Showing posts with label daniel ellsberg. Show all posts
Showing posts with label daniel ellsberg. Show all posts

Sunday, March 20, 2011

Daniel Ellsberg on Why He Demonstrated Saturday on Behalf of Bradley Manning @ the White House (with video)


Jane Hamsher (FDL) with video (10:02):
I’m on chauffeur duty again this weekend, driving Dan Ellsberg to the White House for a rally today at 12 noon. Dan, Kevin Zeese and Retired Col. Ann Wright are board members of the Bradley Manning Advocacy Fund, and they will be calling on President Obama to end Manning’s abusive conditions at Quantico.

Other speakers include Elliott Adams, Chantelle Bateman, Brian Becker, Medea Benjamin, Zachary Choate, Ryan Endicott, Ayesha Fleary, Chris Hedges, Kathy Kelly, Mike Malloy, Michael McPhearson, Caneisha Mills, Ralph Nader and Debra Sweet. I’m really looking forward to it, and if you’re in the area I hope you’ll come down and join us.

I’ll be live tweeting the event. You can follow me here.

Tomorrow we’ll be at Quantico for the demonstration, and FDL will be live streaming the event. You can find details about everything that is going on this weekend at Stop These Wars.org, and sign up for tomorrow’s Quantico rally here.

Howie P.S.: This talk by Ellsberg is not an easy sound bite, but well worth your time. Here's the video of Ellsberg getting arrested later @ the White House.

Sunday, October 24, 2010

Glenn Greenwald on "The Nixonian henchmen of today: at the NYT"

Glenn Greenwald:
Yesterday, Assange walked out of an interview with CNN, which he thought had been arranged to discuss the significance of the Iraq War revelations, because the CNN "reporter" seemed interested in asking only about petty, vapid rumors about Assange himself, not the substance of the leaks. The Nation's Greg Mitchell summarized that interview this way: "Assange to CNN: 'Do you want to talk about deaths of 104,000 people or my personal life?'" CNN's answer could not have been clearer: the latter, definitely.

But the low point of this smear campaign was led by The New York Times' John Burns, who authored a sleazy hit piece on Assange -- filled with every tawdry, scurrilous tabloid rumor about him -- that was (and still is) prominently featured in the NYT, competing for attention with the stories about the leaked documents themselves, and often receiving more attention. Here's the current iteration of the front page of the NYT website, with the Assange story receiving top billing:

MORE...

Monday, July 26, 2010

Democracy Now! Covers the Afghan WikiLeaks Data Dump (with audio/video)

Democracy Now! with audio/video:
It’s one of the biggest leaks in US military history. More than 90,000 internal records of US military actions in Afghanistan over the past six years have been published by the whistleblower website WikiLeaks. The documents provide a devastating portrait of the war in Afghanistan, revealing how coalition forces have killed hundreds of civilians in unreported incidents, how a secret black ops special forces unit hunts down targets for assassination or detention without trial, how Taliban attacks have soared and how Pakistan is fueling the insurgency. We host a roundtable discussion with independent British journalist Stephen Grey, Pentagon Papers whistleblower, Daniel Ellsberg, former State Department official in Afghanistan, Matthew Hoh, independent journalist Rick Rowley and investigative historian Gareth Porter.

Thursday, June 17, 2010

Daniel Ellsberg and Glenn Greenwald on Whistleblowers and Wikileaks (with audio/video)

Democracy Now! with video/audio:
Pentagon investigators are reportedly still searching for Wikileaks co-founder Julian Assange, who helped release a classified US military video showing a US helicopter gunship indiscriminately firing on Iraqi civilians. The US military recently arrested Army Specialist Bradley Manning, who may have passed on the video to Wikileaks. Manning’s arrest and the hunt for Assange have put the spotlight on the Obama administration’s campaign against whistleblowers and leakers of classified information. We speak to Daniel Ellsberg, who’s leaking of the Pentagon Papers has made him perhaps the nation’s most famous whistleblower; Birgitta Jónsdóttir, a member of the Icelandic Parliament who has collaborated with Wikileaks and drafted a new Icelandic law protecting investigative journalists; and Glenn Greenwald, political and legal blogger for Salon.com. [includes rush transcript–partial]

Thursday, June 10, 2010

Ellsberg: "'Obama Deceives the Public"

Daniel Ellsberg (Spiegel Online):
Daniel Ellsberg, legendary leaker of the "Pentagon Papers" in 1971, still has a bone to pick with the White House. In an interview with SPIEGEL ONLINE, the 79-year-old peace activist accuses President Obama of betraying his election promises -- in Iraq, in Afghanistan and on civil liberties.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Mr. Ellsberg, you're a hero and an icon of the left. But we hear you're not too happy with President Obama anymore.

Daniel Ellsberg: I voted for him and I will probably vote for him again, as opposed to the Republicans. But I believe his administration in some key aspects is nothing other than the third term of the Bush administration.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: How so?

Ellsberg: I think Obama is continuing the worst of the Bush administration in terms of civil liberties, violations of the constitution and the wars in the Middle East.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: For example?

Ellsberg: Take Obama's explicit pledge in his State of the Union speech to remove "all" United States troops from Iraq by the end of 2011. That's a total lie. I believe that's totally false. I believe he knows that's totally false. It won't be done. I expect that the US will have, indefinitely, a residual force of at least 30,000 US troops in Iraq. MORE....


Wednesday, February 17, 2010

Daniel Ellsberg on Obama (with video)


OpEdNews with video (02:33) of the trailer for the feature film "The Most Dangerous Man in America Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers":
Looking at the Republicans, I can hardly regret my vote and support for him, and I will surely vote for him in 2012. But not because I expect from him the change we need: in the absence of a yet-nonexistent citizens' movement that will change the political environment to which he responds.

Certainly in style, and in some respects in policy, he's far from being a Bush-type Republican. But he's just as far from what we need as he is from McCain and Palin.
Howie P.S.: This is from "Conversation with Daniel Ellsberg: Evaluating Obama So Far" by Joan Brunwasser. The film, which has been nominated for a 2010 Academy Award, opens in Seattle on March 12.

Wednesday, September 16, 2009

WHISTLEBLOW THIS: Ellsberg and John Dean on "the permanent national security state"

Danny Schecter (News Dissector):
On the basis of 30 years of study, of the Pentagon Papers and other documents at the Rand Corporation and Pentagon, and on the basis of his two tours as Marine in Vietnam, Ellsberg believs there is a permanent national security state that “captures” politicians like Barack Obama. John Dean seemed to agree and pointed to reforms that Obama embraced before taking office and now has many “second thoughts” about. This has led to back-sliding on various “national Security” reforms in the areas of government surveillance, release of torture videos, freedom of information, account ability, transparency etc.

These guys had seen it all before and now say they say they are seeing it again.

Friday, August 10, 2007

"Daniel Ellsberg: A Personal Vision for Cindy Sheehan's Campaign"

Daniel Ellsberg (BUZZFLASH):
[Remarks of Daniel Ellsberg at a press conference August 9, 2007 at which Cindy Sheehan announced her independent candidacy for the 8th Congressional District of California, an office now held by Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House.]

I don't speak for Cindy Sheehan -- whom I admire unreservedly -- or for her campaign. When I say "we" in what follows, I'm really just giving my own perspective on this campaign, as one of her supporters.
I see this campaign as aiming much higher than putting Cindy Sheehan in Congress in 2009. Well before that time, we aim to help restore our Constitution, to end a war and avert starting a new one, and to remove from power, two officials -- George W. Bush and Richard Cheney -- who block those objectives before they can do more harm in their remaining months in office.

That's an ambitious project; but there's a clear path to achieving it. We will work to change public awareness and, as a result, Nancy Pelosi's policies as Speaker of the House well before the election, by revealing to the public real alternatives to the courses she and the Democrats have followed so far, and demonstrating the breadth and strength of public support for those alternatives.

The truth is that Democrats, and even Republicans, can do much better than they have been doing, under Pelosi's leadership in the House, to protect our freedoms and our security. In this campaign, we will publicize specifics of what can and should be done, and let the public tell the politicians which approach they want.

One essential demand is for Pelosi to encourage, rather than to block, Congressional investigations of past and ongoing Administration deception, unwisdom, illegality, and unconstitutionality in pursuing an aggressive war and in curtailing our rights. Such investigations, calling forth testimony under oath of current and former officials, many of whom are eager to tell the truth at last, as well as demonstrating continued Administration stonewalling will almost surely lead to what does not yet exist: irresistible pressure from a belatedly informed public for the impeachment and removal of Bush and Cheney.

Further, we need Pelosi's leadership in rescinding the unconstitutional parts -- which will not leave much -- of the PATRIOT Acts, the Military Commissions Act, and the recent, outrageous legislation purporting to legalize warrantless wiretaps and data mining. And -- absolutely essential to ending our war in Iraq, ever -- public pressure is needed to demand that Congress defund our indefinite occupation, providing funds only for the orderly, safe withdrawal of all our troops, contractors, and bases on an announced timetable.

If this campaign can help bring about even the first of these, it will also, almost incidentally, put Cindy Sheehan within reach of success in the election. This is, in fact, a historic campaign opportunity, exploiting an opening unique in American politics. At this moment, Cindy appears to face insuperable odds, opposing without party support, a powerful, heavily funded incumbent. But we aim to change that. All we are asking is for Nancy Pelosi to do what she should: to uphold her oath of office, which is not to obey a Commander-in-Chief or to enlarge a Democratic majority but to uphold and defend the Constitution.

If we can induce her to do that, then a year from now, Cindy Sheehan should be running for an open seat, or against a brand-new incumbent appointed by our Republican governor. Nancy Pelosi, third in line for succession when Bush and Cheney are impeached and removed, will be in the White House. That will, as it happens, leave an open field for Cindy.

So you see, it's nothing personal for us. After all, as representatives of big business go, Nancy Pelosi is better than most. We don't aim to kick her out of politics; we aim to kick her upstairs. And there's a bonus: President Pelosi as a write-in candidate in November. She's far from ideal, from the point of view of members of this campaign, but for Democrats, we could do a lot worse. Off the record, some of us see this as the best strategy for keeping Hillary out of the White House without letting a Republican in.

So there it is: a vision for 2009 that can evoke some real enthusiasm: Cindy in the House, Pelosi in the White House, the U.S. out of Iraq, our Constitution back, and Bush and Cheney under criminal indictment.