BS: Very Important Talk by Daniel Ellsberg

Subject: BS: Very Important Talk by Daniel Ellesburg
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Sep 08 - 10:04 PM

I wish there was a transcript available for this talk for those who can't watch video online, because he talks about a lot of things that are extremely important for people to know...

http://fora.tv/2008/09/04/Wars_in_Iraq_and_Vietnam_Threats_Against_Iran

Subject: RE: BS: Very Important Talk by Daniel Ellesburg
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Sep 08 - 10:05 PM

Sorry. I spelled Ellsberg wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Very Important Talk by Daniel Ellesburg
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 23 Sep 08 - 11:13 PM

Will you summarize it please?

With so many political threads going, we need more information to follow each one.

Thanks.

Subject: RE: BS: Very Important Talk by Daniel Ellesburg
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Sep 08 - 11:24 PM

He talks about the various times the US government has taken the country to war on false pretenses. He talks about Johnson (committed impeachable offenses), the Gulf of Tonkin incident, Nixon, the war in Iraq, the Bush administration's behavior with regard to Iran. There's also a brief summary on the page I linked to, below the viewer under "Info".

Subject: RE: BS: Very Important Talk by Daniel Ellsburg
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Sep 08 - 11:41 PM

Also, he reads memos from his time at the Pentagon during the Vietnam war about the US government's plans for provoking war with the North Vietnamese, and shows how the behavior of the Bush administration is a lot like the behavior of the Johnson and Nixon administrations in the way they brought the country to war, and he makes predictions about what the Bush people will do based on this information.

Subject: RE: BS: Very Important Talk by Daniel Ellsburg
From: Little Hawk
Date: 24 Sep 08 - 01:31 AM

I have just finished watching the whole thing. Very worthwhile to watch it, Stilly, if you have the time available.

There's a good deal of insight into present and possible future scenarios in Iraq and Iran.

There is also a lengthy discussion of how the USA goverment has morphed from a constituional democracy (its original design) into a one-man rule by a singer "decider" (the president) which is decidedly unconstitutional and in violation of the law and the president's own oath of office. This has been process that began in Harry Truman's administration and further proceeded through a number of succeeding administrations, most notably those of LBJ, Nixon, and G.W.Bush.

This is not a case of "Republicans bad, Democrats good". This is a case of a progressive and covert takeover of the government and betrayal of the US Constitution by the executive office and national security agencies, a takeover tacitly orchestrated by BOTH parties, and with the collusion of highly powerful people in BOTH parties.

This is not a partisan matter at all. It is a slow motion coup, being achieved in stages, with the will to achieve it being expressed through the executive branch of the US government.

To put it simply, loyalty to one single man, the president (the "commander-in-chief"), is being used in the minds of many thousands of government people (from the mighty down to the meek)... to trump people's sworn loyalty to the Constitution. That is unconstitutional action, and it amounts to the establishment of what could be termed a presidential monarchy...or a dictatorship...but one wearing sheep's clothing, so to speak.

It evokes powerful myths in people's minds that have long been established: that if the president (the surrogate father of the country) asks you to do something, then your loyalty to the country demands that you do it.

But what if the president asks you to do something that is clearly unconstitutional? (such as illegally starting a war without a declaration of war BY Congress) (such as illegally abrogating constitutional civil rights of citizens) (such as illegally torturing prisoners of war) (such as illegally attacking a country which has not attacked the USA or anyone else and couldn't realistically do so even if they wanted to) (such as lying about WMDs in Iraq and lying about supposed attacks on American ships...ex: Tonkin Gulf Resolution)

What then???? Well, most people's normal reaction is immediately to obey the president, to obey their "commander-in-chief" when he issues an order, not to go to their library and read the Constitution for several hours or for several days and then try and figure out if the president just asked them to do something unconstitutional!

They haven't got time to be consitutional lawyers. They are under pressure. They obey orders.

In similar fashion, people like Hitler and Mussolini and a host of lesser such types ended up getting their people to obey illegal orders too. There is plenty of precedent for doing this sort of thing with any executive office that sees itself as above the law...or as the one who in practice IS the effective law of the country.

That's unconstitutional. The president is not supposed to be a monarch, and he is not supposed to be above the law...nor does he make the law. He is subject to the law, just like any other citizen.

A commander in chief who violates the Constitution must be impeached if the Constitution is to remain in effect at all.

I notice that Dennis Kucinich has taken note of that, and he has not stopped pressing in Congress for the impeachment of both George Bush and Dick Cheney.

Subject: RE: BS: Very Important Talk by Daniel Ellsburg
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 24 Sep 08 - 03:08 AM

I have similarly watched the whole thing.

the question that kept occurring to me was - all very well - but where would that have left Abraham Lincoln when the civil war wasn't turning out to be a picnic.

And what of Roosevelt's position. he knew that war was the preferable option - yet his congress opposed him - right up to Pearl harbour, as I remember.

Both Bush and Nixon could have argued that they were in a better position to judge than Joe Public - having better intelligence and more access to a wider view. After all the Vietnamese administrattion that USA lost were not nice people. they treated their citizens very badly.

Subject: RE: BS: Very Important Talk by Daniel Ellsburg
From: CarolC
Date: 24 Sep 08 - 04:21 AM

None of that justifies gutting our Constitution.

Subject: RE: BS: Very Important Talk by Daniel Ellsburg
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 24 Sep 08 - 06:15 AM

Better than your country getting gutted by Hitler or Stalin.

It seems to me you could learn a lot from Shakespeare's Wars of the Roses plays - Richard 2 through to Richard 3.

The first imperative of any head of state is to survive - for many other people want that job, and they will all have terrific reasons for you giving it up.

My own position in the 1960's and 1970's was that I thought Ellsberg was a great patriot at the time, I thought that the watergate hearing - a source of shame to many Americans was an endorsement of the great Bob Dylan line - even the president of the united states sometimes must have to stand naked - a great exercise in democracy.

on reflection I'm not so sure. the Vietnamese were shafted with a stalinist administration for the next god knows how many years. all the suffering in those wars went for nothing - except perhaps to show that democracy wasn't going to go down without a fight.

I hope I don't sound like right wing 'hawk'. I felt betrayed and lied to, when no WMD's turned up in Iraq.
who the hell knows how history is going to turn out?

Subject: RE: BS: Very Important Talk by Daniel Ellsburg
From: CarolC
Date: 24 Sep 08 - 06:45 AM

We weren't being threatened by anyone when we went to war in Vietnam. Our government lied to us and said that we had been attacked when we had not. We weren't there to liberate the Vietnamese. We were there to force the people of Vietnam to accept colonialization. Ho Chi Minh came to the US for help shaking off colonialization before he went to the communists, and we rejected his request for help.

Ellsberg was not talking about World War II. He was talking about a pattern of deception that has emerged in the US since the time of Truman in which the government of the US has taken this country to war for bad reasons, by deceiving the people of this country, and gutting the Constitution in the process.

Subject: RE: BS: Very Important Talk by Daniel Ellsburg
From: CarolC
Date: 24 Sep 08 - 06:58 AM

And personally, if our own government becomes a fascist dictatorship, which it is well on its way toward becoming, I don't see how we are really any better off in the long run (as a country) than we would be if the fascists of Europe had won WWII.

The first imperative of our head of state (and every member of our government) is to protect and defend the Constitution. That is what they swear an oath to do.

Subject: RE: BS: Very Important Talk by Daniel Ellsburg
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 24 Sep 08 - 07:25 AM

'We weren't being threatened by anyone when we went to war in Vietnam'

No but the Chinese subcontinent and the third world generally was being infiltrated by a very aggressive version of Marxism. I think it was a case of taking a stand somehwere. vietnam drew the short straw.

'And personally, if our own government becomes a fascist dictatorship, which it is well on its way toward becoming, I don't see how we are really any better off in the long run (as a country) than we would be if the fascists of Europe had won WWII.'

Take a look at Auschwitz, and repeat that. Ask virtually anybody, would they rather have lived in the 1950-70's in the Soviet Union or America. If you don't feel grateful and protective of what your political system has delivered thus far - well you should do.

The first imperative is to save your ass - take a look at those history plays. Anywhere can have a great constitution - most tyrannies have wonderful sounding ones. Not many places can keep the basic freedoms intact.

Subject: RE: BS: Very Important Talk by Daniel Ellsburg
From: CarolC
Date: 24 Sep 08 - 07:54 AM

I'm sorry, but I don't think someone who doesn't live and pay taxes in the US gets to tell us that we are responsible for what happens in southeast Asia.

Had the US helped Vietnam shake off the colonialists rather than helping the colonnialists subjugate that country, the war in Vietnam would never have happened, and Vietnam would have been a US ally with a government that was friendly to the US and to capitalism. It was US imperialism that caused the war in Vietnam.

No, I'm sorry. I don't feel at all safe and protected. We are well on our way to becoming a fascist dictatorship in this country, complete with torture, imprisonment without recourse to any kind of legal protections, spying on and serveilance of citizens, and "private security contractors" (mercenaries), whose only allegiance is to the people who sign their paychecks, to help them keep the people of this country in line. And now they're in the process of bankrupting this country and turning it into a third world banana republic. Nope. Sorry. Definitely not safe and protected.

Auschwitz was possible because the Nazis had established certain scapegoat groups of people who were assigned the status of "not quite human". We are also well on our way toward becoming like them in that respect as well, with our establishing Muslims as the current scapegoat group, and our mass slaughter of Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan (and if the Bush administration gets its way, Iran as well).

I'm sure it's all very nice to be sitting far away in another country and telling those of us who are in this country how nice it is to be here. Sorry, but I'm not buying it.

Subject: RE: BS: Very Important Talk by Daniel Ellsburg
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 24 Sep 08 - 08:16 AM

'I'm sorry, but I don't think someone who doesn't live and pay taxes in the US gets to tell us that we are responsible for what happens in southeast Asia.'

sorry luv, it goes with the territory. Tyrants have to be stood up to and its never a pleasant duty. sometimes like JFK's dad, we don't want the job. sometimes you find yourself with unpleasant allies. But if we don't do it - the world gets even more unsafe.

As for sitting faraway in another country - that's the American prerogative. We had nearly two years of getting bombed in ww2 before America came in after pearl harbour. We got bombed again (admittedly not on the same scale) largely with American financed bombs in the 70's and 80's during the IRA's military campaign.

I'm pretty damn sure it was nicer to be America than in the eye of those particular storms. The way the tourists stopped coming after every IRA campaign convinces me that quite a few Americans thought the same.

Subject: RE: BS: Very Important Talk by Daniel Ellsburg
From: CarolC
Date: 24 Sep 08 - 08:18 AM

I want to add something to this part right here...

I'm sorry, but I don't think someone who doesn't live and pay taxes in the US gets to tell us that we are responsible for what happens in southeast Asia.

Even more important than the taxes, is the number of our men and women (our fathers, brothers, sons, and daughters) who died over there, or who came back either physically damaged, or, and perhaps even worse, emotionally and/or mentally damaged from that war. We are still grievously wounded as a country because of what we did in that war. I find it quite presumptuous for someone in another country to be telling people in this country that we had a responsibility to send our precious young people to die and be maimed in Southeast Asia, and to be still paying for that, financially, physically, and emotionally, while that person was not in a position to be impacted by the war as we in the US were and are.

Save the patronizing lectures, please. We can decide for ourselves whether or not we want to be the world's policemen and whether or not we should uphold the central pillar of our democracy. The people in the UK can take responsibility for their own country and leave those of us in the US to take responsibility for ours.

Subject: RE: BS: Very Important Talk by Daniel Ellsburg
From: CarolC
Date: 24 Sep 08 - 08:23 AM

Goes with what territory? Really, where does someone in the UK get off telling those of us in the US what our "territory" is?

We are the tyrants this time around, and we were during the Vietnam war as well. Our presence in that country was never for the benefit of the people of that country. It was all about imperialism and the emerging American empire. Be afraid of that empire. It has no one's best interests at heart except for a few greedy and power hungry people at the top.

Subject: RE: BS: Very Important Talk by Daniel Ellsburg
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 24 Sep 08 - 11:48 AM

Carol - the culture of your country is all pervasive. Everybody all over the world sings your songs, dances to your music, watches your TV programmes, drinks Budweiser, coca cola and America's favourite coffee.

Poll the people of the world and most of them would want to be American - and that includes kids in this country.

With it comes responsibilities. because people are looking at you for an example. Both lifestyle and moral. It matters when you do something despicable like retain capital punishment in your legal system.

Its not a case of being the world's policeman - more a case of being the guarantor or for some unfotunates at least a distant hope of the freedoms that you have told everybody are important. When the Chinese demonstrated in Tianamen Square - they didn't erect a likeness of the Eiffel Tower, or the English houses of Parliament - they chose as a symbol the Statue of Liberty.

You don't get to choose in these matters - history chooses you. And its a better and prouder role than being the representative of evil and oppression.

Ask yourself in which other home of philosophies opposing America ......here Moscow, Beijing, Tehran .... where else could Ellsberg be having this debate with views so diametrically opposed to the administration? that's the freedom you have to try and preserve.

Subject: RE: BS: Very Important Talk by Daniel Ellsburg
From: Bobert
Date: 24 Sep 08 - 12:49 PM

The problem with Vietnam wasn't communism... It was colonialism... Had western countries never spli, occupied and tried to dominate Vietnam there would have never been a civil war... The Vietnam War was the direct result of French and American meadlings...

Same as in Iraq today... Colonialism, occupation and civil strife...

This is an outdated and bad model for the 21st century...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Very Important Talk by Daniel Ellsberg
From: CarolC
Date: 24 Sep 08 - 03:31 PM

The war in Vietnam wasn't about being the guarantors of anyone's freedom. It was about suppressing freedom. As are the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and as will by any war we eventually fight with Iran if we do.

I am told by the person arguing with me in this thread that we in the US have to try and preserve the freedom that made it possible for Ellsberg to do what he did.

THAT'S PRECISELY WHAT I AM DOING HERE IN THIS THREAD!

That's exactly the reason it's so important to get out the messages of people like Ellsberg, because it is our own government here in this country, that is the biggest threat to our freedoms!

Someone needs to open their eyes to what is really going on with the government of the US.

Subject: RE: BS: Very Important Talk by Daniel Ellsberg
From: CarolC
Date: 24 Sep 08 - 03:35 PM

And that's also precisely why we MUST preserve and protect our Constitution. Because it is the ONLY guarantor of those very freedoms that people around the world admire.