Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

A final warning to WikiLeaks?

The Hill is reporting that the Pentagon has demanded WikiLeaks immediately hand over all the classified documents it illegally possesses, including those it has not yet published, and that the website delete those records from its computers. Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell made clear this was not a “request”:

"We are making a demand of them," Morrell said. "We are asking them to do the right thing."

"We hope they will honor our demands," Morrell said, adding if WikiLeaks refuses to comply "we will cross the next bridge when we come to it."

"If doing the right thing is not good enough for them," the Pentagon spokesman said, alternatives will be explored "to make them do the right thing."

Sounds like a final warning has been issued -- and that the Obama administration intends to take action to stop WikiLeaks from disclosing any further life-threatening intelligence.

By Marc Thiessen  | August 5, 2010; 2:30 PM ET
Categories:  Thiessen  | Tags:  Marc Thiessen  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The Prop 8 decision: look at the evidence
Next: Elena Kagan, justice of the Supreme Court


"We'll drive off that bridge when we come to it!" - - Sen. Ted Kennedy

Posted by: ronjaboy | August 5, 2010 2:50 PM | Report abuse

Who says? Under what authority?

Posted by: Marcaurelius | August 5, 2010 2:51 PM | Report abuse

We gonna plug all these leaks at any cost. Right? G. Howard Hunt and E. Gordon Liddy. Where are you, now that we need you?

Posted by: sameolddoc | August 5, 2010 2:55 PM | Report abuse

Thiessen, you're a tool. By Targeting WikiLeaks, Does The U.S. Military Serve America's Interests -- Or Its Own?

Posted by: crabbygolightly | August 5, 2010 2:57 PM | Report abuse

I am sorry, I do not know what authority the Pentagon has to order anyone who is not in the military or on a military base. And how would WikiLeaks know if it is classified anyway?

Thiessen must be rubbing himself. Earlier in the week, he proposed kidnapping Assange from the territory of friendly allies, now he can fantasize that the Pentagon will launch a drone at Assange.

Posted by: Nemo24601 | August 5, 2010 3:00 PM | Report abuse

Wikileaks is the use of crypto for anonymity and the use of reliable robust distributed file systems. The genie is out. If you continue to use computers and networks you will always have to deal with this --consider a P2P implementation.

Consider that your petty US laws do not apply everywhere.

Folks in glass empires shouldn't fly drones.

Assange is a hero.

Posted by: Major_Variola_ret | August 5, 2010 3:16 PM | Report abuse

So Thiessen relishes the word that the Pentagon will not settle for due process, but ready "Alternatives to make them [Wikileaks] do the right thing."

If the Pentagon pursues extra-legal measures, under some "no holds barred" concept of relations with citizens of friendly countries. then people like Thiessen better stay home and be scared, very scared. Of course, perpetual fear is a mainstay of neo-con thought, but Thiessen has more to worry about than most.

The whole frackus is more about embarassment than military setbacks. Further disinformation or ignorance will not help our cause.

Perhaps Thissen's real concern is that some former colleague will get fed up with our costly misadventures abroad and leak records of Pentagon extra-legal shennanigans (spying on US citizens) and WMD fabrications during the prior and current administrations. The ensuing legal and political consequences might give reason to worry.

At any rate, Thiessen should not advocate military reprisals against unarmed civilians. The Pentagon is not a law enforcement organ and acts only upon authorization of Congress and command of the WH. There may also be blowback. EU magistrates could issue a warrant for his arrest as an agent of human rights crimes. Less scrupulous people might go further and contemplate treating Thiesen the way he fondly endorses treatment of others. A little "enhanced interrocation" perhaps? Near-drowning, sleep deprivation, stalking, extra-judicial rendition, cyber-attacks, and fancy gadgets are all part of the "game."

Actually, I suspect the Pentagon is more bark than bite in this case, and may simply mean it will propose that NSA track and spy on all who visit the Wikileaks site, which of course Congress will pretend it did not authorize already, but which 1st Amendment groups will litigate.

Posted by: jkoch2 | August 5, 2010 3:17 PM | Report abuse

Yes, Marc "Torture" Thiessen seems particularly exercised about this issue. I wonder why? I had assumed he was just another sad right-wing hack looking for a place to hang his hat after the salad days of the Bush admin. But maybe there is something more, some documents yet to be released (or leaked).

Posted by: gposner | August 5, 2010 3:30 PM | Report abuse

If you sent the Republican Neocon's, Chick-Hen Hawks and Thiessen to the wars they started..

Wikileaks would not exist.


Posted by: vettessman | August 5, 2010 3:33 PM | Report abuse

Assange is not MY hero! His idea of "transparency" apparently means that soldiers can upload the position of their units to the enemy to the web in real time... "Hey, enemy here are our coordinates!"

I think the Pentagon is paving the way for a Stolen Property avenue to pursue the international arrest warrant for Assange. And I would support them in that pursuit. Not everything is "free" -- I can't pay hackers to scrape Assange's computer for personal information and then sell it online (legally). Those military correspondences were stolen "property" of the Pentagon.

Oops, you break the law, you go to jail. Bye bye Assange!

Posted by: ashburns | August 5, 2010 3:42 PM | Report abuse

Purge The Washington Post of all neocons now. Purge the Pentagon of all neocons now.

Posted by: kurthunt | August 5, 2010 3:50 PM | Report abuse

Sooooooo if Wikileaks posted nude pictures of your wife and you having sex and was holding more information including copies of your insurance policy and beneficiaries. That would be OK? You wouldn't demand anything? Whatever is stuck in all of your Craw's is KILLING YA!

Posted by: minco_007 | August 5, 2010 3:55 PM | Report abuse

The ignorance of some of these posts is amazing. Those are US classified documents. The military or any other government entity can go after the holders of those documents anywhere in the world.

They HAVE to demand them so that we, as a country, don't set a precedent saying it's okay to hold onto classified information just because you've posted it for everyone to see. It's still classified information, whether you agree or not, and it's the government's duty to protect that information

Posted by: RAF4 | August 5, 2010 3:58 PM | Report abuse

I find it hard to believe the wapoop is confused about this topic

I remember a past episode about the Pentagon Papers

happened about 1970

the wapoop was one of the principle actors in that incident

now the wapoop wants to takre the exact opposite opinion on wikileaks

oh how the mighty have fallen

Posted by: nada85484 | August 5, 2010 4:11 PM | Report abuse

When the leaks are plugged, I wonder whose reputation will remain unfairly besmirched for the next 40 years before being posthumously rehabilitated after the documents are declassified.

Posted by: sasquatchbigfoot | August 5, 2010 4:16 PM | Report abuse

yeah, pretty amazed at those who defend wikileaks claiming some sort of freedom. especially when US citizens are putting themselves in harm's way to maintain those freedoms. talk about biting the hand that feeds you.

Posted by: Waffle1 | August 5, 2010 4:16 PM | Report abuse

"we will cross the next bridge when we come to it."


I believe "the next bridge" is called "Prior restraint"

maybe thiessen could look it up

the wapoop has a little experience with this subject

Posted by: nada85484 | August 5, 2010 4:16 PM | Report abuse

Dear US Pentagon

I think we better let the Hague decide.

You're out of bounds of your nation state.

Crimes against humanity are crimes against humanity.

Your nation state laws will be reviewed at the Hague - along with what documents Wikileaks CHOOSES to bring.

US could lose sovereignty on this - I'd be careful US Pentagon.

War crimes committed by a nation state will come down the line - directly to you.

Of COURSE a serial killer wants their FBI case files -

wikileaks is holding any nation or corporation who causes harm to another human being - accountable.

US Pentagon is just covering their butts.

NO ONE - is above the Hague !

And? US Pentagon ? while you track down General Tommy Franks- who ARCHITECTED THIS WAR in AFghanistan ?

You can take THAT - all the way to the bank of America.

Tim Miltz

And by the way US Pentagon ? I think the UN forces can handle you just fine - get your passports ready !

Posted by: NationalismDividesHumanity | August 5, 2010 4:23 PM | Report abuse

Geoff Morrell, who, as a former correspondent never served in the military, is backed up by Marc Thiessen who, as a former speechwriter for Jesse Helms, Rumsfeld and Bush/Cheney, never served in the military are trying to tell many of us who did serve that leaks are endangering lives.

Where is the empirical evidence? What should those of us who did serve not need to know about a near decade long war in Afghanistan?

It's nice to be a AEI chickenhawk, but that's not the real world in which a small number of people fight for the rest of us.

Posted by: harper-d | August 5, 2010 4:27 PM | Report abuse

Dear US Pentagon

Recall- Iraq lost it's sovereignty on the very same crimes against humanity Saddam committed - as you are facing having revealed.

Yes, the UN WILL Act this time to come in and END THIS.

Be careful what you ask for US Pentagon

Like Iraq- US may find itself with UN forces present IF you don't step forward and reveal crimes against humanity that will be revealed whether you do or not.

What happened in AFghanistan ?

It seems- didn't STAY in Afghanistan

What happened at Abu Ghraib ?

It seems- didn't STAY in Abu Ghraib.

Let me get this right US Pentagon

You're in a glass house with a stone - threatening to throw it ?


The HAGUE will decide -

You can take your military ABUSE and HARASSING THREATS and GFYS.

Hey- anyone seen Tommy Franks? or US Pentagon senior spokesperson ? Larry Di Rita ?

Now now - where did they skirt off to.

Posted by: NationalismDividesHumanity | August 5, 2010 4:28 PM | Report abuse

Dear US Pentagon.

What you do NOT get?

The United Nations DOES get pertaining to crimes against humanity committed BY US armed forces IN iraq.

Now, you went into Iraq without UN support.

What - did you think you could just do anything you wanted without accountability ?

No, NOW you must be held accountable for your CHOICE to enter into the theater of warfare in Iraq- and now you will.

If you want THOSE documents- images, mpegs, audio mp3's? You'll have to 'cross that bridge' to the UNITED NATIONS.



Tim Miltz

Posted by: NationalismDividesHumanity | August 5, 2010 4:33 PM | Report abuse

If you sincerely think that the Pentagon is powerless against Wikileaks, you are naive. There are folks in the Pentagon who could come up with computer viruses that would shut down Wikileaks hard. And that's just for kicks and giggles. If Wikileaks isn't willing to put national safety above it's own sgrandizement, someone else most certainly will. There is no question that the Attorney General can take legal action against Wikileaks. But putting the above-board stuff away for a while, let's just say that the Pentagon has ways of handling its business.

Posted by: October10S | August 5, 2010 4:38 PM | Report abuse

At least you're not in as much trouble as Porter Goss is.

Not everything was destroyed- and if that doesn't send a chill down the back of every American - I don't know what does.

This is BIGGER than a nation state US Pentagon.

I suggest you get a big bag of popcorn sit back and enjoy the show.

Humanity has a RIGHT to hold accountable those who commit crimes against it - whether you are the US Pentagon OR the CIA.

The only people I see clean as a whistle in this - are the soldiers who merely followed orders- AND - the FBI- who VERY WELL do their job.

As a result of this we should probably be able to shed the laughing stock Homeland - and the CIA. And good riddance.

I suggest we hand the Pentagon over to FEMA- whole lotta flooding coming.

Your solutions have failed us US Pentagon.

Accountability time at he Hague !

Don't worry- you actually GET what wikileaks has before the trial- you'll need to know what you're defending yourself against regarding WAR CRIMES.

Off to the Hague !

THAT is where you will meet wikileaks head on.

Anything else will be considered harassment and made addendum AT the Hague.

Seems ovens were found behind Abu Ghraib - tsk tsk- we're better than that. If THAT is bringing democracy to Iraq ? wow.

Or maybe shoving wooden shards up the rectum of innocent Iraqi's is your style US Pentagon - or let's talk about the kids.

Eh ?

Cat got your tongue US Pentagon ?

Posted by: NationalismDividesHumanity | August 5, 2010 4:43 PM | Report abuse

For you Assange apologists out there, please write back and explain why he was too lazy to bother to redact the names of the poor Afghan informants at least... the informants whom the Taliban has vowed to kill along with their wives and children...

Please explain ANY possible justification Assange could have for not simply striking out the names/villages of these poor walking-dead-men?

As a self-proclaimed hacker Assange surely is aware that even 90,000 pages of documents could be stripped of names/locations using simple algorithms and leave his "damning evidence" intact.

So, other than pure LAZINESS (the kind that gets people killed from "collateral damage" that he frowns upon)... to the apologists here, please explain *why* Assange didn't bother to redact the names of Afghani informants?

Hint: "Being in a rush to see your name in the newspapers" doesn't count as a Good One.

Posted by: ashburns | August 5, 2010 4:44 PM | Report abuse

I wouldn't mind this little leftist vermin being eliminated from the gene pool. Accompany that with a full-fleged cyber attack from Daddy DIRNSA and other executive action and you would make an example of this little pimple.

Posted by: madmike272 | August 5, 2010 4:50 PM | Report abuse

I think think the Pentagon and CIA should ask themselves the question, "What would Vladimir Putin and the KGB do in our place?" Then do what Vladimir Putin and the KGB would do, at least for this situation.

Posted by: tmonahan54 | August 5, 2010 5:01 PM | Report abuse

For those stupid enough to question the authority of the Department of Defense to demand the return of classified information and the suggestion that if they do not they will be held accountable I suggest you go read the LAWs regarding protection of those items deamed classified. There is more than you would ever want to see. I have had a security clearance for over 50 years and I can tell you that you do not want the FBI knocking on your front door and then rushing in to sieze every piece of equipment and every file cabinet and every piece of paper in your offices. Then just for further fun they will arrest everyone in those offices and everyone that has been in that office and give them a few days while they question each one as to their part in this event. National secrets, especially one that endanger the lives of our soldiers, sailors, airmen,and Marines, are very important. I suggest that Wikileaks turn everything over and then suggest that they let the DoD and FBI come in and watch them purge their computer systems. You must realize that Wikileaks may have blanked out names and places on the documents they put on the internet but that means they have those names and places in their files and that they have lots of people that work for them that could easily sell that information to people who would happily kill our military personnel. This kid did a really, really bad thing.

Posted by: staterighter | August 5, 2010 5:15 PM | Report abuse

Hold on, let me grab some popcorn.

Posted by: skylights | August 5, 2010 5:50 PM | Report abuse

What I see is

In 2000- a Christian theocracy rolled into town in the White House.

9.11 was a GREETING card from an Islamic theocracy- saying -welcome to the world of theocracies - hope you can swim, this is how we play.

The Christian theocracy in the White House- told the UN to get lost- don't need you - Also the ONLY force that can STOP this Christian theocracy IS the UN. This explains why Bolton sought to undermine the UN - this explains the Fox Christian lobby having to try and get rid of the UN.

Unfortunately - the US Pentagon was USED by this Christian theocracy.

The very kinds of behavior we condemned by Saddam ? in Iraq ? Are the very behaviors we brought through Pat Robertson's Regent University- Monica Goodling hiring the most abusive prison warden in US history. Lane McCotter was the first warden at a Federal prison to LOSE against a class action - in US history - he's THAT bad. Ashcroft - who taught at Robertson's Regent- a prime force driving the Christian theocracy ? said of Abu Ghraib ? Now the Iraqi's can get a taste of Western democracy- he SHOULD have said- a taste of Christian fascist theocracy, which is what the US WAS between 2000 and 2008.

They want it back- Palin, Gingrich, ALL of them are over at - they carry a message of America being restored to Christian values. Note Ollie North's language over at humanevents- it's ALWAYS Islamic Terrorist.

I argue former Blackwater ? Erik Prince even SAID he was on a crusade for Christ in Iraq. Bush stated there is only one voice of authority he listens to and that is of God.

It is CLEAR the US had a coup by an ILLEGAL - UNCONSTITUTIONAL Christian fascist theocracy - and they want it back.

2012 is a CRITICAL election -

9.11 was a RESPONSE to this new Christian Coalition - oddly birthed out of Texas oilmen - so, I MAY suggest it is a PHONY theocracy.

US Pentagon unfortunately has to play cleanup now - the bullying of wikileaks will not be tolerated. The US Pentagon can find wikileaks documents at the Hague - and the United Nations.

The Christian theocracy in the US does not LIKE the UN - because the UN can bring in NATO forces to STOP a Christian theocracy that has too many nuclear weapons.

It WILL NOT BE TOLERATED. The UN SHOULD HAVE STOPPED the United States- which was taken over in 2000- BY a group of Christian extremists- JUST like the Taliban - the West's VERY OWN Taliban - seeking to take power by force ? The UN should have come in during the bush reign of horror.

The UN VERY WELL MAY COME IN to stop a brewing new theocracy with nuclear weapons- topping it ? the teleological final cut scene of Christianity is End Days. An extremist Christian theocracy that possesses nuclear weapons must NOT BE ALLOWED TO SPROUT UP AGAIN.

The Pentagon was USED, the HAGUE - NOT the US Pentagon will decide JUSTICE.

Posted by: NationalismDividesHumanity | August 5, 2010 5:54 PM | Report abuse

Many people have wikileaks documents on their computers and don't even know it.

I somehow don't think the US Pentagon can remedy that.

I have seen some of the photo's and mpegs from Abu Ghraib- I don't think any human being should see those short OF the Hague.

Unfortunately the United States Department of Justice is at the center of Abu Ghraib war crimes- and it is not UP to the US DOJ to remedy justice on matters where it is involved in the crimes. Anyone seen Monica Goodling ? John Ashcroft ?

The HAGUE will bring justice here.

Any acts by the US DOJ OR Pentagon to hinder the delivery of future documents illustrating war crimes committed by the United States ? Will only hinder your position AT the Hague.

The Christian theocracy in the US is mostly voted out- however the DAMAGE left by this group still lingers - the people of Afghanistan know this- the people of Pakistan know this.

The ONLY place for the Christian extremists to go is the hills ! Like the Taliban - better run for the hills- because coupled with INTEL - WITNESSES ? AFTER THE HAGUE CLEARS THIS UP ?


I find people of most ANY religion who are moderates - are FINE neighbors.

It is EXTREMISTS who miss the mark - who are dangerous.

Bush and Ashcroft were Christian EXTREMISTS - so was Erik Prince- so IS Sarah Palin- with her bullet cross hairs on her message of God- and Newt Gingrich- the list goes on - just head over to and check them out.

Plenty of hate speech there to go around.

They don't ACCEPT any 'moderate' Muslim's - to this Christian Right in America ? ALL Islam is a religion of terror. This simply isn't so. The REAL TERROR is when you realize our nation state was HIJACKED from 2000 to 2008 by a group of Christian fascist theocrats who wanted to establish morality not by action - but by theology. The REAL Terror is realizing WHY 9.11 happened, it was ONE EXTREMIST THEOCRACY letting the NEW EXTREMIST THEOCRACY welcoming them to the world of nation states bound to religion - and what to expect.

No Bush ? No 9.11 - never would have happened.

Bush BROUGHT THIS ON ALL OF US - then ? used the US military- and the Pentagon sits there confused - but it IS NOT ACCEPTABLE for the US Pentagon to demand documents PROVING WAR CRIMES be handed over and 'deleted'.

WHO sent that message from the Pentagon ? it's CRIMINAL.

The US Pentagon can find all wikileaks germane to US war crimes AT THE HAGUE and the United Nations - if they have any problem with that ?

Not my problem.

Tim Miltz

Posted by: NationalismDividesHumanity | August 5, 2010 6:05 PM | Report abuse

That last comment should be titled:

A final warning to the Christian extremists masquerading behind a political party- and it seems the Tea Party has cleverly managed to disguise the fact that it IS this VERY SAME Christian theocracy seeking power again.

For go find yourself ONE Tea Party member who is not a Christian.


It's not about race- they want to distract you - it's about religion.

The Tea Party- Fox induced hypnosis wants you to join in a world with one too many theocracies- and LORD FORBID - a Christian theocracy that possesses a BOATLOAD of nuclear weapons- who just happens to support End Days mentality. I observed Sarah Palin on stage at her church- they were explaining how we are IN End Days - right now- and how Alaska is one of God's three chosen refuge states.

My god- what's in the water up there !

Tim Miltz

Hey- look on the BRIGHT side people-

After the Hague clears up war crimes, after we understand what happened from 2000 to 2008 ? We can move on, and PRAY (I'm not a member of any religion) this never happens again.

One thing for sure- this language of restoring Christian values to the United States by Palin is NO different than the Taliban seeking this for Afghanistan - just a different religion - in the US though, we have a Constitution - and last I checked- it should PROHIBIT ANY theocracy taking hold- for it would violate freedom of religion.

To US Pentagon - those responsible will be held accountable - I'd think you'd WANT to pass this through the Hague- I now understand better why civil rights attorney Barbara Olshanksy revealed she was plagued with calls from US Pentagon officials- not to condemn her on her work seeking rights at GITMO - but to ask FOR HER HELP !

Posted by: NationalismDividesHumanity | August 5, 2010 6:12 PM | Report abuse

To the author Marc Thiessen

I observe your precious 'The Hill' resource

choses to censor my comments regarding a Christian theocracy.

Gee- wonder why.

Tim Miltz

I told the author Bridget that I'd post here as well as there- and see which paper publishes the comments regarding The Hague and war crimes from a Christian theocracy in power from 2000 to 2008.

Interesting - if 'The Hill' censors MY comments ? Imagine all the other comments being censored.

Posted by: NationalismDividesHumanity | August 5, 2010 6:51 PM | Report abuse

nationalismdivides society - what a lovely name for a traitor.

Posted by: madmike272 | August 5, 2010 7:14 PM | Report abuse

Australia is a NATO member state. So are a whole lot of other European nations, as well as Iceland. Sweden is not, & as such does not avail themselves to the treaty agreements associated with NATO membership. It seems like most of you people don't have the faintest understanding of international law. It's obvious no one at Wikileaks does.

By the twisted logic on display here, there's nothing to prevent (well other than someone wanting to collect that `dead or alive' bounty), Osama Bin Laden or Mullah Omar from vacationing on the beach in the south of France, and then taking a "tour" of the tube in London while on the way to a round of shopping at Harrods...

Wikileaks has, and is, provably providing material aid to terrorists. No one died and appointed that evil elf King of the Narcs. There are innumerable laws the people involved in Wikileaks have broken, and are breaking in the countries they reside in as well as other places.

It ought to be noted for example that a former NSA employee was recently extradited from Libya to the USA.

Furthermore, while organizations & their reporters, like the NYT & the Guardian enjoy some amount of protection under press shield laws, Wikileaks said at the time of the release of these documents that it was not a press organization. They can't retroactively claim shelter under those laws now that they've jumped into the fire and things are getting a little bit hot for them.

They are not a content indexing service, like the Pirate Bay, either. There is no `fair use' shield for anyone one here, and the siren song Wikileaks is playing is one of treason & betrayal.

Anyone with half a wit in their head should stay away from the site, and the material they publicize.

Posted by: Nymous | August 5, 2010 7:49 PM | Report abuse

Just because you want to play foreign policy expert on the internet, it doesn't actually mean you are one. Most of the people who comment about this matter don't have much clue about international law.

Posted by: Nymous | August 5, 2010 7:52 PM | Report abuse



Posted by: kcraigdc | August 5, 2010 8:32 PM | Report abuse

"Governments derive their powers from the consent of the governed." A fine and durable idea, one of the finest in human history.

INFORMED consent is the only true consent. How can we give informed consent when the gov't/military/insecurity Complex lies to us, withholds facts, covers up massacres and corruption? Obviously, Wikileaks has performed a vital public service to the American citizens, and to historians.

If the military were not lying constantly, there would have been no need for Wikileaks to do what it did. If the military hadn't been so insistent on "embedded journalism" we might have had real journalism all along, and the war might be over long ago. But just as every extreme contains the seed of its opposite, the Pentagon's insistence on secrecy & lies has backfired big time. Their secrecy/lies/control of the media ironically bred something they could not control: Wikileaks. Long live Julian Assange.

In this last, bloody decade of the American empire, Wikileaks is a vital player in preparing the way for a return of democracy. When the empire has exhausted itself, maybe we will have a chance to build a sane society.

Why is Thiessen not demanding an investigation of the many collateral murders revealed by Wikileaks? It is these murders themselves which decrease our security, not the knowledge of them. It is the imperial criminal conduct which harms the empire, not the clear-seeing of the conduct.

Why is Thiessen not demanding an investigation of the 2009 leak of McChrystal's plan to expand the war, a leak which undermined civilian control of the military? Who, really, is in charge here?

If we hope to have a return to democracy and the rule of law, we need whistleblowers like Assange to keep shining the light into the dark corners that the militarists don't want us to see. Again, long live Julian Assange and Wikileaks.

Posted by: OpenSpace | August 6, 2010 12:54 AM | Report abuse

Leak the files.

Posted by: Miron1 | August 6, 2010 1:49 AM | Report abuse

The documents have been released on the Wikileaks site for well over a week now. Apparently, Marc Theissen and the Pentagon don't know how the Internet works.

Posted by: atlasfugged | August 6, 2010 2:45 AM | Report abuse

The fact that the Pentagon is making public demands is a sure sign of its weakness in the matter because otherwise, if it had the power to affect things without the permission of Wilileaks, it would do so without an announcement.

Wikileaks holds hostage more national security information to release if force is in any way used against it.

Crow has been served for lunch at the Pentagon.

Posted by: stephendclark | August 6, 2010 6:48 AM | Report abuse

Shows you how hypocritical the left is. If Bush's DOD had issued a "threat" like this, the hippies would have circled the wagons and sang kumbaya. Now it's Barry's gang threating (what, a SEAL team assult? a Chicago gang-bang hit?) and not a whisper from the ACLU, HRW or Greenpeace or whatever.

Posted by: JohnnyGee | August 6, 2010 8:32 AM | Report abuse

Shows you how hypocritical the left is. If Bush's DOD had issued a "threat" like this, the hippies would have circled the wagons and sang kumbaya. Posted by: JohnnyGee |
Apparently someone is not paying attention. Try reading a bit closer and you'll see the left is screaming bloody murder at the Pentagon AND "Barry's gang".

Shows you how hypocritical the right is. If the facts don't fit, just make something up.

Posted by: CardFan | August 6, 2010 8:46 AM | Report abuse

It's clear that all 'o you in the Get Wikileaks crowd have no idea how the Internet and Wikileaks really work. The Internet is a distributed network of networks designed to survive a nuclear attack. Take Wikileaks offline where it is and it will just pop up somewhere else, probably beyond the reach of US Law Enforcement but viewable just fine online. You morons.

Posted by: AgentDoubleVU | August 6, 2010 11:49 AM | Report abuse

Mr. Assange should be starting to worry right about now, because a "cease and desist" demand from the United States military cannot be ignored, or taken lightly...

Of course, this demand MAY be just a pretext for what comes next...

Unfortunately for him, "what comes next" just happens to be the ONE thing that our military does best... and delivering justice unto traitors (especially one such as Assange, who has become their PERSONAL enemy) only adds to the enjoyment of the mission.

He really should have thought this thing through BEFORE making enemies of the world's most powerful military... but it's too late now...

Mr. Assange has an exciting NEW full-time job now, I'm afraid... watching his own back...

Posted by: Guy-Hardrock | August 6, 2010 1:20 PM | Report abuse

bring it on marc and all your whitehouse friends. I like millions of others have the INSURANCE-AES FILE.

I have donated and urge others to donate their dedicated servers to wikileaks and the moment you put any hammer blow on assange millions of us will rise to take his place and continue to crack open the liars in the whitehouse and little new age nazis like marc.

Posted by: nbooradley | August 6, 2010 3:43 PM | Report abuse

lmao at guy hard rock.

Bring it on MO FO. drone strike me.
you IDIOT assange is an australian so therefore can never be a TRAITOR to a nation he never was a citizen of you stupid stupid trailer park idiot.

the harder you try to supress the more will not comply with the idiots like yourself in the USA and more leaks will follow and more resources will be placed online to combat you in return.

bring it on bring on the cybercommand bring on the cia and bring on anything you think you can muster. you will never never never EVER win the information war as you are obviously far too stupid to understand how the internet works or how to stop us.

taking out assange will do nothing to stop it.

we are LEGION.

Posted by: nbooradley | August 6, 2010 3:46 PM | Report abuse


Anyone else want some insurance in the form of a 1.7gig encrypted file just head on to this link

Copy it hold onto it and wait for wikileaks to give you the key if the Us of A tries to supress the truth further.

Millions already have it and the harder the administration tries to silence the more of us have the data and can share it to the world.

tsk tsk tsk tsk what you say about that redneck bomb and torture assange types?

Posted by: nbooradley | August 6, 2010 3:50 PM | Report abuse


You're a smart guy, but this is not a smart approach.

The 15K other documents are in effect already released, and whether or not their encryption key is revealed or not is out of any USG control, I would certainly presume. (I imagine there would be a software "dead man switch", e.g.) This is trivially easy.

Assange is a fool and a tool, just another absolutely classic useful idiot--smart, gullible, delusional, sanctimonious--but once the stuff is out, it is out, period, and it is 100% counterproductive to make foolish threats.

Whatever action is taken against Assange and his fellow agents of tyranny must be done with 100% assurance that the information is already out. Many innocent lives will be lost as a result, but obviously Assange is fine with that, perhaps even enthused about it, since it will make him more of a World Historical Man of Action, and since he and his followers will have no trouble rationalizing the deaths they cause.

There are many people like this--useful idiots who become enamored of tyrants or their ideologies. People did it for the Nazis (or just against the allies), for Communism (or just against free societies), and certainly now for radical Islamic tyranny (or just against those who would stop it). Tens of millions died from their actions, and perhaps thousands (maybe just dozens or hundreds, maybe tens or hundreds of thousands) will die because of these leaks--but that just shows how the focus needs to be on preventing these leaks in the first place, since once they're out on the Internet, they're out, period.

In most cases, the Internet has helped freedom--in this case it is helping those who most fiercely oppose it. So far as these documents go, that's just a fact of life at this point.

Assange and Wikileaks should be opposed, but only within the law and with a full regard for unintended consequences of foolish actions against them. And whatever action is taken, it will not change the fact that 100% of the documents already leaked will be revealed, and indeed already have been (presumably) to many.

As an aside: I wonder if the Taliban, Iran, Al Qaeda, China, etc. will be smart enough to fund Wikileaks without getting caught funding Wikileaks. Since Wikileaks opposes transparency for itself (gee, there's a surprise), and since the Taliban, Iran, et al probably won't reveal themselves to Wikileaks as sources of its funding (that might confuse the more naïve of the useful idiots), I presume hiding funding sources should be easy, but I hope it is hard. Alas, there is a LOT of money available (from drugs and from governments) for those who would kill either democracy or NATO (particularly American and British) troops in the Middle East and Central Asia.

Posted by: Zorkonillion | August 11, 2010 12:57 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company