WikiLeaks says it won't be threatened by Pentagon

[unhappycamper]

WikiLeaks says it won't be threatened by Pentagon
By KEITH MOORE, Associated Press Writer Keith Moore, Associated Press Writer – 31 mins ago

STOCKHOLM – WikiLeaks will publish its remaining 15,000 Afghan war documents within a month, despite warnings from the U.S. government, the organization's founder said Saturday.

The Pentagon has said that secret information will be even more damaging to security and risk more lives than WikiLeaks' initial release of some 76,000 war documents.

"This organization will not be threatened by the Pentagon or any other group," Julian Assange told reporters in Stockholm. "We proceed cautiously and safely with this material."

In an interview with The Associated Press, he said that if U.S. defense officials want to be seen as promoting democracy then they "must protect what the United States' founders considered to be their central value, which is freedom of the press."

"For the Pentagon to be making threatening demands for censorship of a press organization is a cause for concern, not just for the press but for the Pentagon itself," the Australian added.

[northernlights]

1. for the pentagon to be claiming risk to lives

is a joke. :crazy:

Wanna tell me again exactly *who* has "blood on their hands?" :rofl:

[msongs]

2. Mr. Assange better watch out for drones that kill more than women and kids nt

[Iggo]

3. The Pentagon doesn't care who or how many die.

Never has.

They just don't want the lights turned on.

[NJmaverick]

5. Neither does WikiLeaks

the only difference is the Pentagon is tasked with protecting a nation.

[Iggo]

8. That's not the only difference.

For starters, WikiLeaks didn't kill half-a-million to a million Iraqis over the last ten years.

Let's go ahead and call that for enders, too.

[NJmaverick]

4. Wikileaks will also not let a few innocent civilians getting killed as a result

of their actions stop them either.

[G_j]

6. Jeremy Scahill: WikiLeaks and War Crimes

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8940309

WikiLeaks and War Crimes
Jeremy Scahill
August 12, 2010

Four months before WikiLeaks rocketed to international notoriety, the Robin Hoods of the Internet quietly published a confidential CIA document labeled "NOFORN" (for "no foreign nationals")—meaning that it should not be shared even with US allies. That's because the March "Red Cell Special Memorandum" was a call to arms for a propaganda war to influence public opinion in allied nations. The CIA report describes a crisis in European support for the Afghanistan war, noting that 80 percent of German and French citizens are against increasing their countries' military involvement. The report suggests that "Afghan women could serve as ideal messengers in humanizing the role in combating the Taliban because of women's ability to speak personally and credibly about their experiences under the Taliban, their aspirations for the future, and their fears of a Taliban victory."

On July 25 WikiLeaks published its massive cache of classified documents on the war in Afghanistan. Four days later, Time magazine posted on its website its August 9 cover story, featuring a horrifying image of a beautiful young Afghan woman named Aisha with a gaping hole where her nose once was, under the headline "What Happens if We Leave Afghanistan"—echoing the strategy laid out in the Red Cell report .

These two media events unfolded in starkly different ways. While Time has been praised for telling Aisha's story, WikiLeaks has been characterized as a criminal syndicate with blood on its hands. Former Bush administration speechwriter Marc Thiessen called for the United States to use whatever means necessary to snatch WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, including rendering him from abroad. Others have called for the United States to shut down WikiLeaks and prosecute its members. Michigan Republican Congressman Mike Rogers has called for the alleged leaker, 22-year-old Army intelligence analyst Bradley Manning, to be executed if he is convicted.

Time managing editor Richard Stengel drew the contrast with WikiLeaks in an editor's letter accompanying the story, claiming that the WikiLeaks documents, unlike the Time article, fail to provide "insight into the way life is lived" in Afghanistan or to speak to "the consequences of the important decisions that lie ahead." Actually, the documents do exactly that. WikiLeaks may not be a media outlet and Assange may not be a journalist, but why does it matter? The documents provide concrete evidence of widespread US killings of Afghan civilians and attempts to cover up killings, and they portray unaccountable Special Operations forces as roaming the country hunting people—literally. They describe incidents of mass outrage sparked by the killing of civilians and confirm that the United States is funding both sides of the war through bribes paid to the Taliban and other resistance forces.

..more..

[glitch]

7. Dear Pentagon, Tell it to the drones. Love, Wikileaks nt