Do you remember the division amongst your acquaintances with Daniel Ellsburg & the Pentagon Papers?

[kentuck]

Were you on the Ellsberg side or the "other" side? The "other" side thought he had betrayed the country. He was a traitor. I supported Ellsberg in his effort to make the truth known about Vietnam.

I sometimes wondered why I took the side of Daniel Ellsberg? The best I can figure is that I am one of those folks that lived by the rule: "Comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable." That used to be a bigger part of the Democratic Party, as I recall?

So, if someone says "your government is keeping secrets from you", then, my ears perk up. I am naturally inclined to support anyone that challenges those in power. Perhaps it is a "weakness" of mine?

I am naturally distrustful of big banks, the CIA, the NSA, big business, and Wall Street. Simply because of the history. What they have done in the past, they will probably do in the future.

It is my inclination to criticize them even if they are not guilty of what people are charging. I know it is only a matter of time. Somebody has to be in this unarmed, people, truth militia. Somebody has to challenge the authority and those in power. Otherwise, we will be dancing whatever the fiddle is playing... (I know those are words they look for when they are spying on people)

And I am supposed to feel free..?

[villager]

1. I don't remember as many rushing to Nixon's defense then, as are rushing to the NSA's now

'...here at the "Underground"

But then again, I grew up in Northern California...

[backscatter712]

13. Back in the Vietnam era, they didn't have Internet sockpuppets... n/t

[WinkyDink]

2. Not among MY friends.

[kentuck]

4. Perhaps I should change to 'acquaintances"?

I knew some folks that thought he was a traitor. I don't recall united acclaim for what he did?

[orpupilofnature57]

7. Nor mine, it's not the Democratic thing to do .

[backscatter712]

12. +1! n/t

[MotherPetrie]

3. I don't recall ever discussing it with my then nonpoliitcal friends, but I was totally pro-Ellsberg

And ITA with every word of your post.

[Warren Stupidity]

5. everyone i knew thought it was fucking great.

plus the heavy hitters in the media - the nyt and the wapo were involved. It was at the high point of the anti war movement and shit was coming down all over the place.

my but have we gone a long way since then, a long way toward nationalistic authoritarianism that is.

[DURHAM D]

6. My peer group supported Ellsberg.

The group that didn't was the WWII generation. The same generation that got us into the damn thing to begin with. Also, the same generation that blamed my generation for "losing the war".

[Blue_In_AK]

8. My friends have always been lefties.

I and my friends were on Ellsberg's side and we supported Mike Grsvel reading the pentagon papers into the congressional record.

[cherokeeprogressive]

9. I remember it vaguely. I was 8. I remember how upset and opposed my Parents and Grandparents were

with each other. My Grandpa was fit to be tied. He had two Sons in Vietnam. I think he would have shot Ellsberg himself if he had the chance. The next big thing was finding out The Gulf of Tonkin incident was a fabrication.

They are a couple of pieces of the puzzle that led me to vote as a Democrat. It would seem to me that many many people here either don't remember how opposed to the US Government the left was in the 60's and early 70's, or see it only as an anti-Obama attitude; therefore feeling obligated to come to his defense over something only indirectly related to him.

[enough]

10. I didn't know anyone who didn't revere Ellsburg, but I see now that that was an indication

of how monochromatic were the people I associated with at that time. I know a much more diverse group of people now (at the age of 69).

[kentuck]

11. I was a hippie...

But I talked with a lot of older folks at the time and most of them in my neck of the woods thought he was akin to the socialist, George McGovern...

[frazzled]

14. Antipathy toward the war had grown so overwhelming by then

that it was simply the proof that was needed to solidify resistance. Like it or not, the public is not out in the streets on this kind of meta-data collection, despite the fact that general outlines of it have been known for more than a decade. Also, many know that the warrantless parts of it, the most disturbing aspect, were changed in 2008. Also, people's sons and brothers are not getting drafted to die for anything related to it, which may explain why there is less interest. Lastly, 9/11 hadn't hit our shores. You can finish that part of the narrative yourself.

So no, nobody in my circle was opposed to the publication of information contained in the Pentagon Papers.

But there were very big differences between these two incidents that make comparing one with the other not very apt. The Pentagon Papers were a historical document. The revelations were about previous administrations, going back to Truman, and their actions and deceits: from Kennedy planning to overthrow Ngo Dinh Diem to Johnson lying about various things and his expansion of the war, including the bombing of Cambodia. A comparable thing would be if someone inside the government in, say, 2008 or 2009, decided to release a report (if one existed) outlining precisely how the Bush administration lied us into Iraq.

These latest "leaks" are not a single historical document brought to the public's attention. They involved the indiscriminate hacking and worldwide dissemination not of a report but of huge amounts of programmatic detail about ongoing intelligence activities. It's not that nobody was unaware either than the US had initiated meta-data collection after 9/11 or that it spies on other countries. It was about revealing processes and methods that might compromise the nation's ability to conduct intelligence. And I think that is how it has divided people so severely, largely, imo, on the basis of whether they massively distrust the government in general or whether they feel, even if they wish to have more oversight and transparency, that the government must be trusted within certain bounds to conduct intelligence activities.

And as I said before, there has been no shred of evidence uncovered thus far that the collection of phone or (now defunct) email data has actually led to real harm to US citizens. We saw our friends and family coming home in body bags from a senseless war for many years by the time the PP came out.

I hope that explains how I see some of the difference between these two incidents.