Whistle-Blower Daniel Ellsberg’s Final Thoughts

On June 4, 2023, two weeks before he died, Daniel Ellsberg gave one final interview at Politico. Michael Hirsh's interview appears in an article titled: "Daniel Ellsberg Is Dying. And He Has Some Final Things to Say: The iconic whistleblower reflects on the urgent need for others to follow in his footsteps."

I have the greatest admiration  for Daniel Ellsberg's bravery and his patriotism as a whistle-blower. I am writing this post to share some of his final thoughts, which I consider to be critically important in this era of increasing societal willingness to tolerate both corruption of own's own tribe and overall government censorship. But first, a few thoughts about whistle-blowers.

A lot of people are uneasy with whistle-blowers--they think of them as law-breakers, which is true. But what else are you supposed to do when you are a government employee who has a front-row seat to corruption in your own office? I admit that I feel more passion for the plight of whistle-blowers than many people because I was one. In the late 1980s, I became an anonymous source for various newspaper articles in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reporting the corruption of Missouri Attorney General, William Webster. See also here.

I understand the hesitation that many people initially have for supporting whistle-blowers, because they are law-breakers. We have laws that put whistle-blowers at financial and criminal risk for exposing corruption, which usually (as in my case) requires revealing internal documents to prove that corruption. The choice might seem daunting from the outside, but it becomes stark for whistle-blowers: Would you rather stay quiet, thereby acceding to government corruption? Or will you break laws, risk getting fired (which I was) and risk losing both your liberty and your means to pay your bills, all for the higher purpose of letting fellow citizens know that they are being betrayed by their elected officials? If your reputation is important to you, the choice becomes easier. And as one of my confidants told me back in the 80's, "You will need to look in the mirror at yourself every morning for the rest of your life. What kind of person do you want to see?"

For many whistle-blowers, including Daniel Ellsberg, there is no choice at all. He needed to expose the corruption because so much was at stake. He chose to become a whistle-blower in an especially dramatic and dangerous way. He did it to stop the tragic farce we refer to as "the Vietnam War," where 50,000 Americans and hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese people were being slaughtered based upon an initial big lie (the purported Gulf of Tonkin incident) and subsequent non-stop lies spewed by the U.S. government that the Vietnam War was winnable. Contrary to these lies, secret internal U.S. communications made it absolutely clear that, for a variety of reasons, the U.S. would never prevail militarily.

The entire Politico article is well worth reading. Here are a few of Ellsberg's last thoughts that I'd like to share:

“The need for whistleblowing in my area of so-called national security is that we have a secret foreign policy, which has been very successfully kept secret and essentially mythical,” [Ellsberg] says. “I’m saying there’s never been more need for whistleblowers … There’s always been a need for many more than we have. At the same time, it’s become more and more dangerous to be a whistleblower. There’s little doubt about that.” . . .

During the course of our hour- and-20-minute interview, Ellsberg contended America still runs a “covert empire” around the world, embodied in the U.S. domination of NATO. He believes Washington deliberately provoked Vladimir Putin into invading Ukraine by pushing its seat of power eastward toward Russia’s borders; that the mainstream media is “complicit” in allowing the government to keep secrets it has no right to withhold; and that any notion Americans are ever the “good guys” abroad “has always been false.”

“I think very few Americans are aware of what our actual influence in the former colonial world has been, and that is to keep it colonial,” Ellsberg says. “King Charles III [of Britain] is no longer an emperor, as I understand it, but for all practical purposes Joe Biden is … Here’s a point I haven’t made to anyone but would like to in my last days here. Very simply, how many Americans would know any one of the following cases, let alone three or four of them?” Ellsberg then rattles off a series of U.S. orchestrated coups, most of them fairly well documented, starting with Iran in 1953, and then in Guatemala, Indonesia, Honduras, Dominican Republic, Brazil and Chile.

I respond by saying those were all Cold War policies, if covert ones, and ask him whether he thinks anything has changed since. In announcing the complete U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021, for example — as the Taliban effectively chased American troops out of the country — Biden declared that the United States was “ending an era of major military operations to remake other countries.”

Ellsberg doesn’t believe it. “Democrats in this area are as shameless as Republicans,” he says. “Our elections in the realm of foreign policy and defense policy and arms sales, I have come to understand, are essentially between people vying to be manager of the empire.”

 

Continue ReadingWhistle-Blower Daniel Ellsberg’s Final Thoughts

Bad Leakers and Good Leaks.

A recent document leak on Discord shows that the U.S government is lying to Americans. The contents of this leak make it clear that U.S. troops are already on the ground in Ukraine, a situation that dramatically increases the risk of direct confrontation of the U.S. and Russia, which could be cataclysmic given the current situation, already hair-trigger dangerous. The U.S. corporate news is refusing to discuss the new revelations, both the White House dishonesty and the danger on the ground in Ukraine. Why? It's entire predictable.

When the corporate news media likes the content of a leak, they don't give a rat's ass about who leaked it. On other  occasions, the corporate news media finds the leak content inconvenient, in which case they zero in, laser-like, to destroy the reputation of the leaker, harping on the illegality of the leak and simultaneously suppressing the content of the leak. This protocol is in their standard playbook, as discussed by Glenn Greenwald in "The Same Establishment Playbook is Used to Malign the Character of Leakers and Distract Attention From the Substance of the Revelations."

On a virtually daily basis, one can find authorized leaks in The New York Times, The Washington Post, on CNN and NBC News: meaning stories dressed up as leaks from anonymous sources that are, in fact, nothing more than messaging assertions that the CIA, FBI, Homeland Security and the Pentagon have instructed these subservient media corporations to disseminate. When that happens, the leaker is never found or punished: even when the leaks are designated as the most serious crimes under the U.S. criminal code, such as when The Washington Post's long-time CIA spokesman David Ignatius in early 2017 published the contents of the intercepted phone calls between Trump's incoming National Security Advisor Michael Flynn and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. Most of Russiagate was constructed based on authorized leaks, a generous way of describing official propaganda from the U.S. Security State laundered in the American corporate press.

But when it comes to unauthorized leaks -- which result in the disclosure of secret evidence showing that the U.S. Security State lied, acted corruptly, or broke laws -- that is when the full weight of establishment power comes crashing down on the head of the leaker. They are found and arrested. Their character is destroyed. And now -- in a new and genuinely shocking escalation -- it is the largest media corporations themselves, such as the Times and the Post, that actually do the FBI's work by hunting down the leaker, exposing him, and ensuring his arrest.

This playback is always used in such cases and is easily recognized. The point is to shift attention from the substance of the embarrassing and incriminating disclosures onto the personal traits of the person who exposed them, so as to make the public forget about what they learned and come to see the leaker as so unlikeable that they want nothing to do with the disclosures themselves.

Glenn's System Update Episode #70 further explores the media's treatment of the Discord leaker.

Continue ReadingBad Leakers and Good Leaks.

NYT Forced to Acknowledge U.S. Spy Efforts due to Third Party Release of Leaked Documents

In Daniel Ellsberg's day, the NYT was seen as a place friendly to whistle-blowers and those who have documents exposing secret government activities. No longer. Further, the NYT refuses to post a link to the leaked documents, only linking to its own hand-wringing articles. Nowadays, secret documents are leaked elsewhere and the NYT needs to play catch-up, coupling its reluctant acknowledgement with a warning about the damage that could be caused by leaks about secret U.S. activity:

The leak has the potential to do real damage to Ukraine’s war effort by exposing which Russian agencies the United States knows the most about, giving Moscow a potential opportunity to cut off the sources of information. Current and former officials say it is too soon to know the extent of the damage, but if Russia is able to determine how the United States collects its information and cuts off that flow, it may have an effect on the battlefield in Ukraine.

The leak has already complicated relations with allied countries and raised doubts about America’s ability to keep its secrets. After reviewing the documents, a senior Western intelligence official said the release of the material was painful and suggested that it could curb intelligence sharing. For various agencies to provide material to each other, the official said, requires trust and assurances that certain sensitive information will be kept secret.

On the other hand, if you are part of the U.S. security state, the NYT is more than happy to post your propaganda, as it did in the case of the Nord Stream Pipeline. Unbelievably, knowing that it's "explanation" of the pipeline destruction is bullshit, the NYT suggests it's not a good idea to dig further into who destroyed the pipeline:

It's a good day to celebrate the immense good fortune of NYT reporters who get to draw big salaries while not having to do the difficult work of actually practicing journalism.

Proposed new Mission Statement for the New York Times: Pay No Attention to the Man Behind the Curtain.

Joe Biden promised to disable the pipeline prior to its destruction:

Biden's neocon crony, Victoria Nuland, helped to lead the post-destruction cheerleading, as Aaron Maté reminds us, but, again, Pay No Attention to the Man Behind the Curtain.

No wonder the corporate media and their U.S. government partners hate Twitter 2.0...

Continue ReadingNYT Forced to Acknowledge U.S. Spy Efforts due to Third Party Release of Leaked Documents