Utopia Talk / Politics / Wikileaks; Informants/Villages at risk

Aeros Member	Tue Jul 27 20:58:47 GJ Wikileaks. Sleep well knowing you've struck a blow for liberty. http://www...s/story-e6frg6so-1225897924552 HUNDREDS of Afghan lives have been put at risk by the leaking of 90,000 intelligence documents to WikiLeaks because the files identify informants working with NATO forces. In just two hours of searching the WikiLeaks archive, The Times found the names of dozens of Afghans credited with providing detailed intelligence to US forces. Their villages are given for identification and also, 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 founder of WikiLeaks, claimed on Monday that all the documents released through his organisation had been checked for named informants and that 15,000 such documents had been held back. The Afghan Government has reacted with horror to the volume of information contained in the files. A senior official at the Afghan Foreign Ministry, who declined to be named, said: "The leaks certainly have put in real risk and danger the lives and integrity of many Afghans. The US is both morally and legally responsible for any harm that the leaks might cause to the individuals, particularly those who have been named. It will further limit the US/international access to the uncensored views of Afghans." The Pentagon claimed that a preliminary review of the thousands of secret reports released by WikiLeaks showed that they posed no immediate threat to US forces. But experts warned that the Taliban and al-Qaâ??ida would already be using the information to identify and target informers in the war zone. Robert Riegle, a former senior intelligence officer, said: "It's possible that someone could get killed in the next few days." Michael Hayden, a former director of the CIA, said that militants would be able to find out "who was in the room" for the planning of specific operations, and then "would probably punish the traitor". The potential human cost of the leaks has added to pressure on the Pentagon to find ways to keep its secrets contained, and on the White House to revise an Afghan strategy that is increasingly seen as failing. Among the documents is a report from 2008 that includes a detailed interview with a Taliban fighter considering defection. He is named, with both his father's name and village included. There is also detailed intelligence on other Taliban fighters and commanders in his area. The Times has withheld all details that would identify the man. The man names local Taliban commanders and talks about other potential defectors. "The meeting ended with [X] agreeing to meet with intel personnel from the battalion," the report reads. It is not known whether the man subsequently left the Taliban. In other documents, named Afghans offered information accusing others of being Taliban. In one case from 2007, a senior official accuses named figures in the government of corruption. In another from 2007, a report describes using a middleman to talk to an alleged Taliban commander who is identified. "[X] said that he would be killed if he got caught interacting with any coalition forces, which is why he hides when we go into [Y]," the report reads. In another report, American officers negotiate with a named Taliban fighter through the man's brother and uncle. In all cases the dates and precise locations of the reports are included. Mr Assange, appearing at the Frontline Club in London last nigh, said: "We held back 15,000 reports not because we viewed that they would be any threat to Western forces in Afghanistan but rather because some of them, a very, very few number, mentioned the names of local Afghanis that might have been subject to retribution. We're not sure yet but we decided to pause." He claimed that WikiLeaks had implemented a "harm-minimisation policy" to weed out documents that could endanger the lives of Afghans. When pressed by a lawyer in the audience on whether WikiLeaks had the expertise to apply such a policy, Mr Assange said: "We have read more leaked documents than any other organisation that's not a spy agency on earth. If someone can apply this policy surely we can do it."
earthpig GTFO HOer	Tue Jul 27 21:34:02 i hope this is sensationalist reporting.
Aeros Member	Tue Jul 27 22:01:15 Somehow I doubt it. It is an Australian publication after all, so I don't think they have any overt reason to hype things.
pillz Member	Tue Jul 27 22:03:23 Boo-hoo I hope they continue to leak this kind of data. Hopefully the US will finally pull out or actually decide to win the war instead of just sitting there idly killing civilians with smart bombs.
Seb Member	Tue Jul 27 22:05:00 Aeros: Australian... owned by Murdoch. Aka Lord of Fox.
Seb Member	Tue Jul 27 22:05:50 Just read the same story in the times... I mean the SAME story. Word for word nearly. Murdochs empire re-hashes stuff. Published in Australia, possibly written for fox news.
earthpig GTFO HOer	Tue Jul 27 22:06:37 Nope, it's confirmed. Verified independently by me. :D From December of 2009: Outside the village of <village name>, Taliban insurgents attacked a road survey team working for <company name> Construction Company. In the two hour engagement - one contractor was killed and one is missing. Two Taliban were reported killed in the incident. Kapisa ISAF and the ANA responded from FOB Frazier-Morales. <company name> Construction Company is under contract with USACE to build the Kapisa North Supply Road. At the time of the attack, private security were present. Incident was reported by Mohammed <tribe & father name> of <company name> Construction Company, <province name> Area Office. Censoring was done by me, just now. all i did was grep for the most common Muslim name, Mohammed. If wikileaks wishes to claim to have a "harm-minimisation policy", they need to take this material down ASAP and offer a very frank apology to a whole bunch of innocent Afghanis that may end up very dead very soon.
Rugian Member	Tue Jul 27 22:10:50 Who do I blame more if some of those people die?Wikileaks, or the United States government and military that have allowed a theoretically easily-defeatable enemy to all but win the war in Afghanistan thanks to eight years of neglect and incompetence? Yeah, I'd say option 2 is the bigger factor here.
Aeros Member	Tue Jul 27 22:13:24 Option 2 is a fair point, but it does not negate your first point Rugian. These people talked to our troops in the hopes that "easily defeatable" enemy could be beaten, and Wikileaks is going to get them and there families killed as consequence.
Rugian Member	Tue Jul 27 22:13:52 I mean really. If we weren't so horribly half-assing the job in Afghanistan while diverting troops to a completely unnecessary warzone in Iraq, these people would face no threat even if their names were released into the public domain. Given that the US-dominated government is not going to survive our departure unless we radically change our approach in the country anyway, we may as well give the locals incentives against associating themselves with the soon-to-be former regime.
Rugian Member	Tue Jul 27 22:15:53 Aeros Member Tue Jul 27 22:13:24 Option 2 is a fair point, but it does not negate your first point Rugian. These people talked to our troops in the hopes that "easily defeatable" enemy could be beaten, and Wikileaks is going to get them and there families killed as consequence. Again, I don't blame Wikileaks here. If Afghanistan had been handled in at all a competent manner, this wouldn't even be an issue. So what you are basically saying is that we need to classify information due to the extent of the incompetence present in the military and government. I'm not sure that's a position I'm on board with.
earthpig GTFO HOer	Tue Jul 27 22:16:27 Which episode in history, exactly, are you basing your assertion that Afghanistan is an easy nation to occupy? Anywho: If what you want to see is the US withdraw from Afghanistan with as few Afghanis dying as possible (and no consideration given to NATO deaths), then surely you can see that publishing a Death List is not conducive to minimizing Afghani deaths?
Asgard Member	Tue Jul 27 22:23:12 "From December of 2009: Outside the village of <village name>, Taliban insurgents attacked a road survey team working for <company name> Construction Company. In the two hour engagement - one contractor was killed and one is missing. Two Taliban were reported killed in the incident. Kapisa ISAF and the ANA responded from FOB Frazier-Morales. <company name> Construction Company is under contract with USACE to build the Kapisa North Supply Road. At the time of the attack, private security were present. Incident was reported by Mohammed <tribe & father name> of <company name> Construction Company, <province name> Area Office. Censoring was done by me, just now. all i did was grep for the most common Muslim name, Mohammed. If wikileaks wishes to claim to have a "harm-minimisation policy", they need to take this material down ASAP and offer a very frank apology to a whole bunch of innocent Afghanis that may end up very dead very soon." I'll tell you why they won't do that: Bashing the US is more important to them than Afghan lives. I'm not in support of the US's war crimes done in afghanistan... but - this is how ultra-leftists think. They claim to be morally superior, but they can be as cold as stone when they have a chance to bash their target and pay in innocent blood for it.
Asgard Member	Tue Jul 27 22:23:41 "From December of 2009: Outside the village of <village name>, Taliban insurgents attacked a road survey team working for <company name> Construction Company. In the two hour engagement - one contractor was killed and one is missing. Two Taliban were reported killed in the incident. Kapisa ISAF and the ANA responded from FOB Frazier-Morales. <company name> Construction Company is under contract with USACE to build the Kapisa North Supply Road. At the time of the attack, private security were present. Incident was reported by Mohammed <tribe & father name> of <company name> Construction Company, <province name> Area Office. Censoring was done by me, just now. all i did was grep for the most common Muslim name, Mohammed. If wikileaks wishes to claim to have a "harm-minimisation policy", they need to take this material down ASAP and offer a very frank apology to a whole bunch of innocent Afghanis that may end up very dead very soon." I'll tell you why they won't do that: Bashing the US is more important to them than Afghan lives. I'm not in support of the US's war crimes done in afghanistan... but - this is how ultra-leftists think. They claim to be morally superior, but they can be as cold as stone when they have a chance to bash their target and pay in innocent blood for it.
earthpig GTFO HOer	Tue Jul 27 22:25:17 @Rugian - the NATO presence in Afghanistan has certainly played a direct role in the deaths of some, and an indirect role in the deaths of others. By providing an accurate hitlist, wikileaks has willingly signed up as a direct contributor to more Afghan deaths. And it's not like the people on these hitlists are pro-NATO fanatics or pro-Jihad fanatics. The gentleman I located above is probably one of many foremen in a construction company doing work for the the now-current regime. An average Joe holding down an average job to feed his average family. An Average Joe that doesn't need to die *whatever* your beliefs are, assuming those beliefs are not fanatical. Would you be OK with folks handing the name and address of a construction foreman in the US over to stateside terrorists? They are doing construction work on contract for the exact same regime, after all.
Rugian Member	Tue Jul 27 22:28:24 earthpig GTFO HOer Tue Jul 27 22:16:27 Which episode in history, exactly, are you basing your assertion that Afghanistan is an easy nation to occupy? 1) Red herring. I wouldn't expect anything more from a HOer, but do try harder. Our problems in Afghanistan are not primarily the result of the difficult terrain. 2) Just as an FYI, Afghanistan has been conquered a shitload of times throughout history. The British and Soviets had problems with it, sure, but throughout most of history it has been overrun repeatedly. "Anywho: If what you want to see is the US withdraw from Afghanistan with as few Afghanis dying as possible (and no consideration given to NATO deaths), then surely you can see that publishing a Death List is not conducive to minimizing Afghani deaths?" What *I* want to see is sufficient numbers put on the ground to actually guard more than a handful of select towns and checkpoints. This is something that should have been maintained since the initial invasion. HOWEVER, since the current political mood pretty much guarantees that this will not happen, I favor withdrawal. Many Afghanis have already hedged their bets based on this possibility. If we withdrawal, it doesn't make any difference if the country falls to a Pakistani-affiliated, Iranian-affiliated, or independent group, or just fractures altogether - the eventual power-holders are almost certainly going to be hostile to American interests. Given that, if we really do care about maintaining the lives of innocent Afghans, we should make clear that at this point cooperation with the US is definitely NOT in their interests, instead of continuing to maintain a level of ambiguity over what the country is going to look like six months down the road. You know, it honestly sucks for the Afghanis who thought they could help their communities by helping the US and getting burned as a result. But, Wikileaks list or not, I'd think that many of them would be exposed by the successor government(s) regardless. It's a timing issue - are they targetted now, or two years from now. In that situation, it's best to make clear that those thinking of helping America should not do so.
Aeros Member	Tue Jul 27 22:28:46 As an aside, this article was originally posted in the Times of London.
earthpig GTFO HOer	Tue Jul 27 22:29:17 Minus the leftist/rightist stuff, I'm tending to agree with Asgard. After they published the heavily edited attack helicopter clip from Iraq a few months back and claiming not to have enough money to keep the servers up, it appears that wikileaks.org has realized that they have found a reliable method of ensuring that mountains of donation money continues to pour in.
Rugian Member	Tue Jul 27 22:31:46 Responses to earthfag and Asgard to come tomorrow. I'm tired and it's getting late here.
earthpig GTFO HOer	Tue Jul 27 22:36:05 " But, Wikileaks list or not, I'd think that many of them would be exposed by the successor government(s) regardless. It's a timing issue - are they targetted now, or two years from now. " Please. the vast vast majority of collaborators throughout history get off scott free.
mexicantornado Member	Tue Jul 27 23:05:20 "Who do I blame more if some of those people die?" You are a cool guy Rugian, but your anti-government leanings is just retarded in this case. You blame wikileaks for leaking sensitive information onto the world wide web. Obviously. Also the war in Afghanistan has hardly been waged the way you describe. The fact is we have won the war in Afghanistan but Pakistan has always been a slowing factor. While they had a dictator they were easier to control, now with a democracy it has been a slow process in getting the right to use air drones and tactical strikes in Pakistan. Also Pillz is a fucking moron. That is all I'll say about that tool.
saiko Member	Wed Jul 28 03:56:43 "Who do I blame more if some of those people die?Wikileaks, or the United States government and military that have allowed a theoretically easily-defeatable enemy to all but win the war in Afghanistan thanks to eight years of neglect and incompetence?" Or, you know, the people doing the actual killing.
Adolf Hitler Member	Wed Jul 28 05:16:43 Interesting that the files contain reports of OBL issuing orders and having monthly meetings as late as 2006.
earthpig GTFO HOer	Wed Jul 28 05:30:52 Source? you know, something more specific than 'wikileaks.org'...
Adolf Hitler Member	Wed Jul 28 05:32:01 http://edi...x.html?hpt=T2#fbid=9oqXjoLmkWU The leaked documents provide fleeting glimpses into the possible whereabouts of Osama bin Laden in the years since his escape from American forces at Tora Bora in the Afghan mountains. Documents published in the British newspaper The Guardian quoted intelligence sources as saying bin Laden wanted al Qaeda operatives disguised as journalists to attack Afghan President Hamid Karzai during a news conference in 2004. In 2005, his financial adviser and an Afghan insurgent leader reportedly were dispatched to obtain rockets from North Korea to use against U.S. forces in Afghanistan. In 2006, he was reported to be attending monthly meetings in the Pakistani city of Quetta with fellow fugitives from the leadership of the Taliban, the Islamic militia that hosted al Qaeda when it controlled most of Afghanistan. Another report the same year states that he arranged a marriage for a valued lieutenant, a specialist in building roadside bombs.
earthpig GTFO HOer	Wed Jul 28 05:36:31 are you fucking kidding me? adolf is claiming that cnn claims that the guardian claims that wikileaks claims that a mole claims that US intelligence reports claim that... OBL was at a known location sometime 4 years ago. seriously? no one else here sees nothing ridiculous about this, given that we all have ready access to cutting out about 4 of those middle men? and cnn? what the fuck. is there anyone that works at cnn that is actually a journalist?
www.yeswecansong.com Member	Wed Jul 28 05:40:19 http://www.cagle.com/working/100727/beeler.jpg
Adolf Hitler Member	Wed Jul 28 05:41:04 Huh? What happened to your brain? Someone hacked your account? You're drunk? Im not just claiming CNN reported that, I just proved it. You really think cnn and the guardian faked info in the files?
jergul Member	Wed Jul 28 05:41:41 Earth pig If it is such that all support of the regime and Nato forces has to be done in out most secrecy, then the war is lost anyway. Draw the right conclusions from the leak, not the wrong one. If we had a hope in hell, would it matter if a construction worker reported an attack?
Adolf Hitler Member	Wed Jul 28 05:43:49 you know, something more specific than 'wikileaks.org' So when I mention quotes from wikileaks, you demand a source that is not wikileaks? Huh???
jergul Member	Wed Jul 28 05:49:34 Anyway, the documents are classified as secret. So pretty accessible. It would be a mistake to assume Taliban did not have access to them already.
earthpig GTFO HOer	Wed Jul 28 05:58:27 "So when I mention quotes from wikileaks, you demand a source that is not wikileaks? Huh??? " miscommunication. i was asking for a specific link or method of locating the link to the information you alleged. http://wikileaks.org/blablabla/thisandthat/whatever or specific details on where to find it, for example. similar to my post of Tue Jul 27 22:06:37 - why bother with cnn or theaustralian.com, when we can look for ourselves? you claim that wikileaks claims that OBL was having tea with his buddies on a monthly basis in 2006, so please show us where, exactly, wikileaks claims that.
earthpig GTFO HOer	Wed Jul 28 05:58:46 jergul - ill get to you tomorrow :D
earthpig GTFO HOer	Wed Jul 28 06:10:37 And by tomorrow, I naturally mean right now. " If we had a hope in hell, would it matter if a construction worker reported an attack? " well, yes. It would mean the attackers could be located, and the job could potentially be completed sooner. " Anyway, the documents are classified as secret. So pretty accessible. It would be a mistake to assume Taliban did not have access to them already. " I'm quite skeptical as to the implication, but I'd welcome any sources you had to back it up. But, I'll assume you would agree to this compromise: "Certain folks within the Taliban probably have access to certain information classified by USG as Secret". Let's not make the mistake of assuming the Taliban was a single entity. The US Government broke Enigma. This does not mean that *every* US Military asset had access to that information. Not nearly the case. Now that the entire organization has access to it, they don't have to sustain the losses associated with pretending they don't. They may already have had the name of our construction worker above, but now they don't risk tipping NATO off to their source of the information by killing him and his family. My main point is this: If wikileaks wishes to claim to have a "harm-minimisation policy", they need to take this material down ASAP and offer a very frank apology to a whole bunch of innocent Afghanis that may end up very dead very soon. (I fully acknowledge that taking it down at this point would be more symbolic than anything. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out "click here to download".)
jergul Member	Wed Jul 28 06:40:44 EP I meant it should not represent a security risk for a construction worker reporting an attack. How many 1000ds of people have "secret" clearance? Pretty much squad leaders and above or thereabouts. The problem is more that the information has been compiled and is accessible to lots and lots of people (the source of the leak is by all indications just a minor clog). A trivial affair for the Pakistanis to access the information covertly if we assume they do not have direct access. Pay off level? 5k dollars or something? And once the Pakistanis have it, you can pretty much assume the Taliban does too. To name one possible route. Key again is lack of compartmentalization. The data has been collected and is open to pretty wide access. Agree re compromise. But also think that if taking down informants was an issue, they would do it quite easily. Its not. Simply because witch hunts do not win hearts and minds - and they are winning the hearts and minds. Besides, there are much bigger demons for them to fight in the form of the Afghani government. And the Taliban will have to work with them anyway. Wikileaks is not the one compiling the information and giving thousands access to it. So if an apology is owed, then it should come from your government. There is a higher purpose here. We need reminding how incredibly fucked up the whole operation is. Time to cut and run.
Aeros Member	Wed Jul 28 09:22:06 "There is a higher purpose here. We need reminding how incredibly fucked up the whole operation is" You know, that is probably the exact same rationalization Julian Assange used when he signed all those peoples death warrants.
Aeros Member	Wed Jul 28 09:23:25 As a funny aside, I read an article in Foreign Policy magazaine where the reporter commented that he listened to Julian Assange speak in Norway a few months ago. He said he was so "Self Righteous" it "made me want to vomit". At least he lives up to expectations.
jergul Member	Wed Jul 28 09:59:44 Aeros The death warrant were signed when your government compiled the files and gave 1000ds of people access to them. Except of course that the Taliban is winning the hearts and minds so is not bothering with spiteful small stuff as it is counter productive to winning hearts in minds. They could target assassinate all kinds of lesser government officials if that is what they wanted to do. No need to add random construction workers reporting attacks the Taliban would want known anyway.
earthpig GTFO HOer	Wed Jul 28 14:49:49 "How many 1000ds of people have "secret" clearance? Pretty much squad leaders and above or thereabouts." Company Commander and above, roughly. Company level radio operators (because they put the crypto on the radios). BN level intel dudes and officers not involved in logistics. "Key again is lack of compartmentalization. The data has been collected and is open to pretty wide access. " I can agree to that, though you overestimate who has access to it. Your $5k figure is off, I think. The lower ranked folks that $5k will influence aren't in a position to covertly communicate with Pakistani agents. The higher ranked dudes that can are career military. They would have moved over to the corporate sector if money mattered to them. Also, folks that find themselves in debt are routinely stripped of security clearances. Can never find em all of course, but it reduces targets of opportunity.
earthpig GTFO HOer	Wed Jul 28 14:52:42 The solution to the compartmentalization issue, btw, is to stop using fucking networked computers with OCD sysadmins. If a dude is feeding information to NATO forces in a given village, that information should be kept on a piece of paper and never leave the nearest FOB.
Mavl Member	Wed Jul 28 16:29:04 "GJ Wikileaks. Sleep well knowing you've struck a blow for liberty. " So liberty is when you provide foreigners with information on how to better blow your country up? Cool.
jergul Member	Wed Jul 28 17:17:45 EP Could be I overstated, though I don't really think so. Agree as to compartmentalize low level assets. Point really is that everyone named in the reports was blown long ago due to data compiling at low security levels.
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: