Slashdot Mirror


Pentagon Makes Good On Plan To Destroy Critical Book

mykos writes "Remember when the Pentagon said they were arranging a taxpayer-funded, government-sponsored book burning a couple weeks ago? Well, they made good on that threat, purchasing 9,500 copies of the book to be destroyed. The publisher, St. Martin's Press, has redacted anything the Pentagon told them to redact in the upcoming second run of the book. They Department of Defense has not yet paid for the burned books, but says they are 'in the process.' Pentagon spokeswoman Lt. Col. April Cunningham gave this statement: 'DoD decided to purchase copies of the first printing because they contained information which could cause damage to national security.' Whew, looks like we're safe now."

3 of 306 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Talk about censorship by commodore64_love · · Score: 1, Troll

    >>>The Pentagon didn't really 'buy' the books. They paid for them. There's a difference.
    >>>Some body at the pentagon "Oh, shit, this has classified intel in it. Call up the publisher"

    So? This is a difference that matters not. (Like whether I paid the hooker with dollars or euros - the end result is the same.) I can not lay my hand on any part of our Union Constitution that gives the general government power to censor information.

    If the Pentagon left classified information (i.e. info that they are holding americans without trial), then too bad for them. Let them do a better job. A democratic Republic can not work if the leaders treat the People like Serfs (or children). The People have a right to know because the people are the source from which all legitimate authority comes from. Thank God for places like wikileaks so the tyrants can not hide their actions in the dark.

    As for the publisher, shame on them. "Collaborator" is the proper term. They should let the people know, via the liberated press, what is really going on behind closed doors. Just as the publishers did during the Watergate or McCarthy scandals.

    --
    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
  2. Re:Talk about censorship by commodore64_love · · Score: 0, Troll

    >>>Mod parent up.

    Good grief. I can't believe how readily you (and others) are to watch your right to speak, print whatever you wish, and basically be a Free Individual be taken away. The central Union government is demoting you to the level of a Serf (slave) and you cheer them on. I can just imagine Slashdot ~80 years ago: "They weren't mistreating the Gypsies and Jews. They were just asking them to carry IDs and wear the symbol of their religion on their sleeve. There's nothing with that."

    And somebody replies:

    "Mod parent up."

    --
    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
  3. Re:Talk about censorship by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    I think you live in a fantasy world of Standin' Up To Da Man, where you release info, even if it's hurtful to what your nation's engaged in, on principle.

    Keep in mind that commodore64_love would have supported this move 150% had it been done during the Bush years. His mention and capitalization of Current Administration just further proves how much of a partisan ideologue he really is.