EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Transcript: Today's Live Q&A With NSA Leaker, Edward Snowden
- 'Tip of the Iceberg': Senators Warn Far More Data May Not Be Safe
- Playing the Obama Bumper Sticker Game
- Intentional and Evil: Court Marshall Sexually Assaults Woman, Then Arrests Her When She Protests
- David Brooks, Tom Friedman, Bill Keller Wish Snowden Had Just Followed Orders
- Transcript: Today's Live Q&A With NSA Leaker, Edward Snowden
- The Terror Con
- Remembering Satyajit Ray’s Hirok Rajar Deshe: On Edward Snowden, Resistance and Inverted Totalitarianism
- Pentagon Bracing for Public Dissent Over Climate and Energy Shocks
- Bank of America Lied to Homeowners and Rewarded Foreclosures, Former Employees Say
Popular content
Today's Top News
Fearing Increased Wikileaks 'Credibility', Pentagon Asks Media Not to Use Leaked War Files
WASHINGTON - The Pentagon asked media organizations yesterday not to publish any classified war files released by the WikiLeaks website as the United States braces for the potential disclosure of hundreds of thousands of secret Iraq war documents.
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. (Photograph: Andrew Winning/Reuters) In July, WikiLeaks obtained and released nearly 77,000 classified military reports from Afghanistan. Now, the Pentagon says the group has as many as 400,000 documents from a military database on operations in Iraq.
WikiLeaks editor in chief Julian Assange downplayed expectations that a leak was imminent. In a Twitter post, Assange said such reports were coming from "a single tabloid blog'' that had put out a "tremendous amount'' of false information about his site.
Still, the military says its 120-member task force has been on high alert. The group has been reviewing the documents for weeks to determine what information might be compromised.
Marine Corps Colonel Dave Lapan, a Pentagon spokesman, told reporters that the military isn't sure whether WikiLeaks has shared the Iraq war logs with any news organizations. But, he said, media should not disseminate the "stolen'' information even if it's already posted online by WikiLeaks.
"The concern is that WikiLeaks as an organization should not be made more credible by having credible news organizations facilitate what they're doing,'' Lapan said.
In a separate development, Swedish authorities rejected Assange's request for residency, a potential setback in his efforts to gain protection from Swedish press freedom laws.
Assange also said his company has been cut off by a company that handled many of its donations. He blamed the financial cutoff on the US government, which denied any involvement.
Assange said London-based Moneybookers.com pulled the plug on its relationship with WikiLeaks over the summer, shortly after the website published the leaked documents.
Related news: WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange slams Wired magazine on Twitter (Guardian/UK)
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
46 Comments so far
Show AllI see that Mr. Lapan makes reference to "credible news organizations". Must be a damn short list.
//"The concern is that WikiLeaks as an organization should not be made more credible by having credible news organizations facilitate what they're doing,'' Lapan said.//
Of course, "credible news organizations" must remain "credible" so they can feed us more lies, and news organizations that publish unwanted truth must not gain credibility.
Bravo, Pentagon spokesman Marine Corps Colonel Dave Lapan!
No wonder the Taliban, or whomever the enemy du jour is, is kicking Amerikkka's ass with generals like this Lapan moron running the show.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11570283
an article about mr. assange's residency refusal..........
Seconded.
the scandinavian elites are fully incorporated into the global fascist capitalist class.
BOYCOTT SWEEDEN!
Of course the media, particularly NBC, which is owned by defense contractor General Electric, will toe the Pentagon line about publishing any war crimes that Wikileaks might expose. As to the rest of the corporate-owned media, they are merely propaganda ministers for the corporate-owned government, so they, too, will likewise fall into line.
Gawd bless Amerikkka!
Tom, I am wondering about you use of Ks in Amerikkka. Doesn't that suggest the klan? Or just the image of a country that is so far off track?
I think both of those notions apply.
Most that I have seen that refer to "Amerikkka" are pointing out the racist and fascist nature of those who control the government. It is not usually used by KKK supporters, but by those who see the KKK and their ilk as being in control.
does anyone know the way to make donations at this time to Wikileaks?
do they need money?
What is the military afraid of? The last release of documents did nothing to change policy and very little to change perceptions of the "GWOT". Civilians were killed!! Stop the presses!! Everybody knew that already and most of the U.S. citizenry likely believes that either a) they're ragheads so what, or b) the old fog of war rationale, these things happen etc. So even if every major newspaper published these documents, or just the most incendiary parts, the release of these would likely result in a collective yawn on the part of the public.
The fascist amerikan military fears the truth! Of course the brainwashed masses DO NOT care about the pain and suffering their empire is/has caused since its inception. Therein lies a large part of why amerika IS collapsing - no compassion !
Well, Jill, what you're seeing her at CS is about as much decent press as we're going to get, and many of the articles here spin their own little propogandas.
What we need is a nation that's truly pissed that we're being lied to, and from where I sit and the people I talk to, we have a nation where a minority know we're being lied to, a majority of which respond with hopelessness or indifference. Indifference is the worst, particularly among the young, who have never experienced a press that would keep the Pentagon Papers in the news. Hunger for the truth is rare among our desensitized youth.
"Hunger for the truth is rare among our desensitized youth."
How can you hunger for something you've never had?
Perhaps it's recognition by the youth that have been lied to by their schools, government, churches, media, and parents their whole lives. When people who lie get "ahead" when truth tellers stay poor and unheard, what incentive does a search for truth hold?
Especially when the young people who do look for the truth cannot even get taken seriously by the previous generations and are dismissed for being "naive" or "idealistic" when they try to organize action based on truth.
In truth, most "youth" I encounter are more aware of the "truth" as you put it than those of previous generations. They just don't see anything that they can do about it.
The perfect "Farenheit 451" society has been achieved. Mission accomplished!
Free press= free society; too bad free press is Dead in fascist amerika. No free press til after the empire falls.
The only breaking news we get today from our media today is celebrity gossip.
"The Pentagon (US Government) asked media organizations yesterday not to publish any classified war files released by the WikiLeaks website as the United States braces for the potential disclosure of hundreds of thousands of secret Iraq war documents."
What is shocking is not that the US Government is "asking" the media not to publish news of which it disapproves (for which a nod or a raised eyebrow would normally suffice), but that Wikileaks has pushed it into such desperate straits that it must do so so blatantly, so openly, so cravenly. It should be embarassing and degrading for such a mighty entity to make such an abject plea publicly. The time may have been when such a beseeching announcement by the government would have been greeted by derision. Now, it is expected that that timorousness will not be acknowledged for what it is, but recast as a clarion call to which the credible media will nobly respond. And that expectation will not be disappointed.
How did we get twisted into this grotesque society?
That is so true: the mighty U.S., who asserts the right to come into our houses and open our mail, who tries to look up our very asses, who tells us if we have nothing to hide, we shouldn't fear their big eyeball constantly peering at us, has to flutter its little handkerchief and beg: "Oh, my, please, Mr. Newspaperman! Don't tell the public what WE are doing!" Our taxes pay these morons' salaries as they murder, lie, and then try to hide it!
Years ago a newspaper would fight for the right to publish this information. Well, it's going to get out one way or another. Some people will be aware and some won't, but everyone senses something's gone horribly awry in this country, even if they can't quit place their fingers on it.
DoD has undoubtedly already talked to the media in private - in fact, they probably work closely together all the time. This public statement is some kind of propagandistic move, to provide CYA for themselves and the media, etc.
I'd like to see a 120-person 'task force' studying how to end the 'wars' that lead to the documents that must now be 'leaked' rather than a ridiculous one studying how to deal with said documents.
A credible news organization to Colonel Lapdog is one that is a media whore, like Foxy News!
? actually in truth..its the fascist news channel !
This represents a very interesting countermove in the ongoing asymmetrical cyberwar between tiny Wikileaks and the massive Pentagon, and it may be effective in the short run. If you looked at the huge Afghan War document trove at wikileaks, you can see how hard it is to prioritize and decipher this mass. On its initial strike, Wikileaks gave the material to the well-staffed NY Times, UK Guardian and Der Spiegel, who did the job of creating readable versions. Even so, much of the US audience failed to read even those versions. (I think the Guardian's version was the most complete of the three, particularly in its emphasis on how Pakistan was playing both sides in the Afghan war.)
It is possible, though, that a lighter and faster force like Wikileaks will eventually outflank the mighty Pentagon. This has been true in many kinds of war ever since the small Greek ships defeated the mighty Persian armada at Salamis.
A great obstacle to Wikilinks making a swift countermove is, at present, its determinedly neutral position regarding the US and its opponents. Wikileaks may well be tempted to form an alliance with Al Jazeera, Pravda or other outlets beyond Western control, but I think that could fatally undermine their neutrality, and discredit them with the important Western audiences they are seeking to influence.
Dear valatius;
Why would Wikileaks HAVE to make a swift countermove? They don't and they won't. Time is on their side, as they let the Pentagon issue news release, and news release about what wikileaks is doing ( when it isn't doing anything!)
When Wikileaks is ready, it will move.
"Swift countermove?" That is the U.S military reaction all the time. No time to react or think...JUST DO IT!
Didn't I read somewhere today that a gun went off in the Pentagon? Yeah, probably some generaal just shooting himself in the foot again.
Of course, valatius, the little guy, as in the American revolution, with less to carry and more mind to think for a real cause, will always win. Yeah, generals, you can't keep the helots down forever!
MSM is between the rock and a hard place.
if they obey pentagon's order, which they will,
what little credibility they have left will be gone instantly.
if they refuse to bow down to pentagon, which will never happen, they will be publicizing their own complicity in the war crimes through the documents.
they should refuse and go down in flame, i'd say, LOL.
Wikileaks opened the file on the Pentagon's propaganda campaign to win over Europe's hearts and minds toward their war aims which was really to liberate Afghan women from oppression, today in Democracynow news a top Canadian military commander of one of the largest Canadian military bases in Afghanistan was arrested for crimes against women, including murder,rape and stealing underwear. Col David Russel Williams. I believe Wikileaks was exposing propaganda. But the Pentagon is turning the issue to be about Wikileaks and away from a forum on themselves.
Correction: he wasn't arrested today. That happened a while back (probably a year or so). He was convicted today. If that makes any difference.
More than likely the other torture pictures that Obama denied release had to do with the torture of women, and the government knew that might be the tipping point for the American public. Maybe
It certainly would be the last straw for many in the middle east.
The article mentions, Marine Corps Colonel Dave Lapan statement, “The concern is that WikiLeaks as an organization should not be made more credible by having credible news organizations facilitate what they're doing.” By “credible news organizations” he means corporate news organizations that tow the Government’s propaganda perspective. For example, an Apache helicopter shoots unarmed Iraq Reuters reporters, and cleared the pilots of any wrong doing. The video appears to show the pilots committing war crimes, even though the U.S. “military experts” who reviewed the tape did not find anything objectionable about the pilot’s actions. Not one “credible” newspaper asked if the U.S. military would reopen this case after the Wikileaks' video release.
www.thefirstpost.co.uk/61771,life,video,video-us-apache-helicopter-shoots-unarmed-iraq-reuters-reporters-wikileaks
"The Pentagon asked"
Not true. Our pentagon theatens or bribes but it never asks.
When are we going to get a list of the members of the media considered 'friendly' to the pentagon?
When will we know who in the media regularly serve as mouthpieces for CIA or pentagon propaganda in return for access to scoops?
When hell freezes over.
To prove your point, see this "opinion" on the NYT:
Privacy vs. Profits
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/19/privacy-vs-profits/?scp=5&sq=Wright&st=cse
The writer, Mr. Wright (no kidding!), shamelessly states "I don’t know whether the journalists pointing to this peril are right, but I do know this: They better hope so. The further erosion of privacy may be the salvation of journalism — the only way journalists can hope to make a living in the thus-far nonlucrative world of online publishing."
Need I say more? Except that most of the commenters, supposedly well-educated, intelligent, enlightened people actually agree.
And this "sell" is on the issue of privacy. They have ardent "advocated" pushing their agenda in every single front, the Pentagon first and foremost. When I see things like this, I know that the US is finished, expiration date is on it for all who care to see it.
TRUTH
JUSTICE
&
THE AMERICAN WAY
talk about your oxymorons.
i'm not sure what "twitter feed" is. i opened the url you provided, but not at all sure what the torrent page is about. hey! i won a prize for being the the 100 thousandth to visit.
bet i'm not the only one.
Let's see.....compare the following statements:
Pentagon asks puppet press not to purview papers.
US news is censored.
Any difference?
Only a nuanced difference. Complicity (bribes or media plants) has better PR than Coercion (threats).
But the nazis that run our government will do whatever they want.
The MSM *might* allow some bad stuff to come out, if it happened in Iraq after January 2009. Corporate Media and the group they serve might be willing to throw a few military guys under the bus if they thought it would finish off Obama for 2012, and more Democrats this November.
Of course, they will have to remain studiously silent about all the crimes committed while W was the figurehead. Sort of like not *ever* mentioning it was Rumsfeld who hooked Saddam Hussein up with those famous chemical weapons in the first place - or that Hussein was a CIA asset since the time of his failed CIA-backed assassination attempt of Qassim in 1959.
I wonder if Julian is now the CIAs most feared man?
There was a time when the good doctor Che held that noteable position.
The Pentagon need not fret. Their corporate media arm would never, ever do anything that isn't in the best interests of its owners. Besides, who cares? it's not as if the sheeple are paying attention much less understand or care what is being done with their money and in their name. Particularly now that I hear Bristol Palin is doing the monkey dance on DWTS.
It's about time our government started running scared.
_Maybe_ we can get enough information to _finally_ "hang" George "Puppet" Bush and his puppeteers for TREASON.
The Pentagon should be worrying about its own credibility issues instead of Assange's.
Only a troubled conscience, assuming there is one, would need to hide something. What is the US afraid of? Even without these revelations by WikiLeaks, by now the entire world knows what the US is all about: the biggest terrorist nation on Earth.