Slashdot Mirror
Bradley Manning Charged With Aiding the Enemy
Hugh Pickens writes writes "The Washington Post reports that the army has brought twenty-two new charges — including the Article 104 offence of 'aiding the enemy' that carries a potential death sentence — against Pfc. Bradley E. Manning, a former intelligence analyst accused of leaking hundreds of thousands of classified military and diplomatic documents to the anti-secrecy Web site WikiLeaks. The new charges, filed under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, include wrongfully causing intelligence to be published on the Internet, knowing that it will be accessed by the enemy, that US officials have asserted could put soldiers and civilians at risk. However the prosecution has notified Manning's attorneys that it will not recommend the death penalty and the charge sheet, like the original set of accusations, contains no mention by name of the enemy to which the US military is referring. Manning's supporters reacted to the new charges with dismay. 'I'm shocked that the military opted to charge Pfc. Bradley Manning today with the capital offense of 'aiding the enemy,' says Jeff Paterson, project director of Courage to Resist, which has raised money for Manning's defense. 'It's beyond ironic that leaked US State Department cables have contributed to revolution and revolt in the Middle East, yet an American may be executed, or at best face life in prison, for being the primary whistleblower.'"
Rules are made for a reason. He knew the rules. He did the crime, and he's going to do the time.
And I don't believe for a second that 1) he was doing this for some higher cause, more like blatent teen narcissism; or that 2) disagreeing with a law morally entitles somebody to break it.
I hope he gets his arse kicked.
That "enemy" being the American people.
but he gave the info to wikileaks which is cool, so they should just like let him go and tell him not to do it again
Bad analogy guy once again lives up to his name!
It'll be interesting to watch the prosecution try to weasel out of this simple question.
Something bad is coming when people are suddenly anxious to tell the truth.
did anybody think he would get off with a warning? at least the prosecutor said he would not seek the death penalty. guess the US doesn't want a martyr's blood on its hands.
Yeah, because US people are way more important and deserve to be alive. The rest of us are less important and our lives are disposable.
If there's one thing the business of government will not tolerate, it's competition -- especially when that competition exposes government as the incompetent, self-serving elite which they are. The plain fact is that Manning and Wikileaks did what government could not -- and in the process exposed their corrupt objectives -- and now the elite at the top of the pyramid are absolutely fuming.
I don't know if there's anything I enjoy more than watching the power pyramid squirm with jealousy and embarrassment.
And his disclosures to wikileaks are arguably responsible for triggering the revolution in Tunisia, which set off Egypt and Libya. Maybe he should get a peace prize before you go and kill him.
Nice strawman.
That's what you get for embarrassing the communist republicrat party. Freedom of speech, bah, if you embarrass the wrong people you don't have no right to it, it says it right there in the patriot act.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
Taliban?, Al-qaida? Wikileaks?. The Public Opinion?.
It does not matter what the content of the leak was or what supposedly beneficial effect it had. Breaking faith with your country and failing to follow orders cannot go unpunished.
Pretty sure that the GUY WHO SET HIMSELF ON FIRE was the catalyst for the revolution in Tunisia.
Hes not going to get the death penalty, but he better get the book thrown at him and along with everything else AND the kitchen sink. on a side note.. with all the info he leaked what no info on the states having UFOs or stuff on the MIBs geez. at least leak something worth while to read.
Just as in the previous two Bush administration (this being the third Bush administration currently), the "enemy" is whoever is not "with us". Anyone who did not aid in invading Afghanistan or Iraq can be counted as an "enemy". Anyone who doesn't view tax breaks for the rich as the pathway to economic salvation is an "enemy". Anyone who uses a god-forsaken and wholly Un-American "socialized" single-payer health care system can be an "enemy".
Sure, Manning aided someone from at least one of those categories.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
Remember that to stand any hope of getting their sticky mits on Julian Assange they have to say
"honest, we sure ain't gonna shoot him".
UK extradition LAw (An afaik European as well) states that extradtition is not on the card where the death penalty is involved.
So Pfc Manning has to avoid the death penalty just so the judges over here can say, "off you jolly well go Mr Assange".
Then they sentence both of them to 999years without parole in Gitmo after a 30min sham trial in Cuba having given the EU two very big fingers and a dose of 'we don't care'.
then Pres Obama can tell the Americans, 'Job Done'.
YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE THRUTH
"Arguably". That's a weasel word, and you're talking bullshit and you know it.
There's no proof that Wikileaks caused anything, and this stupid little idiot will have had himself jailed for the rest of his life for nothing.
The reason why the Middle-East and North Africa is exploding, is because food and energy prices have recently surged, and that coupled with a long history of bad government turned the region into a powder keg, set off by the self-immolation of a humble fruit vendor in Tunisia.
Food and energy prices have gone up because of exploding demand from countries like India and China, freak bad weather, and the financial crises caused by the US.
He provided raw operational and tactical data to groups shooting at his fellow soldiers and people cooperating with them.
"...'It's beyond ironic that leaked US State Department cables have contributed to revolution and revolt in the Middle East, yet an American may be executed, or at best face life in prison, for being the primary whistleblower.'"
The ends do not justify the means. The guy took a risk for his beliefs, and got called on it. Now he can go be the virtual martyr he wanted to be, by rotting in prison for the rest of his life.
I disagree, if you have clear evidence of a crime, you are obligated to disclose that information. If not by US law, then by the 'be a fucking human being' law. Let the courts sort it out later.
I have not read the leaked documents, so I can't comment about how many, if any, fall under the above.
Apparently, so did Manning... Maybe he'll be the catalyst for the revolution in America. Which is long overdue, by the way.
as soon as they find one of themselves who can talk, or write, they will be submitting their list of intentions for US. they surmise of course, that as the by far highest # & most valuable of the population, they will not be dissed. there is a little more to it than that, but it might be a good idea to pay attention (which is very affordable, even in 'these times') to THEM, & possibly avoid a whole bunch more murder & mayhem as only we are able to conjure up. one thing is crystal clear. majority rules in this case, & their #'s are staggering. probably why they're so interested in being in crowds, helping us laugh, staying alive/undamaged, stuff like that.
It's amazing that even after so much corruption in government has been exposed, the common man simply brushes it off and reverts to blindly trusting authority. If that doesn't illustrate the power of indoctrination, I don't know what does.
Eh? How the fuck did you conclude that?!
Failing to name "the enemy" is standard military procedure. Referring to them by a name would humanize them more than a generic noun like "the enemy" would.
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
How could his supporters possibly be "shocked"? They are dimwitted as he if they cannot see the connection. This guy has committed treason, any country has very very stiff penalties for such an action. However, it is curious the accusation completely ignores just "who" the enemy is; though that should be obvious and I do not mean Wikileaks.
My karma is not a Chameleon.
And the highest rule is: uphold the constitution and protect america from enemies foreign and domestic.
If keeping the rule about shutting up breaks the constitution or aids domestic enemies of american people to get away with, literally, murder, he goes with the conscience.
The war crimes that the USA signs up to also insists that a serving member of the millitary must refuse an immoral command or become equally liable.
PS WHAT enemies did he help?
Wow, a lot of dumb posts for this article. I'm not a lawyer of military justice, but releasing sensitive classified documents onto the internet is certainly, in layman's vernacular, "aiding the enemy". We are currently fighting two actual declared hot wars, and we have enemies in each of those, and in each of those the enemies gained operable knowledge they otherwise wouldn't have. How is that NOT aiding the enemy?
To me it is a plain case of treason and capital punishment seems reasonable, but a life sentence could also be reasonable if the prosecution is feeling generous.
A mere forty years ago a great whistleblower did his work and risked all, but did not get placed in brutal imprisonment and danger of death for putting his country's moral character to a test, and even a corrupt President would voluntarily resign upon the revelation of his lawbreaking. I speak of course of Danny Ellsberg and President Nixon.
Anyone who could become privy to what Pvt. Manning did, that is that the USA conducts thinly veiled torture with electric shock, waterboarding, psychological torture, and that it renditions prisoners to regimes like the recently deposed one in Egypt which engage in blatant torture including drills,
anyone who could see that this is a blatant exercise of power meant to subdue the disadvantaged of the world and mold the economics to the advantage of America's elite to the detriment of everyone else, including future generations,
anyone who could see the brutality of willful shoot-ups of civilians and journalists by snickering, racist Apache gunship crews,
anyone who could see the contravention of international law and agreements we are assigned to and to which our national honor is affixed by deliberate scheming,
anyone who could see that the nature of our government's policies is hidden, distorted, or misrepresented to its constituents
and hold their peace, working in silent assent to atrocities, and not speak out, would have been convicted at Nuremberg, would have made themselves directly share responsibility for monstrous crimes, and would be no guardian of liberty or law, but a tool to those who corrupt both. If the letter of the law is all that is right and Bradley Manning is a criminal for blowing the whistle on the corrupt exercise of power, then everyone who signed the American Declaration of Independence ought to have hung too, and apologies are due for this nation's existence altogether with its rights and wrongs, and a ridiculous and futile exercise - thus the powers that would have Manning punished are discredited.
They who would sacrifice essential freedom for a little security will gain neither, and lose both, quoth Ben Franklin.
They who would sacrifice basic humanity and law for obedience to tyrants are heirs to tyranny and the stain that brings, and none of the things that have ever made this country worth fighting for. We'll need more people like Manning to get our country back from the plutocrats and propaganda that have already plundered its wealth for their wars.
Obvious. It occurred after the leak, so it was obviously because of the leak.
What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
unless your smoking the same stuff which Krugman of the NYT is because he claims its because Obama is President and our audacity and courage to elect him empowered the people of the Middle East to revolt.
As for aiding the enemy, well, pick one. I am sure we can make one up if we need it. There were certainly documents and such that put the lives of many soldiers and civilians in danger but I understand how quickly many here dismiss them. Its far better to portray it as Us vs The Man even though half the place is willing to hand over all rights and money provided they think someone else gets the shaft.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
I was wondering the same thing.
If anyone has any information to substantiate the claim of "It's beyond ironic that leaked US State Department cables have contributed to revolution and revolt in the Middle East" I'd like to see it.
Purely curious here. I feel like I missed something huge.
The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) supersedes civilian law when dealing with members of the Armed Forces: Army, Air Force, Navy (Marines included here, even though they hate being told that they're in the Navy :P ) & Coast Guard.
When enlisting or accepting a commission, you swear an oath to uphold all of these laws and much, much more. You forgo your Constitutional rights -- this is one of the reasons that military service is considered making a sacrifice. You accept a new set of rights which are outlined in the UCMJ. What a Private First Class thinks is of no concern -- Privates are for doing, Sergeants are for making sure things are done, and Officers are for thinking (in a nutshell). His only obligation is to follow the lawful orders given to him by his seniors.
Whenever something is done by a Soldier, it is often covered by multiple Articles of the UCMJ. For example, mouthing off to a senior NonCommissioned Officer may violate the following:
Article 91. Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer.
Article 92. Failure to obey order or regulation.
Article 117. Provoking speeches or gestures.
An interaction as simple as "Private Smith, take out the trash." -- "Fuck you Sergeant Jones!" is clearly more complex than one guideline, and is that NCO or Officer's duty to interpret and punish accordingly.
The same laws which protect the United States and its allies also protect each service member. He will receive a fair trial through Courts Martial, and may be found guilty or not. If he has been found to (intentionally or unintentionally) disclose sensitive or classified information, he will pay accordingly. Each charge will be looked at both individually and collectively as to its intent and results. The military takes care of its own.
What else can happen when an unstoppable force collides with an immovable object?
Yes because Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia. Or was it Eurasia? So many enemies...
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
'I'm shocked that the military opted to charge Pfc. Bradley Manning today with the capital offense of 'aiding the enemy,' says Jeff Paterson, project director of Courage to Resist, which has raised money for Manning's defense.
I fully expected the prosecution to throw the book at Manning. Waving the threat of capital punishment serves as a great way to make future Mannings think twice before replicating his actions. (or at least to remain sensibly quiet about doing so)
This has been asked-for many, many times on /.
Nobody here ever makes the effort to substantiate this claim.
However, lots and lots of people here repeat it, nonetheless.
"if someone has something you want, make them the Enemy".
seems to me there are no leaks, a leak would happen before the Action takes place, which could change outcomes, put people in danger and be a traitorous act.
all the stuff I seen on WikiLeaks came after the Fact, exposing governments cover ups, Crimes, untruths and wrong doings. now I understand not wanting to get caught by the people that governments are lying too and should be working for and governments being afraid the people will force it out of existence (which really needs be done)... a government afraid of being open and honest should be shut down.
Let's see, we've got a disgruntled Army private violating the laws of the country he's sworn to protect, funneling classified documents to an anti-Semitic accused rapist. Leave it to slashdot to advocate for criminals.
Can you point us to the proof you have that he was in fact a homosexual?
It seems to be the main argument you have to proof he's not a whistle blower.
"unpatriotic" for f*cks sake..., try being human instead will you?
when it comes to publishing information almost everything about the effects is "Arguably".
The leaks about the leaders of the countries in question wouldn't have helped.
The government there was afraid enough of the information in the cables to censor wikileaks and sites which referenced the cables about tunisia.
of course they might not have actually done much to accelerate the revolutions either.
we can't be sure.
it's not falsifiable either way unless you can think of some objective way of deciding beyond your ironclad certainty that wikileaks could have had no effect at all.
There are quite a few articles like this that allege that the cables about the Tunisian government combined with the self-immolation of the grocer to ignite the revolution. Please note that the Tunisian government thought that the cables were important enough that they blocked access to Wikileaks and other sites that were carrying news about the leaked cables, and reportedly imprisoned some people over their dissemination.
From the article:
No one is suggesting WikiLeaks and its editor Julian Assange can take full credit for toppling the corrupt Tunisian regime. But the whistleblower's contribution to Ben Ali's downfall might at least give the US Justice Department, determined to prosecute Assange as a spy, pause for thought.
Fanatically anti-fanatical
WTF is going on with people? He's now in detention, can he still leak documents? Then why the hell are you treating him like he's a threat to all human beings? Damn the US authorities.
Everyone who has ever been granted a security clearance understands what the consequences of disclosing classified information to unauthorized parties. If he didn't think he would get caught, well that's his problem. History is full of people serving life sentences or given the death penalty for unauthorized disclosure or espionage (Lonetree, Ames). He did the crime, he must face the consequences.
"Maybe he should get a peace prize before you go and kill him."
Assange would never go to Norway to get the Nobel Peace Prize, since the Norwegians might extradite him to the U.S. like the Swedes.
He fought The Law; The Law Won.
The only traitors here are the lying scumbags in public office that Manning exposed. America's politicians need to be exposed for the corrupt assholes they are. The people in charge of our government are the ones who are selling out the country. The more embarrassment they get the better. Manning is a hero for the people of this great country, and this is an example of no good deed going unpunished.
Some people think that he's guilty because he was charged. Some people think he's innocent because he was charged. I think I'll let the due process play out.
Or is it wither, Obama? It's past due for the US alleged "commander in chief" to emerge from his bunker and put an end to this demented travesty.
This is just typical of a nation of hypocrits that could not organise a pissup in a brewery after 10 years of teaching.
Someone exposes what a bunch of tossers the government is and the government threatens to carry out murder to create silence
Nuff said know what i mean
Manning is accused of creating pretty much all major US military leaks published in 2010. Within months of these leaks which focus on the Middle East to a great part, a cascade of popular revolts sweeps through most Middle Eastern nations.
Naturally, the promotion of actual democracy in these nations threatens the strategic position of the US as the sole bringer of Iraq-style "freedom". It's hard to force a regime change in democratic countries (well, the US did that during the cold war, but that was before the internet). Freedom in the Middle East is the enemy. Manning and Wikileaks aid the enemy.
Very arguably, tension in those countries has been building for years along with their population. Social media, or more to the point, the free flow of information has the tendency to reduce friction in systems it infects. By friction, I don't mean social friction, I mean the stickiness of resistance to change of those systems. Wikileaks was a very small piece of the information flows that unstuck those medieval societies. And what example are the rebels pointing to: Democracy.
Having said that, not all information should be free, say, your personal habits for marketdroids, your bank records, your medical records, reporters' sources, diplomatic cables, etc.
That's news to me. Please enlighten us: exactly when did congress formally declare war as the constitution requires? Oh, that's right -- they haven't actually declared a war since WW2. Stop spouting bullshit.
A revolution in America would totally destroy it and likely most industry world-wide. The general population is a bunch of greedy babies whining about what is fair. Not that things are great the way that they are, but popular opinion in the states in terms of the way things should work is completely unsustainable and motivated by nothing but feel-goodery. The simple fact is we're dominated by a very lucky generation that seems to think it took no work, sacrifice, or unfairness to achieve the fortunate lives we have. Everybody just says "Well, why can't we just get rid of poverty, people don't deserve to be poor." "Why can't we just pay teachers more, they work hard!" "How can we even think of cutting social security benefits? Old people need that money!" "Lets just hand out free medical care! The Canadians do it! We're letting people die in the street!"
What do you think the results of that kind of revolution would be? Ruin.
If I can just reach out with my words and touch a butthole, just one, it will all be worth it.
I was wondering the same thing.
If anyone has any information to substantiate the claim of "It's beyond ironic that leaked US State Department cables have contributed to revolution and revolt in the Middle East" I'd like to see it.
Purely curious here. I feel like I missed something huge.
It is my understanding that the dirty little secrets did, in fact help break the camel's back at Tunisia. Not because they revealed any great State Secrets, but simply because they provided confirmation of what everyone believed all along - that there's an awful lot of corruption in international relations and that it works to the benefit of corrupt leaders and despots. For example, it's been pretty much a given that all a Fidel Castro-type revolutionary had to do to receive buckets of cash and arms from the USA was to declare that he was Anti-Communist. Seeing actual mechanisms in play, however, was just too much.
WikiLeaks didn't single-handedly start the dominoes falling for freedom anymore than Twitter did. The dominoes were set up long ago. They just provided the extra fuel to the fire.
(No, I refuse to use the euphemism "capital punishment").
Seems your nick-name ("myopic") is well-chosen, then :-(
I'm not going to comment on whether he was in the right or wrong.
2) Got very angry at having to be a closet homosexual, even though the military is generally not interested in punishing people who are "discrete homosexuals."
You're an idiot. They punish "indiscreet" homosexuals, but not "indescreet" hetrosexuals. It would be entirely fine and fair if they punished soldier who brought their wife/husband along to some event for being indiscreetly hetrosexusal. But they don't so they're still wildly biased. Do not try to spin this policy as in any way reasonable.
no unethical behavior,
. It was indiscriminate in a "you screwed with me, so I'll screw you right back" way.
So? Just because he didn't have the right motivation didn't mean that he didn't reveal whole heaps of unethical behavior. I can tell you're very much biased because you're trying to use unrelated facts (his motivation) to discredit other facts (the leaked material).
You're being as emotional as the "nutjob dupporters" you so vigorously decry.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
We (I'm from the U.S.) aren't officially at war with anyone. How could he be aiding an enemy that doesn't exist?
Put identity in the browser.
Will some one give him a Code Red?
"Lets just hand out free medical care! The Canadians do it! We're letting people die in the street!"
As a Canadian, yes we do, it works very well, and we laugh at your stupidity when you fight against it. Its just one more thing that makes us shake our heads and say "dumb redneck americans have no idea whats good for them"
Someone sure is pro-usa. It's not like the military or government in the USA could possibly do anything wrong, could it?
Manning saw that things were horribly corrupt on the inside. What was being given to the public was not what was actually happening. He did something about it. Not the smartest thing on earth, but to make an omelette, you have to break a few eggs.
The USA brought this on themselves by decades of abusing their power. It was only a matter of time before the envelope was pushed too far from the inside. Now that it's sprung a leak, the USA is going batshit insane trying to seal it. They just haven't realized yet that it's too late, that horse is long gone.
Talking points straight out of Glenn Beck's ass. I hope you're being sarcastic, because it feels like I'm feeding a troll.
If he felt that his action was morally necessary, he must accept the potential consequences.
Truly gross amounts of information that should be in the public domain are classified by the US gov't. Some of us are working to change that system. Going 'vigilante' and deciding to release that information yourself (and let's assume he did it for moral reasons, and not primarily attention-whoring), well, you play the game and take your chances.
I know if I or someone I knew was put in danger by their names being leaked, I'd want the death penalty, too.
I'd be curious how many of his "free information!" supporters were faux-outraged by the 'leaking' of Valerie Plame's former covert status? (ie motivated primarily by politics, not ethics)
-Styopa
How about you define patriotic? Last I checked, torturing people wasn't actually part of our big Stars and Stripes and fireworks and what have you extravaganza that is this nation.
There is no -1 Disagree.
How do you know he is a homosexual? Did you have sex with him or did he tell you that he is gay?
The cables weren't the reason, but they *were* the catalyst.
The unrest started in Tunisia as protests against the ruler's immediate family who were making out like bandits. The corruption had long been known about (it wasnt subtle) but the spark was the wikileaks release which showed a bunch of cables from US embassy in Tunisia that detailed the corruption. http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/feb/02/wikileaks-exclusive-book-extract
The government responded by shutting down wikileaks access which resulted in Anonymous group taking action against official Tunisian government sites and defacing them (with the same cables, amongst other things) which also had a pronounced and under reported effect on people's urge to actually protest.
So, Bradley Manning has probably done more to unleash the wave of democratization hitting north Africa than any other single individual. That doesn't make what he did legal but if everyone stuck to what was legal, we would all be living as serfs to feudal barons.
http://rareformnewmedia.com/
Damage/problems created by Manning's activities are not necessarily the same as any damage due to posting wiki-leaks. I wasn't thinking of Wikileaks in particular. They released a subset of the data but Manning actually downloaded a lot more than that. The entire data set will/has make it into the wild.
I wouldn't be so sure of that.
Hang the son of a bitch.
"Lets just hand out free medical care! The Canadians do it! We're letting people die in the street!"
As a Canadian, yes we do, it works very well, and we laugh at your stupidity when you fight against it. Its just one more thing that makes us shake our heads and say "dumb redneck americans have no idea whats good for them"
Yep. You Canadians pay significantly less in health care costs and get better health care on average (though the high end care award still goes to the US.. for the few that can afford it). Now if only I could understand what possessed you to make your unit of currency the "loon"...
Yep - one man with a match and some gasoline is the reason for the current unrest, protests and rebellion. And to think that the Al Qrapola spent all these years blowing people up, raping, torturing, dismembering people, blowing up mosques, funeral processions, schools to try to get the same thing to happen. One match and a dollar of gasoline - that's all it took.
You would love reddit!
Actually, the people who continue to vote them into office are the ones who are selling out the company.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
I'm not sure if Manning is gay or not (don't care either), but man, this reads like some sort of panicked "I don't trust 'em, he's one o' those gays...!"
That's because they actually are trollls.
Because money makes you crazy. Duh. :)
"This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
Dude, are you going to post this shit in response to every /. article? It's not going to happen so just deal with it, JACKASS!
My understanding is that the cables showed the level of duplicity in certain regimes and that that contributed to the final straw that broke the camel's back. Though I've also read commentary that said it was the Fed's policy of exporting inflation that was the real tipping point, so who knows? We're much too close to the action, historically speaking, to have enough perspective on the whys and wherefors.
God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
People like the above will cling to ANYTHING to character-assassinate Manning and Assange. If that means throwing some insane feminists the way of Assange and the WBC and friends the way of Manning, it's a job well done. The last sentence of the comment should be particularly revealing: it's patriotism above all, even when that borders on fascism (the dangerous, non-internet kind).
As with any case, the purpose for punishment is not to "get even" or any nonsense like that. It is to set a precedent that will deter the next asshole who thinks about doing the same thing. Regardless of how you try to rationalize what Manning did, giving away state secrets to foreigners cannot be tolerated. It must result in execution now and every time it happens.
"throw a lot of stuff against the wall and see what sticks". It's a common tactic when one side has limitless funding and resources. Also called "Steamrollering". The Army's first set of charges were too weak and full of holes. As the wiki leaks story progressed (and stories of Manning's torture), the Army realized that they would lose if they went to court with what they had - none of their accusations held water. So they came up with as many charges as they could, and "re-charged" Manning. Trouble is, like the first set of charges, these are weak, too, but the Army is banking on "prosecution fatigue" where the court will get tired of wading through the prosecution's BS and pick SOMETHING that they can get a guilty verdict on. Let's hope Manning has good representation who sees through this and will stop this tactic in its tracks.
Republican leadership = Idiocracy
Some here feel that Manning is a traitor and hanging's too good for him. Some here feel that the guy is a hero, and should be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
There are many arguments for and against. Regardless, Manning is only so far CHARGED with various "crimes". I haven't seen that the prosecution has any actual evidence to convict.
Consider the financial meltdown for a moment. Do you realize that NO ONE has gone to jail for that? Nobody. Nada (don't reply about Madoff, that's not related).Sure, there were some guys from Bear Stearns that were charged, but the convictions didn't happen because the prosecution couldn't convince a jury, because they just didn't have enough evidence.
Lately, prosecutors haven't even been pursuing charges unless they are sure they can make it stick. Of course, the military is different in that they think they can railroad anyone they like, to make an example and keep the rest of us in line. But the truth is, when Manning comes to trial, the prosecution may have a hard time making the case stick.
In the meantime, put the noose away and give the dude a little more breathing room. After all, we are supposedly living in a country where you are innocent until proven guilty. Unless you guys with the noose in your hands want to change that about the "land of the free" as well.. Yeah America. You're number one.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
No, they are not. What set off the revolution in Tunisia was the self-immolation of Mohamed Bouazizi. You insult the actions and memory of Bouazizi.
You are a pathetic, piece of shit apologist for a traitor who has tried to dishonor the memory of a man who died. You should be ashamed of yourself. You should be taken out and flogged, you arrogant asshole.
Way of the new world, folks.
It's spineless brown-nosers like you that are part of the problem - traitors to the people.
Manning is a hero, he should get a Nobel Prize at least.
Unless they can prove that Manning deliberately intended to aid the enemy, the charge won't stick. If intent were unnecessary, they'd have to also charge Rumsfeld with aiding and abetting, since his bungling and obfuscation of fact did more to aid Al Caida than any terrorist ever will.
Apparently the gov't need to put the fear of God into the PFC. Probably their case is weaker than they hoped, probably because they're unable/unwilling to reveal background evidence that's necessary to prosecute their principal indictments.
After all, what we're talking about is the ultimate oxymoron: Military Justice.
But the results speak for themselves. In one fell swoop, Manning and Wikileaks have done for the rest of the middle east what thousands of American soldiers' lives and trillions of dollars were lost trying to do for Iraq and Afghanistan.
So yeah, charge Manning up the wazoo on anything you can come up with, but Obama should pardon him as a show of thanks from a grateful nation and world.
THANK YOU BRADLEY MANNING! A TRUE MODERN HERO!
> more to unleash the wave of democratization hitting north Africa than any other single individual
Sorry, I meant to add, except for the guy who set himself on fire.
http://rareformnewmedia.com/
Hey, fucking moron...yeah, I'm talking to you. Krugman never said that. So what shit are you smoking? Given your level of idiocy, I'd say you're huffing paint fumes.
It doesn't matter who the people vote for. Either Turd Sandwich or Giant Douche will get elected every single time.
Maybe PFC Manning is guilty of a crime, maybe he isn't. Either way, this is obviously a big deal to the DoD, among others. Why is no going after the policy-and-decision makers that created an environment such that a lowly PFC could take and leak so much sensitive data?
Perhaps you should bother to understand what it is you're saying before you go mouthing off. "Arguably", means its open to discussion and/or debate. The speaker is indirectly soliciting discussion or debate. Speakers who say such things are more typically open minded in nature. Someone who attempts to cast an open minded person in a negative light, strictly for being open minded, is what the world considers negative and closed minded.
The basis for your rant means that we should listen to a negative, closed minded person and absolutely most not discuss or debate else you'll then attempt to cast them in a negative light. Basically, your words make you out to be a prick. And using you're own words pretty well proves absolutely nothing you say is worth discussion; unless you want to prefix it with, "Arguably."
As another nit, people who attack accurate communication, for being accurate, such as you have done, likely have other issues. Which again raises the question as to why we should listen to you. Arguably, we shouldn't.
He fully expected to spend decades in a Federal prison for releasing the Pentagon Papers and was fully prepared to do so.
That he did not was a result of gross misconduct by the Nixon administration resulting in his charges being thrown out
If your children ever found out how lame you are, they'd murder you in your sleep
Yes the enemy. Hmmm...you mean the enemy like those innocent people in the video on youtube being shot from an attack helicopter??? The real enemy to the US government is it's own people finding out the truth about what their government is up to. What you talkin bout Willis? I'm talking about shielding those in power taking kickbacks to push laws and wars that screw ordinary citizens just so they can support their friends and own high lifestyles. The TRUTH...you can't handle the TRUTH!
onsidering the nature of what was allegedly done, and the position held by the defendant, I think it's perfectly reasonable to go for the maximum punishment. IMHO, It really doesn't matter what the documents were that were leaked. Hell, they could have been a top secret souffle recipe, and I would still want to see the offender properly prosecuted!
P.S. Mmm, souffle. http://www.foodnetwork.com/recipes/alton-brown/cheese-souffle-recipe/index.html [Food Network – Alton Brown]
P.P.S. Maybe I shouldn't have skipped breakfast this morning...
My sausage tree didn't grow, does that make me a bad mommy?
I note that opinions expressed in support of the charge are marked as trolls, while opinions expressed in opposition to the charge are modded up.
Good.
Perhaps if there were actually some good arguments for punishing Manning, they wouldn't be marked as troll. "Hang the bastard" and "he got what he deserves" aren't arguments, they're ignorant and inflammatory claims.
"From the depths of my skeptical and rationalist soul, I ask the Lord to protect me from California touchie-feeliedom."
Dude is guilty, dude needs to stand trial and stay in prison if found guilty. Divulging secrets when you are in a position of trust is a serious matter, Manning did put lives in danger, might have directly had people murdered because of his actions. And if that is the case he needs to face the death penalty for his crimes. He very well may have decided to impose his own version of morality by his actions, the problem for him is that the world does not revolve around him and his decisions and actions will face the rules made for the rest of us.
Enjoy your Karma, after all you earned it. Feel your Karma Joe, feel it burn.
I think you refuted your own point with your first list.
1) They see a specific act of crime or a whole culture of crime. (He saw specific crimes)
2) They see what their options are for working within the legal system to address it. (He worked in the military and saw there was no chance for an internal change)
3) They gather the evidence needed to prove their case. (He downloaded 250k pages needed to prove the information to the outside)
4) They release it to outside sources if they can't work within the system. (He sent the information to WikiLeaks after seeing the internal system would not work.)
Whether he is a hero or enemy will only be shown in the history books years from now. I personally can see both sides of the equation, but if you are going to argue one side you need to make sure it's rock solid. But then again, that's what the lawyers and judges are for.
You funny apologist clown.
It is legal to violate Geneva convention (rendition, various "torture" techniques)?
Is it legal to violate UN charter and spy on diplomats (using techniques that constitute identity fraud in our own country)?
Is it legal to prostitute children in Afghanistan?
Is it legal to cover up civilian casualties of war? Misrepresent civilian deaths? Cover-up friendly fire casualties?
Is it legal to bribe/extort foreign officials?
Is it legal for US companies to perpetrate fraud on developing nations?
Is it legal to bypass UN&US sanctions on "enemy nations"?
Is it legal for the US government to threaten foreign nations wishing to take action against illegal/unethical behavior of US corporations?
Is it legal for the US government to retaliate economically against foreign nations who impose legislation in their countries opposing dangerous or untested products?
Is it legal to test drugs on Nigerian children without their knowledge or consent and blackmail prosecutors suing you for said actions?
You are blithering idiot for choosing willful ignorance in the face of the revelations in these cables. At the absolute bare minimum, there is evidence to support additional investigation to determine what laws were broken.
Well, the charges against Manning have been formally and legally documented. One can argue about the consequences, but I have not heard anyone argue that Manning did not do what has been alleged. "Material support to the enemy" could be a charge that requires not just potential impact, but also motivation, and that's what the Court will have to decide.
The opinions that "the people rule", "openness is the only way", etc, etc, are hyperbole.
Interesting read. Thanks!
You're right the danger to soldiers and citizens is easily dismissed, because its fairly obvious those are not real concerns of our foreign policy.
1) Soldiers volunteered. If they don't want to die for shallow and vain reasons they chose the wrong occupation. Shit for a long time we sent them into battle unarmored.. Sounds like a really important resource to me... Meat shields.
2) It overlooks the fact that the primary danger to our soldiers is the occupation of enemy territory. And the primary danger to citizens in occupied territory is from the war we wage. It's a bit hypocritical don't you think then to chide leaked documents for "putting lives at risk"?
If this is serious, you're no better than the Iranian conservatives demanding death penalty for protestors and opposition politicians.
I don't say he didn't do something illegal that may be punished, but demanding the death penalty is extreme.
Nice post. Spoken like a true prosecutor.
Please, tell me again how the law, general or military, is the supreme determinator of ones actions and the consequenting punishment for any deviation therein is always just. That is what this is all about, right? Justice?
If there were ever an apt mod war, I would say this is it. You essentially have a dispute over the execution or pardon of a US citizen.
http://thislandpress.com/09/23/2010/private-manning-and-the-making-of-wikileaks-2/
The more important failing point of his argument is the part where he believes that Manning was disillusioned with Don't Ask, Don't Tell to the point where he released these documents in revenge. Frankly, that argument doesn't make any sense when he knew there was a president that promised to repeal the policy and it was already under pressure to be repealed before he released the documents.
Manning was a whistleblower. He wasn't a vengeful child or traitor.
while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
It doesn't matter that the leak had results that may have been positive. I might be on Manning's side if his intention had even been whistleblowing in the first place, but it was actually just self-aggrandizement, same as that prick Assange. For that, he needs to be made an example of. Breaking one of the most important laws there is for fame comes with a steep price.
That was true for about an hour, and now has been reversed. Comments rated as trolls are now +4 Insightful, and comments in support at +5 Insightful are now +2/+3.
Funny business going on.
while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
As opposed to continuous homosexuals? I think the word you're looking for is discreet.
So say we all.
This.
That and the government has spent so much time on the investigation they will find it difficult to discard charges.
He will be fortunate if released prior to his 40th birthday.
There is one lucky golden ticket to his release Put your coffee or any other beverages down ( wait for it..) The Nobel Prize.
Do i owe you a keyboard???
Has anyone considered that he will face the consequences of his actions (you know, like an adult) because he simply thought his country's ideals were that important? He would have understood better than any civilian the consequences of going up against the US military's torture regime and show trials. Manning made the world a better place even knowing the abuse he would suffer after being caught.
The prosecution in the case will not recommend the death penalty, so you can breathe easy there. It's not like they're tone-deaf to how bad an execution would look to the world in this case. Prosecution will, however, not be hard-pressed at all to prove the charge of aiding the enemy, since under the Uniform Military Code of Justice, Article 104 (2), his offense is as follows:
"(2) without proper authority, knowingly harbors or protects or gives intelligence to or communicates or corresponds with or holds any intercourse with the enemy, either directly or indirectly;
shall suffer death or such other punishment as a court-martial or military commission may direct."
WikiLeaks could very well be used as the prosecution's evidence for an indirect transmission of intelligence to a foreign enemy, and Manning knowingly posted intelligence to the site. As much as passive citizens are using the site, you cannot pretend like enemies with active grudges against the United States didn't at least drop by once or twice. As far as people asking "what enemy will they prove?", that doesn't have to be specific. That's all they need to prove the charge. You can always hope that a future administration will grant him pardon, but at this point, I don't see a way he's getting out of these charges.
This post just smears him, making a ton of assumptions/accusations about his reasoning, based on nothing, when Manning himself (in the chat logs) described his reasons for releasing the information:
"Lamo: what's your endgame plan, then?. . .
Manning: well, it was forwarded to [WikiLeaks] - and god knows what happens now - hopefully worldwide discussion, debates, and reforms - if not, than [sic] we're doomed - as a species - i will officially give up on the society we have if nothing happens - the reaction to the video gave me immense hope; CNN's iReport was overwhelmed; Twitter exploded - people who saw, knew there was something wrong . . . Washington Post sat on the video David Finkel acquired a copy while embedded out here. . . . - i want people to see the truth regardless of who they are because without information, you cannot make informed decisions as a public.
if i knew then, what i knew now - kind of thing, or maybe im just young, naive, and stupid . . . im hoping for the former - it cant be the latter - because if it is were fucking screwed (as a society) - and i dont want to believe that we’re screwed."
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/12/14/manning
What the fuck is going on to get slurs like this modded up so high? Is the moderating system being abused?
Anyone else notice the tags change from having "republicans" to having "democrats" in the list?
What is with that?
while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
The military has laws which make it very illegal to do what Manning allegedly did. At the time he allegedly released the documents, he was sworn to obey those laws. Assuming for a moment that he is indeed guilty, he should have to pay the price for his actions. As for whether or not his act was noble, that is for history to decide. Most heros pay a high price to earn that label. Often the price is their life.
Having a bookmark to Google does not make you an expert on everything.
his NAME is Mohamed Bouazizi
In Project Mayhem, you are awarded a name when you are captured or killed.
You think it a coincidence that Allstate's current advertising campaign revolves around Mr. Mayhem?
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
The POINT is that the elite at the top of the pyramid did a run-around on the constitution in order to make it happen. Why? Because they KNEW that they couldn't make the war happen using the formal process of declaration as the constitution requires -- because at the bottom of it all, the wars are unjust.
When they've got billions of dollars on the line, and the one thing standing in their way is the supreme law of the nation, what does the business of government do? They route around the supreme law of the nation. There's a reason why the constitution has been mitigated by the elite to mere "suggestions" rather than laws -- because the business of government is infinitely more profitable when there are no limits to what they can do.
I am all for people being held responsible for their actions, be it government officials or any one else.
Manning, a former intelligence analyst, should have known better. End of thought. Sometimes
intelligence is not what it seems.
"(2) without proper authority, knowingly harbors or protects or gives intelligence to or communicates or corresponds with or holds any intercourse with the enemy, either directly or indirectly; shall suffer death or such other punishment as a court-martial or military commission may direct."
When you get a security briefing, such things are made apparent to all. He was apparently not listening or selectively listening. If it
was the latter, he deserves whatever he gets. If it was the former, he is not a candidate for the kitchen police. How did this person
get any clearance? Should not the people who granted this clearance be held accountable also, on an equal basis?
Simply put, the claim that Manning exposed corruption can't save him. If he had only exposed corruption, he'd be golden. Whistle-blower laws would have protected him. Probably would have had his life turned upside down for a while, but come out the other side.
But he didn't just expose corruption. He also chose to release unrelated documents that he shouldn't have. He left himself wide open for prosecution doing that. The law doesn't look at two acts and balance them. You can be a saint of a person, helping the poor for decades, etc etc. Kick one of them in the nuts and you still go to jail for assault. The law doesn't go "Hey, you've been a good guy, we'll look the other way on this one."
Now he can hope that the judge(s) will take the sum of his deeds into account and have mercy, but that's unlikely. The judges can rationalize it as "You discounted the harmful side-effects of your actions. Therefore we will discount the helpful effects."
As for "aiding the enemy", it will be an easy argument for the prosecution to argue. There doesn't have to be any actual aid or enemy. They just have to show he had reason to believe it could aid the enemy. Not "believe", "reason to believe". His reason to believe? He would have been told releasing documents could aid the enemy. Doesn't matter if he accepted that reason or not, he was given that reason. He just had to be told divulging the documents could aid the enemy.
Even if not told, he was releasing secret documents which by definition are not released so as to not aid the enemy. What enemy? Doesn't matter. Doesn't even matter if the enemy was real or hypothetical.
He's screwed.
The world is made by those who show up for the job.
Half of Congress are millionaires, the rest is in the pocket of billionaires to become millionaires.
They don't give a shit about poverty.
You sir are an idiot and a jack ass. It's no wonder this country is going down the crapper with the sort of deluded morons that post this sort of dribble.
1 DADT was at most a motivating factor, it wasn't the only one, and there were definitely plenty of criminal activities included in what he leaked.
2 is just complete bullshit, the DoD has a history of ignoring DADT and ferreting out homosexuals regardless of their discretion.
3 Again, I'd like to reiterate that you're an idiot looking to justify the government's point of view, he didn't have the expertise or the resources to troll through all that without getting caught, so he released them to somebody who had a lot more resources.
4 No, he didn't dump them to the public, he dumped them to wikileaks that redacted and then dumped them. What you're saying is factually ignorant and incredibly misleading.
if your health care is so damn good then why did one of your politicians " Danny Williams " come to the united states for heart surgery rather then letting that fantastic NHS do the heart surgery? also how are those nice long wait times for basic care? i have a pace maker and i absolutely refuse to let a NHS take root in the united states
If you engage in an illegal war, invade a couple of countries, kill hundreds of thousands of innocent people, break US law, violate the constitution, and completely ignore international law, including the Geneva convention treaties put in place after the atrocities of WWII, and you THEN proceed to cover it all up, there's nothing wrong with what you're doing, and you are even considered heroic and patriotic, and nothing happens to you except maybe getting more funding.
However, if you BLAB about it and release documents that PROVE it, THEN you're a horrible, horrible person who needs to die.
God, the people in this country are fucking stupid.
Exactly what enemy are they referring to? Them? Adjusts Tinfoil hat.
No, no. We're at war with Terror, Drugs, and Poverty. I don't really know which of those he aided, although a coworker of mine claims that Julian Assange is "a terrorist by anyone's definition", so maybe it is Terror.
SIGSEGV caught, terminating
wait... not that kind of sig.
While some of the leaked documents might be considered whistleblowing, many were unrelated to the U.S. military's engagements. Whistleblowing usually involves some specific possible crime/wrongdoing, releasing unrelated documents is not whistleblowing and just straight leaking.
He's not a whistleblower... he's a traitor.
That's what happens when civilians try and push their frame of reference on the military. You're better at sitting in a Starbucks coffee shop talking about how things would be different if you were running the country (or coach of a sports team).
Reality is, it wouldn't be better... and you can't understand what politics and military are really about. I know, you think you do... but you really can't.
Btw, we won't know if the revolution in the middle east is good or bad for years to come. You say it like it's a good thing, but you have no way of knowing that yet. We could be looking at new Irans, etc given a few years for this to sink in.
Once again, people make alot of assumptions based on their frame of reference in life. Those often don't turn out to be accurate.
The data faucet needs to be available to all those that might even remotely need it. Never mind that it will flood the house one hundred times to stop a single destructive fire. They can always easily jail or hang the careless or malicious person.
Dear Bradley is doomed. send a few dollars to his prison can-tine account he will appreciate it.
First, Manning was a PFC in the Army, not a private citizen, and there wasn't a draft on, so he enlisted. When you enlist, you essentially concede the rights you might have as a private citizen where those rights are superseded by military law. You essentially sign away most of your rights when you join the military, and allow yourself to be held to a different standard of conduct than civilians. So the guy had an obligation to treat classified information as such, and not dump it out into the public realm in the name of whatever.
Second, let's say that there's this huge paper trail of horrible things that the State Department and the Department of Defense has on record that would make any right thinking human being cringe, and that justice demands sees the light of day. Does it seem likely that, after nearly ten years and any number of the horde of intel analysts that work in the military and have seen these documents, only one guy does anything? What seems more reasonable: that a PFC, the lowest rank in the Army IIRC, with a beef and an inferiority complex, gets bitter and decides to play Deepthroat, or; that a massive government conspiracy of hellish torture and insidious political manipulation across the globe is finally uncovered by the noble, dedicated efforts of Gomer Pyle. I mean, I know this is Slashdot, but take the tinfoil hat off for just a minute and think this through.
Third, what enemies? Well, there are the specific enemies such as al-Qaeda and various other terrorist networks and foreign nations that might want to use the information for propaganda or to target informants. There are also the enemies that we don't necessarily know about, meaning parties unknown which may want to use the information in these documents to harm the US or our allies.
Fourth, for someone who seems to have a fairly low opinion of the US, Mr. Paterson seems to have a wildly inflated sense of our influence over foreign peoples. Again, which seems more reasonable: that the release of documents which contain some candid opinions and interviews with regional leaders has inspired four (five?) separate revolutions in the Arab world, or; that dictatorial regimes which have been hamfistedly combating political dissent for decades have finally reached the breaking point. I mean, have you noticed how little the revolutionaries in these countries have mentioned the US or the west at all? We're not even on the radar, except in Libya where they'd like us to bomb Qaddafi again. Sorry, conspiracy theorists and neocons, this is mostly an in-house thing.
And finally, Mr. Paterson seems to believe that Manning should get a medal for inspiring a new Arab awakening. There's no reason to believe that any of the governments which may form (or reform) in these countries will ally themselves to the US or our interests. In fact, there's a good reason to believe that, particularly in Yemen, religious fundamentalists will dominate the political scene, which would not be an optimal result from an anti-terrorism point of view, and at the very least will be hostile to US and western interests. So don't give PFC "Lawrence of Arabia" Manning a medal just yet.
Here is Art. 104 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice: http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/10/A/II/47/X/904
Any person who - (1) aids, or attempts to aid, the enemy with arms, ammunition, supplies, money, or other things; or (2) without proper authority, knowingly harbors or protects or gives intelligence to, or communicates or corresponds with or holds any intercourse with the enemy, either directly or indirectly; shall suffer death or such other punishment as a court-martial or military commission may direct. This section does not apply to a military commission established under chapter 47A of this title.
Looks like the procecution will need to prove intent to assist those against whom we are at war.
Quite right! It's the damned Electoral college's fault. Where's my pitchfork?
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
I have a hard time being sympathetic. If there were some particular issue of malfeasance addressed by these documents then that's one thing. "Entity X has done something wrong and here are the docs to prove it." No problems. However I just can't believe anyone actually read 300000 documents before casting them into the wind. That goes for Manning and Wikileaks. They seem to think that every secret is something evil that needs to be exposed, which is just not true. All tech companies have proprietary info that they keep under wraps etc. If all secrets are bad, then I want Assange's personal info: credit cards, phone numbers, bank accounts and physical location tracking every 5 minutes. What is he trying to hide? He must be doing something bad!!!
Sorry, but gray text on gray background is making my eyes bleed.
You mean the warmonger Friedman, not the Nobelist Krugman.
Purely out of curiosity, why is it always the UK's NHS that's held up in the US as the example of "This is socialised healthcare, it's terrible, we mustn't do it"?
Most of the first world has some sort of socialised healthcare - Canada does, most of Europe, Australia. And they all operate in slightly different ways to the NHS - usually by heavily subsidising healthcare but not making it entirely free. But we don't hear Americans saying "Canada has social healthcare, look how terrible it is!". We don't hear "France has social healthcare, look how terrible it is!" Why not?
There is no "certainly" that the released documents compromised any soldiers or our assets. Only 5000 documents of the 250K have been released, and they were redacted with the help of the news outlets that published them.
Well, apparently, you only have to fool the majority of people for a little while.
That's because the "enemy" the government is referring to is the public. They obviously can't admit that in a court filing.
Liberty in your lifetime
There were certainly documents and such that put the lives of many soldiers and civilians in danger but I understand how quickly many here dismiss them
Got a decent fer'instance? Even one single solitary document containing even one fact that you can demonstrate might have even theoretically endangered a single life?
Seems nobody else has managed that challenge yet. There were one or 2 half hearted attempts months ago, but the best they could do was documents showing where troops were many months before the release. They couldn't seem to find any cases where the troops were still where the documents said they were.
So there it is, show us here a single solitary instance where even one life might reasonably be believed to be endangered and we'll all quit dismissing the endangerment argument so easily.
Manning sold out his own country for nothing more than self-satisfaction. I'm glad to see him getting charged with aiding the enemy. I hope he gets the death penalty.
Even if we take that first part for true (maybe we assume that no one could possibly do something with good intentions that ends up hurting some idiotic sense of national pride), really?
Manning is a kid who was serving in the military. HE'S the first guy you'd like to see on the chopping block for "selling out" his own country? Not, say some elected official who has taken money from corporations to make decisions against the interests of the citizenry? Really? Wow. Okay. Wow.
Oh wait, the "nothing more than self-satisfaction" is what deserves the death penalty? If, say, the Koch brothers had paid him to do it, that would make it okay?
contains no mention by name of the enemy to which the US military is referring.
The main motivation of Manning/Wikileaks has been to inform the public about the goings on in the Pentagon, State Department, and various theaters of war. And in that sense, they have succeeded. So I guess Walt Kelly said it best;
"We have met the enemy and he is us."
Have gnu, will travel.
I love these Americans that take a single incomplete second hand experience with Canadian health care and immediately believe that it extrapolates to the entire system. The reality is that the vast, VAST majority of Canadians don't ever go to the U.S. for health care, and most of us are perfectly fine with the wait times. Personally, I've had several broken bones, had several family members with cancer and heart problems, and I've never had a problem with the wait times. In fact, I don't even know anyone that has ever had an urgent health care issue that wasn't taken care of promptly.
If our health care system was so bad, you'd think we'd see more outrage among actual Canadians instead of just a steady stream of outrage and rhetoric coming from American "conservatives."
Furthermore, the vast majority of Americans couldn't afford the treatment that was given to Danny Williams, and under the American system they'd either have to put the next few generations of their family into tremendous debt or just forgo treatment and die.
I hate to break this to you, but plenty of Canadians live practically normal lives with pace makers.
There's plenty of money for all that, it's being hoarded by a new aristocracy.
Bradley Manning, you're the only soldier in the last 11 years to which I can honestly say "Thank you for your service. You are a true hero." The rest of them are "just following orders" in a pair of useless wars. Good on them for serving their country by serving the popularly elected government, but the missions are honorless.
Blar.
Motivation is critical to many crimes. Heck, the whole concept of a mens rea which is fundamental to many felonies, is based on the state of mind and motivation of the individual.
Manning cannot attach a legally reasonable connection between his motivation and his chosen course of action which would motivate a non-brain dead jury to say "this man clearly acted to uphold the spirit of the law or protect the public."
If you don't get the difference between leaking specific documents that you know show clear criminal acts and dumping a volume of documents that would take a small army of readers to verify out of sheer spite, then you are the moron. The difference between that is the difference between shooting someone in self-defense under legally questionable circumstances and gunning down an entire public space while claiming you did public good because a few of the victims just so happened to have warrants for their arrest.
he was helping the US establishment in their [not so] covert battle against the citizens of the USofA. Funny, I thought he was fighting for the freedom of all USofA'ers.
"He did what he did as an act of revenge against a policy he disliked."
You can't possibly actually know that.
Should we not start a fund to help him pay for an attorney?
If you can, just for a moment strop to imagine something...
In WW2 if a disgruntled PFC on the German front pulled a truck up to his office and proceeded to load the entire back end with every single sensitive document he could get his hands on, and then drove it across the the combat zone and delivered it to the Nazi's personally, then returned back to his unit and said "I have done this in the name of freedom to expose the evils of our government. Btw, that list included a list of vulnerable strategic assets critical to the success of the war but I'm sure Hittler will only look at the diplomatic cables." What do you think would happen?
Now, imagine this... instead of using a truck he found a way to get all 250,000 documents into the hands of every one... every German officer, soldier, Hittler himself, AND the Japanese... and you can't forget these papers include wonderful details like the US and UK's private discussions about the possible war with Russia as soon as Germany fell... lets Give that to Stalin. And when asked WHY he sent his papers to every single enemy in the world his answer is now "I felt the american people had the right to know!"
How is this in ANY way different from what he has done today? I have spent 4 years in Iraq as a soldier and contractor. I have seen personally the horrors that terrorists subject their own civilian populations to. I promise you Al Qaeda is every bit as bad as the Nazi's, and would love very much to kill every one of us on this topic. PFC Manning intentionally delivered as much sensitive information as possible to a venue where he knew EVERY enemy of the united states would have immediate unrestricted access to it. It is not necessary to say WHICH enemy because he gave it to ALL of them. The documents he delivered did in fact include lists of vulnerable strategic assets critical for NATO operations abroad and at home, that's not whistle blowing at all, it's not revealing a crime or mismanagement, fraud or abuse... it is intentional reckless endangerment of peoples lives. I am appalled at what he did and I am ashamed that anyone could possibly support his actions.
*IF* He had leaked information specific to crimes committed by this or any administration by identifying specific documents tied to those crimes and revealing them to enforce the moral standards we demand our leaders uphold, I could condone his actions. There are systems within the US Gov specifically designed for whistle blowing, but if he felt those were corrupted as well then I could understand his choice to release these sensitive documents to the public so that justice can be demanded... I would still send him to Court Martial because every action must be held accountable. Whistle Blowing isn't a crime, but publicly revealing classified information is. With a strong moral argument his sentence would be light, probably demotion and discharge from service. However, that's not in any way similar to what he did... instead of revealing evidence of abuses he released everything, knowing that some of it was of life or death significance. Sure, there are certainly crimes hidden away in those documents... all I've heard from them is a lot of diplomatic cables that should have been kept private, but I'm sure there may be a crime or two buried away, right next to the list of vital strategic assets.
He admits what he did and his only defense is "But it was the right thing to do... oh sorry, I hope you don't die because of it." I was in Iraq when he leaked the documents.
I don't think it's reasonable to say that one man's self-immolation automatically disqualifies all the other contributing factors. Bradley manning is a whistle-blower, he brought to light all kinds of military and government corruption. We have a strong tradition of that in the US, because most of us don't believe our government is beyond reproach. So I think maybe you are the traitor, since you are putting your government and military above our nation's best interest and above any sense of decency and fairness, and above any practice of transparency and full disclosure. Your blatant disregard for the truth, in that you want it to remain hidden, is disgusting.
He wasn't forced into the military, he willfully joined up. So he knows the rules (he learned OPSEC on day one) and broke them anyway, which makes him a traitor. His actions endangered the lives of soldiers around the world and undermined their effort (regardless if you agree with it or not). It's an insult to anyone who has worn the uniform. But of course all you armchair warriors will disagree because you know nothing about what it's like to serve a single day let alone in combat, well except for maybe Call of Duty. Let me be clear, a soldiers life isn't a political pawn!
Theres not a war?
Department of Defense begs to differ.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_War_on_Terrorism_Service_Medal
The President agrees that there is a war.
"Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred."
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Inauguration/story?id=6689022&page=1
Congress also agrees that there is a war
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use_of_Military_Force_Against_Terrorists
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use_of_Military_Force_Against_Iraq_Resolution_of_2002
Vote third party. Get your friends to vote third party. You wont change the fact that each election you are presented with two unpleasant choices, if each election you accept one of them.
Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
Wrong. Maccleans (popular Canadian magaznie) recently ran an article rating the health care systems in most developed countries. Canada ranked dead last.
I am a dual citizen and have lived for multiple years in both countries. I can attest to the fact that the US health care system is superior to its Canadian counterpart.
The facilities, quality of care and time it takes to get a procedure done are all better in the US.
And we had Rush Limbaugh, probably one of the most out spoken "conservative" critics of national healthcare go to Hawaii which has the most socialistic healthcare system in the US for his medical needs. He didn't pick Massachusetts which has a similar system; no, he bloodly got as from the US as possible without actually leaving it.
Not to mention the conservative, cut-spending-now republican convention whose top topics were against nationwide healthcare was in Hawaii. And they totally ignored Hawaii's situation.
So either these guys publically disagree with nationwide healthcare and privately love it, or they have no clue how to manage anything. Either way, you wouldn't want them leading the country.
A fitting name to post under for a Canadian. :)
... contains no mention by name of the enemy to which the US military is referring
There isn't one in the War on Terror ;) They are everywhere, all around us, *lurking*
the rest of the US doing whatever the hell they want
You mean the US government doing whatever the hell they want. If recent events have proven anything, it's that the government and the people are NOT one and the same. (After all, if you were the same person running the government, then why do they need guns and a special right to use them against you?)
but that is how the government thinks about its citizens whats wrong with it being the other way around?
We've held him in jail without a trial and have tortured him every day of his imprisonment.
Now we want to kill him?
As a Democrat who hated Bush and voted for Obama, I'm noticing that Obama is going to very extreme measures to protect his secrets. I have to ask, what's so important that he needs to kill an American citizen to protect? Is this how we treat whistleblowers from a president who promised transparency and the "truth"?
Torture and murder. Thanks Obama, for doing Bush's job better than even he could.
Are you arguing that we're at War with Iraq? Because, you know, we're not. We won that war. The war is over. Hell, we've even finished the occupation, technically.
Likewise, 'terrorists' does not appear to qualify as an actual 'enemy' for us to be at war with. Under the authority of that bill, we have invaded, and thus gone to war with, Afghanistan, but likewise that war is also over.
The US is at war with no countries right now. We have soldiers dying in various countries, but those are peacekeeper actions within allied nations, not 'war'.
If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
Since this was leaked to the World, is the World now our enemy in the eyes of the military?
No, but there was a war and there remains a war in Afghanistan, Al Qadea and the Taliban remain there.
War is hell.
Which is exactly WHY you shouldn't enter it without just cause - which is exactly what we did. I have never seen a good reason as to WHY the US invaded Iraq.
Yes, we've been there a long time and some may say that is irrelevant now. But NONE of this would have happened if we a) weren't there or b) had any kind of how/when we were going to leave.
Amazing how that one horrible decision has led to so many others. It has cost this country, and others (among other things) loss of money, credibility, and lives.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
US Government confirms that the US population is its enemy.
it was each citizen's duty to disobey illegitimate rules ?
paying your dues to aristocracy, was a rule back in 18th century. so was subjectship of the king.
i see you talking very comfortably and smugly, while enjoying the benefits of the rule-disobeying, your ancestors have done ?
isnt there a contradiction there ?
Read radical news here
So very true. I've posted the same thing a few days ago. Plus, the members of the military are overseas specifically to coerce and kill. That adds yet another layer of hypocrisy to the "OMG! think of human lives" argument.
Well lets just get rid of money entirely and everybody live on good intentions.
Now I know thats going to the extreme, and I'm not trying to be a troll, but you have to realize that making fat ass sums of money is a big reason people work as long and as hard as they do. Take away the incentives and they will just stop trying to get ahead. You think its hard to get people to take their education seriously now, wait until you don't have that "you need to get a good education so you can get a good job and afford X" line. Notice how we aren't all firemen, astronauts, pilots or [insert childhood dream job here]? Why do you think that is?
People doing business for the satisfaction of accomplishment and not power or money is very very rare (but very very admirable and I think very present here on Slashdot). However, big changes in quality of life are preceded by big industrial movements, which are preceded by big scientific movements. You can't just cut the incentive for industry at the knees and expect the equation to still work, unless you want a government directed industry which I strongly disagree with on the terms of believing it to be morally wrong. And even if we did go with it do you really think that would work?
If I can just reach out with my words and touch a butthole, just one, it will all be worth it.
and which 'lives' were these secrets saving ? the private cia contractors which ran torture camps ? those who aided kidnappings all over the world ? double agents which have been delivering wedding locations to cia so that cia strikes could kill hundreds while trying to kill a few random mid ranking commanders ?
precisely what lives were these secrets saving again ? these 'innocent' people who have consciously contracted with cia to effect murders, kidnappings, torture in exchange of money ?
dont give us bullshit.
Read radical news here
so, kkk was a majority back in 1930s ? or a local majority which was trying to go medieval on people ?
and, rule of majority, is tyranny ? so then, we should allow local tribes in south america and africa, to continue cannibalism tradition, which was banned ?
dont be a witless moron. there are moral and ethical standards at any given time. some rules and laws are set to observe these. you cant go saying 'majority is tyranny' and go about ritual sacrifice, or cannibalism, or lynching.
'state secrets' has not even been the want and desire of the majority. it was invented and perpetrated by government agencies, and the private interest backers placing their candidates in front of the people as multiple choices.
Read radical news here
Assange would never go to Norway to get the Nobel Peace Prize, since the Norwegians might extradite him to the U.S. like the Swedes.
Norway has repeatedly denied extraction to the U.S since we consider their prisons to have way to low standards and the death penalty to be a cruel punishment. Norway would be way safer than Sweden.
-- Linux user #369862
Hang that mother fucker.
So you would agree that Bradly Manning is responsible for every single civilian death in Northern Africa (Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, etc.)?
And the "wave of democratization" is likely going to be usurped by already-organized groups with political aspirations in these areas. Note that the folks that actually started both the French and Russian revolutions were nice, friendly people that never envisioned what was going to come out the other end. My guess is that the only organized groups there are in these places are Islamic fundamentalists that will institute a pan-Islamic calphate. After all, the borders of these nations are completely arbitrary and have no basis in history or geography. So why wouldn't they unite?
I don't understand why this isn't more clear cut. He broke the law by releasing classified documents. If someone who worked for your billion dollar company suddenly decided that he was pissed off and would open-source all of your proprietary code, people shouldn't suddenly say that he is innocent. Now he's also in the military and the laws in the military are way more strict about doing anything harmful to your country. He broke the law and now he will be punished for it. Prosecuting Assange is a much less clear-cut case because it is unclear whether or not he broke a US law.
the reality is that it's infected the chain of command
Like all aspects of government, the military is controlled in a pyramid fashion from the top down, not the bottom up. Therefore it is not possible, or even logical, that corruption "infects" the chain of command from the bottom up. The elite near the top of the pyramid either choose for themselves whether to engage in corruption, or they are mandated to engage in corruption by yet even higher elites. But never do they "fall victim" to corruption from the bottup up.
You can't declare war against an organization, only another country. We have no specific country we are fighting against so we are not technically at war despite all the rhetoric in D.C. This is why this charge won't stick, because no stated enemy was helped by leaking the cables, it was merely embarrassing for a lot of people. I have no idea why Republicans came up with this idea that terrorism should be fought with armies, the only thing it is good for is funding the military industrial complex.
Wrong. Maccleans (popular Canadian magaznie) recently ran an article rating the health care systems in most developed countries. Canada ranked dead last.
I am a dual citizen and have lived for multiple years in both countries. I can attest to the fact that the US health care system is superior to its Canadian counterpart.
The facilities, quality of care and time it takes to get a procedure done are all better in the US.
I suggest you make any necessary changes to wikipedia then, since your source is so much better than than the one used there. Seriously, Canada's health system isn't a model of efficiency (that title goes to Sweden), but compared to the US it's a utopia.
"...gives intelligence to, or communicates or corresponds with or holds any intercourse with the enemy, either directly or indirectly."
http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/10/A/II/47/X/904
The US Supreme Court ruled in 1942 that an enemy doesn't have to be in uniform and the Military Commissions Act of 2006 further defines it.
He is going to rot in prison.
If this is true, Obama his cronies needs to go, preferably be on trial for treason against THE AMERICAN PEOPLE and malpractice.
What a "change".. Get rid of your Godawful politicians already.
Because, in this case 'enemy' is people'. their own people. imagine - what would the people do with the information that their government is betraying country's ideals and hiding stuff through the wall of secrecy !! what blasphemy. what treason ! how could, 'the people' know what their government is doing !!!! outrageous ...
its rather impossible to come up and say 'hey, we are doing shit behind our people, and so we dont want them to know. so, our enemy is people'
Read radical news here
But, the question is, whether WE, as 'the people' have to accept that, or not.
let me tell you as one of those people - we dont. we own the government. not government us. government, cannot define what's right, or what's wrong, without us.
and i dont remember defining doing filthy shit behind country's back, and then hiding it behind a wall of secrecy, as an allowable act.
Read radical news here
Now we can stop moaning about how he has been held without charge for months in horrible conditions.
No doubt you would claim those 9 children obliterated the other day by Nato gunship crews were also "armed" as they would picking up wood for a cooking fire.
Damn the ENEMY, but they are sneaky, huh? Frankly, the "Apache community" should stand trial the way Lt. Calley once did, but we know that's not about to happen, especially not in the lawless rogue empire nation of the United Skynet Almagamated (USA).
Perhaps you are related to the vice-prez of the USA, Joey Bin Biden. No doubt we should seek his wise counsel on the matter, just as we wonder what he would say about whether Gadhaffi is an actual dictator, or even a psycho dictator, something which evidently appears to have caught our banksters, pharmaceutical lobbyists, Monsanto lobbyists, and Exxon-Mobil lobbyists, like Susan Rice and the other neocons on Obama's administration, completely by surprise!
We do know of vice-prez Joey Bin Biden's recent sage declarations: that Mubarrak of Egypt was "NOT a dictator" and that "Julian Assange is a high-tech terrorist" --- you go, Joey Bin Biden, man of many achievements (such as that op you were a part of, together with Anita Hill, to get Clarence Thoms seated on the US Supreme Court --- you go, Joey!!!!).
I've know a variety of military pilots over the years; some stalwart and of absolute integrity, such as Maj. Fritz Meyers, who refused to take the path of least resistance and retired early to publicly denounce the "official version" of the surface-to-air missile shootdown of Flight 800 (which the radar data, released some years later under an FOIA request, has proven).
But those Apache crews, and the Nato crews, aren't among them.
Not sure what your point was, but you DO realize that he was on vacation (Christmas 2009) in Hawaii at the time he experienced chest pains. This was an EMERGENCY! Nothing pro-active or scheduled about his decision.
Life is not for the lazy.
One can reasonably argue that the leaked cables was the match that lit the powderkeg. Wikileaks' revelation of the extravagance and corruption of the Tunisian governing elite is what motivated the Tunisians to finally revolt. That revolt would not have occurred if the strong desire wasn't already there, if there wasn't already a long history of simmering resentment. And Tunisia's revolution (or revolt if that's what you call a revolution as it's occurring) obviously motivated Arabs across the rest of the region to do the same.
There are many, many, actually countless, numbers of laws congress has and is now in violation of. The vast majority of them should be dangling at the end of a noose for crimes against the people.
Good question. I'm not a constitutional scholar, but doesn't creating an act-of-war (911 WTC, bombing of USS Cole...etc) constitute that person, group, and associations thereof as an enemy of the state? Or, is an enemy only defined by an official declaration of war by congress?
Life is not for the lazy.
> So you would agree that Bradly Manning is responsible for every single civilian death in Northern Africa (Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, etc.)?
Would you agree that Jesus is responsible for every death committed in the name of a Christian god? That Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and George Washington are responsible for every death from every bomb dropped by a US plane or bullet fired by a US soldier?
> My guess is that the only organized groups there are in these places are Islamic fundamentalists that will institute a pan-Islamic calphate.
Rather than guess why don't you use the wonderful resource known as the Internet to educate yourself? As far as Egypt and Tunisia go, the people are fairly well educated and a lot of the necessary institutions for democracy are already there, as well as a strong sense of nationalism. The threat of Islamic fundamentalism is just the latest boogeyman, like the communists in the 1950s.
You might be using some selective remembrance there.
The Canadian health-care system is trash talked to. In fact, one of the funniest thrashings of the Canadian health care system is the fact that a superior court ruled that Quebec's ban on wait time insurance was immoral because the wait times for treatments were causing people to die or be permanently disfigured by their conditions.
France and other larger countries are typically ignored because they aren't thrown up as models of how it can work. This is mostly because the UK and Canada are more similar to the US. When people claim it can work, they know the population in the US won't stand for the differences between the US and France in the government of the economy and other areas. It's implicit that their systems works because of things that are radically different which we won't accept.
When the My Lai Massacre was first reported, a Col. Colin Powell, of Americal, was instrumental in covering it up.
Which is how those clowns reach general and admiral rank (see the background of douchey John McCain's father and grandfather).
Only after the gunship crewman became a civilian, and continued to pursue the matter did it ever reach the light of day.
But with endless duty and service in today's nonconscripted slave military, and partially-privatized, how could Manning know when, or if, he would ever be separated from service?
A lot of posters today simply can't locate their genitals....
Excellent point. I have often wondered how the White House claims "wartime powers" (wrt wiretaps, search of private homes and businesses, and surveillance of civilians) when we do not have an official declaration of war.
Maybe we do. I have never seen or heard about it. All I hear is "wartime powers" "wartime powers" and more "wartime powers". Where is the declaration of war?
They do not want to make an actual declaration of war because, if they did, then the terms and conditions for the end of the war would be given in the declaration of war. If we had terms and conditions for the end of the war then we would have citizens pushing to meet them and then there would be no perpetual assumption of "wartime powers". The scam should be crystal clear.
the NPG electrode was replaced with carbon blac
Your right, south and central America are far more likely spots for Canadian medical tourists. Just like India and Taiwan are popular with the UK's.
And no, it's not a single instance extrapolated, it's a single instance that is easy to remember because it's a politicians who bailed on the system.
You mean like the wealth being made from wait insurance? You know, the insurance policy that quite a few Canadians are purchasing that guarantees they will be taken out of the country for treatment if necessary?
I could see your point if health insurance wasn't still being purchased and sold in Canada to Canadians.
Wrong. the medical bills would simply be levied against their estate and their kids wouldn't get any inheritance. What wasn't paid would be written off in taxes and keep their paid services per charitable services at a rate in which they continue to receive the non-profit tax deductions.
There are enough programs out there that it's likely it would have been paid for in the first place. I'm not sure why you insist on perpetuating the myth that people are left to die because they can't afford something. It's illegal for any hospital to refuse emergency medical treatment to anyone on the bases of their ability to pay.
The parent may have implied a couple incorrect notions, you certainly did. Let's take a chance and see what happens if our notions are actually correct before spouting them. I'm betting that improvement in both places could be possible.
You are confusing the rights of public and private entities.
Public entities report to their citizens, and should be transparent in their activies.
Private citizens and companies have should have certain rights to privacy.
46137
In case you didn't miss the next response to your parent, check it out: http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2020186&cid=35368210
He links to an article that answers your question: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/feb/02/wikileaks-exclusive-book-extract
I'm sure if you looked you could find more articles that strengthen the association, but the cables definitely had an effect in confirming the Tunisians' suspicions about the extravagance and corruption of their ruling elite and pushing them further toward revolution. Maybe they would have revolted without the leaked cables, but the leaked cables definitely helped.
'It's beyond ironic that leaked US State Department cables have contributed to revolution and revolt in the Middle East, yet an American may be executed, or at best face life in prison, for being the primary whistleblower.'"
There's nothing ironic at all about the situation. The State department cables may contribute to revolution and revolt in the Mid East BECAUSE a traitorous American RELEASED them. If the American wasn't a TRAITOR, then those cables would never have come out, and perhaps we would not be seeing this level of turmoil right now.
I find it ironic how someone could totally misuse the word irony, and yet not perceive that it was a traitorous act that caused the situation to come about, NOT the mere existence of diplomatic cables, that have always had a Machiavellian nature since the dawn of statecraft.
There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
Without someone with the intellect of the framers of the constitution, the original American revolution would probably have resulted in a third world country. The problem is not the current generation if you get my meaning...
"People don't want to learn linux" hasn't been a valid excuse since '03.
I think it is reasonable to say that none of the documents Manning released had anything to do with the Tunisian revolution. Please explain in detail how "all kinds of military and government corruption" in the U.S. caused the Tunisian revolt. Please tell everyone what was in those documents that caused the revolt and how the Tunisians found out about them. Do you think that Tunisia is part of the U.S. and that they rose up against the U.S. government?
Just because you want something to be so, it does not follow that said thing is so. Just because you think that Manning is some sort of hero for breaking the law by betraying his oath and his country, he is not one. He is a traitor to his country. Tell you what, you tell me exactly where in U.S. law it says there will be full disclosure of what our diplomats and operatives think of the diplomats and rulers of other countries. Is it in the best interests of the country that candid individual opinions have been made public? If you had a negative opinion of your in-laws, would you want them broadcast to them? If you had a negative opinion of your co-workers, would you want an email expressing that opinion in insulting terms to be distributed to everyone? Do you think it might have a negative effect on your relationships? If so, then why do you think it is a good think to release the same things when it involves the U.S. government?
If you think that truth, transparentness, and full disclosure are so wonderful, why don't you do it? Post your full name; address; phone number; SSN; driver's license number; make, model, and tag number of any and all vehicles you own; physical description; credit card numbers; bank names and account numbers; family members names; pet names; sexual orientation; boss's name along with your unvarnished opinion; your unvarnished opinion of your family members, in-laws, girlfriend and/or wife and her family, etc. If you support full disclosure, surely you believe you should practice it, right?
Please hold the sarcasm; it's not conducive to rationale discourse (I know I'm expecting a lot from Slashdot).
Here's an interesting case for you:Take an expensive therapy like Provenge (an immunotherapy for prostate cancer that costs around 90k per patient and that extends life for an average of 3 months). Now, with the demographic shift that is occurring due to extended life spans coupled with the fact that prostate cancer is predominantly a disease of old age, how do you decide who gets something like Provenge in a government-subsidized system like Canada? Does everyone get it or no one? If the former, how can you possibly think the system can withstand the costs of this sort of thing. If the latter, wouldn't that mean the most advanced therapies are not available in Canada (since going private in Canada for the therapy would be impossible since they don't allow a two-tier system)?
Seriously - who exactly is the enemy? Everyone who isn't American? In my mind, at this point in time, the American government is clearly an enemy of the people.
BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
That's a BS argument. He didn't release them for that point and probably had no idea what he was releasing.
If you opened fire on a crowed and happen to kill some wanted criminals by chance should you be forgiven for the incident?
If that isn't satire then you are one sick sack of shit! In that case, please don't post more comments until you get some bloody help you fucking psycho.
It would destroy America? Cool, when do we get started?
BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
Actually, the Canadian unit of currency is the "Dollar". Please hold while I shake my head again and mutter something about dumb redneck americans.
BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
You're an idiot, and you're lying. Every study I've ever seen has been extremely critical of the US health care system because it really isn't better. Hell, cuba's health care system is better than the one in the US.
BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
OK, so now that we've established that you're an idiot, what now?
BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
Yeah, it's so much better in america where they can discriminate against people and just outright deny them healthcare for stupid reasons. Holy fuck you're an idiot.
BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
Interesting.
I mean, they ousted a dictator in Tunisia for refusing to let him sell his goods. Then that inspired egyptians to rise against theirs in a relatively swift victory. Now we have one of the "Epic bad guys of the world" getting the boot in Libya as a consequence. Imagine they succeed, what would killing your own citizen for telling the truth bring along in America?
Oh wait, americans can't throw stones as they consider it a form of excercise...
Yeah, I saw one.
One of the cables talked about a wealthy fencer from a prestigious family from a specific city in Iran as being an informant to the embassy. Now, it didn't mention his name specifically, but come on, how narrow is that pool going to be? I also don't know if anything has come from it yet or will come from it, but it's pretty safe to say that this dude is less then safe. Maybe, I guess it depends what prestige gets you vs. the spy hunters in Iran.
That's the worst I've seen from the pile. But despite his possible risk, the good that the leaks have done far outweigh the bad. The USA is not immune to corruption or abuse, and sunshine is the best cure.
Hate to break it to you but you have been brainwashed by insurance company propoganda to act against your own best interest.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Actually, the Canadian unit of currency is the "Dollar". Please hold while I shake my head again and mutter something about dumb redneck americans.
Yeah, that's what I thought too until I went to Canadia, and all the Canadians called it the 'loon' because of the bird on it (another questionable choice -- you didn't have any PEOPLE you were proud enough of to put them on your money, besides the queen of a different country?). What's even worse, they called the two loon the 'toon'. You poor Cannucks have some self esteem problems I think, but I like your country, even despite your obsession with curling and the Savage brothers.
Please hold the sarcasm; it's not conducive to rationale discourse (I know I'm expecting a lot from Slashdot).
Here's an interesting case for you:Take an expensive therapy like Provenge (an immunotherapy for prostate cancer that costs around 90k per patient and that extends life for an average of 3 months). Now, with the demographic shift that is occurring due to extended life spans coupled with the fact that prostate cancer is predominantly a disease of old age, how do you decide who gets something like Provenge in a government-subsidized system like Canada? Does everyone get it or no one? If the former, how can you possibly think the system can withstand the costs of this sort of thing. If the latter, wouldn't that mean the most advanced therapies are not available in Canada (since going private in Canada for the therapy would be impossible since they don't allow a two-tier system)?
Yeah, that's roughly the same stuff I hear from every Republican. That is, ignore the overwhelming empirical evidence that socialized medicine is better and cheaper, and ask a loaded question about a specific example that requires a committee to investigate, not a single person to answer based on some potentially erroneous information given by the asker of said loaded question. In short, like most things in life, it depends.
More to the point, Canadians have an average lifespan 3 years greater than that of Americans (see the chart in GP post). So it sounds like they're doing pretty good at keeping people alive.
To be fair American spies around the world are now under investigation. i guess Americans should ask themselves if informing the American people and the international community of illegal actions the government is taking without the consent of the people is something that should be punished.
Manning is getting punished because he snitched on the American gang Government for breaking international law. the international community should put trade sanctions on America for their behaviour.
The documents show that the US government works with all kinds of despots and dictators, regardless of what we think of them. This was true in Tunisia before the revolt, the same is true of Egypt. It's not so far fetched to think that bringing that to light might contribute civil unrest in those countries, as their citizens would feel betrayed by their government. It's too bad a similar uprising has not happened here. It doesn't matter whether the law requires full disclosure or not, allowing the government to act secretly without accountability is a bad idea. The strong rarely need protection.
I don't really care what people know about me (maybe I should, but I don't). I'm not going to go out of my way to make that information available, but I will give it to anyone who asks and has a good reason. I have a good reason to want to know what the government is doing with my tax dollars. If they are crooked, I need to know that. I am a share-holder and the US government represents me. I don't want to see innocent people killed in my name using my tax dollars, and that's exactly what the military documents show.
It's "loonie", not loon.
She's not the queen of a different country, she's the queen of Canada. She just also happens to be the same person as the queen of the UK (and Australia, etc.). It's an important distinction.
We prefer to put people on our bills, which currently feature Sir Wilfrid Laurier (7th Prime Minister, on the $5), Sir John A. Macdonald (First PM, on the $10), Queen Elizabeth II (on the $20), William Lyon Mackenzie King (10th PM, on the $50), and Sir Robert Borden (8th PM, on the $100).
Also, in regards to the toonie, at least calling it a doubloon didn't catch on.
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
Not to mention that he and his insurance paid the bill, not the citizens of Hawaii.
You are an ignorant fool. First, Rush was on vacation in Hawaii. He didn't fly there from Florida or new york because he was having chest pains. He was already there. It's completely stupid to suggest that someone jumps on a plane and cherry picks some state thousands of miles away because of an emergency condition.
National health care has nothing to do with Hawaii. The health care in Hawaii, outside of minimum standards prescribed by the FDA, is completely Hawaii's jurisdiction. That's where the public health care belongs too. In the state, not the federal government.
Or, you just don't know what you are talking about and letting everyone on the world know it too. And if all your politics are this clueless, I'm not sure anyone should listen to you about it ever again.
Sorry, you're right about the "loonie". I gotta say though, "loonie" isn't really an improvement when talking about currency. The queen thing is kinda lame (what's she done for you lately?), but I get that it's kinda cool being able to move to Australia or the UK without as much hassle, and putting some old rich lady on your money isn't that high a price to pay for something like that.
So what can you tell me about curling and the Savage brothers? When I was in Vancouver for 2 weeks, I was able to find at least 2 curling matches and either Boy Meets World or the Wonder Years on TV at any given time.
When you are invaded, you are at war. An ex political faction of Afghanistan was driven out of power by a war we commence. That same faction, the one that gave safe harbor to Al Qeada, is trying to retake the territory.
In short, we are at war technically as much as any other way we have been in.
Probably because a: you don't understand why we went to war, and b: fighting terrorism with law enforcement turned into 4 hijacked planes and about 3000 innocent people dead who did little more then showing up to work.
If you don't care, why didn't you post your information? Oh, that's right, you do care. And, you didn't bother to show any connection between Manning's leaks and the Tunisian revolt. Congratulations, you have proven yourself a liar and a fraud. Go die in a fire, you loser piece of shit.
Are you being serious right now?
He may indeed be less safe, but not necessarily since harming him now would lend weight to his allegations.
That cable is odd in many ways. They seem to have done a lot of research into the informant including his hobbies, but they aren't really sure about the company he informed on. The best they could manage is a quick google? Couldn't they have asked him to be specific about the company?
Nevertheless it does meet the minimum requirement in that it could in theory endanger his life. I would like to see evidence of the 'many' military or civilians supposedly endangered.
After this, I'm not wasting any more time on you. Just remember that healthcare quality is more complex than a simple measure of mortality. If I live 85 years in Canada but with my last years with a broken hip because I can't get to the head of a waiting list versus to 82 in the US, I'll take the latter.
Yes because Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia. Or was it Eurasia? So many enemies...
Allow me to alleviate your (feigned) bafflement. (For those who like to cut to the chase.)
Previously unseen tape shows bin Laden's declaration of war
Bin Laden gave his peace terms in is letter to America. In short: covert to Islam as a nation, give up the US constitution and implement strict Sharia la
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
Anyone who calls a unit of currency the 'loony' or 'toony' can't be taken seriously.
No one will see their attack coming.
After this, I'm not wasting any more time on you. Just remember that healthcare quality is more complex than a simple measure of mortality. If I live 85 years in Canada but with my last years with a broken hip because I can't get to the head of a waiting list versus to 82 in the US, I'll take the latter.
Yeah, I don't think that's the case there. But guess what? If you're in the US and don't have money, you won't be getting that hip replacement. Ever.
Maybe you should read some history such as USA-Tunisian history, agreements and CLOSE cooperation the last 200+ years!
Tunisia was a very important ally and heavily backed by USA. Whatever corrupt government that was running tunisia it has 110% full support of USA.
The Queen (and Governor general and Lieutenant governors) aren't really supposed to do much. They're strictly for head of state ceremonial stuff (greeting foreign dignitaries, etc.), whereas the Prime Minister actually does stuff in government, unlike the US where the president has to do both. I personally think it's more effective to divide the role like we do.
As for curling, I'm eagerly awaiting the world championships since Saskatchewan won the tournament of hearts (The skip's hometown isn't far from me). Also waiting to see if we'll win the brier next week.
No idea on the savage brothers. I've never much been interested in most TV.
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
04:55 Hotel Two-Six; Crazyhorse One-Eight.
05:03 Crazyhorse One-Eight; Bushmaster Seven. Go ahead.
05:06 Bushmaster Seven; Crazyhorse One-Eight. Uh, location of bodies, Mike Bravo five-four-five-eight eight-six-one-seven [military map grid reference].
05:15 Hey, good on the uh...
05:17 Five-four-five-eight eight-six-one-seven [map grid reference]. Over.
05:21 This is Crazyhorse One-Eight, that's a good copy. They're on a street in front of an open, uh, courtyard with a bunch of blue uh trucks, bunch of vehicles in the courtyard.
05:30 There's one guy moving down there but he's uh, he's wounded.
05:35 All right, we'll let 'em know so they can hurry up and get over here.
05:40 One-Eight, we also have one individual, uh, appears to be wounded trying to crawl away.
05:49 Roger, we're gonna move down there.
05:51 Roger, we'll cease fire.
05:54 Yeah, we won't shoot anymore.
06:01 He's getting up.
06:02 Maybe he has a weapon down in his hand?
06:04 No, I haven't seen one yet.
06:07 I see you guys got that guy crawling right now on that curb.
06:08 Yeah, I got him. I put two rounds [30mm cannon shells] near him, and you guys were shooting over there too, so uh we'll see.
06:14 Yeah, roger that.
06:16 Bushmaster Thirty-Six Element; this is uh Hotel Two-Seven over.
06:21 Hotel Two-Seven; Bushmaster Seven go ahead.
06:24 Roger I'm just trying to make sure you guys have my turf [area], over.
06:31 Roger we got your turf.
06:33 Come on, buddy.
06:38 All you gotta do is pick up a weapon.
06:44 Crazyhorse this is Bushmaster Five, Bushmaster Four break. We are right below you right time now can you walk us onto that location over.
06:54 This is Two-Six roger. I'll pop flares [drop flares]. We also have one individual moving. We're looking for weapons. If we see a weapon, we're gonna engage.
07:07 Yeah Bushmaster, we have a van that's approaching and picking up the bodies.
07:14 Where's that van at?
07:15 Right down there by the bodies.
07:16 Okay, yeah.
07:18 Bushmaster; Crazyhorse. We have individuals going to the scene, looks like possibly uh picking up bodies and weapons.
07:25 Let me engage.
07:28 Can I shoot?
07:31 Roger. Break. Uh Crazyhorse One-Eight request permission to uh engage.
07:36 Picking up the wounded?
07:38 Yeah, we're trying to get permission to engage.
07:41 Come on, let us shoot!
07:44 Bushmaster; Crazyhorse One-Eight.
07:49 They're taking him.
07:51 Bushmaster; Crazyhorse One-Eight.
07:56 This is Bushmaster Seven, go ahead.
07:59 Roger. We have a black SUV-uh Bongo truck [van] picking up the bodies. Request permission to engage.
08:02 Fuck.
08:06 This is Bushmaster Seven, roger. This is Bushmaster Seven, roger. Engage.
08:12 One-Eight, engage.
08:12 Clear.
08:13 Come on!
08:17 Clear.
08:20 Clear.
08:21 We're engaging.
You're arguing that in the heat of the moment these pilots didn't know what they were doing. The above audio transcript lays it out very clearly - that they did in fact know they were engaging a civilian vehicle and individuals who were trying to pick up the dead/wounded.
The 2011 "Manning Revolutions" the brought democracy to the middle east.
Not to mention the DOD already put out a statement saying the release of the files didn't put any of the soldiers or civilians at risk
Was destroying the left's (and maybe the right's) ability to think rationally and objectively. This thread is full of derp and whargarble defending a traitor who is getting exactly what he deserved.
Left, i am disappoint. /voted for Clinton, Gore, Kerry and Obama
Utilizing the synergization of benchmark e-solutions to pre-workaround action items!
So why is it so bad to leak those docs? If the leaks merely underscores what the US government thinks in private is what they say in public, why were the leaks decried as harming the diplomatic efforts of the US Government?
Either you're wrong, the government lying or a mix of both.
What the hell ever happened to fact? Truth is for religious people. For intelligent people, we work in things like Fact and theories. Truth is word that allows people to abuse theory by accepting unsubstantiated theory as fact.
On the other hand, I'll take truth if you toss in a bottle of 30 year single malt scotch and a playboy cover model. Then I should be too busy to bother with silly things like fact.
More serious than you are. There is absolutely ZERO evidence wikileaks had anything to do with the Tunisian Uprising, yet arrogant, piece of shit assholes like you are trying to claim it was because of wikileaks. I swear, the lot of you should be chained together, doused in kerosene, and set afire.
It's not an unreasonable assertion. As with any mass movement, we can't know why exactly it happened. More generally, social unrest happens when people feel they are being oppressed or taken advantage of. You say a student burning himself caused it, but that's really just like a match starting a fire. Fire needs more than just a spark, it needs fuel. One person burning themselves would not lead social unrest in the US today because everyone is fat and happy for the most part, and they all have too much to lose. In Tunisia, though, such a thing was possible. And really, it was only a matter of time. In any case, any evidence that discredits the government (even if it's the government of another country) contributes to the perception of oppression and usury. So it probably did have something to do with it.
On a side note, you should consider cutting back on the meaningless inflammatory remarks. They only serve to shut down discussion. It's the cyber equivalent of covering your ears and yelling "I'm not listening". If you're going to do that, you'd do just as well to say nothing at all.
Subject says it all. Totally predictable and unsurprising.
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
It is an unreasonable assertion because there is absolutely zero evidence for it and if you are going to make an assertion you need to be able to back it up. There is no discussion. It is you and your ilk trying to claim credit on behalf Wikileaks and that worthless traitor Manning for the Tunisian uprising and me pointing out to you that you are bunch of worthless lying assholes who are trying to steal credit from many people, but most especially the man who ended his life because he could not provide for his family due to the corruption in the government.
He was not a student. The fact that you say that shows you don't know what the fuck you are talking about, you arrogant son of a donkey-fucking bitch. He was a 26 year old, the sole earner for his family of six, who made his money operating an unlicensed fruit cart. The "fuel" was the long term governmental corruption, something the people of Tunisia have known about for years.
You want me to tone down? Stop trying to steal credit away from the people of Tunsia and Bouazizi and giving it to Wikileaks for something Wikileaks had nothing to do with. Stop being a fucking piece of shit asshole and accept the fact that you are ignorant about the whole situation and then go learn what really happened. Other than that, there is nothing to say because YOU ARE WRONG!
Just typical. They create the War and we are the one's who get the bullets.
Of course it's all about controlling us and getting us to cower in the face of
our enemies. I say expose the mongrels secrets and to hell with what happens.
This World is due for an Enema so that corruption can be eradicated. Our
various Government's should be afraid of Us!!
The leaks happened before the revolution, they contained information about the government of Tunisia, therefore the potential for a causal link exists. You are correct that the man was not a student, as he was a graduate who was unable to find work and was fed up after the government shut down his vegetable stand. If you would to read a discussion of the link, here's a discussion of it. But honestly, I don't know what kind of "evidence" would prove such a link to your satisfaction. Do you? Would you like signed statements from all the participants saying that Wikileaks had something to do with it? All I said was that Wikileaks may well have had something to do with it. You say there's zero evidence, but I don't know what kind of evidence you're looking for, it's not like there's going to be fingerprints or DNA evidence. The fact that the leaks happened soon before the revolution, and people were talking about it at the time is all the evidence you're going to get (and it's all the evidence you could possibly hope to get). If that's not enough for you that's fine, but there's no reason for you to shout down people who think it is good enough.
And what's with you saying that I'm arrogant or that I don't know what I'm talking about? All I have to go on is news reports, I've never been to Tunisia. If you'd been there and were involved with the rebellion, maybe you'd have a point. But as it stands, I don't see any reason to think you know any more about it than I do.
Once again, I would like to reiterate to you how unnecessary and pointless your name-calling and inflammatory remarks are. If you don't want to talk to me, you don't have to reply. You're really just wasting your fingers typing all that. I'm not going to get upset and my feelings will not be hurt by some random person on the internet for calling me names.
So your point is that the US, after 10 years of war, still has not been able to deal with a handful of individuals? Oh dear oh dear...
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
And you live up to yours.
Take off every 'sig' !!
I guess because the moon landings happened before the revolutions, the moon landings caused the resolutions, right? Just because a "causal link" can exist, it does not follow that one does exist.
Your argument is that because one thing happened before a different thing, the first thing caused the second thing even though there is no evidence linking the two. That is called Post hoc ergo propter hoc. It is that kind of thinking created the biggest lie of all, religion.
Now shut the fuck up, shithead.
The fact that the leaks happened soon before the revolution, and people were talking about it at the time is all the evidence you're going to get. That is satisfactory to me. If you are looking for more evidence than that, what are you looking for? If you can't think of anything, that means a lack of evidence (in your eyes) was a foregone conclusion.
If the leaks had happened a long time before the revolution, or if they'd not contained anything about the government of Tunisia, or if they hadn't been discussed and shared among protestors in the time leading up to and during the revolution, I'd concede that they probably weren't a factor. But as it is, there's no good reason to say they did not contribute.
The fact that the leaks happened soon before the revolution, and people were talking about it at the time is all the evidence you're going to get.
That is no evidence at all.
If you are looking for more evidence than that, what are you looking for? If you can't think of anything, that means a lack of evidence (in your eyes) was a foregone conclusion.
All the evidence I need is a statement by those involved in the revolution that the leaks caused it. That you would give credit to Wikileaks with no evidence that it had anything to do with it shows YOU have made a foregone conclusion to give credit where none is do and deny credit where it is due.
if they hadn't been discussed and shared among protestors in the time leading up to and during the revolution,
Show me where the protesters say they read, shared, and discussed the leaks or admit you are a liar.
I'd concede that they probably weren't a factor.
Yet you continue to insist that they should get credit for all while ignoring the true causes.
But as it is, there's no good reason to say they did not contribute.
Actually, the fact that they have not been mentioned by the protesters is reason enough. And, moreover, there is no good reason to say they contribute.
You and your ilk continue to try to give credit where none is due and in doing so dishonor the true causes. You should be treated like the worthless glory mongers you are; beaten bloody, tarred, and feathers.
Ok, here is a quote from a young tunisian directly linking the cable to the revolution. Here is an article about the tunisian government blocking a website which posted the leaked cable. Here is an article about Gaddafi's statement that the leaked cables were responsible for the revolution (you didn't ask for that but I saw it from the other article and it seemed relevant).
Again, I'm not saying that the leaks caused the revolution, only that they contributed to it. There's enough information here to support that hypothesis.
It is funny who you say "I'm not saying that the leaks caused the revolution" when the comment that I originally responded to states
. I can only assume that you are lying piece of shit scumbag. You are trying to change the argument and I won't let you. You stepped up to defend that statement and I am not going to let you back away. Either the Wikileak provided by that traitor Manning is responsible for triggering the revolution or it isn't. You can have no half measures. Either prove that Wikileaks is "responsible for triggering the revolution in Tunisia" or admit it is not. Otherwise, STFU.
Here's the thing, people have to be careful when saying wikileaks contributed to it because it's bad to imply that the revolution may not have happened were it not for a western news source (which is really what wikileaks is). Certainly, the Tunisians did the work (and paid in blood) to get these guys out of power, and they deserve credit for it.
You seem to be saying that the leak had no impact, and that it is only a bad thing. Then someone tells you that it's "arguably responsible for triggering the revolution in Tunisia" and you flip a switch. But it's true, a valid argument can be made that a revolution might not have happened without the credible disclosures of corruption contained in the leaked documents. If you search the internet, you will find no shortage of people making exactly that argument. We can never know whether or not the revolution would have happened without the leaked cables because the reality is that the revolution happened when the leak happened. We can't retrospectively separate the two.
You asked for evidence. I gave you the evidence you asked for and you said it wasn't good enough. Sorry, there's nothing else I can do beyond that. I don't know what you will consider a credible source of information, nor do I know whether or not such a source would support my argument (for the reason I mentioned above).
You did not give me any evidence. You gave me an anonymous blog post. That is evidence of nothing. Quit making excuses and admit you are trying to give credit where it is not due solely to build up Wikileaks.You are a bunch of assholes, just like that traitor Manning. You should be ashamed of yourselves. In fact, if you want to steal credit so much, you should suffer the same fate, you should be doused with fuel and set on fire to burn to death, along with Manning, Assange, and the whole Wikileaks staff.
Stop being an asshole. Stop trying to give credit to wikileaks where it is not due.
I think I made it pretty clear that I don't think it's appropriate to take credit away from the people of Tunisia. But just because you give credit to one source, doesn't mean there weren't any other contributing factors. All I'm saying is that Wikileaks contributed to the revolution, and that it might not have happened without it. At the very least, you have to admit that it had some effect.
A lot of news articles mention protesters citing wikileaks during their protests, though I can't find and direct quotes (except in blogs, which you say aren't credible). Here is one such article from the New Yorker (I don't know if you will consider it credible or not). Here is what it says:
Admittedly, that is supposedly cited from an article from the New York Times, but when you check the source article, it seems to have since been edited, and says instead:
Still, the meaning is the same. The leaks added credibility to the protesters complaints. Without them the protests may not have found the popular support they needed to succeed.
Here is a Tunisian website that translated and distributed the leaks prior to the revolution. If the leaks weren't important, why would Tunisian activists risk doing something like that?
You say you think it is inappropriate, yet you do it just the same. That says it all.
I'm not taking any credit away from the demonstrators by also crediting wikileaks. There's enough credit to go around. If you have the attitude that it must be one and not the other, you miss a lot of important details of the event.
What did you think of the links I provided?