E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSBy Rich Gardella of NBC News and Alex Johnson of msnbc.com
The government's case against Pfc. Bradley Manning is really about keeping government secrets safe by silencing whistle-blowers across the U.S. government, WikiLeaks leader Julian Assange and Pentagon Papers leaker Daniel Ellsberg contended Wednesday.
Manning, 23, an Army intelligence analyst, is charged with leaking thousands of classified documents and diplomatic cables. It is widely believed he provided the documents to WikiLeaks, which began publishing them last year in cooperation with The New York Times and other news organizations.
Assange has never said Manning was the source, but he has made the soldier's treatment in U.S. custody — confined alone in a small cell at a Marine base in Virginia until he was transferred to Leavenworth prison in Kansas last month — a personal crusade, alleging that it was intended to humiliate him and send a message to would-be government whistle-blowers.
"I don't know whether it (the source) was Bradley Manning or not, but he is only person behind bars on that allegation," Assange said in explaining why he's been so dogged in defending Manning.
Joined on a conference call with reporters by Ellsberg, Manning's attorney and representatives of the Bradley Manning Support Network, Assange said the government's treatment of Manning amounted to using a "sledgehammer to crack a nut."
The government is trying "to terrorize whistle-blowers into not revealing information to the public," he charged.
Ellsberg, who triggered a Supreme Court freedom-of-the-press judgment when he leaked the Defense Department's secret history of the Vietnam War to The Times in 1971, called Manning a hero. He said Manning was "accused of being the one person who obeyed his oath to the Constitution" by disclosing government "crimes that could be prosecuted" during the war in Iraq and its aftermath.
The bigger danger, Ellsberg contended, is that if Manning is convicted, the government would be emboldened to further pursue journalists for reporting leaked material. He and Assange pointed to U.S. prosecutors' decision this week to subpoena Times reporter James Risen to testify at the trial of former CIA operative Jeffrey Sterling, who they allege leaked classified information that Risen used in his 2006 book about Iran's nuclear operations, "State of War."
The Justice Department has cited the 1917 Espionage Act in prosecuting Sterling and at least four other alleged sources of classified material used in various news reports, raising alarms among First Amendment activists that the Obama administration is pursuing a governmentwide war on whistle-blowers.
The administration's interpretation of the act is a fundamental threat to investigative journalism and to "any journalist who has a byline above classified material," Ellsberg said.
Assange added, "The Obama administration's attempts to expand 1917 Espionage Act ... will put a chill across all investigative journalism in the U.S."
But Assange also leveled scathing criticism at U.S. journalists, essentially saying they were wimping out in the face of unconstitutional federal pressure.
Saying U.S. coverage of Manning's case had been "appalling and salacious," Assange said: "Either the mainstream press collapses as an effective organ, and all sources are forced to deal only with WikiLeaks, or the U.S. is a free society that upholds values."
He added: "From our perspective — from WikiLeaks' perspective — either of these outcomes works."
Leave a Comment:
Who gives a rats a** what that idiot thinks. Who is he to even speak.
He's the guy who's trying to teach you sheep what it means to do real journalism, instead of spouting whatever bulletin of the day the government gives you.
Except that he doesn't do real journalism, he's simply a mouthpiece for others to funnel stolen information. How's that journalism?
After Manning's butt is shoved into the deepest dark hole we can find, we intend to do the same to Shyt-for-Brains Assange!
Whistle blowers publicize wrongdoing, be it in the workplace or in the govt. We have a whistle blower protection law to encourage whistleblowing. And, yes, whistleblowing has to be documented with work product, otherwise you're simply making a charge against a Goliath.
If Jeffrey Wigand hadn't blown the whistle on his former employers, Brown & Root, we'd still wouldn't believe that cigarettes cause cancer, as cigarette companies swore didn't. Yes, he shared documents that proved these companies knew from the git-go what the medical consequences of smoking were and knew full well that smoking developed addicts. And they chemically manipulated their manufacture of cigarettes to ensure addicts, thus a guaranteed market.
Were it not for wikileaks or people like Ellsberg, we would know nothing about what our govt is doing, especially because the mainstream media, now corporate sponsored, has decided reporting amounts to reading govt press releases.
Nixon would never have been forced from office if he'd had the benefit of today's mainstream media. We would only have learned of his crimes from a wikileaks.
Govt secrecy is the enemy of democracy.
The military has no such whistle blower protection laws. Manning violated the UCMJ and must now man up to it.
Had he went through the proper channels if he thought something bad was happening, he wouldn't be where he is now. All he did was a blanket leak of documents.
There is whistleblowing, which is a good thing, then there is leaking secrets, which is treason because what is revealed to us is also revealed to our enemies. This is the latter. Fortunately, what he gave out has not (yet) resulted in any deaths.
Assange promised an exposing of the banks responsible for our current depression. Now that would be whistleblowing, and much more welcome, even though that MIGHT result in some deaths.
We don't know that it hasn't resulted in deaths of informants, who Assange derided as "collaborators" that deserved to be killed. Unfortunately, unless there is another gullible, misguided a-hole like Manning who wants to leak more classified info, we will probably never know the true cost of Wikileaks.
PBS's Frontline just did a show on this yesterday. Pretty interesting. Manning's problem, whether or not he was a disturbed individual or carried grudges, is that he is held to the higher standard of the military code of justice. He had to swear oaths of allegiance and promise not to do exactly what he did. He's not a civilian and has other requirements associated with his security clearances.
You might try to make a case about the helicopter attack video as being something that "needed to see the light of day". Still wrong in his case, to release this. But I believe where he really crossed the line was the wholesale downloading and release of hundreds of thousands of classified files. He could not possibly have reviewed the content and made a "moral decision" about these "needing to be made public." This is a pretty clear cut example of espionage, regardless of who he gave them to. No moral thought process involved, here's a huge pile of "stuff", see what you can find. Sorry, that's treason.
Catch the Frontline if you can. I think it puts Assange into a different light than he would like to spin it. Particularly his comments about not redacting informant names. He contends they were "collaborators" involved in improper things so they deserve anything that befalls them as an outcome of being revealed. Who is he to make that decision? Personally, he comes off as an arrogant little twerp who thinks he's better than everybody else. His original intentions were to make a whole lot of money off all the information. He has no right to claim a moral high ground.
Manning did it to try and get revenge on the military due to his being gay and the don't ask don't tell policy...that is the sad part - putting his own feelings ahead of his country.
When did an Intelligence Specialist, charged with protecting sensitive information, become a "journalist"?? The Army has journalists and if Manning was interested in the field, he should have selected that MOS. As it is, he had a job, which he failed miserably at, and as a result, his current outlook is very dim.
Private Manning was extensively trained to handle Classified Information, training that included how to report wrongdoing encountered performing his job without releasing sensitive or classified information. He chose to ignore that training, which was a lawful order, and he is in a world of $h*t as a result!!
I hope all your folks that want Manning prosecuted are disappointed in the outcome. Without true patriots like Manning our country doesn't stand a chance. Secrets are the enemy of Democracy.
I do feel sorry for Manning, but it doesn't justify his actions. He released massive quantities of confidential information he was sworn to protect, without even knowing everything that was in it. It just wasn't physically possible to have reviewed and studied all that information before he gave it away.
A whistleblower is someone who reveals wrong doing. That doesn't apply to Manning in the vast majority of what he revealed. When he swore his oath, put on his uniform and gained his security clearance, he agreed to a higher set of standards. He violated those standards.
I'm pretty much an idealist, but I'm realistic enough to be able to see that Assange has an agenda that really isn't all that "morally justified". In fact Assange has attempted to make whistle blowing it's own corporation. But it's a corporation without a board of directors. He's the boss and he makes all the decisions. Where's all that corporate banking dirt he promised months ago? How come we haven't seen that yet? He didn't care too much about people getting killed because of what information he released before, because in his mind, they were "bad guys" anyway. Just maybe he's thinking that what he has said he would reveal, might just put his own life in jeopardy. If he was really about getting "the truth" out, that wouldn't really be a concern.
Assange has an agenda, just like Manning had an agenda and "getting the truth out" is just a cover for that real agenda.
Cool, k then can I have your Name, SSN, date of birth, mother's maiden name, and all the passwords to the online games you play? Just go ahead and post them here so we can get the widest dissemination possible. I'm only asking because it's the right thing to do. Just harmless information right? It's not like it can cause any harm. I'm smart so I've thought about all the possible uses your info can be used for so don't worry, you'll be fine.
Got the hint yet?
Assange deserves nothing less to be treated like Osama Bin Laden, for all those non-thinkers who like to pretend they are all about free speech. If you think Assange is your hero, then you think its okay for me to walk into your house and steal all your money. Better analogy, you think its fine for me to run over your kid if the child is in the middle of the street. Fine with me if you want to admit that.
The last I checked, Manning isn't a journalist. He doesn't work for any news service. He worked for the US government in a position related to national security. Also, the last I checked, Assange isn't much of one either. He hasn't reported any (stolen) "news" that wasn't in someway destructive to everyone involved. As far as I can see, Assange isn't about reporting the news for the sake of news, he about seeing how much he can make off his stolen information, whether it be in monetary reimbursement or infamy. Too bad they both wasted their energies on the negatives. Just think what they could have done if they had worked towards the positives. It wouldn't have taken much to flip their destructive agenda into something constructive, but I really think it's all about the Benjamins.
Bottom line: Manning is a traitor. Assange is guilty of possibly instigating a theft, but definitely guilty of receiving stolen property. Both are crimes. Both are criminals. Both knew the penalties going in. No excuses.
These guys are retarded. Where do they get off thinking that our military personnel have any whistle-blowing protection? That would make for a pretty lame military force. A private, like this douche bag Manning, doesn't like a military action deemed critical to our national interest so he whistle-blows just before or during the operation? LOL! Yeah, that's living in the real world. When are they just going to line up Assange and Manning and put a bullet in their heads. Heck. I'd line em up so you just needed one so as not to waste military resources. They should be thankful they've been allowed to live this long. Wasn't so many years ago and this would have already been old news.
The military operates on a completely different set of laws and expectations. They ARE a completely different world than civilians. The military has STRICT guidelines that are written in the UCMJ. Regulations are almost anal. You must dress a certain way (down to seams matching, exact placement of each and every insignia, order of ribbons, medals, stripes.. etc are detailed by the mm). You are NEVER blindsided by the expectations. There is a good reason for this- The military MUST always be in a position to engage in battle. A disarrayed unit that does 'it's own thing' leads to failure and also results in lives lost. A person that "dances to their own beat" can get their entire unit wiped out.
You give up certain amount of rights when you take the oath, you are told this during the MEPS. You are told this (and proven) during basic training, and even then you are given a few months to decide if you can abide by the rules. If you can't, you can get out of the military- it's not honorable and you don't get the benefits that a Vet deserves but you don't have a negative mark either as you would by being thrown out.
Manning KNEW what was expected of him, he took an OATH, knowing what he could and could not do. Manning knew he did wrong, he was disgruntled and instead of seeking an early out.. he took the method that he did. He was well aware of what would happen to him if he got caught. He's in isolation simply because he's in danger from cellmates who will view him as a traitor. He leaked secrets so he's limited from contact except for a select few (he is being treated as if he may give out more information to a visiting informant). He's a military prisoner- and being held by the military according to their rules. So civilians can't go and visit him just because they want to. He was stripped of clothing because he made a remark (joking or not- the military will not take the chance of him getting out of a court martial- the one right he does have). He chose to live in the World of the Military, he broke military laws, he will be tried by military system, and he will exit by the rules of the military.
Manning is a traitor- not a whistle blower. He didn't see 1 thing wrong and exposed it- it just gave out everything he could get his hands on. He didn't even know what information was in those classified documents... he didn't care if he exposed vulnerabilities that could be used against us in a terrorist attack or used to take the lives of our soldiers, nor did he care enough for this country. He wanted to hurt the military and he didn't care if any of his fellow soldiers got hurt from the information. So therefore he's a traitor. So stop heralding this guy as a hero and taking away any credit those who blow the whistle because they see something wrong and cared enough for this country to alert someone to it.
To be a whistle blower, one of the first criteria is that you have to let your superior know that you have a problem with the way something was handled. To my knowledge, this did not happen. He simply stole Top Secret information and then gave it to another piece of crap whose only intention was to do damage. Their focus is nothing about someone's rights, it is about causing damage to the US Govt.
Let's analyze the arguments of Manning's defenders:
1. He was a whistleblower releasing information on Army wrongdoing. Wrong, the vast majority of what he released had zero to do with Army actions, good or bad, at all. The vast majority was simple intell based on statements from people within our outside the military. Moreover, he didn't even know what he was releasing in nearly all instances, he simply forwarded files with no knlowledge of their contents.
2. He is entitled to protection assigned to journalists. First off, journalist do not have the protections most people assume they do, and that is backed up by a long history of SCOTUS decisions going back to even more liberal courts than we have today. Manning was not a journalist at all, he was a disgruntled soldier with a history of mental illiness.
3. Without exposure the US as a country will fail. Just who the heck decides where exposure stops? The allies were able to read German and Japanese radio intercepts all through WW2 and it saved countless lives and shortened the war. Is it ok for a journalist to expose that because the public has a right to know? How about when journalist exposed the fact we were tracking OBL via his cell phone and he immediately stopped using them? is that ok? Fact, secrets need to be kept as exposing them cost innocent lives. Just because something is secret does not make it need to know news or a sign of government wrongdoing.
4. Nothing that has been exposed has caused harm. That is crud, people have died already in demonstrations caused by the release of the information. Already people who would talk to the US maybe letting us operate more efficiently and safely are less willing to talk and risk exposure. Those are documented facts.
These are just a few of the most obvious rebuttals to those defending Assange, Manning and their ilk. The reality is there are people who hate the USA and will never accept anything done by it is worthwhile or that there are secrets worth having. Many of them exist in our country. Moreover, anyone who think journalists operate solely out of some feeling of the public good and aren't looking for personal professional success is hopelessly naive.
Whe you are in the U.S. Military, you take an oath the support and defend the Constitution, laws and people of the U.S. So called, "free-speech" for military personel, is greatly restricted, even in a case after you have been discharged, you STILL have an obligation, FOR THE REST OF YOU LIFE, to protect and keep confident, sensitive information you may have had access to unless it has been officially declassified by the government. What this weasel did is a massive violation of that oath and should be considered an act of treason. Prosecution to the fullest extent by a "military tribunal" is entirely approapriate. Screw ass-ange and this traitor who has deliberately put our people and interests at risk.
What a bunch of BS. First of all if Manning had gone through the proper channels none of the wrong doing would have ever come out. Second, what had a bigger probability of getting people killed, Mannings leak, in which he is trying to expose the corruption in our government and abroad, or a POS preacher in Florida burning of the Koran, which we know got many people killed? Since after all it was his right to burn it. Reporter or not doesn't matter, he saw wrong doing and he knew what he had to do to get that out and I highly doubt him being gay had anything to do with it, he is a hero to many. No matter what Manning does or any American does, the enemy wants us dead and will use whatever means and excuse necessary to do so. Whether Manning did this or not doesn't matter to the enemy. Roscoe hit it on the nose partially, he took an oath to protect the constitution and the people, so in his eyes he knew he had to protect those things and that's why he exposed these corruptions. Now because of this Patriot Act, we the people willing to give up our freedoms for security in which we will lose both and deserve neither. BF
you're still missing the point. manning swore an oath. an oath, if you have any ethics, morals or values, is something held to the highest standard. a military oath, involving code of conduct and so much more, goes beyond. those that have served in any branch of the military are the elite in what they do. the best at intelligence gathering, the best at fighting and, yes, the best at killing. that is part of being a soldier. as another posting stated above, breaking that oath or a laxed feeling toward that oath gets people killed. people that you depend on to watch your back, while they watch yours.
this isn't a club where, if you don't agree with the bylaws you stopping paying membership dues and leave, this is the military. you are charged with the highest duty that can be bestowed on any one individual, the protection of your country and it's citizens! if manning wanted to be a journalist, there are plenty of liberal arts schools in the country that would have accommodated him. but, that's not what he chose. instead, because he didn't like the view when he got to the top of the hill, he chose to break that oath and his sworn duty.
he deserves whatever punishment the military decides to hand him.
Agreed Sempre. Those that are trying to use our oath as a catch-line obviously never spent time in the service. The only people that think he is hero are those Green card carrying ACLU activists that have never picked up any outside of a flower and a joint.
I find it interesting that not one journalist has come out in support of Mr. Manning or Mr. Assange.
I guess the main stream media has decided that the theft and internet dumping (without any sort of "reporting") of classified state department cables is just not the same as the theft and newspaper article indicating that a report developed by the Pentagon says the military leadership and Whitehouse are lying. As much as he wants to be treated like a "reporter", Mr. Assange just isn't one.
BTW, what journalism school did Assange go to ? Did he even attend a college ? How many years of investigative reporting for major news outlets does he have ?
Although journalism is the business of "major news outlets," it is not restricted to them.
Has Mr. Assange come out to condemn the attach on PBS ?
What a POS. He's not a reporter, he's a narscascistic hack, at best.
Who cares what you think?
So is the paid-troll-talking point for today, "who cares what you think"? You guys should really coordinate better so your talking points aren't so synched, it gets really easy to tell who's a bot.
So here goes.... no one cares what you think. Because you're not.
I consider myself a liberal, and I think Manning should be hanged if convicted. As an American, I do not want a 23 year-old PFC deciding whether or not something should or should not be secret. He is not a hero, and he should not serve as an inspiration to any other renegade "patriots" who violate their oaths to their country and threaten national security for either their own misguided ideology or for their own personal gain. What he did was treason.
Ellsberg is completely wrong about the chilling effect on journalists. To my knowledge, the government isn't pursuing any journalists. It is pursuing the leaker of the confidential information. He is an artifact, trying to relive the glory of his own treason in releasing the Pentagon Papers.
Our government and our military needs more Mannings to keep it honest, instead of letting the military run wild with our supposedly civilian controlled military.
If everyone shared that point of view, there would be no ability to keep anything classified. Why not just save everyone the trouble of having to leak information. We can just post our military's plans for combat operations online so the Taliban knows exactly where they need to be to ambush our troops. The military, of which Mr. Manning was a member, does not operate that way.
The govt leaks classified material all the time--when it's to the political advantage. Bob Woodward's books are full of leaked classified material. He's a journalist. Let's prosecute him, too.
I agree BlueBurner. If he did in fact leak classified information, I would seek prosecution.
Thank you Mr. Ellsberg. I truly enjoyed the Pentagon Papers. What most don't seem to understand is while it only took hours to release via wikileaks it took months to publish your book---The end result was the same.
Nixon----Opened China for us helping to put them in the position of buying our debt apparently he should be thanked for that.----But NOT by me.
manning has in fact NOT been convicted or at this time even brought before a judge----only accused and treated as though guilty.
Hmmm so when the Bush admin leaded the CIA's undercover (leaking classified info), the left was screaming for a lynching. Yet now when a PFC leaks classified info, he's a hero?
Seems like a double standard to me. Or is it ok when it benefits the Democraps or Republican'ts agenda?
I've got a great idea, how about not giving a dam about the crooked politicians and worry about those of us on the front lines. I don't want some rebel 23 yr old kid telling insurgents where my platoon is sleeping tomorrow night.
i see ellsberg is trying to earn a early grave like assange already has. it is just a matter of time for assange to suddenly have an "accident" and i hope it is not long in coming.
Hateful monster
And what then are you. This is not about some creepy rich guys in a country club plotting the annihilation of the extra humans, this our fighting men and women placed in harm's way so Assange can get rich.
And how about when out boys had to purchase their own safety equipment?
Should those facts NOT have been leaked?
Remember in your vehemence Karma means you don't get away with anything---Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. etc
I agree Lexi, but that goes both ways. With the freedom of "do want you want with free information", the "bad guys" also get the information that puts us in harms way. Your argument is just as neutral as mine. The real solution is to pull out and let these animals fight for their own country and kill their own countrymen
I think what a lot of people fail to realize is its not Manning or Assangeputting our troops in harms way. If you take the time to look at whats being leaked you will see that there is a lot of dirty politicians putting our troops in harms way. Since you will never hear the real news from MSM it is people like Assange and Manning forcing them to do so. A good example of this is the conflict between Palestine and Israel. You will never hear on the news or shown for that matter how the Israeli troops abuse their power and kill Palestine children like it's target practice and only show the Palestinians as the enemy. Granted I support Israel but the evil exists on both sides. Israel abuses the western tech that we give them and don't think twice to kill a kid who was just throwing a rock. Don't believe me, look it up. There are plenty of videos out there to show you the atrocities that are happening and it cannot be refuted. We need people like Assange and Manning to keep this government in check.
Given the fact that our mainstream media is driven by only 4 or 5 large corporations, and these are apparently working in direct collusion with our government to sanitize information for the general public, I find it appalling that some people still believe Wikileaks is criminal in their decision to release classified reports that show the true nature of our government's involvement in the ME.
I mean, who do you trust?? CAN you trust the MSM to properly inform you, as a citizen, or to vet our leaders appropriately without prejudice??? Can you???
First of all, I would like an answer as to the exact crime that Manning is being charged with. Second, I would like to know exactly how this leaked information has created a material loss for our government or otherwise negative consequence as a result of his actions, if he was indeed the source of the leaks.
I cannot believe that so many Americans are ready to tar-and-feather Manning without so much as a hint of any real wrongdoing, or even circumstantial evidence, being presented properly to the public sphere. I have not read one single article defining how he was found to be the perpetrator of these leaks. If anyone can provide this, please do!
Lastly, it's sickening that so many of my countrymen are willing to publicly eviscerate Manning, but turn a blind eye to the real crimes brought forth by our own government, including the very officials that were simply embarrassed by these leaks!
A lowly Army enlistee deserves your wrath and condemnation, to the point of lethal intent, but you cannot bring yourselves to even appropriately critique the very reasons we are at war to begin with???
The hypocrisy and moral degeneration that abound in our country will be our downfall. We will wake-up some day in a nation that has forsaken its principles of freedom and justice in the name of security and fearmongering. We will end up slaves to our own begotten demise.
Amen, IndyPatriot! Well said. We should be demanding more information, not trusting our elected officials, who take money from all kinds of industries, to decide what's best for us. It's our govt after all.
Used to be our government. We gave it away out of laziness and ignorance. Our news consists of 'heroes' from 'reality shows' and over-paid sports teams. Our news consists of headlines about what Lohan stole today. We sob over tornado victims for a moment and then want to know what pet Paris has acquired. Our attention has slipped to the vapid and the assinine. The next time any of you don't vote in an election just remember, you threw this counry to the politicians. The next time you unthinkingly vote for the party instead of over-all issues and needs, don't be surprised at what we end up with in D.C.
I'm gonna come hang over here with the intelligent group and watch all the townsfolk with torches and pitchforks throw their fits. Sad to see all the hate...even more sad to see our country going down the drain because of that mentality.
That's the defense, he leaked about a crime? That just doesn't get it. He leaked it all. I have no sympathy for this guy at all, and I am quite liberal about such things. I say expose a crime, we need to be respected by others, and being honest is a good way to be. Someone committed treason. If it was Manning he should pay the price. The administration is prosecuting treason, and that is what they should do.
Ellsberg may be a bit too in love with himself. This is a whole different matter than when he was in flower.
Attention whore's, the both of them. These kind of people, go "missing".
Manning is active duty military. We all know what that means and so did he. He betrayed his country now he needs to face the punishment.
Assange makes a living stealing private information and selling it. He's a super creep.
Assange makes his living publishing information other people give him anonymously. Assange publishes material Amerika, Inc. won't. Assange is a bona fide member of the fourth estate and is working to protect the liberties you have already surrendered when you chose to live comfortably in fear and ignorance.
CitizenNine are you freaking nuts? He betrayed his country? How about he exposed government murderers!! A TRUE patriot does what he did, you can go to hell and play with hitler! you're the creep!
whatever!-1089708
DIP TARD
Assange and Manning are hero's to the innocent who cannot protect themselves and its not them putting our troops in harms way its the dirty politicians putting our troops in harms way. That's why it was leaked, because he saw how our politicians who are supposed to protect us are doing the opposite for their own political interests. Big Oil, big government and big corporations control this war and we're here for the sacrafice.
Private Manning has betrayed the US Army, his unit, and our country, for that he needs to be punished as prescribed in the USCMJ. As a military officer, I find his actions to be reprehensible. Having said that, I feel that any information, once obtained by a journalist who is NOT part of the uniformed services can be published. That's what our first amendment is about. There are two completely different issues at play here. One dealing with our constitution, which should be protected, and the other dealing with a traitor who should spend the rest of his life in prison.
George - I agree mostly, except that for some reason I feel this kid was lacking in common sense and maybe should not be given such a stiff sentence. I feel he learned his lesson and would never be so naieve again. Or maybe I am the naieve one I don't know.
No - just because he was lacking in common sense doesn't excuse what he did. Naivete is not a defense to treason, and there is no such thing as a "second chance" once a crime has been committed. I completely agree with George - the crime here was committed by Manning (at least allegedly), not the reporters who reported it. They are protected by the First Amendment. Manning is not.
Gary, under normal circumstances, I would feel the same way. The fact that Pvt. Manning is enlisted in the Army makes a difference to me. Had he been a civilian and hacked into the government system, I'd say give him a lesser punishment. This case is different. He was specifically trusted by the government and by the Army. I assume he also held top secret clearance. He betrayed his oath, the Army and the US. Back in the day he would have faced the death penalty, so a life sentence is in fact a lesser punishment. I agree with "why do I need a name", that lack of common sense is no excuse for his actions. If he is found guilty of all charges, appropriate punishment must be enforced. It will also serve as an example to other members of the military.
O.K. I'm with you on this one.
You all suck, what about our government being a traitor? He exposed murderous crimes by our military, he's no criminal you idiots.
I am not sure what government you are refering to, but my government has never betrayed me, and I am very proud to serve in the US Army. It is one of the most noble institutions in the world. There are plenty of governments out there that betray their own people. US is not one of them. As far as your comment goes about crimes by our military, I am not sure what crimes you are referring to. We are a nation at war. Death is an expected part of it. Nobody forced this young man to join the army. Just like the rest of us, he did so voluntarily. If he had an issue with certain things, as a soldier he is to report it to his superior. Providing this information to Assange (if he really did that), hardly qualifies as following a chain of command. Military is not a regular employer. Everyone in uniform understands (or at least should understand) that. If the allegations are true, this soldier committed a serious crime for which a just punishment should be given.
Oh, pish, posh, PIFFLE! Your government has betrayed you roundly, repeatedly.
George, your comments have been very well put and I couldn't agree with you more. Although I wish to add something. PFC Manning's actions could be justifiable and eligible for pardon if he found himself in "extraordinary circumstances" and it could be shown that he acted in "true faith and allegiance" to his Oath of Enlistment, the Government, and the Constitution of the United States.
All evidence suggests that PFC Manning faced no extraordinary situation and very likely acted out of emotional distresses caused by relationship problems in his private life. One of the things I do find rather odd is why prior acts of misconduct, including something severe enough to warrant a reduction in grade, didn't result in him losing his TS or TSBI clearance?
Steve if Manning is guilty or if Assage is guilty and they "go missing" then are the ones that make them "go missing" not guilty of a crime..Your thinking does not work for me..
G White - It is flawed thinking.
The problem is it's not thinking.
The US does not need to disappear them. They have Manning in custody. He is going to be tried before a military tribunal under the UCMJ, not a civilian jury. Assange is an arrogant enough a-hole that he will sabotage himself and become irrelevant, or else the Swedes will convict him of rape and he will be out of the spotlight for a few years. No need to turn either of them into a martyr. Did anyone else see that Frontline special on this story last night? Assange came off as a coward and an egomaniac.
Why hasn't the ACLU stepped up for Manning? They step up for the KKK but not him? I used to contribute to them but their complete lack of involvement in this case is appalling. Hey Feisty Redhead- No comment when a man is held in solitary confinement, striped naked at night and only allowed one hour of daylight in a 24 hour period. Sounds like torture to me. He has not been convicted !!!!
"The bigger danger, Ellsberg contended, is that if Manning is convicted, the government would be emboldened to further pursue journalists for reporting leaked material. He and Assange pointed to U.S. prosecutors' decision this week to subpoena Times reporter James Risen to testify at the trial of former CIA operative Jeffrey Sterling"
....this seems to be the real problem about this issue that Assange and Ellsberg are trying to address. I'm not sure Manning did or did not do the right thing because I'd need to know more details....but, I do believe that we need to be careful how our government handles these issues. There is way too much abuse of power when our freedom of speech/press is muzzled by fear and intimidation. This sends a very chilling message to journalists!
A military person, entrusted to safeguard national security related information can't simply decide to give it away.
This has nothing to do with journalism and simply is common sense.
We can't condone betrayal, violation of law, and disobedience of direct orders by military personnel under the protection offered by first ammendment rights.
There is a common sense problem alright.
This has nothing to do with journalists. Manning isn't a journalist, neither is Assange. Taking information that was stolen and simply posting it online isn't journalism, in fact, most journalists should be sticking up for themselves. I'd be pissed if my hard work and effort was equated to the half-assed work of Assange.
Manning, however, is an active military personnel, and is subject to the UCMJ. If you have a problem with that, don't enlist. But, don't try to sit there and tie this issue to journalists.
Citizen Nine - you are just wrong. With your attitude then anything could be justified. Good men have to speak out when bad men are in charge and illegal things are happening. If you were in charge that would be illegal too.
MSNBC is an assualt on journalism but you don't hear Assange whining about that.
Hey, I have a great idea! If Seal Team 6 has had enough R&R after the stunning job they did wacking out the world's #1 Muslim wacko nutbag animal, let them gear up again & have some easy fun putting those pukes Assangehole & Ellsberg out of everybody's misery too!!! Just a thought.......
I'd have a lot easier time buying into the attempts to depict Manning, Assange, et al, as doing something noble and necessary if they'd been even remotely selective in their releasing of information. If they'd stuck to that which constituted evidence of governmental wrongdoing. But they didn't do that. The simply infodumped everything they had, including many things that in no way government wrongdoing but were better left classified.
I agree DK - this was an information dump for the sake of showing they could do it. Much of the information initially released was embarassing rather than meaningful and results in people being less open about their opinions and observations. If Manning and Assange felt the information had to be released despite its classified status, then the flip side of civil disobedience is being willing to accept the consequences.
Hey everyone, Manning didn't have top-secret clearance to anything, it was there for him to expose like a Juicy steak on the counter...waiting for someone to take a bite!
As a Intelligence Analyst he did have a Top Secret Clearance, which he abused.
WHISTEL BLOWERS ARE AWSOME, they keep all scum bags, cheats, thief, etc. out of business, there ought to be more like this to guys, they are our real heroes, not the SEALS TEAM that murder an unarmed man and shot a woman as they were giving up. BRTCARGUY, DUMB AS---HLE
miguel perez-2015711
Dip Tard
Is it possible that one low-ranking soldier had access to all that info? Sounds questionable to me.
Americans do have the right to know if their government is doing something illegal, immoral....
However, war is like making sausage, and some folks don't want to know what it involves.
I think a lot of people that have a negative opinion of Manning are of the opinion that the release of information was a betrayal of his fellow servicemen and his country. From what I've read, he attempted to make his superior officers aware of the criminal behavior that was revealed in the information but nothing was done. The Oath of Enlistment that Manning took upon entering the military follows:
I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.
Note that the first part is a promise to defend the Constitution. It is followed by a promise to obey orders by the President and his superiors. The first and foremost obligation is one of true faith and allegiance to the Constitution. The Constitution is a piece of paper. Obviously, the Constitution as used here symbolizes the People and their ratified Constitutional law. The Oath is an oath to protect the People, the owner's of the United States, and final authority over all, including the Federal Government and the military, both of which were created by the People for the People's benefit.
The Oath SPECIFICALLY mandates TRUE FAITH AND ALLEGIANCE. That means simply citing the words isn't enough. By taking the Oath, you are promising REAL LOYALTY, not CONVENIENT LOYALTY. You are promising to live up to a standard of devotion to one's fellow countrymen that would be considered heroic by most. Heroes do the right thing even when personal safety and their own best interest might be injured in the process. Their behavior is exemplary and directed towards their primary objective of fulfilling their duty, AS PRIORITIZED IN THE OATH. Manning did EXACTLY that by INFORMING U.S. CITIZENS of wrongdoing by military personnel in their employment. If Manning had divulged the fraudulent information put forth to justify the Iraq War, hundreds of thousands of people would be alive today that needlessly died, including thousands of U.S. soldiers. Would he have been a traitor then? I think so in the eyes of those perpetrating the fraud. To the rest of us, I think not.
If Manning, as many likely do, believed that a fraudulently contrived war manufactured for profit by the country's leader(s) was the de facto equivalent of treason by jeopardizing the reputation of the country within the global community, putting military personnel in harm's way for an evil purpose, and putting civilians at risk of further attack from enemy sympathizers, then it's not at all difficult to believe that he also felt that exposing criminal wrongdoing would mitigate the damage done by the fraudulent engagement if it resulted in a more rapid end to the engagement. Because he had no avenue to make the People aware of what their military was doing improperly, he had to make a decision as to whether to uphold his Oath that PRIORITIZES HIS LOYALTY TO THE CONSTITUTION OVER ANY OTHER MANDATE, or remain silent. I think the chose the most risky, and the most ethical option available to him. Had he ambitions of notoriety, he would have made the information available directly. Because he did not, it suggests that he prioritized the release of the truth over personal safety. Circumstantial evidence strongly suggests that the release was done with a strong regard for the safety of those innocents that might be put at risk as a result of the release along with the possible damage to national security. Had his superiors been willing to accept responsibility for the activity divulged and attempted to make it right to the innocent victims and their families, none of this would have been made public in the first place. U.S. Citizens don't want their military avoiding responsibility for mistakes and wrongdoing. If we're that kind of People, why bother with the pretense of justifying any war. Why not just invade and conquer for the material rewards.
There are some who think him a ratfink! They think he wimped out or weaseled out by ratting on his fellow servicemen. Some of those servicemen should probably thank him for saving their lives as his actions will likely slow down the next elected warmonger who thinks nothing of committing our soldiers to death for no honorable reason and for his own personal interest. I think those who believe Manning to be a ratfink should look in the mirror. After all, who are those that feel the most betrayed by a snitch. Isn't it usually the criminals they're snitching on?
Manning fulfilled his Oath in true faith and allegiance and is being unlawfully tortured by those who should have divulged and made right the wrongs from the outset rather than criminally engaging in a coverup.
U.S. Citizen-3526674
Utter Bull@!$%#!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Milo-2
You know why bulls are so pissed off at Rodeos and bull fights?
@ed would...After taking that oath, and before being granted access to classified information, PFC Manning signed THIS document.........
Standard Form 312
CLASSIFIED INFORMATlON
NONDISCLOSURE AGREEMENT
(SF 312; Rev. 1-00)
AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN (Name of Individual) AND THE UNITED STATES
1. Intending to be legally bound, I hereby accept the obligations contained
in this Agreement in consideration of my being granted access to classified
information. As used in this Agreement, classified information is marked or
unmarked classified information, including oral communications, that is
classified under the standards of Executive Order 12958, or under any other
Executive order or statute that prohibits the unauthorized disclosure of
information in the interest of national security; and unclassified information
that meets the standards for classification and is in the process of a
classification determination as provided in Sections 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4(e) of
Executive Order 12958, or under any other Executive Order or statute that
requires protection for such information in the interest of national security. I
understand and accept that by being granted access to classified information,
special confidence and trust shall be placed in me by the United States
Government.
2. I hereby acknowledge that I have received a security indoctrination
concerning the nature and protection of classified information, including the
procedures to be followed in ascertaining whether other persons to whom I
contemplate disclosing this information have been approved for access to it, and
that I understand these procedures.
3. I have been advised that the unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized
retention, or negligent handling of classified information by me could cause
damage or irreparable injury to the United States or could be used to advantage
by a foreign nation. I hereby agree that I will never divulge classified
information to anyone unless: (a) I have officially verified that the recipient
has been properly authorized by the United States Government to receive it: or
(b) I have been given prior written notice of authorization from the United
States Government Department or Agency (hereinafter Department or Agency)
responsible for the classification of the information or last granting me a
security clearance that such disclosure is permitted. I understand that if I am
uncertain about the classification status of information I am required to
confirm from an authorized official that the information is unclassified before
I may disclose it, except to a person as provided in (a) or (b) above. I further
understand that I am obligated to comply with laws and regulations that prohibit
the unauthorized disclosure of classified information.
4. I have been advised that any breach of this Agreement may result in the
termination of any security clearances I hold; removal from any position of
special confidence and trust requiring such clearances; or the termination of my
employment or other relationships with the Departments or Agencies that granted
my security clearance or clearances. In addition, I have been advised that any
unauthorized disclosure of classified information by me may constitute a
violation, or violations, of United States criminal laws, including the
provisions of Sections 641, 793, 794, 798, 952, and 1924, Title 18, United
States Code, the provisions of Section 783(b), Title 50, United States Code, and
the provisions of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982. I
recognize that nothing in this Agreement constitutes a waiver by the United
States of the right to prosecute me for any statutory violation.
5. I hereby assign to the United States Government all royalties,
remunerations, and emoluments that have resulted, will result or may result from
any disclosure, publication, or revelation of classified information not
consistent with the terms of this Agreement.
6. I understand that the United States Government may seek any remedy
available to it to enforce this Agreement including, but not limited to,
application for a court order prohibiting disclosure of information in breach of
this Agreement.
7. I understand that all classified information to which I have access or may
obtain access by signing this Agreement is now and will remain the property of,
or under the control of the United States Government unless and until otherwise
determined by an authorized official or final ruling of a court of law. I agree
that I shall return all classified materials which have, or may come into my
possession or for which I am responsible because of such access: (a) upon demand
by an authorized representative of the United States Government; (b) upon the
conclusion of my employment or other relationship with the Department or Agency
that last granted me a security clearance or that provided me access to
classified information; or (c) upon the conclusion of my employment or other
relationship that requires access to classified information. If I do not return
such materials upon request, I understand that this may be a violation of
Section 793, Title 18, United States Code, a United States criminal law.
8. Unless and until I am released in writing by an authorized representative
of the United States Government, I understand that all conditions and
obligations imposed upon me by this Agreement apply during the time I am granted
access to classified information, and at all times thereafter.
9. Each provision of this Agreement is severable. If a court should find any
provision of this Agreement to be unenforceable, all other provisions of this
Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
10. These restrictions are consistent with and do not supersede, conflict
with or otherwise alter the employee obligations, rights or liabilities created
by Executive Order 12958; section 7211 of Title 5, United States Code (governing
disclosures to Congress); section 1034 of Title 10,United States Code, as
amended by the Military Whistleblower Protection Act (governing disclosure to
Congress by members of the military); section 2302(b)(8) of Title 5, United
States Code, as amended by the Whistleblower Protection Act (governing
disclosures of illegality, waste, fraud, abuse or public health or safety
threats); the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982 (50 U.S.C. 421 et
seq.) (governing disclosures that could expose confidential Government agents),
and the statutes which protect against disclosure that may compromise the
national security, including Sections 641, 793, 794, 798, 952, and 1924 of Title
18, United States Code, and Section 4(b) of the Subversive Activities Act of
1950 (50 U.S.C. Section 783(b)). The definitions, requirements, obligations,
rights, sanctions and liabilities created by said Executive Order and listed
statutes are incorporated into this Agreement and are controlling.
11. I have read this Agreement carefully and my questions, if any, have been
answered. I acknowledge that the briefing officer has made available to me the
Executive Order and statutes referenced in this Agreement and its implementing
regulation (32 CFR Section 2003.20) so that I may read them at this time, if I
so choose.
Signature
Date
Social Security Number
Organiza
@ed would...After taking that oath, and before being granted access to classified information, PFC Manning signed THIS document.........
Standard Form 312
CLASSIFIED INFORMATlON
NONDISCLOSURE AGREEMENT
(SF 312; Rev. 1-00)
AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN (Name of Individual) AND THE UNITED STATES
1. Intending to be legally bound, I hereby accept the obligations contained
in this Agreement in consideration of my being granted access to classified
information. As used in this Agreement, classified information is marked or
unmarked classified information, including oral communications, that is
classified under the standards of Executive Order 12958, or under any other
Executive order or statute that prohibits the unauthorized disclosure of
information in the interest of national security; and unclassified information
that meets the standards for classification and is in the process of a
classification determination as provided in Sections 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4(e) of
Executive Order 12958, or under any other Executive Order or statute that
requires protection for such information in the interest of national security. I
understand and accept that by being granted access to classified information,
special confidence and trust shall be placed in me by the United States
Government.
2. I hereby acknowledge that I have received a security indoctrination
concerning the nature and protection of classified information, including the
procedures to be followed in ascertaining whether other persons to whom I
contemplate disclosing this information have been approved for access to it, and
that I understand these procedures.
3. I have been advised that the unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized
retention, or negligent handling of classified information by me could cause
damage or irreparable injury to the United States or could be used to advantage
by a foreign nation. I hereby agree that I will never divulge classified
information to anyone unless: (a) I have officially verified that the recipient
has been properly authorized by the United States Government to receive it: or
(b) I have been given prior written notice of authorization from the United
States Government Department or Agency (hereinafter Department or Agency)
responsible for the classification of the information or last granting me a
security clearance that such disclosure is permitted. I understand that if I am
uncertain about the classification status of information I am required to
confirm from an authorized official that the information is unclassified before
I may disclose it, except to a person as provided in (a) or (b) above. I further
understand that I am obligated to comply with laws and regulations that prohibit
the unauthorized disclosure of classified information.
4. I have been advised that any breach of this Agreement may result in the
termination of any security clearances I hold; removal from any position of
special confidence and trust requiring such clearances; or the termination of my
employment or other relationships with the Departments or Agencies that granted
my security clearance or clearances. In addition, I have been advised that any
unauthorized disclosure of classified information by me may constitute a
violation, or violations, of United States criminal laws, including the
provisions of Sections 641, 793, 794, 798, 952, and 1924, Title 18, United
States Code, the provisions of Section 783(b), Title 50, United States Code, and
the provisions of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982. I
recognize that nothing in this Agreement constitutes a waiver by the United
States of the right to prosecute me for any statutory violation.
5. I hereby assign to the United States Government all royalties,
remunerations, and emoluments that have resulted, will result or may result from
any disclosure, publication, or revelation of classified information not
consistent with the terms of this Agreement.
6. I understand that the United States Government may seek any remedy
available to it to enforce this Agreement including, but not limited to,
application for a court order prohibiting disclosure of information in breach of
this Agreement.
7. I understand that all classified information to which I have access or may
obtain access by signing this Agreement is now and will remain the property of,
or under the control of the United States Government unless and until otherwise
determined by an authorized official or final ruling of a court of law. I agree
that I shall return all classified materials which have, or may come into my
possession or for which I am responsible because of such access: (a) upon demand
by an authorized representative of the United States Government; (b) upon the
conclusion of my employment or other relationship with the Department or Agency
that last granted me a security clearance or that provided me access to
classified information; or (c) upon the conclusion of my employment or other
relationship that requires access to classified information. If I do not return
such materials upon request, I understand that this may be a violation of
Section 793, Title 18, United States Code, a United States criminal law.
8. Unless and until I am released in writing by an authorized representative
of the United States Government, I understand that all conditions and
obligations imposed upon me by this Agreement apply during the time I am granted
access to classified information, and at all times thereafter.
9. Each provision of this Agreement is severable. If a court should find any
provision of this Agreement to be unenforceable, all other provisions of this
Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
10. These restrictions are consistent with and do not supersede, conflict
with or otherwise alter the employee obligations, rights or liabilities created
by Executive Order 12958; section 7211 of Title 5, United States Code (governing
disclosures to Congress); section 1034 of Title 10,United States Code, as
amended by the Military Whistleblower Protection Act (governing disclosure to
Congress by members of the military); section 2302(b)(8) of Title 5, United
States Code, as amended by the Whistleblower Protection Act (governing
disclosures of illegality, waste, fraud, abuse or public health or safety
threats); the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982 (50 U.S.C. 421 et
seq.) (governing disclosures that could expose confidential Government agents),
and the statutes which protect against disclosure that may compromise the
national security, including Sections 641, 793, 794, 798, 952, and 1924 of Title
18, United States Code, and Section 4(b) of the Subversive Activities Act of
1950 (50 U.S.C. Section 783(b)). The definitions, requirements, obligations,
rights, sanctions and liabilities created by said Executive Order and listed
statutes are incorporated into this Agreement and are controlling.
11. I have read this Agreement carefully and my questions, if any, have been
answered. I acknowledge that the briefing officer has made available to me the
Executive Order and statutes referenced in this Agreement and its implementing
regulation (32 CFR Section 2003.20) so that I may read them at this time, if I
so choose.
Signature
Date
Social Security Number
Organization
.....Doesn't leave much room for debate, does it?
Governments (their officials, actually) have always been the greatest of criminals since the invention of official secrecy. Exposure is their only weakness and fear their only weapon. The horrors of the Kennedy war in Vietnam, the Bush war in Iraq, and the Obama war in Afghanistan make pipsqueaks like Saddam or nutters like Osama green with envy. Still, Saddam kept the Sunnis, Kurds, and Shiites from killing each other; his grave is becomming a shrine. Osama gave many fatwa warnings that if the U.S.A. kept financing the torture chambers of the Mubaraks and the holocausting of Palestineans, there would be retalliation. Osama, for his crimes, was never accused of lying, only mass murder. War without cause or whose only cause is the taking of lands and resources of others is the fundamental crime of the human race. All else is just a pale imitation. Exposure is only the first step to redemption. The second step, restitution, is rarely if ever taken.
As a young Marine I was taught by our comanding officers that we were to do the right thing no matter what the orders were, and that if we did the wrong thing, orders would not be a valid defense.
@T-Wan "Still, Saddam kept the Sunnis, Kurds, and Shiites from killing each other;.."
He kept them from killing each other by killing them himself. I was there, I witnessed it! (Iraqi Kurdistan, April-July 1991)
I was no great supporter of the second Iraq war, but the world is a much better place without him.
@Chad,
In addition to him signing the SF 312, in order for his Top Secret clearance to be valid, he has to read the first paragraph out loud to the two people that sign the 312. That does not even cover if he was read on to other programs as well.
he accuse U.S. journalists of wimping out. he does this from the mansion where he is hiding out rather than facing rape charges, while American journalist are killed in Libya. who is the wimp you scum bag
Failure to prosecute Daniel Ellsberg to the fullest for his treasonous actions was one of the gravest mistakes this country ever made! Hopefully we will not make the same mistake a second time; I would like nothing better than to see young Bradley brought before a firing squad.
If you were laying in the mud in Phuoc Long you wouldn't have thought Ellsberg was guilty of treason.
I guess it is all according to your perspective at the time.
" classified information" is there to keep the sheeple in the dark. Manning if he is the culprit never leaked anything that was harmful to the so called "national security". in fact the so called national security they refer to is nothing more than THE POLITICIANS OWN SECURITY.
The next thing I want to read about Assange is his obituary.
So what ever happened to a government OF the people, BY the people and FOR the people? Governments like corporations are ran by people and people are all corruptible. I want to know what my government is up to.
There has never been a Government that has never been completely open and honest. They have always had secrets and they will always keep secrets from it's citizens.
All you nice people who want this child murdered-nice of you, can't even wait until he is found guilty. Very American of you-you shame this country! Perhaps the Republicans who wish to destroy The American People should also go on trial-they are far more evil Traitors to The People than this poor kid ever could be, and yet you aholes vote for them-could you be any more stupid? Wait until they take your Medicare away and then your Social Security-that's next you know, but you'll keep voting for them because of their FAKE patriotism, rah rah, flag flag, FAKE FAKE-Judge these people by their actions and stop being retarded and deluded by fake patriots who only wish to rob you blind even more than they already do. Unless of course you won't mind living on the streets or being a slave in you 'retirement' years, huh?!! Idiots!
That's not going to be there fate Johnny. There part of the 'in' crowd. They know better and are better than every one else.