Category: Journalism

Once again using anonymous sources the media is claiming that the British military wants US Special Forces out of their sector of operations in Afghanistan:

A SENIOR British commander in southern Afghanistan has called for US Special Forces to leave his area of operations because the high level of civilian casualties they had caused was making it difficult to win over local people.

Other British officers in Helmand province, in south-west Afghanistan, criticised US Special Forces for causing most of the civilian deaths and injuries in their area.

They also expressed concern that the Americans’ extensive use of air power was turning the people against the foreign presence as British forces were trying to solidify recent gains against the Taliban.

A US military spokesman denied the request for US forces to leave was made, formally or otherwise, or that they had caused most of the casualties.

No where in the article does the journalist identify one British officer making this claim so for all we know it could be the British commander of the chow hall telling this to the reporter.  Additionally the only British officer quoted and identified by the journalist had this to say:

The chief British press officer in Helmand, Colonel Charles Mayo, defended the US Special Forces, saying they were essential to NATO’s efforts to clear out heavily entrenched Taliban insurgents.

A US military spokesman said Special Forces would continue to operate in Helmand for the foreseeable future. He denied their tactics had increased civilian deaths and blamed the Taliban for fighting from civilian compounds.

So the official position of the British military in Helmand province is that the US Special Forces are wanted and will stay in the area.  So why isn’t the headline of the article labeled such?  It is because the author so desperately wants to believe US Special Forces are killing all these civilians and will quote and sensationalize anyone that feeds this belief.  Thus if the commander of the chow hall tells the reporter that US Special Forces are not wanted in Helmand Province it will become headline material despite the official British military position saying otherwise. 

This whole article sounds very familiar to the prior Taliban misinformation campaign that ended in an entire Marine unit being redeployed out of Afghanistan.  You often hear the media trumpet the "rise in violence" in Afghanistan however when you look at who is being killed 75% of the casualties are Taliban fighters.  Thus the rise in violence is actually because the US military and its allies are killing an increasing amount of Taliban.  That is why the Taliban is increasing its disinformation campaign in regards to civilian casualties.  The misinformation campaign worked to get the US Marines kicked out of Afghanistan so why couldn’t the same tactic work to get the US Special Forces, which are probably the most deadly hunters of Taliban fighters, kicked out of Afghanistan as well? 

This is just another example of the all to willing media being more than happy to aid the Taliban in this goal.   

UPDATE: Rick Moran has a good posting that provides a great reality check over the whole Beauchamp saga and tends to confirm my opinion that outing him was good, but the gloating over it is getting over done.  Over at Neocon News they have a hilarious graphic related to the Beauchamp saga you should check out.

______________________________________

Via Blackfive, comes this news that Private Scott Beauchamp has admitted to being a fraud:

THE WEEKLY STANDARD has learned from a military source close to the investigation that Pvt. Scott Thomas Beauchamp–author of the much-disputed “Shock Troops” article in the New Republic’s July 23 issue as well as two previous “Baghdad Diarist” columns–signed a sworn statement admitting that all three articles he published in the New Republic were exaggerations and falsehoods–fabrications containing only “a smidgen of truth,” in the words of our source.

By signing the sworn statement admitting he lied, Beauchamp is probably only looking at getting an Article 15 after all of this is said and done.  If he wrote on a sworn statement that his stories were true and then was later proven to be false than he would be looking at big trouble for lying on a sworn statement, which is a huge no, no in the military.  What Beauchamp did does piss me off, but fibbing and exaggerating war stories I seriously doubt is something that rises to court martial offense.  An Article 15 is a good way to handle this issue.  Article 15’s are handled within the unit and are quick to administer thus preventing turning Beauchamp into a leftist martyr by a prolonged court martial process.  

This would be at least the second Article 15 for Beauchamp which could open him up for removal from the military with a chapter for pattern of misconduct.  Judging by his writings he may have psychological issues that may be enough to have him chaptered for a personality disorder.  Anyway chaptering him from the military should be a priority and Beauchamp probably wouldn’t mind because it will speed up his career to become a latest leftist war hero, which is why he joined the military in the first place. 

Another interesting question is if the US military has been sitting on the fact he signed a sworn statement admitting he lied just to let the The New Republic hang itself with all its claims of fact checking and verifying of the story.  If the Army intentionally did that, it was extremely clever, but it was probably an unattended consequence.  Either way The New Republic’s creditability which wasn’t much to begin with, is totally shattered. 

Michelle Malkin and Ace have good postings up as well on the latest Beauchamp news,but I do have to say that I find the gloating a bit over done.  The guy is a dumbass and is being held accountable for his actions.  Probably no punishment for Beauchamp will be more painful than the fact that he has been disgraced in front of everyone in his unit.  Imagine how hard it must be for him to go to the chow hall at Camp Falcon now and look other soldiers in the eye after everyone knows what he did. 

I highly recommend everyone read this article by a Jesuit priest Rev. Paul McNellis, sums up the Beauchamp saga quite well without rejoicing in the fact Beauchamp’s life has hit some definite self inflicted hard times.

TFM has a great update on the fall out from the fraudulent article in The New Republic.  Can TNR possibly look anymore pathetic than they do now?  Well yes because "Scott Thomas" has been revealed and just happens to be married to a TNR staffer. What a tangled web some people weave. More at TFM and Ace. 

UPDATE: TNR stands by its story, and Michelle Malkin is reporting on this too and has possibly identified who is the fraud.
_____________________________
Yet another leftist plant in the military has been discovered.  Read here about the newest war hero being lionized by the American left, "Scott Thomas".  I have posted before about leftist plants being used to politicize the military and at this rate soon an entire platoon of them can be formed with 1LT Watada as the platoon leader.  Just another example of libelous journalism that the media in America continues to get away with. 

I blogged before about the politicizing of the body armor issue.  Notice you have heard nothing about this body armor issue any more from anyone.  If you want to know why you might want to watch this report.  HT: MM

Here is the latest attempt by the media and politicians to play politics with the military:

Independent ballistics tests commissioned by NBC News raise new questions about whether America’s fighting men and women really do have the best body armor available.

The Army insists the body armor troops are now wearing — called Interceptor — is the very best in the world.  And, without question, those vests have saved lives in Iraq and Afghanistan.

But an NBC investigation suggests there may be something even better out there called Dragon Skin, a flexible body armor of interconnected ceramic discs.  

What follows in the report is a very selective reporting of the facts that NBC News wants you to know about.  NBC News is alleging that the US military is giving its soldiers inferior armor to save money and for political reasons.  Of course this report is followed by well timed outrage from Democratic law makers:

"In light of recent media reports suggesting that a particular body armor system may offer better protection than the system currently being used by our servicemembers, Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) and Jim Webb (D-VA) – both members of the Senate Armed Services Committee – today called on Comptroller General of the United States David M. Walker to initiate a Government Accountability Office (GAO) investigation to reassess the body armor systems currently being issued by all the military services and the Special Operations Command for effectiveness and reliability against the threats facing U.S. troops in combat," states a press release issued by the Clinton campaign.

This has caused the Army to come out and defend themselves from the false allegations:

The Pentagon news conference with Brig. Gen. Mark Brown, the Army’s top officer in charge of charge of body armor, detailed a series of tests that he says the current Interceptor system, currently issued to soldiers and Marines, has passed.

The unusual briefing aimed to refute what it calls inaccurate reporting by NBC after the network broadcast a series of reports in which correspondent Lisa Myers raised questions about the Interceptor body armor, which the military maintains is "the best, bar none."

[…]

"We have conducted the same test standard for all of our current body armor producers. Every one of them has passed with zero failures," Brown said. "This (Dragonskin) has passed with 13 failures. If they make a product improvement, we are willing to test again to that standard and see if they can make it."

Brown said DragonSkin suffered "catastrophic failures" by not being able to withstand temperature ranges from 60 degrees below zero to 120 above, a range that he says can be expected when vests are used in the arctic or put to use in Iraq. Interceptor has withstood these tests, Brown said.

What is especially troubling about this whole thing is that the US military had to release footage of all the tests so terrorists can analyze how to defeat US body armor.  What was probably the most damning information left out of the NBC report was that the Dragon Skin body armor weighs 47.5 pounds compared to the Interceptor armor that weighs 28 pounds.  How could NBC News leave such critical information as this out of their report?  It just shows that they are deliberately presenting only the facts that supports the narrative they want everyone to believe.  It is truly sad how bad the level of journalism in America has reached.  The media at one time played a critical role as a check and balance on the government, now it is nothing more than a propaganda organ and a political weapon for members of the government. I know members of the media read this blog and I would interested to read an opinion from someone in the media on the NBC reporting.

Anyway, at the rate this body armor debate is going, the Democrats will be advocating that we wear medieval armor like King Arthur pretty soon.  With the amount of weight on us that the Democrats want, it will slow soldiers down that much more and make it easier for the snipers to target soldiers and the Democrats will get all the body armor testing results they could possibly imagine. 

What is funny about this whole thing is that Marines won’t even wear heavier armor:

Extra body armor — the lack of which caused a political storm in the United States — has flooded in to Iraq, but many Marines here promptly stuck it in lockers or under bunks. Too heavy and cumbersome, many say.

Marines already carry loads as heavy as 70 pounds when they patrol the dangerous streets in towns and villages in restive Anbar province. The new armor plates, while only about five pounds per set, are not worth carrying for the additional safety they are said to provide, some say.

"We have to climb over walls and go through windows," said Sgt. Justin Shank of Greencastle, Pa. "I understand the more armor, the safer you are. But it makes you slower. People don’t understand that this is combat and people are going to die."

Staff Sgt. Thomas Bain of Buffalo, N.Y., shared concerns about the extra pounds.

"Before you know it, they’re going to get us injured because we’re hauling too much weight and don’t have enough mobility to maneuver in a fight from house to house," said Bain, who is assigned to the 3rd Battalion, 6th Marine Regiment. "I think we’re starting to go overboard on the armor."

For the best reporting on this, I highly recommend everyone go over to OP-FOR where a body armor expert provides some really great analysis of the NBC News report.  Here is a taste of the level of detail he gets into:

NBC News claims to have commissioned an independent, side-by-side test of Dragon Skin and the Army’s Interceptor vest. According to them, Dragon Skin outperformed the Army’s body armor in stopping the most lethal threats.

There are only two labs that are National Institute of Justice (NIJ) certified to run NIJ body armor tests. They are the HP White Laboratory in Street, MD and US Test Labs in Wichita, KS. A third lab, Chesapeake Testing in Chase, MD, is under NIJ review for certification. Additional military facilities certify body armor performance for DoD. NBC does not own one of them, nor does NBC appear to be pursuing a scientific approach at a licensed facility. A proper test would require over two dozen SOV 3000 Level IV Dragon Skin vests to be placed on a human torso model and shot by specific threat rounds at a standard range and impact velocity, from specific angles and impact points, and under a variety of contamination and environmental conditions that soldiers might face in combat. Fresh off the manufacturing line ESAPI would be shot for comparison, if further certification or validation (already awarded to the ESAPI) was needed.

Was the “Interceptor” ESAPI armor NBC tested government issued or procured independently? The markings on the armor seen in the video are unfamiliar and they appear to be independently procured non-issue plates from non-standard or non-qualified vendors. Wouldn’t a fair test use the fresh issue ESAPI plates, like the Pinnacle armor provided? Are the alleged ESAPIs NBC tested fresh and certified current production? Did they come from Pinnacle or a surplus store dumpster? There are six qualified vendors that have passed ESAPI first article protocol. The vendors deny providing plates to NBC. And none of them are Canadian.

There is a whole lot more so make sure you read the whole report. 

OP-FOR has a follow up report here as well that further debunks the NBC News claims.  However, just like everything else with this war none of these politicians, their media allies, and the loony left actually care what armor is better and what the troops want and need.  This is just another issue for the Democrats and the loony left to score political points with, manufactured by their media allies. 

To settle this, I think everyone in Congress who advocates that we in the military should wear Dragon Skin body armor should spend a year walking around Washington D.C. wearing 47.5 pounds of body armor.  The discomfort they experience won’t even compare to the heat of Iraq and Afghanistan with all the extra gear we carry in the military.  If Democrats like Senators Webb and Clinton want us to wear their armor so much, they should lead by example and wear the armor with us. 

However, this has nothing to do with armor, but politics.  The Democrats and the loony left have scored their political points and now the whole thing will proceed to blow over with the American public left with the perception that the US military is using substandard armor by an uncaring Pentagon leadership only interested is giving Haliburton like contracts to Bush political supporters.  It all nonsense, but the perception has been created and the politicizing of the military continues.

Just when I think the American media couldn’t get any worse it does. I’m not sure if there has been a bigger piece of propaganda under the cover of investigative journalism than this week’s 60 Minutes piece on the Appeal for Redress frauds. If you have the stomach you can download the video here. Let me get everyone up to speed on what Appeal for Redress really is.

Appeal for Redress operates a website where US military personnel can sign a petition to end the war in Iraq. Appeal for Redress has tried to cultivate an image of being a “grassroots” campaign by US military personnel to end the war in Iraq. If you watch the 60 Minutes piece that is exactly what they say that they are a “grassroots” effort with no external financing. However, this couldn’t be further from the truth.

Appeal for Redress was founded by Navy Seaman Jonathan Hutto. No where in the 60 Minutes interview did they bother mentioning Mr. Hutto’s past activities before joining the Navy. Fortunately others have:

Then there is the issue of the spokeman for “Appeals for Redress” featured in the media reports. Jonathan Hutto is described as a Navy seaman based in Norfolk VA who set up the website a month ago. But the media failed to report on Mr. Hutto’s less than pro-American background.

According to his own writings, Hutto “enlisted in the United States Navy in January of 2004” after “working at non-profit organizations and an unsuccessful stint at teaching 5th grade post graduating from Howard University in 1999.” The non-profit organization Hutto worked for was Amnesty International – not your typical volunteer organization. In 2002, Hutto was Membership Program Coordinator for the Mid-Atlantic Region of Amnesty International.

In 2001, Hutto was a speaker at The Fight against Police Violence: from Cincinnati to PG County, Maryland. Hutto’s co-speaker at the event was Glova Scott of the Socialist Workers Party. The speech was posted on The Militant website.

Mr. Hutto was also involved in anti-war demonstrations before the Iraq War as well:

When Hutto graduated from Howard, he worked for the ACLU and then for Amnesty International. Hutto has expressed disdain for President Bush, stating “[Bush’s] agenda is not only anti African/African American, but anti-labor, anti-woman, anti-environment and anti-human rights”, has called the Iraq war “illegal” and the United States “imperialist”.

Here is a picture of Mr. Hutto protesting in his prior life before suddenly joining the Navy:

Here is Hutto now:

So what are the odds that a member of a number of liberal, leftists groups opposed to the war in Iraq suddenly has the urge to go serve his country during war time? Not very good, unless he joined as a plant by the anti-war groups opposed to President Bush and the war in Iraq. Now this is a scenario that has a lot of evidence backing it courtesy of some of the best blogging ever by Greyhawk at the Mudville Gazette.

Mr. Hutto joined the Navy in 2004 and suddenly in October of 2006 he launches his website just before the 2006 Congressional elections. Even more interesting is that he has a slew of media available to promote his website when he launched it in 2006. His “grassroots” effort against the war was instantly covered in over 200 newspapers across the country. If you are in the military and are against the war and started a website do you think you could get over 200 newspapers to cover the launch of your website? Probably not, but Hutto did. How did he do it you may ask?

Well this is how; out of all these newspapers only one exposed Hutto’s website for what it really is:

Yesterday, a company that does public relations for the liberal activist political action committee MoveOn.org, Fenton Communications, organized a conference call for reporters and three active-duty soldiers to unveil the soldiers’ anti-war group Appeal for Redress.
<…>
A staff member at Fenton Communications who requested anonymity said his company was approached last week by a longtime peace activist and former director of the anti-nuclear proliferation front known as SANE/Freeze, David Cortright, to publicize Appeal for Redress. Mr. Cortright is now president of an Indiana-based nonprofit group, the Fourth Freedom Forum, and his biography on the organization’s Web site says he helped raise “more than $300,000 for the Win Without War coalition to avert a preemptive attack on Iraq in 2002–03.”

So who is Fenton Communications exactly you may ask. They are the public relations firm for just about every liberal activist group you can imagine. Here is a list of all the groups that Fenton Communications provides PR services for. I’ll highlight a few of them below:

Greenpeace, Sierra Club, Turner Foundation (Ted Turner connection), Heinz Family Foundation (John Kerry connection), Amnesty International (Hutto connection), every liberal activist group from San Francisco that you can imagine, every gay rights group you can think of, Air America Radio, Al Gore, Salon.com, AFL-CIO, UAW, Arianna Huffington, Moveon.org (George Soros connection), Fourth Freedom and the list goes on and on.

Fenton Communications is obviously a huge media company with massive political power and money behind it. Now we know there is big money behind Hutto’s “grassroots” movement and now who exactly setup his webpage and organized Hutto’s group you may ask? If you look on the Appeal for Redress sponsors page you see three organizations listed as being behind the Appeal for Redress site, Military Families Speak Out, Iraq Veterans Against the War, and Veterans for Peace. None of these groups are listed as being promoted by Fenton Communications. These three groups are actually front groups for the real power behind Appeal for Redress.

The Appeal for Redress webpage as Greyhawk first reported was registered to J.E. Glick, of 803 North Main Street, Goshen, Indiana. So who is J.E. Glick? This person is actually Jennifer Glick, the director of Information Services, for the Fourth Freedom Forum one of the clients of Fenton Communications which proves the NY Sun’s article about the group fronting for the Appeal for Redress group. After Greyhawk uncovered evidence of Fourth Freedom’s involvement and emailed Ms. Glick for an explanation, which she never provided, the organization moved quickly to cover their tracks by re-registering the Appeal for Redress site under a different site owner from Veterans from Peace.

Since Fenton Communications is behind the promoting of this website they have cleverly tried to create a “grassroots” image of Iraq veterans against the war and they are doing this by using what appears to be “grassroots” front groups to do it. This is called Astroturfing:

In politics and advertising, the term astroturfing describes formal public relations (PR) campaigns which seek to create the impression of being a spontaneous, grassroots behavior. Hence the reference to the “AstroTurf” (artificial grass) is a metaphor to indicate “fake grassroots” support.

So now you know Appeal for Redress has big money behind it from shadow sponsors and is being promoted by the biggest liberal public relations firm in the United States that works for billionaire liberal activists like George Soros and Ted Turner. So now is it any wonder why Appeal for Redress is suddenly formed right before the 2006 Congressional elections? Is it also no wonder why now during the debate over President Bush’s “surge” in Iraq a feature story on CBS’s 60 Minutes program is aired? Could it be that Fenton Communications is behind this current media blitz?

If you are still not convinced behind the Fenton Communications involvement in the 60 Minutes program than read what Lara Logan the CBS reporter who put the 60 Minutes feature together had to say about the piece:

“It’s basically a grass roots movement amongst active duty, serving members of the U.S. military.” And “We were very careful to look thoroughly at the group, and to look into their military backgrounds, and to make sure that this wasn’t… people with something hidden in their past or some reason that wasn’t the stated reason to be involved in this.”

She could not find any evidence of “people with something hidden in their past”? WTF? All Ms. Logan had to do was do a Google Search on Jonathan Hutto and all his anti-war and liberal activism before joining the Navy pops right up. Additionally Ms. Logan describes Mr. Hutto like this:

“I’m not anti-war. I’m not a pacifist. I’m not opposed to protecting our country and defending our principles,” says Navy Petty Officer Jonathan Hutto, an Iraq war veteran who, along with another veteran, initiated the petition.

However, Mr. Hutto never served in Iraq, but hey that is a small lie compared to the big lie that Ms. Logan is legitimizing as hard news on 60 Minutes.

I think it is important to note that Ms. Logan is well known for running anti-military pieces including when she tried to pass off Al Qaida propaganda footage as hard news without telling viewers it was an Al Qaida propaganda video:

She would have gotten away with it if it wasn’t for bloggers exposing the story and forcing CBS news to not air the segment. Do a Google search on Lara Logan and read her articles or go to her fan site and read or watch her reports there. Just about every single one from both Iraq and Afghanistan is negative and yet we should trust her reports when she couldn’t even uncover Jonathan Hutto’s past activities when Ms. Logan said in her own words she was being “very careful to look thoroughly at the group” before airing the 60 Minutes report?

I think clearly 60 Minutes and Ms. Logan are both working in concert with Fenton Communications marketing campaign involving Appeal for Redress.

Also notice once again that word “grassroots” that Ms. Logan was using. To paraphrase the infamous words of Joseph Goebbels, if you keep telling a lie over and over again, eventually people begin to believe it. That is exactly the image Fenton Communications is trying to cultivate with Appeal for Redress and Ms. Logan and her ilk are aiding them in that effort. Their ilk now includes Yahoo with the webpage promoting the Appeal for Redress 60 Minutes segment on their site:

The reason the anti-war and liberal activist groups have had to go this route an implement a well organized astroturfing campaign is because of the all volunteer military. It is tougher to create discontent in the ranks when everyone volunteered to serve, especially now that their argument of soldiers being duped into the military and forced to go to war has been proven wrong. It has been over 5 years since the nation went to war on September 11, 2001, which means all the young soldiers, junior sergeants, and officers that make up the vast majority of the soldiers in the US military enlisted knowing full well they were going to war.

So next these groups tried to create a perception of poor troop morale, which failed, along with their efforts to stop military recruiting by attacking and banning recruiters or going after ROTC programs. Remember all the stories of the military not meeting their recruiting numbers a couple years ago? That was because the military was in the midst of expanding the overall force numbers, which meant more people had to be recruited. Now that the force has completed the expansion it is easier to maintain recruiting numbers which the military has been able to do for well over a year during a time of war. Then the media tried to create an image of US soldiers with higher than normal suicide rates, which once again that was quickly debunked. Another parallel effort was to paint soldiers as uneducated low lives that are committing crimes all over Iraq. That hasn’t worked yet either. Is it possible Fenton Communications had any involvement in any of these media campaigns? You be the judge.

Now the latest effort is to create an image of a “grassroots” campaign within the military against the war in Iraq. Hutto’s group is one branch of this effort along with the 1LT Ehren Watada’s refusal to deploy. Just like Mr. Hutto, 1LT Watada joined the military after the war in Iraq had already started. Did he not know the nation was at war? Why join the military if you are against the war in Iraq? It is because he has other motives just like Hutto. 1LT Watada’s dad is a known peace activist who refused to deploy to Vietnam and is a political insider in Hawaii who is known to compare President Bush to Hitler. So who is backing Watada you ask? Well, none other than Iraq Veteran’s Against the War and Veterans for Peace, the same groups backing Hutto’s Appeal for Redress group, which are as I have shown front groups for the Fourth Freedom Forum, which is promoted by Fenton Communications. So when you connect the dots it is easy to see how the groups behind Hutto and Watada receive so much publicity when their groups only represent .04% of the US military. How come the other 99.6% of US soldiers cannot get the same amount of air time on 60 Minutes as Appeal for Redress?

What I have found interesting watching this whole astroturfing campaign unfold is how similar it is to the South Korean spy scandal. In the spy scandal North Korean spies within the Korean political party the Democratic Labor Party planted agents within South Korean activist groups to act as front groups to promote anti-US activities within South Korea. So who taught who? Did Fenton Communications learn this astroturfing scheme from the North Koreans or did the North Koreans learn it from Fenton Communications?

In order to counter the large and elaborate astroturfing campaign members of various milblogs have begun our own real grassroots effort by creating an online petition on February 12th of this year called an Appeal for Courage. In just two weeks 1,197 people have already signed the petition compared to the 1,584 people who have signed the Appeal for Redress petition which has been online since last October and is backed by shadow groups that are using the largest liberal media company Fenton Communications to promote the website in over 200 US newspapers, 60 Minutes, and Yahoo. Despite all this publicity and money behind Hutto’s group, the Appeal for Courage petition is on pace to blow by the Appeal for Redress astroturfers. If you are active duty, reserve, or National Guard it is perfectly legal to sign the petition. You can read the DOD directives and the petition here. Let your voice be heard instead of drowned out by the .04% on 60 Minutes that are backed by an elaborate, well funded liberal marketing campaign.

People, groups, and media like Hutto, Watada, Fourth Freedom forum, CBS News, Fenton Communications, and the rest of their ilk don’t support the troops, and this is nothing new. They are just really damn good at hiding it.

Read more at: Milblogs, Flopping Aces, Malkin, Blackfive, LGF, Ms. Underestimated, Op-For

Popular South Korean news website, Oh My News has apparently been hacked:

The well-known Korean online news service OhmyNews, which is written by its readers, has reportedly been infected with a “Trojan Horse,” a malicious code that allows hackers to steal personal information. Internet security firm Geot (ww.geot.com) and Manian.com (manian.dreamwiz.com), a club of Internet users, said Sunday OhmyNews was hacked on Saturday afternoon.

The Trojan lurking on the website will install itself on the computers of readers logging on to the site, and will leak their ID and passwords when they log onto online game sites.

Apparently a Chinese hacker did this to get online game passwords. I wonder if this is going to start a cyber war?