Re: RE: Re: Lying About Vietnam (and lying about econom ics)

[Michael Pugliese <debsian@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

   Damn! Newest issue? Ellsberg was reputed to be working on an
autobiography. A friend who went on to SUNY, Binghampton, Tom Riefer, got to
do some research for him. And, my step-Dad who knew folks cat RAND Corp. in
the 60's, sez he was quite a "swinger".
Michael Pugliese

Michael

----- Original Message -----
From: "Brown, Martin (NCI)" <mbrown@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 8:51 AM
>Subject: [PEN-L:14385] RE: Re: Lying About Vietnam (and lying about econom
ics)


> It got a very negative review in The Nation
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Pugliese [mailto:debsian@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 11:45 AM
> To: pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [PEN-L:14383] Re: Lying About Vietnam (and lying about
> economics)
>
>
>    See the new bio by Tom Wells on Ellsberg.Looks great. Wells, also
wrote,
> "The War At Home, " UC Press, on the anti-Vietnam War mvmnt.
> Michael Pugliese
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tom Walker" <timework@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: <pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 8:37 AM
> Subject: [PEN-L:14380] Lying About Vietnam (and lying about economics)
>
>
> > Daniel Ellsberg is also author of the 1961 article, "Risk, ambiguity and
> the
> > Savage axioms" published in the _Quarterly Journal of Economics_. That
> > article makes it quite clear why and when it doesn't make sense to treat
> > *uncertainty* as if it was probabilistic risk, something that economic
> > modelers persist on doing anyway.
> >
> > June 29, 2001
> >
> > Lying About Vietnam
> >
> > By DANIEL ELLSBERG
> >
> > The Pentagon Papers, published 30 years ago this month, proved that the
> > government had long lied to the country. Indeed, the papers revealed a
> > policy of concealment and quite deliberate deception from the Truman
> > administration onward.
> >
> > A generation of presidents, believing that the course they were
following
> > was in the best interests of the country, nevertheless chose to conceal
> from
> > Congress and the public what the real policy was, what alternatives were
> > being pressed on them from within the government, and the pessimistic
> > predictions they were receiving about the prospects of their chosen
> course.
> >
> > Why the lies and concealment? And why, starting in 1969, did I risk
prison
> > to reveal the documentary record? I can give a definite answer to the
> second
> > question: I believed that the pattern of secret threats and escalation
> > needed to be exposed because it was being repeated under a new
president.
> . .
> >
> >
http://partners.nytimes.com/2001/06/29/opinion/29ELLS.html?todaysheadlines
> > Tom Walker
> > Bowen Island, BC
> > 604 947 2213
> >
>