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.
Click Here to Read Whole Article
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