[Peace-discuss] Wikileaks and our wars…

[C. G. Estabrook]

But the WH denied nothing contained in this material.  That's remarkable.


On 7/26/10 11:58 AM, Morton K. Brussel wrote:
> …The initial response <http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/40204.html>
> from the White House was extremely unimpressive:
>
>     * This leak will harm national security. (As if those words still had some
>       kind of magical power, after all the abuse they have been party to.)
>
>     * There’s nothing new here. (Then how could the release harm national security?)
>
>     * Wikileaks is irresponsible; they didn’t even try to contact us! (Hold on:
>       you’re hunting the guy down
>       <http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-06-10/wikileaks-founder-julian-assange-hunted-by-pentagon-over-massive-leak/>
>       and you’re outraged that he didn’t contact you?)
>
>     * Wikileaks is against the war in Afghanistan; they’re not an objective news
>       source. (So does that mean the documents they published are fake?)
>
>     * “The period of time covered in these documents… is before the President
>       announced his new strategy. Some of the disconcerting things reported are
>       exactly why the President ordered a three month policy review and a change
>       in strategy.” (Okay, so now we too know the basis for the President’s
>       decision: and that’s a bad thing?)…
>
> This is from an astute article by Jay Rosen, at
>
> http://journalism.nyu.edu/pubzone/weblogs/pressthink/2010/07/26/wikileaks_afghan.html
>
> --mkb
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss