WaPo indirectly requested permission from US officials to publish files had been already published by WikiLeaks
An email
from the Hillary Clinton Email Archive published by WikiLeaks
demonstrates the direct connection of the mainstream media with the
US state and the fact that they publish stories only after approval,
especially in 'sensitive' issues.
The
letter from Craig Whitlock, staff writer at Washington Post, to
Michael A. Hammer who appears that he served as Acting Assistant
Secretary for Public Affairs at the time, indirectly requests
permission for the publication of cables already leaked by WikiLeaks,
concerning secret US drone operations in East Africa.
A
particular paragraph proves it is common practice for the mainstream
journalists to inform US officials before publishing: “Given
that Wikileaks recently posted the remainder of its database of State
Department cables to its publicly accessible website, my editors have
determined that it's no longer necessary for the Post to provide the
State Department with hard copies of the cables we are planning to
cite in advance -- as we have done in the past.”
Key
parts:
I'm
working on another national-security story involving some State
Department cables, and was hoping you could help, or point me in
the right direction.
This
story will report that the U.S. military (specifically, the U.S.
Africa Command and the Navy) have been deploying MQ-9 Reaper drones
on secret counter-terrorism missions over Somalia from a base in the
Republic of the Seychelles.
The U.S.
Africa Command had announced publicly in September 2009 that it was
basing some Reaper drones in the Seychelles as part of an anti-piracy
mission. But several confidential State Department cables make
clear that the drones were also being used to perform
counter-terrorism missions over the Horn of Africa and Somalia, and
that U.S. officials asked the president of the Seychelles to keep it
secret.
Given
that Wikileaks recently posted the remainder of its database of State
Department cables to its publicly accessible website, my editors have
determined that it's no longer necessary for the Post to provide the
State Department with hard copies of the cables we are planning to
cite in advance -- as we have done in the past. Naturally, however,
The Post would still like to get reaction or comment from the State
Department for the story.
The
cables state that a primary reason for basing the Reaper drones in
the Seychelles was so they could conduct counter-terrorism missions
over Somalia and the Horn of Africa. Yet U.S. diplomats asked
Seychelles President Jean Michel and other Seychellois officials to
keep this aspect of the program "discreet" or a secret. Why
did the State Department insist on the need for confidentiality? Was
the publicly advertised anti-piracy mission a ruse or a cover story?
Although
U.S. officials stated publicly in 2009 that the Reaper drones were
unarmed, the cables make clear that the U.S. government was
contemplating arming the UAVs. In fact, two cables reveal that U.S.
diplomats told President Michel that they would notify him in advance
if they decided to go ahead and arm the Reapers with missiles. Did
U.S. diplomats or other U.S. officials subsequently notify President
Michel that UAVs based in the Seychelles would be armed? If so, when?
We have
not fixed a publication date for this article yet, but it is possible
that we will publish as soon as Wednesday.
Full
letter:
Comments
Post a Comment