While I disagree with what Lamo did, Manning is an idiot for bragging about what he did to anyone, and the "Russian roulette" argument is perhaps sound.
I'm tempted to agree with Lamo. It doesn't sound like Manning was thinking carefully about what information he released or why. He was just a lost soul who found a way to feel important and wield power against a system he felt trapped in. If he really had an agenda to expose U.S. wrongdoing or give Americans a better understanding of the nature of war and the consequences of projecting American power overseas, then I would be all behind him. If he was thinking that carefully, though, he wouldn't have needlessly incriminated himself to a near-stranger.
There is no doubt that Manning was stupid, but he's a 22 YO kid. Lamo made no attempt to talk the kid down: he just sold him out to a military that runs secret prisons, tortures, and claims the right to be able to assassinate its own citizens.
My guess is Lamo, despite his argument that there was morality behind what he did, sold the kid out to protect himself. Given Lamo's lax sentence for past crimes (6 months house arrest), I'd guess he made an agreement to inform in the future.
It isn't like Lamo sold out a fellow hacker; Manning had special access, and probably obtained the leaked information using that, rather than any particular skills.
That phone call to Lamo was tantamount to "Hi. You don't know me, but you're now an accessory to treason." Already convicted felon or not, nobody needs that kind of turd dropped right in the middle of their life.
I agree completely. Except for one thing: "Already convicted felon or not" makes it sound as if being convicted of felony A makes it easier to handle being accused of felony B. But the opposite is the case.
Lamo could easily have been looking at a scenario where he got far worse punishment than the actual perp. Getting a conviction against a known felon is so, so easy. It's not inconceivable that he would have ended up taking the fall. Just because it happens in spy novels doesn't mean it can't happen.
As for the ethics of turning Manning over to the tender mercies of the US Government: no matter what you may think of the ethics of commiting the particular crime that Manning is accused of, there are limits to how far down the cliff you should follow a suicidal person. When you get a cold call from someone you do not know to tell you about some serious Federal crimes, there are several possibilities. One is that the caller is the real thing. Another, far more likely, is that he's mentally ill or trying to punk or scam you. Yet another is that he's a government agent trying to entrap you. But one thing is for sure: there is nothing that you, the world, or the "hacker" community will lose by turning this guy in. He's obviously an order of magnitude too indiscreet to be a good spy, he's going to succeed in getting himself caught any second now, and the only question is whether you're going down with him.
It's the Obama administration claiming this right, not the military. It's the CIA that has been accused of torture prisons (and it was Al Gore who had no problem with rendition), not the military. And the Congress really should provide explicit guidance on what is and is not torture, rather than ducking responsibility so that the military can do its job.
I can see dumping the gun camera footage. It may have been principled. The government, after all, chose to ignore what looked to me like an eminently fair FOIA request from Reuters, so it kind of deserved to get p0wned by the Annie Lennox lookalike who runs wikileaks. But a lot of the rest of it just seems like a kid throwing his fellow soldiers under a bus, weakening his country, and being a punk. I'd have done the same thing Lamo did, once I knew the extent of what Manning had done.
I have to agree with that. I always expected military intelligence to be more careful with who has access to what. I am disappointed a guy like Manning was given access to as much as he claims (specially the diplomatic cables).
That said, I am happy the info was leaked. I only hope there are more leakers. I don't care whether they are patriots or idiots. I prefer the patriot ones, but we can't afford to be very picky.
The effectiveness of agents in his position depends totally on how much people trust him and his department. Betraying that trust reduces the effectiveness of him and his fellow agents.
If only Lamo knew how to channel his hacking capability and work with authorities first before performing the breach. Of course, kids with that ability could have done it through sheer excitement. It's hard to judge someone easily when we don't really know what's going on with their lives on a day-to-day basis. What only shows up on the headlines are one of 365 days where they caused social turmoil.
Also the government really threw the book at Lamo for being an Aspergers kid who didn't know better then openly hack into websites. It is quite understandable that he would immediately turn over anything even remotely suspicious after that experience.
you would have trouble finding someone who spends more time manicuring their public image. check the recent edits on the wikipedia article about him if you don't believe me.
the entire story breaking was based on this principle. he thought it would be best if he basically made a press statement via wired column through a friend who would say all the right things, a day before an official statement by the military. if anyone wants more examples they are not hard to find. now the story is actually about him and not the leaker in question. this kid should run for office.
Boring prose. I couldn't make it to the end. Journalism should not try to engage readers at the expense of telling news. Where is the news in the first sentences?
