Rating: 
Summary: Everyone knows the secret except those reading the documents
Review: Daniel Ellsberg's service in Vietnam has been documented in other books, but his personal account is very informative. There are several true gems in this memoir, the most remarkable being the scene in which he personally warns Kissinger of the dangers of top secret access, this just prior to Kissinger's taking the National Security Advisor position. Ellsberg warns the good Doctor that those with access to highly classified information go through a transformation process which eventually leads them to think that anyone without the same access is a simpleton not capable of judging policymakers. They stop listening to outsiders and eventually turn themselves into morons. A follow-up scene shows that Kissigner did fall victim to that syndrome at least on occasion. Perhaps the same may apply to Dan Ellsberg. He assumed that once the public saw what he saw in those "secret" papers the world would turn back on its axis. Ellsberg may not have realized that "the people" have always known the key secret -- the "great leader" will stop at nothing to remain in power and his men will do anything to keep their jobs. [See the final paragraph of David Chandler's book "Voices from S-21" for the best explanation I have seen about how men rationalize the evil they do by placing themselves in a "state of agency" to a bureaucracy to which they cling for survival.] The "secret" is as old as man himself, and never changes. Only those on the "inside" imagine themselves brilliant by virtue of their access to the details of age old political power schemes. The quotes from the Oval Office tapes of Nixon's "frank" reactions to Ellsberg's plot to publicize the McNamara study are wonderful, laughable, and a great joy to read. Would today's Oval Office tapes really be any less satisfying?
Rating: 
Summary: A History Primer with an Everyman's Voice
Review: Daniel Ellsberg¡¯s Secrets: A Memoir of Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers has many facets, which taken together make for a very stimulating and liberating narrative. However, like the Nixon administration and many former colleagues in the Department of Defense, I had some reservations about Mr. Ellsberg¡¯s decision to violate his agreements not to reveal top secret documents to the public. In the process of reading Mr. Ellsberg¡¯s account, however, I freed myself from that burden. Secrets is nearly 500 pages of history, honest narrative, an epic journey of the soul, and a practical primer on constitutional affairs. Ellsberg, the ¡°thief¡± as President Nixon called him, began his career as a Marine officer, earned a doctorate in Economics from Harvard, worked fro the Rand Corporation, and then worked for Robert McNamara in the Defense Department, beginning on August 4, 1964. He not only read mountains of top secret memos and field reports from Vietnam, but wrote more than a few himself. Even before he discovered a study Secretary McNamara commissioned, Ellsberg had heard significantly dissenting opinions from high ranking officials and Rand employees concerning President Johnson¡¯s handling of the Vietnam War. After long stays in Vietnam, Ellsberg finally began to notice the discrepancies between official reports and actual events. But not until the summer of 1969 did Ellsberg contemplate publishing the Pentagon Papers, after he met several people associated with the resistance against the war and reading about civil disobedience. It¡¯s that decision to publish a top secret document, which raises the central issue of the entire book: the proper moral and legal way to dissent. As Ellsberg argues, the agreements government employees and contractors sign not to divulge classified information are only part of executive branch administrative regulations. This code of secrecy helped to create the aura of the imperial presidency, whose enduring legacy was the history of the facts documented in the Pentagon Papers, which successive administrations hid from the public. Ellsberg rationalized his decision, by arguing, that the Nixon administration, just like all the other administrations since Truman, was subverting the Constitution. By making the information public, Ellsberg intended to redress this offense, and to allow the public, through the legislature and judiciary, to challenge President Nixon¡¯s prosecution of the war. I worked in similar environments as the ones Ellsberg describes, so his account of his indoctrination into the world of classified information is both familiar and eerie. I still believe espionage and leaking information is harmful to national security, but Ellsberg, in his defense, recounts instances of other officials leaking information for political gain. Furthermore, the Nixon administration¡¯s rationale for muzzling Ellsberg initially did involve protection of the sources, but it¡¯s own record. Ellsberg himself sanitized the information, and, until he succeeded in handing the documents to the New York Times, chose few people, mostly congressional leaders and family, to read the accounts. Along with the central narrative concerning Vietnam, Secrets also reveals much about Ellsberg¡¯s family, personal motivations, the resistance movement, and government officials, such as Kissinger. If the information in the Pentagon Papers were not disconcerting enough, the information discovered from declassified Nixon White House tapes is positively sickening. Finally, the connection revealed on those tapes between Nixon¡¯s campaign against Ellsberg and the Watergate scandal are just depressing. Through out the narrative, though, is the resolutely calm, everyman¡¯s voice Ellsberg manages to convey. Ellsberg also tries to present conflicting accounts of conversations and other published information to support his case. Although the Pentagon Papers are immense, and Ellsberg does quote from many sections, I would like to read more. Even after 500 pages, there are many questions left unanswered. Many of the people Ellsberg mentions also published their own accounts and perspectives on Vietnam, including Vann and Sheehan. Secrets in no way distracts one from discovering more, and it¡¯s an excellent place to start, because Ellsberg himself shows how to make the journey. Ellsberg¡¯s opinion about the war is clear enough, but the reader can reach his/her own. Fortunately, though, no one has to go through the ordeal he did.
Rating:
Summary: A History Primer with an Everyman's Voice
Review: Daniel Ellsberg¡¯s Secrets: A Memoir of Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers has many facets, which taken together make for a very stimulating and liberating narrative. However, like the Nixon administration and many former colleagues in the Department of Defense, I had some reservations about Mr. Ellsberg¡¯s decision to violate his agreements not to reveal top secret documents to the public. In the process of reading Mr. Ellsberg¡¯s account, however, I freed myself from that burden. Secrets is nearly 500 pages of history, honest narrative, an epic journey of the soul, and a practical primer on constitutional affairs. Ellsberg, the ¡°thief¡± as President Nixon called him, began his career as a Marine officer, earned a doctorate in Economics from Harvard, worked fro the Rand Corporation, and then worked for Robert McNamara in the Defense Department, beginning on August 4, 1964. He not only read mountains of top secret memos and field reports from Vietnam, but wrote more than a few himself. Even before he discovered a study Secretary McNamara commissioned, Ellsberg had heard significantly dissenting opinions from high ranking officials and Rand employees concerning President Johnson¡¯s handling of the Vietnam War. After long stays in Vietnam, Ellsberg finally began to notice the discrepancies between official reports and actual events. But not until the summer of 1969 did Ellsberg contemplate publishing the Pentagon Papers, after he met several people associated with the resistance against the war and reading about civil disobedience. It¡¯s that decision to publish a top secret document, which raises the central issue of the entire book: the proper moral and legal way to dissent. As Ellsberg argues, the agreements government employees and contractors sign not to divulge classified information are only part of executive branch administrative regulations. This code of secrecy helped to create the aura of the imperial presidency, whose enduring legacy was the history of the facts documented in the Pentagon Papers, which successive administrations hid from the public. Ellsberg rationalized his decision, by arguing, that the Nixon administration, just like all the other administrations since Truman, was subverting the Constitution. By making the information public, Ellsberg intended to redress this offense, and to allow the public, through the legislature and judiciary, to challenge President Nixon¡¯s prosecution of the war. I worked in similar environments as the ones Ellsberg describes, so his account of his indoctrination into the world of classified information is both familiar and eerie. I still believe espionage and leaking information is harmful to national security, but Ellsberg, in his defense, recounts instances of other officials leaking information for political gain. Furthermore, the Nixon administration¡¯s rationale for muzzling Ellsberg initially did involve protection of the sources, but it¡¯s own record. Ellsberg himself sanitized the information, and, until he succeeded in handing the documents to the New York Times, chose few people, mostly congressional leaders and family, to read the accounts. Along with the central narrative concerning Vietnam, Secrets also reveals much about Ellsberg¡¯s family, personal motivations, the resistance movement, and government officials, such as Kissinger. If the information in the Pentagon Papers were not disconcerting enough, the information discovered from declassified Nixon White House tapes is positively sickening. Finally, the connection revealed on those tapes between Nixon¡¯s campaign against Ellsberg and the Watergate scandal are just depressing. Through out the narrative, though, is the resolutely calm, everyman¡¯s voice Ellsberg manages to convey. Ellsberg also tries to present conflicting accounts of conversations and other published information to support his case. Although the Pentagon Papers are immense, and Ellsberg does quote from many sections, I would like to read more. Even after 500 pages, there are many questions left unanswered. Many of the people Ellsberg mentions also published their own accounts and perspectives on Vietnam, including Vann and Sheehan. Secrets in no way distracts one from discovering more, and it¡¯s an excellent place to start, because Ellsberg himself shows how to make the journey. Ellsberg¡¯s opinion about the war is clear enough, but the reader can reach his/her own. Fortunately, though, no one has to go through the ordeal he did.
Rating:
Summary: Fascinating and important
Review: Ellsberg has presented us with a fascinating explanation of how an "elected monarchy" behaves when it wants something and is not getting it. According to Ellsberg, five presidents wanted victory in Vietnam, and were not getting it. Rather than bend to reality and suffer a bruised ego, their reaction was to escalate the war and to lie about it. The author makes a very plausible case that had it not been for the Pentagon Papers and Watergate, the war would have been continued with total disregard of an opposition political trend, and the escalated bombing resulting in mass civilian casualties.
Ellsberg himself is a unique figure in that he is an intellectual, a former marine, and worked at the highest levels in advisory capacity. Reading this book not only gives the reader the history of the Pentagon Papers, but raises questions about the nature of government and leadership. Will leaders degenerate into an "elected monarchy" unless their actions are constantly monitored? If so, what are the best mechanisms to ensure that the leaders are accountable and that their actions are fully disclosed, without bogging them down to total ineffectiveness? I highly recommend this book. Lets learn from history, so we are not doomed to experience such things as the Vietnam war again.
Rating: 
Summary: unseemly
Review: Ellsberg refers to the boss who protected him - a Mr. McNaughton - as "deceptive". I wonder how many who protected Mr Ellsberg came to use the same word.
Rating:
Summary: Still a Jerk
Review: Ellsberg's claim to fame is that he stole a government report about Vietnam from the Pentagon, and delivered copies to the New York Times and the Washington Post. For the last 30 years, he has been taking victory laps for that criminal act. His book is an argument that he and his partner, Anthony Russo, are as important to America as the Founding Fathers. The photos in the book are overwhelming evidence of Ellsberg's narcissism. Although he was a minor character at best in Vietnam, he pretends to be the focus of attention. His book is good in one respect: it reveals the self-righteousness of anti-war activists. Don't waste your money on this book.
Rating:
Summary: well-written and insightful
Review: Ellsberg's memoir of his life in the 60s and early 70s is fascinating and difficult to put down. It chronicles his journey through the dangerous jungles of Vietnam and through the dangerous jungles of Washington, DC, and his conversion from hawk to dove. He effortlessly carries the reader through his tenure under Robert McNamera, walking point on the ground in Vietnam, his RAND consulting career, life on the lamb, and courtroom battles with the Nixon administration which bleed into the Watergate scene. Through his discussion of the contents of the 4000 pages of the Pentagon Papers, he systematically refutes the Cold War "domino theory" that the last five presidents had succumbed to. He exposes the governments' entire Vietnam strategy as one of ideological rhetoric, misunderstanding, and miscalculation. While an exciting page-turner, it is also a depressing/disturbing book based on what it reveals about the Executive branch. Regardless of one's politics, the reader forever will look differently at how his government handles and reacts to foreign wars and agression.
Rating:
Summary: well-written and insightful
Review: Ellsberg's memoir of his life in the 60s and early 70s is fascinating and difficult to put down. It chronicles his journey through the dangerous jungles of Vietnam through the dangerous jungles of Washington, DC, and his conversion from hawk to dove. He effortlessly carries the reader through his tenure under Robert McNamera, walking point on the ground in Vietnam, his RAND consulting career, life on the lamb, and courtroom battles with the Nixon administration which bleed into the Watergate scene. Through his discussion of the contents of the 4000 pages of the Pentagon Papers, he systematically refutes the Cold War "domino theory" that the last five presidents had succumbed to. He exposes the governments' entire Vietnam strategy as one of ideological rhetoric, misunderstanding, and miscalculation. While an exciting page-turner, it is also a depressing/disturbing book. Regardless of one's politics, the reader forever will look differently at how his government handles and reacts to foreign wars and agression.
Rating: 
Summary: Good Book - Bad Audiobook!
Review: First, let me say that Daniel Ellsberg should have read the entire book by himself. It was moving, personal, authentic and very convincing. The reader hired to read this audiobook sounds unprofessional. His attempt on voices of generals and presidents are really bad and not at all well done.
Overall, I learned a lot from this book. A lot! Too bad that that the US government did not learn anything from previous history.
Rating:
Summary: Transformation of an Insider
Review: I honestly did not think I could read and re-read a five hundred page book with detailed accounts of history going back to World War II. But after listening to Kutler's presentation of Richard Nixon's secret tapes in Abuse of Power, I felt that I needed to know more about the history of Southeast Asia and of the American presidency, particularly that of Richard Nixon.
The book is worth the concentration required to focus on such complex material written by a stunningly brilliant man. Although I grew up during the escalation of American conflict in Vietnam, I had no idea it dated back to Truman and continued through five presidencies, most of it secret. The public relations label of "Watergate caper" had stuck with me from my early twenties, and I had no idea of the breadth of dirty tricks of which Watergate was merely the tip of the iceberg. I conclude that the firing or resignation of virtually everyone at the top levels of the White House, including the president, was not to clear up a mess, but to further obfuscate. Much evidence had already been burned or shredded or erased or "deep-sixed," as one top-level official ordered. As the effort to paint the Watergate break-in as a "caper" by over-zealous Cubans and a few die-hard loyalists unraveled, mostly because these loyalists were not receiving the hush money they demanded, it becomes clear that the crimes of the Nixon administration go far beyond Watergate or the burglary of the office of Daniel Ellsberg's psychiatrist. We're talking proposed kidnappings, physical assaults, illegal wiretaps, false leaks to the press, faked memos, and perhaps even murder.
We certainly know that thousands of Americans, and hundreds of thousands of Southeast Asians were killed and mutilated for presidential purposes kept from the American public.
Ellsberg states that most Americans have a built-in filter that prevents us, no matter how hardened or cynical, from believing that our own administration would lie to us or commit criminal acts. Ellsberg himself struggled for decades with his growing awareness that his insider status as a consultant to the White House, including two years in the battlefields of Vietnam, led not to the glory of democracy, but to the deaths of innocents.
Secrets is no simplistic self-justification for leaking the Pentagon Papers, the act for which Daniel Ellsberg became famous. Daniel Ellberg was a brilliant young man who innocently entered the lower level of administration after graduating from Harvard, then serving in the Marine Corps. He believed that he was serving his country. He fought hard against his growing awareness that the White House was enfolded in a tissue of lies.
He risked his life to research Vietnam "on the ground," even though he'd already served his military duties.
What is fascinating about this book in terms of tone is that Dr. Ellsberg never stoops to name-calling or castigation. A true researcher, he allows evidence to speak for itself.
|
