Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Bradley Manning Pleads Guilty To 10 Charges

Posted by Soulskill on from the free-information-has-a-steep-price dept.

Entropy98 sends this quote from the LA Times: "Army Pfc. Bradley Edward Manning pleaded guilty Thursday to 10 charges that he illegally acquired and transferred highly classified U.S. government secrets, agreeing to serve [up to] 20 years in prison for causing a worldwide uproar when WikiLeaks published documents describing the inner workings of U.S. military and diplomatic efforts in Iraq, Afghanistan and around the globe. The 25-year-old soldier, however, pleaded not guilty to 12 more serious charges, including espionage for aiding the enemy, meaning that his criminal case will go forward at a general court-martial in June. If convicted at trial, he risks a sentence of life in prison at Ft. Leavenworth, Kan."

7 of 491 comments (clear)

  1. Aiding the enemy by detritus. · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The big revelation is that he also gave the documents over to US agencies first. Aiding the enemy my ass, he went to Wikileaks after the New York Times (which Daniel Ellsberg used for the Pentagon leak) and other news agencies that didn't follow through.

    1. Re:Aiding the enemy by jkauzlar · · Score: 5, Interesting

      We already knew about the waterboarding which our best intelligence indicates will get people to admit to anything we want them to admit (such as erroneous links between Iraq and 9/11 in one famous case). Manning did leak the video (search for 'Collateral murder Iraq video') of u.s. soldiers firing on a truck of civialians as well as people coming to help them in the aftermath, including killing two AP reporters. There were also leaked cables that confirmed thousands of accidental civilian casualties as well as standard modes of torture that were previously only hearsay or not considered widespread (involving sexual abuse, power drills and/or hanging people from the ceiling, forcing them in stress positions for long durations, etc). Additionally there was evidence of specific shady dealings with foreign gov'ts.

    2. Re:Aiding the enemy by hypergreatthing · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Wait, who is the enemy here?
      Last time i checked, the only possible fit for the enemy in this whole scenario is the public. It embarrasses many officials who were doing things or saying things they shouldn't have been. I don't see any standard description of an enemy that could have benefited from any of the leaks. The only thing that makes sense is public opinion and backlash again shady dealings.

    3. Re:Aiding the enemy by vux984 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Aiding the enemy doesn't have to be a deliberate choice. You don't have to say "today I will aid the enemy."

      You do to be convicted of "attempting to aid the enemy". To attempt something requires intent.

      If you just want to convict him of "aiding the enemy" instead of "attempting to aid the enemy" THEN you can maybe forego intent, but then you would at least have to prove that he did in fact aid them. So far the analysis hasn't shown there to have been any material aid rendered.

      Embarrassing the government, and making a bunch of diplomats look like the complete asshats they are, and exposing dubious behavior to the world is not "aiding the enemy".

      So what you are arguing is that the material he released was so meaningless that it makes no difference to anyone. His valiant bravery in releasing documents that seriously compromise US diplomatic efforts didn't actually have any effect on anything at all ...

      No. I'm arguing that it didn't aid the enemy. Aiding the enemy should be a very significant and overt bar.

      Should we charge anyone trying to get rid of rapiscan airport scanners for aiding the enemy? What about people who argue against having to take their shoes off and be subjected to full body searches every time they fly, or people who object to no fly lists, and warrantless searches within 100 miles of the coast? In theory these measures make it harder for terrorists to hurt us, so anyone seeking to get rid of these measures is aiding the enemy? The majority of slashdot are traitors?

      Aiding the enemy needs to be a LOT more overt than that.

  2. Chaotic good. by MRe_nl · · Score: 4, Interesting

    http://www.salon.com/2011/07/07/bradley_manning_american_hero/

    --
    "Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
  3. Re:nice efficiency there by overmoderated · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The entire US government should be on trial, not Manning for having a conscience.

  4. Re:nice efficiency there by MouseR · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Tell that to the hundred thousand civilian dead Iraqis, victims of an unjust, unfounded war that only the US public bought in their post 9/11 panic.

    Pentagon already said no deaths or injuries occurred as a result of the document leak.

    I still think Manning deserves what he got. He had no rights to commit this treason.

    As for WIkileaks, the US has no rights to hunt them for publishing them. Its not like they paid for them.