Slashdot Mirror
WikiLeaks Gives $15k To Bradley Manning Defense
wiredmikey writes "The Web site supporting Bradley Manning, the Army soldier charged with leaking a massive number of US classified information to WikiLeaks, posted an announcement on its site today, saying that WikiLeaks had transferred $15,100 to the legal trust account of Manning's attorney. WikiLeaks has been publicly soliciting donations specifically for the expenses of Manning's legal defense following his arrest in May 2010. The contribution by WikiLeaks brings the total funds raised and transferred to Bradley's civilian legal defense team, led by attorney David Coombs, to over $100,000. Supporters say that a 'vigorous defense' for Manning is estimated to cost $115,000."
The reason i say that is they may be able to use this in their espionage attempts. Meaning if he was given the info without asking for it, its one thing, but if he asked for it, than he can be tried under the espionage act (assange)
Now that they are giving him money for legal defense, a good lawyer can say that it shows that they were in fact working together. IANAL btw
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
Is $15k a significant chunk of change for WL or is it less than a day's allocation of the hookers and blow funds? How much of what has been donated to WL specifically for this cause is $15k?
That my nation has deprived PFC Bradly Manning of due process is something I worry about greatly.
If I was on any sort of stage I would be repeating the words 'due process' every day until Manning is given his rights.
Really, I know what I'm doing...Ohhhh, look at the shiny buttons!
Manning is fucked no matter what basically. The UCMJ doesn't have a "Because I though it should be released," exception to the rules on classified materials. Also, as implied by the UCMJ thing, he'll be court-marshaled which means tried by a military court. Trying for nullification by a sympathetic jury is more or less impossible.
His case is pretty open and shut when you get down to it. I can't see what an expensive defense will do for him.
Technically, WikiLeaks did nothing wrong (according to what you can find publically). Now that they are assisting him, as another person stated, it shows that they are working together. That is very bad for WikiLeaks. Unfortunately, Manning did commit a crime whether we like it or not. Whether it was for the good or not, it is still a crime. WikiLeaks needs to slow their roll before they get themselves in some trouble (and rest assured, there are lawyers waiting for WikiLeaks to slip up on something). WikiLeaks is a pretty cool place to get some information, but if they keep slipping by donating to people like Manning, they may be giving places reasons to take them down, which sucks.
The world is how you make it
A token amount, just for appearances. The simple fact is that WikiLeaks no longer needs Pfc Manning, and the handwriting is pretty much on the wall for him, anyway. The best he can expect is a dishonorable discharge and a short stay at USDB in Leavenworth. Giving him any more would be a waste of resources they may need to defend Assange in Sweden.
Wikileaks should operate like a newspaper and Not be involved with defending the informants. Now they can be accused of colluding with the guy who stole US documents. Wikileaks should just be REPORTING the documents, and nothing else.
They just shot themselves in the foot.
FOX NEWS.com should be BANNED from television and internet. Have the Congress take it over and give us Truespeak.
but he can pretty much expect to have to live in solitary confinement if he wants to survive in prison. People who are perceived as traitors are right up there with child molesters to many convicts. The fact that he is a homosexual and it's come out that he was motivated to leak the data by DADT will only make it worse for him.
If I were his attorney, plan A would be some form of insanity defense based on his mental state over DADT and plan B would be violation of civil liberties for imprisoning him so long in such harsh conditions without a trial.
Like?
It's not illegal to donate money and just donating money doesn't mean you know the person.
For one thing, the complete lack of any mention of Area 51 or the JFK assassination shows that the US Military Industrial complex is even more secretive than we thought!</sarcasm>
and on the other hand, court marshal and execution for treason.
Do not meddle in the affairs of sysadmins, for they are subtle, and quick to anger.
new papers that are going to be released has ufo information revealed by u.s. officials in transcripts. another reason why they are trying to suppress it so frantically, is this.
Read radical news here
im not even going to go into the fact that he has helped americans to discover that their government was betraying their trust, their funds and their rights.
The U.S. Constitution emphasizes that Americans should never trust the government outright.
You must be new here.
Ever heard of the state of Louisiana? http://www.la-legal.com/history_louisiana_law.htm
He will face a court martial, but this isn't a capital offense. Individuals that have been caught and convicted of providing information like that in the past have faced long prison terms. There's a spy still in prison since the mid 80s for spying on the US for Israel.
Sure he'll likely spend decades behind bars, but he's not facing any capital charges here.
What money? The money that Paypal is sitting on or the money that Mastercard won't allow to be donated?
I am NOT an expert on the USMJ (or even passingly familiar with it), but I wouldn't a treason charge would come from a civilian court, as it is defined constitutionally? Now, that is not to say there is not a capital crime in the USMJ that he might have committed in passing classified information to a non-state entity. I don't know.
Though what the laws against spying are really talking about is paying someone to give you information, it could potentially be shore horned in this case and the US government sure as hell wants Assanage. They could potentially argue that this constitutes a payment for the information they received which makes them not a passive party, but an actor and thus guilty of a crime.
As you say, big mistake when you are under the gun anyhow. Plus, as I mentioned in another post, I can't see how this'll really help. I can't see Manning winning his case. He very clearly broke the law under the UCMJ and being that it'll be a military trial, the jury is not going to be sympathetic. Right or wrong, he's going to jail.
If Wikileaks is helping to fund his defense, doesn't that put a couple of nails in the coffin for the defense??
I do agree with most of this however, this guy's life is over and he'll spend the rest of his life in maximum security at Club Fed. While I can't argue the merits of what he did, I can say
that if he is found guilty, then he's forfit his future. I honestly think based on what we know or have been told by the press and the military is only part of the story. Considering this will also be handled by the Military we probably won't know all of the details as to "why?"
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
There's a spy still in prison since the mid 80s for spying on the US for Israel.
Jonathan Pollard and Israel keeps asking every administration to release him. Fortunately, even under Bush, that request has been denied every time.
I don't expect that to change under Obama either. The military and intelligence communities would go apeshit over his release. A U.S. citizen who spied for a foreign country who gets rewarded for the spying by being sent to the country who spied for and who would treat him a hero. Yeah, that would go over well.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
Here's what they can do to get Assange, and part of the reason his organization is paying some of Manning's legal bills :
After giving Manning 'protective solitary confinment' (aka coercive torture) for enough time, they'll get Manning to claim that Assange and him worked together to get those government documents. Manning will be offered a deal for a limited amount of prison time if he serves as a 'government witness' against Assange. Given the last 7 months have been hell on earth for Manning, turning such an offer down would be incredibly difficult. Even if there is no actual communication logs showing this, the mere testimony of Manning (under duress) is a "witness statement" that a grand jury can use.
Once they get Assange dragged into U.S. custody, they can lock him up in jail for years while federal prosecutors file motions for extensions and things. Then, finally, they can give him a show trial where the jury is stacked with people who hate sex criminals. (even though Assange would not be accused of such crime, the jurors would think of him as a rapist).
Even if he were acquitted (the case as I outlined it is very weak) he would be out hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal defense fees and years off his natural lifespan. The Federal government cannot be sued to reclaim either of these things unless Assange were able to show that the government KNEW he was innocent. (which if they have a coerced statement from Manning, above, the government doesn't have to pay)
So in a nutshell : they can punish Assange severely for his actions even if they are never able to convict him of a crime. And imagine the mental anguish : Assange won't know for months or years during this process if he is going to be convicted and made to rot in prison for decades.
This kind of thing happens day in and day out in the U.S. We make more people rot in confinement than the worst despotic regimes in history. And there are many effective ways to get around the protections offered by your 'rights', making them nearly meaningless in practice.
In the military system, legal counsel is free of charge whether or not you can afford it. And with a high profile case like this, I'm sure they'll appoint someone very senior. If you want to pay for a civilian lawyer, usually they are former military lawyers, or they're not well suited for military court. I wouldn't donate to this even if you want to defend Bradley Manning.
It's worth noting that the other complicating factor here is that the reason Manning is imprisoned under harsh conditions right now is that the prosecutors are trying to get him to testify that Wikileaks (and Assange in particular) contacted him and convinced him to release the cables. In other words, they want Wikileaks to become his accomplice, and Wikileaks may think that contributing huge sums to his legal defense would help the prosecutors make that argument.
I have a major problem with the process the prosecution is using here: Arrest person A for a crime, then hold him without trial under harsh conditions until he testifies against person B (who just happens to be a political enemy of the government). That's a popular way for totalitarian governments who want to create evidence for show trials, not a valid police tactic in a free country.
I am officially gone from
I would appreciate at least one example of what you consider some real, real shit.
Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please.--Mark Twain
Wow, several months late in their less than timely follow through. Wikileaks has gone on the record as saying they were going to donate $50,000 to Manning's defense. Does it surprise anyone that when it came time to follow through they fell through? All told they've raised at least $150,000 just from the heavily edited helicopter video alone. Of which they can only be bothered to spend $15,000 on his behalf. Take the $150,000 from the video and $50,000 pledge and you get a $185,000 profit for Wikileaks on those two items alone, not counting everything they raised from the cables.
Look, I know that fifteen thousand and fifty thousand both start with 'fift', but that doesn't mean they are anywhere near the same amount. I don't know about in Europe, but in America raising money for a cause and refusing to use it for a cause is considered a pretty serious felony fraud. This of it this way, less than 1 dollar in 3 that was pointedly raised for his defense was actually donated. Consider all the other money wikileaks has gotten from the rest of Manning's contributions and you'll see just how badly Wikileaks hung Manning out to dry. On a personal level, considering his treasonous actions could result in anywhere from 52 years in prison up to the death penalty, it's nice too see wikileaks living up to it's potential and hanging him out to dry.
You must be new here. Slashdot has moderation. If you're lost and looking for the "like" buttons, here's what you do: head over that way, take the second on the right, push your way through the crowds of teenagers, past the drunk party photos and lonely people clamoring for attention. There you will find facebook.
They cant, he did not technically do a treasonous act. I suggest you learn military law about Treason and not listen to idiots with the last name Palin.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
the difference in between apple fanbois and 'assangebois' is that, the latter is a show of support for people exposing uncomfortable truth. and the fact that there are morons who put two in the same basket, like you, is the explanation for why we are in this kind of mess on this planet in the first place.
Read radical news here
Let the ACLU or some other such organization defend Manning if they think it is right. But Wikileaks is supposed to be for publishing anonymous whistle blower information. Manning is not anonymous, nor is he a whistle blower, nor does their mission involve defending people from lawsuits.
I'm glad I didn't give any money to Wikileaks.
Has the palin family been working for webster's lately?
I'd say that taking documents he shouldn't have taken, and then giving them to someone who wants to damage the country is a pretty good example of #3, and even #2
treason
[tree-zuhn] Show IPA
–noun
1.
the offense of acting to overthrow one's government or to harm or kill its sovereign.
2.
a violation of allegiance to one's sovereign or to one's state.
3.
the betrayal of a trust or confidence; breach of faith; treachery.
Do not meddle in the affairs of sysadmins, for they are subtle, and quick to anger.
Exactly where has PFC Manning been denied due process as defined under the UCMJ? Please cite the specific section instead of trying for sensational statements.
He has been denied a speedy trial and has suffered punitive treatment in pre-trial detention. This violates Article 10 UCMJ and R.C.M. 707.
Because justice is only for those that have money.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
How, pray tell, has he been deprived of due process?
Maybe you haven't heard the reports of the condition of his detention. It was written about quite extensively in December. Here's an article with a number of links.
He's also innocent until proven guilty. He "should be tried" should be your stance.
Dan
So that goes for almost everyone who has ever suffered through the US "justice" system.
Supporter of the +1 Over Dramatic mod option. In memory of apk.
Law and dictionary definition are two separate thing
Jehovah be praised, Oracle was not selected
Webster has no legal standing in the US Court system. The Constitution, on the other hand, does: "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court."
Manning was spying on America for Americans! He felt that the citizens needed to know what was being kept secret from them. The guy was sold a bill of goods about military service, and when he was in the thick of it he realized that he and everyone else had been lied to.
Blar.
The military and intelligence communities didn't seem to mind the recent release of Russian agents. Maybe they didn't transfer any valuable secrets, but they were working for Russia.
I can't be arsed to look it up, but I'm pretty sure the formal legal definition of "treason" requires you to give help or information to a an active enemy of the Unites States (as in a foreign power we are in state of war or conflict with). I don't think he committed the legal act of treason. On the other hand he's guilty of at least half a dozen crimes which he knowingly committed. The kid is boned. He'll be lucky if the courts take youthful idealism into account and just send him to military prison for 10 or 20 years instead of life (the US hasn't executed anyone for espionage outside a time of war for a long time and i doubt they'd start by making a martyr out of this kid).
I don't know what kind of "vigorous defense" they plan to offer. Regardless of your opinion of Wikileaks itself, this guy has pretty clearly committed actions which violate a number of laws and military regulations, all of which he was aware of, and all of which he was reminded of at least annually if not more often. He deserves his day in court like anyone else, but the smart money would be on taking a plea deal and hoping for the best.
I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
This has been said many times before, but in the US treason is very specifically defined, as follows,
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
because the English at the time had a habit of using 'treason' as a catch-all term for 'things the [Government|Crown] doesn't like'. I note, not without irony, that many commentators on this issue, even on Slashdot, now do the same thing. Especially ironic is that treason is defined in the Constitution; yet on this very site, during the Bush era, comments often claimed that Bush's disregard for the Constitution amounted to treason, and that he should therefore be impleached, imprison, or executed.
Decades behind bars is a horrible sentence. Almost as much as execution.
First Wikipedia begs for money. Then WikiLeaks ask for money. Soon people are going to equate "Wiki" with begging for money. (Or PBS.) :-)
Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
The military is pretty big on doing what you are told, following orders. While all orders must be lawful to be followed, there are not provisions for someone to say "Well it was a lawful order, but I thought it wasn't best for the American people."
Like it or no that is how it goes. He broke military law, and is going to go to jail for it. I'm not claiming it is right or wrong, I am claiming that it is what it is going to happen.
Yes I agree. His living conditions are hellish. I hope no one here argues it doesn't amount to torture.
In fact, it is long-term torture, lasting for close to a year now.
The man has yet to be sentenced. He should not be punished, especially not by long-term torture, in the interim.
Minimum security is plenty to hold him.
That is true. $15K is less than the $20K Michael Moore gave Assange for his rape defense. Manning's case is a lot more serious and more complicated (in the sense that there are a lot more things that can go against him just on errors in legal paperwork).
You might as well just light your money on fire. It would be quicker and less emotionally painful.
You'd be better off sending your money to a local group, because I'm pretty sure your leaders act the same as ours. You can believe otherwise if you like.
Tiger Blooded Bi-Winning Machine
It can be argued that letting the enemy see the secrets we're keeping about our actions against them would be "aid and comfort".
The only question then is whether that was the motive, and it's not likely to be provable that Manning's motive was to help our enemy kill us more easily. That's just the result of his negligence in considering the possible consequences of his actions.
Those aren't UFOs conspiracy noob. Those are craft built by a consortium of conglomerates and elites using stolen technology from aliens, and they will be used to facilitate the world-wide hoax called Project Blue Beam. Although this effort is being thwarted by another powerful group who are using their weather and earthquake weapons in a secret war.
This is common knowledge.
Tiger Blooded Bi-Winning Machine
The military and intelligence communities didn't seem to mind the recent release of Russian agents. Maybe they didn't transfer any valuable secrets, but they were working for Russia.
It's quite normal to do that; often in exchange for our spies there, which is what happened in this case. Spying for your own country is not treason; and there are accepted norms for how to treat foreign agents. Pollard, Walker, et.al. were Americans entrusted with our secrets and sold themselves out. That is very different than a foreign agent coming to the US to spy.
I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
I don't think WikiLeaks has done anything wrong. They receive information and post it. So what if it pisses off those who allowed their information to leak. But in the case of the soldier who leaked this information he has committed treason against this nation and should be sentenced to death. Sorry to be so brutal but it's the only crime and sentence defined in the constitution and I think we should make frequent use of it against any US citizen leaking or selling information. If that person is leaking information to correct a perceived wrong then they should stand up for what they believe in and be ready to face the consequences of their actions. For those looking to profit... off with their heads! By the way, I love my country but I hate my government so I can't blame those leaking information to stop something wrong they know about, but they need to be aware of the consequences and I suspect more information is leaked for $$$$ than any moral reasons.
...is a bigger threat to democracy than terrorism ever was.
The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
to the prosecution? As a former holder of a TS/SCI clearance who took my oath of secrecy seriously I would like to see this guy get nailed to the wall.
While I generally agree, I have to point out that the spies we traded them for were Russian citizens who spied for the US - so your argument doesn't really hold.
Learn about Photography Basics.
He should get a good plea deal too since I'm sure the government is very interested in exactly what was on that CD.
Nice...:p
The Lawyer's account of his conditions aren't all that bad, but lend themselves to abuse.
Sleep deprivation is the most common charge levied against them, as it would be entirely legal and plausible under the conditions for "prevention of injury" watch. Taking everything at face value wouldn't be "harsh" in my mind for a convicted criminal, but this is pre-trial holding, and it has been going on for longer than many prisoners entire sentence. Note that the government has already passed the statutorial limit of a Speedy Trial, and his lawyer has filed a Motion to dismiss all charges
That's because Israel doesn't have any American spies locked up, if they did I'm sure there would be a trade
"One is innocent until proven guilty."
While the court must presume innocence, the rest of us have no such requirement. I have no moral obligation to pretend he didn't do what he did. I'm not in his fan club.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
While I generally agree, I have to point out that the spies we traded them for were Russian citizens who spied for the US - so your argument doesn't really hold.
Well, in that case it came down to they had something we wanted for something they wanted so we made a deal. What kind of a deal? A deal deal.
Nobody wants Walker et al, and Israel may want Pollard but really have noting to offer in trade that's worth the political fallout so there's no deal. In the Russian case, they wanted their people bad enough to do a deal.
I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
Oh good. Because I thought our planets problems were much more complicated than what people think of Assange and Wikileaks. If that's the only problem we can have everything fixed in time for the 2012 Armageddon.
Yea, it was a great deal for us too. The spies they got were pretty worthless, and the ones we got were top notch.
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.
The only thing I can't help but thing is that he might not have the two witnesses or a confession. Giving a countries secrets to another country with the express purpose of sharing that information to countries hostile to yours is most definitely giving aid and comfort to enemies.
so, youre on this website, and you are asking that question ? what are you ? a joke ? ...links in parent...
we have discussed a lot of things like these on this very website. the fact that you are asking that question .... well, i wont spend too much effort to explain. youre either a shill, or you actually dont read the website youre participating, or, you are a zealot. there can be no other explanation for expressing strong opinion in a subject you dont know shit about.
So I actually am asking because in my visits here and else were I have honestly not come across a compelling item of import large enough to warrant much of the claims being made that this was so important an action (the leaks). Hey, perhaps that's my own fault for missing them. Perhaps they are to come. Thus I actually DO accept with interest your offers. I really DO want to see what people are so worked up about.
A zeolot?...no, if I were a zeolot, I would not be asking for your point of view I would think. I'd be calling you names and giving my best spin, right....oh, wait
Not that I'm above that, but that was certainly not the case here. About the only thing I can cop to is feeding the parents own words back with an implied question-mark, which I think was warranted. One of the reasons is, if I choose the phrase, I'm perhaps building a strawman. The claim is of "real, real, shit. Subjective indeed, but can someone make a case for it?
I have strong opinions on the subject, but my interest is in looking at the other side of things,...ALways! That's why I asked sir. Not that I am wholey against a little whistleblowing and am hoping for openleaks success frankly.
Have I read everything on this or ANY site discussing this? Um, no actually I'm a pretty busy dude and I have my hands full. But I do try to stay informed and am asking for help doing so from those I disagree with. And I look forward to some condensed and skimable education here. Hell, that's what the site is BUILT to provide, isn't it?
As to your offerings, frankly those two links don't really change my opinion. Sorry. But let me make sure I've got this right. They are:
Link 1)A bit of bullying in a push for more stringent copyright and patent laws in an apparent attempt to riegn in internet piracy. Many sides to that one, but news? Magnitude?
2) The CIA kidnapped a guy that among other things they believed was planning to attack the US embassy in Rome and is apparently agreed to be a bad dude. Not particularly pretty, but the artical seems most upset with the WSJ. And more importantly I don't even see where this info is part of the leaking discussion. Seems completely off the point. Perhaps I'm just being a zeolot?
bottom line.
I remain interested in hearing from anyone who can educate me. But, how about toning it down with the belligerence.
Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please.--Mark Twain
906a. ART. 106a. ESPIONAGE
(A) (1) Any person subject to this chapter who, with intent or reason to believe that it is to be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of a foreign nation, communicates, delivers, or transmits, or attempts to communicate, deliver, or transmit, to any entity described in paragraph (2), either directly or indirectly, any thing described in paragraph (3) shall be punished as a court-martial may direct, except that if the accused is found guilty of an offense that directly concerns (A) nuclear weaponry, military spacecraft or satellites, early warning systems, or other means of defense or retaliation against large scale attack, (B) war plans, (C) communications intelligence or cryptographic information, or (D) any other major weapons system or major element of defense strategy, the accused shall be punished by death or such other punishment as a court- martial may direct.
http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/ucmj2.htm#906.%20ART.%20106.%20SPIES
What exactly is "communications intelligence"? I don't know, but this is likely the article of the UCMJ he'll be charged with.
http://www.couragetoresist.org/
A.3.C is probably nailing it on the head.
He is guilty of Espionage - the facts speak for themselves.
Here is the relevant section of United States Code TITLE 10, Subtitle A, PART II, CHAPTER 47, SUB-CHAPTER 906a Article 106a. Espionage aka the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
There are no exceptions, excuses or extenuating circumstances for what he did. This kid was just plain stupid and he is more then likely going to spend the rest ( or a very large portion ) of his life in a very small box in Kansas or if he is lucky he will just get the needle.
Hey KID! Yeah you, get the fuck off my lawn!
There's a spy still in prison since the mid 80s for spying on the US for Israel.
Pollard and a few spies got jail sentences as part of a cooperation deal. They also had valuable information about the agencies that recruited him and knowledge of what exactly was leaked. Keeping them in jail allows prolonged interrogations to happen. In this instance, all of that is already known and Manning has very little value other than to be used as an example. Executing him would have a very chilling effect on anyone else who considered betraying their sworn oath to protect classified information. I'm sure the govt is heavily debating whether the political fallout of an execution would outweight the improved security it would result in.
Interesting that two recent CIA shows have a "Walker" in it; "Chuck" and "Covert Actions". I at first thought the latter was copying the former; now I see that it is a tribute (of sorts).
I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
And becoming even more common, thanks (?) to the mass wildlife deaths.
I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
He has been denied a speedy trial and has suffered punitive treatment in pre-trial detention.
Allegedly. Isn't that for the courts to decide? I very much doubt they would take any risks with his treatment that could be used to his favor legally.
FYI - It was two years almost to the day from the arrest of Timothy McVeigh (April 19, 1995) till his trial started (April 24, 1997). He was arrested the same day as the bombing, and was identified as the likely bomber in two days. That case would seem far more straightforward than some of the case against Manning.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
Does anyone else here think he should be giving more...
You're offended that he stole the information? Uh yeah, that's what leakers do. That's how information gets out when the government doesn't want you to know what it is doing.
And who exactly was "put in danger". You know, more danger than what one must expect when forcibly occupying a nation, or conniving with the occupiers of your homeland?
His country lied to him about what it was doing, and he felt we deserved to see how secrecy was being abused.
He's a hero. More of a hero than anyone in Iraq or Afghanistan could ever be.
Blar.
It was a great PR move for the CIA, that's for sure. "Be a spy for us, and even if it takes a while, we won't forget about you and will bring you to the US as soon as we can."
Learn about Photography Basics.