Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Censorship Books Government The Military United States Your Rights Online

Pentagon Makes Good On Plan To Destroy Critical Book 306

Posted by timothy
from the in-soviet-union-books-burn-you dept.
mykos writes "Remember when the Pentagon said they were arranging a taxpayer-funded, government-sponsored book burning a couple weeks ago? Well, they made good on that threat, purchasing 9,500 copies of the book to be destroyed. The publisher, St. Martin's Press, has redacted anything the Pentagon told them to redact in the upcoming second run of the book. They Department of Defense has not yet paid for the burned books, but says they are 'in the process.' Pentagon spokeswoman Lt. Col. April Cunningham gave this statement: 'DoD decided to purchase copies of the first printing because they contained information which could cause damage to national security.' Whew, looks like we're safe now."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Pentagon Makes Good On Plan To Destroy Critical Book

Comments Filter:
  • by durrr (1316311) on Sunday September 26, 2010 @08:29AM (#33702712)
    The authour should've seen this coming and made the first print run 9,5 million books instead.
  • by SydShamino (547793) on Sunday September 26, 2010 @10:06AM (#33703322)

    Sony, EMI, Universal, and Warner are "artists" at heart?

    Did your rant against the current administration get in the way of your common sense? You usually do better than this.

  • by Gordonjcp (186804) on Sunday September 26, 2010 @10:21AM (#33703414) Homepage

    ... where you can say what you like, if you get permission first.

    Seriously, guys, look at how we do it in the rest of the world. Learn from the experience of others. When Britain let America run its own affairs, it was a bit like leaving a house full of teenagers alone for a weekend with the keys to the gun cabinet and wine cellar.

  • by DrYak (748999) on Sunday September 26, 2010 @10:25AM (#33703432) Homepage

    Some body at the pentagon "Oh, shit, this has classified intel in it. Call up the publisher"
    Some body at the publisher "We'd love to help protect national security, but we don't want to take a multi thousand dollar hit to costs"
    Some body at the pentagon "Yes, we can compensate American citizens for damages incurred by helping us protect national security"
    Some body in the press "OMG THE PENTAGON IS BURNING BOOKS!"
    Captain Picard *headpalm*

    Julian Assange : "Yay ! More stuff to upload onto WikiLeaks !"

    Sweden : "...hum, our server start to get a little bit full...."

    Some body at the pentagon : "Look ! This time we have definite and conclusive proof that Julian Assange is an evil pedo-terrorist ! And it's complete coincidence that we have found it just right now"

    Swedish Judge : "Nah, sorry. Still looks photoshoped. The light isn't quite right"

  • by Yvan256 (722131) on Sunday September 26, 2010 @10:36AM (#33703498) Homepage Journal

    Explanation for the graphics guys out there: the Pentagon is kinda like the alpha channel.

  • by VanessaE (970834) on Sunday September 26, 2010 @10:39AM (#33703514) Homepage

    I sent the following email to Macmillan, parent company of St. Martin's Press. I didn't hear about the book until it was too late; needless to say, I'm PISSED:

    ----------

    Please forward this to St. Martin's Press, this is meant specifically for them, though it also pertains to Macmillan as well.
    ===

    As a natural born American citizen and someone who cares deeply about her civil rights, I am writing to tell you how utterly disgusted and angry I am at your company for censoring a publication at the Department of Defense's request. I refer to Operation Dark Heart, detailing Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer's time fighting in Afghanistan.

    To make matters even worse, I am especially angry at your company for ALLOWING THE ENTIRE FIRST RUN OF BOOKS TO BE DESTROYED BY OUR OWN GOVERNMENT!!

    Remember Germany during World War II? The Nazi Party? This was the very tactic that government used to control the spread of information - gather up every book, scroll, and other publication they could find that covered the subject they wanted to suppress, by any means necessary (usually by direct theft), and burn them, often quite publicly in huge middle-of-the-street piles.

    This is not Nazi Germany, this is America. This is NOT supposed to happen here!

    What happened to the concept of Freedom of the Press? Freedom of Speech? Does the First Amendment mean nothing anymore? You are a book publisher. Therefore, you are a member of the Press, as the word was defined when our Constitution was first put into practice. That definition has not been changed in our Constitution, therefore, the First Amendment would have protected your right to continue to publish the information in that book - that was part of its original purpose.

    Don't tell me you couldn't have known - the warnings were in the news on September 10th. Don't tell me you needed the money - the destroyed content is worth less than $260,000 retail, compared to over $1 Billion in total sales in the past year. You had the right and the absolute DUTY to refuse sale of those books, knowing full well they were to be destroyed, and you have the right and the DUTY to argue against the government where censorship of any work is concerned, especially since this government has played the "national security" card WAY too many times. I am so utterly angry with your company and everyone therein who had anything whatsoever to do with allowing this to happen, that I will NEVER AGAIN buy anything from ANY company under your purview.

    You have lost all credibility in the eyes of whatever Americans still exist who believe in the protection of their rights.

    9500 books. DESTROYED. Shame on you. Shame on all of the people who continue to work for you from this point forward.

    I understand there were 10,000 copies made in the first run, meaning that nearly 500 of them made it into private hands (or eventually will). With any luck, at least one will get scanned and put online in text form, uncensored, unrestricted, and freely available (and it won't be my doing, so call off your lawyers). If you don't understand why I say this, look up the "Streisand Effect" sometime.

  • by jmac_the_man (1612215) on Sunday September 26, 2010 @10:52AM (#33703570)

    They should let the people know, via the liberated press, what is really going on behind closed doors. Just as the publishers did during the Watergate or McCarthy scandals.

    If they were doing this in secret, you wouldn't be reading about it on Slashdot. As it stands, Fox has run at least two stories on it. CNN has another. This is all over the media.

  • by Trevorm7 (1082535) on Sunday September 26, 2010 @11:05AM (#33703654)

    Captain Picard *headpalm*

    *facepalm*

  • Re:Wrong (Score:3, Funny)

    by HiThere (15173) <`charleshixsn' `at' `earthlink.net'> on Sunday September 26, 2010 @12:48PM (#33704250)

    While your definitions are pretty much spot-on, your expectations of Slashdot commentary are ludicrous.

  • by Scrameustache (459504) on Sunday September 26, 2010 @01:10PM (#33704358) Homepage Journal

    Sony, EMI, Universal, and Warner are "artists" at heart?

    Have you read their EULAs? I mean really read them? It brings a tear to my eyes when I do, man.

  • by MiniMike (234881) on Sunday September 26, 2010 @01:19PM (#33704408)

    He should have sold electronic copies and let the Pentagon keep buying until they "ran out"...

  • by Bahamut_Omega (811064) on Sunday September 26, 2010 @02:07PM (#33704708)
    Could we put the people at the book burning to death by burning at the stake? Sure it would be messy & painful, but at least we could likely add the conservative faggots on to roast as well.
  • by TheRaven64 (641858) on Sunday September 26, 2010 @02:29PM (#33704852) Journal

    From a non-US-citizen perspective, the difference between the US Republican and Democrat parties doesn't amount to that much

    Wow, this post makes me ashamed to be non-American. Even a superficial look lets you see that the two parties are completely different. One is red and the other one is blue. Not the same at all! They're right at opposite ends of the (visible) spectrum!

Programmers do it bit by bit.

Working...