Government Objects To Outing Taxpayer-Funded Sex Trade?

The Market Ticker ^ | 12/8/2010 | Karl Denninger

[FromLori]

In little boys perhaps?

On the Kunduz Regional Training Center (RTC) DynCorp event of April 11 (reftel), Atmar reiterated his insistence that the U.S. try to quash any news article on the incident or circulation of a video connected with it. He continued to predict that publicity would "endanger lives." He disclosed that he has arrested two Afghan police and nine other Afghans as part of an MoI investigation into Afghans who facilitated this crime of "purchasing a service from a child."

I see.

So we have diplomatic activity related to what appears, if this cable is correct, to be child prostitution linked to a US company providing services in Afghanistan.

This is the sort of thing our government is trying to keep from being disclosed by Wikileaks?

This is what our government deemed "classified"?

Covering up child prostitution - if that's what happened - is a legitimate "state secret"?

We absolutely should have diplomatic secrecy surrounding the activity of US corporations engaged in international commerce and training activities when the accusation is made that they're involved, however peripherally, in the sexual exploitation of children?

By the way, Frontline ran a nasty little video piece on this general practice. Get your barf bag before watching.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/story/2010/12/the-dancing-boys-of-afghanista.html?utm_campaign=homepage&utm_medium=feeds&utm_source=feeds

Is that what this cable is talking about?

Is that what Joe Lieberman wants to protect?

Shouldn't the people know if this is where their taxpayer funding is going?

Shouldn't we ask Lieberman whether he supports the sexual exploitation of children, since he obviously wants to not only stop disclosure but the allegation and investigation of events just like this?

Sounds like a fair question to me.