Snowbird
28th December 2010, 04:50
The WL release of the most recent cables was a far cry from the first WL publication this year of intelligence documents about the war. This go-around, publication(s) not only by WL but by the major news sources, were all/each previewed by the U.S. government.
The first WL publication of intelligence documents about the war in Afghanistan consisted of unredacted documents which WL posted directly onto its website. This info included names of Afghan informants. Do we know how long or for what duration these names remained on that website? If it was for a long duration, there may be danger to those informants in the long run.
Did I just hear the name Valerie Plame mentioned from the ethers?
Officials may be overstating the danger from WikiLeaks
McClatchy News
WASHINGTON — American officials in recent days have warned repeatedly that the release of documents by WikiLeaks could put people's lives in danger.
But despite similar warnings ahead of the previous two massive releases of classified U.S. intelligence reports by the website, U.S. officials concede that they have no evidence to date that the documents led to anyone's death.
Before Sunday's release, news organizations given access to the documents and WikiLeaks took the greatest care to date to ensure no one would be put in danger. In statements accompanying stories about the documents, several newspapers said they voluntarily withheld information and that they cooperated with the State Department and the Obama administration to ensure nothing released could endanger lives or national security.
"After its own redactions, The (New York) Times sent Obama administration officials the cables it planned to post and invited them to challenge publication of any information that, in the official view, would harm the national interest," The New York Times said in a story published on its website Sunday. "After reviewing the cables, the officials — while making clear they condemn the publication of secret material — suggested additional redactions. The Times agreed to some, but not all."
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/11/28/104404/officials-may-be-overstating-the.html
The first WL publication of intelligence documents about the war in Afghanistan consisted of unredacted documents which WL posted directly onto its website. This info included names of Afghan informants. Do we know how long or for what duration these names remained on that website? If it was for a long duration, there may be danger to those informants in the long run.
Did I just hear the name Valerie Plame mentioned from the ethers?
Officials may be overstating the danger from WikiLeaks
McClatchy News
WASHINGTON — American officials in recent days have warned repeatedly that the release of documents by WikiLeaks could put people's lives in danger.
But despite similar warnings ahead of the previous two massive releases of classified U.S. intelligence reports by the website, U.S. officials concede that they have no evidence to date that the documents led to anyone's death.
Before Sunday's release, news organizations given access to the documents and WikiLeaks took the greatest care to date to ensure no one would be put in danger. In statements accompanying stories about the documents, several newspapers said they voluntarily withheld information and that they cooperated with the State Department and the Obama administration to ensure nothing released could endanger lives or national security.
"After its own redactions, The (New York) Times sent Obama administration officials the cables it planned to post and invited them to challenge publication of any information that, in the official view, would harm the national interest," The New York Times said in a story published on its website Sunday. "After reviewing the cables, the officials — while making clear they condemn the publication of secret material — suggested additional redactions. The Times agreed to some, but not all."
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/11/28/104404/officials-may-be-overstating-the.html