Wikileaks reveals identity of Afgan informants

In the times, but I can't get the online article. I found this instead:

Leaked details put informant lives in danger

Leaked War Files Expose Identities of Afghan Informants

Quote:

---

In just two hours of searching the WikiLeaks archive, The Times found the names of dozens of Afghans credited with handing intelligence to US forces. Their villages are given for identification and, in many cases, their fathers' names.

US officers recorded detailed logs of the information fed to them by named local informants, particularly tribal elders. Julian Assange, the Australian WikiLeaks founder, claimed all the files released through his organisation had been checked for named informants and that 15,000 such documents had been held back.

---

More in the link. So, has wikileaks gone too far? Is there anything which can/should be done?

Yup, it's as I suspected actually (from the helicopter video, the story about the guy who got turned over by a hacker, and from an interview I saw with the assange guy). The assange guy is basically an idiot. I'm not good enough with words to put it better than that.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...googlenews_wsj

Quote:

---

Julian Assange, the editor of the WikiLeaks website that on Monday released some 92,000 classified military documents, has told the German newsweekly Der Spiegel that he "loved crushing bastards."

---

:rolleyes:

I doubt the Taliban have access to the Internet, luckily.

Mr. Assange is an odd and dangerous man, his claim to have "weeded out" these types of documents has been proven terribly false, the consequence? Send him to Afghanistan where he can leak information from the front lines. The stupid man.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beskar

I doubt the Taliban have access to the Internet, luckily.

---

They do.


In any event, this information is highly damaging to the NATO war effort and the lives of thousands of Afghan informants, who in many cases just wanted to build a better society.

I could understand leaking such information if it was of the caliber of the Pentagon Papers - high level policy discussions that revealed huge public deception on the part of multiple administrations. However, the only real new information revealed so far is that the Taliban has, on occassion, used surface to air missiles with rather unreliable success rates, a fact that NATO has categorically denied until now. However, I can understand their reluctance to divulge such information, as the story - in relation to the Soviet narrative - would likely have more impact on the war effort than the actual missiles. Anyone following the war already knew that the Karzai government is highly ineffective, Pakistan is playing a double game, and that the CIA and military special ops teams are assassinating Taliban and AQ leaders.

Other than that, the information does little but endanger NATO allies in the region. Great work Julian! I hope he is enjoying his fame while he can as something gives me the impression the NSA is developing a very special freak accident for him. He has now become a threat to national security.

Ah. His idea of 'crushing bastards' is giving to the Taliban the means to hunt down and kill everyone who's helped the US. And probably their families too.

Before this I was somewhat fond of wikileaks. Now I'd rather that coward is sent to Afghanistan and the Taliban told he's a western spy.

CR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beskar

I doubt the Taliban have access to the Internet, luckily.

---

Oh they do

I hope these guys realise people are going to die. Family comes first chapeau

Taliban was even so kind to congratulate the Labour party for letting the government fall over the Nato effort, the only consideration being to not be swept away at the local elections here. How very cynical. Even more cynical than putting our troops in danger by inventing torture stories, but that was last elections. People need jobs alright.

Be a man, release the last documents too. We have every right to know what our forces are doing down there, and how our troops are killing innocent civillians, among plenty of other stuff.

Since our governments won't tell us, measures like this is needed. Too bad for the informants, but hey, risks of the trade. National security? HAH!

EDIT: I do, however, find it fascinating to see how many here who are willing to limit free speech... Because during the cartoon-thingy, most people went on about how "free speech is absolute" and such.... Just lies, eh?

Pakistani friend of mine kinda has an opinion on you and yours. What's up with you lately

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Pakistani friend of mine kinda has an opinion on you and yours. What's up with you lately

---

Yes, I know there are a lot of people in the world with free speech issues, I'm not surprised that some of your friends are among them; some of mine are as well....

EDIT: for those who are wondering what the fuzz is about, here is the link to the actual files on wikileaks. Start readin'!

In the Netherlands our minister of Justice just released a draft of a law that prohibits Dutchmen from copying anything from Wikileaks. This law is severely restricting freedom. Not only ar you prohibited of copying or publishing classified information, the Attorney Generaal (Openbaar Aanklager) can remove things from the internet at his whim (Pirate Bay?). This is bad, very bad. Sadly the ordinary people don't care for freedom as long as Holland Got Talent is on tv :(. For the Dutch/Belgians among us: http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/document...inaliteit.html

You should be glad, he's a vassal of the crown spying to find undesirable thoughts, it's what you wanted don't complain now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

You should be glad, he's a vassal of the crown spying to find undesirable thoughts, it's what you wanted don't complain now.

---

With a bit of luck Hirsch Stalin is gone in a few weeks, on the scrapheap of history, or is this wishful thinking?
And are you implying that a right -wing cabinet would stop this. VVD (Fred Teeven), CDA (Hirsch Stalin) and PVV (Geert Wilders) will only destroy the last bits of internet freedom and privacy. Please read the draft, you'll be shocked!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skullheadhq

With a bit of luck Hirsch Stalin is gone in a few weeks, on the scrapheap of history, or is this wishful thinking?
And are you implying that a right -wing cabinet would stop this. VVD (Fred Teeven), CDA (Hirsch Stalin) and PVV (Geert Wilders) will only destroy the last bits of internet freedom and privacy. Please read the draft, you'll be shocked!

---

I know what's in it. You thought it was a good idea to enpower the government with such means if it would halt the rise of the right, well there you have it. Christians and leftists don't respect privacy capice they feel they have the right to peel you like an onion, for the sake of harmony.

And yes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

I know what's in it. You thought it was a good idea to enpower the government with such means if it would halt the rise of the right.

---

I have NEVER said anything like that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Christians and leftists don't respect privacy capice

---

And Wilders and Teeven do respect freedom or privacy? If it was up to them Netherlands would be a police state already. They would curtail Wikileaks as eagerly as Hirsch Stalin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skullheadhq

I have NEVER said anything like that.


And Wilders and Teeven do respect freedom or privacy? If it was up to them Netherlands would be a police state already. They would curtail Wikileaks as eagerly as Hirsch Stalin.

---

I prefer to call him Hirschbollah. Again it's what you wanted, the comfortable bliss that is an ideal society isn't free of charge. Creepy no?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Again it's what you wanted.

---

No, where did I ever say I wanted this? Hirsch Stalin or Hirschbollah wanted to outlaw games a few weeks ago, this man is crazy! I still hope for a cabinet without the CDA and Fred Teeven.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Creepy no?

---

Creepy isn't a strong enough word to describe this law.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skullheadhq

No, where did I ever say I wanted this?

---

Your were glad Beatricks put her foot down to stop Wilders, making it possible for her to overrule parlement as she pleases. You aplauded that so don't complain when they construct ways to get to you as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Your were glad Beatricks put her foot down to stop Wilders, making it possible for her to overrule parlement as she pleases. You aplauded that so don't complain when they construct ways to get to you as well.

---

The queen appoints 'informanten' since she's on the throne, why bother now. If there is someone with experience, it's her. Parliament doesn't appoint them, so there's no overruling, and Wilders would destroy freedom and privacy anyway, constructing the Netherlands to his own Utopia, Israel.

And no, the queen doing her job and a nutcase of a Hirsch Stalin trying to outlaw games and freedom of press and freedom of information is not the same.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Myrddraal

In the times, but I can't get the online article. I found this instead:

Leaked details put informant lives in danger

Leaked War Files Expose Identities of Afghan Informants



More in the link. So, has wikileaks gone too far? Is there anything which can/should be done?

---

yes, they have gone too far. releasing informant names is a death sentence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro

Yup, it's as I suspected actually (from the helicopter video, the story about the guy who got turned over by a hacker, and from an interview I saw with the assange guy). The assange guy is basically an idiot. I'm not good enough with words to put it better than that.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...googlenews_wsj



:rolleyes:

---

Makes you wonder if he left those names in it on purpose.

One can disagree with the war in Afghanistan, but that doesn't mean you have to bring the lives of those people in danger.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

EDIT: I do, however, find it fascinating to see how many here who are willing to limit free speech... Because during the cartoon-thingy, most people went on about how "free speech is absolute" and such.... Just lies, eh?

---

Apples and oranges.

Making a drawing doesn't bring other peoples' lives in danger... Even the most fervent supporter of free speech knows there are limits. It's nothing more than common sense, really.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andres

Even the most fervent supporter of free speech knows there are limits.

---

A limited freedom is no freedom. And who is to judge what you can say and can't? The censorship committee?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skullheadhq

A limited freedom is no freedom. And who is to judge what you can say and can't? The censorship committee?

---

nice rhetoric, sounds a bit empty to me when i think of johnny taliban paying a midnight visit to someone listed in those files.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Furunculus

nice rhetoric, sounds a bit empty to me when i think of johnny taliban paying a midnight visit to someone listed in those files.

---

That's part of the job when you're informer. Just as the risk of getting shot is part of your job when you're soldier. Informer is not the same as construction worker or merchant, something which they could have become as well. Don't get me wrong, I am the last to want them dead, but to curtail freedom for them goes way to far.
And if the west is so worried about them, why not bring them and their families to somewhere safe?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skullheadhq

And no, the queen doing her job and a nutcase of a Hirsch Stalin trying to outlaw games and freedom of press and freedom of information is not the same.

---

Yes it is, the OM is to judge what is allowed content or not with this law, not the judge. In the purple setup you wanted her travesty would decide, not the parlement. We have a trias politica for a reason, to keep meddling of interests to a minimum.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Yes it is, the OM is to judge what is allowed content or not with this law, not the judge. In the purple setup you wanted her travesty would decide, not the parlement. We have a trias politica for a reason, to keep meddling of interests to a minimum.

---

No Montesquieu in the Netherlands, if you want him you can always go to Belgium. The OM is part of the state, the OM can censor the internet so the state can censor the internet if they deem it 'unfit' without the possibility of a Parliamentary intervention. It's that simple. Luckily I know how to work with proxies, but people who want information but can't most possibly don't know how to work with proxies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skullheadhq

That's part of the job when you're informer. Just as the risk of getting shot is part of your job when you're soldier. Informer is not the same as construction worker or merchant, something which they could have become as well. Don't get me wrong, I am the last to want them dead, but to curtail freedom for them goes way to far.
And if the west is so worried about them, why not bring them and their families to somewhere safe?

---

all i would argue is that america has a duty of care to its informants, and by releasing that information without redacting names and identifying information Wikileaks has assumed that duty of care, and thus a part of the liability.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skullheadhq

No Montesquieu in the Netherlands, if you want him you can always go to Belgium. The OM is part of the state, the OM can censor the internet so the state can censor the internet if they deem it 'unfit' without the possibility of a Parliamentary intervention. It's that simple. Luckily I know how to work with proxies, but people who want information but can't most possibly don't know how to work with proxies.

---

The OM is part of the state indeed, judges are in theory not but they are all appointed by her travesty, but most of them don't screw Colombian whores on Aruba at the various orgy's that are organised for them so that is mostly fine, not THAT corrupt really.

So, you're arguing that the state should be given the power to censor the web because some judges are corrupt? That's rediculous!
Here is some more info in Dutch: https://www.bof.nl/2010/07/28/wetsvo...voor-websites/