Re: Pentagon linked to shaming attack on RMS
* Federico Leva (Nemo) [2021-04-08 14:55]: > I agree it's unlikely that someone at the Pentagon would have interest in > arranging any of this _ ___ _ | | / _ \| | | | | | | | | | |__| |_| | |___ |_\___/|_| There is no thing that Pentagon does not have interest in. It is good if you review few past decades of world events. There are strategies for future, probably for next 50-100 years. I can in this moment think of spying as a major tool. We can think of PRISM, Snowden, we can think of CIA planting backdoors, Intel management engine, we can think of crypto limitations on export, we can think that future spying is prime defense for every Orvellian government, destroying free software goes along the strategy very well, and slowly slowly encryption will not be any more private, there will be backdoors for governments and private corporations. Of course I cannot know that, I don't work in Pentagon, but I can observe what is going on. , but we've seen weirder things happen, e.g. at the > Open Technology Fund. USDS has hired many hackers and has been loud about > it. > https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-biden-digital-service-idINKBN29Q08Q Our apologies, the content cannot be accessed, Reuters allows me to read it only if I don't use Tor. Maybe that is one of reasons why defense is interested in destroying good ideas we spread in free software. > I believe a former president explained in a recent book of theirs what the > idea was. Cf. > https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/viewFile/7409/2220 I am not going to read that much of politics. > For this reason, while it's probably unwise to ask any USA federal > authority whether they know about certain actions by one of their > employees/whatever ostensibly conducted in their private time, it > might be fair game to file FOIA requests to find out whether there > was any unseemly coordination or use of government resources. That is one good way. Provided one trusts the government to provide information and to record information in certain place. Which one cannot do, it is impossible to trust one's own government, unless you govern yourself. Good is to report the matter to federal inspectors and get a proper feedback on that specific matter. > I don't know about precedents in USA but we > regularly have to do this in the EU because the European Commission > constantly conspires with copyright industry lobbies: > https://www.asktheeu.org/en/request/article_the_copyright_directive > https://www.asktheeu.org/en/request/eeas_letter_to_the_office_of_the I just said, one cannot trust government. > Ideally evidence would be collected *before* launching accusations > against people. For that specific person, evidence is in the public mailing lists, unless the defendant wish to say it was not him, it was somebody with his name, and using his email address, something like. > Also, MIT was also largely funded by the Pentagon for a long while, > so if we start a tally of how many GNU or Debian contributors lived > under Pentagon-paid roofs the exercise might get tedious fast. At beginning of your article you said you don't know why would Pentagon be interested, but here, MIT is largely funded, so is that not a relation there in open to assume that Pentagon does have interest in what is happening in software world, directly or indirectly? Jean Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns: https://www.fsf.org/campaigns Sign an open letter in support of Richard M. Stallman https://rms-support-letter.github.io/
Re: Pentagon linked to shaming attack on RMS
I agree it's unlikely that someone at the Pentagon would have interest in arranging any of this, but we've seen weirder things happen, e.g. at the Open Technology Fund. USDS has hired many hackers and has been loud about it. https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-biden-digital-service-idINKBN29Q08Q I believe a former president explained in a recent book of theirs what the idea was. Cf. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/viewFile/7409/2220 Il 03/04/21 05:17, Jacob Bachmeyer ha scritto: I do not know how familiar you are with ongoing political controversies in the USA, but there has been considerable controversy over claims of politicizing the civil service For this reason, while it's probably unwise to ask any USA federal authority whether they know about certain actions by one of their employees/whatever ostensibly conducted in their private time, it might be fair game to file FOIA requests to find out whether there was any unseemly coordination or use of government resources. I don't know about precedents in USA but we regularly have to do this in the EU because the European Commission constantly conspires with copyright industry lobbies: https://www.asktheeu.org/en/request/article_the_copyright_directive https://www.asktheeu.org/en/request/eeas_letter_to_the_office_of_the Ideally evidence would be collected *before* launching accusations against people. Also, MIT was also largely funded by the Pentagon for a long while, so if we start a tally of how many GNU or Debian contributors lived under Pentagon-paid roofs the exercise might get tedious fast. Federico
Re: Pentagon linked to shaming attack on RMS
Daniel Pocock wrote: On 03/04/2021 13:55, Jean Louis wrote: * Jacob Bachmeyer [2021-04-03 05:17]: Daniel Pocock wrote: Its all in the last picture Paul Tagliamonte, seconded the motion in Debian, with the co-founder of Rebellion Defense and the top brass at the Pentagon. https://debian.community/paul-tagliamonte-debian-usds-white-house-mob-ringleader/ I do not know where you are located, so perhaps you are unaware that that is a fairly tenuous link in the USA -- the "military-industrial complex" that President Eisenhower warned us about in his farewell speech has grown very large and the "revolving door" between government and private industry has been long-lamented and long-pilloried. After more careful review of the hyperlink, if that email is genuine, it is in my opinion against the mentioned law 5 CFR § 2635.702 - Use of public office for private gain. I found an even stronger example, attached below. While he was in the White House, he sent a strongly worded email encouraging people to lynch Jacob Appelbaum, another US citizen, like Dr Stallman. It is copied below. It does seem to be another instance of inciting a (thankfully virtual) lynch mob, yes. Paul R. Tagliamonte was employed in the White House, US Digital Service and Pentagon, Defense Digital Service from 2015 to 2019. There are more photos on the site now. This takes in all of the following Debian conspiracies and it looks like he was an active participant in all of them: - public shaming of Jacob Appelbaum with falsified accusations - Debian Christmas lynchings 2018, blackmailing Dr Norbert Preining to make a forced confession early in 2019 - death of Lucy Wayland during the period that the fascists were blackmailing Dr Preining Tagliamonte has contributed to this toxic culture, the email below proves it. Now he added his weight to the lynching of Dr Stallman by seconding the motion for a GR vote. He does not appear to be a Government employee right now but his firm is a defense contractor so it is almost the same thing. This suggests that Tagliamonte may be a proverbial "bad apple" but does not rule out the "rogue employee" option or suggest that Tagliamonte's lynch mob gathering activities had any sort of official sanction. It certainly does not actually link the DoD to Tagliamonte's activities -- USDS was part of the Executive Office of the President, not the military, and Tagliamonte only landed at a defense contractor after his trip through the "revolving door". I read the coroner's report for Lucy Wayland. She died far too young, 2 days before de Blanc gave her talk at FOSDEM about how to blackmail people. Wayland died from the type of accident that is much more likely during a period of acute stress. I can see somebody dying in similar circumstances during the current lynching of Dr Stallman. In both cases, Molly de Blanc appears to be present. So we have (possibly) another "bad apple" who seems to be consistently involved in stirring up lynch mobs within Debian. Is this other person also involved in the attacks on RMS? When people write emails like this in Debian, they are impersonating a police officer. After all, they use words like "enforce", they make verdicts, they make punishments. There are real crimes and real victims. Small point of order: please highlight the word "enforce" in the message you included, quoted below for convenience: Forwarded Message Subject: Re: Jacob Appelbaum and harrassement Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2016 16:53:50 -0400 From: Paul R. Tagliamonte To: Debian Private List The DAM is not providing input into the criminal process. The DAM will be providing input into who is and is not a Debian Project Member. A member who threatens the safety of others should be removed, if we trust that it's an issue. We have Debian project members who can substantiate these claims, and do not feel safe. Will we act to create a safe space for our members? On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Piotr Ożarowski wrote: [Rhonda D'Vine, 2016-06-15] Come on. Really? Sorry, I consider your response pretty disgusting. so if we see another email with a message that some DD (about whom we might never heard before) will be expelled because there are "accusations" out there, we should just respond with "burn him alive!"? What if these accusations where not true? Don't we have courts for a reason? Since when is DAM qualified to evaluate criminal evidence? Don't get me wrong: I'm pretty sure I'd be demanding higher punishment for rapists, murderers and other degenerates than most of you... but AFTER proven guilty! This is bad, and is an example of "crybully" tactics, especially the rhetoric about a "safe space" while completely ignoring the safety of someone who may well have been falsely accused. So we have classic "some are more equal than others" hypocrisy. -- Jacob
Re: Pentagon linked to shaming attack on RMS
Daniel Pocock wrote: Another example below, it shows he is batting for his own side, during business hours. [...] Forwarded Message Subject: Re: Jacob Appelbaum and harrassement Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2016 08:53:57 -0400 From: Paul R. Tagliamonte To: Steffen Möller CC: Debian Private List It's not about a badge, or DDs being "special" (spoiler: we're not), or us giving some great honor by gracing him with our company, it's about safety. I am not comfortable with him around, in whatever form. I don't want people like that in my community -- a community where my guard is "down". Illegal or not, even if he's productive or not (which I don't think he is), his presence will result in contributors feeling less safe and less able to do work they're spending their free time doing. This is the same "crybullying" as before. Note the "feeling" rhetoric, and how the crybully is "not comfortable" with the target of his current lynching effort. Note that the context (elided for length here) shows that Tagliamonte is standing for his desired lynching of Appelbaum against what seems to me to be three-in-a-row of people calling out this behavior and reminding him that virtual lynching is still wrong. One even compares the events to the actions of Anonymous and tries to remind him that Debian is not like that. -- Jacob
Re: Pentagon linked to shaming attack on RMS
Jean Louis wrote: * Jacob Bachmeyer [2021-04-03 05:17]: Daniel Pocock wrote: Its all in the last picture Paul Tagliamonte, seconded the motion in Debian, with the co-founder of Rebellion Defense and the top brass at the Pentagon. https://debian.community/paul-tagliamonte-debian-usds-white-house-mob-ringleader/ I do not know where you are located, so perhaps you are unaware that that is a fairly tenuous link in the USA -- the "military-industrial complex" that President Eisenhower warned us about in his farewell speech has grown very large and the "revolving door" between government and private industry has been long-lamented and long-pilloried. After more careful review of the hyperlink, if that email is genuine, it is in my opinion against the mentioned law 5 CFR § 2635.702 - Use of public office for private gain. I believe the question would be what did he gain or intend to gain? The context suggests a discussion about possible attempts by the government to infiltrate Debian, so revealing his status as a government employee would seem to be harmful to him in that context. Tagliamonte, whose actions are legitimate to discuss because he has publicly promoted a position on the issue, would have been hired in 2015, based on the email you quote in that article. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/5/2635.702 IMHO, when Tagliamonte during his employment mentioned his position in government, he is in violation of the above law. Thus his work at Debian IS INFLUENCED by person who worked in government, and it represents conflict of interest. The catch to a blanket statement here is that government employees do still have personal capacities in which they act outside of work, so he would almost certainly claim that that statement was made in his personal capacity. It was (presumably) a true statement (he was a government employee at the time) but he would almost certainly have been "off-the-clock" in that discussion. As such, Tagliamonte would have been considered a civil service employee, and was supposed to have been hired on an apolitical basis. The Federal Regulation does not mention differences on that page. It speaks of employees regardless of the basis of employment. The difference in this case is whether Tagliamonte may be more likely than average to hold certain political positions. The fact of his employment should *not* indicate anything about his views, but accusations of politicizing civil service employment are routinely thrown about in the USA. I get the sense that neither of you are Americans, so I am trying to explain how these things are seen here. In conclusion, while asking his employer if they are being paid to help instigate a mob against RMS seems to be an amusing example of "sauce for the gander" First time I have read your comment, and because did not find facts (and still don't see enough) on the page, I was in agreement. Now I see it right that Pockock points out to that violation, at least if the email there is genuine, as that is clearly abuse of power. If he is no longer a government employee, what power does he have to abuse? Tagliamonte's previous government employment and trip through the "revolving door" to the private sector does not stand out as reason to suspect that the government is somehow behind the attacks on RMS. The "revolving door" is simply too widespread to support a claim of that type of corruption. >From visits to many countries, even if one person employed in government does some action, it is act of government, that is why there is the regulation (law) to prevent the abuse of power. I just do not see what would be the sanction for that. Prohibitions may apply after the employment: 5 CFR § 2641.202 - Two-year restriction on any former employee's representations to United States concerning particular matter for which the employee had official responsibility. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/5/2641.202 That sounds suspiciously like Trump's executive branch lobbying ban. I am unsure how it would apply here. Is Tagliamonte suspected of lobbying the USA government for some purpose? -- Jacob
Re: Pentagon linked to shaming attack on RMS
* Jacob Bachmeyer [2021-04-03 05:17]: > Daniel Pocock wrote: > > Its all in the last picture > > > > Paul Tagliamonte, seconded the motion in Debian, with the co-founder of > > Rebellion Defense and the top brass at the Pentagon. > > > > https://debian.community/paul-tagliamonte-debian-usds-white-house-mob-ringleader/ > > I do not know where you are located, so perhaps you are unaware that that is > a fairly tenuous link in the USA -- the "military-industrial complex" that > President Eisenhower warned us about in his farewell speech has grown very > large and the "revolving door" between government and private industry has > been long-lamented and long-pilloried. After more careful review of the hyperlink, if that email is genuine, it is in my opinion against the mentioned law 5 CFR § 2635.702 - Use of public office for private gain. > Tagliamonte, whose actions are legitimate to discuss because he has > publicly promoted a position on the issue, would have been hired in > 2015, based on the email you quote in that article. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/5/2635.702 IMHO, when Tagliamonte during his employment mentioned his position in government, he is in violation of the above law. Thus his work at Debian IS INFLUENCED by person who worked in government, and it represents conflict of interest. > As such, Tagliamonte would have been considered a civil service > employee, and was supposed to have been hired on an apolitical > basis. The Federal Regulation does not mention differences on that page. It speaks of employees regardless of the basis of employment. > In conclusion, while asking his employer if they are being paid to > help instigate a mob against RMS seems to be an amusing example of > "sauce for the gander" First time I have read your comment, and because did not find facts (and still don't see enough) on the page, I was in agreement. Now I see it right that Pockock points out to that violation, at least if the email there is genuine, as that is clearly abuse of power. > Tagliamonte's previous government employment and trip through the > "revolving door" to the private sector does not stand out as reason > to suspect that the government is somehow behind the attacks on RMS. > The "revolving door" is simply too widespread to support a claim of > that type of corruption. >From visits to many countries, even if one person employed in government does some action, it is act of government, that is why there is the regulation (law) to prevent the abuse of power. I just do not see what would be the sanction for that. Prohibitions may apply after the employment: 5 CFR § 2641.202 - Two-year restriction on any former employee's representations to United States concerning particular matter for which the employee had official responsibility. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/5/2641.202 -- Jean Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns: https://www.fsf.org/campaigns Sign an open letter in support of Richard M. Stallman https://rms-support-letter.github.io/
Re: Pentagon linked to shaming attack on RMS
* Daniel Pocock [2021-04-03 10:11]: > On 03/04/2021 04:17, Jacob Bachmeyer wrote: > > Daniel Pocock wrote: > >> Its all in the last picture > >> > >> Paul Tagliamonte, seconded the motion in Debian, with the co-founder of > >> Rebellion Defense and the top brass at the Pentagon. > >> > >> https://debian.community/paul-tagliamonte-debian-usds-white-house-mob-ringleader/ > >> > > In conclusion, while asking his employer if they are being paid to help > > instigate a mob against RMS seems to be an amusing example of "sauce for > > the gander", Tagliamonte's previous government employment and trip > > through the "revolving door" to the private sector does not stand out as > > reason to suspect that the government is somehow behind the attacks on > > RMS. The "revolving door" is simply too widespread to support a claim > > of that type of corruption. > > It is far more complicated. Misuse of office can occur whether a staff > member is political or not. There are many countries in the world that I have visited. In many countries government employees are disallowed to hold external positions in organizations or to establish their own private businesses. There are exemptions and normally officers need to ask for permission if there are exemptions, depending from country to country. I do not know if person in question violated any laws. One shall first find out if he was employeed in the same time and if there was some conflict of interest or presentation of his title within government. Please review the law here as it most probably applies: https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/5/2635.702 > Society trusts these people with training, surveillance technology, guns > and nuclear weapons. In return, it is expected that they demonstrate > the highest standards of integrity. Exactly right. Your references are right, and you have got a right feeling. I just suppose because of the environment in Germany or German speaking area, as one good part of people there demand correctness. My statement here however, does not endorse your article for reason that I have not seen enough factual background. I hope you may research it better with the above law reference. -- Jean Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns: https://www.fsf.org/campaigns Sign an open letter in support of Richard M. Stallman https://rms-support-letter.github.io/
Re: Pentagon linked to shaming attack on RMS
Daniel Pocock wrote: Its all in the last picture Paul Tagliamonte, seconded the motion in Debian, with the co-founder of Rebellion Defense and the top brass at the Pentagon. https://debian.community/paul-tagliamonte-debian-usds-white-house-mob-ringleader/ I do not know where you are located, so perhaps you are unaware that that is a fairly tenuous link in the USA -- the "military-industrial complex" that President Eisenhower warned us about in his farewell speech has grown very large and the "revolving door" between government and private industry has been long-lamented and long-pilloried. Tagliamonte, whose actions are legitimate to discuss because he has publicly promoted a position on the issue, would have been hired in 2015, based on the email you quote in that article. He was thus hired under the Obama administration and was among the large set of employees carried over through most of the Trump administration. It is possible that Tagliamonte's hiring may have been unduly influenced by political considerations, as the USDS is very closely associated to the Presidential administration -- the Executive Office of the President that contains USDS is the nearest nonpolitical organization to the President of the United States. As such, Tagliamonte would have been considered a civil service employee, and was supposed to have been hired on an apolitical basis. I do not know how familiar you are with ongoing political controversies in the USA, but there has been considerable controversy over claims of politicizing the civil service and I remember a running pattern of these claims being made by whichever side was not currently in power for the past few administrations at the least. (Democrat President? Republicans complain. Republican President? Democrats complain.) In conclusion, while asking his employer if they are being paid to help instigate a mob against RMS seems to be an amusing example of "sauce for the gander", Tagliamonte's previous government employment and trip through the "revolving door" to the private sector does not stand out as reason to suspect that the government is somehow behind the attacks on RMS. The "revolving door" is simply too widespread to support a claim of that type of corruption. -- Jacob
