Wikileaks Puts Afghan Informants In Danger
Tweet
Hundreds of Afghan civilians who worked as informants for the U.S. military have been put at risk by WikiLeaks’ publication of more than 90,000 classified intelligence reports which name and in many cases locate the individuals, The Times newspaper reported Wednesday.
The article says, in spite of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange’s claim that sensitive information had been removed from the leaked documents, that reporters scanning the reports for just a couple hours found hundreds of Afghan names mentioned as aiding the U.S.-led war effort.
22 Responses to “Wikileaks Puts Afghan Informants In Danger”
GOP Rep. Spencer Bachus Facing House Ethics Probe For Insider Trading
Jennifer Aniston Reportedly Pregnant With Twins
PHOTOS: Tamara Ecclestone At The Langham Hotel
Red Front? “Center For American Freedom” Logo Echoes Communist Style
Romney Calls For Defunding Planned Parenthood, Wife Was A Donor
GOP Fundraising Email Asks Supporters To “Knock Out” Obama
Romney Comes Up Limp In Nevada
Obama Opens Lead On Romney In New Poll
Latest Entries
Why Do Liberals Support Drone Strikes?
Weekly Standard Rolls Out The Iraq Argument For Iran
Equal Polarization, My Ass
Some Crazy Stuff That Happened In World War II
Maryland Republican Campaign Funds Used To Defend Voter Suppression
The Obama Jobs Record In One Graph
Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality
Newt Gingrich, Filled With More Excrement Than Your Average Politician
New Year, Powerline Still Stupid
Thanks Again
Meta
Blogroll
Disclaimer
The views on this site are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect the views of my employer, Media Matters for America
© 2000-2011 Oliver Willis
As unfortunate as that is, I do not think it challenges the legitimacy of what Wikileaks has done. The fact is, our political and journalistic safeguards regarding this war have broken down. The politicians kowtow to the military, and the journalists are embedded. I think it will take extreme actions like this to get the public’s attention and make them face facts: The war is a slow moving disaster.
As unfortunate as that is
Boy, is this a fantastic phrase. Sorry that your cooperation with us has led to your targeting for death, but now I can make some political points about the war.
Why is that “revealing the facts” always indicates that the war is a “disaster”?
Isn’t it just possible that certain things that take place in war must be classified :
Troop locations
Intelligence informants
Weapons movements
Support locations
and, of course,
when investigations are taking place, they must be kept secret until they are completed.
“Top Secret” does not equal “Cover Up”
What a bunch of crap! The United States is supposed to be a free and open society. The government shouldn’t keep any secrets from its people – not one. PERIOD! If our military wasn’t dirty as hell and didn’t use barbaric tactics, there wouldn’t be any need for secrecy!
Sorry to break it to you folks, but that is what generally happens to collaborators in war. The French Resistance frequently murdered people they believed to be cooperating with the Germans. Similarly, American patriots during the Revolution terrorized Loyalists to Great Britain.
Furthermore, I think the ultimate imperative in this situation is to undermine the occupation of Afghanistan. It ceased to be about 9 / 11 and al-Qaeda years ago, and now is just a cynical exercise in regional hegemony.
Truth is the first casualty of war.
The government shouldn’t keep any secrets from its people – not one. PERIOD!
Would you like ponies with those rainbows?
This isn’t something where one should apply a “they did it first so it’s OK” type rational as in gotcha politics, but conservatives have little room to whine about this kind of thing considering the extent to which most of them laughed off the endangerment of the undercover operatives in the Brewster Jennings CIA front company explicitly exposed by Robert “Douchebag of Liberty” Novak in the Valerie Plame affair. (And before we get the usual suspects chiming in that Plame was “just a desk jockey”, etc., I’m talking explicitly here about the OTHER operatives in Brewster Jennings, which Novak mentioned BY NAME in his reports…)
This isn’t something where one should apply a “they did it first so it’s OK” type rational as in gotcha politics…
Yeah, so?
Why is that “revealing the facts” always indicates that the war is a “disaster”?
Well, according to Occam’s razor, that would be because the war is a disaster.
The thing that pisses me off the most is that Pakistan is funding the Taliban, and we still keep giving them money. We need to give them an ultimatum. Either they stop this crap, or that money goes to India.
I know, it’s not that simple, but a guy can dream, right?
Zython, you are missing the point. Occam and his razor have nothing to do with it.
There were over 90,000 pages of released data, that somehow boils down to “war bad – must stop.” That’s analysis?
I know, it’s not that simple, but a guy can dream, right?
You can always apply for a dreamer’s position with the current administration – they are always looking for more.
This has become a wingnut talking point, & it isn’t true. Posters at Daily Kos made this accusation on a diary that was about wikileaks, but weasel pointed out he checked the example the Times quoted, & found it just wasn’t true.
And ‘The Times” being refered to isn’t the New York Times, but the Times of London.
Hey, The Times quotes “a senior official at the Afghan foreign ministry” and “One former intelligence official”, so obviously this must be a real concern and not something ginned up by the administration to distract attention from an unpopular, unwinnable war.
Riiight Oliver. And the failed US policy in Afghanistan itself has never gotten any civilians killed.
And if I was an Afhan working with the US, I’d be far more worried about the revelation that Pakistan, with US funding, is working hand-in-hand with the Taliban.
What a lame-ass attempt at push-back.
Good for Wikileaks. Screw Afghanistan.
Wikileaks are ruining our opportunity to remake Afghanistan in Our Image. LOL
Call me a dreamer, Willis, but I am the one defending the principles this country was founded on. Apologists for the military-industrial complex and defenders of the veil of secrecy called “national security” that the Pentagon draws over everything to hide their misdeeds, are not the patriots! In fact, you are the antithesis of a patriot by condoning and supporting this anti-American bullshit!
I suppose that Daniel Ellsberg should have been strung up as well.
It takes about 30 seconds to find this information online:
“The Times and its sister paper The Sunday Times are published by Times Newspapers Limited, a subsidiary of News International. News International is entirely owned by the News Corporation group, headed by Rupert Murdoch.” (Wikipedia).
Seriously, Oliver. You can’t quote Murdoch when its convenient. Besides, I don’t understand your fascination with invading and occupying a foreign land. Didn’t Thomas Jefferson say something about how America should not get entangled in foreign alliances …
Oliver? Response please?
Didn’t Thomas Jefferson say something about how America should not get entangled in foreign alliances …
Well, it was George Washington, and what he actually said was, “We have to fight the terrorists over there so we don’t have to fight them over here.” Or at least, that’s the modern interpretation.
Difficult to understand why those names could not have been redacted, I love Wikileaks for being the only organization with any balls whatsoever, but endangering informants seems like something to be avoided regardless on how someone feels about the conflict.