16 1 min 12 yrs

Those who applauded the theft of the 90,000 + classified documents that were then handed to Wikileak to publish might like to ponder on the consequences.

The Taliban has issued a warning to Afghans whose names might appear on the leaked Afghanistan war logs as informers for the Nato-led coalition.

They will be hunted down and killed.

In his first comments on the massive leak, Robert Gates said that “the battlefield consequences of the release of these documents are potentially severe and dangerous for our troops, our allies and Afghan partners, and may well damage our relationships and reputation in that key part of the world.” “Intelligence sources and methods, as well as military tactics, techniques and procedures will become known to our adversaries,” he added.

He’s right. It’s so obvious. Wikileak have assisted our enemies. What does that make them?

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]


  1. Well last time I checked Sweden isn’t at war with the Taliban, isn’t a member of NATO, isn’t a member of the Multinational Taskforce, and so they aren’t helping their enemy. Should an international news source (for lack of a better term) not report on information?

  2. There used to be an offense called Treason and the penalty for Treason was death. I don’t think it’s been rescinded so both the mole and the people running wikileak need to stand trial on charges of Treason and face the ultimate penalty!

  3. Admiral Mike Mullen said that Julian Assange, the founder of Wikileaks, may already have blood on his hands following the leak of 92,000 classified documents relating to the war in Afghanistan by his website.

    Oh right so its those who expose the slaughter of civilians who have blood on their hands.

    And as for Gates I think the fact that that comment comes from someone who is part of the administration which sought to cover up the murder of innocent civilians, means he speaks with a forked tongue.

  4. "the people running wikileak need to stand trial on charges of Treason and face the ultimate penalty!"

    So Swedish people should be hanged for treason against the United States?

  5. Something whiffs here.

    Now it may be that "the battlefield consequences of the release of these documents are potentially severe and dangerous for our troops, our allies and Afghan partners", as Gates says. However no-one who has played a senior role in the Afghan campaign can possibly accuse others of endangering the lives of our troops and civilians.

    Gates presides over a policy which has killed thousands of troops and many thousands more civilians in Afghanistan and now Pakistan. "But it was necessary …" they would say. Maybe so, but still the policies of Washington and London have led directly to far more deaths than anything wikileaks and whistleblowers could ever do.

    Lies always get you into trouble in the end and someone has lied either about the campaign or the Taliban’s reaction to the leak. We’ve been told countless times that we have and are killing Taliban leaders, that we have killed many thousands of Taliban and that the Taliban is on the run and we are winning.

    Yet all of a sudden the Taliban has the run of the country to hunt down Afghan informers?

    Look at what you are being told today: after nine years of war, thousands of deaths and an unbelievable amount of treasure spent, the Taliban can travel the country with lists of names to hunt down and kill the victims when found.

    That doesn’t sound like we’re winning.

  6. Wikileaks founder, Julian Assange, an Australian, will soon have blood on his hands.

    I hope that there are consequences for this act.

  7. I don’t buy any products of the MSM – no newspapers, no BBC licence fee etc. The entire network is one interlinked lie. Here is a Bilderberg meeting:

    At their 1991 meeting at the Black Forest resort in Baden Baden, Germany, they discussed plans for a common European currency and European central banking; and reviewed Middle Eastern events and developments in the Soviet Union. David Rockefeller said during the meeting:

    "We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time magazine, and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years … It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during these years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supernational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries."

  8. the private that leaked this information should be shot for treason, and the wikileaks people should be locked up for espionage

  9. Troll,

    As a matter of interest, when was the last time a serving member of armed forces in the US was executed after military trial ? Is it a rare enough occurance ?

  10. The last one, as far as I know, Kloot, was in the early 1960s. There is someone on death row now but his execution has been cancelled by a judge. There also hasn’t been an execution in the United States for treason since the 1860s.

  11. i don’t agree with Troll every day, but he is correct.

    The individual should be executed in accordance with Article 106a of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

  12. Wikileaks claim that they offered the Whitehouse, via a newspaper, the opportunity to check the information for any thing that might lead to direct harm. The Whitehouse didn’t respond. Whether true or not, i’ve no way of knowing, obviously, but thats what i’ve read.

    Cant understand what the leaker hoped to achieve though. Even if civilian casualties are not widely reported I think most already know its been a bloody & vicious war and will be for some time. I doubt reading through the leaked papers (which is pretty hard going anyway i’ve found), will turn many people who are currently for the campaign, against it. Just can’t see it.

  13. "The individual should be executed in accordance with Article 106a of the Uniform Code of Military Justice."

    It might just be my reading of it but Artile 106a mightn’t apply here. It states that actions must be "with intent or reason to believe that it is to be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of a foreign nation". Was this information leaked to help the Taliban or any other foreign nation? If not then Article 106a doesn’t apply.

  14. Kloot it’s very rare. Seamus when you release secrets you are doing it to help the enemy and hurt your country, regardless of any other intentions you might have.

  15. Motive will be very important in this case. Was the person involved doing it to help the Taliban, hurt the United States? Or was he doing it because he believed it was in the public’s best interest to know?

Comments are closed.