Slashdot Mirror
Bradley Manning Sentenced To 35 Years
An anonymous reader writes with bad, but not unexpected news: "The U.S. soldier convicted of handing a trove of secret government documents to anti-secrecy website WikiLeaks has been sentenced to 35 years in prison. Pte First Class Bradley Manning, 25, was convicted in July of 20 charges against him, including espionage. Last week, he apologized for hurting the U.S. and for 'the unexpected results' of his actions. He will receive credit for three and a half years, but be dishonorably discharged from the U.S. Army."
It's not a legitimate secret. It's a coverup of war crime. They are not the same thing.
Considering today news is breaking about the NSA monitoring 75% of all domestic US internet traffic, and logging all domestic emails, as well as their plans for a national facial recognition system (as in live video feeds), it seems obvious to me that they sentenced him today and announced it in this way in an effort to distract us from what really matters.
Sources: http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/nsa-has-access-75-percent-us-internet-traffic-says-wsj-6C10967780
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/21/us/facial-scanning-is-making-gains-in-surveillance.html?_r=0
Reporting on war crimes should be considered a service to his country.
Slashdot editor senteced to 35 years of grammar school.
Meanwhile Bush, Cheney, and a whole line of people that authorized or performed torture remain free. People who murdered innocent civilians and laughed about it, free. It's all a big joke.
I agree. And I'm glad many Bothans died to get the plans for the Death Star into the hands of the rebels. Those traitors to the Empire deserve it!
Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
If they were 35 of your years I think you'd see it differently.
Easy for you to say, you're not the one sitting in a cell for the next 11.5-35 years of your life.
"all i wanted was a pepsi..."
.. by the time he gets out there will be no more licence plate records of his car stored in the CA traffic police database!
I'd understand if you'd want those who commited the war crimes he revealed to be executed, but him? I don't understand how you can arrive at the conclusion that he deserves that, unless you were perhaps one of those who commited a crime he revealed ?
William Calley, the officer in charge of the My Lai massacre (murder of 304 civilians) server 3 1/2 years house arrest.
Bradley Manning has been sentenced to 35 years, and must server 1/3 to get parole which they will of course deny him.
President Obama authorized the killing of Americans without trial, something illegal under the very rules of the U.S. (constitution)
One of those Americans killed was a 16 YEAR OLD BOY who was murdered by his own government, without trial.
The United States no longer pretends to be the land of the free, it now openly favors corporations (Apple given presidential override of import ban), rich individuals and political cronies.
Today is a very sad day. The truth is the enemy, justice inconvenient, and money/power the one true ruler of this country.
Merely disgusted.
I know he did something considered wrong, and the punishment has been dealt out (excessively but there had to be something).. but I'm wondering when the crimes of the people Manning exposed will be dealt with if at all?
if the government's idea of "secret" weren't complete and total BS. Today, "secret" simply means "stuff that would embarrass us". The only context that getting most of today's government "secrets" into the public's scrutiny would qualify as "aiding an enemy" is if they consider the American people to be their enemy. Which is, sadly, closer to the truth than it ever should be.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
Well, if you recall, the Emperor allowed the plans to be leaked so as to lure the pitiful rebellion into a trap.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
"Protect Whistleblowers: Often the best source of information about waste, fraud, and abuse in government is an existing government employee committed to public integrity and willing to speak out. Such acts of courage and patriotism, which can sometimes save lives and often save taxpayer dollars, should be encouraged rather than stifled. We need to empower federal employees as watchdogs of wrongdoing and partners in performance. Barack Obama will strengthen whistleblower laws to protect federal workers who expose waste, fraud, and abuse of authority in government. Obama will ensure that federal agencies expedite the process for reviewing whistleblower claims and whistleblowers have full access to courts and due process."
The United States government is the largest criminal organization in the world. Bradley Manning exposed some of the war crimes routinely committed by the United States. That, in and of itself, makes him a hero. It takes no courage to invade another country that is drastically weaker than you are and to then shoot people (mostly civilians) who are simply defending their country from foreign invaders. It takes a lot of courage to stand up to the Imperial US Government.
ACLU's Ben Wizner: "When a soldier who shared information with the press and public is punished far more harshly than others who tortured prisoners and killed civilians, something is seriously wrong with our justice system."
"It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." -- Prof. Dumbledore
Why people have such a problem with the fact that he was in the army, supposedly serving his country, and did something that he was forbidden to do, and so should face the consequences? .
Because "I was just following orders" should never, ever, ever be a legitimate reason for committing crimes against humanity.
so got enough oil now?
people distracted enough?
jump-started economy by borrowing/printing money and getting it
into peoples pocket by hiring soldiers to chop down poppy plants
in some mountain village?
what's next?
I'd like to believe that someday we will get to a more enlightened part of our evolution and realize that Bradley Manning's actions were the start of a more transparent government, and that the Internet took on the role of government overseer that the media long ago surrendered to the very same government. Maybe then he will be released, pardoned, and seen as the hero that he is.
Posting to undo a bad mod...
And reading the comments, especially on the Reuters article, is depressing. There is a lot of hate out there, and blind devotion to the overlords.
Serving your country and serving your government are not necessarily the same thing. I think Manning was serving his country but not his government.
I don't think anyone can argue with the fact an offence was committed. But the punishment should fit the crime. It is on that basis I object to this sentence. The sentence is so long that I feel this punishment violates your constitution. It is cruel and unusual.
We're talking about locking this guy up longer many rapists or murderers. You're even talking about executing him. How is that a sensible level of punishment?
At the end of the day, nobody died from this leak. Nothing of any substance has changed in geo-politics either. The cable leaks had a tendency to show that US foreign policy behind closed doors was pretty much the same as it was on the public sphere. As a Brit, I thought they actually came out of it looking quite good. It was the other countries were made to look like asshats.
Manning is a bit of an idiot and should serve some time but taking his entire life in forfeit for his stupidity is totally disproportionate and in my view unconstitutional.
I have respect for this man. He broke the law for the sake of what is right.
Are you perhaps confusing this case with that of Snowden?
That's true. I think his weakness was his over confidence. In any case, the Bothans still died.
Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
While I'm glad that some of the information he revealed came to light, he was completely reckless in the way he went about it. He did, arguably and depending on your perspective, as much harm as the original "crimes" he revealed. You don't just share 10,000 secret documents without at least reading them first. Snowden, perhaps reflecting his age and experience, is doing exactly that. So while I feel strongly that any crimes revealed by Manning should be prosecuted, I also feel that he needs to go away for a while. He was young and foolish, but he should pay for his mistakes. Whether 35 years is too long? I think it sounds too long, but it's not life. Chances are he'll get out before he's 40.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
That should teach a geek to not to stray from covering up government wrongs. Well, maybe at least, he will win the Nobel Prize.
You're not getting voted down, but you will have to sleep at night knowing that you are a fascist and will be partly responsible for contributing to the now inevitable decline of America into a dystopian technocracy. You should revisit your understanding of authoritarianism. When you give those in power the ability to make arbitrary laws and conduct fake star chamber trials to imprison or murder people that don't agree with their agenda, you're endangering yourself as well. You've been brainwashed and are a sick, sick collectivist. The sooner you understand what's been rotting your brain for your whole life, the sooner you can join the Rebellion, because right now you are basically sucking Darth Vader's robot phallus with aplomb.
One of the only good things that will come from the breakdown of society (as a direct result of compliance by idiots like this guy) is that we won't have to hear sycophants cheering for their own enslavement. Or maybe we will, Stockholm syndrome in the forced labor camps and all...
I see that the propaganda corps have dropped by to share their views on exposure of war crimes with us.
Let me remind you of your oath, son. The constitution trumps your "don't talk about fight club" bullshit.
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Remember, though, as Luke has taught us. The only way to win is not to fight.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
You feel that because of some twisted nationalistic pride and unquestioning faith that the overlords are benevolent, know what they're doing, and are above the vast swaths of historical abuse by similar authority figures. We feel he's been unfairly treated because of a lot of things.
1) He exposed a whole hell of a lot of people doing "forbidden" things. Most of whom are never going to face prison time, courts, fines or even a slap on the wrist.
2) The people he's exposing have previously concealed their wrongdoing. Gaming the system of justice is serious infraction. It's often worse than what they're hiding.
3) The people he's exposing have a vast amount of political power and very much have control over his punishment. I don't think it's a stretch to say that they're abusing their power and being vindictive.
4) He's been tortured. Not the sort of torture with massive blood loss, hideous scars, and severed limbs, but the sort of torture you get in a lab setting. And it looks like it was enough to break him.
Yes, he should face consequences for violating orders and exposing secrets. And he should face praise and leniency for making the USA a better place and upholding his oath. You know, to protect the nation from threats from within.
He is definitely guilty. He did the things with which they're accusing him. The punishment of that crime is straightforward.
However, I think he is a patriot and should be lauded for his efforts. When he did it, he knew that this was what he risked. He obviously felt that it was worth it to provide such a tremendous service to his country. I applaud him and consider him a national hero for making such a sacrifice for me and everyone else. I would like to think I would do the same, but without being placed in that situation, I obviously can't say for sure. He can. His moral character was tested and he passed with flying colors.
This is the way things should/need to work. If there weren't consequences, we'd have all sorts of deluded people releasing classified documents (that they - possibly errantly - felt needed to be released) because they thought they'd just be allowed to go on their way (the world needs to know that we use slightly too weak of bolts on our drones, so here are the plans to prove it!).
The best possible timeline for this type of situation in my opinion:
1. He releases documents and is exposed as doing so
2. He is arrested and tried for the crime
3. He is found guilty and sentenced
4. If the public good that came from the action is so dramatic as to warrant it, he should receive a pardon (but that doesn't mean he shouldn't have been found guilty to begin with).
Of course, I won't hold my breath for the pardon, though. Politicians are too concerned with appearances to risk being "soft" on "terrorism" (everything bad is "terrorism", don't you know).
I salute you Bradley Manning. Serve your sentence with pride.
He's up for parole in 11 years (at least as theRegister reports it).
Funny, isn't it? How rednecks are considered ignorants, but most of them have a clear definition of what is "government" and what is "america". Amazing how patriotic they usually are (flags, american pride, traditions), and yet they hate the "gub'mint". They're considered crazy paranoids because of that hate, and how the gub'mint tramples on their freedom.
And here we are, educated people, confusing government with country.
If he'd been smart enough to send the war crime data, and ONLY that, to the Hague etc then he'd likely have fared better than by doing a bulk data dump which included so much material he couldn't have checked it all.
Reactions to Manning seem to be dictated by the ideology of the beholder rather than what he actually did.
I don't find him either a hero or a villian, just a young troop with serious personal issues who went attention-whoring without thinking it through despite his training.
I'm also not sure that what he released wasn't salted with items which allowed those doing the salting to further their own agenda. Hammering Manning would confirm everything he dumped in the eyes of the world. He'd have been easy to exploit.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
I just doubt that now Manning will become more powerful than we thought possible...
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
First, the trial was only notionally under the Constitution. The court-martial was conducted under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). It is MUCH harsher than civilian courts, and Manning, as a soldier in the US Army, was under a restricted set of rights to begin with. The sentence is for 5 or 6 (depending how you count them) espionage counts, two computer fraud counts, five theft counts, and multiple military violations. Most Murder or Rape trials are for a single major count: there are at LEAST 12 major counts against Manning. . .
The Empire was a legal entity created through a vote in the Senate.
So, yeah the rebels were terrorists.
Oh wait, they won..I mean freedom fighters.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Most likely when he notices that he threw away his life to shake the people up, only to notice that nobody gives a shit.
It's basically what keeps me "in line".
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
If anything came out of it, I'd agree. But just for a few news broadcasts nobody even gives a shit about anymore merely 2 years later, which had NO impact at all, neither on the position of people towards the war, nor on politics, nor on international reaction towards the US, nor in ANY other way? I think not.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
He did, arguably and depending on your perspective, as much harm as the original "crimes" he revealed.
No, the State has admitted that his disclosures did not lead to any deaths.
You don't just share 10,000 secret documents without at least reading them first.
Manning left that job up to journalists. He first tried to leak directly to the NYT, as Ellsberg had done and they rebuffed him. He then went to Wikileaks, which arranged a consortium of newspapers (El PaÃs, Der Spiegel, Le Monde, The Guardian and The New York Times) to analyze, redact, and publish the information responsibly.
Snowden, perhaps reflecting his age and experience, is doing exactly that.
Why is Snowden more qualified to determine what's right and wrong to publish than a group of experienced journalists?
So while I feel strongly that any crimes revealed by Manning should be prosecuted, I also feel that he needs to go away for a while.
But that's not how it works. If Manning revealed crimes, then he is to be afforded, by law, whistleblower protection. In fact, he did reveal crimes, has been denied those protections, and those who committed the highest crimes are walking around with huge pensions and stock options for doing so.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
sorry to see you go.
I thought it was: "the only way to win is to have Yoda as your mentor...."
Win or win not. There is no try.
Secrets depend on inducing terror in the people charged with keeping those secrets. That means the explicit tangible threat of massive prison sentences.
We are keeping too many things secret that shouldn't be secret.
Is it fair to have such massive prison sentences covering things that shouldn't be secrets in the first place?
IIRC Wikileaks was initially releasing the documents a bit at a time, working with journalists to, among other things, redact anything that might put anyone in danger. It was only when the US government started attacking Wikileaks on every available front (forcing CC processor to stop taking donation, getting Assange extradited etc.) that the entire thing was made public.
I suspect that if the US government had accepted the leak as fait accompli and honestly tried to work with Wikileaks to redact information that could cause actual harm to informants etc. they could have significantly limited the damage. None of this would have prevented them from prosecuting Manning, btw.
But no, instead of trying to ensure that reporters of leaks (Wikileaks included) acted responsibly, the US government decided that those reporting on leaks were criminals themselves. That is complete nonsense and a dangerous attack on western democracy.
I'm unsure if Manning deserves to spend time in prison for his actions. I am sure that the US government has done things in response to Manning's actions that are way worse.
That has nothing to do with the situation. He grab an leaked 10,000 documents. Documents that undermined serious diplomatic negotiations.
And what crime against humanity did he expose? oh, right none.
He did exposed military intelligence mistakes.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
"but most of them have a clear definition of what is "government" and what is "america""
no, they don't.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
He didn't commit treason, and the death penalty is barbaric and riddles with flaws.
Frankly, time served and dishonorable discharge is punishment enough.
He'll never be in the position to do it again, he isn't a danger, and all he is doing is costing us money to keep.
AA federal felony, and a dishonorable discharge will punish him for life.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
But he just did.
If he'd been released with time served, he'd be forgotten.
While he's in prison, unjustly serving 35 years for the sin of revealing war crimes, he is a powerful, powerful symbol.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
Theres no "restart game" button when you f*ck around with governments and spy agencies. There are lifelong jail sentences and potential assassinations. We've seen a half dozen of these "hacker-martyers" in recent years.
Well, it wasn't a quote, and it is an old lesson. But still, Luke won by refusing to fight his father.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
It only requires that their adversaries define what crime is.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Don't worry, so it doing a hit of crack cocaine, or breaking into a private computer (what should be a civil case).
It will never change until everyone stops saying, "there should be a law against that." That includes every single person here at /., btw.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
When Bush was president, any criticism of him was seen by the "rednecks" as an attack on America. "Why do you hate America?" was pretty much a cliche.
Reporting on war crimes should be considered a service to his country.
What war crime did he report on? You mean the Collateral Murder video? WikiLeaks "reported" on that. He did no such thing. He just took some documents and leaked them. If these had been financial documents or other "personal" documents, he would be held just as liable, even if they exposed the crimes of those to who the documents pertained.
Laws depend on inducing terror in the people charged with following those laws. That means the explicit tangible threat of massive prison sentences.
We are keeping too many things illegal that shouldn't be illegal.
Is it fair to have such massive prison sentences covering things that shouldn't be illegal in the first place?
Congratulations, you've just described every mandatory sentencing law in the world.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
How about I put you in a chemical coma and lock you in a box for 20 years. No harm, no endurance, no pain, no despair. You go to sleep and you wake up in the future. You'll come out before you're 40.
How does that sound?
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Apart from the fight bit when he chops his dads hand off.
What I learned is that you have to watch out for the insider threat. After all, it was Darth Vader that killed the Emporer, not Luke.
Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
The freedom fighters killed over 31 million people working in the death star. At least the name of the thing was correct.
According to this, parole and time off could reduce his remaining sentence to as little as 8.3 years.
Which is still a shitload of time to have to sit in a prison cell, particularly if he's really trans and they won't let him transition.
>Remember, though, as Luke has taught us. The only way to win is not to fight.
Was that before or after he blew up the Death Star?
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
The kid will be nearly 60 when he is released. These next years of his life would have been his most important, and now he will spend them rotting in a prison until he is an old man. I won't speak for what he did, but it's a sad fact none the less.
At the end of the day, nobody died from this leak.
Are you sure? Because of WikiLeaks carelessness in handling the documents given by PFC Manning a lot of names of informants and dissidents were revealed. Even the names of those who happened to visit US Embassies were revealed. Can you be certain that none of those were killed or in the very least made an example of, much like PFC Manning is being made an example of?
Just FYI, I don't agree that he should have gotten 35 years when more violent criminals can get < 10 years. Personally, I think he should have gotten a few years, have the NSA keep tabs on him(at least then their domestic spying might be justified), then be black listed from any job that entails any sort of confidentiality or security agreement. This would show he got punished(time served in jail), isn't put in a position where he can repeat his actions(black listing), and that if he leaks again then the government will know(NSA watching).
The article you cite says his disclosures did not lead to any deaths of any military sources. Many believe Manning's leaks precipitated the Arab Spring which could have a death toll over 30,000. And it certainly crippled foreign relations (with the revelations in the e-mails) and may have made the US military and diplomatic processes somewhat less effective in areas where lives were and are at stake.
Also, whistle-blower laws are not automatic, (and I don't know if they should be). The fallout of the Snowden and Manning handling of secrets emphasizes my point. You have to report the crimes up the proper chain -- merely publicizing things you think may be whistle-blower protected is the wrong way to go about it. There are explicit paths required to report something covered by the MILITARY whistle-blower protection act complaints. Releasing classified information directly to the press or anyone public is simply not protected whistle-blower activity, particularly in military circles.
Lastly, it's not clear there were any war crimes. The Apache attacks, the most-cited "war crime" of many in the Manning list, while terrible in retrospect, are difficult to prosecute, and wide latitude is given to military personnel who believe their actions are legitimate. There WERE armed combatants on the ground, and the cameramen were easily perceived from the air as carrying RPGs rather than cameras. There is extensive coverage of this all around the web, including Wikipedia of course. This certainly could have been a war crime, but Manning could not have been certain.
Manning should have known all of this. He could have followed proper whistle-blower protocol. He chose not to. I'd have much more sympathy if he had originally tried the proper channels and was rebuffed, but that's not what happened (unless I missed something -- I'd love to be corrected here). I've seen no useful analysis of the Whistle-blower mechanisms because people don't seem to actually try them -- they circumvent the laws designed explicitly to give them protection then complain or seem surprised when they don't get that protection.
Well, it wasn't a quote, and it is an old lesson. But still, Luke won by refusing to fight his father.
You must have seen a different movie than I did. He didn't refuse to fight his father, he refused to expediently KILL his father. Even though he did fight his father, even delivering a dismembering blow, he was able to transcend his paralyzing fears of both giving into the dark-side and not protecting the people he cared about. Free from his fear, he became free to simply turn-down Palapatine's command to execute Darth Wheezer. Fortunately, his transcendence unlocked the better part of Anakin's nature, which came flooding out when the emperor brought out his force-Tesla-taze, resulting in the overthrow of the emperor, wheezer, and the armada of lawn darts.
What a violation of his rights. Reveal the crimes and murders committed by government, and you get sent to jail.
Signature intentionally left blank.
> and all he is doing is costing us money to keep.
Not at all.
He's also being made into a poster child for "Don't forget, Uncle Sam wants YOU... to keep your goddamned mouth shut"
You don't think that matters a hell of a lot more to the folks in power than, say, keeping some piddly little serial killer locked up?
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
You also elect them.
Although, as George Carlin stated, if fire fighters fight fires, and crime fighters fight crime, what do freedom fighters fight?
I am officially gone from
Also they technically worked both sides, depending on who was paying more. They were officially neutral but each side used them.
Those 31 million were responsible for how many deaths on Alderaan? Fuck them, and I don't even care how many of them were just government contractors trying to make a living. They were responsible for the murder of almost 2 billion people!
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
He might not be in Texas.
William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
undermined serious diplomatic negotiations
If that is true, and there are arguments on both sides. Then I would still argue its not Manning who is to blame.
I can't thank of any legitimate reason, none, that a representative government should be conducting diplomatic negotiations in secret!
The public has a right to know EXACTLY what agreements our government is making with any others, full stop. Because lets face it if we can't know what is being discusses is probably illegal, immoral, or otherwise socially unacceptable to our society. As to all the spying and espionage; Why does everyone else in the world seem to resent our nation today? Might it have something to do with the fact we have become the bogey man lurking in every shadow waiting to topple their freely elected government; muck around in their private affairs, drone strike their children etc.
All the secrecy is not protecting our national security; very much the opposite, its turning us into the pariah that makes us a terror target in the first place. It makes our public feel like they don't have a voice, breaking down society. It harms faith in government, also breaking down society. It makes informed voting impossible, so we don't elect the best leadership. Instead of the government helping discover and disclose vulns in software and network systems to keep our industry safe, it causes them to remain hidden. I could go on and on.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
It's a... bouncing marsupial.
I don't find him either a hero or a villian, just a young troop with serious personal issues who went attention-whoring without thinking it through despite his training.
How was he attention seeking? He leaked the documents through the most protective and secure whistleblowing service ever created at that time. He never wanted to be identified but was exposed by someone he thought he could trust, but who didn't take any repsonsibility for the information that Manning shared with him and thus doomed Manning to his prison term.
Leakers are in a difficult position, especially given massive databases of documents. One person could not possibly safely release all the documents, but he trusted Wikileaks to look through and responsibly release the documents (which they did along with other reputable news agencies). He had seen what he considered to be crimes in the documents he did look at, so it is reasonable risk to leak the entire corpus in hopes of illuminating more crimes. Wikileaks states "we may remove or significantly delay the publication of some identifying details from original documents to protect life and limb of innocent people."
If you are a leaker, especially at that time, Wikileaks was a seemingly responsible choice. That all the documents eventually got released without redaction was a security mistake (by Wikileaks and others) that cannot be blamed on Manning. The important thing to remember is that exposing crimes of those with great power is extremely valuable and worth considerable risk and cost to those innocent of the crimes.
More info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_diplomatic_cables_leak
Complexity Happens
"Speaking as a roofer, l can tell you a roofer's personal politics comes into play heavily when choosing jobs."
he is a powerful, powerful symbol.
Of what happens if you improperly release classified information/squeal.
I predict he'll be mostly forgotten about within 2 years.
I don't read AC A human right
He was charged with 20 counts NOT 10,000. Prosecutors don't need to read all 10,000 they only needed to read 20.
Just because you kill someone in self defense doesn't mean that you can kill anyone you want.
Even if 9,880 documents are evidence of war crimes, he is still guilty of releasing sensitive information the SHOULD be kept secret.
1. UCMJ isn't 'notionally' under the constitution. It's completely under the constitution.
2. UCMJ trials aren't actually harsher than civilian courts. Consider how long it's been since somebody was sentenced to death under the UCMJ, as opposed to federal or even state courts.
3. You keep your rights even as a soldier.
4. Murder/rape trials - can you cite a source on this? I thought kidnapping charges were fairly commonly associated with rape charges. Besides, you only need to be convicted of 1 count of aggravated murder in order to be sentenced to death/life in prison. It's not the severity of the act that gets you multiple charges, it's complex behavior. Murder, in the end, can be extremely simple.
5. 'Major Counts' can be misleading. As I said in #3, the penalty for murder is so severe that if Manning had murdered somebody in the course of his thefts all the espionage, fraud, theft, and such would be minor counts.
I don't read AC A human right
You can feel them as they watch you,
A thousand eyes now filled with pain,
I'll just sit back and relax now,
As your heart disconnects from your brain.
Yes I guess I see,
They ain't doin nothin here but livin' off of you and me, well
Yes I guess I know,
There ain't no place left on this earth that you can call your own, and
Yes I hope I see
The day we all wake up and get up off our bended knees, well
Hallelujah,
Let it all just burn,
Cause they ain't the type for listenin and they sure ain't never gonna learn.
-- Devil Makes Three, Never Learn
while [ 1 ]; do echo -n -e "\xe2\x95\xb$((($RANDOM&1)+1))"; done
crime against humanity
Here's a few:
http://collateralmurder.com/
1. Murdering journalists.
2. Murdering kids.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/21/bradley-manning-leaks_n_3788126.html
3. Thousands of 'unrecorded' civilian deaths.
4. Torture and illegal rendition.
Go read up a bit, you ignorant, git.
You now belong to that august hall of esteemed justices that loyally carried out the Chancellors' laws from 1933 to 1945.
Your descendants will be so proud.
Ghandi.
Nelson Mandela.
Not saying Bradley Manning is in the same category. But sometimes people in prison do end up as powerful symbols.
I only look human.
My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
The article you cite says his disclosures did not lead to any deaths of any military sources. Many believe Manning's leaks precipitated the Arab Spring [mondoweiss.net] which could have a death toll over 30,000 [usnews.com]. And it certainly crippled foreign relations (with the revelations in the e-mails) and may have made the US military and diplomatic processes somewhat less effective in areas where lives were and are at stake.
The Arab Spring was caused because the people found out they were being fucking lied to by their own governments. Why are our foreign relations fucked? Because our God damned cheating, conniving LIES were exposed for all to see...except you, apparently! So you want to blame the guy who exposed the lies, not the fucking liars who betrayed us all? What a piece of shit you turned out to be.
Also, whistle-blower laws are not automatic, (and I don't know if they should be). The fallout of the Snowden and Manning handling of secrets emphasizes my point. You have to report the crimes up the proper chain -- merely publicizing things you think may be whistle-blower protected is the wrong way to go about it.
What a naive dumb ass you are.
Manning should have known all of this. He could have followed proper whistle-blower protocol. He chose not to. I'd have much more sympathy if he had originally tried the proper channels and was rebuffed
If he tried the official channels and was "rebuffed", we'd have never heard about any of this, stupid ass.
Per the article, hasn't the sentence already been decided at 'life in prison'? The only question now is whether or not he'll ever be eligible for parole. His being eligible for parole in a decade if it's allowed is part of the administration details - it's how the military parole system is set up, it doesn't consider Bales specifically.
My sense of justice is that he never gets parole, or if he does manage it that it doesn't come for at least 60 years.
I don't read AC A human right
Which is still a shitload of time to have to sit in a prison cell, particularly if he's really trans and they won't let him transition.
My first thought on this was: Then maybe he shouldn't have released the information; in which case he'd have been out in less than 2 years. Depending on how long he enlisted for, he'd have been out in 2012(4 year enlistment) to 2014(6 year), with the GI bill, VA benefits, etc...
I don't read AC A human right
I think he should be punished. But what burns me up is all the corrupt colonels and signals intelligence contractor execs that I've known who are still stealing and getting people killed with impunity, while Manning gets 35 years for trying in a flawed way to do the right thing. The system is rewarding the wrong people. When someone like Sandy Berger gets a $50K fine and a short suspension of his clearance for stealing documents for the purpose of destroying evidence, Manning should not get 35 years for what he did. A few years is enough.
Also, the US has way to many "serious diplomatic negotiations" that require duplicity rather than openness. Its wrong, and it all blows back eventually.
What in the world are you talking about?
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
No, the State has admitted that his disclosures did not lead to any deaths
Not all harm involves death, and not all deaths are equal. That's why I mentioned perspective. You could take the humanist view, and while I respect that, I don't think that people will give up on tribalism anytime soon.
Manning left that job up to journalists.
But it didn't work out that way, did it? His solid intentions are why I have sympathy for him. But his actions did, in the end, result in the unfiltered release of all the documents.
Why is Snowden more qualified to determine what's right and wrong to publish than a group of experienced journalists?
First of all, he seems to be working with some of the same people as Manning. Second, his actions have not, to this date, resulted in the indiscriminate release of classified information.
But that's not how it works. If Manning revealed crimes, then he is to be afforded, by law, whistleblower protection.
What whistleblower law applies to Manning?
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Plusgood. He is given 35 years helpwise for Big Brother.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
Like Snowden, Manning's personal story is not the story. What he disclosed is the story.
Check out the difference between Nationalism and Patriotism. Which is flag-waving? Can Nationalists co-opt flag-waving... it seems to me like they have.
The 12 counts do not really indicate separate crimes though. The stacking of counts is one of the abuses that is prevailing in the "justice" system now, in order to force excessive sentences.
"In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act."
He deserves something. But it's all out of proportion with the consequences. Hell, there are soldiers who abused prisoners to the point they died, and were not even sentenced to jail time. Most of these assholes got between 3 and 7 years in jail for murdering civilians and covering up the facts. One guy (the "leader") got a life sentence with eligibility for parole in 10 years, and another got 24 years and will be eligible for parole in 7.
And Bradley Manning gets 35 for being a traitor and releasing information that it isn't clear has caused the death of anyone, just a whole lot of embarrassment?
You're correct. He would have been caught after sending only the first handful of reports, and he probably would have been tried for only one count of espionage instead of six. And any actual crimes that folks might have uncovered in the rest of the material would never have been uncovered.
That's the problem. At a fundamental level, whistleblower protection must cover public disclosure, because (with the exception of a single isolated incident here and there) if the organization against whom the whistle is being blown were capable of policing itself, the blowing would not have been necessary in the first place; blowing the whistle to an internal auditor is pretty much guaranteed to be useless. And once you release something to the public, chances are, the government knows who you are. Therefore, you get one shot at releasing everything that needs to be released. Anyone suggesting that there's another way is really kidding himself or herself.
This is not to say that he couldn't potentially have tried to be more selective about it, but there's also a time factor involved. The longer it takes from when a crime occurs to when the public knows about it, the more likely it is that the perpetrator will get off because of statutes of limitations. Therefore, if the goal actually is ensuring that those crimes get prosecuted, the best hope is distributing the information broadly to a large group of people who can then divide and conquer. The press is remarkably good at that. The only question is whether they can be trusted to be responsible about what they disclose.
Now disclosing it to a site like Wikileaks... is a different story. His mistake was not what he disclosed, nor was his mistake disclosing it to the press. His mistake was disclosing it through a dubious organization that operates on the fringes of the law rather than going directly to a reporter at a major news organization.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
They are making an example of him. The government has nothing to fear from rapists and murderers.
You pass off jail time like it's no big deal, he'll be out by 40 and everything will be fine. You have no fucking clue what just the plain time shift does, much less the psychological damage, the physical abuse from other inmates, potential rape, diseases, poor medical care...
Prison *is* death.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Dude, spoilers! ;)
-Turkey
Among many other crimes they exposed H. Clinton's involvement in a scheme to bug UN diplomats, a violation of both US and international law.
When will the court pronounce sentence on her?
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
Of course it's a big deal - isn't that kind of the point? They say he'll spend 8 years in there, and I think that sounds about right. 35 is too long, but that's just my opinion.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/restore-united-states%E2%80%99-human-rights-record-and-grant-clemency-pvt-bradley-manning/L7zHZv4r
Prove anything by multiplying Huge Number times Tiny Number
often means you die a horrible death for something you believe in. Being shot in the head for disobeying an order that goes against your belief system, is the same as running into a burning building to save someone when the chance of survival is near zero.
Real life is not the movies.
So, the prison sentence just furthers the fact that there was real risk in exposing the crimes of the US government. Most people are getting hung up on the fact that he went on a fishing expedition after the initial video leaks (which are arguably a war crime). If he had stopped at the initial leaks i'm sure he would still be sitting in prison had they caught him. Being morally right doesn't mean the government won't throw the book at anyone that gets in its way.
Same with Snowden, If the government gets its way, he will be rotting in prison long before anyone is charged, or any trials commence based on the evidence of wrongdoing that is now public. Even if in the end, all those programs are deemed illegal, he will still be rotting in jail (or dead) for daring to challenge the government.
"There are explicit paths required to report something covered by the MILITARY whistle-blower protection act [wikipedia.org] complaints. Releasing classified information directly to the press or anyone public is simply not protected whistle-blower activity, particularly in military circles" And every single person that has followed the official defined path has been shut down, fired, marginalized, harassed, etc. etc. etc. rather than their concerns or reports being vetted and addressed. Perhaps THAT's why Snowden chose the path that he did? If he's going to be a martyr anyway, at least make sure that the information goes public!
Considering how there are US soldiers convicted of murdering Afghans and Iraqis who still got lesser sentences, how did Manning get more years in prison than them?
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/restore-united-states%E2%80%99-human-rights-record-and-grant-clemency-pvt-bradley-manning/L7zHZv4r
Arab spring
Climate change summer
American fall
Nuclear winter
Cryonics - Keep cool and carry on.
Also, be sure to check out Stanley Milgram's famous "obedience to authority" experiment
The point of his experiment was to see at what length an ordinary person would go to commit harm to another under influence of an authoritative figure. Don't miss the chance if you ever get to see the original footage of the experiment.
Those Alderaans were shitting into their own drinking water and pouring plastic into it as well. they didn't have long...
Your mistake is that you don't have the slightest idea of what you're talking about. Manning went to mainstream media like NYT and WaPo first and they turned him down. Only then he went to WikiLeaks, and WikiLeaks arranged a consortium of major newspapers to disclose the information responsibly, and the only reason the cables got leaked wholesale was because of the gross negligence/incompetence of a Guardian journalist, i.e., "a reporter at a major news organization".
Deus est fatalis
The complete leak was resulting from a chain of errors. WikiLeaks screwed up and published the entire blob where anyone could download it. Then the Guardian screwed up and published a book containing the password. Without WikiLeaks screwing up to begin with, the password disclosure by the Guardian would have been a non-incident.
Also, IMO, it really doesn't matter if he tried some mainstream outlets first, nor does it matter how WikiLeaks handled it. What matters is that the moment WikiLeaks became involved, any credibility went out the window, because they are the journalistic equivalent of a tabloid, at best. At that moment, everything became suspect—became tainted. He should have kept trying major news organizations until he found someone willing to break the story. Period.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
The unredacted cables got released because of a stupid blunder by David Leigh from The Guardian, who published the cable's encryption key in a book. Manning acted responsibly and let the disclosure be handled by major newspapers, and it "didn't work out" only because of something he couldn't predict or influence.
Deus est fatalis
He couldn't predict that handing classified cables en mass over to a reporter might end badly? Well, as I said, perhaps Snowden has the benefit of age and experience. Or he could just be lucky. Either way, one of them leaked tens of thousands of classified documents without vetting them and the other hasn't.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Repeating a Big Lie doesn't make it true. It just makes you a bigger liar.
Uh... What have you been smoking?
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
I don't find him either a hero or a villian, just a young troop with serious personal issues who went attention-whoring without thinking it through despite his training.
Uh-huh. Because that categorization doesn't paint him as a villain at all.
Reactions to Manning seem to be dictated by the ideology of the beholder
Yup
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
The US is not bound by that court due to some agreements made when setting it up. Remember that the golden rule is whoever supplies some of the gold writes the rules.
And what crime against humanity did he expose? oh, right none
child prostitution and trafficking
systemic kidnapping (aka "extraordinary rendition") and torture
Is that still none? Do these qualify by your standards? If not, what does?
Please inform me what us discussing here the topic has influenced in terms of politics or international reaction.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Oh yes, save that messy bit of publication and just go direct to prison.
Oh really? Remember that diplomats still talked to Hillary after what came out about her.
So if Manning gets 35 years for a bit of "undermining" how long should someone get for revealing an active CIA agent to the press?
How about selling US made weapons to a terrorist group that had killed over a hundred US marines plus a lot of civilians with a bomb only one year previously, and skimming a bit off the top of the sale to pay for house airconditioning and a convertable?
Partisan politics leads into a very sickening swamp.
Ryszard Kuklinski was a Polish Colonel, one of Warsaw Pact commandants.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryszard_Kukli%C5%84ski
He passed Top Secret Warsaw Pact documents to USA. Not about crimes, but secret military documents about tactics, strategy, and also blueprints of advanced weapons. He was a traitor ot his own country, that's technically obvious.
USA considered him a hero (!), and after 2000 also Poland changed their mind, mostly on patriotic level - because he made damage to Russians, not only to his own country. He is still very controversial figure.
Now you have people like Manning and Snowden who expose commited crimes and wrongdoings of their country. It is not as clear as with Kuklinski to say they are traitors, maybe whistleblowers, line is much more blurred.
Guess what!
Kali's morality here on behalf of USA governement!
Foreigner gives secret documents to USA - GOOD!
USA guy reveals USA crimes to world - BAAAAD!
Hypocrisy, plain and obvious.
Mother, should I run for president?
Mother, should I trust the government?
Mother, will they put me in the firing line?
Mother, do you think they'll try to break my balls?
Direct your moron comments towards Ms. Manning. She kept everything in unencrypted form and trusted people with the unredacted documents. From Wikipedia:
So she swiped hundreds of thousands of documents from work, kept them in unencrypted format on various computers and SD cards, and uploaded anything that would upload to Wikileaks on blind trust. And I'm the moron.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
You sir are a moron. He did no such thing. He leaked un-redacted documents to WikiLeaks. Yes, they(WikiLeaks, not PFC Manning) initially redacted the information, but only when reporters refused to publish the documents unless they did. And later they had a security breach where the documents were leaked into the wild without the redactions. This has since put both international reporters & dissidents in great harm. In China for example, dissidents listed on the documents from PFC Manning were hunted down by what amounts to lynch mobs. And in parts of Africa, reporters were forcibly removed from countries because their names appeared on US Embassy visitor logs.
Try verifying your information before opening your moronic mouth.
And if vegetarians eat vegetables, shouldn't we be more worried about the humanitarians?
As long as you tell me how to use the shells.
A terrorist is a freedom fighter who isn't on your side.
Casteism
The spoiler was Jar Jar.
Second, his actions have not, to this date, resulted in the indiscriminate release of classified information.
So, if Greenwald, e.g., screws up and discloses the 5000 documents accidentally, then Snowden will be in the same category as Manning? That doesn't make sense - either his actions were responsible or they weren't. I won't argue that Manning was smarter than Snowden (it seems pretty clear that Snowden is much smarter) but the principle doesn't hinge on third party blunders, except as an excuse for _never_ blowing the whistle (because that's always an outside chance).
What whistleblower law applies to Manning?
The primary one would be the Geneva Convention, under which is is obligated to report war crimes and is entitled to protections for doing so.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
So, if Greenwald, e.g., screws up and discloses the 5000 documents accidentally, then Snowden will be in the same category as Manning?
Pretty much, yeah. But also, it's conceivable that Snowden at least read 5000 documents (especially given his downtime at the airport!). It is not possible that Manning read the hundreds of thousands of documents in his possession.
but the principle doesn't hinge on third party blunders
Sure it does. If you are going to undertake an activity like removing classified documents from their secure location, it is on you to make sure those documents stay secure. If you, say, leave them unencrypted on an SD card, you deserve whatever misfortune befalls you. If it were me, I'd have everything encrypted and I'd only release the documents to my partner as needed.
There is a big difference between Snowden and Manning. Snowden gives documents to the press that he knows implicate the government in what he thinks is wrongdoing... this is textbook whistleblowing. Manning handed the press a huge pile of documents, thinking that they probably contained evidence of wrongdoing - but he couldn't really be sure because he hadn't gone through them. That's as much a fishing expedition as it is whistleblowing. Had he restricted himself to things he KNEW were going on, well, he'd be Snowden.
The primary one would be the Geneva Convention, under which is is obligated to report war crimes and is entitled to protections for doing so.
While some of the documents seem to reveal war crimes, he didn't know of those documents when he released them. He effectively got lucky.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.