Pentagon Aims To Buy Up Book

jamie writes "Operation Dark Heart, a book about the adventures and frustrations of an Army officer who served in Afghanistan, has ruffled some feathers at the Pentagon. From the article: 'The Defense Department is attempting to buy the entire first printing — 10,000 copies — of a memoir by a controversial former Defense Intelligence Agency officer so that the book can be destroyed, according to military and other sources."

Comments

Re:Is this really censorship?

[Dunbal]

Your tax dollars at work...

Founding Fathers do facepalm

[0111 1110]

I think our government should just abolish the first amendment. They clearly don't believe in it. This just makes me so sick. Where is wikileaks when you need them?

Re:Founding Fathers do facepalm

[Sarten-X]

The first amendment is irrelevant. From TFA, the military's attempting to keep hidden the real names of intelligence officers involved with some actions. Any criticism of the military actions is still likely in the second edition, which is already approved. The first amendment does not grant the right to endanger others by means of speech. It grants the right to hold and express any opinions you want, and Congress will not render such expression illegal.

Re:Founding Fathers do facepalm

[theCzechGuy]

Nope, the "editing" is still censorship. There are many forms of censorship and reasons to do it, but the fact there is some kind of censorship in most states, even those that are supposed to be democratic. After all, the communists didn't prevent most authors and journalists from publishing, they just asserted the right to say what is ok and what isn't. And when it wasn't, there was editing. Yet saying the communist didn't censor the newspapers that were published is a little bit of a stretch. Like many thing the problem of censorship is not a black and white thing and there is no clearly visible line that has the freedom and law on one side and the orwellian nightmare on the other.

Re:Founding Fathers do facepalm

[tomhudson]

Is it censorship? Yes.
Do you want someone killed because someone else screwed up in a cooperative deal that was supposed to prevent this? No.

Not all censorship is created equal.
We don't publish the names of children who are victims of sexual abuse.
Is that censorship? Yes. Is it wrong? No.

We don't publish the names of rape victims.
Is that censorship? Yes. Is it wrong? No.

We don't publish the names of stalking victims.
Is that censorship? Yes. Is it wrong? No.

We don't publish your credit card info all over the net (hopefully)
Is that censorship? Yes. Is it wrong? No.

We may disagree on the standard for reasonableness, but some things really don't need to be "out there".

We practice censorship all the time.
I won't watch "Silence of the Lambs" because I walked in on the scene where some guy is hunched over a sewing machine.
"What's he doing?"
"Making a woman suit."
"A what?"
"He killed these women, skinned them, and now he's ..."
"Bye!"

For me, that's not entertainment. For someone else, it is. And after hopping over to Wikipedia and reading the plot summary, I don't think I missed anything.

Adults can decide to watch it, but I think we'd agree that children below a certain age (as determined by their parents) shouldn't watch stuff like that, without triggering the "think of the children" or "censorship" alarms.

Kindle Version

[virtigex]

Maybe he should also publish a Kindle version. The author could really clean up then.

Re:Blurb totally misleading.

[BlakJak-ZL1VMF]

mod parent up, case dismissed, nothing to see here, move along...

misleading blurbs FTL.

Re:Is this really censorship?

[zippthorne]

But when the first printing sells out, the publisher is only going to print more. Clearly this is a scam to funnel taxpayer money into the pockets of this "former officer", paying a hefty fee to the publisher to launder the dough.

Re:Is this really censorship?

[Jawnn]

...Clearly this is a scam to funnel taxpayer money into the pockets of this "former officer", paying a hefty fee to the publisher to launder the dough.

How and where, exactly, is this made "clear"?
Oh. You were joking? Silly me for missing the sarcasm. In that case, it's not the least bit funny. This action by our nation's military is deeply troubling. No matter how you figure who is writing the check, that the military is attempting to suppress information that the public has a right to see is frightening in it's implications.

Re:Blurb totally misleading.

[0123456]

Don't US officers have to agree to let the military vet any books about their experiences if they want the job?

Re:Is this really censorship?

[Jurily]

It's actually the honourable thing to do in this case - along with firing whoever signed off on it in the Reserve component.

Once you accept that "a lot of material that shouldn't have been printed in the first place" indeed shouldn't have been printed, sure.

However, it's still censorship. The only question is whether we approve of it.

Re:Ignorance: America's biggest gift to itself.

[Americano]

I'm sorry, before I can take your post seriously, I require full disclosure, in the form of all of your personal information, Anonymous Coward.

Please submit it for open discussion, and then we can continue talking about how the only way to discuss anything is with all information being freely available to the public.

I mean, fair is fair, right?

Re:Blurb totally misleading.

[Americano]

Tell you what - I'm okay with MY tax money compensating someone for the DoD's screw-up, so why don't you cover universal health care for me, and I'll pay for the books?

Re:Is this really censorship?

[Zixaphir]

Because you can't read the damned book. God.

Re:Is this really censorship?

[hairyfeet]

Personally I believe the only way forward is for ALL drugs to be legal, and here is why: I'm sorry if I don't get this quote right, or if I attribute it to the wrong person,(I believe it was from William F. Buckley Jr) but it really helped explain it simply..."If I put a bottle on a table with a skull and crossbones on it, and I say to you "This is poison, it will destroy your health, marriage, family, and finally kill you" and you push past me and down the bottle? STUPID YOU! Why should I have to saddle MY family and MY country with billions in debt and taxes to build cages and armed guards around that bottle?"

As for TFA, frankly with the amount of pure bald faced lies we have seen coming from the military (we're winning? civilian deaths are low! the government there works!) I wouldn't trust them to tell me water was wet if it was raining on my head.If you want people to support you then you have to stop CONSTANTLY LYING. So until they do a 180 on their current SOP I'm gonna have to vote for them being lying scumbags and call this censorship. After all, if you go ahead and trust the person of has repeatedly lied to you over and over and over again, who is the fool?