A true American Patriot.

[markw]

No matter your belief on the war, leaks of this magnitude cost both American and Afghani lives. Pvt. Manning should be tried as a traitor, IMNSHO.

"(CNN) -- (Adrian Lamo,) A California hacker said he doesn't regret going to federal officials to show them alleged confessions an Army private made about leaking more than 90,000 documents that reveal secret information about U.S. war strategy.
...
A superstar in the hacking world, Lamo was convicted in 2004 on one count of computer crimes after breaking into the New York Times, Microsoft and Lexis-Nexis computer systems. Lamo has also reportedly breached Excite@Home's company network and broken into the internal networks of Yahoo! and MCI WorldCom. Wired magazine wrote that after Lamo would crack their security, he would tell the companies about their vulnerabilities, free of charge."

For the whole link, click here.

 

[Nugu]

I have conflicting feelings about this whole thing.

On one hand I think we should be able to know about whats going on over there beyond the tear jerker stories we're fed by the media.

But I also think there should of been more caution in releasing the data on wikileaks side. Maybe screening the data, or giving a advance copy to the Govt.


I don't know. I do however hope they don't go too hard on him as even they (the military) knew he was overstressed to the point of being discharged. You'd think they'd be smart enough to not tell someone with access to sensitive information they're fired without removing access.

 

[Nemo128]

I'm with ya on this one mark.

 

[highfigh]

People who care more about concealing their sources than about their country's security and success of the war effort should be imprisoned. The saying "Loose lips sink ships", used during WWI and WWII, is a good way to keep info from falling into enemy hands. Gerry Rivers, AKA Geraldo Rivera, drew the position of US tank forces in the sand when he was on camera during the early part of the Gulf War and as soon as someone saw what he was stupidly doing, they walked over and erased it with their foot. Rivera hadn't thought of the possibility that the other side may be watching the same broadcast and should have been sent back to the US immediately.

There's a reason some information isn't made public- you don't tell the enemy what you're planning to do unless you're using the information as a threat, as was done with the first and second nukes. The media will skew the info in the way that works for their cause- usually making it as subjective as possible and not actually reporting. They inject their opinions as often as possible and it's the fault of the press that people spit on, threw things at and generally pissed on the soldiers who returned from Vietnam. It was the Sec'y of Defense, Johnson and many of the top military leaders who should have been pissed on, IMO.

I think this is treason, too. I doubt anyone will be tried for it, even though it has already caused this month to be the most costly, in terms of the lives of our forces, since we went to Afghanistan.

 

[Chu Gai]

I commend Lamo for what he did. While information such as Iran disrupting efforts in Iraq or Afghanistan and Pakistan playing both ends against the middle is nothing new, IMO it never received the attention it deserved in either the press or the US Congress. So even though the information that was leaked may not have been harmful, the very fact that individuals would violate their sworn duty on such a scale is appalling. I support the most vigorous prosecution of these individuals by the military and would have no objection if the sentence was death.

 

[GO-NAD!]

Amongst the documents leaked, it appears that there was at least some raw, unconfirmed data. And, it has caused a bit of a stink up here. During the Battle of Panjwaii, in 2006, there was a skirmish that resulted in the deaths of 4 Canadian soldiers. One of the leaked documents claimed that they died during a blue-on-blue incident - an American aircraft supposedly bombed a building they were in. However, after the battle, it was announced that they had been killed by Taliban bullets and/or RPGs.

After the leaking of these documents, our government opposition parties started to accuse the goverment of a "cover-up" and that Canadians were being lied to about the war. The media also played its part by playing up this "information" because it was controversy.

Only after the comrades of these 4 soldiers, who were right there when they died, came forward to say no, that's wrong, they died from the battle with the Taliban, not friendly fire, has the hullabaloo started to die down.

All this controversy served to do, was re-traumatize the families of those who died, and nothing else. The government oppostion and the media couldn't be bothered to do a bit of fact checking before playing up this nonsense.

BTW, total casualties from that battle: 16 Canadian and 2 American KIA, several (uncountable) hundred Taliban KIA. Message that you cannot go toe-to-toe with us - priceless....

 

[highfigh]

I don't think a government should lie to an ally about what happens on the battlefield. However, wars are always fought partially with propaganda, whether at home or where the action is. I also don't think the families of the fallen should be lied to, either. The problem is that people can't keep their mouths shut, regardless of where they are.

 

[highfigh]

Amongst the documents leaked, it appears that there was at least some raw, unconfirmed data. And, it has caused a bit of a stink up here. During the Battle of Panjwaii, in 2006, there was a skirmish that resulted in the deaths of 4 Canadian soldiers. One of the leaked documents claimed that they died during a blue-on-blue incident - an American aircraft supposedly bombed a building they were in. However, after the battle, it was announced that they had been killed by Taliban bullets and/or RPGs.

After the leaking of these documents, our government opposition parties started to accuse the goverment of a "cover-up" and that Canadians were being lied to about the war. The media also played its part by playing up this "information" because it was controversy.

Only after the comrades of these 4 soldiers, who were right there when they died, came forward to say no, that's wrong, they died from the battle with the Taliban, not friendly fire, has the hullabaloo started to die down.

All this controversy served to do, was re-traumatize the families of those who died, and nothing else. The government oppostion and the media couldn't be bothered to do a bit of fact checking before playing up this nonsense.

BTW, total casualties from that battle: 16 Canadian and 2 American KIA, several (uncountable) hundred Taliban KIA. Message that you cannot go toe-to-toe with us - priceless....

It's too bad there's no rule that's unwritten, but universally accepted, stating that anyone fighting in a war is required to wear the uniform of their country. If that was the case, this fight would have ended long ago.

 

[s162216]

Gerry Rivers, AKA Geraldo Rivera, drew the position of US tank forces in the sand when he was on camera during the early part of the Gulf War and as soon as someone saw what he was stupidly doing, they walked over and erased it with their foot. Rivera hadn't thought of the possibility that the other side may be watching the same broadcast and should have been sent back to the US immediately.

In the Falklands war, the BBC World Service actually announced that the Parachute Regiment was going to assault Goose Green a day before it was scheduled! The British commanders were listening to it and were so furious that the Colonel in charge threaterned to sue the BBC and the government. Luckily though although the Argentines were listening in, they decided it was just a bluff as they reasoned no country would purposely tell their enemies what they were going to do.

 

[highfigh]

Luckily though although the Argentines were listening in, they decided it was just a bluff as they reasoned no country would purposely tell their enemies what they were going to do.

...unless they make a clanking sound when they walk.

It's bad enough when someone from outside can fool the leaders enough as a spy that they aren't suspected but when the info comes from inside, it's treason. Spying has been done for thousands of years and I have to think that some degree of it is expected, which is why many layers of security clearance exist. 90K documents couldn't have been accessible to someone who's at the bottom of the heap, could they? If so, I hate to think of the possibilities.

 

[lsiberian]

I'd blow the whistle on the private for sure, but I'd do it with secrecy.