Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Luminous Animal

(27,310 posts)
Mon Dec 23, 2013, 12:34 PM Dec 2013

Rolling Stone: Barrett Brown Faces 105 Years in Jail. But no one can figure out what law he broke.

Introducing America's least likely political prisoner:

http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/barrett-brown-faces-105-years-in-jail-20130905

Encountering Barrett Brown's story in passing, it is tempting to group him with other Anonymous associates who have popped up in the news for cutting pleas and changing sides. Brown's case, however, is a thing apart. Although he knew some of those involved in high-profile "hacktivism," he is no hacker. His situation is closer to the runaway prosecution that destroyed Aaron Swartz, the programmer-activist who committed suicide in the face of criminal charges similar to those now being leveled at Brown. But unlike Swartz, who illegally downloaded a large cache of academic articles, Brown never broke into a server; he never even leaked a document. His primary laptop, sought in two armed FBI raids, was a miniature Sony netbook that he used for legal communication, research and an obscene amount of video-game playing. The most serious charges against him relate not to hacking or theft, but to copying and pasting a link to data that had been hacked and released by others.

"What is most concerning about Barrett's case is the disconnect between his conduct and the charged crime," says Ghappour. "He copy-pasted a publicly available link containing publicly available data that he was researching in his capacity as a journalist. The charges require twisting the relevant statutes beyond recognition and have serious implications for journalists as well as academics. Who's allowed to look at document dumps?"

Brown's case is a bellwether for press freedoms in the new century, where hacks and leaks provide some of our only glimpses into the technologies and policies of an increasingly privatized national security-and-surveillance state. What Brown did through his organization Project PM was attempt to expand these peepholes. He did this by leading group investigations into the world of private intelligence and cybersecurity contracting, a $56 billion industry that consumes 70 percent of the U.S. intelligence budget.

"Barrett was an investigative journalist who was merely doing his professional duty," says Christophe Deloire of Reporters Without Borders. "The sentence that he is facing is absurd and dangerous."



65 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Rolling Stone: Barrett Brown Faces 105 Years in Jail. But no one can figure out what law he broke. (Original Post) Luminous Animal Dec 2013 OP
The one word summation: JEB Dec 2013 #1
I was going to write that there are no words for this, but you're right. woo me with science Dec 2013 #49
Where all members of Anonymous belong. nt politichew Dec 2013 #2
Too bad, when they catch one, more take their place. The more they try to destroy freedoms the more sabrina 1 Dec 2013 #4
SO "BRILLIANT" politichew Dec 2013 #7
Senior strategy officer? Really?? starroute Dec 2013 #23
What utter nonsense, seriously. Clearly you did not read the article or for that matter, know sabrina 1 Dec 2013 #36
Either you didn't read the article or you're cruel beyond comprehension DisgustipatedinCA Dec 2013 #5
Post removed Post removed Dec 2013 #8
Either read the article or continue to look like a moron DisgustipatedinCA Dec 2013 #11
It's a whitewashing of his association with a cyber terrorist organization. nt politichew Dec 2013 #15
The USA ...IS a terrorist organization! L0oniX Dec 2013 #32
What crime did he commit? I tweet and tetweet anon posts regularly Luminous Animal Dec 2013 #35
I'm sorry, how many people have died as a result of Anonymous' hacks? NuclearDem Dec 2013 #12
Oh no, terrrooorrr! Hissyspit Dec 2013 #26
Disgusting for so many reasons. NuclearDem Dec 2013 #9
What's disgusting is their irregard for the rule of law and targeting of military families. nt politichew Dec 2013 #10
Good God, really? NuclearDem Dec 2013 #14
You play with fire, you get burned. politichew Dec 2013 #16
We can certainly tell which side of the Authoritarian line you're on. hobbit709 Dec 2013 #18
So someone who killed absolutely no one and caused no real lasting damage NuclearDem Dec 2013 #19
Actually they are, at least some of the time tkmorris Dec 2013 #22
Enjoy your stay. L0oniX Dec 2013 #33
irregard? irregard?!! frylock Dec 2013 #20
heh... progressoid Dec 2013 #25
Your misunderestimate of my strategery wee-wee'd up your refudiation...heh...heh.... n/t xocet Dec 2013 #60
Post ONE incident by Anon to back up that claim. I'll wait .... probably forever! sabrina 1 Dec 2013 #37
Where does Agent Mike belong? L0oniX Dec 2013 #34
And in place of the free press they are deliberately strangling, woo me with science Dec 2013 #48
Wow. Anonymous are my greatest hope. And you dis them? loudsue Dec 2013 #54
Nice, short and really clueless responses. Congrats. n-t Logical Dec 2013 #58
I acknowledge that I am no legal scholar .... etherealtruth Dec 2013 #3
'Everything changed after 9/11'. sabrina 1 Dec 2013 #6
Agreed! n/t etherealtruth Dec 2013 #13
When you threaten an FBI agent...and his kids...and post those threats to YouTube, msanthrope Dec 2013 #56
I missed that in the article ... etherealtruth Dec 2013 #57
Well..in your defense, the OP omitted the homophobic rant and the credit card hacking--- msanthrope Dec 2013 #59
Not to worry for our Constitution proscribes cruel and unusual punishment: wait, junior reminded us indepat Dec 2013 #17
Yes, Bush didn't like the Constution, but at least he was honest about why. sabrina 1 Dec 2013 #38
You are so right, Sabrina! n/t markpkessinger Dec 2013 #40
Maybe you and I could be at the fore-front of DUers voicing opposition to trashing our Constitution indepat Dec 2013 #41
I would be happy to do so. I do whenever I see it and sady I have over the past few years. sabrina 1 Dec 2013 #44
I certainly did with gusto when junior trashed our Constitution and feel BHO deserves no less as do indepat Dec 2013 #62
We all did when junior trashed it, but a few seem to have joined the trashing lately. It appears sabrina 1 Dec 2013 #63
He's screwed. progressoid Dec 2013 #21
Then We the People must rise to the occasion Demeter Dec 2013 #24
Two dates changed everything. 9/11 and 2008 Demo_Chris Dec 2013 #27
Never mind this, that duck dick said something ybbor Dec 2013 #28
Something creepy? n/t Egalitarian Thug Dec 2013 #30
The Ministry of Justice concerns itself with perfidy. DeSwiss Dec 2013 #29
I've been hoping this case would get some sunlight.... Th1onein Dec 2013 #31
Yes, it does, but if everyone rose up in his defense, they could do nothing. We have the power, but sabrina 1 Dec 2013 #39
Sadly...Yes. But, it won't last forever...and that's my hope. And, KoKo Dec 2013 #43
Thanks for Posting...this needed to be seen..! KoKo Dec 2013 #42
Mindcrime TransitJohn Dec 2013 #45
K & R dipsydoodle Dec 2013 #46
He posted a link to publicly available data, wtf is he in jail for?! uponit7771 Dec 2013 #47
But we still have coffee shops! woo me with science Dec 2013 #50
;) Luminous Animal Dec 2013 #65
"...step out of line, the man come and take you away" woo me with science Dec 2013 #51
More evidence of a Fascist America. Enthusiast Dec 2013 #52
K&R Solly Mack Dec 2013 #53
Y'all just don't understand the prosecutor's difficult job.. sendero Dec 2013 #55
K&R'd! snot Dec 2013 #61
HUGE K & R !!! WillyT Dec 2013 #64

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
49. I was going to write that there are no words for this, but you're right.
Tue Dec 24, 2013, 05:36 AM
Dec 2013

Last edited Tue Dec 24, 2013, 06:31 AM - Edit history (1)

There's a very good one.

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
4. Too bad, when they catch one, more take their place. The more they try to destroy freedoms the more
Mon Dec 23, 2013, 12:49 PM
Dec 2013

people rise up against them.

Anonymous is brilliant, they have struck fear into all the right people who have secrets to hide.

I wonder if they are not part of the good side of our government who have watched the corruption exploding but are not in a position to speak out without being silenced. Who knows? Whatever or whoever they are, they are a natural outgrowth of oppressive policies that restrict people's freedoms.

 

politichew

(230 posts)
7. SO "BRILLIANT"
Mon Dec 23, 2013, 12:54 PM
Dec 2013
I. Anonymous Conducts Personal Attacks on the U.S. Military Members

Barrett Brown, 29, calls himself senior strategy officer for the group. He recently was interviewed by MSNBC and explained why his group is looking to attack critical U.S. institutions. He states, "It's a guerrilla cyberwar — that’s what I call it. It's sort of an unconventional, asymmetrical act of warfare that we’ve involved in. And we didn’t necessarily start it. I mean, this fire has been burning."


http://www.dailytech.com/Anonymous+Vows+Personal+Attacks+on+US+Military+Families+War+on+US/article21087.htm

starroute

(12,977 posts)
23. Senior strategy officer? Really??
Mon Dec 23, 2013, 01:45 PM
Dec 2013

I just googled on it and that phrase has appeared exactly once in connection with Brown, in the March 2011 article that you quote. Brown is most often described as an unofficial or de facto spokesperson for Anonymous -- and he denies even that. (He also likes to pull people's chains.)

http://www.vice.com/en_ca/read/we-spoke-to-barrett-brown-from-prison

VICE: We have such little time, so let’s get right into it. A lot of people say that you’re the spokesperson for Anonymous. What do you say to that?
I’m not. For two years now I’ve denied that publicly. Every time I’m asked, it turns out that I’m not. The first thing people find when they Google me should be a D Magazine article in which I explained that. No one is the spokesperson for Anonymous. It doesn’t work that way. I wouldn’t want that position if it were a position.

I don’t necessarily agree with everything Anonymous does, I don’t necessarily like a lot of Anons. I was very supportive of the dynamics that Anonymous represents, I’m very much an advocate (and continue to be) of these new sorts of communities to express yourself on the internet and the next move I’ll be making is deploying some communities—a little more structured than Anons—to perpetuate themselves, and grow, while maintaining Anonymous’ core qualities. I’ve identified with Anonymous very closely for two years now, but one of the interesting things to me is how all the articles refer to me as the self-proclaimed spokesperson for Anonymous. They all copy off each other.

You did also call yourself Cobra Commander at one point.
Oh yeah, I called myself that after the NBC Nightly news called me the “underground commander in a new warfare.” Which is just a ridiculous thing to be called.


http://www.dmagazine.com/publications/d-magazine/2011/april/how-barrett-brown-helped-overthrow-the-government-of-tunisia

Anonymous is sometimes referred to in the mainstream media as a group or a collective—the Christian Science Monitor went with “a shadowy circle of activists”—but Anonymous, per se, doesn’t exist. It has no hierarchy, no leadership. So even though Bloomberg and others have called Brown a spokesman for the group (which, again, isn’t a group at all), Brown denies having any position within Anonymous.

“Anonymous is a process more than it is a thing,” Brown tells Isikoff. “I can’t speak on behalf of Anonymous, because there’s no one who can authorize me to do that.”

When he explains Anonymous to a newbie, Brown relishes the inevitable confusion and will toggle between sincerity and irony to heighten it. Until you’ve spent some time with him, it’s hard to know what to believe. When you’ve gotten to know him better, it’s even harder.

“You have to remember,” Brown says, reclining in the green lawn chair, one arm slung over its back, a cigarette dangling between his fingers, “we’re the Freemasons. Only, we’ve got a sense of humor. You have to wield power with a sense of humor. Otherwise you become the FBI.”

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
36. What utter nonsense, seriously. Clearly you did not read the article or for that matter, know
Mon Dec 23, 2013, 06:58 PM
Dec 2013

anything about Anonymous which would be the antithesis of what you are claiming.

But I do love how they create confusion in those who support the 'security state' which is why I would not be surprised if some of them are part of the good people in our government. I think they relish the attempt to find out who they are, but anyone who has followed their more important work has to wonder how they know as much as they do.

Response to DisgustipatedinCA (Reply #5)

 

DisgustipatedinCA

(12,530 posts)
11. Either read the article or continue to look like a moron
Mon Dec 23, 2013, 12:57 PM
Dec 2013

Pride in one' sown ignorance is something I've never understood.

 

NuclearDem

(16,184 posts)
14. Good God, really?
Mon Dec 23, 2013, 01:02 PM
Dec 2013

Anonymous goes after the inverted justice system, corrupt capitalist institutions, groups waging war on whistleblowers, and child pornography rings, all with zero loss of life or lasting damage to anyone, and you come up with one example of some people in a free association group doing something shady?

Whatever. Barrett Brown gets 105 years, and the people Anonymous targeted with minor inconveniences for their roles in war crimes, growing the police state, and screwing the 99% get off scot free.

 

politichew

(230 posts)
16. You play with fire, you get burned.
Mon Dec 23, 2013, 01:04 PM
Dec 2013


They are not civil rights leaders.

Stop trying to cast them that way.
 

NuclearDem

(16,184 posts)
19. So someone who killed absolutely no one and caused no real lasting damage
Mon Dec 23, 2013, 01:14 PM
Dec 2013

should get 105 years in prison?

Jamie Dimon, Dick Cheney, and James Clapper are walking around free men, but when a group uses ultimately harmless tactics to minorly inconvenience them they should get the book thrown at them?

Whatever. It's clear what side of this fight you're on.

tkmorris

(11,138 posts)
22. Actually they are, at least some of the time
Mon Dec 23, 2013, 01:25 PM
Dec 2013

Steubenville for example. I'm not sure why you love governmental and police overreach so much, but you'll find that isn't a particularly popular view around here. Which you well know.

frylock

(34,825 posts)
20. irregard? irregard?!!
Mon Dec 23, 2013, 01:15 PM
Dec 2013

the adults are trying to have a conversation here. maybe you can take your imaginary words and impress someone elsewhere.

progressoid

(50,196 posts)
25. heh...
Mon Dec 23, 2013, 02:21 PM
Dec 2013
"'Refudiate,' 'misunderestimate,' 'wee-wee'd up.' English is a living language. Shakespeare liked to coin new words too. Got to celebrate it!"

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
48. And in place of the free press they are deliberately strangling,
Tue Dec 24, 2013, 05:35 AM
Dec 2013

we get a constant, reeking stream of corporate-fascist propaganda.

All governments that turn authoritarian find people by the hundreds who do not hesitate to sell their morality and human decency in order to shill for policies that exploit, imprison, impoverish, or murder human beings by the millions for the profit and power of a few.

Some may eventually find their conscience and regret their complicity. In general, though, I suspect that this line of work attracts those who rarely struggle with such internal voices in the first place.

States that build surveillance machines also build propaganda machines.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4216987
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3189367

etherealtruth

(22,165 posts)
3. I acknowledge that I am no legal scholar ....
Mon Dec 23, 2013, 12:49 PM
Dec 2013

but, WTF?

I can't understand what this man did wrong that would even approach being charged with a crime (I know that is the point of the article) ... I am trying to figure out at what point the criminal justice system has been allowed to "make shit up" as they go along?

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
6. 'Everything changed after 9/11'.
Mon Dec 23, 2013, 12:52 PM
Dec 2013

How they have used that tragedy to roll back democracy is a crime in itself.

 

msanthrope

(37,549 posts)
56. When you threaten an FBI agent...and his kids...and post those threats to YouTube,
Tue Dec 24, 2013, 10:43 AM
Dec 2013

you are probably going to be charged with a crime.

etherealtruth

(22,165 posts)
57. I missed that in the article ...
Tue Dec 24, 2013, 10:47 AM
Dec 2013

I guess I didn't read carefully. I would hope threatening anyone and their family ... and post threats, your actions would be addressed legally

 

msanthrope

(37,549 posts)
59. Well..in your defense, the OP omitted the homophobic rant and the credit card hacking---
Tue Dec 24, 2013, 11:13 AM
Dec 2013

I would be banned if I repeated here what Mr. Brown said, and if I were writing a sympathetic article or an OP about an 'investigative journalist' I might conceal the fact that he passed on people's credit card information by passing links to the hacked information...... something no legitimate news source would do.

anytime a federal prisoner claims they don't know why they're in jail that means they're too stupid to read their indictment or think that you are.

indepat

(20,899 posts)
17. Not to worry for our Constitution proscribes cruel and unusual punishment: wait, junior reminded us
Mon Dec 23, 2013, 01:05 PM
Dec 2013

the Constitution is just a piece of paper, so maybe Barrett Brown really is in a pickle.

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
38. Yes, Bush didn't like the Constution, but at least he was honest about why.
Mon Dec 23, 2013, 07:10 PM
Dec 2013

As he said,i he could be a dictator if it wasn't for the Constitution or words to that effect. I've actually begun to see a the Constitution being trashed right here on DU lately. It's creeping into our party now.

indepat

(20,899 posts)
41. Maybe you and I could be at the fore-front of DUers voicing opposition to trashing our Constitution
Mon Dec 23, 2013, 08:04 PM
Dec 2013

indepat

(20,899 posts)
62. I certainly did with gusto when junior trashed our Constitution and feel BHO deserves no less as do
Tue Dec 24, 2013, 04:44 PM
Dec 2013

the so-called felonious ones on the SC.

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
63. We all did when junior trashed it, but a few seem to have joined the trashing lately. It appears
Tue Dec 24, 2013, 08:16 PM
Dec 2013

that some were not so much concerned about the Constitution after all, it seems it was all about politics for them.

These have been very revealing years for many of us who actually MEANT it when we attacked those who were vioting their oaths of office.. I guess I thought we were the good guys who stood up for what was right. I have learned not to be so naive anymore, which is probably a good thing.

progressoid

(50,196 posts)
21. He's screwed.
Mon Dec 23, 2013, 01:22 PM
Dec 2013

For whatever reason, the powers that be don't want him out there, and they'll use what ever means to make sure he's finished.



 

Demo_Chris

(6,234 posts)
27. Two dates changed everything. 9/11 and 2008
Mon Dec 23, 2013, 02:26 PM
Dec 2013

9/11 because it was the starting gun in the war of terror, signaling our willing abandonment of the rule of law and constitutional rights.

2008, because that's when our party stopped caring.

 

DeSwiss

(27,137 posts)
29. The Ministry of Justice concerns itself with perfidy.
Mon Dec 23, 2013, 03:14 PM
Dec 2013
''The Ministry of Peace concerns itself with war, the Ministry of Truth with lies, the Ministry of Love with torture and the Ministry of Plenty with starvation. These contradictions are not accidental, nor do they result from from ordinary hypocrisy: they are deliberate exercises in doublethink.'' ~George Orwell, 1984

- The Banality of Evil, indeed. They don't even have the intelligence to come up with their own script.

K&R
[center][/center]

Th1onein

(8,514 posts)
31. I've been hoping this case would get some sunlight....
Mon Dec 23, 2013, 03:41 PM
Dec 2013

It's amazing what they are doing to this journalist. It sends a chill through journalism, the world over.

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
39. Yes, it does, but if everyone rose up in his defense, they could do nothing. We have the power, but
Mon Dec 23, 2013, 07:14 PM
Dec 2013

partisanship and apathy prevent the people from using their power. However, throughout history it has been the same way until things reach a critical point when the criminals go just a bit too far and that is when things begin to change. Too bad so damage is usually done before that happens. You'd think we would have learned by now, but propaganda works still on far too many people.

KoKo

(84,711 posts)
43. Sadly...Yes. But, it won't last forever...and that's my hope. And,
Mon Dec 23, 2013, 08:53 PM
Dec 2013

as you say in your post....We hope for better when they go...TOO FAR...and for sure it's looking like that more and more these days!

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
50. But we still have coffee shops!
Tue Dec 24, 2013, 05:38 AM
Dec 2013

Last edited Tue Dec 24, 2013, 07:32 AM - Edit history (1)

People can still post on the internet!

We don't have a police state!

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
51. "...step out of line, the man come and take you away"
Tue Dec 24, 2013, 07:35 AM
Dec 2013

There's something happening here
What it is ain't exactly clear
There's a man with a gun over there
Telling me I got to beware

I think it's time we stop, children, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down

There's battle lines being drawn
Nobody's right if everybody's wrong
Young people speaking their minds
Getting so much resistance from behind

It's time we stop, hey, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down

What a field-day for the heat
A thousand people in the street
Singing songs and carrying signs
Mostly say, hooray for our side

It's s time we stop, hey, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down

Paranoia strikes deep
Into your life it will creep
It starts when you're always afraid
You step out of line, the man come and take you away

We better stop, hey, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down
Stop, hey, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down
Stop, now, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down
Stop, children, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down

sendero

(28,552 posts)
55. Y'all just don't understand the prosecutor's difficult job..
Tue Dec 24, 2013, 09:04 AM
Dec 2013

... "they can't take a case to court unless it is a slam dunk conviction".

That's the BULLSHIT I get around here when I complain that not one bankster has been even subjected to a trial. That selective prosecution is effectively justice thwarted.

Excuses, excuses and more excuses, but when they have a message to send that they WANT to send they will damn well prosecute whether there is much evidence of a crime at all.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Rolling Stone: Barrett Br...