Transparency? First Wikileaks casusalty.

[KJ]

http://www.newsweek.com/2010/08/02/taliban-seeks-vengeance-in-wake-of-wikileaks.html

""After WikiLeaks published a trove of U.S. intelligence documents—some of which listed the names and villages of Afghans who had been secretly cooperating with the American military—it didn’t take long for the Taliban to react. A spokesman for the group quickly threatened to “punish” any Afghan listed as having “collaborated” with the U.S. and the Kabul authorities against the growing Taliban insurgency. In recent days, the Taliban has demonstrated how seriously those threats should be considered. Late last week, just four days after the documents were published, death threats began arriving at the homes of key tribal elders in southern Afghanistan. And over the weekend one tribal elder, Khalifa Abdullah, who the Taliban believed had been in close contact with the Americans, was taken from his home in Monar village, in Kandahar province’s embattled Arghandab district, and executed by insurgent gunmen.""


Now transparency, theoretic exercises and "what if" games may all be fun games to play.
This is what happens in the real world when you leak classified documents.

This is a sad day for operations in Afgh.
Why would anyone trust the coalition now when we say we are there to give people a better life and keep them secure.

Congratulations Julian Assanage, now you and your source has Afghan blood on your hands.
Not only that, by denying the coalition intel like this effectively have done you will soon have coalition blood on your hands as well.
All about the bucks and keeping your shitty site alive huh?

//KJ.

 

[A Can of Man]

And don't forget the officers and NCOs of that intelligence unit.
They might have just lost the war singlehandedly.

 

[HokieMSG]

Both the leaker and the guy runnning wikileaks should be prosecuted for murder and conspiracy. They had to know this type of thing would happen if the documents were published. If they felt the need to publish, they should have redacted any information that would endanger the lives of the people helping the coalition. In their rush to get the information out they will have caused many deaths. I have nothing but contempt for these individuals. They should be responsible for taking care of the families of the afghans killed.

 

[Micha]

The last media person with a perception of himself as a gatekeeper must be deceased in this case. This is an example that one should be cautious. That one's own motives may overshadow what is basically reasonable. Is it more important to get those documents out, because you then can pat yourselves on the shoulder that you have lifted the lid on something that is really inflamed? Or should one begin to think about the consequences for individuals such revelations might have? And who are making those decisions? The Internet and the opportunity it gives all to contribute to the party, also gives this power to every one of us. Potentially seen anyway. And is it necessarily good? It may in fact be the issue that’s left when the wind on these 92,000 documents have subsided.

 

[HokieMSG]

My comments are embedded in bold.

The last media person with a perception of himself as a gatekeeper must be deceased in this case. This is an example that one should be cautious. That one's own motives may overshadow what is basically reasonable.
Is it more important to get those documents out, because you then can pat yourselves on the shoulder that you have lifted the lid on something that is really inflamed?

Releasing the documents was not really necessary IMHO. It was rash, reckless and potentially lethal.

Or should one begin to think about the consequences for individuals such revelations might have?

Absolutely. Once the documents were obtained, Wikileaks should have redacted ANY information that could possbily harm a soldier or informant. Sadly they did not do this in their rush to publish. As such, the publishers at Wikileaks should be held, criminally and financially liable for the damage they have caused. This is yet another example of the "Law of unintended consequences".

And who are making those decisions?

People who think that the publics "Right to know" trumps the safety of those involved.

The Internet and the opportunity it gives all to contribute to the party, also gives this power to every one of us. Potentially seen anyway.
And is it necessarily good? It may in fact be the issue that’s left when the wind on these 92,000 documents have subsided.

 

[Wolf]

Secrets are made for a reason.
In this case, it seems, to protect certain brave individuals.

This deeply disturbs me.