Dannel Ellsberg and Anthony Russo at a press conference during their trial for leaking the Pentagon Papers. |
Today’s
most talked about news items—the massive spying scandals unearthed by National Security Agency (NSA) contractor
and whistle blower Edward Snowden and bravely brought to daylight by Glenn Greenwald who has been monitoring
abuses by the national security establishment for years and the Court Martial of Bradley Manning for dumping documents on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to Wikileaks—seem like déjà vu to those who recall the
tumultuous events surrounding the Pentagaon
Papers more than forty years ago.
On
June 13, 1971 The New York Times began publishing The Pentagon Papers, a
top secret history of the military and political involvement of the highest
echelons of the U. S. Government in
the Vietnam War.
The
study had been commissioned by Secretary
of Defense Robert McNamara and was completed in 1968. The document had been obtained by Daniel Ellsberg, a former military
analyst for the RAND Corporation
think tank who had been involved in the original study. He hoped to expose how the leaders of the
government in successive administrations had systematically lied to the American people about both their
intentions in Vietnam and about the actual conduct of the war.
Among
the many disclosures that shocked the notation was the Lyndon Johnson had made the decision to widen U.S. involvement with
the introduction of combat units on the ground well before a heralded
“consultation” with his senior advisors.
Johnson was also shown to be committed to bombing North Vietnam even as he was running for election in 1964 on a
promise of seeking “no wider war.” The
documents also revealed the long secret war in Cambodia.
The
Nixon Administration reacted with a
combination of horror and fury. Attorney General John Mitchell immediately
sought a restraining order against the Times
to prevent them from continuing publication citing the 1917 Espionage Act which made it a crime to
be in possession of classified documents illegally obtained “…which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the
injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation,
willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated.”
The Times was
forced to suspend publication as the case was expedited through the Federal Courts. A few days later another restraining
order was issued against the Washington Post, which had also been
provided the text by Ellsberg and had begun running its own series.
As the case was being reviewed, Senator Mike Gravel, Democrat
of Alaska entered 1400 pages of
the Pentagon Papers into the Congressional
Record, which could not be restrained by the courts and put the material in
a public form which could be quoted without fear of prosecution.
The next day, on June 30 a deeply divided court ruled 6–3
that the injunctions were unconstitutional prior restraint and the government
failed to meet the heavy burden of proof required. Each of the nine justices wrote decisions
agreeing or dissenting opinions on various parts of the ruling.
It was less than the clear-cut victory for freedom of the
press that the Times and Post hoped for, but it did affirm a
broad interpretation of the First
Amendment and allowed them to resume publication of the papers.
Meanwhile the Justice
Department had warned/threatened publishing houses against issuing the
papers as a book. Fearful, not one major
commercial publisher would touch it.
Gravel, a Unitarian
Universalist, suggested that Beacon
Press, publishing arm of the Unitarian
Universalist Association (UUA) take it up.
UUA President Robert West agreed
setting off two and a half years of harassment, intimidation, and court action
against the publisher and the UUA by the government. Despite threats and even a personal phone
call from Nixon the company rushed to put out the full Mike Gravel Edition of the
Pentagon Papers in October.
After publication the Justice department subpoenaed all
of the UUA bank records for four and a half months, including checks from
individual members. That action was
stopped on appeal, then started again, and finally ended, but the government
tied the UUA up in court for two and a half years and cost hundreds of
thousands of dollars in legal fees.
Both West and Beacon Press Director Gobin Stair were publicly named to be likely to be
indicted on espionage or even treason charges and both were called to testify
in the criminal trial of Ellsberg and his co-defendant Anthony Russo, an associate who had helped with the copying.
At various times government agents hinted that the UUA
and each member congregation might lose non-profit tax exempt status and that
UUA might even be placed on the notorious Attorney
General’s List of Subversive Organizations.
Ellsberg and Russo had been charged under the Espionage
Act and with a raft of other charges including theft and conspiracy, carrying a
total maximum sentence of 115 years. The
trial finally got underway in January of 1973 in the Boston courtroom of U.S.
District Judge William Matthew Byrne, Jr.
During the trial a number of “gross improprieties” by the
government were revealed. Not the least
of which was the August 1971
break-in of the office of Dr. Lewis Fielding, a psychiatrist who had
treated Ellsberg. This operation was
conducted by G. G. Gordon Liddy, H.
Howard Hunt and three Cubans at
the direction of Nixon aid John
Ehrlichman—the first operation of the infamous Plumber’s Unit that would soon be swept up in Watergate.
It was also revealed that Judge Byrne personally met
twice with Ehrlichman, who offered him directorship of the FBI. Although Byrne said he refused to consider the offer while the
Ellsberg case was pending, even agreeing to meet with Ehrlichman during the
case raised red flags.
The government was accused of illegally obtaining evidence
and of monitoring the defense team. When
the government tried to claim it had “lost” wire tap records on Ellseberg the
exasperated Judge Byrne declared a mistrial and said “The totality of the
circumstances of this case which I have only briefly sketched offend a sense of
justice. The bizarre events have incurably infected the prosecution of this
case.”
Nixon’s paranoia, which ultimately resulted in his
resignation in disgrace over the Watergate scandal, can be traced to this
case. Aids Ehrlichman, H. R. Halderman, Richard Kleindienst, and John Dean were forced to resign when the Fielding burglary was disclosed in the
course of the trial. Egil Krogh and Charles Colson were convicted and sent to prison for their roles
in supervising the break in.
So what about today? Well unfortunately intimidation of the press
has become routine—and successful. The New York Times voluntarily withheld for
months documents proving the President
George W. Bush had planned from the beginning to use the September 11, 2010 attacks as a pretext
on which invade Iraq until after the
election of Barack Obama.
Julian
Assange, the Australian Internet
activist and proprietor of Wikileaks,
was hounded by American authorities, questionably charged with sexual assault
in Sweden and had to go into hiding
to prevent kidnapping or arrest by American authorities. He has been living in the Ecuadorian embassy in London, which has offered him asylum,
since last June. At one point British
authorities threatened to storm the embassy to arrest him
The Obama
Administration, which has been much more aggressive pursuing and charging
leakers than any before it, also rolled out threats to prosecute news outlets
under the same Espionage Act used against the Times, Post, and Beacon Press.
Daniel Ellsberg himself, now widely regarded as a hero
for standing up to Nixon, has said that under the current administration he
would likely be locked up for life under Obama.
The freak out about the NSA leaks is even more
hysterical. Snowden has “gone to ground”
in Hong Kong amid fears that he
could be kidnapped or even assassinated.
Although no charges have yet been formally drawn, the administration has
loudly talked about aiding the enemy and even possible treason charges. The admittedly
often hysterical Senator Rand Paul has
expressed fears that Snowden could be named an enemy combatant and taken out by a drone attack. Far fetched,
but strangely it no longer seems beyond the limits of possibility.
Hard line Republican
Representative Peter King of New York went on CNN to tell Anderson Cooper
that reporters disclosing classified documents should be prosecuted.
Meanwhile readers of this blog, which has undoubtedly
triggered whatever algorithms are used by the NSA supper sophisticated snooping
programs to flag possible dangerous threats, and those who click on links here
from Facebook or Google Plus have to look over their
shoulders and assume that Big Brother really
is watching.
No comments:
Post a Comment