Monday May 28, 2012

JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION

Pentagon asks media not to publish war leaks

World Oct. 19, 2010 - 05:52AM JST ( 10 )

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

Order by Time Order by Popularity

10 Comments

0

sabiwabiOct. 19, 2010 - 11:26AM JST

WikiLeaks editor-in-chief Julian Assange on Monday played down expectations that a leak was imminent. In a Twitter post, Assange said information 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-person task force has been on high alert.

Maybe they're looking for excuses to go after Wikileaks, or for placing controls on the internet, for national security reasons, of course ; ).
0

smithinjapanOct. 19, 2010 - 12:15PM JST

"WikiLeaks was largely unknown until this spring, when it released a gritty war video of Army helicopters gunning down a group of men—including two unarmed Reuters photographers—in Iraq."

They don't want hundreds more incidents like this coming to light, no doubt. I say publish it all. I realize it has the POTENTIAL to endanger troops on the ground, but if that's because everyone's been lied to, then I think it's need to know. Especially if it's involved in reasons for going INTO the war in the first place, or sheds light on actual numbers of deaths, etc. Basically, this is going to make a lot of people look really bad, and so they're begging that the truth doesn't come to light.

If it's classified information such as troop movements or plans on raids, etc., however, then I agree they should not be published.
0

mikehuntezOct. 19, 2010 - 02:43PM JST

There is no way wikileaks could have gone over 77,000 documents to see what was good to leak and what was potentially endangering lives. For this recklessness I think the guy should be prosecuted to the full extent for his recklessness.
0

AuntyAmericanOct. 19, 2010 - 03:15PM JST

There`s nothing that puts troops lives at risk like sending them into a foreign country to fight an elusive and clever enemy.

USA you get everything you ask for.

Go Wikileaks.
0

TimRussertOct. 19, 2010 - 03:27PM JST

Go Wikileaks.

And the collateral damage the accused rapist Julian Assange does? The foreign-funded Taliban and foreign Mujahadeen in Afghanistan who read the leaks will slaughter anyone they conclude is a "collaborator", regardless of any actual participation.

Innocent civilians killed? Who cares though, as long as there is even the slight possibility that the far Left imagines they can score a few points against the big bad Yankee and coalition troops. People who support Assange are not against war, they are against losing their petty little battles - against capitalism, or against "neo-liberalism", or against "eco-outlaws" or against Western civilization itself.
0

nandakandamandaOct. 19, 2010 - 03:52PM JST

Well, some troops, sure, yes. But they are secondary, in my opinion.

With these leaks there is a possibility now of more collateral damage among Afghan civilians than all the deaths caused by fighting so far. This is what should be troubling us.

Plus...

Efficient eradication of all potential opposition will also guarantee that the brutal Taliban regime gets in unopposed...
0

SuperLibOct. 19, 2010 - 04:14PM JST

Mostly it comes down to supporting the war or not supporting the war. If you supported the war then you probably see this guy as someone illegally releasing classified documents that could endanger others. If you don't support the war then you probably see this guy as someone illegally releasing classified documents that could endanger others, but you just don't care.
0

talking2UOct. 19, 2010 - 06:50PM JST

Innocent civilians killed?

You can't get any more penny-wise pound-foolish than that. Bombs and predator drones flying around more randomly than what we are told, (and we know this thanks to LEAKS) but what we really need to be wary of is this specter called information?

I will give you credit and just assume you are trying to fool us. Sorry, not fooled.
0

MisterCreosoteOct. 19, 2010 - 11:21PM JST

Seems to me the much bigger story is that Julian Assange has recently been denied citizenship by Sweden, which is like the spiritual home of political correctness. Obviously this is someone who cannot be trusted, or who is 'a hater.'
0

talking2UOct. 20, 2010 - 07:27AM JST

Is anyone really going to let an attack on one of the many messangers make them deaf to the message? Anyone that dumb?