Officers of the United States Government should be on trial -- not PFC Bradley Manning.

[leveymg]

294. Sid, Ellsberg actually says the term "data dump" . . ." is the opposite of the truth."

Last edited Wed Jun 5, 2013, 02:09 PM - Edit history (1)

Ellsberg says his circumstances were somewhat different, his having read all the top-secret documents given to him from the Brookings copy. But, as he admits, his decision to not read the more voluminous less classified documents may have been a mistake, as he may have missed some of the more important information.

In the end, most of the less classified materials were also released. The original Pentagon Papers published omitted one-third of the 48 volumes that is now available from the National Archives as of the declassification in 2011.

Ellsberg and Manning both know what are typically in State Dept. Cables, and so now does anyone who cares to read some of them. They're country reports and assessments, rather like reading the back pages of a longish NYT article, not operational plans for military or intelligence operations. Both made judgment calls based upon what they understood to be the risks versus the potential benefits. Ellsberg's decision was somewhat better informed, but he agrees what Manning did was whistle-blowing and that it was justified by the circumstances. I'd say, without completely agreeing with either, that Daniel Ellsberg not Sid Dithers is an authority on the subject.