Wikileaks reveals identity of Afgan informants

[Brenus]

Is this information true? Because from “nothing new on these documents we didn’t know yet” it became “oh, the horrible traitor gave secret intelligence to the enemies” thing.

The one I read was just a Operational Report on a successful ambush by the Taliban against a Franco-US-Afghan operation, where the French being spare head suffered heavy casualties… Nothing really special…

Now, I watch numerous documentaries on Afghanistan and the faces of the Allies interlocutors are shown without any problems (not the translators) or the ones of the Afghan Army.
Doctors treating elderly, women, children, all of them are shown…

So, what make the eventual link of names different?

[Vladimir]

So, what make the eventual link of names different?

How about names, name of the father, village they live in...?

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Is this information true? Because from “nothing new on these documents we didn’t know yet” it became “oh, the horrible traitor gave secret intelligence to the enemies” thing.

The one I read was just a Operational Report on a successful ambush by the Taliban against a Franco-US-Afghan operation, where the French being spare head suffered heavy casualties… Nothing really special…

Now, I watch numerous documentaries on Afghanistan and the faces of the Allies interlocutors are shown without any problems (not the translators) or the ones of the Afghan Army.
Doctors treating elderly, women, children, all of them are shown…

So, what make the eventual link of names different?

Most of the documents will probably be boring after action report stuff. Even with tens of thousands of released documents, the number of names/identifying characteristics divulged will be relatively small.

Horetore:

You'll note that my critique never said they didn't have a right to publish or a right to critique the policy. Both are fundamental to freedom of speech and the role of the 4th estate as a watchdog.

My critique said that 1) NATO has to do a better job of protecting such information, and 2) that I believe wikileaks failed to properly excise the names/characteristics of locals involved with NATO. The latter constitutes, in my mind, either very sloppy journalism (most likely answer here) or an active effort to support the enemy.

The press may well have a duty to oppose policies it believes are against the best interests of its readership or of humanity in general, and to be both active and vociferous in its efforts to expose "cover-ups" and present its viewers with the truth. It does NOT have the duty to aid and abet the enemy at whom the policy is aimed in order to combat that policy. All of our societies have accepted means of peacefully persuading our politicos to do something different -- including the influence of a free press on public opinion. THAT is the appropriate venue for wikileaks efforts.

You, to all appearances, oppose the conflict in Afghanistan. You are free to lobby your government by any legal means to withdraw Norwegian participation in the NATO effort there. If you feel strongly about the issue, it may well be your moral DUTY to do so. Were you to send money to support Taliban fighters in their struggle against NATO forces, you would have gone beyond the pale and acted criminally.