Taliban hunt Wikileaks outed Afghan informers

[Turborama]

Source: Channel 4 News (UK)

Exclusive: The Taliban has issued a chilling warning to Afghans, alleged in secret US military files leaked on the internet to have worked as informers for the Nato-led coalition, telling Channel 4 News "US spies" will be hunted down and punished.

Speaking by telephone from an undisclosed location, Zabihullah Mujahid told Channel 4 News that the insurgent group will investigate the named individuals before deciding on their fate.

"We are studying the report," he said, confirming that the insurgent group already has access to the 92,000 intelligence documents and field reports.

"We knew about the spies and people who collaborate with US forces. We will investigate through our own secret service whether the people mentioned are really spies working for the US. If they are US spies, then we know how to punish them."

Read more: http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/uk/taliban+hunt+wikileaks+outed+afghan+informers/3727667

---

Wikileaks: damage is done say human rights group

Thousands of Afghans have downloaded the Wikileaks document the Afghanistan Human Rights Commissioner tells Channel 4 News, raising fears over informants' safety where personal details may be revealed.

In a newspaper article Jullian Assange insisted that the release of the Afghan war logs on his website is justified. Mr Assange claims that many informers were "acting in a criminal way" by sharing false information with Nato authorities, that the White House did nothing to help Wikileaks vet the documents despite being asked and that the risk to informants' lives was outweighed by the overall importance of publishing information.

But Ahmad Nader Nadery, the Commissioner of the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC) told Channel 4 News the damage is already done, because thousands of Afghans have already downloaded the files.

He said:

"Release of names of the tribal elders and community members who met US, ISAF or NATO forces is an absolute irresponsibility.

There is no protection mechanisms for these people, be it informant or other community members who as part of the role as an elder meets with the officials or international forces, while wikileaks served greatly in brining to public some of the unspoken files, it certainly also acted against the principle of “Do No Harm” that all civil society and watchdogs have to adhere to.

I am not sure if only taking these names out now of the website could do any good, as only in Afghanistan, as far as I know, thousands of people had downloaded the entire package."

Full article with examples of the info. on informants the leaked docs contain: http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/politics/international_politics/wikileaks+damage+already+done+says+human+rights+group/3727677

[RedCloud]

1. Almost as if the Taliban acting on orders from the CIA...

released this statement.

Color me suspicious for the time being.

[Javaman]

2. I was thinking the very same thing.

what better way to support the pentagons Bullshit, by having your enemies issue a report like this?

50-60 years from now, it will be revealed, after the US has collapsed, that this whole thing was one massive charade to keep the military industrial complex going.

[Pavulon]

9. ohh boy. In the case of collapse

which seems wonderful to some here, who do you think will fill the void? Lets say china, you think they will be a "better" option?

[Javaman]

15. Wow, you read an awful lot into my response, didn't you?

where did I say ever say that it would be wonderful? Put words in peoples mouth, much?

And frankly, I don't care for your communist inference, thank you very much.

"Lets say china, you think they will be a "better" option?"

weird.

stop going from zero to 60, it's very unattractive.

[Igel]

19. You think the Taliban are too stupid to take advantage of this?

What--they're Muslims and therefore entirely rooted in the 8th century? Their skin isn't the right color? They speak a less-studied language?

It's the usual "cui bono?" problem. It's a shoddy imitation of thinking and presupposes omniscience on the person who uses it to justify a conclusion.

The announcement does a number of things that help the Taliban. Sure, it might also help the US military in some way not very obvious to the US military.

Killing off people is the least of the problem.

It chills further cooperation by these people. It scares enemies. Intimidation is a valid tool in warfare. Those who *might* be mentioned in the data dump are now on their best behavior.

It says that if there are further leaks then those thinking of becoming informants might be compromised. Of course, "informant" might just mean "accept aid" or "have discussion with." They might actually have talked, or just be reported to have talked. So it scares not just those who did help but those who might help in the future.

Nearly anybody can be killed by the Taliban and this can be cited as justification. If they say that Wahid bin Putin was a US informer, who's going to look through 75k pages to prove that he wasn't? It's just rumors that Wahid's real crime was not letting his daughter was 14, D-cup, weighing 115 lbs, and her father refused to let her be the local Taliban commander's temporary wife.

In fact, now anybody can be threatened and blackmailed by the Taliban. That guy asking to be hired as a guard? Passes the background check, not an obvious Taliban sympathizer. Then again, you never know if the night before he was contacted and told that his son's name was in the data dump--even if he wasn't. How's he to know? The Taliban could always threaten; but this is not just a threat against a person, but a threat to a family's honor.

[Javaman]

22. wow, lay off the coffee.

How the hell did you pull that from what I said?

you have a very very vivid imagination.

[BootinUp]

24. I wouldn't get too worked up here, been there done that

many of the people here have views on this subject that are political anathema, they really have no credible spokesperson for their views so they have to get it out somewhere. You will see conspiracy theories, war crimes, and all kinds of manufactured justifications thrown around with great gusto and high fiving as they try to avoid the simple truth that leaking those documents was really not such a good idea. The bottom line for them is really simple though, the ends justifies the means. Whenever that is used as justification you can forget trying to find common ground. Its an ideological thing.

say hi to javaman for me.

[Javaman]

29. you can say hi to me yourself...

Or do you lack the character?

I see you are part of the zero to 60 group yourself.

I have never seen a group of people who enjoy putting words in peoples mouths as much as you and the other poster.

I've read several of your replies to other threads and it appears as if you are center right dem.

this is where we differ greatly.

[bvar22]

25. Taliban too stupid?

No.
I believe that Taliban is smart enough to already know everything that was in Wikileaks.
OTOH, I DO believe that there are people here stupid enough to buy into this manufactured hysteria.

[alcibiades_mystery]

30. They "live in caves," doncha know?

They are the mighty geniuses that took down "every empire" that's ever set foot in Afghanistan, but also too stupid to actually hurt the US without helpful plotting by the "CIA."

:sarcasm:

Don't you know how lefty insanity works by now?

[Brooklyns_Finest]

44. Nope

My little nieces and nephews (and eventually my own kids) will make sure that America will stay as strong in 50 years as it is now. Believe it or not, some of us actually love America and will fight to keep it strong. A world in which the US has collapsed is a world that no one would want to live in.

[florida08]

3. make that 3

[Turborama]

10. 1 is too many

And, by the way, that's 3 reports so far which include more than just 3 names.

Have you read through the 200,000 pages yet?

[bemildred]

4. "Freedom is messy" -- D. Rumsfeld

http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2003/04/17/antiquities/

[dbonds]

5. This statement seems targeted at turning people against wikileaks.

I am inclined not to believe the statement.

[Poll_Blind]

11. Yeah, I got more than a whiff of that as well. n/t

PB

[nalnn]

13. true or false

Regardless of whether the statement is true or false doesn't it stand to reason that the Taliban would do just that?

[superconnected]

14. Yeah, but the few who may die are no where near the great many who will die if this

crap isn't exposed and this war isn't stopped.

[Chan790]

35. Oh, the naivity...

this war isn't going to be stopped regardless. There is no voice or faction with power or likely capable of getting to be in power who wants it to end...ergo it will not be ending any time soon. All this leak did was insure that some people who likely would not have died brutally otherwise will now be murdered. That's not an achievement worthy of praise.

Julian Assange can sit on his high horse and morality all he wants...he's about to be complicit in a lot of pointless murders. Whether he meant to be or not is irrelevant, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. His defenders are apologists for a guy with blood on his hands.

Just because his goals and desires co-align with those of anti-war protesters doesn't mean he's a good person or that opponents of the war in Afghanistan should be getting in bed with him. It's like some people learned anything from the mistakes of Ronald Reagan. The enemy (Assange) of your enemy (the MIC) is not necessarily your friend...just like the enemies (The Contras/Iraqi Baathists/Mujaheddin) of Reagan's enemies (Sandinistas/Iranians/Soviets) turned out not to be America's friends.

If you want out of Afghanistan, find and vocally-support a non-military road-map to stabilization that keeps the Taliban and Al-Qaeda sympathizers out of power...because pacifism is sure as rain never the answer to anything. I'm tired of the idealistic fairytale circle-jerk where people think we can leave immediately and unilaterally and Afghanistan isn't going to degrade into a fuckhole from which future terror attacks will be launched against the US.

[MH1]

39. +1000

:applause:

but, I wouldn't be so quick to assume that all of the pro-Assange posters here actually care if Afghanistan DOES "degrade into a fuckhole from which future terror attacks will be launched against the US."

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

17. Ah, truthiness. -nt

[saigon68]

6. telling Channel 4 News "US spies" will be hunted down

LOL

What a piece of swill

[bemildred]

7. Well it was good of him to call them up and chat, don't you think?

Set them straight on the situation, in case they were confused.
:rofl:

[saigon68]

8. LOL---Good post

Yes --ass clowns they ignore the obvious

You bomb a village a kill a few dozen kids & grand mothers and


then their grandsons of the dead mark for "Retribution" the informant/informants, who for bribes of money said the "Bad Guys" lived there

[librechik]

42. yeah--hmm--I wonder how well this call was confirmed?

Seems to me the Taliban is a somewhat secretive organization. Why would they give away their plans to the news?

People can call up the broadcast and say anything. Why did Channel 4 talk so unsceptically to a self-proclaimed terrorists? And believed what they said?

There was a lot of pressure to prove damage connected to the leaks. Why wouldn't someone take money or some other inducement to call up and say what the US wants to hear?

[frylock]

12. i love the smell of bullshit in the morning..

it smells like bullshit.

[superconnected]

16. "punished"? Is GW running the taliban now?

"US spies" will be hunted down and punished."

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

18. TOO convenient.

Way TOO fucking convenient.

[laylah]

26. That was my first thought. n/t

[JVS]

36. yup

[Earth_First]

20. Well if this dribble isn't directly from the mouth of Mintrue I don't know what is...

As it's already been said, it's way too fucking convenient that a military general says that Wikileaks puts Afghan informants at risk (AFTER the Pentagon has said no actionable intelligence was revealed) now the "Taliban" is doing exactly what they said they would almost the very next day.

:eyes:

[NJmaverick]

21. I wish the wikileaks people could face criminal charges for their actions

[JVS]

34. A lot of people here feel the same way about the Bush administration, but 'tis not to be.

[MH1]

38. I agree with both!!!

[bvar22]

23. WOW.

A lot of DUers have had synchronous overnight transformations.
Now, people who have a history of no concern for the plight of murdered Afghans are now suddenly wailing Humanitarians passionately concerned for the welfare of poor Afghans.

Where were they when the bombings started in 2001? :shrug:

[Turborama]

28. Who?

If you are referring to me when you say "people who have a history of no concern for the plight of murdered Afghans", I think you need to know that I have been concerned about the plight of Afghans since well before the bombings started in 2001.

What I can see here is a serious lack of critical thinking and widespread cognitive dissonance going on since the leaks came out.

[daleo]

27. If Wikileaks is such a boon for the Taliban

Why are they telling the world? Wouldn't it make more sense to lay low?

If the Nazis had been profiting from allied leaks, would they have boasted about it? Did we boast about Ultra?

[BakedAtAMileHigh]

31. Were the 'Taliban' wearing Nikes + Contact Lenses?

'Cuz I will wager dollars to donuts this is CIA propaganda.

[askeptic]

32. If we care about them - go get 'em and protect them

It seems that if we (the U.S.) were really concerned about their safety, we would go get those informants we treasure so much and get them to safety or into the U.S. I mean if we can't protect them, then it REALLY says a lot about where the war effort is.

[MH1]

37. so you're ready to spend another $10 billion or so on this new project?

come on, it is never possible to protect everyone who might provide useful information.

There is no doubt that there was something seriously fucked up in the situation that allowed Manning to get the documents that had actual names in them. But that fact does NOT absolve the people who published the documents without redacting the names.

[BreweryYardRat]

33. We all knew this was coming.

It's critically important to expose military fuck-ups that kill civilians, especially in a situation like Afghanistan where civilian goodwill is vitally important.

However, all Assange and/or his source had to do was take an extra week or two to redact the informants' names. They were lazy, they wanted to get it out as fast as possible, and now Afghanis who've helped us are going to pay.

[lonestarnot]

40. Who supplied everyone over there with notebooks?

[Odin2005]

41. This is the TALIBAN, people, they are probably just making shit up.

They are good at inflaming Western opinion so they continue having an occupier to hate.

[superconnected]

43. And if they didn't, the US would make this crap up for them.

And would have anyway. Oh yeah, they did, right after the docs were released.