Talk:Daniel Ellsberg

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Military work group.


Daniel Ellsberg was a good article, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Delisted version: December 4, 2006


ELLSBERG, DANIEL (1931- ). A brilliant student, Ellsberg graduated from Harvard in 1952. He won a fellowship to study advanced economics at Cambridge University and then returned to Harvard for a M.A. in economics (1953). Ellsberg then waived his student deferment and volunteered for service in the marine corps (1954-56) seeing duty in the Middle East during the Suez crisis of 1956. Returning to Harvard, Ellsberg earned a Ph.D. in economics and then joined the Rand Corporation (1959) to study game theory and risk in nuclear war. In this capacity Ellsberg was a participant in strategy sessions relating to the Cuban Missile crisis (1962), a Defense Department consultant who visited Vietnam (1961), and a rising intellectual star who joined the Defense Department in 1964 to work for Robert S. McNamara, the Secretary of Defense, on issues relating to the Vietnam War. Ellsberg went to Vietnam again in 1965 where he began to move from his previously hawkish views on the war to the position of a dove because he felt the program of pacification followed by the US was not working. Between 1967 and 1969, at McNamara's request Ellsberg subsequently worked to compile a forty-seven volume classified document analyzing US policy decisions on Vietnam. This material later became known as the Pentagon Papers when on June 13, 1971 the New York Times and other newspapers began to publish excerpts from these volumes that Ellsberg had copied and given to the newspapers. The contents of the Pentagon Papers reenforced Ellsberg's moral qualms about US policy in Vietnam and documented the way successive American presidents overstepped their powers in conducting the war. The papers also revealed instances whereby the government had by-passed Congress or their advisers and misled the public about the extent of the US involvement in Vietnam. Following publication of the Pentagon Papers, the government sued the Times and Ellsberg was charged with conspiracy against the government. The Supreme Court ruled six to three (June 30, 1971) in favor of the Times and Ellsberg's case was declared a mistrial (1973) when the judge learned that agents employed by the Nixon staff had illegally broken into the office of Ellsberg's psychiatrist seeking potentially damaging information on him. Ellsberg's PAPERS ON THE WAR (1972) sets out his position on the Vietnam conflict and his reasons for opposing it.

Contents

[edit] =

Ellsberg, Daniel

Ellsberg, Daniel, 1931–, American political activist, b. Chicago, grad. Columbia Univ. (B.S., 1952, Ph.D., 1959). After serving in the U.S. marine corps, he worked for the Rand Corporation (1959–64; 1967–70), conducting studies on defense policies. Originally a strong supporter of the Vietnam War, he became a committed opponent of U.S. policy. In 1971 he gave the New York Times access to a secret history of the Vietnam War, commissioned by the Dept. of Defense, which revealed that the government had repeatedly misled the American people about the escalation of the war. The government attempted to prevent the publication of the report, which became commonly known as the Pentagon Papers; the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the New York Times Co. v. United States (1971) that the publication of the papers was permissible. The government attempted to prosecute Ellsberg for the release of the report. The charges were dismissed in 1973 when it was revealed that White House officials had burglarized the offices of Ellsberg's psychiatrist in an effort to discredit him (see Watergate affair.)

[edit] "geez, is this for real?!"

I removed the sentence "geez, is this for real?!". Disputes of veracity should be discussed here not in the article.

[edit] White House attempt to *assassinate* Ellsberg?!

Currently (Dec 13 '04) the article says:


the White House secretly flew a dozen Cuban CIA "assets" to Washington DC with orders to assault or assassinate Ellsberg.


Is that consistent with what most historians think -- or is it a very controversial and dubious theory? What's the reference?

  • It's mentioned in Ellsberg's autobiography "Secrets", and referenced there. One of the Cubans involved claims he was told to kill Ellsberg, and another says he was told to mere break his legs. Some of the same people were involved in the break-in of Ellsberg's psychiatrist's office, and at least one was involved in Watergate. (As well as god-known-what-else that we don't know about.) Quadell (talk) (help)[[]] 22:03, Dec 13, 2004 (UTC)

-Thanks Quadell. I intend to look that up. At this point I'd say I'm doubtful of the claim. I've been reading Peter Rudenstine's seemingly very thorough "The Day the Presses Stopped," which doesn't mention it among the reasons for the dropped prosecution against Ellsberg (see "Aftermath" section). An assassination attempt would be huge -- not something one would think a historian would want to omit. Some other sources I've seen also don't mention it, though one I saw speaks of a plan to create a disturbance by "punching him in the nose" then running. --Uriel, Dec. 14, 2004.

I just listened to an interview with Ellsberg on Scott Horton's Show show. Ellsberg specifically denied that the CIA assets were sent to 'assassinate' him. Rather, he said the prosecutors of the CIA assets told him the exact wording was "totally incapacitate." Ellsberg seems to think that it was really a plan to break his jaw or something that would keep him from appearing in public prior to the mining of Haiphong harbor. --Tim, July 18, 2005

[edit] malayn prostitute

Someone added a crack about pie and prostitutes into the quote, so I removed it

-Knight

[edit] The impact of the "Pentagon Papers"

"The publication of the papers greatly detracted from public support for the war in Vietnam."

What is the evidence for this claim?

--67.116.50.23 00:59, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Since there's no citation, I deleted the paragraph. It should have citations for inclusion. --Donald Hosek 06:44, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GA Re-Review and In-line citations

Members of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles are in the process of doing a re-review of current Good Article listings to ensure compliance with the standards of the Good Article Criteria. (Discussion of the changes and re-review can be found here). A significant change to the GA criteria is the mandatory use of some sort of in-line citation (In accordance to WP:CITE) to be used in order for an article to pass the verification and reference criteria. Currently this article does not include in-line citations. It is recommended that the article's editors take a look at the inclusion of in-line citations as well as how the article stacks up against the rest of the Good Article criteria. GA reviewers will give you at least a week's time from the date of this notice to work on the in-line citations before doing a full re-review and deciding if the article still merits being considered a Good Article or would need to be de-listed. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact us on the Good Article project talk page or you may contact me personally. On behalf of the Good Articles Project, I want to thank you for all the time and effort that you have put into working on this article and improving the overall quality of the Wikipedia project. Agne 20:32, 25 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] New photograph of Daniel and his wife

I've added a free photograph to the article (Creative Commons licensed). Ioerror 17:31, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reasons for GA Delisting

This article's GA status has been revoked because it fails criterion 2. b. of 'What is a Good Article?', which states;

(b) the citation of its sources using inline citations is required (this criterion is disputed by editors on Physics and Mathematics pages who have proposed a subject-specific guideline on citation, as well as some other editors — see talk page).

LuciferMorgan 23:19, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Added in Ellsberg religion. Removed unsourced information concerning Parents.

[edit] Religion

I am new at editing, however after reading quite a few other articles it does not seem approporiate to mention Ellsberg's Jewish parents and interest in Christian Science. I will delete it. Gandydancer 19:31, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I had added that in but then removed it after I saw your post. I am not sure why you deemed it inappropriate but will trust your judgement in leaving it out of the article Canking 22:40, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Leonard Weinglass

It would be good to have more info about the trial. In an interview with Duncan Campbell, published in The Guardian Newspaper 2007-01-09, G2 Section pp10-13, (also available online at Guardian Unlimited - accessed 2007-01-09), entitled "Society has become more punitive", Leonard Weinglass remarks that he was the laywer for the defence and still maintains friendship with Daniel Ellsberg. Vernon White . . . Talk 21:36, 9 January 2008 (UTC)