On each of these matters, congressional investigation is called for. The chance of this would be greatly strengthened by leaks from insiders. Subsequent hearings could elicit testimony from the insiders who provided the information (whose identities could be made known to congressional investigators) and others who, while not willing to take on the personal risks of leaking, would be ready to testify honestly under oath if requested or subpoenaed by Congress. Leaks are essential to this process.
{ 1 trackback }
{ 22 comments… read them below or add one }
@Zak– read Daniel’s book Secrets, available in most public libraries. It has the whole story in detail.
Thank you so much for all you’ve done for us Mr. Ellsberg. Like yourself we all must learn not to fear our oppressor, then their power will diminish exponentially. With the Truth will come our Freedom and Dignity, in ALL relationships, even personal ones. Like Julian, you are one of my greatest hero’s, Bless you!
Daniel Ellsberg,
I have recently read articles that you were in Viet Nam. Although you may have been there as a DOD employee, I don’t see how you could have led a combat platoon in the Marine Corps. That is unless you were in the French Foreign Legion in the mid 1950s. Please strighten out your war record for us so as not to have it unduely embelished.
Thank You,
Dr. Ellsberg,
My wife and I just watched the documentary “The Most Dangrous Man in America.” Although I have been very familiar with The Pentagon Papers for years, it was still a very powerful, as well as moving film.
I wanted to introduce myself, and my son, Matthew Erwin, who is currently serving a three-month sentence at the Air Force Brig at Vandenberg AFB, CA.
He was charged with Missing Movement and Desertion, having chosen not to deploy to Qatar, and instead, to fall off the grid. He turned himself in, two weeks later to AFOSI Agents. Needless to say, I was not happy, but my son did what he did fort a number of reasons.
Myself, I contiunue to maintain my Army Reserve status (I have chosen not to serve on AD since this situation with my son, however) as a US Army All-Source Intelligence Officer (CPT), with 25 years of service (AD, reserve, IRR). My academic major (BA) also happens to be in Intelligence Studies.
To make a long story short, my son was raised to be a progressive. We chose the Air Force for Matt, if anything, as a “lifeboat,” so to speak, as socio-economic conditions in the US continue to crumble.
Matthew has always known alot from me about the history of US Foreign Policy, etc (the UNCLASS stuff, of course). We thought that the military MIGHT be a better place to serve, under Obama. However, with the escalation in Afghanistan and the drone attacks in Waziristan, these events contributed to my son’s decision. I remember Matt telling me ominously “I’ve been watching Democracy Now every day…” (our favorite daily news source, as well as a good Open-Source Intel. feed).
I admit, I’ve been whoring myself to Uncle Sam since these recent wars began, although the Intel field was something I fell in love with as a military job, while struggling at the time to put 20 yrs. into the reserve component of the Army. Although Matthew already knew alot of the same information (I knew as far back as 2002 that they were not going to find WMD’s in Iraq, just going by the Open Source intel provided by Scott Ritter, spaeking as an activist) that many military deserters later read before making their decision, we both thought he could “handle it,” and serve a career in the USAF. This may have been a bad assumption on my part, because even my performance has suffered, during certain tours performed within the last three years (overhearing people from Northrup-Grumman bragging about the possibility of stealing more MOS’s away from the Army, etc).
My son worked in contracting, which in-itself is a highly lucrative field, particularly as these wars continue. The Air Force is now even offering a $100,000 bonus for a six-year reinlistment. However, Matt’s never been a money chaser (unlike his Dad, within the Intel. field). He would rather personally enjoy his work, and belong to something he personally believes in (which is actually important at his age). I know he did not particularly like his job (his NCOIC told hardly anyone does), and I could only speculate on what his actual experiences were within the military-industrial complex.
I summary, my son was heading overseas to an actual vacation (R&R) spot for a tour, where his job would have been technically easier than it is, stateside. He was even expecting to put on his E-4, within a month of being overseas. However, along with other reasons, he chose to follow his conscience. Even though he was coerced into “cooperating” (he avoided contact with me prior to turning himself in, where I could have helped him keep his mouth shut), he still did not make any anti-war statements, or take an anti-war stance. This at least helped to keep him from being nailed with a worse discharge, etc.
If Matt and I could gain anything positive from this experience of his, It would be the opportunity to somehow meet with you in the near future, at one of your speaking engagements, etc. Myself, I am a regular contributor to Democracy Now, have sent a contribution to WikiLeaks (whatever happened to the check), and have added my name to a petition on behalf of Bradley Manning. I only get to speak to Matt for 15 minutes at a time, and have not yet addressed the idea of him being involved with the Anti-War movement.
Also, please excuse the website: I was inspired by Jim Rawles at Survivalblog to become involved in Survivalism, and to even offer myself as a consultant, due to my own professionally-related hobby of researching Peak Oil, other areas of resource depletion, previous failed/collapsed civilizations, etc (along with training myself in organic gardening, food preservation, etc.). However, due to recent events since 2008, both globally and locally, I will be taking down the site within a month, mainly for OPSEC reasons, as more questionable people are being drawn into this following, many carrying their own self-fulfilling prophecies (I tried to convey Survivalism as a vehicle for self-reliance and continual self-improvement, regardless of what the future brings. Regardless, the collapse of this civilization is well underway).
Sincerely,
Jerry and Matthew Erwin
Vancouver, WA (USA)
I am waiting for Wikileaks to release documents concerning the Balkans and Serbia. Serbia was the only country in that area besides Greece who fought against the Germans in WWII.
Why did the U.S.[ loved by Serbia }decide to make the Serbs the villains in the Yugoslav wars? Why did they ignore the gross butchering and selling of Serb organs? Why did the US build a camp in Kosovo? Why did the U.S. and other European nations give Kosovo (Serbia’s holy land) to the Albanians and why did the U.S. and some European nations decide they did not want Serbia to have the minerals in Kosovo? Russia is a friend to Serbia, they share the same religion which is Eastern Orthodox. Is that why U.S. and some European nations decided Serbia would be punished?
@Lawrence – while I disagree with your views– Manning swore an Oath to defend the Constitution against all enemies, not to protect government lying to the American people–I appreciate the reasoned tone in which you present your views. This is the kind of dialogue we want to encourage here. Not the inflamed rhetoric of, for example, @David West on the Colbert Report post… Most of the “con” views expressed in the comments section are inflamed personal attacks against Dan. Thanks for a calmly-stated rational argument instead–keep the dialogue going!
Though I agree with your decision to provide those documents to the New York Times, and subsequently agree that the Nixon Administration was both silly and offensive in bringing their charges against you; nonentheless, an active duty service member is not protected under the U S Constitution, at induction – and through active service – every service member is restrained by the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Whether it is CWO John Walker or the Private in question.
The Department of Defense, and it’s subordinate branches of Service, should prosecute any soldier who violates the secrecy of official military records. Unlike the case of the “Pentagon Papers”, which were largely obsolete, and which dealt with abandoned contingincies and diplomatic snafus, the extraordinary release of military records included many that were less than one year old. The individuals named in those documents were still on active duty, and stationed in “war zones”, and there should be no comparison between the two acts.
My God Doctor! You are advocating people portray the confidence of their superiors and reveal classified intelligence! Are you nuts? I think you are inhaling your own smoke Doc. Afghanistan is not Vietnam. We lost 2,300 people in 9/11 and the people who organized and executed are in this country. And you seek to undermine this effort? For what? So we can sit back and wait to get hit again?
What war Sir, was ever clean?
Dr. Ellsberg:
As someone who lived in lower Manhattan on 9/11, there are far too many odd elements about that day, things that just don’t make sense to me. Why did building 7 collapse the way it did? Why was there so little left of each of the planes? How is it that it happened the same day that we were performing military exercises that would have made officials question if the attacks were for real?
Additionally, I am not anti-corporation, but the military industrial complex and big oil are just out of control.
I studied Rhetoric and Political Science at UC, Berkeley, and later became a publicist, and I am blown away by the tremendous weight of misinformation in these times. And no one is held accountable, as they are using our right of free speech against us. I believe these forces to be far more dangerous than the threat of a radical Islamic element (not, certainly, that they should be ignored, but I think we have the power to keep that threat relatively in check).
The misinformation is such a steady barrage that it seems difficult to counter its damage with a positive vision and message that is not strictly defensive.
I think, and I can imagine that you have experienced it over and over again, that the message and its reach is now the most important effort before us. I would love to hear your thoughts.
Thank you.
I have a project for a class of mine. If anyone has any comments please let me know. If Mr. Ellsberg could comment that would be even greater
The question is this: If Daniel Ellsberg were to somehow get seated next to the Reverend Terry Jones on a non-stop flight from Nashville to Denver, what–of substance–might you expect the former to say to the latter?
Dr. Ellsberg:
I just finished Secrets. A marvelous piece of work for which I thank you. I am working on a “teaching unit” in connection with the Zinn Project (aimed, as I currently understand it) at high school students (whose U.S. history course always seems to end BEFORE Vietnam.) The unit’s core is the documentary (“Dangerous Man”) and around it there is extended material on Vietnam and the U.S. role. Initially, the plan was to do a “mock-trial” at the end of the unit on the Papers Case but I have suggested to the lead author that the “mock-trial” instead shift to your prosecution. I was particularly struck by your discussion that (circa 1969-1971) there was simply no law (no statutory law) that criminalized your actions. I found your discussion of what Leonard Boudin and Charley Nesson said to you quite surprising in that regard. (I am attorney and was invited to work on this project to sharpen the “legal issues.” Years ago, I had Charley Nesson for “Evidence” in fact.) Do you think what you wrote in Secrets on the absence of any criminal statutory basis for your indictment (putting aside “theft”) is right? (In other words, have you any second thoughts about your discussion of this question as it relates to your actions? And, more to the point, can you identify for me any subsequent statutory law (federal) that would change that analysis today? I had been thinking of framing the mock-trial as essentially the use by the executive of the judiciary (the criminal machinery) as a method of furthering the very non-democratic executive structure itself. But, of course, the notion of an independent judiciary (enforcing law that is legislatively created) would seem (in theory at least) to stand in the way. Personally, I think this is a bigger issue (in terms of political theory and governmental structure) than the restraint issue (which is a kind of non-issue, when you think about it). And this is why I found your discussion (personal and quite moving) about “secret-keeping” (by you and the hundreds of others who operate the “executive”) so significant. There is a direct link between the psychological/social ethos of secret-keeping and the use by the executive of the criminal threat. It is particularly ironic if in fact there is actually no criminal sanction in place. Again, I greatly appreciated your book (and needless to say, the personal courage and example of your actions).
I didn’t realize these posts were moderated.. Could you substitute this [edited] version correcting two mistakes please, Thank You tgw@37.com
Dr. Ellsberg, I was an idealistic 23yo guy who hitched hicked from Detroit to N.Y. in 1964 with $23 in my pocket and battled my way there to solvency.. I was against the war from nearly day one thanks to Pete Seeger especially… I was in danger of being drafted or prosecuted for resistance for years.. I went to the demonstrations against the war many times.. Once I was only one row away from the heads being clubbed by the police, I will never forget that sound.
You became an instant hero to me upon your release of those histories… But more important I believe, is your never ending activism and especially your apt level headed and sober deportment throughout these long years since that release. So many leaders, indeed almost all, have stumbled or blundered into actions or speech which detracted from their personal stature and thereby to a greater or lesser extent gave the enemies of peace and tolerance tools to lower, discredit and smear all of our leaders. You are a [the] paragon of correct leadership… I am forever in your debt, and will always be untill the day I die, come whatever…All leaders are human and therefor make mistakes….. I just can’t think of any you have made since you broke your silence to the wrongs and crimes OUR country commits. My profoundest thanks….. TGW
The really frightening thing for me is that Wikileaks has managed to expose a culture of officialdom that conducts wars without regard to the conventions of how wars are supposed to be conducted.
I know that the last Attorney General under the Bush administration was eager to dispense with the Geneva Conventions…perhaps they did.
Organisations such as Reporteurs Sans Frontiers and Amnesty International are surely putting the cart before the horse in attacking the methods used by Wilileaks. These NGOs and other groups have taken a back seat and stayed nearly invisible and silent in the face of nine years of atrocities committed by coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. One has to wonder if these “independent” groups are really what they appear to be. That anomaly could be explained in an Orwellian universe, perhaps.
How do we get the masses to vote, and how do we inform them so they can cast an eloquent vote at each and every juncture? I also want to know how can we wipe the remnants of colonialism and slavery from the earth. Finally, I believe the U.S. should release developing countries from debt obligations. If all these things happened I believe we would not see another ‘Nam, Iraq^2 or Afghan Extended.
As far as Assange goes, give him credit for using the MSM to help his cause. Everyone knows that if you’re not a “name”, nobody will give you the time of day. Then, when some progressive outlet picks you up, THEN suddenly you’re “officially news”. Now, in the MSM’s view they have to cover you.
If anyone else was in his position, you’d do exactly the same thing.
Just saw some comments from Amnesty International, Reporters Without Borders and others re: Wikileaks. How “irresponsible” they are for publishing even more documents.
But it seems like they have it backwards. Actually, if they really believe that the Afghan and Iraq wars are illegal and immoral, why aren’t they calling those
“irresponsible”. Who’s putting these Afghans in danger?:
The Pakistani ISI
The CIA
Obama
and others
How come Reporters Without Borders doesn’t repeatedly publish editorials condemning these? Is it because that “violates their impartiality”? Is it because they’re pissed off that Wikileaks is getting massive global attention and they’re not? Is it because this massive exposure is cutting into their donations? I don’t know.
We all know that to get the people in power to change, you have to have millions who non-violently will do everything they can to cut into their power and profit. How come Wikileaks is the only one doing that?
Just checked on Al Jaezzera. And the momentum to destroy Wikileaks is (no surprise) building in lots of areas.
Another non-surprise. Nobody’s seriously talking about the actual issues that Wikileaks is raising. No point in listing what you’ve seen a million times already.
If you’re part of the millions that hate seeing this, here’s an idea. It involves the power of numbers to make it work. One person only won’t cut it.
If you’re really sick of the way the MSM is spinning this (instead of doing their job), then do a complete boycott:
Stop listening
Stop reading
Stop looking at their websites, blogs, podcasts, etc.
Stop using all of their advertisers
Refuse to play any part in their profit margin.
Again, this isn’t the first time you’ve heard this. Also, in this slow news cycle, “the weird and the wacky” take precedence over actual important issues.
But if you don’t do this, can you seriously come up with a better solution?
If you say it’s too much work, well guess what? You can’t outsource dissent.
I’m far from being the perfect activist. On the other hand, unless you actually do every step you can, frankly you have no right to complain. You deserve everything you get.
Then again, you already knew that.
Gary(Aug3,2010 at1.58am) Your comment above is a little naive I think. When Obama says he is bringing the troops home from Iraq, he’s talking about the actual soldiers. Most probably to a great Patriotic reception in the USA, with Obama and Hilary leading the cheers. The private contractors, or most of them, I think you will find, will be staying on, to oversee the interests of the “Military Industrial Complex”, in the military bases constructed at great expense to the American taxpayer.
The USA is probably powerful enough, militarily, to look after itself. The only way to defeat the war criminals in control of the Pentagon is to embarrass and humiliate them with the truth, by organisations like Wikileaks etc.
Just catching up on some new MSM articles about Julian Assange.
We all know that August is always a slow news cycle. Regarding Wikileaks, the MSM seems to be almost stumbling over themselves trying to respin an old angle to help sell papers.
The truth is, the nine megacorporations that control the MSM are pissed off that Assange is making them look bad. Also, ratings and circulations continue to decline. Murdoch trying to charge for his content certainly does help at all.
What’s the answer? Join the govt. and publically humiliate Wikileaks. Assange is a “traitor”. He deserves the dealth penalty. I’m surprised that no one’s called him a “terrorist” yet.
In today’s litigious society, Wikileaks could sue against rubbish like this. Assange says that they have lots of attorneys willing to do free work for them.
But also, if they did do that, does that help their cause? Or, does it divert attention from the important issues?
No one in the MSM is using this to look at the key issues. Naturally because their corporate CEO’s won’t stand for that. But also, I still say that Obama won’t risk the global backlash that would come from either kidnapping or killing Assange. The Democrats still have their massive database of supporters from 2008. The last thing they need is to risk alienating that base.
What does this mean? Are we going to see more pointless MSM stories? “Assange Poetry Vol. 2″ or something?
I agree that all of these are important documents for all to see. Yet, what’s the biggest obstacle to this and other important change happening?
One, massive apathy. And two, egos on the progressive side.
Why the apathy? Because most average people are fighting to not be jobless and homeless. As for the protests, in my experience I keep running into a “major market mentality”.
What does that mean? Apparently while everyone is well-meaning, the really major organizations seem to think that everyone outside of a major media market is a waste of time.
Many times I’ve approached many well-known leaders in the progressive movement re: protests that I was trying to organize. Nobody ever responded to me. I was going to vote for the Greens in 2008. But no one ever called me back to help me do this. So I ended up voting for Nader and Gonzalez.
This tells me that a lot of major progressive groups will fight to defend their turf. Everybody’s fighting for time on Democracy Now and various other outlets. Despite that, mnay of these people keep saying we need everyone’s support. When clearly they could care less about others outside their area?
How come they don’t care? Is it because it’s not worth the time and effort? Is it because everybody outside of the Top 10 Media Markets isn’t a progressive? It’s really frustrating (and rude frankly) for these people to have this double standard.
Another problem is stealing ideas. I approached some major organizations with what I thought is a great idea that could go national. Nobody responded to my repeated emails. Then weeks later, one of them suddenly was using my idea as their great new campaign.
You won’t give me the time of day. And THEN you steal my idea and say it’s yours?
Nothing personal against Mr. Ellsberg and other national figures. But up until now I’m finding a real resistance to talking about this. Why is this such a taboo topic?
If stuff like this continues, nothing will change. Yet, for whatever reasons people will keep fighting these stupid turf wars. When if they would actually work together something would be accomplished.
Now, I wonder if any national progressive figure will actually have the guts to publically talk about this.
Dr. Ellsberg, as someone in his late twenties representing a generation that rejects the war-mongering and imperialism of the babyboomer generation before us, I want to say thank you for the risk you took in releasing the “Pentagon Papers.”
I am that “young” voter who voted for President Obama, only to now fear that the revolution we were “hoping” to ignite is now becoming more of the same. I only learned the details of the Pentagon Papers and your involvement when I was reading up in the recent WikiLeaks and then was directed to the documentary about your story in the halls of power and how you radically chose virtue and conscience over playing the good old boys game.
I look foward to joining in the fight against the anti-democratic and even tyrannical leanings of our government.
If Obama brought the troops home today, all those private contractors would be out of work and the unemployment rate would probably jump a half percent. That’s Obama’s (and Bush’s) “good reason for the war”.