This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Pentagon Papers Whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg Says that the Government Has ORDERED the Media Not to Cover 9/11
It's big news that the Pentagon Papers have finally been released by the government.
But the statements from Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg about 9/11 have not been covered by the corporate media.
As Fire Dog Lake's Jeff Kaye writes today:
The
entire 9/11 field of inquiry has been vilified, poisoned over the
years by ridicule, sometimes fantastic conspiracy mongering, and
fearfulness by journalists of approaching the material, lest they be
branded as irresponsible or some kind of conspiracy freak. As a result,
little work has been done to investigate, except by a small group of
people, some of whom have raised some real questions ...
Similarly, Air Force Colonel and key Pentagon official Karen Kwiatkowski - who blew the whistle on the Bush administration's efforts to concoct false intelligence about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction - wrote (page 26):
I
have been told by reporters that they will not report their own
insights or contrary evaluations of the official 9/11 story, because to
question the government story about 9/11 is to question the very
foundations of our entire modern belief system regarding our government,
our country, and our way of life. To be charged with questioning
these foundations is far more serious than being labeled a disgruntled
conspiracy nut or anti-government traitor, or even being sidelined or
marginalized within an academic, government service, or literary
career. To question the official 9/11 story is simply and
fundamentally revolutionary. In this way, of course, questioning the
official story is also simply and fundamentally American.
Several months after 9/11, famed news anchor Dan Rather told the BBC that American reporters were practicing "a form of self-censorship":
There
was a time in South Africa that people would put flaming tires around
peoples' necks if they dissented. And in some ways the fear is that
you will be necklaced here, you will have a flaming tire of lack of
patriotism put around your neck. Now it is that fear that keeps
journalists from asking the toughest of the tough questions.... And
again, I am humbled to say, I do not except myself from this criticism.
What we are talking about here - whether one wants to recognise it
or not, or call it by its proper name or not - is a form of
self-censorship.
The head of CNN agreed:
Keith Olbermann said:
You
can rock the boat, but you can never say that the entire ocean is in
trouble .... You cannot say: By the way, there's something wrong with
our .... system.
Former Washington Post - and now Huffington Post - columnist Dan Froomkin wrote in 2006:
Mainstream-media
political journalism is in danger of becoming increasingly
irrelevant, but not because of the Internet, or even Comedy Central.
The threat comes from inside. It comes from journalists being afraid
to do what journalists were put on this green earth to do. . . .
There’s
the intense pressure to maintain access to insider sources, even as
those sources become ridiculously unrevealing and oversensitive.
There’s the fear of being labeled partisan if one’s bullshit-calling
isn’t meted out in precisely equal increments along the political
spectrum.
If mainstream-media political journalists don’t
start calling bullshit more often, then we do risk losing our primacy —
if not to the comedians then to the bloggers.
I still believe
that no one is fundamentally more capable of first-rate
bullshit-calling than a well-informed beat reporter - whatever their
beat. We just need to get the editors, or the corporate culture, or
the self-censorship – or whatever it is – out of the way.
The
Pulitzer prize-winning reporter who uncovered the Iraq prison torture
scandal and the Mai Lai massacre in Vietnam, Seymour Hersh, said:
"All
of the institutions we thought would protect us -- particularly the
press, but also the military, the bureaucracy, the Congress -- they
have failed. The courts . . . the jury's not in yet on the courts. So
all the things that we expect would normally carry us through didn't.
The biggest failure, I would argue, is the press, because that's the
most glaring....
Q: What can be done to fix the (media) situation?
[Long
pause] You'd have to fire or execute ninety percent of the editors
and executives. You'd actually have to start promoting people from the
newsrooms to be editors who you didn't think you could control. And
they're not going to do that."
Veteran reporter Bill Moyers criticized
the corporate media for parroting the obviously false link between
9/11 and Iraq (and the false claims that Iraq possessed WMDs) which the
administration made in the run up to the Iraq war, and concluded that
the false information was not challenged because:
"the
[mainstream] media had been cheerleaders for the White House from the
beginning and were simply continuing to rally the public behind the
President — no questions asked."
Of course, the corporate media is always pro-war.
Since 9/11 provided a justification for the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq,
Yemen and elsewhere, the mainstream media doesn't want to question the
government's version of events.
As Tom Brokaw notes:
All wars are based on propaganda.
What Does Ellsberg Say?
Ellsberg says that the government has ordered the media not to cover 9/11:
Ellsberg seemed hardly surprised
that today's American mainstream broadcast media has so far failed
to take [former FBI translator and 9/11 whistleblower Sibel] Edmonds
up on her offer, despite the blockbuster nature of her allegations
[which Ellsberg calls "far more explosive than the Pentagon Papers"].
As Edmonds has also alluded, Ellsberg pointed to the New York
Times, who "sat on the NSA spying story for over a year" when they
"could have put it out before the 2004 election, which might have
changed the outcome."
"There
will be phone calls going out to the media saying 'don't even think of
touching it, you will be prosecuted for violating national security,'" he told us.
* * *
"I am confident that there is conversation inside the Government as to 'How do we deal with Sibel?'" contends Ellsberg. "The
first line of defense is to ensure that she doesn't get into the
media. I think any outlet that thought of using her materials would go
to to the government and they would be told 'don't touch this . . . .'"
He supports a new 9/11 investigation.
He says that the case of a certain 9/11 whistleblower is "far more explosive than the Pentagon Papers". (Here's some of what that whistleblower says.) He also said that the government is ordering the media to cover up her allegations about 9/11.
And
he says that some of the claims concerning government involvement
in 9/11 are credible, that "very serious questions have been raised
about what they [U.S. government officials] knew beforehand and how
much involvement there might have been", that engineering 9/11 would
not be humanly or psychologically beyond the scope of those in
office, and that there's enough evidence to justify a new,
"hard-hitting" investigation into 9/11 with subpoenas and testimony
taken under oath (see this and this).
Alternative Media Is Not Much Better
It is not just the corporate media.
I
have had the owners of highly-regarded alternative media companies
confide in me privately that they don't believe the government's version
of 9/11, but that are scared of discussing it publicly because they
don't want to be tarred-and-feathered for discussing "conspiracy
theories".
Even writers like Glenn Greenwald - who are good on so many issues - won't touch it.
Of course - as Ellsberg points out - "Secrets ... can be kept reliably ... for decades … even though they are known to thousands of insiders”. Indeed, the whole label "conspiracy theory" is just an attempt to diffuse criticism of the powerful.
People used to understand this. As the quintessential American writer Mark Twain said in a more rational age:
A conspiracy is nothing but a secret agreement of a number of men for
the pursuance of policies which they dare not admit in public.
Of
course, as thousands of top American military officers,
counter-terrorism officials, intelligence officers, congressmen,
structural engineers, and others have publicly said, the government's
story about 9/11 makes absolutely no sense. See this, this, this and this. And family members of people who died on 9/11 - and many New Yorkers - want a new investigation.
But you'll never hear that in the corporate media.
»
- advertisements -
Take that rationality bullshit out of here. Logic and common sense have no place whatsoever in a GW article. This is moonbat food, and they're always at the trough looking for more gruel.
Are you not aware that every journalist, save for the Internet Guru's who disaparage the name journalist almost as much as GW disparages the name of the first President, is afraid of being "deaded"? You know, guys who walk into Afghanistan unescorted, knowing they might get picked up by Taliban or other folks who would skin them alive for sport, fear for their lives when it comes to reporting on 911 or reporting on attempts to gag them.
-1
Shamwow.
I guess you've never heard of something called OPERATION MOCKINGBIRD? This got started up over six decades ago.
1947-ongoing:
Immediately after its creation, one of the CIA's first acts is the launching of an illegal war against the citizens of the United States which it calls, ironically, Project Mockingbird.
Mockingbird is designed to deceive and manipulate the American public by controlling the content of American newspapers, magazines, books, movies and the broadcast media. A secret CIA memo unearthed by the Church Committee in 1975 says that “newsmen are cheaper to buy than a callgirl”.
CIA documents reveal that more than four hundred American journalists were/are on the CIA payroll.
Among senior mass media executives who were/are CIA assets are CBS president William Paley,
CBS News President Sig Mickelson, who will later be president of the CIA propaganda fronts, Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty,
Time Magazine owner Henry Luce,
New York Times publisher Arthur Sulzberger and James Copley of Copley News Service.
The “liberal” New York Times provides cover for CIA agents between 1950 and 1966.
Project Mockingbird is headed by Rockefeller cousin, Nazi shyster and Hitler Project organizer Allen Dulles with the help of Frank Wisner, Richard Helms and Philip Graham, a graduate of the U.S. Army Intelligence School and publisher of the "liberal" Washington Post.
The Post itself becomes the CIA's premier media asset.
Eventually, the CIA’s media assets will include ABC, NBC, CBS, Time, Newsweek, the Associated Press, United Press International, Reuters, Hearst Newspapers, Scripps-Howard, Copley News Service and more.
By the CIA’s own admission, at least twenty five major media organizations will become direct CIA assets. In reality, virtually the entire U.S. mass media apparatus is nothing more or less than a gigantic propaganda and disinformation machine masquerading as a free press.
In the same way as the revolving door between the U.S. government and the arms industry, a revolving door operates between the CIA and the mass media.
CIA Director Richard Helms was a United Press International correspondent, CIA Director William Casey was the major shareholder of the owner of the ABC television network, Capital Cities.
Journalists Edward R. Murrow and Carl Rowan both worked as Directors of the CIA front U.S. Information Agency.
NBC news anchor John Chancellor was a director of the CIA’s radio propaganda network, Voice of America.
CBS Vice President Joseph H. Ream is a former deputy director of the National Security Agency (NSA).
Outside the U.S., the CIA has en extraordinary web of media assets with which to deceive, manipulate and misinform the people of the world.
Among the more important CIA fronts are/were Radio Free Europe, Radio Liberty (Cuba) and Radio Free Asia.
Among the newspaper and magazine fronts are Prevves (France), Der Monat (Germany), El Mundo Nuevo (Latin America), Quiet and Thought (India), Argumenten (Sweden) and La Prensa (Nicaragua).
+1
Exactly what I was thinking about as I read GW's article.
In the UK we had something called a "D-Notice" for news outlets to suspend a story. You might have something similar in the US.
Granted, famed Watergate reporter Carl Bernstein says the CIA has already bought and paid for many successful journalists.
And sure, the New York Times discusses in a matter-of-fact way the use of mainstream writers by the CIA to spread messages.
True, a 4-part BBC documentary called the "Century of the Self" shows that an American - Freud's nephew, Edward Bernays - created the modern field of manipulation of public perceptions, and the U.S. government has extensively used his techniques (but the BBC isn't American, so it doesn't count).
I won't deny that the Independent discusses allegations of American propaganda (but that's a British paper, doesn't count).
And (ho hum) one of the premier writers on journalism says the U.S. has used widespread propaganda.
And (are we still talking about this?) an expert on propaganda testified under oath during trial that the CIA employs THOUSANDS of reporters and OWNS its own media organizations (the expert has an impressive background).
And (I can't believe we're still talking about this) while the U.S. government has repeatedly claimed that it was launching propaganda programs solely at foreign enemies, it has actually used them against American citizens. For example:
The U.S. government long ago announced its intention to "fight the net".
And (when's the next episode of American Idol on?) CENTCOM announced in 2008 that a team of employees would be "[engaging] bloggers who are posting inaccurate or untrue information, as well as bloggers who are posting incomplete information."
And (who do you think will win the playoffs?) the Air Force is also engaging bloggers. Indeed, an Air Force spokesman said:
And (did you see that crazy photo?) it is well known that certain governments use software to automatically vote stories questioning their interests down and to send letters favorable to their view to politicians and media (see - as just one example - this, this and this). The U.S. government is very large and well-funded, and could substantially influence voting on social news sites with very little effort, if it wished.
Oh, for crying out loud - if they were ordering everone not to cover the story, why didn't they order you? Are you the one guy brave enough not to take orders? Not a single MSMer would ever dare defy the awesome might of the United States Government (which can't even knock off a pissant like Ghaddafi at the moment)?
Now, as far as the theory of buying reporters - no, kidding. Reporters and editors are bought and sold like penny candy. But not all of them. And if there were real evidence that something other than a bunch of Islamists were behind 9/11, it would have come out...just as if there were any real evidence that someone other than Oswald shot Kennedy, it would have come out by now.
George Washington, I love your stuff. And I admire Tyler's fearlessness as well, though I don't agree with all his economic positions. But when are you going to deal with Obama's asshole buddy, the great constitutional lawyer and Minister of Truth, Cass Sunstein?
Wow. Do you keep this on your clipboard or something?
I have some reading to do - please excuse what was a knee jerk reaction to the story for what it was. I do still have a hard time believing that all of these journalists are being kept quiet for this long - even after reading all of these items (but not the links, admittedly) - particularly when coming forward would instantly make them rich and famous, but I'll reserve judgment for after I've read more.
"I do still have a hard time believing that all of these journalists are being kept quiet for this long"
Well, that would be YOUR problem now, wouldn't it. Apparently you're not a very astute person.
Look it up- Manhattan Project
I mean, really, somehow the nature of man is magically transformed when it comes to the US? This kind of shit is oh so clear in other countries, yet here in the good ole USofA it doesn't happen? What fucking reality is it that You are subscribing to?
Some of us here are paid trolls. I'd hardly be inclined to believe those opposed to the status quo to be in that herd.
I agree. I've spent much time overseas, and foreigners have a much clearer understanding of the concept that power corrupts.
The US govt is the most well developed govt in the history of the world. So not only is it the most effective at tax collection, but also the most skilled at deception and coverup.
For a journalist to take up 9/11 would be like whistle blowing. Whistle blowers have not been doing to well lately. The longer it goes, the harder it will be for someone to stick their neck out.
rich and famous or just dead?
Self censorship is the most powerful and easily hidden type of censorship in the world of "free" speech and the "free" press. All it takes are a few well chosen words and the occasional beating and the 'reporter" population gets the message loud and clear.
This way be serious danger. Safe sailing over there.
BTW the popular myth is that reporters chose their own stories. Sorry, but that's a TV myth. It is the senior editor that hands out the assignments to the lower editors who then spread the censorship into the reporting ranks. All it takes is one bottleneck and the entire organization quickly gets the message.
You've heard of a 'corporate culture' that has turned bad or that has deemed that certain things will not be discussed in the office. Why is it so hard to believe that a news organization 'culture' can be swayed just as easily? Everyday the editors and sometimes the publisher meet to decide what to cover. The message is quickly passed down the line. Don't go here. After a while it doesn't even need to be repeated.
Nice wife, kids, house youse have here. Shame if sumping happened to it.
And you have might have the most loyal nut riders of any contributor on this site - junks galore for not taking it all at face value. Impressive (if not a little hypocritical)!
Hell, if a single reporter had come out saying "so and so from the .gov pressured me to drop the story" then that alone would be huge news. And since when is the MSM concerned about painting the Bush admin in a bad light?
Journalists
Gary Webb (Pulitzer winner -murdered)
Danny Casolaro (murdered)
Researcher and ex-mil intel
Steve Kangas
George,
What about Friedman's (Stratfor) claim that the Bush Admin thought AQ had gotten ahold of nuclear warheads? And that our friends the Saudis were not too interested in this and in effect were backing away as our geopolitical ally?
Would the Admin have let planes through if they had known intel about the raid? Because they thought they needed to invade the middle east in a big way in order to get our "friends" back in step? Because of a real or perceived nuclear threat?
its getting to the point where paying $4 a gallon gas for an oil war isnt questioned too... not to mention promoting womens rights, stoping suicide bombing, or disarming our enemys of everything from nukes on down
.
or whatever war we are figting... libyan freedom from murder
Yeah, but Ellsberg is a bit of a kook, so I wouldn't put too much stock in what he says.
And don't forget America's own evil monopoly search engine they have sold to the world, the CIA-supported and quite criminal Google, Inc., which DIRECTLY censors and erases journalism that the US requests be censored ... and Google of course hiding the fact it even was censored in the first place ... while Google sells a fake line about 'internet freedom', a freedom that Google Inc is actually trying to destroy.
For example, these articles and this website based in Europe, below, are censored from Google search results ... the main theme is the mass corruption and bribery of US national (federal) judges ...Google hides this material, but Google is happy to link to lies and smears and hoaxes about this journalist who barely escaped alive out of America. He is currently protected by the royal house of the King of Belgium, who helped stop the USA from murdering him.
In GW's post, Seymour Hersh is quoted saying he's not sure that the US courts have been totally corrupted, but it seems Seymour Hersh, too, has been deceived by the campaigns of internet censorship so well-practed by the criminals at Google.
Here, a European website about the USA, with all content censored, erased and exterminated by Google - Here is journalism about the US court system that Glenn Greenwald 'constitutional law expert' is also too frightened to discuss:
http://www.banned-in-america.net/
Larry Ellison created the Oracle database for whom before he started Oracle? CIA?
this does not look like a ban to me
http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Abanned-in-america.net
it is a little odd that the homepage isnt indexed, but more than likely just needs a decent SEO on the case for a little while.
I dissagree completely, the few stories/sites that Google censors are nothing in comparison to the wealth of information that it makes available, how do you think it's possible to find relevant sites via Google on '9/11 Truth', 'Holocaust denial', 'Global Warming Scam'(even though the founders of Google strongly believe in human caused global warming) etc.
I'd say Google is our best weapon against the enemies we are fighting against
If you think 'banned in america' is outrageous, you completely ignore what's banned in Europe, just try searching for any sites critical of jews in germany
use scroogle.org
Google is in bed with the CIA even more than the German and Chinese governments.
"do no evil" is nothing more than a marketing scam.
is this really true? so what, youre saying that theres a geo-block on certain sites viewed from Germany, on any google index? or just google.de ?
am genuinely interested and prepared to search, could you name a couple of sites I shouldnt be able to find?
ie doesnt look too censcored here, but if you have specific examples that would be cool
http://www.google.de/search?q=stormfront&pws=0&hl=en&num=10
http://www.google.de/search?q=neo+nazi+party&pws=0&hl=en&num=10
No I don't mean google.de I mean when you actually click on 1 of those link your ISP in Germany is likely to block it, it's not Google that is blocking it, you need a german isp to experience it
ah ok I see, that makes sense, thanks. I hear a lot about Google censoring results and am always interested to actually see a live case.
and a big Hi to my fuckwad junker too ;)
the internet is an information joke. sort for relevance, scrub, rinse, repeat.
Please remember that fear of terrorism makes people stupid.
And that psychologists and psychiatrists say that
those who believe 100% of the government's version of 9/11 suffer from emotional problems or defense mechanisms.GW posting endless discredited leftist media sources and supporting that little creep Bradley Manning. He leaked docs in retailiation to Don't Ask Don't Tell. Daniel Ellsberg? Oh you mean Democrat LBJ and the Gulf of Tonkin false flag for escalating the JFK/LBJ Vietnam War? The Democrats Vietnam War. Like Obama's 5 wars that code pink, cindy sheehan and the rest of the left are silent on.
You are just another idiot Obama voter GW.
The oligarchy transcends left-right model. They own both parties, the Executive, Legislative branches, have established regulatory capture and control mainstream media. Partisan politics is the magician's distraction meant to suggest that you have a choice. You don't.
Dear George,
You know, you cannot proceed to quote such unimpeachable sources as fucking Seymour Hersh, Bill Moyers (Bill Moyers???!!!), and a string of other certifiably insane leftwing lunatics in adducing proof of a 9/11 conspiracy. In fact, only a complete, fucking IDIOT with absolutely no concept of the basics of human nature could ever assert that hundreds--if not thousands--of people could actually succeed in covering up a conspiracy of the size required to explain a 9/11 inside job. Have you ever known even TWO people that actually kept a secret? I didn't think so.
After countless other 'articles' by you, George, this piece proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that you are a fucking ignoramus of epic proportions. I really cannot understand why Tyler continues to give you a platform for your paleo-leftwing nuttery.
JESUS FUCKING CHRIST, can I get a little help here Durden???
Ah, another Blinkered-Bill.
Then perhaps Mr. PD Quig can explain the successfully kept secret of D-Day, June 6, 1944, an enormous operation that completely fooled the Germans, so thoroughly that Hitler held two Panzer divisions for days in Holland I think it was...
Congratuilations. Yours is the only comment worthy of a response. And that response is: the Germans knew there was going to be an assault, they just didn't know the location.
"Have you ever known even TWO people that actually kept a secret?"
Yeah, the CIA, for example.
Honestly... the fact the 9/11 was an inside job is not even remotely "secret"...
...what we have is a society in denial and that's about all there is to support the "no conspiracy here" take on 9/11...
...it really is just like GW and CD are saying in this post...
Air Force Colonel and key Pentagon official Karen Kwiatkowski is a CONSERVATIVE.
And you'll find that many of the leading conservatives (not Cheney-following Neo-conservatives, but TRUE conservatives) question 9/11.
You can start here.
Or, you can start with me and at least a third of the people on this thread behind me...
George, that dick head has no interest in the truth. His only objective is to berate you in order to keep other from using your article to explore possible alternatives to the so called "official story"..
He (like many) bases his argument that a secret of that size cannot be kept by the number of people needed to pull off the conspiracy. This of course is absurdity at its best, there are many secrets held by hundreds.. How many people work at the CIA, FBI, MI6, Mossad.. and we are to believe this is just too many people to hold a secret? Really??? So these government groups are an open book and couldn't keep a secret.. The guy is a fucking retard.. and I don't even like to use that word.. but.. it really does fit best..
GW...YOU RULE. Love this.
It's full moon retard week. It will pass.
You are the worst by far ZH has to offer - and please stop sullying the name of Gerorge Washington.
HellFish add something to the conversation...
or go play with your pud!
Or play with your pud while you add to the conversation.
Give me your address and i will send you a case of kleenex and depends.
You are going to need them.
GW! What will they say when Ft Calhoon nuclear POWER PLANT GOES BOOM!!! LEVEL 4 EMERGENCY!!! HOLY SHIIIIT!!!!!
http://fiatsfire.blogspot.com/2011/06/meltdown-wednesday-greece-at-level-7.html
LEVEL 4 IS THE SAME FUCKYOUSHIMA WAS FOR A WHOLE MONTH!!!!