By Dr. Tom (MD):
At the top of today’s news is the story that broke over the week-end about CIA contract employee Edward Snowden who confessed from his Hong Kong hotel room on Sunday that he deliberately leaked large amounts of classified information to the press while working- not for the Agency itself, but for one of its many contractors.
It thus recalls the famous Pentagon Papers that tied President Nixon’s “plumbers” to two failed break-ins in the 70s: the first was at the famous Watergate complex in Washington. The other was an earlier effort on the West Coast to obtain confidential medical records from the office of Daniel Ellsberg’s psychiatrist after the ex-Marine and Vietnam veteran- then an employee of the Rand Corporation, “leaked” massive amounts of data his Rand job had made him privy to and reinforced his doubts about America’s growing involvement in Vietnam to a level he could no longer ignore.
The furor created by the release and publication of the Pentagon Papers in 1971, was huge, but sadly, its significance has apparently been forgotten by many; including most of the media and the present administration.
Happily, Daniel Ellsberg is still alive and has been quick to praise Snowden’s act of conscience as “more important” than his own. He also gives credit to Bradley Manning who, because he was on active duty when he defied the government, has been subject to a level of punishment that became routine at Guantanamo.
When one listens to Snowden’s account, one also realizes that he, Manning, and Ellsberg faced exactly the same dilemma: at what point do you stop compromising with blatant dishonesty? The major differences between them are attributable to the internet, which has compressed time while increasing the ease with which “classified” information can be acquired and disseminated. It may not seem that long since the 70s, but digital technology has reshaped the world. Ellsberg’s access to information was through Xerox copiers, while Snowden, a high school drop-out and typical “geek,” has obviously mastered contemporary IT to a considerable degree.
In that sense he closely resembles another forgotten man: Bradley Manning, whose defiance while in uniform has undoubtedly made his pre-trial confinement more akin to the treatment of those unfortunate enough to disappear into the American gulag at Guantanamo.
Ellsberg’s disclosure was against the law in 1971, but the Department of Justice declined to prosecute him because of federal misconduct by Nixon’s “plumbers.”
Eerily like the Seventies, we also have a lawyer in the Oval Office. Although Obama smoked pot in High School and is well versed in Constitutional law; he has also used drones against civilians in one undeclared war in Asia and waffled repeatedly on another; thus I’m not that optimistic about Snowden’s chances of avoiding prosecution.
In the meantime, Bradley Manning’s trial begins at Fort Meade this week. The intensity and tenor of its media coverage will be an important indicator.
One key point is wrong.
Daniel Ellsberg was prosecuted and faced more than 100 years in jail. He went through weeks of trial but on the 89th day just as it was about to go to the jury the judge dismissed the charges because of outrageous government conduct. Among the conduct that was inappropriate was Nixon’s top staffer, Ehrlichman, making multiple contacts with the judge and meeting with him to offer him the directorship of the FBI. More well-know were the break-ins of Ellsberg’s psychiatrists office. Perhaps more relevant to today’s news, the judge found the taping of Ellsberg’s phone and the FBI being unable to provide justification for the tapes or the records of the tapes from the wiretapping to be outrageous. This was Judge William Matthew Byrne Jr.’s fist case as a federal judge.
See http://www.nytimes.com/learning/general/onthisday/big/0511.html.
Today, Ellsberg does not believe the result would be the same. He believes Obama would have sought life in prison as his administration has done to Bradley Manning, the NY Times would not publish the documents as they have become defenders of the security state, the media would have not have given him the attention and the taping of phone calls has now become accepted, not outrageous.
There has been outrageous conduct in Bradley Manning’s case as well but the mass media has not covered it so the government gets away with it. He was held in solitary confinement for more than a year. The US will not even let the UN torture investigator meet with him because they do not want what happened to him reported. His speedy trial rights have been violated as he has been incarcerated for over 1000 days waiting trial (speedy trial requires 120 days). President Obama has said he is guilty as has the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff making a fair trial in the very hierarchical military system hard to imagine.
The government has done its best to hide critical documents during discovery including on the key question of whether there has been any adverse damage to US national security — there have been multiple investigations by the CIA, State Dept, FBI and White House, none have reported anyone injured or harmed and his testimony Manning said he did not release documents that he thought were sensitive. The documents he released were available to hundreds of thousands of people so were not sensitive (Ellsberg’s, on the other hand, were top secret intelligence analysis.) See The Judicial Lynching of Bradley Manning for more.
Just so you know my bias, I serve on the steering committee of the Bradley Manning Support Network, http://www.BradleyManning.org and have been working on this case for over two years.
KZ