Hacker Turns in Army Leaker
[Guest post by DRJ]
A hacker has turned in an Army analyst who reportedly bragged about leaking voluminous intelligence information, including an Iraq War video made famous on Wikileaks:
“[Former high-profile hacker Adrian] Lamo says that he was responsible for reporting Specialist (SPC) Brad Manning to the military authorities after the analyst boasted to him that he had handed over thousands of classified documents and classified military video to whistle-blower site Wikileaks.
Lamo feared being arrested himself and was concerned about the impact of the leaks on national security. As noted in the linked article, he also struggled with his decision to turn Manning in.
If this is true, I blame Manning for what he did. Period. But there may also be some blame for a Watergate media that has romanticized whistleblowers and an educational system that puts individuality and “marching to your own drummer” above responsibility. There is a place for whistleblowers and individuality but they don’t always trump loyalty.
– DRJ
Manning deserves prosecution.
BUT, how the heck did he have access to all of that? What happened to security controls enforcing “need to know?” One of our tips of the day on the government network (non classified) I use is that we must report access to any data we don’t need to do our job. No way he needed access to all of those dip communications from State.
There’s more problem here than one “leaker.”
Comment by Dan S (b5ccb6) — 6/7/2010 @ 1:10 pm
Sounds like Scully and Mulder had the hacker over a barrel.
Comment by Federale (a589e9) — 6/7/2010 @ 1:21 pm
> that puts individuality and “marching to your own drummer” above responsibility.
And yet they still manage to promote zombielike mindless conformity and unthinking obedience to official diktat. Bizarre how they’ve managed to meld those two together.
Basically, you’re to have no large group allegiance of significance (no nation, no religion)
The whistleblower mentality has its place — if the video in question was the norm, and not an exception (much like Abu Ghirab) then one can justify it as an action. If it’s an exception or an accident, then its damage to relations is greater than its importance as public knowledge.
Comment by IgotBupkis (79d71d) — 6/7/2010 @ 1:30 pm
I think he’s auditioning for a new job at the NYT – they specialize in this kind of stuff, after all. However, the job will never materialize, since he’ll be spending most of his remaining days at Leavenworth.
Couldn’t he be charged with treason in this kind of case? A firing squad would be too good for him.
Comment by Dmac (3d61d9) — 6/7/2010 @ 2:24 pm
“Aiding and abetting the enemy in a time of … police action.” Don’t see that listed here, you’re free to go. Might be wise to hide.
Comment by htom (412a17) — 6/7/2010 @ 2:35 pm
If his boasting is true, and I think there is some reason to suspect it’s not, imagine if this had happened under Bush and Rice. Methinks he would have been egged on, rather than turned in.
Comment by starboardhelm (94c0da) — 6/7/2010 @ 3:33 pm
Comment by htom — 6/7/2010 @ 2:35 pm
In case you missed it, Congress in the Fall of 2001, passed the Authorization for the Use of Military Force in Afghanistan; which for all practical purposes, is a Declaration of War – there is no prescribed form for such a declaration in the Constitution, so the results are what matter, not the wording.
Comment by AD - RtR/OS! (f11dd4) — 6/7/2010 @ 6:24 pm
AD – RtR/OS — I did not know that (the consequence.) His lawyers will claim there’s a difference, I’m sure. Assuming that he’s charged with anything.
Comment by htom (412a17) — 6/8/2010 @ 6:04 am