Wired/AP Kevin Poulsen and Bradley Manning
For more than six months, Wired's Senior Editor Kevin
Poulsen has possessed -- but refuses to publish -- the key evidence in
one of the year's most significant political stories: the arrest
of U.S. Army PFC Bradley Manning for allegedly acting as WikiLeaks'
source. In late May, Adrian Lamo -- at the same time he was working with
the FBI as a government informant against Manning -- gave Poulsen what
he purported to be the full chat logs between Manning and Lamo in which
the Army Private allegedly confessed to having been the source for the
various cables, documents and video that WikiLeaks released throughout
this year. In interviews with me in June, both Poulsen and Lamo confirmed that Lamo placed no substantive restrictions on Poulsen with regard to the chat logs: Wired was and remains free to publish the logs in their entirety.
Despite that, on June 10, Wired published what it said was only "about 25 percent" of those logs,
excerpts that it hand-picked. For the last six months, Poulsen has not
only steadfastly refused to release any further excerpts, but worse, has
refused to answer questions about what those logs do and do not
contain. This is easily one of the worst journalistic disgraces of the
year: it is just inconceivable that someone who claims to be a
"journalist" -- or who wants to be regarded as one -- would actively
conceal from the public, for months on end, the key evidence in a
political story that has generated headlines around the world.
To read the rest of this critical article, go to Salon
|The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.