Slashdot Mirror


DoD Study Contradicts Charges Against WikiLeaks

Voline writes "Last Summer, after WikiLeaks released 90,000 leaked internal US military documents in their Afghan War Log, Pentagon officials went on a media offensive against WikiLeaks, accusing it of having the 'blood on Its hands' of American soldiers and Afghan collaborators who are named in the documents. The charge has echoed through the mainstream media (and Internet comment threads) ever since. Now, CNN is reporting that after a thorough Pentagon review, 'WikiLeaks did not disclose any sensitive intelligence sources or methods, the Department of Defense concluded.' And, according to an unnamed NATO official, 'there has been no indication' that any Afghans who have collaborated with the NATO occupation have been harmed as a result of the leaks. Will the Pentagon's contradiction of the charges against WikiLeaks get as much play in the media as those original accusations did?"

9 of 228 comments (clear)

  1. Yes, but... by ocdscouter · · Score: 4, Funny

    What this obviously means is that no one has been killed *yet*! There will yet be deferred blood on guilty hands!

  2. Re:Hilarious by PatPending · · Score: 3, Funny

    to note seemingly half of ./ comments were dead set against Wikileaks for exactly this reason...

    And the other half were /. comments.

    --
    What one fool can do, another can. (Ancient Simian Proverb)
  3. If Wikileaks has more blood on their hands by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Then the Pentagon should resign and put Wikileaks in charge of both wars. Surely the Pentagon has to have more blood on their hands just as a matter of pride. I mean, it's what they do, no?

  4. Re:Hilarious by http · · Score: 4, Funny

    You are diluting the meaning of diluted, and the deluded about the spelling of deluded.

    --
    If opportunity came disguised as temptation, one knock would be enough.
    3^2 * 67^1 * 977^1
  5. Re:It doesn't sell. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Wikileaks did disclose the names of several Afghanistan operatives, potentially putting them at risk of retaliation by the Taliban.

    As long as no photos were leaked then the Afghani operatives are in no danger. YOU try finding "Ahmed" and "Mohammed" in Afghanistan. They're perfectly safe.

  6. Re:Who Cares? by ooshna · · Score: 2, Funny

    my agenda is to create a totalitariam system of grammar control on the Internet. We will have a 3-strikes law for people who use then/than incorrectly.

    How many strikes for improper capitalization?

  7. Re:It doesn't sell. by machine321 · · Score: 3, Funny

    If FOX is already on 24/7, then they can't watch it any more.

  8. Re:Who Cares? by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 2, Funny

    My agenda is to create a totalitarian system of spelling control on the internet.
    We will have a three-strikes law for people who spell totalitarian incorrectly.

  9. Re:Who Cares? by Nazlfrag · · Score: 4, Funny

    My agendum is to create an anarchist system of anonymous bad spellers on the internet. We won't make to many mistakes, just enough to piss of the grammar nazis.