1. No I'm not. I work with both military and civilian researchers that have gone to Afghanistan. In the open press (search through the NY Times archive) are accounts of field commanders working with villagers, tribal elders, and farmers to understand the "human terrain." This community cooperation was utilized in Iraq and has been chronicled in many unclassified sources.
2. You're assuming that the Afghans have a mature court system. They do not, as should be evident by even a cursory review of reports in the open press. Commanders have to weigh and cross-check the evidence gathered from sources while also protecting these sources from reprisal. This is not a court of law; it's a battlefield and the methods of gathering, processing, and prosecuting intelligence from the local populace reflects the different context. This should be self evident.
3. The Army does its best to protect secrets, but like any organization, there are those that for either ideological, venal, or plain stupid reasons leak classified information. To expect otherwise is to be naiive. In a position of trust, it is fairly easy to steal 100K documents if they are electronic and can be burned surreptitiously to a CD or DVD. Which is just what Bradley Manning did.
I generally support WikiLeaks, but in this case Julian Assange has published information that most likely will cost Afghans their lives. The Taliban have already threatened as much. What's really tragic is that this leaked information, again at the possible cost of human lives, does not substantially broaden the public's understanding of the Afghan war.
I must say that the nature and tone of your questions betray a fundamental lack of understanding of how intelligence in counter-insurgency operations is gathered and how classified material is used and distributed.
Worst yet, your characterization of Afghans that work with ISAF against the Taliban as Quislings betrays true ignorance (and bigotry) on your part.
