U.S. Army to Help WikiLeaks Censor Files?

August 18th, 2010

Update: DoD on the Matter

Via: Twitter:

We are not interested in negotiating

—End Update—

Your what hurts?

Via: CBC News:

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange says the U.S. Army has expressed willingness to discuss the online whistleblower’s request for help in reviewing classified documents from the Afghan war and removing information that could harm civilians.

Assange told The Associated Press by telephone that contact was established this week between WikiLeaks’ lawyers and the General Counsel of the U.S. Army. WikiLeaks has asked the Pentagon for help in reviewing the documents to purge the names of Afghan informants from the files.

WikiLeaks already has published 77,000 classified U.S. military reports covering the war in Afghanistan from 2004 to 2010, an extraordinary disclosure which some say could expose human rights abuses across the NATO-led campaign.

On Sunday, WikiLeaks said it will publish its remaining 15,000 Afghan war documents within a month.

The supposed offer from the U.S. Army was surprising given the Pentagon’s original’s stance. The Pentagon has accused WikiLeaks of endangering the lives of soldiers and informants in the field, and demanded that WikiLeaks refrain from publishing any more secret data.

Keep in Mind: WikiLeaks Founder, “Constantly Annoyed that People Are Distracted by False Conspiracies Such as 9/11?

7 Responses to “U.S. Army to Help WikiLeaks Censor Files?”

  1. cryingfreeman says:

    Fishier than a mermaid’s corset. Wikileaks looks to me (and countless others) like it has limited hangout stamped all over it.

  2. Dennis says:

    But this way Wikileaks can release information and retain the moral high ground of not endangering the lives of civilians by putting the responsibility to edit out names in the army’s hands and as long as Afghani civilians’ names (and things that point to them) are all that’s removed the facts should still remain.

    Or am I simply naive?

  3. Dennis says:

    Having said that, I’ve tentatively placed Wikileaks in my ‘Hmmm’ basket for the time being.

  4. rotger says:

    To me this is the end of any remaining hope I had toward wikileaks. I’m pretty ashamed I gave 10$ to support them while they were “down”.

  5. Eileen says:

    @dennis and cryingfreeman,
    Not 5 minutes ago I sent an email to Kevin re Pakistan coverage. Dunno what’s going on, but if there is a timeline out there, Pakistan started to flood on, or very near to the day that Wikileaks released its war diary.
    Yes, yes, I know too rich even for my coinkeydinakal blood.
    But everyone seems to be ignoring this strange coninkeydink.
    I for one think that the Wikileaks War Diaries papers have unleashed the HARPsichord on the Pakistani people. Like its their fault that the Bush Administration gave billions of dollars to the Musharef regime. And where in the world is Musharef lately?
    According to What REally Happened, the U.S. is still using bombs via drones to kill peole there even as this flood affects millions upon millions of people.
    I don’t have a probably with Wikileaks going to the Army for help. They’ve been pounded for endangering lives. Mitigation of collateral murder is a good thing methinks. It is also good that Wikileaks continues to release info. Finally, something to refocus the human brain on the war “effort” rather than on some other mind numbing discussion about some TV show that is brain dead material to begin with.
    I’ve had a bumper sticker on the back of my car since 2005, that says “Bring them Home.” The bumper sticker is falling apart. I don’t care, I’m leaving it there. I am not going to diss Wikileaks. I relate to the hair turning white overnight. This doesn’t happen to people who don’t feel emotional pain INTENSELY.
    Limited hangout? My gut says NO.

  6. Eileen says:

    And if Carmen Sandiago was on the case re where in the World is Musharef? I’ll bet ya he is in “a very limited hang out situation” at the newly established Bush II camp in Paraquay.
    Filing his fingernails nervously, I am sure.

  7. lagavulin says:

    I agree with you, Dennis (on the first post). Wikileaks has the documents, so they hold the cards. They can accept the redacts or deny them…and in accepting them they lay-off a great deal of responsibility for any snafu’s that might result, moral or otherwise.

    And (as with almost everything in modern life) there are two opposing ways this could be viewed: as Wikileaks selling out some of their autonomy, or as the military backing down from something they feel unable to stop and offering concessions instead.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.