Wired Releases Full Manning/Lamo Chat Logs 307
bill_mcgonigle writes "After more than a year, Wired has finally released the (nearly) full chat logs between Adrian Lamo and Bradley Manning. Glen Greenwald provides analysis of what Wired previously left out. Greenwald writes: 'Lamo lied to and manipulated Manning by promising him the legal protections of a journalist-source and priest-penitent relationship, and independently assured him that their discussions were "never to be published" and were not "for print." Knowing this, Wired hid from the public this part of their exchange, published the chat in violation of Lamo's clear not-for-publication pledges, allowed Lamo to be quoted repeatedly in the media over the next year as some sort of credible and trustworthy source driving reporting on the Manning case.'"
Who are these people? (Score:4, Insightful)
The summary should have at least once sentence saying who these people are. I don't recognize the names "Adrian Lamo" and "Brandley Manning".
While we don't need the whole detailed story, at least some context would be helpful. Even if I had read about these people and whatever shenanigans they're involved in earlier, I might not remember it now.
Reward him (Score:3, Insightful)
Let's just hope his Medal of Honor won't be posthumous...
Facts: Lets be clear on some facts here (Score:3, Insightful)
Nothing Manning released has been shown to result in ANY injuries or fatalities. Almost all of the data was 4+ months old. However it DID show a lot of reprehensible behavior on the part of the US government, assist several nations in mending hurt ties with each other and generally show that the US is not being as transparent as it should be with its people. There was far too much information marked top secret for no true reason other than protecting the image of certain diplomats doing stuff they shouldn't be.
Does this mean I support the release of top secret information? NO. Would I have done what manning did? No, but I'm glad he did. It gave the american people a better idea of how their government is acting. I was not proud to be an american for a while.
Re:Blah Blah Blah (Score:3, Insightful)
Not only did Manning do nothing wrong, he did democracy a HUGE favor. Maybe even bought it an extended life.
I have absolutely no respect for Wired, fuck them.
Re:Ha ha (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm no US citizen, but I was under the impression that American soldiers' loyalty was to the US Constitution, and not to any individual person(s).
Re:What A Disgusting Comment (Score:4, Insightful)
Also, Manning did not betray this country. He betrayed the Bush and Obama administrations.
Re:Ha ha (Score:5, Insightful)
Absolutely. The President also swears loyalty to the Constitution. The oaths are supposed to emphasize that the US is a country ruled by laws rather than men.
However, there's lots of evidence that this is no longer the case. For instance, Bradley Manning's confinement is violating the spirit if not the letter of at least 3 of the 10 amendments that make up the Bill of Rights:
Fifth Amendment - depriving him of liberty without due process, quite possibly attempting to compel him to incriminate himself
Sixth Amendment - depriving him of a speedy and public trial by jury, failing to inform him of the charges against him, failing to allow him to confront the witnesses and evidence against him, and limiting his access to counsel (including numerous attempts to spy on his lawyer)
Eighth Amendment - cruel and unusual punishment (specifically, borderline torture according to most international organizations that study that sort of thing)
But it doesn't matter, because those responsible for prosecuting crimes have decided to look the other way on government misdeeds, and the courts have blocked nearly all lawsuits pertaining to government misdeeds on the grounds that they might compromise national security.
Re:So? (Score:5, Insightful)
My expectations for anything resembling serious journalism are nil, roughly on par with my journalist expectations from HallMark cards. However, my past experience with them was always that they were insufferably fluffy and vacuous; in a useless; but more or less benign way. Their treatment of the Lamo/Manning transcripts, though, appears to be oozing pure evil and utter dishonesty from every pore.
Re:What A Disgusting Comment (Score:5, Insightful)
Get off your high horse and pull your head out of your arse, Manning did this country a service on the order of the Pentagon Papers release. Some people actually want to know what our country is doing to others as opposed to burying our heads in the sand.
Re:Oath (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Swore to obey? (Score:5, Insightful)
The trouble is that the way the military works, if you choose to disobey an order on moral grounds, you have a steep hill to climb to prove that you were justified in doing so. And by the time you climb it, you've been punished heavily for disobedience.
I don't really know what the solution is there - if the hill wasn't steep then you'd get dipshits disobeying orders because they don't feel like it.
what's not to get? (Score:5, Insightful)
Manning did what he did for idealistic reasons. Also, he did not lie to anyone (that I know of). He hoped his actions would lead to positive global change.
Adrian Lamo did what he did for the greater good of Adrian Lamo. He lied Manning to get more info and ultimately betrayed him.
Wired participated and perpetuated these lies and gained publicity as a result of them.
Re:Facts: Lets be clear on some facts here (Score:5, Insightful)
There was far too much information marked top secret for no true reason other than protecting the image of certain diplomats doing stuff they shouldn't be.
And this terrible crime is truly worth having our clearanced military personelle deciding that its time to violate his oaths and divulge whatever information he saw fit-- even that which shows no "horrible crimes"-- to the entire world.
Truly we want a vigilante system where oaths arent worth the paper theyre printed on.
Re:Facts: Lets be clear on some facts here (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually, the full version of the helicopter video was released at the same time.
And you ignore the interviews with the members of that very squadron who say such things were common place. One of the interviews was the guy who was saving the kid.
Finally, I bet the people who were most scared were the ones whose improper behavior was being shielded by the US Government. Look what the Tunisians did when they found out about the extravagant lifestyle of Ben Ali and his family.
Re:Facts: Lets be clear on some facts here (Score:5, Insightful)
If you're so hard up on oaths, let's give Obama and Bush the same treatment we've given Manning. They have both utterly violated their oath to protect the Constitution.
Until people at the top start going to jail for their crimes, I can't hold anyone beneath them responsible. I'd much rather the military be ineffectual due to no one following orders than to have a well oiled machine under the command of criminal thugs like Bush and Obama.
Re:Netcraft Confirms It (Score:2, Insightful)
When you are forced to work for a corrupt organization are you bound by an oath to the same? You know you are not! History has told you,
Re:Bye bye Wired (Score:1, Insightful)
Bradley Manning, on the other hand, has been suffering a character assassination from day one.
That's because, from "day one," he deliberately acted with outside parties to copy and distribute hundreds of thousands of sensitive documents, without any thought about consequences he couldn't possibly foresee. He lied, violated his oath, endangered people, programs, and processes that involve untold thousands of man-hours to mop up, and he did it all because he was "in a bad place," emotionally. There's no character assassination involved here, there's only character suicide.
Re:Netcraft Confirms It (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Should have continued to withhold. (Score:5, Insightful)
And [Manning was] a traitor. Don't forget that part.
I'll go 10 to 1 that you would've been on the side of the British, cheering whenever one of the traitor colonists was caught and trussed up.
Is there space in that head thing of yours for the idea that Our Country may require a course correction? And that those who cause such a correction are not automatically wrong?
Re:Oath (Score:5, Insightful)
All of the cover-up went straight to the top and everyone covered for each other. That was for the death of one (famous) soldier. I don't know what else is in the leaked Manning documents but just the Iraqi reporters being attacked by helicopter gunships was enough to disgust me.
I don't necessarily agree with what Manning did but I don't disagree either. About the only thing I *DO* know is that he is utterly screwed.
Re:Netcraft Confirms It (Score:5, Insightful)
"I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic"
Mission Accomplished. (Especially the "against domestic enemies" of the Constitution part.)
Re:Oath (Score:4, Insightful)
O RLY (Score:5, Insightful)
[citation needed]. Even the Pentagon admits that there's no evidence anyone was endangered by this leak. So how about naming some of the "people, programs, and processes" that were endangered? I mean, besides the ones that involve the US gov't lying to the American people and then covering it up. I'm sure THOSE programs really were endangered.