E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act appeared to be headed for approval one year ago - until the release of hundreds of thousands of U.S. diplomatic cables to the WikiLeaks website, allegedly by Army Pvc. Bradley Manning, thrust it to the sidelines.
Opponents of the bill seized on the incident to strip an important provision from the legislation, which ultimately died when Congress closed for Christmas without taking it up, advocates say.
“There suddenly became a concern in the Congress that was ill-informed, that the legislation would protect leaks of classified information … which wasn’t true,” said Danielle Brian, executive director of the Project on Government Oversight, a nonpartisan independent watchdog that seeks good government reforms. “… It was in large part a reason why the legislation stalled and it also caused a real backlash of overreaction by agencies to start clamping down on employees’ access to information.”
EPA file
Army Specialist Bradley Manning, accused of leaking US government documents published by Wikileaks
As Manning has his first court appearance on Friday – a pretrial hearing – proponents of the legislation to protect government workers who report illegal or unethical behavior by officials have regrouped.
They are pushing a measure -- the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act of 2011 -- winding its way through Congress, but they are encountering some familiar hold-ups. “The Manning case is certainly feeding the resistance,” said Brian, noting it was not the only factor.
Manning, who turns 24 on Saturday, is accused of using unauthorized software on government computers to pull classified information, illegally download it and send the data for public release by what the Army called the "enemy." He has been held for 18 months in confinement and his pretrial hearing at Fort Meade, Md., on Friday will be his first public appearance. He is charged with 22 counts that could land him in prison for life.
The Bradley Manning Support Network argues that the soldier is not a traitor but fits the definition of a whistleblower, citing online discussions in which he allegedly said he hoped to generate “worldwide discussion, debates, and reforms” and wanted “people to see the truth… regardless of who they are… because without information, you cannot make informed decisions as a public.”
The law firm representing Manning did not respond to an email or phone call placed seeking comment on whether they would argue this he was a whistleblower as part of his defense.
Though the new legislation pending in Congress could make some "very modest improvements,” it is still only a Band-Aid, said Stephen Kohn, executive director and co-founder of the National Whistleblowers Center, a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization.
“I think that the underlying hostility to protecting national security whistleblowers pre-existed Manning … and there’s no end in sight -- meaning Congress, which excluded national (security) whistleblowers from protection in 1978 and has taken no action to fix the problem since, will continue in this current status,” he said.
Kohn said those opposed to the earlier legislation used the Manning case as a “smokescreen.”
“These folks were against it to begin with, they’ve been against it for years,” he said.
The Manning incident was bound to occur, he said, “because if someone was of conscience and did have concerns, they really have no legitimate place to go. … Under the current regime, there’s really no way to disclose these national security violations effectively and protect yourself. It does not exist.”
During the 2010 debate, Kohn’s group sent a letter to Congress with concerns that a provision in the legislation would allow “managers and political appointees to fire career civil servants who disclose violations of law.” This in turn prompted more than 90 organizations to voice their backing of the bill, The Washington Post reported.
Around the same time, the Post reported that Darrell Issa, a Republican congressman from California who had supported the bill, switched sides and argued for a delay. An Issa spokesman noted then that "new areas of concern that have been raised by the WikiLeaks" releases had convinced the congressman that the legislation should be considered in 2011.
In the first week of November, Issa and other lawmakers introduced the latest version of the legislation to the House.
"There’s really genuine interest in all three parts (White House, Senate, House of Representatives) to get something passed this spring. So I’m very hopeful actually," Brian said.
History has little to show for Americans in similar situations as Manning. In one of the most well-known cases of U.S. whistleblowing, former Marine Daniel Ellsberg in 1971 released what came to be known as the "Pentagon Papers," a secret government study put together during his time as an analyst in the Nixon Administration. The study revealed that previous administrations had deceived Congress about stepping up the Vietnam conflict. A judge eventually threw out the government's espionage and conspiracy case.
"The WikiLeaks’ unauthorised disclosures of the last year are the first in 40 years to approach the scale of the Pentagon Papers (and even surpass them in quantity and timeliness)," Ellsberg wrote in an editorial published in The Guardian, in which he called for other potential whistleblowers to not "wait until a new war has started."
Kohn did note a case that ended with positive results for whistleblowers in 1777, when 10 sailors and soldiers jumped ship and blew the whistle on the U.S. Navy commander for torturing British prisoners. The Continental Congress supported the whistleblowers, passed the country’s first whistleblower law and released all the documents -- regardless of how embarrassing they were to the United States.
“That was the first and maybe only time back in U.S. history that our government backed national security whistleblowers,” he said, chuckling. “It’s been pretty much downhill since 1777.”
Kohn also said the response to the incident showed “the founding fathers’ view of every person’s obligation to disclose misconduct was rather consistent with our view, and in fact, we believe that that is the legislative intent behind the First Amendment.”
Brian said she did not believe legislation to protect the Bradley Mannings of the world for leaking publicly classified information would ever be passed, but she hoped that his case would highlight the issue facing those in his situation. She noted that her organization and its allies were working hard to create "meaningful channels for a Bradley Manning.”
“I really believe that the lack of safe channels for disclosure is part of why people like Bradley Manning need to go straight to the public or to the media,” she said. “I’m hoping that what people learn from this is this is why we need to have a better way of handling this information, because the government does sometimes hide their misconduct behind classification and we need to have a robust way of dealing with that.”
More content from msnbc.com and NBC News:
- 'Dismal': 1 in 2 Americans are now poor or low income
- Village defiant as government creates new narrative
- Death sentences, executions take 'historic drop'
- Feds: Arizona sheriff violates Latinos' civil rights
- Revealed: Why court cleared Amanda Knox
- Boy defies dad's rules to attend firefighter's wake
Leave a Comment:
I see a BIG difference between "whistle blowing" and treason. Turning over thousands of classified government documents to wikileaks to be published on the web is treason. No soldier who has taken the oath to protect and defend the country has the unilateral right to copy and disseminate classified documents. There are NO circumstances that make this okay.
I also see a difference. Manning blew the whistle on international corruption. Cheney, Rove, and Libby committed treason when they outed Plame. Cheney and Rove have not been prosecuted. Libby's sentence was commuted by Bush. That set the precedent to simply pardon Manning for any crime he did or did not commit and be done with the whole affair.
Bruce-308647- You are correct. He is a traitor. Assange the coward left Manning hang. Manning committed a crime. His supporters can not frost over the crime he committed. They think what he did was ok, but the thief that steals food to eat is still a thief. He stole documents that were classified. He should be behind bars for life.
You can not going through life only obeying the laws you want. Assange is also guilty and should face charges, so he can stand side by side with Manning in court.
Manning fails the whistle blower test. First, he chose to grab ANYTHING he could. He didn't simply choose those things related to war crimes. Second, he did not turn them over to any legally protected agencies that whistleblowers can use to reveal offenses. Manning did not go to the AG, or a Congressman or even to a valid news outlet.
Wikileaks fails the news outlet test because it does not edit, add value to or seek rebuttal. It leaves that duty to REAL news sources. This is evidences by Assange contacting the NYTimes and the Guardian to do the actual journalism. Wikileaks merely dumps the information, exposing it to even hostile sources. It isn't a news outlet, it is a provocateur. However, if Wikileaks would like to find out if it could qualify for freedom of the press protection, Assange or another Wikileaks representative would have to allow themselves to be arrested. It would probably take about 5 to 10 years to adjudicate and based upon the standard that is given in schools of journalism for a news article, they would most likely loose.
Manning is not a whistleblower. He is a young man who through arrogance and, perhaps a mild mental illness, thought that he was above the normal rules of behavior. There is no way that Manning could be sure he was dealing with someone who was just pretending to be a web-activist. For all he really knew, he could have been dealing with a foreign agent. The results were the same though and because the data dump was so huge, it did nothing to really inform the American people of a grievance they might have against their government. Therefore, he utterly fails the whistleblower test.
Manning is a piece of $hit Traitor.,and the people defending are even worse....
I have only read a few of the many documents via Wikileaks. I cannot say whether Manning is right or wrong, but whistle blowing when wrongs have been done is admirable. Bringing light to corruption, criminal activities, and anything else that is wrong should be commended. It's only when things/actions remain hidden in the darkness of secrecy that some of the worst atrocities go unchallenged. Whistle blowers in my opinion are heroes for their courage and self sacrifice to expose the wrongs done. I am not calling Manning a hero in the least, but do we know more about what our gov does behind closed doors than before. When everything is out in the open, lest espionage, do we not all then have a say in the moral direction our country takes. Truth only harms those that are afraid to face it and holds accountable those that have abused it.
Michael you are an idiot. once you atart the blame Bush crap you prove yourself to be a weakminded idiot. manning is a traitor and should hang. You are not much better because givin the chance you would sell us all outq
Anyone else see the connection between support for Bush and weak minded idiot? Conclusive!
This poor web-activist who didn't know what he was doing, is not even close to have any psychiatric problem, he knew what he was doing, he use his condition as a member of the armed forces to leak confidential information, if this crime happened during the cold war this scumbag could be declare guilty of treason and be dead at this time.
I disagree differnet
A news outlet has no business editing the important embarassing bits out. Thats the number one problem with journalism today, and its why the people rarely get the whole truth. Their jobs is to inform, thats it. Not editorialize, or give opinion. Or edit stuff out, and cover it up.
Wikileaks is one of the few true news outlets.
In my book, manning is a whistleblower. And I thank him for exposing the rampant corruption. A lot has changed already because of him. Especially public awareness and a willingness to start questioning things by the public. Its about damn time if you ask me. Some of arent sheep, we dont follow. And i dont condone wrong doing for any reason, even survival.
There is no info the public is not allowed to see in my book. As far as im concerned, everything should be open to public scrutiny.
let me just say... What potential value was their in Manning grabbing the musings of various diplomats about the character of people to whom they were talking? Or how about the list of sites that the government was worried could be compromised by entities hostile to the USA? In fact, the largest portion of the documents did nothing but expose people to whom we were talking. Again, there was no moral imperitive in the vast majority of the information he took. That's the problem. Real whistleblowers target a specific action. Manning did not. He took whatever he could and gave it to a foreign entity.
Freedom, go back and look at the Pentagon Papers. The NYTimes got a dump of information too. They carefully went through it. Took the parts that were significant to the US public to know, added value to it by getting input from experts, redacted information that could compromise the life and safety of people mentioned in the documents and allowed the people exposed for rebuttal. That is journalism. Putting documents online is not. In fact, Assange had to ask the NYTimes and the Guardian to do the real heavy lifting of journalism. But I encourage someone on Wikileaks staff to allow themselves to be arrested so that their status can be adjudicated.
He gave it to a western news outlet that he knew would publish it. One of the few that would. Please name another that would have published, I guarantee you cant name one. I mean all of it, not just some of it..
We the public, have a right to know the character of the people who represent us around the world and make policy. Manning exposed many with serious flaws, to say the least. Not only that, he exposed all kinds of lying, and illegal conduct. Involving both diplomats, and the military.
And as you yourself say, if most of it is inconsequential, then why are you accusing manning of leaking important embarrassing documents? You cant have it both ways.
edit: NYT left out most of the important stuff, it wasnt until wikileaks published, that NYT followed suit. They would have covered most of it up.
I agree with differnet. It may have been one thing if he turned over specific targeted files that proved corruption and wanted to right a wrong. He turned over thousands of documents because he was pissed at his boyfriend and wanted to lash out. He's no hero, he's a whiny child throwing a temper tantrum
That is NOT journalism, its spin doctoring. Its covering it up. Its leaving bits out. As I said, there is no real journalism, because we rarely get the whole truth. I dont need someone to make up a conclusion for me, I can do that for myself. To do that, I need ALL the info.
Cheney is a traitor and the only things keeping him out of prison is a week kneed Justice Department and the fact that with the pumps and pacemaker he uses for a heart, he wouldn't survive the arrest, let alone a trial and well deserved incarceration. He outed a covert CIA agent for political purposes. That act resulted in the deaths of much needed contacts and assets in the middle east. Cheney is a coward and a traitor regardless of what you may think of Manning.
I'm not an advocate of the death penalty, but treason would be at the top of my list of crimes deserving capital punishment.
>I'm not an advocate of the death penalty, but treason would be at the top of my list of crimes deserving capital punishment.
Me too. Starting with Bush and Chaney.
Differnet, thank you for your thoughtful analysis of this situation. Good to know that an adult is in the room.
You would make an excellent juror in any trial. Unfortunately, you are also the type of person that attorneys of both sides tend to strike. Too hard to manipulate.
No free thinkers allowed, eh toad...
I am still at a loss, how a PFC, has access to all that classified information.
He was an intelligence analyst saxon. It was his job to sift through all the info coming in, looking for the juicy bits.
Sure, protect whistleblowers. But hang Manning.
>I am still at a loss, how a PFC, has access to all that classified information.
Idiots at the Pentagon.
Freedom, you can agree all you want, but the courts will undoubtedly agree with my point of view. We have over a hundred years of case law that support the standards for new organizations and qualification as a journalist.
Laws can change. People can be pardoned. If enough of the public wants him to walk, he will. Most of the public doesnt support what the governments been doing, or havent you noticed?
The world doesnt revolve around the U.S. or its courts.
To all those liberals who think exposing information (of any kind) is a good thing:
Everyone has dirty little secrets, either family or personal secrets. What would YOU do if I gained knowledge (verifible evidence) of your little goodies and spread them all over the press? Would YOU say "oh, well that's ok. People have the right to know" or would YOU be a little ticked off and want to take me to court?
Some thing are best left covered whether they are personal or national secrets. And yes, every stinking country on this globe has national political and military secrets that need to be protected. You may not agree but their publication is not up to you.
So what your saying is, that if classified government documents do not conform to your personal moral beliefs, then it's perfectly OK to have those documents released to the public.
Concurrently, if those classified government documents happen to fall within your personal endorsements, then they are to be guarded.
THE INDIVIDUALS OPINION IS IRRELEVANT. You don't don't get to decide !!! It's not your job.
Give him a big hammer. Have him make little rocks out of big ones.
Yup, I'd admit wrong doing and take responsibility for my actions. Unfortunately our government would prefer to deny all accountability and blame everybody else. Hmm, sounds like several individuals I know. And that, friends is the problem with the country today. If the government were an open book our representatives would actually have to be accountable for their actions.
You wont find any secrets in my closet. Some of us live without corruption.
The Public makes the rule EDD, we can have any rules we want. And the public wants the current rules changed. Or hadnt you noticed all the discontent lately? Lots is going to change over the next few decades, because its going to take that long to make it happen. But change is on the wind, big time. People are getting sick of big government and all their wars.
So despite the depolrable actions of the government no one should ever expose those wrong doings? How can you follow rank and file when there are obvious wrongs committed by our government?
I feel sorry for people like Freedom4everyone and others that seem to think what Manning did is perfectly acceptable. It proves a lack of critical thinking skills and a callous disregard for unforeseen consequences.
Freedom, you say Wikileaks is "the only real news outlet". Yet you seem to ignore the fact that Wikileaks revealed documents that had nothing to do with corruption, war crimes or any other "nefarious" actions. Wikileaks released documents that served no other purpose than to embarrass the United States.
Please explain exactly what benefit this serves. And please...don't try to excuse it by pointing out the documents they released that did expose corruption or other things. Releasing helpful information does not excuse them from doing things to intentionally harm this country too.
People like you seem to think that you have a right to any and all information and that revealing the truth never has any negative consequences. That kind of attitude belongs to the ignorant and the foolish. It belongs to the kind of people who have no real clue.
Manning is a traitor, not a whistleblower. It is impossible for the man to have known what was in every single document he copied and gave away to Wikileaks. We're talking hundreds of thousands of documents. NOBODY could possibly know what was in all of them. He could have easily released information that could've gotten people killed or caused an international incident. He obviously didn't bother to consider that, proving his callous disregard of any consequences for his actions.
Give him the chair and let him ride the lightning. He deserves nothing less.
Reading alot of the posts here I can tell the majority of posters did not serve in the military.This PFC did not have access to classified or secret material and anything he got his hands on was either authorized by a superior or was known to a superior who allowed it to be accessed.All we have seen are embarassing situations to some high ranking world politicians.Somebody higher up than this PFC was looking to embarass a bunch of people and he found somebody to do his dirty work for him.Our government in particular the Pentagon and the Military do not want the American people to know how deals are really done,they prefer us to believe that everything they do is sensitive to national security ,even calling some diplomat an a$$hole.
Even when a Rupert Murdoch is exposed, they/he doesn't have to pay for his wrongs. Those who say Manning should fry should just admit they support corruption. Remember Bush was about to pull the covers over the public eyes and help cover up his biggest campaign donors thievery (ENRON) and was only stopped by the distractions of 9-11. Too bad 9-11 was pulled off - Bush would have been impeached if he saved ENRON. As criminal as ENRON and Worldcom were - few paid the price they should have. What world were the supporters of Murdoch, Bush and the rest of their ilk raised in? You want to see the punishment fit the crime - unless it's your favorite crooks.
Character??? Who cares about CHARACTER? I only want to know about actual laws broken - character is a subjective thing that means different things to different people, so it is pretty irrelevant in the long run. I know that Manning leaked stuff, but I don't know what that stuff was. If it was just a bunch of emails where someone complained about the folks they were working with, well that just seems like a stupid prank, not some "corruption expose" that deserves any pat on the back. If it actually threatened the safety of his fellow military members, then shoot him for all I care. Either way, I don't see him as a "hero," and have no sympathy for him.
The Pentagon denied any records of Iraqi civilian deaths--but they did. There was so much information that the government hides from us that IS our business. The information that Wiki leaks was able to expose wasn't harmful to our military or our nation's security. The documentation just gave us a picture of how corrupt this country has become.
Treasonous and traitors---that is what our founding fathers were called. Our government has become a giant mass of secretive manipulations committed in the guise of freedom. What a creation we have--A government that is run by corporate interest and wanders all corners of the world scouring for a potential war. The treasury is robbed by military industrialists and their minions--our elected officials.
Free Manning.
drdarby17, you are suspended for a week for violating rule # 1 of the Code of Honor.
You don't have a great history. Cut it out please.
link-138,
I have no idea why you or anyone else would thnk that the government is the only one who maintains secrets and secrets that kill people. Why don't you demand that corporations by "open" to public view. Perhaps you're too yound to remember Ford and the deaths of people due to their criminal design of the Pinto.
But aside from that, a government has to conduct covert operations because ALL governments are not and never will be "nice" to one another. It boils down to human nature. And by allowing these secrets to be made public could and has caused the deaths of people dedicated to protecting you butt.
Do you honestly think that if we had just talked over our differences with Iraq or the Taliban that they would have said something such as "oh, we didn't really understand where you were coming from and we shouldn't have done what we did". They would have considered us a bunch of whimps and continued to kill our people. An ideal world is just something that will never happen but that does not mean we should stop trying to make it better. But leaking sensitive info like that sob did is not the way to do it.
Hiding your head in the sand is a sure way of getting something shoved up your ....
All you guys saying "he should have given it to an AG or Congressman/woman,
Do you really think they would follow up on it though? I highly doubt it. If you have information that is scandalous to the Government why would you go to a Government official with that information? It will just vanish into the black ink vortex never to be seen again once the CIA gets their hands on it.
Going to a third party, independent organization is the only way to blow the whistle on Government corruption; you cannot go to the source of that corruption, hand over the evidence, and expect anything to be doe with it.
Now as to the volume he stole, yes that does make him look bad, however it also brought to light the atrocities committed by our troops at the orders of their superiors. I do not care how bad a war is, civilians should never be intentionally fired on unless the are confirmed enemy combatants.
I read in one of the articles that some civvies in a small town were throwing grenades at troops when they yelled for help. Fine I can see killing those combatants, they are actively attacking the troops. That does not give you proper justification to them wipe out an entire village or to kill civvies you meet anywhere else in Iraq or Afghanistan.
Frankly I am of the belief that Government should have no privacy. If they feel the need for us not to have our own privacy why should they get any? If they can illegally wiretap phones, why can we not do the same to them? The Government should not takes actions against us that they would not see done to themselves by the population since we, the people, are their bosses.
Manning may be a criminal, but he is by no means a traitor.
When news outlets publish things they shouldn't, they should be held as liable as those who provide the information.
Bruce, who gets to decide what is information they should not publish though? The local courts? The Federal Government? Just who has the right to say that information should not be allowed to be posted? Is that not similar to what China does? How far should we let the Government intrude into reporting the facts? Should we just let the Government do what it wants with no public oversight?
These and questions like these defuse your argument because information is created to be read. Governments will always bury information that is damaging to them and thus we will never hear about things like what happened in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is the same with non-disclosure agreements, I think that no company should require their employees to sign such a document. Unless they are doing something illegal why should they want to keep their actions on the hush hush?
The Government is owned by the people of this country; we pay into the system to pay for the entire thing. The Government is then essentially acting on our behalf, why would we not want to know when they start doing crap like killing civilians? Does that accurately describe the kind of actions you want them to take?
Unless we no longer are in ownership of the Government every action it takes no matter what that action is should be disclosed to us. If the Government want's privacy it can find a way to fund itself without taking our money via taxes.
At no point should a corporation or Government be afforded more privacy then the general citizen has nor have the right to restrict one's free speech ever, no matter the circumstances if there is a truth to be told with factual evidence to back it up.
Black inking should be banned.
This is what happens after a revolution. The ones who lead the revolt start making exceptions for the principles they once stood for, all for the sake of "order" and "peace". When really it's about maintaining control.
The fact that he didn't focus purely on corruption in what he divulged certainly discredits Manning, but our gov'ts treatment of whistle blowers since 1777 is very telling as well. Whether you hate Manning or not, it can't be denied.
1777 was the last time congress protected federal whistleblowers !!!!
Wright or wrong this kid is toast . Congress can not afford to let him off . Not only that if they pass a complete law, that puts them under pressure to come clean if and when caught dirty . GWB and the big C would face war crimes charges along with most of congress .
Really bob, what war crimes did GWB commit?
@ Justagrunt
Shall we start with water boarding , Other forms of torture , foregin blackhole prisons brought to you by the CIA also run by the CIA .
bob
Well, that's the question, isn't it? We'll never know.
Well bob, waterboarding was a legal means of enhanced interrogation at the time of it being used.
The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) is an independent US Government agency responsible for providing national security intelligence to senior US policymakers.
On December 17, 2004, President George W. Bush signed the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act which restructured the Intelligence Community by abolishing the position of Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) and Deputy Director of Central Intelligence (DDCI) and creating the position the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (D/CIA). The Act also created the position of Director of National Intelligence (DNI), which oversees the Intelligence Community and the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC).
https://www.cia.gov/about-cia/histor...cia/index.html
Gee grunt ball start with invading a sovereign nation, violating the Geneva Convention.....where would you like to start? Just exposing an active CIA operative is treason. GWB, Cheney, and the lot should be in prison!
Well in that case all the members of Congress should be in prison also, you know then ones that voted to use force against Iraq. How did the Geneva Convention get violated? Did President Bush or VP Cheney expose the CIA operative?
@ ron
Now you are getting the point !!!!! A big part of the story is the wording of the purposed WHISTLEBLOWER LAW before congress now . Congress is looking to close loop holes that could be used against them . It is classic C.Y.A. by congress . WE are above the law ( if not we will change that law ).
bob
JustaGrunt; How about the incident with Cheney shooting his buddy in the face with a shootgun, claiming they were hunting? A hunting accident, is that the real reason Cheney shot his friend? Then to top this all off, Cheney dosen't have a hunting license and never reports the shooting to the police, because in all states and hospitals it is required by law to report all shootings to the police. So they all are withholding information from the police about the shooting and he dosen't have a hunting license. Do you want me to break this down for you with all the prison time, for all the violations that were committed here? Hunting without a license alone, comes with as much as five yrs. in prison and as much as a $10,000 dollar fine, and this is just scratching the surface!
Tell that to the Haag, Both GWB and Cheney are wanted as war criminals by them. Only the U.S. government thinks they dont deserve prison. Everyone else wants them hung. If they leave the U.S., they will be arrested.
Justagrunt, right after WW2, several of Japan's general officers were courtmartialed, found guilty of waterboarding, which was then, and still is, illegal. Those generals were hanged for their part in it. The US signed a treaty outlawing torture, in which waterboarding was included.
So no, it was not LEGAL. Just because some phoney lawyer wrote a letter explaining that it was legal does not make it legal.
And you are saying President Bush made the govt grow? I thought the GOP was for a smaller govt. Hmm, say one thing, do another, right?
Bush was not responsible for much of anything while he was president. Cheney was the defacto president and simply told Bush what to say and what to do. You know, kind of like when a father used to put his son on his lap and say, OK Georgie now you're driving the car. Bush was barely sentient for both terms. Cheney was a true traitor, Bush a mere bystander.
As soon as Ron and his like want to go after tricky Dick....then lets talk... You have no place to convict one person because you say he committed treason....and then because a high official in your party does the same thing you look the other way.....so while i agree Manning committed treason....so did Dick.
We'll see if guys like Ron are evolved enough to prosecute NO MATTER WHAT PARTY AFFILIATION. oh wait...he's our champion.... 2faced defenders of our nation.... terrible...be a man RON.
SallyAnn; You are exactly right. Dubya or Chensy will never leave this country again as long as they live, if they do they will be arrest and held accountable for their war crimes. Then Dubya takes and has the Patriot Act enacted and now government is in everyones living room, but the Repubs claim less government is the answer. Sure, its less government, because its not visibley seen. Freedom? its being diminished more and more everyday, its getting harder and harder for the gop to find more freedom to take away now.
@Sallay Ann, it was still legal by the courts of the United States at the time that it was used. Congress knew about it also, and did nothing. Also where did I say that GWB grew the govenment, which he did, what makes you think that I am part of the GOP?
@ F4E, you mean The Hague? Because if you do, they have not issued warrants for President Bush or VP Chaney. only a court in Malaysia has.
@ Joe, so are you saying that VP Chaney shooting someone accidently in the face is a war cirme? Also in 2009 Bush went to Cananda, so he has left the country.
it seems the idiots are out today!!! this is about manning and teason not water boaroding(fyi only THREE people have been water boarded to date , we also got some very important imformation from that)this not about free speech it`s about national security . he was sworean oath be betrayed that oath !!! that is treason , he should be held accountable. the haag and nato are frign jokes the crap that goes on around the world , and you babies are cry`n about bush and cheeny, get a life . terrorist have been tortoring and killing for years.
JustaGrunt; your problem is you are consumed with the whole Left v Right mentality. If Congress truly supported the war, then they are just as responsible as Bush. BUT; the war was Bush's idea and many were against the war before they were for it, and only went along with Bush when coerced and manipulated by pork added on that those against the war felt was the only way their desires would ever be approved. End the practice of both parties using the system to manipulate each other and then see what gets passed and what doesn't. Politics are not sports trades - you are either for a proposal or against it - this practice of adding and subtracting on side issues is just part of the crimes on voters. We don't elect these people to be swayed - they ran on a platform and then sell us out when they take office. Hold all of them accountable, not just one side.
I very much agree agree with you. I think everyone should be held accoutable for their actions, or in-actions depedent on what the case may be. The common (wo)man in the military wants nothing more then for peace to brakout and take hold, but until that day comes we can only dream about it. As Plato might have said, it is not found in any of his works, Only the dead have seen the end of war.
bluelake,
"Bush was not responsible for much of anything while he was president."
WOW! Did you get that wrong! Look at the current resident of the White House; he hasn't taken responsibility for ANYTHING. Always blaming Bush or the Republicans or sunspots for whatever has or has not happened during HIS whole administration.
However, obama will take responsibility for ending the war in Iraq because it will garner votes for his reelection and that is alll he cares about.
"Well bob, waterboarding was a legal means of enhanced interrogation at the time of it being used."
No, it was not legal, there was never a bill passed that allowed waterboarding to be used. It was a "legal opinion" by White House Lawyers that stated it was legal. It was and still is torture and a war crime. Also, Congress did not just authorize the use of force in Iraq. The authorization had 2 very specific criteria that had to be met before force could be used. 1. That Iraq fails to cooperate with UN weapons inspectors and 2. that an operation link between Iraq and Al Qaeda be established. Neither of these cirteria were ever met, eventhough Bush certified that they had, just hour before the invasion began.
OK, this whole water boarding thing is stupid. It doesn't violate the Geneva Convention because there was no mistreatment of prisoners of war. The nice folks who got boarded were terrorists, not Soldiers. They were not fighting in accordance with the Geneva Convention and accordingly, are not afforded those protections.
As for PVT Manning? He signed a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA). In it, the penalties for unauthorized disclosure are clearly put forth. He fails to meet the requirements for whistle blower because he was not reporting a single act or series of acts that were illegal. 99% of what he turned over was absolutely legal, just classified. He is a spoiled little boy who is going to end up paying for the rest of his life.
The only "change" he brought about is my current inability to use thumb drives in my government computers, which is costing the tax payers millions a year in CDs and DVDs. I used to use a couple of $20 thumb drive to move my files around, now I burn a few dozen CDs a week. Multiply that by the number of government employees/military members and see what he cost the American People.
Todd, well said. I was waiting for someone to relize that inorder to be protected by the Genva Conventions you must first act by them.
@raddave,
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=iraq+war+resolution+text. Follow that link and tell me where it says the authorization had 2 very specific criteria that had to be met before force could be used. 1. That Iraq fails to cooperate with UN weapons inspectors and 2. that an operation link between Iraq and Al Qaeda be established.
It stated that Iraq has failled to cooperate with UN inspectors, and has a link to Al Queda.
As far as I am concerned the guy is a hero. We have a right to know what our government is doing in our names and the information he released proved that they were lying to us and sullying our nations great name. Don't get me wrong I don't think the guy is perfect, and he may deserve some punishment. But his "crimes" are nothing compared to those in Washington who will never see the inside of a cell.
I agree.
Please, this was nothing heroic. It was the rash actions of a mentally damaged fool led to believe he was making a difference by a third party with the ulterior motive of doing anything they could to destroy the United States.
You won't think a future "whistleblower" who rats on your boy Obama is a hero I bet. Most whistleblowers are liberals and liberals as is the case with conservatives have a much different opininon of whistleblowers when their ox is being gored. When the Solyndra issue blows sky high and Eric Holder finally rolls over for the Fast and Furious investigators to save his pathetic a-- and fingers Obie as the real culprit in this unbelievable fiasco...lets see how you feel then. As for Manning 50 years sounds about right.
If this guy is a hero, then we are in a world of trouble. Take your left wing nutty stance somewhere else! What's next? We share our missle launch codes with those scumbags in the Middle East, just so they know what we are doing and when we are doing it? WAKE UP YOU IDIOT! This little scumbag committed TREASON!
Destroy the U.S. my arse. More like bring down international gangsters. Only those who were doing illegal unethical things, had anything to fear here.
Freedom4Everyone; Only those who were doing illegal, unethical things, had anything to fear here. Well Freedom4 Everyone, if thats the case then every repub president this country has had since Ike, would be in prison. Nixon, Reagan, Busch and his son Dubya would all be sitting in the clink after their respectful terms as president. I'm sure this will continue as long as repubs are elected, they just started their less government and they aren't about to stop until its in every home in this country.
And you don't think any Democratic President has anything to hide?
@F4E
You have no clue, do you? You have no idea how many people can be harmed in your efforts to expose 1 person for 1 wrongdoing. Nor do you, or Wikileaks, care.
Damn the torpedos and everybody else on the sub, full speed ahead. I'll destroy them even if I have to sacrifice everyone with me or even slightly next to me.
That appears to be the logic you're using. As well as Assange's personal motto.
almost all politicians republican and democrat, are dishonest !!!!! dems say they are for the people , they don`t care about us, repubs don`t care about us . all they care about is money and power!!! they will sell us out to the higest bidder. they don`t want people like manning selling our secrets they want to sell them , so they can make the MONEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hero? Hero? The only heros I know are still in south east asia, iraq, afgan, world trade. The ones that never get to come home. HE IS NOT A HERO! Maybe you were compairing him to the sandwich
the end never justifies the means...especially, in this particular case
Do you mean lying to the American people about the success of the war so that the government can continue on trying to rectify the situation and perpetuate a war in order to save face, the inability to humbly admit truth and defeat, despite the overwhelming reports that it was all unwinnable? Those kinds of means.
Thanks Sylvia
"he hoped to generate “worldwide discussion, debates, and reforms” and wanted “people to see the truth… regardless of who they are… because without information, you cannot make informed decisions as a public.”"
What was he hoping to generate "worldwide discussion, debates, and reforms" about? He released hundreds of thousands of classified diplomatic cables of which he could not possibly have read more than a few, and the few that he even read he would probably not have understood the meaning of. So it's hard for me to believe his intent in releasing these cables was to inform the public of some allegedly illegal or unethical conduct on the part of our diplomats. This was a massive and indiscriminate release of classified information of all sorts that was not targeted at any specific wrongdoing.
So, what do you think his motivations were?
No Alias Adam,
"So, what do you think his motivations were?"
Your guess is as good as mine! Maybe he did it just because he could, like that guy who climbed mount Everest, and when people asked him why, he said, "Because it was there".
I don't know, I think the best indicator of his motives are the words that come directly from his mouth. And you've quoted them already
"he hoped to generate “worldwide discussion, debates, and reforms” and wanted “people to see the truth… regardless of who they are… because without information, you cannot make informed decisions as a public.”
I don't understand what would make you doubt the verasity of his own claims. Especially because that quote is not taken from conversation following his arrest. He wasn't trying to spare himself from punishment by portraying himself as a noble person. He said it before he needed to defend himself. That tells me he believed what he was saying not simply trying to cover his ass.
No Alias Adam,
"That tells me he believed what he was saying not simply trying to cover his ass."
It may very well be true that he believed what he said, and it all sounds very noble and pure, doesn't it? But we are not talking here about his idealistic state of mind. He appears to be an idealist. But that is irrelevant in this case, as far as I'm concerned, because he uploaded literally hundreds of thousands of classified documents to WikiLeaks. Do you actually believe he read and understood every one of those documents before uploading them? If not, then I don't think he was motivated by any desire to provide the public with any "truth" because he could not possibly have known what kind of "truth" it was that he was providing.
I think he understood that the government and the military were working to cover up instances that could be seen as disparaging to the war effort. I think he knew that these classified documents descibed incidents where civilians were being killed and he knew that nothing was going to be done to either change coarse or re-evaluate the mission in Afghanistan if he hadn't released the documents. Unfortunately I think the government is beyond caring about public sentiments and the release has done little to change our coarse of action but I think it's obvious that was his intended goal. I think the contents of the documents is proof positive he knew, generally, what he was releasing.
No Alias Adam,
"I think he knew that these classified documents descibed incidents where civilians were being killed and he knew that nothing was going to be done to either change coarse or re-evaluate the mission in Afghanistan if he hadn't released the documents."
That still does not justified what he did. A person who has a security clearance occupies a position of trust; not just trust by the government, but trust by the people of the United States. Would you want someone who could not be trusted to keep a secret holding a security clearance? What he did was simply irresponsible because he knew full well he was violating the people's trust in doing it. As for civilians being killed, while tragic, most incidents of civilians being killed in Afghanistan have been accidental. Civilians are killed in every war, and, unlike in Afghanistan where most civilian deaths have been accidental, in other wars civilians have been deliberately targeted. Remember the fire bombing of Dresden, Germany, and the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan, during World War Two. Hundreds of thousands of civilians were incinerated in those attacks. War is an ugly business.
So morons want whistleblower protection for anyone who releases classified documents? That would include the names of undercover agents and targets of surveillance, morons. He didn't release any smoking gun documents just embarassing emails and junk, idiots.
Pugiron - There's a big difference between Classified and Secret...moron.
Like Cheney, Rove, and Libby? Plame was an active CIA agent when they outed her to pressure her husband to help justify their means.
jrae, just for your edification Classified is a level of classification, of a particular security rating, just as Secret, Top Secret, etc are levels of security classification. However, "classified" is also used as a general term within military and intelligence circles to denote documents which have been determined to warrant some level of security. When a document is said to be "classified", that doesn't just refer to those documents rated for security as Classified, but in fact can refer to any level of security.
So there's a difference between a document considered to be classified, and a document which is rated as having the security level "Classified". You might want to keep such distinctions in mind before calling someone else a moron.
Manning is a hero
Keith-1952
Hmmm, a hero sandwich maybe. As a solider he missed his chance at being a Hero by committing Treason.
Life in prison is his reward and well deserved.
He hasnt had his trial yet Milo. I wouldnt count your chickens just yet.
Hmmm, wanna bet. I served for 20 years, during which time I served on several Court Martials. Two things are going to hang him. I'll let you guess what they are.
That's if it gets to court. He has plenty of civilians championing his cause. He can even be pardoned, cant he.
Sorry but, ROFLMAO. At the very least ART. 134 (The Catch All) will seal his fate. Hence the court martial.
The Jury is made up of Military Personnel. In this case it could be a combination of Senior NCO's and Commissioned Officers. However it could be Commissioned Officers only.
As a retired Senior Staff Non-Commissioned Officer its my opinion that when the facts are presented, Manning's goose is cooked.
Yes, if it remains a military only matter. But as i said, Manning as more then just a few civilians fighting for his release. The civilian authority has the last word.
So Milo, you served for 20 years and if you had seen any egregious errors (I'm sure you would have in 20 years of service) being perpetrated by the military, the government, you would, instead of notifying the public of these transgression, turn a blind eye and continue as per usual? You would not devulge that information to the public? Manning stood against laviathan to do what was right. I consider him a hero and a committed champion of the people rather than the establishment.
Freedom4Everyone
I appreciate your vigilance concerning manning, however misguided it is. In this case civil authority has no authority over this case.
* This case will be adjudicated by a General Court Martial.
* Public opinion has no bearing on a military court Martial.
Sure there will be some misguided political pressure, but it will not benefit manning.
Mannings actions were/are a misguided violation of the UCMJ, no matter what the reason was.
No Alias Adam
Manning had a duty to bring any and all wrong doings to his superiors, once he reported to his seniors his duty was done.
He could have sent this info to the Inspector Generals office. Had he done so he would not be in the pickle he is now going to pay dearly for.
"Manning had a duty to bring any and all wrong doings to his superiors, once he reported to his seniors his duty was done."
What if at that point nothing was done about it? What if his superiors, seniors or even the Inspector General swept the information under the rug in order to maintain the continuity of the establishment? What would you suggest he do at that point? Leave it, it's out of his hands, he's done his part?
His superiors did know what was going on already, the information was freely available amongst them and they had done nothing. The White House was briefed on the information, they knew and did nothing. What recourse did that leave Bradly?
No Alias Adam,
Why are you playing the "what if" game? It's ignorant and irrelevant. Deal with facts, not make believe please.
Fact: Manning did not take his concerns and/or information to his chain of command. Therefore, your "what if" scenario is meaningless.
Fact: Manning chose to indiscriminately and illegally access, copy and disseminate classified information to a foreign party. He chose to disregard any potential negative consequences that may result from his actions.
He is no hero. He is no whistleblower. He is a traitor.
And just for your information, his superiors wouldn't have automatically known what was going on. The documents Manning illegally accessed were classified documents and his immediate superiors may or may not have had access to them.
It's obvious from your comment that you really don't know much about the military.
no alias adam, he did not go to his superiors , the what if didn`t happen . so you don`t know what if . what he did is treason do the crime , do the time.......
I know enough to know the military is just like the a police force or the church or government institution and bureaucracies. The allegiences' of those involved with such institutions often times override justice and truth and instead tend to guard the reputation and continuity of the establishment. I know enough to know that even if Manning had gone to his superiors with the information it would have, in all likelihood, been swept under the rug.
If you'll take notice I followed my hypotheticals with assertations that the information was alreay known by his superiors and if not them it was known by the White House. What do you think, he was the only one with the information and if only he'd told his chain of command rather than leaking the documents the whole military structure and government coverup of misdeeds would have been avoided? The information was out there within the establishment and there was ample time to act accordingly and right those wrongs. That was never going to be done, it was obvious. So again, what recourse did he have?
it is not what if!!! you or I don`t know who new what, you have to go with the chain of command even if they change the law it is treason now. and he should be tried in a military court
You're right, it's not "what if." They military command knew about the crimes committed in the arena of war. They chose to gloss over those facts, classify the incidents as classified information and work towards saving the reputation of the military and the nation. The information was damaging and instead of admitting to it and taking a head on approach to combat it, instead of changing coarse or re-evaluating the situation, they swept it under the rug and continued persuing a failing policy and actions. You're also right that, "you or I don`t know who knew what." but we do know that it wasn't just Manning and it certainly wasn't the public, yet there was no disscusion, no talk to re-evaluate, just more of the same. And it was all being done on our dime, using our nations name, the public deserved to know.
"Abuse by Catholic priests, laymen and laywomen was systematically covered up by the church to protect its reputation, the commission said"
That's what this looks like to an unbiased observer. This is what our government has done. To protect their reputation, their jobs, their pride, their greed, their power, they have covered over misdeeds. They have led the population astray and Brably Manning wasn't about to tow the party line. He was couragous, much more couragous then those who follow rank and file while their superiors commit crimes. Allegience to the state, the church any institution before an allegience to justice and truth does not make you a hero.
No Alias Adam,
The lack of critical thinking you display truly saddens me, because it is indicative of the severe failure of the public education system to teach people how to think.
You say if Manning's superiors didn't know, the White House did. Really? Do you think the White House knows everything that goes on? Seriously? So you're basically saying that the White House is omniscient huh? God? Give me a break.
Depending on the information and what level it was initiated at, who was involved, what agencies were involved, etc. it is a lot easier than you think to keep things from the White House, Congress, etc. Directors, department heads, section chiefs and any other type of management or oversight individuals can easily bury information if they choose to do so.
You ask what other recourse did Manning have. Gee, I can think of several right off the top of my head. Take a few specific documents and give them to the networks. Give each network a copy of the documents and see what they do with them. Give them to some of the big newspaper outlets like the NYTimes, the LATimes, etc. See what they do with the info.
Post these few specific documents on YouTube, Facebook, etc. Hell, stand on a street corner and pass out copies of them so people can see for themselves.
Yes, he still would be punished under the law, but any of those options would have been far more acceptable than what he did.
This dirtbag copied hundreds of thousands of documents. Do you really think he knew what was in all of them??? That, all by itself, should show how irresponsible and uncaring this guy was about what his actions might cause. I don't care who you are. Nobody could possibly know what is in all of those documents.
Then, to multiply his idiocy, he gives them to a foreign organization. Do you really think this fool did in depth research on Wikileaks before sending them all that information? Do you think he actually took the time to ask himself if this organization could use this information to do real harm to the US? And no, I'm not talking about revealing corruption, crimes, etc. I'm talking about revealing specific information that could be used against us militarily or economically.
Manning's actions are the actions of an ideological, ignorant and uncaring idiot. That is why he is a traitor.
Are you guys kidding me? Do you actually think no one in the military and or government knew that we were persuing an unwise coarse of action in our war efforts in Afghanistan? Do you think the memo's and notes stating the current coarse was not sustainable was not common knowledge amongst the military brass and top politicians? Come on. Do you think Bradly Manning was the only person with access to this information and oh, if only he had reported the abuses, if only he had worked with his superiors the proper actions would have been taken, the wrongs would have be righted? Give me a break. This was systemic misinformation about what was going on in Afghanistan. Consecutive administrations did not want any release of information that would be disparaging to the war effort. They did not, under any circumstances, want to admit that they were wrong even though it was explicitly laid out in the documents that analysts and advisors were suggesting the war, in it's current model, was unwinnable. That's what the documents outline. Take it to the bank.
Look at Daniel Elsburg and The Pentagon Papers. Do you think, if he hadn't released those 10,000 pages of classified documents, we'd have pulled out of Vietnam like we did? It was an embarassment for politicians to admit we've lost and if there was any helping it, they wouldn't have done it. But when Daniel released the papers it was obvious the administration and the military were persuing a coarse of action that was unwise and unwinnable and any amount of advice was not going to change their minds. It took public outrage to change the policy towards Vietnam. Just like the current and former administration was not about to admit their efforts in Afghanistan were not working. They tried to cover up and go on as per usual.
You guys can't seriously think this wasn't common knowledge in the intel, military and political world, can you?
No Alias Adam,
You know, you can spin this any way you want. Wrap it up in truth, justice, mom and apple pie if it floats your boat. It will not change the fact that this man intentionally violated his oath, broke the law, gave classified information to a foreign organization and did NOTHING prior to that to bring this information to light. He did not do a single thing to bring these matters to light before sending all that information to Wikileaks.
So spare me the "he had no choice" bs. It doesn't hold up to even basic scrutiny.
I'm sorry you can't seem to wrap your mind around that one little fact, but that's your problem. He had options. He could have gone about this in other ways. He CHOSE not to attempt those other options. He CHOSE the path he did.
Now it is time to reap what he has sown.
And contrary to what you mistakenly believe, Manning DID have options. Better options. It's his fault he chose not to make use of them. Now, hopefully, he will pay for his lousy judgement. You call him courageous and a hero all you want.
I'll call him what he is. A misguided, ignorant fool.
Hey Mr. what if. the material was classified you do know what that means. NOt like the want ads. some people might know but not every body knows. Have you ever heard of "need to know" have you ever heard of that. And out of "all" the poeple that "knew" he was the only honest one
Your guys problem is, you assume our overriding concern should be protecting the rep of the miltary and of the government. I hate to break it to you, its not my concern.. Because i dont approve of most of what is going on already. And I support truth and justice above ALL ELSE.
To some Manning is a hero and a patriot. To others, a traitor. In any case, Manning knew what he doing was illegal. He practiced civil disobedience and will have to pay the penalty.
However, like any other accused, he deserves the full protection of the law until proven guilty. Some of the treatment he has received while detained, if reports are true, is deeply troubling.
The impact of the information in the released documents and what it says about the U.S. government, its policies and practices, will be decided in the court of public opinion and in the voting booth.
The U.S has turned into N.Korea if you ask me. Or worse.
You have your own Gulag now. And you have made torture legal. Citizens can now be held indefinitely WITHOUT TRIAL. All privacy protection is gone.
Welcome to the U.S.S.A....
UCMJ is what he is under
Manning did not release specific documents to reveal a specific illegal action, as a "whistleblower" deserving consideration might have done. He released hundreds of thousands of classified records, regardless of the content, or the consequences for the US, and individuals named. He should suffer all the consequences the legal system can muster.
All the criminal behavior of the government, Pentagon, CIA and all the other agencies, security or otherwise is Classified.
The Pentagon including the CIA is the biggest organized crime outfit in the universe all controlled by the MIC like Lockheed, Boeing, Northrop, General Dynamics, Raytheon, Halliburton, McDonnel Douglas and about 1000 others domestic AND FOREIGN.
We were forewarned by Dwight Eisenhower and Thomas Jefferson.
Leon Panetta is the real terrorist.
Yes, lets just get rid of the military, intelligence agencies, national defense, police...
People really are thick.
I am not a Democrat by any stretch of the imagination but my opinion of Leon Panetta is he is a good american with the best interests of our country at heart. He understands the security of our country is not a "faculty lounge" discusion topic. He understands there are real bad guys out there who would like to see the US diminished, economically, militarily and lose influence in the world community China, Russia, Iran, North Korea to name the most virulent anti american nations.He knows to survive in this tough neighborhood called earth we must remain strong as weaklings get pushed around by the bullies. Many posts on this site reflect the naive belief that we are always wrong...regardless of our motives and many including Obie foolishly believe the soft touch is the way to go.Well Iran, Syria,Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt are thumbing their noses at Obie and our country in response to his soft sell. We never seem to learn. The world is safer when democracies are formed and less safe when totalitarian regimes are formed. History proves this over and over again for those who care to take note. Some wise man said democracies never attack other democracies and I think this is borne out by the past. The US still remains the gold standard for democracies and people still flock here to live freely and climb the economic ladder not available in most countries. So "we be doomed" I'll gladly tolerate the Boeings,Raytheon to keep the country secure and I wouldn't trust your ilk a second with this or probably any other serious responsibilty.
Then why is the government turning the country into a totalitarian regime?
You have your own Gulag now. And you have made torture legal. Citizens can now be held indefinitely WITHOUT TRIAL. All privacy protection is gone. You have checkpoints springing up all over.
Welcome to the U.S.S.A....
Really awe have Gulag's now. What law states that American Citizens can be held with out trial? If you are refering to the Defense bill that was just passed, there is language included in the bill that excludes Americans.
You are wrong. Anyone (including Americans) on US or foreign soil who are merely "deemed" to have terrorist connections of any sort can be held indefinitely without charge and without trial until the end of the war on terror.
That would never survive a challenge under the 6th amendment. At least I hope that it wouldn't.
culheath,
Yeah, just keep telling yourself that. Have you read the actual bill? I doubt it. Have you actually taken a copy of the real bill and given it to a lawyer to determine what it really says?? Again, I doubt it.
You see, I have. I took a copy of the bill to 3 different lawyers and they all said the same thing. This bill does NOT give the government the right to inter American citizens without trial or for as long as it wants. The level of fearmongering generated by this bill just proves people aren't too bright.
It's amazing how much fear is generated by ignorance, even in a modern society. How sad.
I dont approve of anyone being held without trial. Terrorist of otherwise. Everyone deserves their day in court.
Some of us still believe in justice and fairness.
The soldier should be tried for treason the documents he released jeopardized national security of the US and other nations and people's lives were and are at risk due to his incorrect actions.
He does not deserve any mercy at all.
Really? Ok, what were those things that jeopardized our national security NewTampaResident? Can you show us, or is this just the normal, "well, if the government says so, it has to be true" rhetoric?
"He does not deserve any mercy at all."
Foaming at the mouth are we? He hasn't even went to court yet Dexter, and people like you already have him judged and ready for the rack or rope. Tell me, have you ever served on jury duty? I would think that you would know better if you did. It's people like yourself that drags the term humanity through the mud. I'm glad you don't represent the whole human race, if you did, we would all be up a creek without a paddle.
Only in America; Would it even be possible for a fair trial in this case. He has the deck stacked against him. I'm scared the jury will be given instructions they will have to go on and if they don't then things just might fall back on them one day. If its a repub jury then he's going to hang and then everyone in the so called right places for this will be happy.
It will either be a trial by Judge, or a panel of Commissioned Officers with Senior Non-Commissioned Officers.
Joe,
Your ignorance and petty hatred towards people you don't agree with only makes you look foolish.
First off, Manning will be tried by the military, not a civilian court. He violated military law and will therefore be charged under a General Court Martial. Whether or not he is tried in a civilian court will be based on whether or not charges are brought against him for violating civilian laws.
Save the political commentary bs for some other venue. Last time I checked, the President was a Democrat and the Attorney General is a Democrat and they BOTH want him tried. But I guess that's different since they're Democrats huh?
I wish people like you on both sides of the political/ideological aisle would either grow up or shut up. Your childish bs got old a long time ago.
Whistleblower or not, I would like to ask this individual one question. What will you say to the families of the hundreds of people whose lives you put at risk by releasing their names? In addition to the charges he is already facing, he should be charged one count each for recklessly endangering the welfare of another person for each name he released. More charges to follow if any of these people actually lost their lives as a result of his actions.
Retired, maybe some of those diplomats should not have blown their yaps saying ignorant things about the people in whose countries they were placed. Then on top of it, it was being recorded, isn't that just great? So, who put who into a position of danger here? Oh, that's right, those sensitive documents contained ignorant statements that the public shouldn't see that these diplomats made. That's nice to know. Sure, let's all stick up for diplomats that should never have been given that post from the start.
I am by no means sticking up for the diplomats. I think some of them should be buried up to their chins on the beach just before high tide. My concern is those people who will be affected by this persons actions. With few exceptions the goverment should have no secrets from the American people. Except possibly in National Defense matters.
"What will you say to the families of the hundreds of people whose lives you put at risk by releasing their names?"
Wasn't that "danger" proven to be nothing but a government smokescreen? I remember something about some independent research group/news organization going through the information that had been released up to that point, of the names released only three were of any consequence, two were dead and the other had already been outed as a double agent (being paid for info by the US but working for the "insurgents"), the rest of the names were already publicly known.
Blow my whistle, bitch! (It's from a techno song)
It's shameful what this "democratic and Christian" nation does to its own citizens. It brings back memories of the torture ways of Stalin, Pinochet, et al. You expect war crimes, torture galore, extra judicial killings of prisoners, black boxes, "extra-ordinary renditions" and that a la carte menu of ways to suppress dissent and make everybody try to think a la tea partier, just because the black illegal from Kenya wasts to be accepted by the neo nazis of the fourth reistach. It's bad when this democracy slaying ways came from the retard pervert from Texas, but coming from a constitutional scholar, although this I'm not sure, nor about his "intelligence" is a double tsunamic tragedy and to put the icing on the cake: Christian also. The trifecta for the perfect storm of crimes galore.
It was reported how this "Christian and democratic" nation places a top secret classifcation to war crimes as it was with the Haditha war crime anf for which no one pay, not even a single day in jail, no demotions and here, in Haditha we have the brutality of evil. 20 innocent civilians, including children and OMG and infant. And to think that Nixon was forced to resign for obstruction of justice.
Now, if another retard, another war crmiminal wants, a la the retard pervert from Crawford, Texas, to hold anyone indefinetely, supposedly the tyrant of turn can do it and then to show hypocrisy to the nth degree, we tear the togas when Iran imprisons our Criminals In Action agents disguised as tourists, students, "scientists."
I wish those who proclaim being so vehemently against abortion, use just a tad of that phony outrage and spend it in going after war criminals, we would be, I hope, but I won't hold my breath, more civilized, better and truer Christians. It's sad, so sad to see a supposedly beacon fo democracy behaving as the likes of what the worse can offer. And just like honest German people couldn't or wouldn't raise a finfer to defend their morals, this "Christian" nation also allows all that was dear to most Americans go down the drain with all the hypocritical feces that our purchased, sealed and delivered politicians can defecate. Now, I see why Iran is bent on getting nuclear bombs, our cowards are dumb and dumber but not so dumb as to start a nuclear holocaust specially when the other side can retaliate in the same manner, not to be confused with the Jewish one, because that one has been milked to death. It's just running on fumes, odors.
For world peace's sake, we should demand that Russia try to bring the Warsaw pact back into the fold. We need a counter balance to this "Christian and democratic" nation run amok.
lolwut¿
Good luck pinhead. Even the former commies know how f — — ed up the warsaw nations were and I would venture if you lived there in those times you would be whining and trying to get to the good ole' US!
For downwithe bolsheviks. I see intelligence is not one of your talents. I'm talking about a counter balance to wild cowboy mentality, but to refresh your memory, if you have one, what did NATO, America did when the riots in the Iron Curtain? Stay away because we knew we couldn't take them on like we do now with those nations to weak to defend themselves. Remember, the Nazis also tought they could take on the world, and as they say, the rest is history. Many empires ceased to exist because one day when the sh*it hits the fan and the powerful try to bite more than they can chew, is when they fall. Only God knows when it's our turn and since we have NATO on the Don Corleone side, maybe this time, our time, will be the exception to the rule, but by then we will be another tyranny, just like those we love to hate. In other words, we became them. Go figure!
There should be a way to expose information the public has a right to. Information stamped confidential by those that wish to keep their mistakes from being discovered.
He is a Traitor. Plain and simple. He put the lives of others in jeopardy. He should be put in front of a firing squad and executed. Twist it any way you want, he does not have the right to give government documents to anyone else period.
They are those that will believe the goverment will do no wrong. These are the same people that were the tories during the revelutionary war. These are the people that would have kept the U.S. part of the British empire. Freedom will never come because there are more of them than those that want freedom
whistle-blowers have no protections in America, there is a wide gap between the way the law works and the way we are led to believe it works. 80% of Federal Whistle-blowers end up in Prison instead of being protected.
The hardest part for Manning is the fact that he learned this information while commiting a crime. You may not like the laws and we as Americans can get laws changed but you cannot just ignore the laws you don't like and break them.
If that were the case we'd have constant chaos.
Sure we can 3rd, you just have to be prepared to face the storm. Its called civil disobedience. You should try it some time, its very liberating.
3rdpartyadvocate - It is obvious that you skiped all your civics classes. Americans break laws all the time to make change, it is our historic birthright.
What do you think we have now? One look at congress will tell you that order is not of the highest priority.
Manning's a whistleblower, young, naive and will be given time. The powers that be will not allow anything else. Hopefully, enough public outcry will make his sentence less than it would have been otherwise.
So it goes.
Hahahah thanks for the laugh culheath.
I hate to break this to you and the other Pro-Manning crowd out there, but "public outcry" doesn't mean anything to a military Court Martial trial. Manning will be tried by a military court for his actions. Whether a civilian court tries him as well is irrelevant. If found guilty, which he should be, Manning will be punished by military law, not civilian law.
Spin it anyway you want, the man broke the law, stole information he had no right to take and then gave it to a foreign organization. That is treason. Whether you agree with his actions or not is irrelevant in the eyes of the law.
He was reckless, irresponsible and the consequences of his actions could have been far worse than they were. There are right ways and wrong ways of attempting to bring crimes, corruption, etc. to light. The way Manning did it was definitely the wrong way.
By the way, anyone who believes that his actions were just should really question that belief. You are, in effect, saying that the end justifies the means...and that has been used to justify an awful lot of evil throughout history.
Just something to consider.
treason is kind of a bad choice for civil disobedience , it can get people killed and undermine our national security . its not like smoking a joint at a 420 ralley
Someday Manning will be in the history books as a hero and patriot…if we survive that long.
No he will not. He will be a traitor for all of history. And people like you will go down in history as the hate America era.
--USMC/USN, First Marine Division, I-Corps Vietnam, 1967-68
And you?
I thank you for your service in perhaps American's worst conflict, WBD, but I do have to ask if you volunteered to that conflict.
You decide. There was a very good chance of me getting drafted...as anyone my age and circumstances at that particular time.
Although at the time I believed in what we were doing. Until about 9 months in country...then I figured it out.
He is already seen as a hero in most of the world. The world doesnt just revolve around the U.S. 3rd.
He is already seen as a hero in most of the world
Which only proves the ignorance and anti-American attitude of the rest of the world. It is a viewpoint only based on emotionalism, not logic, reason or intelligence.
Typical.
What's really typical is how your American arrogance has blinded you and so many others. It was emotionalism that led Americans into Iraq, mo9st of the rest of the world saw the reprehensible folly for what it was at the time.
Uhhhh...I have a problem when polititians are responsible for voting for laws that may at one point bite them in the ass. It's the same problem I have when they get to vote whether they will get a raise. Too much bias and they have too much to lose. This needs to be done either by objective committe or popular vote or both.
The American people.
As far as I'm concerned Manning is a hero. We all know that War is wrong and we all know that the only reason that the government is keeping it a secret from us, is because they know, deep in their hearts, that it's wrong also. Try putting Wall st. on trial or have a referendum among the people who to put in jail for life, Jesus or Barabas? Government! Try some transparency.
Manning didn't blow the whistle on anything. He indiscriminately copied everything that came through his inbox and gave it to someone whose goals were in opposition to those of the United States of America. That makes him a spy. Furthermore, nothing he took exposed any atrocities or war crimes. Further further more, the few atrocities that were mentioned in his "release" had already been exposed by actual, protected whistle blowers who managed to serve their country honorably without committing trason. This guy is an @ss clown and attention seeker. If he had done this 20 or 30 years ago, he would be executed or put in prison for life. In these touchy-feely times, whatever happens to him won't be as bad as what he deserves.
CLASSIFIED means that something has been classified at some level of sensitivity. Those official US government levels are
CONFIDENTIAL
SECRET
TOP SECRET
within each level of classification, something can also be additionally segregated by special clearance. If it is below CONFIDENTIAL, it is public. There is nothing ABOVE TOP SECRET. There is no classification of "CLASSIFIED". Each level of classification is classified at that level by the sensitivity of the information - the potential value of that information to someone else, and the relative damage the release or compromise that information could do to the US if released outside of official channels.
For ref - when you are granted access to any classified information, you are told what the classification means. You also agree to protect this information to the level of protection specified. You are also given official channels to use if you have an issue with any information, or see any wrong doing you feel you need to report.
Manning knew that the release of this information was illegal. There is absolutely no question about that. And he did it anyway. I have not seen all of the information so cannot question the exact data, but information is almost always classified for a reason. Yes, sometimes stupid stuff gets classified because someone was too lazy to deal with it in any other manner, but for the most part, things are classified for a reason.
By the very definition of the term, the unauthorized release of US government classified information to foreign powers, Manning is a traitor and deserves to be treated as such.
People think transparency in government is a good thing? You really think you deserve to know everything that is going on? No - you really don't want to know, and there are things that you just shouldn't know. Unless you have worked in that world you would never understand it. And to say that you deserve to know this information is simply naive. Rant all you want. But it is truly and utterly naive.
You are the naive one, Walker. When it comes to the duplicity used by the sleazeball Bush administration, the more transparency the better. It's not like Manning sold state secrets to a foreign enemy, he informed the American people of that sleazeball Bush administration's duplicity in their dealings. That is a whistleblower, not a traitor. The true traitors to American interests were Bush, Cheney and the rest of those scumbuckets. Manning did our country a tremendous service and should be saluted, not jailed. It's because of Bush and his cohorts that whistleblowers are necessary, as Manning has shown in his briefs about how scummy Bush was.
One question everyone is overlooking is how this person got the info. Was the military that lax in their security of handling classified info? Seems like it, if what they say about those documents found in Iraq about the marines killing civilians.
Another thing overlooked is the killing of people giving first aid to wounded civilians by a US helicopter crew, who asked for, and was given permission to fire. That is also against the Geneva Convention, killing first aid people. Nothing was done to the chopper crew, or the person who gave permission to fire. Nothing was done to the people in charge of Manning obtaining the classified info that easy.
Another cover up or two? Make up your own minds on that. Should Manning be punished? I say yes he should, because if nothing else, he betrayed his oath that he took when signing up with the Army. But, if what I have read, Manning reported the incident about the killing of first aid people, and was told to shut up. If that is true, I can understand him giving that info to Wikileaks. But not the rest of the stuff he easily obtained, due to lax security on the part of the Army.
Plenty of blame to go around, and just Manning is going to get punished? I suppose a lot of people thinks that is OK. I don't, I think a very in dept investigation needs to be done, and all of them get courtmartialed, as they all screwed up.
Manning was an inteligence analyst. It was his job to look over mass amounts of information like this. He wasnt just an ordinary infantry man.
By the way, the international courts do not recognize that you were just following orders. Everyone is expected to do the right thing. And will be held accountable if they dont. Even if it means your life. Thats is why none of the Nazis got off.
I was just following orders, isnt good enough. Manning had a greater duty to expose wrong doing. He knew he couldnt do that by taking it to his boss, or even the American press.
Some here are missing some points. While I do not entirely agree with Manning, there are larger issues.
1) There is no agency or channel for someone to expose wrongdoing in this type of situation. The act specifically declined addressing that.
2) In spite of what many politicians stated on camera, the heads of the CIA and military stated there were no 'lives lost' because of this. Compare that to the Valery Plame case, what happened to all her contacts in foreign countries? The Vice Presidents right hand man was convicted of obstruction in that case, but the case itself remains unsolved. That is also treason.
To kind of address Hell no-568603, we definitely pick and choose our prosecutions. A private who embarasses the higher-ups WILL get his ass kicked. Connected contractors stealing hundreds of millions? Not so much. There is no democracy or Christianity in government, just money. And this is both liberal and conservative politicians. That whole right-left thing is just actors playing 'good cop - bad cop' to your eventual destruction.
Good luck to us all.
gearlube,
Yeah, Valerie Plame was a real covert agent alright. By the time she was "outed", she had been stateside for over 6 years, right at CIA headquarters. Her husband, relatives and friends all knew she worked for the CIA.
Yep, that's real covert stuff alright. If anyone had any questions about her, they'd have found out long before she was "outed". Trying to say that being outed put other peoples' lives in jeopardy only proves that most people have no understanding of the clandestine world.
There's a very large difference between being given a light level of cover for light-risk missions and being a real covert agent. Valerie Plame was not even close to being a real covert agent.
Hah, covert. Now that's a real laugh.
Valerie Plume, covert or not, should not have been in any public discussion. Manning, on the other hand, did our country a great service. It's not like Manning took his information and sold it or handed it to an enemy government. What Manning did was let us, the American people, know about the tactics used by the sleazeball Bush administration to bring us to war and the continued sleazeball tactics used by the Bush administration once there. That is the definition of whistleblower, and you numbnuts who think it's treason should be down on your knees thanking him for the great service Manning performed for his country. Thanks to him we may not get involved in any unnecessary wars in the future.