Professor Jeffrey Sachs: Our faith is in the Hands of Small Number of People who Operate in Secrecy

George Napolitano on Judging Freedom YouTube Podcast with Professor Jefferey Sachs:

“The Pentagon Papers Case which is based on very similar behavior involving Daniel Ellsberg and Theo of Washington Post and The New York Times articulates the absolute immunity from civil liability or criminal prosecution to the publishersof matters material to the public interest, no matter how the publishers get them and they are almost always stolen by somebody, some intermediary.

In Assange’s case it was Bradley Manning who 35 years in military prison was commuted to time served on the morning of the last day of Barrack Obama’s term as the president, the morning of Donald Trump’s inauguration really cutting it close but also important.

This is right up your alley Professor Sachs, the Pentagon papers case define one of the purpose for the first time, one of the purposes of the first amendment that the American Public has the right to know what their government is doing.

You know better than anybody how our government will classified almost anything it doesn’t want the public to know about even its misdeeds even its crimes often it’s embarrassments and theirs no secrets in there whatsoever.”

While discussing the pentagon papers, Professor Jeffrey Sachs said:

“What I’ve learned the hard way over more than 40 years of my work is how relentless the lying is by the US government and by this military industrial State.

I was in high school when the Pentagon Papers were first released so they had a big effect on me. But I did not suspect how pervasive the lying was and would be for decades to come.

Almost every single major foreign policy decision whether it is the coup that overthrew Yanukovich where the US played very significant role tragically, wether is was thebreakdown of negotiations between Ukraine and Russia in March 2022 that could have ended this war immediately but the United States said No.

Wether it is another topic we talked about where did that Covid virus come from which also has its US hand in creating a virus in a laboratory.

Whether it is the war in Iraq in 2003, it’s lies not just bad judgement it’s lies repeatedly told to the American people. This is why the whole system of classification is wrong.

It’s not protecting the American people, what it is, is allowing a small group of “Not very Clever People” to bring us closer and closer to nuclear Armageddon. Our faith is in the hands of small number of people who operate in secrecy and who tell lies to the American People.”

The Pentagon Papers Case: A Catalyst for Transparency and Truth

In the early 1970s, a seismic shift occurred in the American public’s perception of their government, precipitated by the courageous actions of Daniel Ellsberg.

A military analyst who served with conviction, Ellsberg found himself at a moral crossroads when confronted with the stark realities of the Vietnam War—a conflict mired in deception and hidden truths.

The Revelation Ellsberg, while employed at the RAND Corporation, executed one of the most significant leaks in American history. He released the Pentagon Papers—a top-secret study detailing U.S. government decision-making in relation to the Vietnam War—to prominent newspapers.

This act of defiance was rooted in a profound sense of duty to inform the public about the discrepancies between the government’s public statements and its actual policies.

The Documents The Pentagon Papers, officially titled “United States – Vietnam Relations, 1945–1967: A Study Prepared by the Department of Defense,” were a comprehensive examination of the United States’ political-military involvement in Vietnam from the end of World War II until 1968.

These documents laid bare the extent of U.S. actions in Indochina, contradicting the narrative that had been presented to the American people and the world.

The Impact The release of the Pentagon Papers had far-reaching implications. It not only exposed the depth of misinformation propagated by successive administrations but also sparked a landmark legal battle culminating in a Supreme Court decision that reinforced the freedom of the press.

The case underscored the public’s right to know about government actions, setting a precedent for future whistleblowers and establishing a cornerstone of democratic society—the informed citizenry.

The Aftermath Ellsberg’s actions, while controversial, ignited a national debate on the role of government secrecy and the importance of a transparent democracy.

The Pentagon Papers did not just reveal facts about a war; they exposed a systemic issue of governance that resonated with the American public’s growing desire for accountability and truth.

While writing this article, We at TheMilitarySummary blog honor the legacy of Daniel Ellsberg and the enduring value of the Pentagon Papers.

As we reflect on this pivotal moment in history, we are reminded of the power of information and the necessity of vigilant oversight to safeguard the principles upon which the United States was founded.

Professor Sachs’ Perspective: A Lifelong Crusade for Truth

As a high school student during the tumultuous early 1970s, Jeffrey Sachs witnessed a pivotal moment in American history—the release of the Pentagon Papers.

This event would profoundly shape his worldview and fuel a lifelong commitment to uncovering truth amid government obfuscation.

The Formative Years

The Pentagon Papers, revealing the extent of deception in the Vietnam War, not only shook the nation but also left an indelible mark on the young Sachs.

It was a stark lesson in the chasm that can exist between government narratives and reality—a lesson that would inform his critical approach to policy analysis and his skepticism of official statements.

Decades of Deception

Over the ensuing four decades, Sachs, armed with an economist’s precision and a historian’s perspective, observed a pattern of persistent lies in all US foreign policy decisions.

His expertise in economics and sustainable development, coupled with his firsthand experiences advising governments, provided him with a unique vantage point to assess the veracity of official statements and policies.

A Pattern of Misinformation

Sachs’ observations over the years have led him to conclude that misinformation is not an anomaly but a persistent strategy employed by the US government.

This pattern, he asserts, is not limited to a single administration or event but is a systemic issue that spans decades.

The Role of the Military-Industrial Complex

Sachs has often pointed to the military-industrial complex as a driving force behind the government’s penchant for secrecy and misinformation.

He argues that this powerful conglomerate of defense contractors and associated institutions has a vested interest in maintaining a narrative that supports their operations and objectives.

The Pursuit of Truth

Despite the challenges, Sachs remains committed to the pursuit of truth. His work, whether it be critiquing the US role in foreign conflicts or investigating the origins of COVID-19, reflects his dedication to uncovering facts and holding those in power accountable.

Professor Jeffrey Sachs’ perspective, shaped by the Pentagon Papers and reinforced by his career, serves as a reminder of the importance of transparency and the need for informed public discourse.

His voice adds a critical dimension to the conversation on government accountability and the role of the citizenry in demanding truth from their leaders.

US Foreign Policy Decisions: Navigating the Complexities of Ukraine

The geopolitical landscape of Eastern Europe has been significantly shaped by the actions and decisions of the United States, particularly in relation to Ukraine.

Two pivotal moments stand out: the 2014 political upheaval in Ukraine and the breakdown of negotiations between Ukraine and Russia in March 2022.

2014: The Shift in Ukraine

In 2014, Ukraine found itself at the center of international attention as political turmoil led to the ousting of President Viktor Yanukovych.

While the US has been accused of orchestrating the events that led to the change in Ukraine’s leadership, these claims have been largely refuted by some western commentators.

While some firmly believed in the US involvement and NATO complete disregards of the Russia State security concerns by referring to the Ambassador William J. Burns Classified Cable to the United States Government which can be found here on Wikileaks Nyet Means Nyet Memo in 2008.

The Role of Diplomacy and Supports

The US, along with its European allies, did express support for the pro-democracy protests in Ukraine. High-profile visits by US officials to Ukraine during the Euromaidan protests underscored this support.

However, it is essential to distinguish between diplomatic engagement and direct intervention in the internal affairs of a sovereign state.

March 2022: The Tense Negotiations

Fast forward to March 2022, when the world watched with bated breath as Ukraine and Russia engaged in negotiations to end the escalating conflict.

Reports suggest that the US played a cautious role, urging Ukraine to remain vigilant and not to lower its guard despite Russia’s pledge to reduce military operations near Kyiv.

The then United Kingdom Prime Minister Boris Johnson visited Ukraine and met with President Volodymyr Zelensky which after he left Kyiv, the Instanbul negotiation of 2022 was aborted by the Zelensky regime.

The Balancing Act

The US involvement in the negotiations was a delicate balancing act, providing support to Ukraine while also encouraging a diplomatic resolution to the conflict according to some of the press releases statements by the Biden Administration.

The US’s stance was clear: any progress in talks would be judged by actions, not words, reflecting a commitment to holding parties accountable.

The US foreign policy decisions regarding Ukraine have been driven by a complex interplay of promoting democratic values, supporting allies, and navigating the intricacies of international diplomacy.

While the US’s role has been significant, it is crucial to approach the narrative with a nuanced understanding that recognizes the multifaceted nature of geopolitical affairs.

US Involvement in the Ukrainian Crisis: A Comprehensive Overview

The United States’ involvement in Ukraine has been multifaceted and has evolved over time, particularly since the onset of the crisis in 2014. Here’s an overview that aims to present a balanced view:

Support for Ukraine’s Sovereignty and Territorial Integrity

* The US has consistently affirmed its support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. This stance has been reflected in various international platforms, including the United Nations.

Assistance to Ukraine

* Since 2014, the US has provided substantial assistance to Ukraine. This includes security assistance, economic aid, and humanitarian support. As of 2024, Congress has appropriated about $127.6 billion for assistance to Ukraine and other countries affected by the war, with a significant portion allocated for security assistance.

Bilateral Security Agreement

* In June 2024, the US and Ukraine signed a Bilateral Security Agreement to strengthen Ukraine’s defense capabilities and deter future aggression. This agreement is part of a broader network of support for Ukraine and reflects the US’s commitment to Ukraine’s Euro-Atlantic integration.

Public Opinion and Policy

* Public opinion in the US regarding support for Ukraine has varied, with some advocating for more support and others expressing caution. The US government’s policy has been to provide support while also promoting accountability for actions deemed as war crimes.

Military Presence in Europe

* In response to the conflict, the US and NATO have increased their military presence in Central and Eastern Europe as a deterrent against further aggression1.

Congressional Oversight

* The US Congress continues to evaluate the impact of assistance to Ukraine, the effectiveness of sanctions, and the broader implications of the conflict. This includes ongoing discussions and potential actions related to US foreign policy and national security interests.

The US role in the Ukrainian crisis is complex and involves various dimensions of support and diplomacy.

While there are differing views on the extent and nature of US involvement, the information presented in this article is based on reports and data from reputable sources, aiming to provide a factual and balanced perspective on the issue.

It’s important to consider the full spectrum of information and the context in which US actions have been taken.

Controversies and Conspiracies: Unraveling the Threads of Global Events

In the realm of international affairs, few topics have been as contentious and fraught with conspiracy theories as the origin of COVID-19 and the initiation of the 2003 Iraq War.

Both events have sparked intense debate, leading to a myriad of claims and counterclaims that challenge the official narratives.

COVID-19 Origin: A Labyrinth of Theories

The emergence of COVID-19 has led to unprecedented global upheaval, and the quest to pinpoint its origin has been equally tumultuous.

Discussions have oscillated between a natural zoonotic spillover and the possibility of a laboratory incident.

A report by the US intelligence community concluded with “low confidence” that the virus most likely arose from a laboratory incident. However, this remains a contested theory, with many scientists pointing out the lack of concrete evidence supporting a lab leak.

The debate continues, with the scientific community urging further investigation into all plausible origins of the virus.

2003 Iraq War: The WMD Allegation

The 2003 invasion of Iraq was predicated on the assertion that Saddam Hussein’s regime possessed weapons of mass destruction (WMDs), posing an imminent threat.

This claim became the cornerstone of the US and UK governments’ rationale for military action.

However, subsequent inspections and reports, including the Senate Report of Pre-war Intelligence on Iraq, revealed that the intelligence used to justify the war was flawed, and no active WMD programs were found.

The controversy over the accuracy and manipulation of intelligence data has led to widespread criticism and has been labeled by some as a deliberate pretext for war.

The controversies surrounding the COVID-19 origin and the 2003 Iraq War WMD claims serve as a stark reminder of the complexities and challenges in discerning truth in the face of conflicting information.

They underscore the necessity for rigorous scrutiny of evidence and the importance of maintaining a critical perspective when confronting narratives that have far-reaching consequences.

US Governments Classification and Secrecy: The Veil Over Truth

In the intricate web of global politics, the classification system of the United States has often been a subject of intense scrutiny.

Renowned economist Professor Jeffrey Sachs has been vocal in his criticism of this system, which he perceives as a mechanism that, at times, serves to obscure rather than protect.

The Critique of Secrecy

Sachs argues that the classification system can be misused to shield government misdeeds from public view.

He suggests that instead of safeguarding national security, it sometimes operates to control information and prevent accountability.

This critique is not unique to Sachs; it echoes a broader concern among scholars and activists about the balance between security and transparency.

The Risks of Concealment

The consequences of excessive secrecy are not merely theoretical. Sachs warns of the tangible dangers posed by the lack of oversight and unchecked power.

He highlights the potential for global catastrophic risks, including the threat of nuclear Armageddon, as a result of decisions made behind closed doors.

The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, with its Doomsday Clock, underscores this concern, indicating that we are perilously close to midnight—the metaphorical point of no return.

A Call for Transparency

Sachs’ call to action is clear: peel back the layers of secrecy and foster a culture of openness.

By doing so, we can mitigate the risks of catastrophic decisions and ensure that those who wield significant power do so with the scrutiny and consent of the governed.

Conclusion

The debate over classification and secrecy is a reminder of the delicate balance between protecting national interests and upholding democratic principles.

As we navigate these complex waters, voices like Sachs’ serve as a beacon, guiding us toward a future where transparency is not the exception but the norm.

A Beacon of Hope for Press Freedom

The recent developments in Julian Assange’s case have ignited a collective sense of relief and triumph among independent journalists worldwide.

Despite Assange’s admission of guilt to a single charge, his impending freedom symbolizes a victory for journalistic liberty.

This outcome resonates deeply within the media community, serving as a poignant reminder of the arduous journey many face in the pursuit of truth.

The saga of Assange’s legal battles and the intense scrutiny he endured underscore the formidable pressures that governments can exert on independent journalists.

Yet, his release also reaffirms the resilience of the press and the enduring spirit of those committed to transparency and accountability.

As we reflect on this moment, it is a stark testament to the importance of safeguarding the rights of journalists and the media’s role in upholding democratic values.

Assange’s case is not just about one individual; it is about the collective right to inform and be informed, a principle that remains the cornerstone of a free and open society.