Daniel Ellsberg at BradBlog: American Media's Complicit Failure To Report On The Sibel Edmonds Case

[Hissyspit]

COMPLETE OP-ED: http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5583



DANIEL ELLSBERG: Covering Up the Coverage - The American Media's Complicit Failure to Investigate and Report on the Sibel Edmonds Case
In an Exclusive BRAD BLOG Op-Ed, the Legendary 'Pentagon
Papers' Whistleblower Calls on the Media to Perform Their
First Amendment Obligations, on Congressional Leaders to
Perform Their Oversight Duty, and for Insider Sources to Come
Forward to the American Public...

-- Guest BRAD BLOG Op-Ed by Daniel Ellsberg

For the second time in two weeks, the entire U.S. press has let itself be scooped by Rupert Murdoch's London Sunday Times on a dynamite story of criminal activities by corrupt U.S. officials promoting nuclear proliferation. But there is a worse journalistic sin than being scooped, and that is participating in a cover-up of information that demands urgent attention from the public, the U.S. Congress and the courts.

For the last two weeks --- one could say, for years --- the major American media have been guilty of ignoring entirely the allegations of the courageous and highly credible source Sibel Edmonds, quoted in the London Times on January 6, 2008 in a front-page story that was front-page news in much of the rest of the world but was not reported in a single American newspaper or network. It is up to readers to demand that this culpable silent treatment end.

- snip -

It's a measure of how far the New York Times and Washington Post have fallen from their responsibilities...since I gave them the Pentagon Papers in 1971. They printed them then. Would they today?

- snip -

If "freedom of the press is mainly for the people who own presses," it is time for those owners to stop using that freedom to help conceal official wrongdoing...

MORE

[AntiFascist]

1. The same cancer which is affecting the intelligence agencies...

is also affecting the leadership of the MSM. They can't easily investigate corrupt covert operations because they are supposed to be kept secret.

[JeffR]

2. How much more?

How many more such clusterfucks "in the name of the People" - and not only against the American people's interest, but against that of any rational, empathetic human being of any nationality?

I pray it comes peacefully, but nothing short of some sort of revolution can save this country from the dung heap.

[Freddie Stubbs]

3. First Amendment Obligations?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

There are no obligations mentioned, only prohibitions.

[mmonk]

6. I don't think the idea of free speech was to be spokespeople

for government or to keep from the public crimes against them or the constitution by government. Free speech meant the opposite, the right to speak up against government action. That is what he is alluding to. Without the press as a fourth estate or watchdog, we are not really free and this election people are so obsessed with will not makes us free.

[democrank]

4. Sibel who?

Don`t hold your breath waiting for corporate media to report real news. They`re busy hawking wrinkle cream and their anchor`s latest book.

[leftchick]

5. K&R

.

[lukery]

7. thanks

thanks to Brad and hissyspit for this

i'll post my response at about 10am eastern.

[lukery]

12. new post

here it is
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2731976

[Hissyspit]

8. .

[PuraVidaDreamin]

9. Is there any way in 200 words or less to describe this crime?

I just barely understand it, and when explaining it to people, I always lose them.
It's so complex. I've read Lukery's stuff/ gone to Sibel's site, even the original Vanity Fair,
is complicated to boil down for someone who might actually listen, or a 200 word LTTE,
for a corporate compliant news jockey.

[mmonk]

11. Just an outline of the case and the improper use of the

States Secrets privilege to silence her should be enough. You can refer the reader to lukery's and Sibel's site for details. The important message you might want to convey is the US media's silence and cite the Times articles.

[BradBlog]

13. Edmonds case made easy, for you...

See a bullet-point list of things Edmonds would like to disclose here:
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=2498

See "What the heck is the Sibel Edmonds case? And why should you care about it?" here:
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5331

[mmonk]

14. Yes.

Excellent point by point. Good work. Most useful in this case.

[PuraVidaDreamin]

19. A big thank you!

This is just what I needed.

[Echo In Light]

10. Never underestimate the media's servitude and cowardice

This is a crucial example of how our mainline media is nothing but a megaphone/platform for the vested interests of the corporate/state nexus. {fascism}

[Usrename]

15. K&R

:patriot:

[wildbilln864]

16. definite k&r! n/t

[Hissyspit]

17. .

[Rex]

18. I'm not sure why this is an issue, the NYTs held a story for a year

at the REQUEST of the WHITEHOUSE. My choice of caps. After that, why would anyone believe anything from the M$M? They let Yellowcake/SOTU slide by while roasting Bill Clinton over his nuts (kinda).

Fuck the M$M!