Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby KnightExemplar » Tue Mar 05, 2013 1:51 am UTC

I can't fit everything in one headline >_<. My best headline: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges, trial on "aiding the enemy" (and other charges) begins soon.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/fe ... nemy-trial

Spoiler:
Bradley Manning has pleaded guilty to having been the source of the massive WikiLeaks dump of US state secrets, though he has denied the most serious charge against him that he "aided the enemy" that could see him languishing in military prison for the rest of his life.

Through his lawyer, David Coombs, the soldier pleaded guilty to 10 lesser charges that included possessing and wilfully communicating to an unauthorised person all the main elements of the WikiLeaks disclosure. That covered the so-called "collateral murder" video of an Apache helicopter attack in Iraq; some US diplomatic cables including one of the early WikiLeaks publications the Reykjavik cable; portions of the Iraq and Afghanistan warlogs, some of the files on detainees in Guantanamo; and two intelligence memos.

These lesser charges each carry a two-year maximum sentence, committing Manning to a possible upper limit of 20 years in prison.

Manning also pleaded not guilty to 12 counts which relate to the major offences of which he is accused by the US government. Specifically, he pleaded not guilty to "aiding the enemy" – the idea that he knowingly gave help to al-Qaida and in a separate count that by causing secret intelligence to be published on the internet he knowingly made it accessible to the enemy.

He also denied that at the time he made the transmission of information to WikiLeaks he had "reason to believe such information could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation".

With Manning having pleaded not guilty to these overarching charges, the prosecution is now almost certain to press ahead to a full court-martial which is currently set for 3 June. The judge has indicated that the trial could run for 12 weeks, although Manning's guilty plea to the lesser charges may short-circuit the process as the government will no longer have to prove that he acquired and communicated the trove of classified material to WikiLeaks.

Manning confirmed that he wishes the trial to be conducted by the judge, Colonel Denise Lind, presiding in the case sitting alone. There will be no military equivalent of a jury.

Lind made clear that she will reserve her judgment on whether or not to accept Manning's guilty pleas until a later date. She has no power to influence the charges other than to ensure that they are consistent with the law – which she has already done.

She does, however, have the responsibility to ensure that Manning has made his plea in full knowledge of what it means for his future, and voluntarily with no coercion.

They will now spend the rest of the day in deliberations designed to meet that responsibility. Lind has said that Manning will be allowed to read out a statement, believed to run to 35 pages, that explains his decisions and may reveal his thinking about what he did and why he did it in transmitting such a huge mountain of classified material to WikiLeaks.


For those not familiar with this case, it has been a long way in the making. Here are the old topics on the subject as far as I'm aware of:
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=77743
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=76955
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=66922

It seems silly to me (and I'm sure everyone involved) that this trial is about two and a half years in the making. But at least it has finally beginning. The rest of the trial will begin June 3 of this year. Lets hope this mess finishes before the 3 year mark. That said, it is the height of stupidity to admit to leaking all of the documents. These are words that will be used against him in the upcoming trial.

His confession contains interesting details, which may force people to change arguments slightly if you read through the old archived debates above. The most interesting to me at least, is that Manning admits to trying Washington Post / New York times first: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/fe ... york-times
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

Alexius
Posts: 342
Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2008 4:45 pm UTC

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby Alexius » Tue Mar 05, 2013 12:32 pm UTC

Do sentences from American courts-martial typically run consecutively rather than concurrently?

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby KnightExemplar » Tue Mar 05, 2013 2:36 pm UTC

I don't know about court-martials, but in normal courts, its pretty much up to the judge.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

Роберт
Posts: 4285
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 1:56 am UTC

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby Роберт » Tue Mar 05, 2013 3:04 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:The most interesting to me at least, is that Manning admits to trying Washington Post / New York times first: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/fe ... york-times

Going to reputable U.S. News sources with a data dump, knowing there's some important, damning information in there that U.S. citizens should be made aware of? Treason! Hang him!


...am I doing this right?
The Great Hippo wrote:[T]he way we treat suspected terrorists genuinely terrifies me.

Chen
Posts: 5487
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby Chen » Tue Mar 05, 2013 3:30 pm UTC

Роберт wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:The most interesting to me at least, is that Manning admits to trying Washington Post / New York times first: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/fe ... york-times

Going to reputable U.S. News sources with a data dump, knowing there's some important, damning information in there that U.S. citizens should be made aware of? Treason! Hang him!


...am I doing this right?


Does where he was sending the information with respect to some newspaper vs Wikileaks really matter? It seems he feared sending it to reputable sources would have it censored or squashed so he went to Wikileaks instead. Isn't this actually more damning than helpful?

Sero
Posts: 321
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 2:31 am UTC

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby Sero » Tue Mar 05, 2013 3:35 pm UTC

Chen wrote:
Роберт wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:The most interesting to me at least, is that Manning admits to trying Washington Post / New York times first: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/fe ... york-times

Going to reputable U.S. News sources with a data dump, knowing there's some important, damning information in there that U.S. citizens should be made aware of? Treason! Hang him!


...am I doing this right?


Does where he was sending the information with respect to some newspaper vs Wikileaks really matter? It seems he feared sending it to reputable sources would have it censored or squashed so he went to Wikileaks instead. Isn't this actually more damning than helpful?


Cite? The linked article describes him as just having no luck with more reputable sources. Getting nothing but voicemail, blown off by a reporter, never getting calls returned.
Princess Marzipan wrote:Dear God, we seriously just went and dug up CITATIONS for TORTURE being a WAR CRIME.

We have been fucking TROLLED, dear readers.

Роберт
Posts: 4285
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 1:56 am UTC

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby Роберт » Tue Mar 05, 2013 3:47 pm UTC

Chen wrote:Does where he was sending the information with respect to some newspaper vs Wikileaks really matter? It seems he feared sending it to reputable sources would have it censored or squashed so he went to Wikileaks instead. Isn't this actually more damning than helpful?


Of course where he tried to leak the documents and why he did it matters. Was he aiding and abetting the enemy, or trying to get vital information to the American public? And if by "censored or squashed" you mean very few people would even talk to him and the ones that did appeared to blow him off as a crank, that is what he claimed in the article. Essentially "I tried to leak to safer American sources, that got me nowhere, so I leaked it to the next safest source I could think of." How is that "more damning"?
The Great Hippo wrote:[T]he way we treat suspected terrorists genuinely terrifies me.

Chen
Posts: 5487
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby Chen » Tue Mar 05, 2013 3:51 pm UTC

The woman said, according to Manning's account, that the paper would only be interested subject to vetting by senior editors.

Despairing of that route, Manning turned to the New York Times. He called the public editor of the paper but only got voicemail.


Maybe it was just bad writing in the linked article but when I read that it seemed like when they wanted it vetted by editors he decided not to do it. Did I read that wrong?

Beltayn
Posts: 92
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 12:54 am UTC

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby Beltayn » Tue Mar 05, 2013 4:10 pm UTC

He CLAIMS to have attempted to reach out to the Washington Post and the New York Times.

Yet, according to those newspapers, there is no evidence that he actually did and the idea that he would be ignored is very implausible.


This seems to be simply an attempt to reframe his own case and build a narrative about being an actual activist and whistleblower, as opposed to a sad, disturbed kid, traumatized by a war zone and the isolation brought on by his sexual orientation, and attempting to get revenge for his bad experiences.

Роберт
Posts: 4285
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 1:56 am UTC

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby Роберт » Tue Mar 05, 2013 5:29 pm UTC

Chen wrote:
The woman said, according to Manning's account, that the paper would only be interested subject to vetting by senior editors.

Despairing of that route, Manning turned to the New York Times. He called the public editor of the paper but only got voicemail.


Maybe it was just bad writing in the linked article but when I read that it seemed like when they wanted it vetted by editors he decided not to do it. Did I read that wrong?

This one phrases it differently, but says the same thing:
Private Manning said he first called The Washington Post and spoke to an unidentified reporter for about five minutes. He decided that the reporter did not seem particularly interested because she said The Post would have to review the material before making any commitment.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/01/us/br ... hare&_r=1&

He's not claiming he was worried about censorship, he's claiming he was worried that no one seemed to be taking the information seriously. A specific scenario would be he goes ahead, the "give the documents to a senior editor to review", and since no one cares, they end up shoved under some other documents on someone's desk and never seen again.
The Great Hippo wrote:[T]he way we treat suspected terrorists genuinely terrifies me.

Alexius
Posts: 342
Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2008 4:45 pm UTC

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby Alexius » Tue Mar 05, 2013 6:01 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:I don't know about court-martials, but in normal courts, its pretty much up to the judge.

In normal courts here in the UK, there are official guidelines- sentences are served concurrently if "the offences arise out of the same incident" or "there is a series of offences of the same or similar kind, especially when committed against the same person", which certainly seems to apply in this case. I just don't know whether this court will operate on similar principles.

Chen
Posts: 5487
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby Chen » Tue Mar 05, 2013 6:18 pm UTC

Роберт wrote:He's not claiming he was worried about censorship, he's claiming he was worried that no one seemed to be taking the information seriously. A specific scenario would be he goes ahead, the "give the documents to a senior editor to review", and since no one cares, they end up shoved under some other documents on someone's desk and never seen again.


Ok that does clear it up somewhat. Still I'm not really clear why he thought people wouldn't pay attention to it, after they actually read it. It doesn't seem unreasonable for a newspaper to be skeptical of some random person saying they have news the people NEED TO KNOW ABOUT and hence asking for a review. Considering he wanted to get the information out there to begin with I don't see what the harm was in giving it to the newspaper AND Wikileaks.

Роберт
Posts: 4285
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 1:56 am UTC

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby Роберт » Tue Mar 05, 2013 7:27 pm UTC

Chen wrote:
Роберт wrote:He's not claiming he was worried about censorship, he's claiming he was worried that no one seemed to be taking the information seriously. A specific scenario would be he goes ahead, the "give the documents to a senior editor to review", and since no one cares, they end up shoved under some other documents on someone's desk and never seen again.


Ok that does clear it up somewhat. Still I'm not really clear why he thought people wouldn't pay attention to it, after they actually read it. It doesn't seem unreasonable for a newspaper to be skeptical of some random person saying they have news the people NEED TO KNOW ABOUT and hence asking for a review. Considering he wanted to get the information out there to begin with I don't see what the harm was in giving it to the newspaper AND Wikileaks.

I don't claim to believe Mr. Manning's account unquestionably - obviously he'll want to paint himself in the best possible light.

Perhaps more pertinent to the issue is this: I don't believe the choices and actions made by a troubled young man will always seem like the absolute wisest possible choices when analyzed by us in retrospect.
The Great Hippo wrote:[T]he way we treat suspected terrorists genuinely terrifies me.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby KnightExemplar » Wed Mar 06, 2013 2:14 am UTC

Роберт wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:The most interesting to me at least, is that Manning admits to trying Washington Post / New York times first: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/fe ... york-times

Going to reputable U.S. News sources with a data dump, knowing there's some important, damning information in there that U.S. citizens should be made aware of? Treason! Hang him!


...am I doing this right?


I do believe that fact runs counter to my arguments in the previous threads. So the comment about "changing a few people's arguments" applies to me the most.

My primary issue with Manning (or the whole Wikileaks thing in general) was how poorly Wikileaks ended up doing things. In particular, I'm certain that the Washington Post or New York Times would have better reviewed the material before it was leaked, and would have redacted names from the Afghan war logs before releasing them in full. The naivete of releasing top secret data to a foreign national with no real loyalty to the US is damning on Manning's part, but if he tried to release it to dependent newspapers / news agencies first, I think I can forgive him on that matter.

Beltayn wrote:He CLAIMS to have attempted to reach out to the Washington Post and the New York Times.

Yet, according to those newspapers, there is no evidence that he actually did and the idea that he would be ignored is very implausible.


This seems to be simply an attempt to reframe his own case and build a narrative about being an actual activist and whistleblower, as opposed to a sad, disturbed kid, traumatized by a war zone and the isolation brought on by his sexual orientation, and attempting to get revenge for his bad experiences.


Hindsight bias is going to poison both sides on this case. But to me at least, I'm inclined to take Manning's statements as it is. Its more likely to me... that a prominent newspaper / media source would be too busy to remember one lead out of hundreds... (especially pre-wikileaks) than for Manning to lie about this case. (Manning has been such a blabbermouth so far anyway).

I don't claim to believe Mr. Manning's account unquestionably - obviously he'll want to paint himself in the best possible light.


He's doing a shit job at that right now however. He's the one who was caught bragging about the leaks to hackers. And Manning just pleaded guilty to the charges without trying to go for some sort of plea bargain. Manning is probably overly idealistic, to the point where he's just hurting himself now. Detailing his leak strategy in a court marshal ABOUT his leaks is about as far away from "painting himself in the best possible light" can be.

Alexius wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:I don't know about court-martials, but in normal courts, its pretty much up to the judge.

In normal courts here in the UK, there are official guidelines- sentences are served concurrently if "the offences arise out of the same incident" or "there is a series of offences of the same or similar kind, especially when committed against the same person", which certainly seems to apply in this case. I just don't know whether this court will operate on similar principles.


Makes sense. I'd expect the same from this court (although... no guarentees). Assuming the courts are similar... the question then, is how to treat the different leaks. It was clear that the "Collateral Murder" leak for instance is Manning. The military was probably pissed off at the case, and yet Manning went ahead and leaked the Afghan War Logs, then the Iraqi War Logs, and finally the Diplomatic Cables. If he accepts the punishment of that, whatever, but its clear that he's guilty of those 4 leaks at this point.

I count at least two separate instances: Collateral Murder, and "everything else". Depending on how he transferred the files to Assange, the Afghan War Logs, Iraqi War Logs, and Diplomatic Cables can be considered "one" leak, or "three separate" leaks.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

Роберт
Posts: 4285
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 1:56 am UTC

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby Роберт » Wed Mar 06, 2013 3:11 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote: He's the one who was caught bragging about the leaks to hackers. And Manning just pleaded guilty to the charges without trying to go for some sort of plea bargain. Manning is probably overly idealistic, to the point where he's just hurting himself now.
True. I agree with the you on the overall feel of things. IMO, leaking to Wikileaks was bad, Manning seems a bit idealistic and made bad decisions, but certainly was not treasonous.

My "treason" comment was not directed against you, but rather against the borg. (Or whatever we want to call the mindless internet commenters who post on news sites.)
The Great Hippo wrote:[T]he way we treat suspected terrorists genuinely terrifies me.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby KnightExemplar » Tue Jun 04, 2013 3:00 am UTC

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/20 ... rts-today/

The court martial officially begins today.

Prosecutors will try to prove that Manning’s leaks aided the enemy by calling as a witness a Navy SEAL who participated in the raid that killed Osama bin Laden. They say that copies of the documents Manning leaked to WikiLeaks were found on the computer hard-drives recovered by U.S. special operations forces during the raid.


Doesn't sound good. Osama Bin Laden's files contained the Wikileaks files, which clearly demonstrates that Al Qaeda was analyzing the Wikileaks documents. This seems like definite proof on the "Aiding the Enemy" charge.

I really don't see how there can be a counter-argument to this. The court case is going to be classified because they'll go into detail about how those leaks damaged the US Army or gave Al Qaeda an advantage... Bradley Manning already admitted to leaking the documents... and he'll have to play QUITE the naiive fool if he wants to convince the judge that he didn't expect the leaks to reach Al Qaeda's hands. After all: isn't the point of releasing all that information to give it out to everyone, including our enemies?
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

liveboy21
Posts: 136
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2011 9:33 am UTC

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby liveboy21 » Tue Jun 04, 2013 3:41 am UTC

That Osama bin Laden looked at the documents really means nothing. Bradley Manning gave documents to Wikileaks, Wikileaks published the documents, the rest of the American media started saying that there was information in there that could hurt the United States. Surely Osama bin Laden would have looked at those documents, whether they contained any useful information or not.

The point of leaks is to give information to the public. Perhaps now with this, the definition of whistle blowing will need to be changed to only 'government approved leaks' being allowed. Or perhaps leaks in general will not be allowed.

BattleMoose
Posts: 1993
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 8:42 am UTC

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby BattleMoose » Tue Jun 04, 2013 3:52 am UTC

To qualify for whistle blowing protections, don't you actually have to read the documents you are leaking?

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby KnightExemplar » Tue Jun 04, 2013 3:59 am UTC

The point of leaks is to give information to the public. Perhaps now with this, the definition of whistle blowing will need to be changed to only 'government approved leaks' being allowed. Or perhaps leaks in general will not be allowed.


Or perhaps, if you're gonna leak documents, be damn sure that they're not "aiding the enemy" and putting your fellow soldiers in harm's way. 700,000+ documents on the internet WILL be found by the enemy, and Bradley Manning has to answer to all of the negative effects that Al Qaeda has done with this information.

If Bradley Manning didn't read the documents he was leaking, he was just leaking documents for the hell of it... at best naiive of the ill-effects it would have on his fellow soldiers. He is the one responsible for the damage that these leaks caused, and that is the purpose of this trial.

Prosecutors are going to try and prove that Bradley Manning clearly aided the enemy with the leaks. We'll just have to see what the judge's ruling on this will be...
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
Lucrece
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:01 am UTC

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby Lucrece » Tue Jun 04, 2013 4:49 am UTC

And if the revelation had been done by mainstream news sources instead of WikiLeaks, how could you not twist that to mean he aided the enemy as well?

We also need to understand that this guy will also not care about plea bargains or strategy that might get him a better sentence when so far while in custody he has been so viciously mistreated, humiliated by being made to stand naked at points while people holding him passed, denied even the smallest of comforts available in a jail cell. Who knows what was done to him by fellow soldiers in charge of holding a "traitor".

Let us not forget what has happened to people indefinitely imprisoned by the US, and how even a harsh jail sentence might seem better to a desperate guy wanting to get at least into the official channels so more oversight will happen on how he's being treated while in custody.
Belial wrote:That's charming, Nancy, but all I hear when you talk is a bunch of yippy dog sounds.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby KnightExemplar » Tue Jun 04, 2013 4:57 am UTC

Lucrece wrote:And if the revelation had been done by mainstream news sources instead of WikiLeaks, how could you not twist that to mean he aided the enemy as well?


Presumably, mainstream news sources would have handled the event better (ie: more redactions or whatnot). Names and locations of US allies who helped us in Afghanistan were listed in the documents Bradley Manning leaked. Wikileaks failed to redact those names, and we now know for certain that Osama Bin Laden was personally combing through these documents. (If names / locations were properly redacted from the documents, it'd be a harder case to argue. But as it stands, Bradley Manning didn't even try to handle this event responsibly.)

Either way, Bradley Manning should have read the data before disclosing it to anyone. He is responsible for what he leaks and the damage it has caused.

We also need to understand that this guy will also not care about plea bargains or strategy that might get him a better sentence when so far while in custody he has been so viciously mistreated, humiliated by being made to stand naked at points while people holding him passed, denied even the smallest of comforts available in a jail cell. Who knows what was done to him by fellow soldiers in charge of holding a "traitor".


Why are you continuing to treat Bradley Manning like some sort of child? Bradley Manning is a grown man and is responsible for his own actions. If Bradley Manning is willing to forfeit his rights and forfeit his legal position... he is responsible for weakening his own defense. Period. Regardless of how much he was mistreated, Bradley Manning made the wrong decision here. He should have fought tooth-and-nail to extract the best possible case for himself. Mind you, Bradley Manning has had a defense lawyer working with him for years before his idiotic guilty plea. Manning is responsible for the situation he has put himself into at this point.

At very least, in doing so, Bradley Manning has symbolically and legally accepted full responsibility for the damages that his leaks have done. So here he is, facing potential life imprisonment for provably leaking key intelligence data to Osama Bin Laden.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
Lucrece
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:01 am UTC

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby Lucrece » Tue Jun 04, 2013 5:27 am UTC

I'm just saying given the circumstances a person can be in when it comes to that scenario, it's not so unreasonable that they would cave under pressure. Prosecutors get their harshest sentences based on this notion -- they know some people will not be able to resist. And it's not about being like a child -- adults can be vulnerable and weak.

I'm not arguing the potential damage he has done. That's for the court to determine at this point. What I'm arguing is how the reaction and treatment that ensued from this perception about him can impact how he makes his choices.
Belial wrote:That's charming, Nancy, but all I hear when you talk is a bunch of yippy dog sounds.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby KnightExemplar » Tue Jun 04, 2013 5:48 am UTC

I still reject that notion however. His Defense Lawyer was the guy who was able to get him better options in the brig. After all that, he'd probably be going against the wishes of his defense lawyer as he plead guilty. Prosecutors can only do so much... Bradley Manning has been protected by his Defense Lawyer for over a year, who has been constantly working to get him better conditions.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
Lucrece
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:01 am UTC

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby Lucrece » Tue Jun 04, 2013 6:16 am UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:I still reject that notion however. His Defense Lawyer was the guy who was able to get him better options in the brig. After all that, he'd probably be going against the wishes of his defense lawyer as he plead guilty. Prosecutors can only do so much... Bradley Manning has been protected by his Defense Lawyer for over a year, who has been constantly working to get him better conditions.



And the decision on whether those conditions will be granted is hardly something that defense lawyer will get much control over until he had to go to the public and make a scandal about his living conditions. And then the public forgets and the powers that be can maliciously stall and add different discomforts/mistreatment.

I'm sure you're no stranger to the power of bureaucracies to cause harm against people who annoy them.
Belial wrote:That's charming, Nancy, but all I hear when you talk is a bunch of yippy dog sounds.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby Tyndmyr » Tue Jun 04, 2013 11:02 am UTC

Chen wrote:
Does where he was sending the information with respect to some newspaper vs Wikileaks really matter? It seems he feared sending it to reputable sources would have it censored or squashed so he went to Wikileaks instead. Isn't this actually more damning than helpful?


I would say so. Also damning is the sheer volume. A legitimate whistleblower calls attention to some specific problem he or she uncovered. They do not simply grab all the classified information they can get their hands on to reveal as much as possible. I find it very difficult to believe from what I've heard that his motivation was simply whistleblowing. I also don't think it can be described as naivete. The military isn't going to hand you access to classified stuff without clearly going over details like "don't give this shit out". He had to make a conscious decision to break the rules, and then, he tried to break them as much as humanly possible. I'm not surprised he's getting locked away.

yedidyak
Posts: 954
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 10:24 pm UTC
Location: Israel

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby yedidyak » Tue Jun 04, 2013 11:40 am UTC

What part of this cable being leaked could be called whistleblowing in any way?

http://cablegatesearch.wikileaks.org/cable.php?id=09BAGHDAD2748 wrote:
SUBJECT: IRAQ'S REMAINING JEWS STAY HIDDEN

REF: 2008 BAGHDAD 1454

Classified By: Acting Political Counselor William Roebuck for Reasons 1
.4 (b) and (d).

¶1. (C) On October 10, Poloff met with one of the last
remaining Jews in Iraq, Khalida Fouad Liahu Moualim (strictly
protect), to discuss the current state of the Iraqi Jewish
community. Moualim stated that there are now eight remaining
members of the Iraqi Jewish community in Baghdad including
herself (a complete biographical breakdown of the community
is contained in reftel).
...
that her husband had been
kidnapped by AQI in 2005 and had most likely been murdered.
(Note: Since the kidnapping, the Embassy's Office of Hostage
Affairs has attempted to assist Moualim in locating her
husband or his remains. End note.) F
...
At present, Moualim works as a dentist in an orphanage and
conceals her religious identity to her co-workers by claiming
to be Christian, although she attends weekly Jewish services
held at the Embassy.

User avatar
Ormurinn
Posts: 1033
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2012 3:42 pm UTC
Location: Suth Eoferwicscire

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby Ormurinn » Tue Jun 04, 2013 12:59 pm UTC

This doesn't really add anything to the discussion academically, but...

Bradley manning is a vile shit who deserves to go down for as long as possible. He betrayed his brothers, his country, and countless innocent people whose intimate details were entrusted to his care.

Fuck him, and fuck all the people defending him as some kind of hero.
"Progress" - Technological advances masking societal decay.

User avatar
Red Hal
Magically Delicious
Posts: 1445
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 2:42 pm UTC

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby Red Hal » Tue Jun 04, 2013 1:06 pm UTC

Good job you didn't post that on Facebook ...
Lost Greatest Silent Baby X Y Z. "There is no one who loves pain itself, who seeks after it and wants to have it, simply because it is pain..."

wumpus
Posts: 533
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 12:16 am UTC

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby wumpus » Tue Jun 04, 2013 3:39 pm UTC

Роберт wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:The most interesting to me at least, is that Manning admits to trying Washington Post / New York times first: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/fe ... york-times

Going to reputable U.S. News sources with a data dump, knowing there's some important, damning information in there that U.S. citizens should be made aware of? Treason! Hang him!


...am I doing this right?


Pretty much. The muted response of "we didn't do it" when the President busted AP leakers should pretty much convince the next line of heroes to sanitize their own data and anonymously dump it on pirate bay or somewhere. All leaking to the press can do is give them someone to point the finger at.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10009
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby addams » Tue Jun 04, 2013 4:30 pm UTC

That covered the so-called "collateral murder" video of an Apache helicopter attack in Iraq; some US diplomatic cables including one of the early WikiLeaks publications the Reykjavik cable; portions of the Iraq and Afghanistan warlogs, some of the files on detainees in Guantanamo; and two intelligence memos.

Yes. That clip made the US look bad.
I saw it. All the other information was boring or unavailable.

He has a 35 page long Statement? Good Grief.
Thirty-five Pages? What does he have to say?

His attorney should have a look at that statement before it is read into The World's permanent record.
35 pages? How can anyone write 35 pages of anything and not write something stupid?

Is it a Psych Eval or a Court? The court wants to know Why he did it?
Why? Was he Helping the Enemy or Helping His Own?

Who is His Own?
Gay guys everywhere?
ok. Was the release of information motivated by revenge?

All of this sort of thing fall into two categories?
1. You did the Wrong Thing for the Right Reasons.
2. You did the Right Thing for the Wrong Reasons.

There is the ever popular:
1. You did the Right Thing for the Right Reasons.

Why do we have so many Secrets?
Somethings are between you and your fifty closest friends.
Secrets? Who wants a Secret?

We don't Talk to Strangers.
Why?

Do we not trust The World?
Do we know that in Every War that happened Any Where at Any Time;
Poor behavior of Enlisted Men and Woman happens? Yes. We know that.

We don't have to Like It!
Who's behavior are we worried about?

Some Nerd that turned on The Light while we were masterbating to Torture and Snuff films?
Or; The guys that made those Films?

How old is he? He is only twenty-six years old. Now.
How long has he been held? Three years as of May.

He is the most famous Political Prisoner in The World?
Don't most Political Prisoners, just, disappear?

Politics is Mean Jr. High School Girls. Right?
What do Mean Jr. Hight School Girls do?

They tell Lies. Lots and Lots of Lies.
Not everything a Jr. High School Girl says is a Lie.
Not everything a Mean Jr. High School Girl says is a Lie.

Politics and Jr. High School.
Some people find the Environment Exhilarating.

Not me. You?

Politics: Who can say the Meanest Thing about another person and Get Away with it?

That is on a Good Day.
On a Bad Bay the Words become Action.

The Poor Man. If he is acquitted. Then what?
Is there a Bradley Manning Registry?

Would he 'have to' check in with the Local Police in every town he visits?
Where would he live?

"A fish may Love a bird. But; Where would they Live?"
My guess would be; "Near Water."

A dishonorable discharge an Open Door and a Slap on the Butt.
That would be nice. Maybe.

What would be his Life Expectancy? Hours or Days?
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
styrofoam
Posts: 256
Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 3:28 am UTC

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby styrofoam » Wed Jun 05, 2013 1:43 am UTC

Ormurinn wrote:This doesn't really add anything to the discussion

Then don't post it.



p.s. Yeah, it's quote sniping.
aadams wrote:I am a very nice whatever it is I am.

User avatar
sam_i_am
Posts: 624
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 3:38 pm UTC
Location: Urbana, Illinois, USA

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby sam_i_am » Wed Jun 05, 2013 5:49 pm UTC

Might I ask, Does anyone know of specific instances of US soldiers dying who wouldn't have died had he not leaked the information?

User avatar
Lucrece
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:01 am UTC

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby Lucrece » Wed Jun 05, 2013 8:08 pm UTC

Image

Now we know what his confinement looks like.
Belial wrote:That's charming, Nancy, but all I hear when you talk is a bunch of yippy dog sounds.

Роберт
Posts: 4285
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 1:56 am UTC

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby Роберт » Thu Jun 06, 2013 5:47 pm UTC

He looks albino.
The Great Hippo wrote:[T]he way we treat suspected terrorists genuinely terrifies me.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10009
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby addams » Fri Jun 07, 2013 5:28 am UTC

Роберт wrote:He looks albino.

Thank you for posting the Photo.

Yes. He does look white.
He looks thin, too.

His uniform fits.
Is he still active duty?

That is a fine uniform.
I like it.

To answer the question posed:
What are the names of the dead?
And; What were the circumstance of those deaths?

I do not have an answer.
Some answers can be made up 'on the spot' if you need one.

How much self-righteous indignation do you need?
One soldier here. Another one there.
Will that be enough?

Do you need entire units dead or disabled?
Wars have innocent victims.

That is a very young man.
In 14 years he will be forty years old.
Half of his life will have spent been in Jail.

Forty is still young enough to have some life left.
If he is healthy. If he is sane.

Will he be allowed to become better educated?
Has the sentence been announced, yet?
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10269
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby CorruptUser » Tue Jul 30, 2013 8:03 pm UTC


Heisenberg
Posts: 3789
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 8:48 pm UTC
Location: Uncertain

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby Heisenberg » Tue Jul 30, 2013 9:02 pm UTC

That's about the best we could hope for. The "aiding the enemy" charge was pretty farfetched anyway. Maybe Obama will commute Manning's sentence on his way out.

elasto
Posts: 3574
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby elasto » Tue Jul 30, 2013 9:45 pm UTC

Unlikely.

In terms of 'those who would sacrifice liberty for security...' it seems pretty clear which way Obama leans.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10269
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby CorruptUser » Tue Jul 30, 2013 9:59 pm UTC

He's pretty much Bushwith with better speeches. I miss Bill Clinton at this point, I really do.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Bradley Manning pleads guilty to lesser charges...

Postby morriswalters » Tue Jul 30, 2013 11:11 pm UTC

Yeah. He was so careless in his behavior he damn near got himself impeached. Nobody who sits in that office will ever be any different.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests