Monday, November 19, 2007

Ellsberg Confirms 9/11 Censorship

Former government official and famed whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg recently said that Sibel Edmonds' case is "far more explosive than the Pentagon Papers".

Ellsberg also confirmed the media's censorship about 9/11:
Ellsberg seemed hardly surprised that today's American mainstream broadcast media has so far failed to take Edmonds up on her offer, despite the blockbuster nature of her allegations.

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 . . . .'"

Let's recap:
  • High-level government personnel (the media would not take low-level people seriously) are calling the media threatening to prosecute anyone who reveals that U.S. politicians and other insiders committed crimes in connection with 9/11 for violating national security
  • The failure of the media to cover the Edmonds' story is so normal and routine, that Ellsberg isn't even seem surprised by it
And if the New York Times refused to run a story revealing that the NSA had been illegally spying on Americans for over a year until after the election was held, how much more likely is it that the media would cover up -- for political reasons -- the greatest crime committed by the U.S. government in its history?

Edmonds herself sums it up pretty well when she says: "The only way they got away with it was because of the mainstream media."

The media can't pretend that they are trying to protect national security, as Edmonds confirms:

"I am not about to expose any methods of intelligence gathering. I am not going to expose any ongoing investigations, or even any investigations that may be ongoing," she told us, explaining that all relevant investigations about which she has information were long ago shut down by the government.

"I am not going to name any informant's name. I am not going to jeopardize any ongoing intelligence. Anything I'm going to be talking about, I know they are investigations that have been shut down by January and February of 2002."

And the media can't feign ignorance. Edmonds says "I know [the media] have it because people from the FBI have come in and given it [the information] to them. They've given them the documents and specific case-numbers on my case."




1 Comments:

Blogger Antares said...

Excellent and potent work, sir. I've blogrolled you and cirtculated an email with your link!

6:47 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home