Daniel Ellsberg speaks. . . .

I am linking to RSN’s interview with Mr. Ellsberg, whom I had the honor to meet in June 2011 at the Progressive Democrats of America convention in Cleveland, Ohio.
I am tempted to cut and paste the entire article here, as it is so filled with wisdom.  Instead, here is the link (http://bit.ly/ZZa8My), and I will select the following paragraph:
“There’s a very general impression that Bradley Manning simply dumped out everything that he had access to without any discrimination, and that’s very misleading or mistaken on several counts. He was in a facility that dealt mainly in information higher than top secret in classification. He put out nothing that was higher than secret. [Information he published] was available to hundreds of thousands of people. He had access to material that was much higher than top secret, much more sensitive. He chose not to put any of that out.”
And this exchange:
“TL: If you were in Bradley Manning’s situation, would you have released as much information as he did?”
“DE: I probably would not put out materials that I hadn’t read. But now we have three years of experience with essentially no harm, and a great deal of good. [Former Tunisian president] Ben Ali, I think, would still be in Tunisia. I don’t think you could have counted on the New York Times having put out the Tunisian material that Le Monde chose to put out. That was critical in bringing down Ben Ali. That led to bringing down [former Egyptian president Hosni] Mubarak. Looking at that altogether, with that experience, I think his decision to put out a great raft of secret material was justified and I would probably do it myself now if I had the chance.”
O.K., one more:
“I believe there’s strong reason to believe that without Bradley Manning’s revelations, some 20,000 to 30,000 troops would be in Iraq right now. That had been Obama’s plan. He was negotiating to that end. But the disclosure by Bradley Manning of a cable that disclosed that the State Department was aware of an atrocity that we had officially denied, and was neither investigating it further nor prosecuting it, made it politically impossible for the prime minister in Iraq to allow Americans to stay in Iraq with immunity from Iraqi courts.”

About these ads

2 Responses to Daniel Ellsberg speaks. . . .

  1. cpmondello says:

    Basically, if Manning did not do what he did, more Americans and Iraqis would be dead, along with more incidents in the USA like the Boston Marathon bombing in the USA, (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Marathon_bombings), and the killing of the British Soilder (http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/26/world/europe/uk-terror-arrest) along with many others we could only imagine would have taken place!!!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 573 other followers