Western Rifle Shooters Association

Do not give in to Evil, but proceed ever more boldly against it

Sunday, February 21, 2010

Where Are The New Ellsbergs?

From Wikipedia:

...[Daniel Ellsberg] attended Harvard University, graduating with a Ph.D. in Economics in 1962 in which he described a paradox in decision theory now known as the Ellsberg paradox. He graduated first in a class of almost 1,100 lieutenants at the Marine Corps Basic School in Quantico, Virginia, and served as an officer in the Marine Corps for two years. During this time, he deployed to Vietnam as a company commander. After his discharge, he became an analyst at the RAND Corporation.

A committed Cold Warrior, he served in the Pentagon from August 1964[1] under Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara (and, in fact, was on duty on the evening of the Gulf of Tonkin incident, reporting the incident to McNamara). He then served for two years in Vietnam working for General Edward Lansdale as a civilian in the State Department, and became convinced that the Vietnam War was unwinnable. He further believed that nearly everyone in the State and Defense Departments felt, as he did, that the United States had no realistic chance of achieving victory in Vietnam, but that political considerations prevented them from saying so publicly. McNamara and others continued to state in press interviews that victory was "just around the corner." As the war continued to escalate, Ellsberg became deeply disillusioned.

After returning from Vietnam, Ellsberg went back to work at the RAND Corporation. As a Vietnam expert, he was invited, in 1967, to contribute to a top-secret study of classified documents regarding the conduct of the Vietnam War that had been commissioned by Defense Secretary McNamara. These documents, completed in 1968, later became known collectively as the Pentagon Papers. Because he held an extremely high-level security clearance, Ellsberg was one of very few individuals who had access to the complete set of documents. They revealed that the government had knowledge, early on, that the war would not likely be won, and that continuing the war would lead to many times more casualties than was ever admitted publicly. Further, the papers showed that high-ranking officials had a deep cynicism toward the public, as well as disregard for the loss of life and injury suffered by soldiers and civilians...


From the Wiki page on the Pentagon Papers:

Leak

...The study was classified as top secret and was not intended for publication. Contributor Daniel Ellsberg, however, turned over most of the Pentagon Papers to New York Times reporter Neil Sheehan, with Ellsberg's friend Anthony Russo assisting in their copying. The Times began publishing excerpts in a series of articles on June 13, 1971.[2] Street protests, political controversy and lawsuits followed.

To ensure the possibility of public debate about the content of the papers, on June 29, US Senator Mike Gravel (then Democrat, Alaska) entered 4,100 pages of the Papers to the record of his Subcommittee on Public Buildings and Grounds. These portions of the Papers were subsequently published by Beacon Press, the publishing arm of the Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations.[3]

Article I, Section 6 of the United States Constitution provides that "for any Speech or Debate in either House, [a Senator or Representative] shall not be questioned in any other Place", thus the Senator could not be prosecuted for anything said on the Senate floor, and, by extension, for anything entered to the Congressional Record, allowing the Papers to be publicly read without threat of a treason trial and conviction.

Later, Ellsberg said the documents "demonstrated unconstitutional behavior by a succession of presidents, the violation of their oath and the violation of the oath of every one of their subordinates".[4] He added that he leaked the papers to end what he perceived to be "a wrongful war".[4]

[edit] Impact

The most damaging revelation in the papers was that the U.S. had deliberately expanded its war with carpet bombing of Cambodia and Laos, coastal raids on North Vietnam, and Marine Corps attacks, none of which had been reported by media in the US.[5] The revelations widened the credibility gap between the US government and the people, hurting President Richard Nixon's war effort.

The papers also revealed that four administrations, from Truman to Johnson, had misled the public regarding their intentions. For example, Johnson had decided to expand the war while promising "we seek no wider war" during his 1964 presidential campaign. In another example, a memo from the Defense Department under Johnson listed the reasons for American persistence:
"70 %-To avoid a humiliating U.S. defeat...
20 %-To keep [South Vietnam] (and the adjacent) territory from Chinese hands.
10 %-To permit the people of [South Vietnam] to enjoy a better, freer way of life.
ALSO-To emerge from the crisis without unacceptable taint from methods used.
NOT-To 'help a friend' "
[6]

Another controversy was that President Johnson sent combat troops to Vietnam by July 17, 1965, before pretending to consult his advisors on July 21–July 27, per the cable stating that "Deputy Secretary of Defense Cyrus Vance informs McNamara that President had approved 34 Battalion Plan and will try to push through reserve call-up."[7] In 1988, when that cable was declassified, it revealed "there was a continuing uncertainty as to [Johnson's] final decision, which would have to await Secretary McNamara's recommendation and the views of Congressional leaders, particularly the views of Senator [Richard] Russell"[8]...

For anyone interested, here is an online version of the actual Pentagon Papers.

*******************************************

What does any of this ancient Vietnam-era crap have to do with the crises faced today by our country?

Just this -- Ellsberg was a creature of the US government's system, yet when confronted with the duplicity and deceit of our country's leadership, he took -- as a solitary individual -- decisive action against that evil.

As this country lurches along its deteriorating path in the greatest long-term threat to American liberty since the 1861-1865 Recent Unpleasantness, where are today's Ellsbergs?

I am both unsuprised and yet still appalled by the law enforcement reactions to Mike's recent "Choose Whom You Will Serve" essay. I worked with enough local, state, and Federal law enforcement types during my career to know which way the bulk of those folks will turn come Der Tag.

On that large majority, I will waste no more breath. They have made their choices and so must live with the consequences for themselves and their families, as must I.

But as to the remaining LEOs who do not use their badge and their position as a club against their fellow citizens, I must ask:

If Ellsberg had the courage to do what he did, why haven't you done the same?

For those of you who work in totalitarian jurisdictions such as California, New York, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Connecticut, Maryland, and the District of Columbia:

How can you claim to be a supporter of the Constitution when your very job is to enforce unconstitutional laws, such as those against firearms possession?

You continue to enforce those unconstitutional laws, yet you hold yourselves out to be different than the "Only Ones" -- your rougher, more violent, more criminal brethren in blue.

How can that be? Are you truly any different?

Try reading some Thoreau and King, then ask yourself the same questions again.

On another topic, which pertains to all of you, regardless of jurisdiction:

You either know and/or could find out what the government plans are for crushing civil disorder. You either know or could learn how your jurisdiction plans to infringe on human rights in order to "quell the disturbances." You either know or could learn about how the US military will operate in conjunction with local, state, and Federal law enforcement, as well as foreign troops, so as to protect your true masters -- not the people of the United States, but the bureaucrats and elected so-called "representatives" of the Government.

You know those "emergency plans" exist.

You know that you could obtain access to those plans and leak them to the outside world -- just as Ellsberg did nearly forty years ago -- to both sound the alarm and to prove just what kind of lying gobs of protoplasm actually are running this country.

Yet you do nothing of the sort.

It's time to man up, amigos -- if you are in fact any different than the majority of your thuggish peers.

It's time for you to start doing something about stopping the madness of an ever-increasingly militarized police state being erected across this nation.

While it's nice to hear you promise not to do bad things to the non-.gov Americans in the future, what about getting those unconstitutional plans out into the public domain today and actually prevent those bad things from happening at all?

Have you as much courage as Daniel Ellsberg had?

Man up, sheepdogs.

Man up.

13 Comments:

Blogger chris horton said...

Excellent CA! Great Post!! Thanks!

CIII

February 21, 2010 at 1:31 AM  
Blogger Mayberry said...

I've been sounding the alarm for almost two years. And in that two years, I've been attacked, verbally abused, and painted as a "nut job conspiracy theorist". That's ok, they can't say I didn't warn them... Meanwhile, I prepare myself, and continue to expose the police, the government at all levels, and statists in general for what they really are...

February 21, 2010 at 1:43 AM  
Anonymous H__ said...

Some have manned up and leaked info. The MIAC Report was leaked by a cop in Missouri who was a Ron Paul supporter and got pissed when he saw Ron Paul supporters listed in the repoprt as potential terrorists. Then, the DHS Extremist Lexicon was leaked by a Federal officer (so a little bird tpld me).

Some who know things have and will leak info.

But there are many rank and file who do not know and really can't find out the true smoking gun info. I think you err in presuming the average street cop or field agent has access to such plans. Why would they, ,anymore than the average grunt GI knows the top secret plans of the Generals.

You quoted wikipedia saying Ellsberg had the very highest security clearances. He knew shit the grunts dying in Vietnam did not know. Same is likely true of the insider, secret plans domestic. Certainly there are some with VERRY high clearances who know the plans. And your criticism is certainly fair as to them. But it would be silly to presume that the rank and file have access to that intel. Your presumption that they could find out is flawed when it comes to the truly top secret crap. There are those who would be an Ellsberg if they had the intel capacity and access of 0Ellsberg - count on it. But the internal enemies in high places are not dumb. They too operate on a need to know basis and are careful to keep the smoking gun bad stuff out of reach of the rank and file who are not proven "company men.". Just as the public at large are treated like mushrooms (kept in the dark and fed bullshit) so are the rank and file troops.

However, there ARE general officers who claim to be patriots who indeed DO have the ability to find out and your rebuke and admonition certainly does apply to them and to their counterparts in federal law enforcement. As to them it is spot on

But wirh those down at the bottom of the totem pole, they are likely kept in the dark as to the real purposes of the "civil affairs" traing they are undergoing.

There are good people there and they are on our side. They certainly should leak what they know and many of them do. But they rarely have access to smoking gun memos or other hard evidence and can just pass on info on training they are doing that set's off alarm bells. Since the training is always masked and presented as being for some benign purpose, all they can give is their hunch that something wicked this way comes. They can read the writing on the wall and put some of the pieces of the puzzle together, but they don't have the blueprints to hand over. Thus we are left with unsubstantiate rumors and hunches and tidbits of reliable but limited view snapshots of training and infrastructure and logistics prep that gives us the willies but no modern Pentagon Papers - yet. At least not in the hands of Captains and NCOs and beat cops

And you can bet that the higher ups are smart enough to keep it that way, especially since they know for a fact that there are many Oath Keepers among their NCOs.


But where are the Patriot generals and police brass? That is the real question. Those are the potential Ellsbergs. Where are the modern George Washingtons?

Maybe the powers that be are too clever to promote anyone who has not been sufficiently vetted for spinelessness or agreement with their place in the New America and new order


H__

February 21, 2010 at 2:51 PM  
Blogger Concerned American said...

H:

agree with your points. The refinement that should be in there is "share all you know, when you know it".

The reality of bureaucratic life is that reports for the Big People are frequently seen or are safely accessible by the little people. My almost 25 years of professional life have proven that to my satisfaction. The point of the essay is urge those who see things to understand that they have a moral obligation to share publicly what they do see.

Will there be a leak on the scale of the Pentagon Papers?

Doubtful.

Will the FEMA plans to close Snoqualmie Pass so as box in metro Seattle be publicized?

One hopes........

February 21, 2010 at 3:13 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

As a retired CA LEO, I can tell you there will be few Ellsbergs, if any, in my former state. People become public employees primarily for the job security and pension. No one is going to jeopardize that. When the meltdown does occur, the LEOS are going to be the kings(and queens) of the hill. They will still get their money, and they will have unlimited power. The fedgov has the ability to cross-designate state and local cops as Deputy United States Marshals. This would put them all under the control of Barry and Rahm. Remember "stroke of the pen, law of the land"? If this is to change,we have to look at our individual communities and see how the top LEO in our county(the Sheriff) stands politically. The County Sheriffs of America will initially be the canaries in the coal mine. Keep your eyes and ears open, my brothers and sisters.

February 21, 2010 at 3:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Right on. Itis high time the guys who claim to be "on our side" step up and do the right thing.

It is not just enough to talk the game of "we will not obey unlawful orders" The orders are out there. The constitution is in shreds now. The 10 point platform of unlawful orders put forward by Rhodes and the Oathkeepers is not enough.
Start to turn in the dirty cops. Start to demonstrate with clear actions that you are with the people not the goons in government. Refuse to go after "tax protesters". Refuse to execute "dynamic entry raids". Refuse to harass gun owners who are doing nothing unlawful.

Let us see that we can "know you by your deeds".
TALK IS CHEAP!
IT IS TIME TO DO THE RIGHT THING. YOU KNOW YOU SHOULD.

February 21, 2010 at 5:32 PM  
Blogger Concerned American said...

Anon:

I yield to no one in my respect for Stewart and his crowd, and have been a supporter of OK from the git.

They are an incredibly important part of the matrix by which we will ultimately prevail over the Bad People.

My point in the comment above stands, nontheless:

"Share all you know, when you know it"

It's good that the MIAC and DHS extremist reports came out.

Kudos to the sources who provided those.

But are we to believe that those pieces of hysterical fiction are the ONLY pieces of paper (or ones and zeros) that the .gov has promulgated in contradiction to the limits clearly enunciated in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights?

I find that impossible to believe, just as I find it impossible to believe that there are not useful (and humiliating) documents to be leaked by persons further down the food chain than the Fed's Senior Executive Service and its state equivalents.

February 21, 2010 at 5:41 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Police chiefs all over the country are resigning and not saying why.

http://www.fourwinds10.com/siterun_data/government/law_enforcement_and_police/news.php?q=1265662299

February 21, 2010 at 5:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Concerned American:

I appreciate your comments.
In no way did I intend to disparage the concept of the OATHKEEPERS. I merely mean that it is only a first step....and what exactly are their numbers in comparison to the vast array of badges out there?
If we think about it we come back to the question of "When to shoot the colonels"...er or more appropriately, Who is going to shoot the colonels? I fear that the folks in OATHKEEPERS will likely be the ones who get shot first, by a stinking firing squad of marxist thugs. I pray they watch their backs as they endeavor to hold together the very fabric of our system of governance.

Here is an idea; would it be possible to circulate the MVB "OPEN LETTER TO LAW ENFORCEMENT" via the Oathkeepers organization?

Keep up the good work.

KPN
3%er

February 21, 2010 at 7:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

oh and anonymous @ 555:

Police Chiefs resigning is not the answer. That vacuum will be filled by goons all too willing to do the dirty jobs that those who have resigned chose to run away from.

February 21, 2010 at 7:58 PM  
Blogger Brock Townsend said...

Re: The Late Unpleasantness
--------
Democracy, the Radical Lieutenant’s Oracle:

[Diary Entry] June 28, 1864

“Here I found my first expert on American politics, Lieutenant C. He is not only a Republican, he is a Radical, and we have already crossed swords several times. Like all Americans, he pushes adulation of his country well beyond the limits of politeness and acceptability. Democracy is his oracle, his god, and he will never agree that it may not be the same thing as liberty.

If I reply that even the will of the people should have its limits, and that if it exercises in America the absolute reign that he talks about, it is more likely to pave the way to tyranny than to preserve liberty, he answers brusquely that I am French, that I don’t understand anything about freedom and that I have no right to judge his country. “Europeans,” he told me, “are born slaves. They always have been and they always will be. Only America knows what freedom is.”

“Oh,” I replied, “get off your high horse. There are many dark spots on your wonderful picture of American freedom.” Thereupon I ticked off for him the suspension of habeas corpus, the violation of the freedom of the press, the transfer of jurisdiction over many cases from civil to military courts, secret arrests, arbitrary imprisonments and all the other abuses of power that are the sad accompaniments of the Civil War. I asked him if that was what he called freedom.

“It is freedom if we have willed it. Mr. Seward boasts that he needs only ring his little bell to have absolutely anyone put in prison. That is true, but behind him are the American people who direct him. Let him strike down the rebels and traitors…We want martial law, do you understand? We want it, and that’s why we are still free.”

“[I replied] Revolutionary power is a seed of dictatorship. Watch out that the seed doesn’t take root. You refuse to see the danger; the freedom of your neighbor means little to you! This is the way to lose your own freedom and to rush headlong into despotism one of these days. [L]et’s get to the bottom of it. I know your theories. We practiced them under the [French revolutionary] National Convention. You think you’ve discovered a new idea, but all you do is recite the sophistries of the Committee of Public Safety.”

Are these not strange opinions in the mouth of an American, notions that would fit better with the outlook of a European Jacobin or a Massachusetts Whig? We think the Americans are madly in love with their individual freedom, yet there is a school of thought which springs up to repudiate it in the name of public safety, which views freedom as submission to the multitude. Love of freedom, like all human passions, falls asleep when it is not contested.”

(A Frenchman in Lincoln’s America, Ernst D. de Hauranne, Donnelly & Sons, 1974, Volume I, pp. 67-70)

February 21, 2010 at 10:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It certainly isn't the answer. But it is a sure sign that they know of whats to come and choose to run away and hide rather than standing for their oath. Look at how many failed to show up for duty after Katrina. Also notice the number of politicians choosing not to run again or retire. They all know the sh*tstorm that's coming.

February 22, 2010 at 12:03 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

@Anon 2/22@00:03 - I have a bit of a different view. Knowing what I know about the Marxists in power, I believe that these police chiefs have probably been approached by Feds laying out plans for ... oh... Probably pretty much exactly what "John Galt Fla" laid out in "the day the dollar died."

These "Chiefs" - unwilling to participate and having been given a "open your mouth and we'll kill your family" (no, I DO NOT believe they're above such) or other similar threat - chose to quietly resign.

Certainly - it would be good if they followed up their resignation by spreading the word of what they know, but ... Let's be honest...

How many of us - with a direct threat to our wife and child(ren) or grand-child(ren) would be brave enough to blow the whistle?

Further, we don't know that they violated their oath at all. They swore to defend - not to martyr themselves and their family... For all we know they may have plans to use their special "inside knowledge" to resist when the time comes.

Probably wishful thinking, but...

OTOH, with this bunch's utter lack of morality, I'd imagine such "Chiefs" - and anyone else with any inside knowledge who didn't play along as ordered - would probably be the first ones to be rounded up or "up against the wall" when the time comes as well.

Then there's the possibility that they're quislings - that they resigned their "chief" post in order to prepare and train to implement the "plans" when the time comes. Who better than someone who has already held the current top-spot and has all the underlings accustomed to following his orders?

Bottom line is that we just don't know - but we'd damned well better consider all the possibilities while we can....

DD

February 27, 2010 at 6:42 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home