Slashdot Mirror
Bradley Manning Convicted of Espionage, Acquitted of 'Aiding the Enemy'
crashcy sends word that a verdict has been handed down in the case of Bradley Manning. Quoting:
"A military judge on Tuesday found Pfc. Bradley Manning not guilty of aiding the enemy, but convicted him of multiple counts of violating the Espionage Act. Private Manning had already confessed to being WikiLeaks’ source for a huge cache of government documents, which included videos of airstrikes in which civilians were killed, hundreds of thousands of front-line incident reports from the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, dossiers on men being held without trial at the Guantánamo Bay prison, and about 250,000 diplomatic cables. But while Private Manning had pleaded guilty to a lesser version of the charges he was facing, which could expose him to up to 20 years in prison, the government decided to press forward with a trial on a more serious version of the charges, including 'aiding the enemy' and violations of the Espionage Act. Beyond the fate of Private Manning as an individual, the 'aiding the enemy' charge — unprecedented in a leak case — could have significant long-term ramifications for investigative journalism in the Internet era."
he should be given a medal (in my opinion).
Aiding the enemy carries the death penalty, but they can't really murder Manning if they want Snowden extradited, can they?
Unless the truth is unwanted.... but who would want to hide the truth? Surely nobody who cares for the freedom and liberty of the people...
He had no business leaking what he did. There's no way you can say he did it for noble purposes- he could not have read 1/20th of what he released, so the idea it might do good was a gamble while it causing harm was pretty much certain.
Since he was acquitted of the charge, isn't that particular kind of potential ramification now less dire? It doesn't prove that the government will never be able to overreach in that manner, but the fact that they couldn't get a conviction on that charge here, even in a military court and little dispute about the underlying facts of document release, suggests that it won't be that easy.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
There wasn't much question of what he had done - he admitted to a number of charges as it was. At the moment he could be facing up to 130 years in prison minus ~200 days from part of his pretrial confinement found to be excessive
Snowden would probably be looking at a similar outcome.
Hard to say what, if any, impact this could possibly have on any charges that might be filed involving Assange.
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
Why should't it? Only those who care not for the liberties, justice, and the freedoms of the people would want the truth hidden. One can not make an informed decision unless one is informed... right?
For those that lied to Congress (Clapper & Alexander)?
Talk to anybody outside, get tortured and killed. They have not quite figured out how to implement that time-tested approach fully, but torture they already do. If "by their methods you shall recognize them" has any truth to it, this makes the nature of the current US administration quite clear.
Seriously, if what you do is to horrible and repulsive that people inside your organization are willing to risk considerable punishment to leak them, then maybe the things you are doing are wrong and you need to stop?
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
The 'powers that be' decided that a long time ago. They want to use him as an example so that no one else even thinks about whistleblowing in the future.
I fully expect him to get 100 yeas without parole, i.e. the maximum on each count and the sentence to run consequitively.
If I look at this case, it returns to the old Prussian adage "Befehl ist Befehl".
If you break the rules, you will be severely punished, and there is no excuse. No own responsibility, no greater good, just do what you are told, no matter what.
I don't think I have to explain you what that can lead to......
When does the US military go on trial for the exposed war crimes?
Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
Award this year's peace-prize jointly to Manning and Snowden! Guaranteed to piss of the US big time and make the rest of the world smile. And we will forgive you for ever awarding it to Obama and Gore ...
karma police: arrest this man, he talks in maths; he buzzes like a fridge, he's like a detuned radio. [radiohead]
Breaking down the verdict by charge, plea and ruling: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/national/manning-verdict/
Not sure if justice has been done, but Manning had to know some amount of retribution would come back from all this.
I'm not sure the amount of years for these convictions is proportional, but at least hanging seems off the table.
That said, I've always been open to the idea of citizenship revocation depending on the seriousness of the crime.
The government has yet to win a case prosecuting on this law, passed during WWI. One thing about the Obama administration is that it is much more activist about using this law against leakers - including journalists. To my knowledge the only other case of prosecution using the law outside this administration was Bush II who tried it once and lost.
A man alerts you to how you're being ripped off by the people who claim to be working for you, and you take the side of the people ripping you off.
It's amazing how powerful the appeal to coercive authority can be. Nobody would ever knowingly accept being ripped off by a private party. In the private sector, breach of contract results in serious conseqences. Yet somehow, coercive authority gets a free pass. This is a perfect example of how indoctrination works.
Sorry, but stealing classified information and disseminating it to the public is not "investigative journalism."
I remember a movie with Keanu Reeves where he was transporting data using his brain "Johnny Mnemonic".. something about government/big pharma not wanting certain 'cure' information to be leaked and in the end, it was the underground hackers who risked their lives getting the info to all citizens. Seems to me like we are heading up that way... Ironic that certain movies from the 80s and 90s were able to predict scenarios such as theses.
What is the point of convicting him of "espionage", if he wasn't "aiding the enemy"? I understand that those laws may cover different acts, but isn't that against the whole spirit of those laws in the first place?
Just asking.
I am pretty sure USA needs enemies to keep going, or at least it is the only explanation I find for what they do and/or they don't do. What I didn't know is that they already got some. Let the superior races deal with each other and we we'll see later, again...
Pfc. B. Manning is the issue, not the U.S.Constitution. The government can investigate till the second comming, and it would not change the 1st Admendment. Of course, if one is NOT a U.S.Citizen News Person; the rules change. From a personal view point, I think the military is more than a little pissed at having to be lawful, in the light of day.
I wonder what the charge was for those that lied to Congress (Clapper & Alexander)?
Same as Bill Clinton for lying under oath to a federal judge. Nothing.
A trivial topic or a non-trivial topic, you still can't lie under oath to a federal judge (or Congress). The trivial nature of the underlying matter is something for the judge to consider in letting a case proceed or in determining sentencing. Like Nixon, it was the lie/coverup not the actual act itself. Similar story here, the NSA's actions probably were legal, its the coverup that Clapper and Alexander have exposure to.
Murder of unarmed civilians, mostly women and children in 22 cases (those were just the ones he was convicted for), convicted to life in court martial, verdict corrected a few times (including presidential pardon) until he served 3.5 years of house arrest in his army office, all in all.
Will we see something similar with Manning, given "more protection for whistle blowers" (before election) president Obama?
Forget it. We are not talking about run-of-the-mill killing gunks here, we are talking about making the U.S. look bad. Slaughtering civilians only makes the U.S. look bad if you let the news spread. Punish the messenger.
All I see everywhere is "NOT GUILTY" and in the fine print "except for the other charges which include the death penalty."
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
In case it wasn't totally, blindingly obvious, the only reason for the "aiding the enemy" charge was so they could "lose" that one - and so have the media report "Bradley Manning not guilty of most serious charge".
All your ghosts are just false positives.
In 2013 a crack intelligence operative was sent to prison by a military court for a crime he didn't commit. This man promptly escaped from a maximum security stockade to the Los Angeles underground. Today, still wanted by the government, he survives as a soldier of fortune. If you have something you need leaked, if no one else can help, and if you can find him, maybe you can hire: THE B-TEAM.
;-)
I'm sure Julian Assange could do double duty as 'Face' and 'Howling mad Murdoch'
I hope he gets 'time served' which is already 4+ years IIRC (could be 3). They kept him naked in a cell for months...it's legal but it's pushing 'cruel and unusual' IMHO...he's suffered enough. Justice is not furthered by keeping him locked up any more.
Now you mention Assange and GP mentioned Snowden....
I think the Snowden comparison is more apt. Both had involvement with Assange at some level, it was only as a channel to leak the info.
What sets Snowden and Manning apart are their methods and the motives behind them. Both were mid-level (at best) functionaries with **high level** access and their conscience dictated they had to act somehow. They're both a bit 'angst-y'...kind of in the 'it's all bullshit' camp.
The difference is, Manning was gay and being discriminated against by the military. Snowden didn't have a central personal grievance.
We see that difference play out in how they attempted to release the info. Snowden **could** have leaked anonymously but he didn't, IMHO b/c of malignant narcissism. There's an established way to leak info to the press anonymously and he did it the egotistical way.
By contrast, Manning tried to release anonymously, but the Wikileaks que for processing raw incoming data was taking too long and he didn't know if his submission was being read (b/c if it had been they should have gotten back with him or released it somehow or something...)...it's all in the Manning/Lamo chat logs
He only contacted Lamo (who was an informant/operative...he snitched at best) b/c he thought Lamo could get him direct access to Assange.
I say let Manning out and throw Snowden in his cell.
Probably. Maybe less. See, Manning and Assange and Snowden...their leaks harm the US government, but the real enemy is **illegal actors** within the government.
The CIA is an empty vessel. An organization with a legal purpose. Beuracratic inefficiencies aside, theoretically in a democracy if the people allow and it is legal then it has a right to exist.
It's when **people** within an org like the CIA use their position for criminal activity...OR when the **leaders** above the CIA as an entity use it as an arm for their **own** illegal activity...same thing...one feeds into the other...
So it's the Military/Industrial/Illuminati Complex that is, IMHO, working over Assange.
If oil interests infiltrate a government and use its military (while engaged in legit military actions) to **also** help their business interests by securing a supply chain...and in that course laws are broken, who is to blame???
For me I can put *some* blame on a system that bueracratically screwed up self-policing it's own policies...but the main share of the blame is not the entity, but the **people** who MAKE THE DECISIONS...
So Assange's enemy is not, in the end, the US government...it's the people who USE that government to further their own illegal interests.
Yes, you rightly may point out that the US would arrest Assange immediately if they could. I won't disagree...my point is that **people want leaks** and that includes the **good people** in government.
There is a way to leak information that **exposes illegal activity** even if it is from the most powerful government in the world, that does not result in the leaker in prison.
Assange, Manning, and Snowden all should have taken notice from Deep Throat and the leakers of the Pentagon Papers...all of whom enjoyed privacy and long careers.
Thank you Dave Raggett
Woosh...
Convicted of violation of the Espionage Act? Ah, well then we should revise said act to retroactively apply exemption to actions which do not aide the enemy. For, if they do not aide the enemy, then they aide the ally or no one. Surely we can't be throwing people in jail for helping us?
It seems tragic that the only way to expose the overstepping of the government on human rights is to have lone leakers throw themselves under the bus and expose information, often haphazardly, to the world. There should be a system in place where government employees can appeal anything they consider unconstitutional to a special court for review. It is up to the judicial branch to uphold the constitution and seems utterly ridiculous that these secret overreaches by the executive branch are not eligible to the same checks and balances put in place for public laws.
I want to see publicly nominated and vetted judges sitting on a board to review classified procedures and actions for their constitutionality. The proceedings can be secret, but the number of cases overturned and left standing should be made public. It may be a pipe dream, but I think this would go a long way to restoring the people's trust in their government by restoring the accountability that was supposed to be there in the first place.
Hypocrisy, so it's okay for the politicians in government to take your data(emails, cloud storage), wiretap your phone calls, etc.. without your permission or even a court order, but, when somebody does it to the government they throw a tantrum. Nobody is supposed to be above the law(constitution) and that's including those in all three branches of government.
When you rent an apartment, storage unit, garage, etc... law enforcement can't search without a warrant unless they hear someone in distress, and this applies to email, cloud storage, isp data, voiceip, etc... regardless of the companies policies which can't override the constitution. What NSA is doing is grabbing everybody's data and storing it and than they search through it and if they find anything suspicious they get a court order and use it against the suspect. This process is just wrong. The communists(not really commi's more like feudalism) were doing stupid shit like this to their sheeple, well except for the court order.
This war on terror was complete bullshit from the beginning, 911. I wouldn't be surprised if there are top secret files hidden away somewhere in DC stating how the u.s government started ww1, ww2, korean war, vietnam,etc... using spy's..
"If al-Qaeda was under the misapprehension that certain communication methods were mostly safe, the simple knowledge that they are *not* safe could compromise intelligence gathering efforts."
well, considering OBL was found by tracking his courier to a compound that was an RF black hole I'm gonna go with they knew (or at least assumed)...
hell, it was probably MORE damaging (than Snowden) that several people have leaked that one of the strongest arguments FOR the Abbottabad compound was the fact that it WAS an RF black hole! I'm sure wherever's hosting/hiding Al Zawahiri ordered DSL & a cell phone the next day with a plan for plausible but not attention drawing use (as Han said to Chewie: "keep your distance but don't LOOK like you're keeping your distance..." "GRR-HOWL!!!!" "I don't know - fly CASUAL!").
It seems like the dilemma of Jaime Lannister - so many oaths - and what if they contradict. Ah slay them all.
seems to be constantly plaguing the USA these days.
Your finest men are being branded criminals. and your ignorance is leading you to support the actual criminals these fine men are trying to bring down.
I seriously hope the next major war is on your shores.
It's a good thing that charge didn't stick, then.
You see, the court did not see Manning doing anything to help the people of the US, i.e, the enemy of the US Government.
Manning was nothing more than a bad employee who in the process of being fired did everything he could to get revenge.
He disclosed a couple of things bad things, but rather than stopping there, he disclosed everything he could.
Nothing but malicious revenge.
He didn't give stuff directly to the enemy, so I 100% agree with him being found innocent of those charges.
all the rest, he's guilty as sin - he even plead guilty to a bunch of those charges.
Actually, the 'tribunal' part would be his choice. For charges of this seriousness it would be a 'general court martial' where he is indeed guaranteed a jury of his peers if he so chose - other military members being considered his 'peers'.
I don't read AC A human right
I can't disagree here, but I look at it a bit differently I guess since I worked in journalism.
They don't control what 'the media' does or how it reacts to unfolding events and they can't be expected to be experts at media relations (even if they are narcissists to varying degrees).
However, 'the media' is definitely part of the military/industrial/illuminati complex...whole companies with vast media holdings are comprimised. Manning/Snowden knew enough to know their info was 'earth shaking'....if they knew that, they should have known they were at risk of getting in with the Adrian Lamos and Glen Greenwald's of the world.
I should, if I'm consistent, direct some of my personal outrage at Glen Greenwald, the reporter who originated Snowden's leaks for The Guardian. Greenwald and his bosses are snakes for how they handled Snowden.
if I was Obama, I'd offer Snowden a deal if he could offer evidence of malfeasence on Greenwald or The Guardian in this. They used him and hung him out to dry!
Thank you Dave Raggett
Someone will always uphold "the rule of law" as something that must be blindly followed and obeyed no matter how immoral or unjustified that law may be. How will they be judged in the future? Like the Fascist POSes they are. (See what I did there?)
Yeah, right.
If they're not doing anything wrong, then they have nothing to hide, right?
if you look at the actual charges against him.
he leaked gunship video of an apache helicopter. You know who else does that? oh, i dont know, thousands and thousands of other military people - thats how it winds up on youtube. it doesnt magically appear there after the gunship fairy swishes a magic wand and makes it appear there.
he leaked a state department cable about a debate regarding the Icelandic Parliament's response to the financial crash of 2008.
Please explain to me how either one of these are vital national security information.
Then please explain to me why the person who leaked the Abu Grahib photos should be prosecuted for Espionage.
The judge in the Tim Dechristopher case pre-screened jurists to eliminate any that might nullify. The prision then put him in solitary for a non-threatening rhetorical use of the word "threaten" in an email. Fascism is threatening us. Oops...
http://billmoyers.com/segment/why-tim-dechristopher-went-to-prison-for-his-protest/
Outside of a court, an oath means nothing
If there's an independent witness then it's a solid verbal contract in most legal systems around the world. In this case we're talking about the military who have their own oaths, laws, courts, police, judges, and jails. A soldiers "pinky swear" is taken very seriously by that system, especially when it's broken. I've never been a soldier but the fact that you appear to believe a (wo)man's word means nothing outside a court of law indicates the principle of "integrity" is too expensive for your particular personality.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
More like epic Woosh.
Maybe spelling it out will help: 1984's Goldsteins...
For fuck sakes read the book people! Or at least watch the film... I promise it has boobs and guns.
He gave aid and comfort to the enemy but not the enemy the government was thinking of when they tried to hang that charge on him. Based upon what the NSA and some of the other three-letter agencies do, it's obvious that they think we are the enemy, especially now that so many of us are so upset with what they were doing. WE THE PEOPLE are the enemy that he aided.
On a somewhat more serious note, as to his alleged espionage what enemy did he give information to? The United States is at war with no country. The last declaration of war was issued by the Congress in 1941. So, who is the enemy? Furthermore, how can giving classified material to a foreign national or somehow facilitating its dissemination to a foreign national (in this case embodied by Julian Assange and Wikileaks) be espionage when that foreign national is a citizen of a friendly power (Australia), an ally for nearly a century? Ironically, what Edward Snowden in revealing that the NSA had cracked the Chinese communications system makes him far more guilty of espionage. But even then, we are not at war with China, neither hot nor cold. We have diplomatic relations with them, citizens of both countries are allowed to freely travel to and from both countries with a tourist visa which is easy to get. If we were in a cold war with them like we were with the Soviet Union I might think differently but there are few signs of them.
I smell an appeal in the works.
It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
Seems Obama doesn't like it when people whistle blow. Funny how he sang a different toon before he was elected to be President.
Manning is in court because Adrian Lamo ratted him out to the FBI after assuring Manning that their chats were confidential.
First of all, by very definition the act of making someone disappear is something you wouldn't know about. Whether this does or does not happen can only be guessed at by looking at general behaviour of the U.S. Second of all, executing political activists - there is always stuff like the Ruby Ridge incident http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_Ridge. It didn't work out quite like the FBI had intended, but close enough. I am sure that other slashdotters can contribute with additional cases and/or material.
Adrian Lamo is a dickwad. He ratted Bradley Manning out. He is a snitch, he is unreliable, he will sell anyone out. He could have just kept his mouth shut. He did not give what he did a second thought. Manning made a mistake trusting Lamo. Manning was following his conscious. He felt what the government was doing was wrong. Lamo didn't even work for the government, he volunteered to be a rat. Can you trust Lamo? No.
Based on a William Gibson book. As is often the case the book expounds on the moral/ethical issues a whole lot better than the film. Well worth a read.
It's impossible for people to understand that giving themselves unlimited power over situations they are a participant in is a bad thing. No one ever does this; it's like its a beyond-human task or something.
The people who charged this guy with espionage - and by implication all future reporters- tell themselves they'll be judicious in their prosecutions. Through a strategic failure of imagination , they don't comprehend that the chilling effect this has on reportage and reporter's initiative, not to mention spineless newspaper boards such the Washington Post's. They poo poo away the vitally important and irreplaceable role an oppositional, truth-seeking press plays in keeping civilization going.
It's a part of the Masters of the Universe syndrome. Give me all power. I'll wield it wisely. I know myself.
They're delusional, right? They don't acknowledge that the system is more complex than they can imagine and that there has to be a balance of power... leaks to the press about big things have to happen- including and especially the ones THEY THEMSELVES didn't initiate. In this area of reality, this is how a healthy system stays healthy.
Look at Snowden. Look at Manning. Look at the insane, hyperbolic vitriol launched against them. What does that say to you? It says that the people in the hierarchy don't get when it's time to just do the old look-away. The wrist slap. Time to size up a situation in its totality, within the broadest historical context and thinking and base their own actions on what ought to be the implicit knowledge of a sophisticated analyst of world events and history. Instead they act like little children. They act like someone called them a name on the playground.
Congress just barely re-upped the Patriot Act section 215 and the NSA is on notice that it's going to be ended if they don't change their act. The author of that specific section has explicitly denied that the NSA is not in violation of it- they are. SO we don't have to have ivory tower discussion about "the intent of Congress". We know.
What does that tell you? That the people and Congress see Snowden's point. That it was a GOOD THING he did what he did.
What it does it tell the NSA ? Nothing- they've done nothing wrong and Snowden is a traitor who aided the enemy.
Prior to this, the NSA was thrashing around looking for an excuse, some legal justification to read the content of everyone's emails all the time and keep them forever. They don't see how this practice could lead to something really systemically sinister in our democracy. This is another part of the Masters of the Universe delusion. They should not be bound by anything, not Congress's intent, not the 4th not anything. Because they're the Good Guys and always will be.
This is just a total lack of perspective. If you ask national security experts they will tell you that there's nothing we can do to keep from getting hit by WMD; it's inevitable. The reason it's inevitable is the mechanics of offense vs defense. Offensive power in the hands of a determined foe is just too hard to prevent or defend against. Sooner or later, they're going to succeed spectacularly.
What will REALLY matter when the inevitable happens , what will really make a difference to the survival of the nation and the government is - are we all together or is their underlying mistrust and seething resentment of the government that takes that event as the last straw ?
The fact that there are (lunatic) 9-11 truthers out there and in no small numbers ought to be a warning shot over the bow of the government. There is widespread distrust of the motives and morality of the people in government, built up over the decades previous by just the kind of shit the NSA and Gonzales and Yoo and all the rest of these sociopaths have engaged in- lying to Congress. Lying to the American people. Manipulating domestic situations to make them seem to be other than they are. Smearing earnest truth tellers as traitors, opportunists, partisans and attention hou