General Discussion

ucrdem

(15,720 posts)

148. Understandable. But:

Thu Jul 11, 2013, 02:22 AM

Jul 2013

No I don't remember many details of the 1971 episode, but I do remember the Watergate hearings of 1973, as I happened to be laid up for a couple of weeks that summer as a result of a bike accident and watched part of the hearings on TV. Ellsberg's role in that drama was rather minimal. Basically he was a victim of having his psychiatrist's office broken into. Apparently they didn't find his file, however.

As for the Pentagon Papers, I wound up answering you in another thread, but the long and short of it is, we know more now than we did in 1971, and according to Wikipedia the Pentagon Papers were only declassified and released two years ago, in 2011. Before that we more or less depended on the NYT and other media to tell us what was in them.

Now let me ask you a question: have you read James Douglass' The Unspeakable? Because his view of Kennedy's role in Vietnam generally and the the Diem assassination particularly is entirely different than yours, which is essentially the standard GOP narrative Ellsberg helped to establish.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

164 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Daniel Ellsberg's Downfall: A Trifecta of Shilling, Conspiracy Theories, and Lies - People's View [View all] flamingdem Jul 2013 OP

Truth Out on Wapo article: Ellsberg: Snowden Was Right to Flee the US flamingdem Jul 2013 #1

Hilariously, the guy who wrote this tripe sports an ACLU t-shirt. Tierra_y_Libertad Jul 2013 #2

An extreme front group for what or whom? Luminous Animal Jul 2013 #3

Its a front group for Glen Greenwald's self-fellating, libertarian agenda. phleshdef Jul 2013 #7

Hahaha! Like I said. No clue as to what a front group is. Luminous Animal Jul 2013 #8

They're calling it a "front group" because it sounds ominous... joeybee12 Jul 2013 #12

Read your own posted definition. phleshdef Jul 2013 #19

And what pet projects of Glen[sic]'s would those be? Luminous Animal Jul 2013 #21

The usual, NSA, Bradley Manning, Big brother is coming to get you, etc. phleshdef Jul 2013 #31

Any proof of your accusations? Luminous Animal Jul 2013 #45

I never said they had ties to Rand Paul. phleshdef Jul 2013 #59

Could you link to an example of Alex Jones, Rand Paul type of material? Luminous Animal Jul 2013 #61

They met using remote means in January, its not a false rumor. phleshdef Jul 2013 #65

In other words, Wikileaks Lite. randome Jul 2013 #67

Yes. Exactly. Couldn't have said it better. phleshdef Jul 2013 #70

I am communicating with you but I have never met you. Luminous Animal Jul 2013 #135

Hilarious. Bluenorthwest Jul 2013 #23

"Front group" harkens back to the 50s and red-baiting days of Joe HardTimes99 Jul 2013 #63

Your hyper sexual auto erotic themes today are not really the best. Bluenorthwest Jul 2013 #10

Says the guy that spends 99% of his posts trying to hijack the topic and make it about gay marriage. phleshdef Jul 2013 #13

+1...nt SidDithers Jul 2013 #16

Oh, so advocacy for equality bothers you, and semi pornographic comments about auto erotic Bluenorthwest Jul 2013 #18

No. Hijacking topics that have nothing to do with the topic of equality bothers me. phleshdef Jul 2013 #24

So stop Hijacking this thread. You should link when you accuse you are utterly mischaracterizing Bluenorthwest Jul 2013 #29

You are a piece of work. phleshdef Jul 2013 #33

Well you hijacked this thread with 'auto fellatio' comments, and that was not the first such post of Bluenorthwest Jul 2013 #46

That wasn't a hijack. I was speaking directly to a subject in the OP. phleshdef Jul 2013 #51

"I'll do what I wanna do." ohheckyeah Jul 2013 #144

Yep. That was a dispicable post. Luminous Animal Jul 2013 #26

What I notice is that the OP does not respond at all, instead a tight group of others come Bluenorthwest Jul 2013 #36

Did it ever occur to you that maybe the OP hasn't been back to his/her computer in the past few hrs? phleshdef Jul 2013 #43

Of course. Did it ever occur to you that the OP might be the author of the blog posted? Bluenorthwest Jul 2013 #48

No, the OP is female, the author of the blog is male. phleshdef Jul 2013 #52

I think people are confusing me with flamingdem Jul 2013 #57

Hyperboblic mendacity. Prove your assertion if you can. You can't, so you won't. Bluenorthwest Jul 2013 #32

I have tremendous respect for anyone who can self-fellate and still accomplish anything. n/t hootinholler Jul 2013 #79

+1. Americans for Prosperity pushing Koch industries' agenda think Jul 2013 #101

Christ, not Spandan again. WorseBeforeBetter Jul 2013 #4

lol. You post the source in your op title like it's supposed to mean something cali Jul 2013 #5

^obsessive...eom Kolesar Jul 2013 #11

what or who is obsessive? cali Jul 2013 #14

I wasn't aware that there was an established standard for DU subject lines Kolesar Jul 2013 #17

lol and I never said there was. cali Jul 2013 #37

i've noticed that when people have no real argument, they turn to personal remarks & armchair HiPointDem Jul 2013 #41

That particular one rarely (maybe never?) contributes more than empty snark. (no text) Quantess Jul 2013 #89

It does mean something. winter is coming Jul 2013 #77

Who is this mediocre McCarthyite you are quoting? Front Group? Seriously? Does he know what Bluenorthwest Jul 2013 #6

It just struck me: Maybe the op is quoting the op. cali Jul 2013 #15

I do believe that to be the case. Bluenorthwest Jul 2013 #20

I think you might be on to something there, Cali. Tierra_y_Libertad Jul 2013 #22

This OP poster never responds but the same set of 'volunteers' responds for him. Bluenorthwest Jul 2013 #25

i think the bog is a front group. HiPointDem Jul 2013 #42

This might be the funniest thing you ever wrote on DU2 or DU3!!!!!! nt msanthrope Jul 2013 #54

+1 flamingdem Jul 2013 #55

Your speculation on someone's privacy--i.e., the OP's identity, is quite ironic in a Snowden thread. msanthrope Jul 2013 #27

why? do explain why you think it's ironic cuz I'm missing that entirely. cali Jul 2013 #30

I am sure. nt msanthrope Jul 2013 #35

so why won't you explain it to poor stupid ol' me? cali Jul 2013 #40

After a day of researching irony, it looks like she or he has come up empty. Luminous Animal Jul 2013 #123

You BBI! Rex Jul 2013 #157

"Where the fuck is his evidence to back up his accusations?" CakeGrrl Jul 2013 #95

Mmmm, Spamden. nt Union Scribe Jul 2013 #9

Again with this extremist website, which is often the source of anti-left propaganda. The author sabrina 1 Jul 2013 #28

+100 nt Mojorabbit Jul 2013 #60

The other day I had one of these conservative "dems" answer me with a link to heritage.org Dragonfli Jul 2013 #139

More character assassination Sanity Claws Jul 2013 #34

It's all they have. kenny blankenship Jul 2013 #39

It's the tried and true tactic of a McCarthyite! n/t markpkessinger Jul 2013 #50

DU rec...nt SidDithers Jul 2013 #38

Predictable. Bonobo Jul 2013 #146

Whoa. This thread. randome Jul 2013 #44

Figaro! flamingdem Jul 2013 #56

Desperate much? n/t markpkessinger Jul 2013 #47

I am more confused everyday by this whole thing olddots Jul 2013 #49

so the character assassination has moved on to Ellsberg.... mike_c Jul 2013 #53

Snowden/Greenwald opponents had been trying not to smear Ellsberg, an American hero Blue Bike Jul 2013 #58

I think they literally can't stop themselves. kenny blankenship Jul 2013 #64

This OP has reached stratospheric levels of pitiful. marmar Jul 2013 #62

Just pitiful Aerows Jul 2013 #69

At this point they're beyond being labeled 'apologists' . . . markpkessinger Jul 2013 #72

Results of DU jury Katashi_itto Jul 2013 #80

Thanks for posting this . . . markpkessinger Jul 2013 #81

Agree! Katashi_itto Jul 2013 #87

I love this post. Bluenorthwest Jul 2013 #140

K & R Scurrilous Jul 2013 #66

This has to be among the most shameless posts I've ever seen on DU . . . markpkessinger Jul 2013 #68

Wow, who knew Ellsberg sat on this Board with Greenwald even though he Cha Jul 2013 #71

Just read this comment about his priorities flamingdem Jul 2013 #76

It is kind of sad. Major Hogwash Jul 2013 #94

I need a shower and lots of soap. I just sifted through that pile of dog shit blog cali Jul 2013 #73

Amen to that! n/t markpkessinger Jul 2013 #74

You forgot the "Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of....?" part. Tierra_y_Libertad Jul 2013 #75

Mustn't forget that! n/t markpkessinger Jul 2013 #78

Two weeks before the Nov. 2012 election, Ellsberg called for Obama's IMPEACHMENT: ucrdem Jul 2013 #82

Ouch. That's nasty. flamingdem Jul 2013 #83

Brother CATO and brother RAND backing brother Booz-Allen, now there's a surprise ucrdem Jul 2013 #86

Throw in Walt.. flamingdem Jul 2013 #88

yep ucrdem Jul 2013 #92

Aha! Full Freaking Disclosure.. Ellsberg has found his stupid Cha Jul 2013 #84

Yep. Ellsberg is a hero to the Infowars.com crowd it seems. . . ucrdem Jul 2013 #91

The holy trinity of woo. nt AllINeedIsCoffee Jul 2013 #93

Who knew? flamingdem Jul 2013 #104

Yet, in the same article, he's urging people in swing states to vote for him. Tierra_y_Libertad Jul 2013 #96

He makes it crystal clear that "I don't support Obama" and he "does not intend to vote for" him. nt ucrdem Jul 2013 #105

So? Tierra_y_Libertad Jul 2013 #114

you are an unbelieveable partisan burnodo Jul 2013 #98

So you're saying I should concentrate on the messenger. Iggo Jul 2013 #85

Career activist trying desperately to stay relevant. nt AllINeedIsCoffee Jul 2013 #90

Will chain myself to Whitehouse fence for food rent-a-radical. n/t Scurrilous Jul 2013 #132

"Career activist trying desperately to stay relevant" sibelian Jul 2013 #164

Daniel Ellsberg has more credibility than you will ever have burnodo Jul 2013 #97

See post #82 flamingdem Jul 2013 #99

let me try again burnodo Jul 2013 #106

Everyone who criticizes the intelligence services turns out to be real creeps - every time! Douglas Carpenter Jul 2013 #100

I just found out upthread tha Democracy Now! is woo! What the fuck! Luminous Animal Jul 2013 #102

Well Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzales have been right-wing shills for a long time Douglas Carpenter Jul 2013 #103

You're catching on. nt ucrdem Jul 2013 #108

"Well Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzales have been right-wing shills for a long time" marmar Jul 2013 #126

Everyone.......every time....none of our business. snappyturtle Jul 2013 #138

Well well well. The Pentagon Papers end at 1967. Nixon was elected in 1968. ucrdem Jul 2013 #107

In Feb1971 Ellsberg discussed the study with NYT Excerpts started being published on Jun 13, 1971 Douglas Carpenter Jul 2013 #109

Nixon won reelection in 1972 with the fourth-largest margin of victory in history ucrdem Jul 2013 #110

I fail to see how Mr. Ellsberg's work helped Nixon win reelection Douglas Carpenter Jul 2013 #111

Think about it. nt ucrdem Jul 2013 #112

of for crying out loud!! you are just pulling my leg, right? Douglas Carpenter Jul 2013 #113

C'mon, Douglas. Think really really really hard and you too can find bliss Luminous Animal Jul 2013 #119

actually Daniel Elllsberg campaigned night and day for McGovern in 1972 Douglas Carpenter Jul 2013 #120

Aw well. Back to the drawing board! Luminous Animal Jul 2013 #122

Quoth Danny. Cool story. nt ucrdem Jul 2013 #124

LOL. The papers were released in '71. Nixon was president, not LBJ. Tierra_y_Libertad Jul 2013 #116

No kidding. He was also getting himself reelected. nt ucrdem Jul 2013 #117

And you have the gall to accuse Democracy Now of woo?? I thought I had HardTimes99 Jul 2013 #118

You don't happen to write Texas textbooks, do you? Luminous Animal Jul 2013 #121

LOL. marmar Jul 2013 #129

LOL bvar22 Jul 2013 #158

How old are you, ucrdem? Jack Rabbit Jul 2013 #141

You go! Bonobo Jul 2013 #145

Thank you, for straightening that mess out. Waiting For Everyman Jul 2013 #147

Understandable. But: ucrdem Jul 2013 #148

I've never heard of James Douglass or his book Jack Rabbit Jul 2013 #159

Yes, that's an excellent review and a commendable summary. ucrdem Jul 2013 #162

Thank you, Jack Rabbit!! Thank you so much! n/t FourScore Jul 2013 #153

Have you no sense of decency, madam? At long last, HardTimes99 Jul 2013 #115

+1000 n/t markpkessinger Jul 2013 #127

Have you read the comments? They even mock Meteor Blades from DKos. This is full-on right wing BS! FourScore Jul 2013 #125

There was a good reason why Spanden C (author of the linked article) was banned from Kos. Luminous Animal Jul 2013 #133

Perhaps it's written right wing BS by banned from kos Autumn Jul 2013 #155

This is wrong, Flamingdem. You should delete it. last1standing Jul 2013 #128

Click the tiny x in the tiny box ucrdem Jul 2013 #130

Thanks. I recently joined in 2001. last1standing Jul 2013 #131

Works wonders. I just hid your call-out thread for example. ucrdem Jul 2013 #134

Glad I could help. last1standing Jul 2013 #136

Any time. There's an equally useful feature called ignore. ucrdem Jul 2013 #137

The Ad hominems keep coming here, but so few Cleita Jul 2013 #142

Why link to a blog post that uses racism to lay out its argument? xocet Jul 2013 #143

This gets my vote for Le Taz Hot Jul 2013 #149

Wow, the author is an idiot and their wording shows their obvious bias/hatred. Just dumb. The Straight Story Jul 2013 #150

Dude, that is fucking AWESOME MannyGoldstein Jul 2013 #151

LOL n/t FourScore Jul 2013 #154

So now we link to right wing rag sites here on DU and attempt to lend credibility to their BS? NorthCarolina Jul 2013 #152

This kind of Right Wing Smear Attacks are what the UnRec was for. bvar22 Jul 2013 #156

This is disgusting. Marr Jul 2013 #160

Hmm... Attacking the messengers tends to kill the messages. ananda Jul 2013 #161

Freedom of the Press Foundation Major Hogwash Jul 2013 #163