>Back in June -- once Poulsen's claims that they were withholding only private information and national security secrets was proven false by The Washington Post

>Back in June -- once Poulsen's claims that they were withholding only private information and national security secrets was proven false by The Washington Post's subsequent publication of chat excerpts that fell into neither category -- this is what I called on Wired to do: This is where I disagree with Greenwald. I spent some time looking over a combined version of the logs that have been released by various sources to date[1], and didn't come to the same conclusion at all. Looking at what Wired did release, I think two criteria stand out -- it's all about either leaks that were already public knowledge or directly related to Manning's role in leaking the documents. If you look at what Wired omitted, it's most of the transcript we have for May 22. The parts that Wired chose to omit are almost entirely either about leaks that weren't yet public at the time Wired published in June or Manning talking about his mental and emotional state. This aligns fairly well with Wired's claim that the portions they chose to withhold were sensitive to either national security or of a personal nature. Looking directly at the primary source bolsters Wired's argument, if anything, in my opinion. [1] http://firedoglake.com/merged-manning-lamo-chat-logs/ http://firedoglake.com/merged-manning-lamo-chat-logs/