Bradley Manning pre-trial.

[BabylonHoruv]

The only good I can see here is that a lot of people are aware that he's a hero and that what is being done to him is wrong. 

And they - we - sit and do sweet fuck all.

How is this "good"?

Well, Occupy has been protesting for his release, so not everyone is doing fuckall. 

[The Good Reverend Roger]

The only good I can see here is that a lot of people are aware that he's a hero and that what is being done to him is wrong. 

And they - we - sit and do sweet fuck all.

How is this "good"?

Well, Occupy has been protesting for his release, so not everyone is doing fuckall. 

Well, I am sure the military will back down any day now.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

The only good I can see here is that a lot of people are aware that he's a hero and that what is being done to him is wrong. 

And they - we - sit and do sweet fuck all.

How is this "good"?

Well, Occupy has been protesting for his release, so not everyone is doing fuckall. 

Weren't you going to post some snuff porn images or something today?

[Don Coyote]

The only good I can see here is that a lot of people are aware that he's a hero and that what is being done to him is wrong. 

And they - we - sit and do sweet fuck all.

How is this "good"?

Well, Occupy has been protesting for his release, so not everyone is doing fuckall. 

Well, I am sure the military will back down any day now.

Didn't you know? The Army is TERRIFIED of hippies and will do everything in its power to avoid an open conflict with the unwashed and unemployed.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Did Manning do something wrong (in an ethical sense)? That's a complex question with no simple answer.

As a citizen, Manning did the right thing.  The government is a treacherous beast that must always be scrutinized.

As a soldier, Manning did the right thing.  Blindly following orders is no excuse for wrongdoing or the concealment of the wrongdoing of others under any circumstances, and is in fact against the code of conduct taught to recruits from day 1. 

In an ethical sense, there was nothing else Manning could do.

In a real world sense, the poor boy is cold fucking meat.  He'll never see daylight again.

I agree 100% with this assessment.

However, one single caveat.

There is also nothing else the government can do. Manning broke a very big rule and he got caught. If the government gave him a pass, it would open the doors to a PR mess in the military. While I personally would like an open and transparent government, I can imagine the headache that the people in charge of secrets would have if First Amendment rights trumped protecting classified data.

That being said, government secrets in a democracy run "by the people" seems insane. But then, a standing army deployed around the globe in a nation founded on ideas that included no standing army and no international wars seems insane.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Did Manning do something wrong (in an ethical sense)? That's a complex question with no simple answer.

As a citizen, Manning did the right thing.  The government is a treacherous beast that must always be scrutinized.

As a soldier, Manning did the right thing.  Blindly following orders is no excuse for wrongdoing or the concealment of the wrongdoing of others under any circumstances, and is in fact against the code of conduct taught to recruits from day 1. 

In an ethical sense, there was nothing else Manning could do.

In a real world sense, the poor boy is cold fucking meat.  He'll never see daylight again.

I agree 100% with this assessment.

However, one single caveat.

There is also nothing else the government can do. Manning broke a very big rule and he got caught. If the government gave him a pass, it would open the doors to a PR mess in the military. While I personally would like an open and transparent government, I can imagine the headache that the people in charge of secrets would have if First Amendment rights trumped protecting classified data.

That being said, government secrets in a democracy run "by the people" seems insane. But then, a standing army deployed around the globe in a nation founded on ideas that included no standing army and no international wars seems insane.

Expedience is not an excuse.

And secrecy is the enemy of liberty.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Did Manning do something wrong (in an ethical sense)? That's a complex question with no simple answer.

As a citizen, Manning did the right thing.  The government is a treacherous beast that must always be scrutinized.

As a soldier, Manning did the right thing.  Blindly following orders is no excuse for wrongdoing or the concealment of the wrongdoing of others under any circumstances, and is in fact against the code of conduct taught to recruits from day 1. 

In an ethical sense, there was nothing else Manning could do.

In a real world sense, the poor boy is cold fucking meat.  He'll never see daylight again.

I agree 100% with this assessment.

However, one single caveat.

There is also nothing else the government can do. Manning broke a very big rule and he got caught. If the government gave him a pass, it would open the doors to a PR mess in the military. While I personally would like an open and transparent government, I can imagine the headache that the people in charge of secrets would have if First Amendment rights trumped protecting classified data.

That being said, government secrets in a democracy run "by the people" seems insane. But then, a standing army deployed around the globe in a nation founded on ideas that included no standing army and no international wars seems insane.

Expedience is not an excuse.

And secrecy is the enemy of liberty.

I agree... I'm not saying I approve of their actions, only that given the version of the US we live in today, they had no choice.

If every solider knew that they could tell everything they've seen, based on their first Amendment rights, regardless of classification... I don't know if Americans would be ready for that kind of TRUTH. Hell, what they don't successfully hide is horrifying... what kind of awful do you think they're successfully hiding?

Manning is in the right from a human standpoint, but when was the last time the US Government thought of citizens as humans?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

If every solider knew that they could tell everything they've seen, based on their first Amendment rights, regardless of classification... I don't know if Americans would be ready for that kind of TRUTH.

Fuck what they're ready for.  Fat fucking bastards don't know how food gets on their table, that's not my Goddamn fault.  Same way with this shit.

Just saying.

[Triple Zero]

I've been reading about this today. One thing that struck me (perhaps because it's my own area of interest) is that this Adrian Lamo person is a very odd and unpredictable guy. He's nicknamed the "homeless hacker" (which is pretty accurate). Strange thing is, he used to be the kind of greyhat* hacker that I'd normally cheer for (depending on what they do, exactly).
... until he ratted on Bradley Manning. He's kind of a strange guy, diagnosed with Aspergers (though it could be any form of Autism Disorder, these things aren't black/white), mostly a stalker/hacker with social engineering skills in the style of Kevin Mitnick, except Mitnick is much saner. He's also got drug problems (amphetamines, "disassociative drugs"). He basically social engineered Manning, partly from the homo/gay angle via IM chat [I got the impression Lamo is also gay, and about the same age as Manning], though Manning was also looking for someone to talk (or as Lamo says "brag") to. The reports from the hearings say that he was "really worried about people's lives being endangered" by Mannings alleged leakings. I don't buy that for one second, Lamo just doesn't seem the type to be bothered much by such things (though he could also just be misguided). He's long time part of "Project Vigilant", which are hackers in the pocket of the authorities, not to do jobs but to act as snitches (since he got in legal troubles several times before, among other things for hacking the NY Times). Reports say he doesn't accept payment for services, except for basic covering of expenses.

I wouldn't be surprised if there's some sort of deal that he's been offered, certain charges dropped, or maybe even some offer he couldn't refuse--he's got parents that he's still in contact with, who are oddly supportive of his grey-criminal actions (thought they'd prefer him to stop, of course).

Thing is, as far as I understand, without Lamo snitching on Manning, they might not even have figured out Manning [alledgedly...] did it, at all.


* definition time:
whitehat hacker = security consultant = person that hacks things in cooperation with corporations, doing penetration tests as well as research for possible new exploits and generally abides to Responsible Disclosure (aka giving the corporation time to fix the issue before making it public),
blackhat hacker = cybercriminal, seeks exploits either for own personal gain or to sell them to criminal organisations,
greyhat hacker = person that just hacks for the shits and giggles, occasional personal gains/privileges, because they can, not for a criminal career, nor to alert people to their security holes.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Fuck these asshole "social engineers" that call themselves hackers. Social Engineering is VERY USEFUL in breaking into companies, but it does not a hacker make.

That being said, I still hve problems with the whole damned story. This guy was trained to keep secrets. Why would he out himself on IRC? What's the likelihood that he outs himself to a snitch? What's the likelihood that he and the snitch meet in a gay chat room?

If it had been a hacker chat room, I'd likely buy it. I know idiots that think chatting about exploits on a hacker channel is a awesome thing to do. However, in a gay chat room... when its the US GOV that you just pissed off? Doesn't seem like a situation where you would mention that you are responsible for a huge military information leak.

[Don Coyote]

Did Manning do something wrong (in an ethical sense)? That's a complex question with no simple answer.

As a citizen, Manning did the right thing.  The government is a treacherous beast that must always be scrutinized.

As a soldier, Manning did the right thing.  Blindly following orders is no excuse for wrongdoing or the concealment of the wrongdoing of others under any circumstances, and is in fact against the code of conduct taught to recruits from day 1. 

In an ethical sense, there was nothing else Manning could do.

In a real world sense, the poor boy is cold fucking meat.  He'll never see daylight again.

I agree 100% with this assessment.

However, one single caveat.

There is also nothing else the government can do. Manning broke a very big rule and he got caught. If the government gave him a pass, it would open the doors to a PR mess in the military. While I personally would like an open and transparent government, I can imagine the headache that the people in charge of secrets would have if First Amendment rights trumped protecting classified data.

That being said, government secrets in a democracy run "by the people" seems insane. But then, a standing army deployed around the globe in a nation founded on ideas that included no standing army and no international wars seems insane.

Expedience is not an excuse.

And secrecy is the enemy of liberty.

I agree... I'm not saying I approve of their actions, only that given the version of the US we live in today, they had no choice.

If every solider knew that they could tell everything they've seen, based on their first Amendment rights, regardless of classification... I don't know if Americans would be ready for that kind of TRUTH. Hell, what they don't successfully hide is horrifying... what kind of awful do you think they're successfully hiding?

Manning is in the right from a human standpoint, but when was the last time the US Government thought of citizens as humans?

The American public DESERVE to know the horrors. Fuck if they are ready. Not that it would matter. I bet most of them would just ignore the horrors, even if they were shoved into their faces.

[Hoser McRhizzy]

cain pointed out on the previous page "the enemy" is never identified as any particular entity.  So, that leaves space open to establish Wikileaks as a terrorist organization.  In this case, Manning's a means to an end.  Is that about right?


[lamo-talk]

I've been reading about this today. One thing that struck me (perhaps because it's my own area of interest) is that this Adrian Lamo person is a very odd and unpredictable guy.

I wouldn't be surprised if there's some sort of deal that he's been offered, certain charges dropped, or maybe even some offer he couldn't refuse--he's got parents that he's still in contact with, who are oddly supportive of his grey-criminal actions (thought they'd prefer him to stop, of course).

Thing is, as far as I understand, without Lamo snitching on Manning, they might not even have figured out Manning [alledgedly...] did it, at all.

If I movie of the week it, it just looks like a young informant who's trying to seem interesting (his claim to be the hacker all the baby hackers wannabe like), likely being harassed by the police/media, and attempting an innocence claim on the back of another person.  

Here's a bit of weirdness that was probably touched on in the other thread.  Apologies if I talk in circles here - I'm trying to sort this out.

What I can know is that Wired journalists have repeatedly returned to Lamo over the past decade as their accessible example of what a Real Life Hacker acts and looks like.  You're right - Lamo was charged and convicted of computer crime-related felony by a U.S. Federal court for hacking into a number of higher-profile networks.  He was fined, offered jobs writing for securities magazines, and came into the media -- specifically, Wired magazine -- positioned again and again as a troubled and fascinating loner hacker-character.  

These might be the same articles you read?
The Homeless Hacker v. The New York Times.
Ex-Hacker Adrian Lamo Institutionalized for Asperger's

Wired reported that Lamo had been institutionalized by police for Aspergers*.  But mentioning it was just a springboard for the journalist to talk about how cool and different hackers are.  As though police institutionalize people for Aspergers all the time.  Do they?  First I've heard of it.  

Scooped up and asked to trap Manning?  Possible.  "But never mind," says the journalist, "Hackers are sooo cool and different from regular people, don't you agree?"  It's a pet peeve of mine - that fiction of computer experts and their supposedly antisocial/robotic personalities.  It gives youngsters who have a talent for computers an excuse to act like douchenozzles.

In other news, the journalist is actually writing a tell-all book on how mysterious and different hackers are from the rest of us dullards.  Offensively mundane possibility number one: that Lamo and the Wired journalist did this to further cement their reputations as experts in the field of ZOMG Rain Man Hackers!  

Last bit of rambly is a disclaimer.  I'm just talking about that journalistic contrivance of The Hacker as Criminal, where knowing how to fix your computer from the terminal is evidence of criminal intent... to do... something...  I'm not saying that coders, crackers and such aren't quirky multifaceted humans.  They are, and the few I've gotten to know well have been fucking brilliant to talk with.  

[/lamo-talk]

* (Huh.  I just went back an re-read that wired article and there's nothing in there about force, the police, AND the timing has changed...  Different from the article I read back in June last year.  I've edited my post to reflect what's in the current article.  fucked up... )

[Triple Zero]

Fuck these asshole "social engineers" that call themselves hackers. Social Engineering is VERY USEFUL in breaking into companies, but it does not a hacker make.

That being said, I still hve problems with the whole damned story. This guy was trained to keep secrets. Why would he out himself on IRC? What's the likelihood that he outs himself to a snitch? What's the likelihood that he and the snitch meet in a gay chat room?

If it had been a hacker chat room, I'd likely buy it. I know idiots that think chatting about exploits on a hacker channel is a awesome thing to do. However, in a gay chat room... when its the US GOV that you just pissed off? Doesn't seem like a situation where you would mention that you are responsible for a huge military information leak.

IM, Instant Messaging. Not IRC, no chatroom. And he probably gained his trust somehow.

Also I find your remark about social engineering kind of short sighted. And I'm kinda tired of the discussion of what's a "real hacker". Lamo used a lot of technical exploits too, but you need social engineering (aka BALLS) to leverage that into something for real powerful effect. I don't understand why you'd get so worked up about that, it's just a very different mindset than a whitehat perspective, call it a reality tunnel of you like.

And fuck now you got me defending Lamo. I don't want to do that. But I didn't expect "he's no hacker because he did social engineering" from you.

[Triple Zero]

Hoser McRhizzy, yeah I read the first of those two, and two citations from his Wikipedia article on his drug problem (though the articles linked in the citations turned out to be about more than just that).

It's perhaps important to note the dates on those articles, they're all from 2002-2004, long before Wikileaks got much visibility.

I was just reading them to get some background on Lamo, see who that guy is, of course I agree that glamourizing his "homeless hacker" lifestyle is ridiculous, it's still interesting stories though, but IMO all of that changed when wikileaks got into the picture.

And that he got "scooped up" is a fact. Asked to trap Manning is a question, still.

[Hoser McRhizzy]

Hoser McRhizzy, yeah I read the first of those two, and two citations from his Wikipedia article on his drug problem (though the articles linked in the citations turned out to be about more than just that).

It's perhaps important to note the dates on those articles, they're all from 2002-2004, long before Wikileaks got much visibility.

Good point!  And thanks.  I put them together thinking about Wired's history with him, found them for the same reason you did - background history - and then my brain muddled them up with last year.

I was just reading them to get some background on Lamo, see who that guy is, of course I agree that glamourizing his "homeless hacker" lifestyle is ridiculous, it's still interesting stories though, but IMO all of that changed when wikileaks got into the picture.

And that he got "scooped up" is a fact. Asked to trap Manning is a question, still.

Still, so fucking creepy...  Thanks for making the distinction.