Slashdot Mirror
Adrian Lamo Explains His Decision To Expose Bradley Manning
ilikenwf writes "Whether you agree with his rationale for doing so or not, Adrian Lamo has come forward to discuss his reasoning for exposing Bradley Manning. Manning, now in federal custody, leaked thousands of U.S. intelligence files and documents. Lamo's side of the story shows that he was concerned for Manning's mental health and stability, and for the lives Manning was risking by releasing classified material — Afghan informants, for instance. Either way, this goes to show that if you're going to release stolen/hacked documents, it's best you do it anonymously and don't brag about it."
but I think a few years in solitary isn't the best thing for one's mental health and stability.
Notice his bizarre reference to Babylon 5 that seems to be without irony. He's obviously a fan, but did he miss the message the show had about how a group of soldiers had to follow their conscience and expose war crimes and corruption from their government at home. These characters had to deal with propaganda from the government, professional snitches (Nightwatch) and threats of treason and imprisonment from their corrupt government. I guess Adrian Lamo was rooting for President Clarke all along.
Yeah, because when I'm "concerned" about somebody's mental stability, the FIRST thing I think of is sending them off to be held for 900+ days in solitary confinement and psychologically tortured.
This sort of post-hoc rationalization is actually *more* embarrassing than Lamo just coming and saying, "yeah, I did it for the fame. Suck my dick!"
It'd be nice to see Anonymous take on Lamo as a new "project." Someone ought to teach him that there's a price that comes with being a paid informant, even in a police state.
I can't believe these were his primary goals at the time. I think he got into something that was way more than he expected, and he pulled a c.y.a. move and sent Manning down the river. Saying he did it for the good of the Afghan people that might be named in the documents seems revisionist. But I guess only he knows, so he gets to tell whatever story he wants.
1. used their real name w the accounts they used to commit their crime
2. told somebody what they're doing
3. don't understand enough about computers to not get caught
4. used their home IP
Missing anything? There's a trend forming here...
Either way, this goes to show that if you're going to release stolen/hacked documents, it's best you do it anonymously and don't brag about it."
Manning never "bragged" about anything. He was reaching out to a fellow hacker (who claimed to be a priest that Manning could confess to without consequence).
Manning was in a hostile environment with NO friends and with leaders who were corrupt and untrustworthy. His own father hated him for his homosexuality. He had nobody and was under an extreme amount of stress while trying to expose the corruption of his government. Almost ANYBODY would have made the mistake of trying to seek out a person that would be like-minded.
If this Adrian Lamo were honest and not just trying to save what is left of his "journalism" career, then he would be doing everything in his power to try and free Manning for standing by his principles.
there's a good way and a bad way to leak information to the press. Wholesale dumps that destroy innocuous diplomatic relationships and endanger spies and contacts is a bad way.
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
Lamo was arrested in 2003 for breaking into the NY Times website along with Yahoo, Microsoft and other. Before that he broke into various corporate networks, Lexis-Nexis, etc. Facing a possible 15 year prison sentence he took a plea bargain with reduced it to 6 month to be spent under house arrest at his parent's home. How did he get such a sweet deal? Was part of the deal an agreement to become an FBI informant possibly? Because if the Anonymous arrests have proven one thing, when hackers are faced with serving serious jail time, they will rat their own mothers out to cut a deal.
One has to pick their path.
The things that really sticks out in this saga are 1) Manning had legal resources available to him to expose wrong doing in the classified world. He chose to ignore that route and used the media instead. 2) Lamo looked at the shear number of documents and had to make a choice to either do nothing with the possibility of many people being killed, or turn Manning in with the possibility of facing the death penalty. Damned if you do and damned if you don't.
This saga has parallels in history. Think back to the first atomic bombs dropped on Japan. There were those in the program that had to come to grips with the fact that the work they did led to 250,000+ dead. They had basically two choices. Accept the notion that dropping those bombs led the the end of the war and ultimately reduce the total number of dead, or go crazy thinking otherwise, since we can never know for sure.
Right or wrong, Lamo chose his path and I will not fault him for it. Manning on the other hand choose poorly.
Some days I get the sinking feeling Orwell was an optimist.
"Espionage" in what sense, exactly? He wasn't in the employ of a foreign government.
!#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
In Lamo's place, I might've done the same.
In Manning's place, I might've also done the same.
I think the problem is the system, not the individuals who feel compelled to expose these things.
He's the kind of fuckhead who would be ratting his friends out an invading force the week after they rolled over his town. He's loyal to power, doesn't have any semblance of principles that exist outside of worshiping power, and therefore he's a fucking model American (or German or Frenchman or whomever is running the show).
He probably spends weekends having wet dreams about exposing plots that discredit Old Glory, or any of the principles she has pretended to have over the past 200 years. He sleeps with on hand on a flagpole, stroking it erotically as he tries to imagine a thousand dead bodies and ten thousand eviscerated limbs and container ships full of blood pouring over his naked body to celebrate the March of Freedom -- making a pitstop in weak Arab States before it returns to bring justice to the nigger Filipinos and nigger Mexicanos and Panamanians and Nicaraguans and Hatians, fouling his financial lebensraum and ruining a diverse America predicated on the phallus worship of power and of the gun and all her related orgasms of control and death -- as long as Freedom worships American Freedom unconditionally. Unconditionally, as judicious as God: you are either with Us, or you are against Us and you are doomed to die if you do not obey. But you won't have to wait for hell in the afterlife. This is currently available for overnight delivery, if you call now.
Just before he climaxes, a tear forms in Adrian's eye as he imagines how glorious and good he is, offering the savage Arab a chance to get on their knees and sign up for slavery instead of being killed on the spot. He revels in the moment that God was in the room when his Lord and Savior, George Herbert Walker, decided in his infinite wisdom to kill a few hundred thousand Iraqis and displace two million more in order to improve women's rights by sending tens of thousands of them into prostitution after killing their husbands on the battlefield. In his own way, Adrian has freed the Iraqi people from the tyranny of owning their own resources, and replaced their struggle against corruption of their government with a loss of basic security, infrastructure, and education.
And when he does climax, Adrian thinks about the power he protects. He thinks about raping and murdering a prisoner and then helping cover it up without having to answer to any semblance of a court. He heaves his entire body into rapture as he pictures an innocent man being electrocuted to death by someone from the Agency while Bradley Manning is forced to watch from a prison cell, crying for mercy, as part of his "non-torture" permanent solitary confinement that Adrian bravely initiated because... why?
Because in Adrian's sick fantasy, Bradley Manning is the individual who needs to be cured of dangerous fantasies. But the truth is that Adrian Lamo is a hallow imitation of a human being, and when he passes away there probably won't be a soul left to save. Lamo will worship whoever has the biggest gun, and it will serve him well because parasites make up for their lack of intelligence and abandoned independence with dependence on larger, more powerful entities who will accept fealty from any random piece of shit from the street, including Adrian Lamo.
Because the "espionage" is actually evidence of crimes, and the authorities are criminals. I know it's hard to accept, but the people in charge are not always right and good.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
This submission text is tainted by the poster's personal opinions - opinions which are, to say the very least, not unanimously shared. If you read the article it is striking how Lamo seems completely bereft of any sympathy for Manning, how he might have possibly fooled him into confessing by promising to treat it in confidence - and how he likes to hide behind complex (made up?) words and phrases instead of answering the interviewer's questions directly. One for the psychologists...
Lamo's concerns regarding disclosure of Afgahan informants from Wikileaks are thus far unfounded, and his claim that "WikiLeaks has a history of hand-waving away the consequences of their disclosures" doesn't seem to jive with the facts in this case. Below is a quote from the relevant section of the Wikipedia article.
Informants named
Some, including Barack Obama and Hamid Karzai, raised concerns that the detailed logs had exposed the names of Afghan informants, thus endangering their lives. Partially in response to this criticism, Wikileaks announced that it has sought the help of the Pentagon in reviewing a further 15,000 documents before releasing them. The Pentagon said it had not been contacted by Wikileaks. However, blogger Glenn Greenwald presented evidence that the Pentagon had, in fact, been contacted, and that it had refused the request.
On 11 August, a spokesman for the Pentagon told the Washington Post that "We have yet to see any harm come to anyone in Afghanistan that we can directly tie to exposure in the WikiLeaks documents", although the spokesman asserted "there is in all likelihood a lag between exposure of these documents and jeopardy in the field." On 17 August, the Associated Press reported that "so far there is no evidence that any Afghans named in the leaked documents as defectors or informants from the Taliban insurgency have been harmed in retaliation."
In October, the Pentagon concluded that the leak "did not disclose any sensitive intelligence sources or methods", and that furthermore "there has not been a single case of Afghans needing protection or to be moved because of the leak." Both Wikileaks and Greenwald pointed to this report as clear evidence that the danger caused by the leak had been vastly overstated.
Yes, I know I'm threadjacking an FP, but the issue that is often made of this so far non-issue I find annoying, particularly because it tends to overshadow the facts that were revealed.
I once took an excursion to Reddit, and later HN. Unlimited up/down voting sucks when dealing with a hive-mind.
But Lamo could not have known beforehand that there would be no fallout from the release. It seems a reasonable fear to be had.
Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
-- Pablo Picasso
He either had no concern for the well-being of Manning and is just saying so or he is utter and complete fool for thinking that ratting him would result in anything other than utter persecution and kafkaesquely hellish existence.
Either he is an informer and enemy of free men pleading for forgiveness or a fool so bad he's got to suffer at least some repercussions.
I've no mercy to spare him.
Claiming Manning committed treason is like saying copyright infringement is theft.
Manning saw all the innocents whose lives were taken, and did the best thing he knew how to save more lives. If any lives were put at risk by the leak, they are far outweighed by the lives endangered by the military continuing to kill in secrecy, without consequence. Manning didn't commit treason. The US Military commits far more treacherous acts daily.
Yep. Military officers in the Abwher were also horrified by the criminatity of their elected government and did something about it. They were indeed shot, as you recommend. I am a retired Naval Officer. Early in this decade I realized I can't wear my old uniform again, even for ceremonies. The reason is that the stench of criminality and war crimes by this government has permeated the fabric of the uniform I once wore to "protect the weak and liberate the oppressed." Take that as my "liberal" answer. It's about time somebody besides me and my like-minded progressive/liberal buddies starts loving on all ten amendments in the Constitution's Bill of Rights. The first good step would be shipping Messrs. Bush and Obama to the International War Crimes Tribunal for "waging agressive war."
"Nothing we despise in the other person is entirely absent from ourselves." -- Pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer
If you leak only certain things, well then the argument can be made that you did it out of conscience. You saw these things and said "The public needs to know this. Even though I took an oath not to reveal this, this public needs to know, it is more important." This is the kind of thing that happened with the Pentagon Papers.
However when you just go and wholesale release whatever you can grab, well that kinda goes out the window. You didn't do it for conscience reasons, you did it for other reasons, ego it would appear in this case. You want to "get them" or whatever. It wasn't a reasoned action.
Well, intent should and does matter in what you do. The reason behind your actions can be as important as the actions themselves.
There is also the issue of harm and potential harm caused vs what was gained. While it seems to be taken as an article of faith on /. that extreme government crimes were revealed, I've yet to have anyone point them out to me. The only thing that seems to get referred to is the "collateral murder" video which if you watch unedited clearly shows the opposite: There was no crime, the soldiers engaged per the rules of war (which are quite different from regular civilian laws).
A selective leak of information that the public needs to know can be a very noble act. A big dump of anything classified you get your hands on is not.
The real reason is that he hasn't had any attention for almost a decade, when he was on The Screen Savers and stuff after all of his hacking pursuits, so he had to do something to get back on the news.
Really Paul? You think it was irrational to fulfill the oath taken and the agreements signed concerning classified information because you (irrationally) believe it would have null effect? How could Lamo or anyone else concisely review the documents for scope? I suppose you have experts instantly available, for free I might add, that just provide this service on call?
I took the same oath when I joined the Navy, and part of that oath is to swear to uphold the Constitution. Manning had information on activities that are clearly unconstitutional. Your argument is what the establishment wants to hear: we must protect secret, illegal government activities that harm millions, if not billions, to protect a few people involved with these programs, even though no evidence can be provided that anyone has directly come to harm from these activities. It seems likely that any harm, even speculatively, that would have come from these disclosures would have been presented by top officials and featured on front page of the Washington Post. But there has been no evidence to support the claims. Lamo made a poor decision.
I once took an excursion to Reddit, and later HN. Unlimited up/down voting sucks when dealing with a hive-mind.
Colloquially: you're a dumbfucker. On what planet is leaking evidence of mass criminality, corruption and war crimes equivalent to leaking the identity of a whistleblower? Until you have a video showing Manning gunning down unarmed civilians - and then gunning down people trying to rescue the dying civilians - you can cram that false equivalency right up your dumb ass.
Trying to make it look like he was concerned. When you look at the chat transcripts, Lamo just badgers Manning for info.
Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
Felony? How about violating a major treaty? The UN Convention Against Torture - signed by that hippie Ronald Reagan - requires prosecution of those who commit torture. A law that Obama has spent 4 years violating by protecting Bushco torturers from prosecution. Then there's the warrantless wiretapping, lying us into 2 wars, violations of the War Powers Act.
You "but he broke the laaaaaw" guys are all a bunch of fucking hacks. You complain about how Manning broke the law, while ignoring the lawbreaking that Manning revealed. You bleat about how Manning violated the UCMJ, ignoring that the UCMJ prohibits unlawful command influence and requires that trials should take place within 120 days. Manning was held for several times that number before ever seeing the inside of a courtroom.