Science  People  Locations  Timeline
Index: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

Home > Pentagon Papers


The Pentagon Papers are a seven-thousand-page top-secret United States Department of Defense history of the United States involvement in the Vietnam War from 1945 to 1971. The Pentagon Papers were leaked in 1971 by Department of Defense worker Daniel Ellsberg. Excerpts were published as a series of New York Times articles beginning June 13. [1] On June 29, US Senator Mike Gravel of Alaska entered 4,100 pages of the Papers into the record of his subcommittee on Buildings and Grounds. These portions of the Papers were subsequently published by Beacon Press. [2]

The document revealed, among other things, that the government had planned to go to Vietnam even when president Lyndon Johnson was promising not to, and that there was no plan to end the war. The document increased belief in the credibility gap, hurting the war effort.

When the Times began publishing the series, President Nixon was incensed. His words to Secretary of State Henry KissingerHenry (Heinz) Alfred Kissinger (born May 27, 1923) is a German-born American diplomat and Nobel Peace Prize winner who played an important part in foreign affairs through the positions he held in several Republican administrations between 1969 and 1977. that day included "people have gotta be put to the torch for this sort of thing..." and "let's get the son-of-a-bitch in jail." (source) The next day, Attorney General John MitchellThe name John Mitchell can refer to several different people. John N. Mitchell U. Attorney General and Watergate conspirator John Mitchell president of the United Mine Workers. John Mitchell American composer. John F. Mitchell British climatologist/Climat talked Nixon into getting a federal court injunction to cease publication of the documents. This is the first time in U.S. history that any executive successfully obtained a judicial prior restraintPrior restraint is a legal term which refers to a government's actions that prevent materials from being published. Prior restraint is considered a uniquely despicable form of censorship in Anglo-American jurisprudence because it prevents the controversia against publication for national securityHouses of Parliament, London, England. These heavy (and ugly) blocks of concrete will prevent a vehicle being rammed into the building National security describes the measures taken by a state to ensure its survival and security. Measures taken to ensure reasons.

On June 18th, the Washington Post began publishing the Papers. That day the Post received a call from the Assistant Attorney General, William RehnquistChief Justice of the United States since 1986. William Hubbs Rehnquist (born October 1, 1924) is an American jurist. He is a former law clerk and Assistant Attorney General and has served as the 16th Chief Justice of the United States since he was elevate, asking them to stop publishing the documents. When the Post refused, the Justice Department sought another injunction. That court refused, and the government appealed. The Times also appealed the injunction that was issued, and on June 26 the Supreme Court of the United States agreed to take both cases, merging them into the case New York Times Co. v. U.S. (403 US 713). The Supreme Court held in a 6-3 decision that the injunctions were unconstitutional prior restraints and that the government had not met its burden of proof. The justices wrote 9 separate opinions, disagreeing on significant substantive issues. While it was a victory for the First Amendment, many felt it was a lukewarm victory at best, offering little protection for future publishers when claims of national security are at stake. Thomas Tedford and Dale Herbeck summed up the reaction of editors and publishers at the time: "As the press rooms of the Times and the Post began to hum to the lifting of the censorship order, the journalists of America pondered with grave concern the fact that for fifteen days the 'free press' of the nation had been prevented from publishing an important document and for their troubles had been given an inconclusive and uninspiring 'burden-of-proof' decision by a sharply divided Supreme Court. There was relief, but no great rejoicing, in the editorial offices of America's publishers and broadcasters." 1



Read more »

Non User