PDA

View Full Version : The age of book burning in the name of NatSec



ElNono
09-26-2010, 10:07 AM
Pentagon destroys thousands of copies of Army officer's memoir (http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/09/25/books.destroyed/)
By Chris Lawrence and Padma Rama, CNN

Washington (CNN) -- The Department of Defense recently purchased and destroyed thousands of copies of an Army Reserve officer's memoir in an effort to safeguard state secrets, a spokeswoman said Saturday.

"DoD decided to purchase copies of the first printing because they contained information which could cause damage to national security," Pentagon spokeswoman Lt. Col. April Cunningham said.

In a statement to CNN, Cunningham said defense officials observed the September 20 destruction of about 9,500 copies of Army Reserve Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer's new memoir "Operation Dark Heart."

Shaffer says he was notified Friday about the Pentagon's purchase.

"The whole premise smacks of retaliation," Shaffer told CNN on Saturday. "Someone buying 10,000 books to suppress a story in this digital age is ludicrous."

Shaffer's publisher, St. Martin's Press, released a second printing of the book that it said had incorporated some changes the government had sought "while redacting other text he (Shaffer) was told was classified."

From single words and names to entire paragraphs, blacked out lines appear throughout the book's 299 pages.

CNN obtained a memo from the Defense Intelligence Agency dated August 6 in which Lt. Gen. Ronald Burgess claims the DIA tried for nearly two months to get a copy of the manuscript. Burgess said the DIA's investigation "identified significant classified information, the release of which I have determined could reasonably be expected to cause serious damage to national security."

Burgess said the manuscript contained secret activities of the U.S. Special Operations Command, CIA and National Security Agency.

Shaffer's lawyer, Mark Zaid, said earlier this month that the book was reviewed by Shaffer's military superiors prior to publication.

"There was a green light from the Army Reserve Command," Zaid told CNN.

But intelligence agencies apparently raised objections when they received copies of the book.

The Pentagon contacted St. Martin's Press in early August to convey its concerns over the release of the book. According to the publisher, at that time the first printings were just about to be shipped from its warehouse. Shaffer said he and the publisher worked hard "to make sure nothing in the book would be detrimental to national security."

"When you look at what they took out (in the 2nd edition), it's lunacy," Shaffer said.

The Pentagon says Shaffer should have sought wider clearance for the memoir.

"He did clear it with Army Reserve but not with the larger Army and with Department of Defense," Department of Defense spokesman Col. David Lapan said earlier this month. "So he did not meet the requirements under Department of Defense regulations for security review."

One of the book's first lines reads, "Here I was in Afghanistan (redaction) My job: to run the Defense Intelligence Agency's operations out of (redaction) the hub for U.S. operations in country."

In chapter 15, titled "Tipping Point," 21 lines within the first two pages are blacked out.

In the memoir, Shaffer recalls his time in Afghanistan leading a black-ops team during the Bush administration. The Bronze Star medal recipient told CNN he believes the Bush administraton's biggest mistake during that time was misunderstanding the culture there.

Defense officials said they are in the process of reimbursing the publisher for the cost of the first printing and have not purchased copies of the redacted version.

At least one seller on the online auction site eBay claiming to have a first-edition printing is selling it for an asking price of nearly $2,000. The listed retail price for the second printing is $25.99.

ElNono
09-26-2010, 10:09 AM
LARRY BURRIS: Operation Dark Heart (http://www.murfreesboropost.com/larry-burris-operation-dark-heart-cms-24541)
By: LARRY BURRIS, Post Columnist

Back in 1971 The New York Times began to print a series of articles known as the Pentagon Papers that the government claimed contained top-secret information.

The government also asserted that release of the information would cause grave damage to the security of the United States.

The attorney general asked the Times, and later the Washington Post, not to publish the information, and both papers refused the request.

Over the next few weeks confusion reigned as attorneys on both sides argued fine points of press freedom and national security.

Eventually the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the newspapers, saying the government had not proven its claim of grave damage to the country.

Now, nearly 40 years later, the same kind of claims about national security are being made about another publication that contains classified information.

Late last month Saint Martin’s Press was supposed to release Operation Dark Heart, the story of U.S. efforts in Afghanistan.

After initially being cleared by the Defense Department, other agencies said the book contains top-secret information that will cause grave damage to the security of the United States.

Next the Defense Department offered to buy up all 10,000 copies of the book already printed, and then offered to edit, or censor, depending on your perspective, the book so it can be sold.

The Defense Department and the publisher did some negotiating, and a new edition containing some 200 deletions is supposed to go on sale this week.

It appears, however, that some of the deletions contain material more than 20 years old, and some of the information is already in the public domain.

If that is the case, then it appears the government is not so much interested in protecting secrets as it is in preventing the public from learning embarrassing information.

But here’s an interesting sidelight: Apparently copies of the original are in circulation.

There is an original copy for bid on e-Bay for more than $1,500, Washington Post officials have said they have a copy, and there are an unknown number of review copies floating around.

My guess is that multiple original copies will soon be on the internet, ready for download.

So actually attempts to censor the book will only make any disclosure of secret information worse.

After all, all I have to do is get a copy of the original and compare the deletions in the new version, and I will know specifically what the Defense Department considers so damaging.

Now it’s absolutely true we need to pay attention when government officials play the national security card.

But in too many instances in the not-so-distant past such claims have been used to cover up embarrassing information, or to promote pet projects or send us to war, rather than protect real secrets.

One has to wonder if that is happening again.

ElNono
09-26-2010, 10:10 AM
http://warincontext.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/operation-dark-heart.jpg

DarrinS
09-26-2010, 10:17 AM
I'm sure the libs' favorite website, wikileaks, will put out a copy.

ElNono
09-26-2010, 10:20 AM
I'm sure the libs' favorite website, wikileaks, will put out a copy.

You can just buy one at ebay...

Stringer_Bell
09-26-2010, 11:59 AM
I'm sure the libs' favorite website, wikileaks, will put out a copy.

Why would libs's want to read things that compromise national security? It's none of their business!

Winehole23
09-27-2010, 02:06 AM
If that is the case, then it appears the government is not so much interested in protecting secrets as it is in preventing the public from learning embarrassing information.Or official crimes.

For me, this is good enough a reason not to let governments have carte blanche to operate in the dark, which is what a state secrets privilege functionally is.

(Ring of Gyges (http://web.sau.edu/richardsrandyl/lithuania_efc_ring_of_gyges.htm), y'all.)

Winehole23
09-27-2010, 02:07 AM
But here’s an interesting sidelight: Apparently copies of the original are in circulation.

There is an original copy for bid on e-Bay for more than $1,500, Washington Post officials have said they have a copy, and there are an unknown number of review copies floating around.Ironic. The classification won't work because the copies already got out.

Winehole23
09-27-2010, 02:13 AM
I'm sure the libs' favorite website, wikileaks, will put out a copy.You don't have to be a lib to appreciate the transparency.

After all, what wikileaks leaks is official US sources. We get a glimpse of the USG's own unvarnished opinions. Is that really such a bad thing?

Winehole23
09-27-2010, 02:58 AM
Ironically the only obtainable buoy in a tempestuous political ocean for DarrinS is bona fides (http://dictionary.die.net/bona%20fides) in the veracity of the declarations of the executive branch of the US government.

DarrinS apparently believes Obama when he says it's a state secret, and excoriates us for wishing certain matters (such as the effects and incidences of war in foreign lands) to appear more truly and evidently before the eyes of those for whom the war is waged, and whose treasure and blood sustain it.

Winehole23
09-27-2010, 03:10 AM
A US citizen should know when he's been placed beyond the protection of the law.

(An evident non-sequitur I know, but it relates to recent official state secrets claims, so please bear with.)

Winehole23
09-27-2010, 03:10 AM
Just bring back outlawry, and declare it openly. Let anyone at all kill him like a wolf.

Caput gerat lupinum. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outlaw)

Winehole23
09-27-2010, 03:14 AM
A point of guile is squandered, but a US citizen deserves the advance notice at least, that the state wants to waste his ass.

Winehole23
09-27-2010, 03:20 AM
The propriety of the ancestral Anglo-Saxon legal milieu announced it publicly, but it needed the help of the neighborhood to catch the bad guy.

Our slick, modern, militarized LE? Not so much, mebbe.

Winehole23
09-27-2010, 03:21 AM
(It's not a fair contest to start with, so the advantage conferred by giving fair warning to the targets of the state is probably not going to be decisive in a fair majority of cases.)

Winehole23
09-27-2010, 03:29 AM
A point of guile is squandered, but a US citizen deserves the advance notice at least, that the state wants to waste his ass.Time was, the common courtesy given to notorious criminals.

It is denied us on the basis of state secrets. Outlawry is now conducted in secret.

Winehole23
09-27-2010, 03:32 AM
It used to be done openly, long time ago, in the land of the Angles and the Saxons (and the Jutes.)

Winehole23
09-27-2010, 03:42 AM
Fucking barbarians.

ElNono
09-27-2010, 08:02 AM
Who's making the bad guys wiser?

When you redact and re-publish, you're merely confirming what's true and valued on the entire account... dumb dumb dumb

LnGrrrR
09-27-2010, 03:35 PM
I'm sure the libs' favorite website, wikileaks, will put out a copy.

You don't like transparency?

Do you think everything our government tries to hide is for our own good and not theirs?

Bender
09-27-2010, 03:46 PM
12 staccato posts by WH... is it a record??? :wakeup

LnGrrrR
09-27-2010, 07:02 PM
12 staccato posts by WH... is it a record??? :wakeup

It could be.

LnGrrrR
09-27-2010, 07:03 PM
Hard to say.

LnGrrrR
09-27-2010, 07:03 PM
Maybe another poster hacked his account.

LnGrrrR
09-27-2010, 07:03 PM
It's a conspiracy.

LnGrrrR
09-27-2010, 07:05 PM
Someone get Parker in this thread to confirm or deny.

LnGrrrR
09-27-2010, 07:08 PM
Not enough crazy in this thread yet.

LnGrrrR
09-27-2010, 07:08 PM
In déméns speramus