Whatever crime he may have committed, it wasn't treason, which under Article III of the Constitution "shall consist only in levying war against them [the United States] or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort." Manning's actions were no more treasonous than speaking out against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Give the poor sap a dishonorable discharge and let him go.

misterbeal

Whatever crime he may have committed, it wasn't treason, which under Article III of the Constitution "shall consist only in levying war against them [the United States] or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort."

---------------------------------------------------

by definition, he gave material aid when he publicly released the info... and a member of the Armed Forces has an entirely different set of rules in addition to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.... they effectively don't get the Bill of Rights

.... so, it was most definitely Treason during time of war and punishable by death, although death is unlikely to happen now that he's dealing

-----------------------------------------------

Sueb1

Totally agree.... when we serve in the Armed Forces, we've got an obligation to follow orders, live up to our security clearances, and everything else that goes with it....

There is literally no excuse for what he did.... he definitely knew what he was doing, definitely knew that it carried the death penalty, and did it anyway....

A lot of people counted on that security, some may have died, even if they didn't.... it clearly was a treasonous act.

We have a few commentators here who have absolutely no knowledge of the case -- in fact, they go directly to the comments section WITHOUT reading the article (or doing any other research) and post their drivel.

Bradley Manning is an undersized, sickly individual with a personality disorder who somehow got past the Army's screening process. They shouldn't have allowed him to him enlist in the first place.

His actions were stupid and contrary to his orders, but they do not amount to treason. No one's life or limb was put in danger; rather some higher-ups' misconduct was publicized, resulting in their embarrassment.

Manning should receive an Other Than Honorable discharge and be allowed to get on with his miserable life.

And you know for certain that no one was killed because of what he gave away???

mostly because it was dated information and NOTHING was of any current intelligence value.

Invisible how do you know at the time of his enlistment that he had a personality disorder?

If I recall correctly, one of the justifications given for invading Iraq was that it would spark a wave of democracy that would sweep the Middle East. Instead, it gave further impetus to the efforts of jihadists to impose intolerant theocratic regimes throughout the region. I have read that State Department cables detailing government corruption in Tunisia, released by Manning and published on Wiki-Leaks, had a significant role in the uprising there, which in turn sparked demands for democracy in other Arab countries, i.e the Arab Spring. It is interesting to see the government prosecuting Manning for actions which lead to a result it claimed as an oblective but was unable to acheive by military means.

Under the military law he does not have the options of picking and choosing what orders to follow even unlawful ones

all service members know that he decided to divulge confidential info now whining because he has to pay the price he knew what the job required many service members disagree with orders they file the complaint using proper channels.do feel sorry for him one bit

@Invisible Hand

As I have not read all of the cables which he released, and I'll surmise you haven't either, you cannot make a blanket statement as to whether or not any person was put in danger of harm or death.

However, whether he was or is "sickly" is immaterial. He intentionally divulged classified information. PERIOD.

He should be dishonorably discharged, and spend the rest of his life contemplating his actions in Leavenworth Prison. If it can be proved that the release of that information did in fact cause another to lose their life, he should forfeit his own courtesy of a Military firing squad.

Punish the whistle blower. Everybody else take it easy.

Shootem, We'll see how many try it again!

Doesn't anybody else recognize a problem when the military claims superiority and more importance than its own country? What is this that we have, a military controlled government or a Republic where the Constitution of the United States takes precedence above all else?

i wonder if the same people posting that he should be killed or imprisoned for life, for disobeying orders and posting some outdated papers which did nothing but make our government and higher ups look foolish, are the same people that expect our soldiers to disobey orders and kill their commanders during their fantasy revolution fer der guns?!

@ Invisible Hand:

Please tell us how many souls were lost in the Iraq war? Now give us your detailed analysis on why none of these losses did not occur due to this "slug's" security give away. As someone stated above, even if no one died as a result of his actions, the punishment for giving away States' secrets is life imprisonment (if not death).

@someotherguy: The government does not work for Manning; he works for the government. He was not commissioned to make foreign policy, or carry it out. The one job that he was signed on to do (protecting state secrets) he failed miserably and in a criminal manner. So, when you do criminal things you should expect to be prosecuted under the code of criminal law.

No tears need be expended for this traitor. Be careful or you may give some of us to reason that some have invisible minds.

Invisible Hand

It doesn't matter if it can be proved someone was killed...

It doesn't matter what he looks like..

He released HUGE amounts of secret data that included data about our wars in Afghanistan and Iraq... it included the real names of interpreters and all kinds of other info...... by releasing that info to literally everyone in the world, he enabled it to aid enemies of ours in wartime.... he broke about a hundred orders and he gave aid to the enemy.... the actual definition of treason.

There isn't a pass for this... in military terms it's huge...

and you know what? Assange and Wikileaks don't give a fxck about Manning.... they knew that if they convinced him to divulge that info, they would get shot to the center stage of the world for convincing a US service member to commit obvious treason.... they didn't care what happened to Manning after the moment he handed the info over.... they got what they wanted...

and Manning is likely going to jail for at least 40 years if not life.... and rightfully so.

I think he should serve at least 10 years, with another 10 restricted probation. What he did was not up to him to decide. A civilian may seek to be a whistle-blower, but the last person that can/should be able to "determine that for his/her self" is someone that is granted access to that kind of information on a top secret basis. I dont think he should get a life sentence.

Bradley Manning gave material support to our enemies. The briefs he released exposed specific military doctrine utilized by our armed forces. This placed our brothers and sisters at risk in the battlefield.

Was it treason? Probably not. We have to look at the motivations behind his actions. Was it his intent to give aid and comfort to the enemy? Was it his intent to support a war declared against the United States? Both answers are probably a "No." To prove treason, there needs to be two independent witnesses to the act or a courtroom confession by the defendant.

He can be charged for sedition, which also carries the death penalty. But even that requires proof that he acted with the intent to harm the United States or aid the enemy with his actions.

@misterbeal: PFC Manning did a good deal more than simply speak out. He released classified material. I agree that it probably wasn't treason. At minimum, he has violated several articles of the UCMJ. (I have not seen the list of charges.) I foresee a very long prison sentence in his future.

@oldhamletman/others: We don't need to be in a 'Declared War' to have a traitor. Also, every US citizen is afforded protections under the Constitution of the United States, which includes the bill of rights and all of the amendments. Military personnel are additionally subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), which can sometimes feel like our other rights are abridged. In fact, they are not. This is why PFC Manning is at trial and not already doing time. (or dead) Our Presidents (current and past) are in a little bit of hot water over ordering drone attacks on U.S. citizens in other countries.

@bt1: Military personnel DO have the option (and obligation) to disobey what they feel is an unlawful order. It has happened many times. Military personnel who knowingly carry out an unlawful order can be charged with a crime in the court of law. Manning wasn't following any orders (lawful or unlawful) when he released the information, so this argument does not apply. Nor does the argument hold that he was purposely disobeying an unlawful order by not maintaining security around classified information. He does not get to choose policy for the U.S. Government or the Military. He lacks the 'expertise' to make that determination.

Some people say he did no damage. What about contractors and interpreters who were captured and even killed? Do their lives mean nothing? I say Bradley Manning was a traitor of the highest order and deserves nothing more than a firing squad.

Just an opinion.

which under Article III of the Constitution

Manning is subject to the UCMJ.

906a. ARTICLE 106a. ESPIONAGE

by admin on Jul.21, 2010, under 10. Punitive Articles

(a) (1) Any person subject to this chapter who, with intent or reason to believe that it is to be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of a foreign nation, communicates, delivers, or transmits, or attempts to communicate, deliver, or transmit, to any entity described in paragraph (2), either directly or indirectly, any thing described in paragraph (3) shall be punished as a court-martial may direct, except that if the accused is found guilty of an offense that directly concerns (A) nuclear weaponry, military spacecraft or satellites, early warning systems, or other means of defense or retaliation against large scale attack, (B) war plans, (C) communications intelligence or cryptographic information, or (D) any other major weapons system or major element of defense strategy, the accused shall be punished by death or such other punishment as a court- martial may direct.

@Debi-1314897

Doesn't anybody else recognize a problem when the military claims superiority and more importance than its own country? What is this that we have, a military controlled government or a Republic where the Constitution of the United States takes precedence above all else?

The CLASSIFIED cables he provided to WikiLeaks "Julian Assange", were predominantly State Department cables. He is being tried by the military as he ILLEGALLY downloaded those cables from CLASSIFIED government computer systems.

This really isn't rocket science. He was granted a security clearance. When he accepted that security clearance, he was provided with numerous documents to sign indicating the responsibilities he was assuming with that clearance, and that responsibility in fact lasts a lifetime. He was also made aware of the penalties for violating that agreement and disclosing classified information. HE chose to ignore that oath and violate the trust placed in him.

And before you ask... I DO know what he signed because I have signed those documents myself, and then some.

So which of you "informed" individuals read the hundreds of thousands of papers he leaked? Until then keep your idiotic comments about doing no harm where they belong. Where your heads are, up....well you get the picture. Hang the little prick or better yet, let Bubba perform rectal exams on him for the rest of his life as he deserves.

Why because you are the expert??? Kiss my azz. Most of us have to work for a living, can't just live in our mothers basement. He broke the law and he broke the code, there are repurcussions, meaning he will probably spend a large part of his life in prison. Can't do the time then don't do the crime. As for higher moral reasons, great men did the time, Mandela, Ghandi, King etc. etc.

Bt1 - unless the UCMJ has changed recently a servicemember is not required to follow unlawful orders.

Interesting response by the majority on this thread: don't matter the higher goals Manning may have had in mind - he broke the military code/law, therefore he's guilty.

The law that he broke is the most sensitive one of all - he spilled the beans. He exposed classified information - and that is treason. Who the hell care what information that was, any way - he SPILLED THE BEANS.

Let's see: on one hand you have a soldier violating his oath/law of conduct etc

On the other hand you have evidence of some egregious deeds, events, actions, developments etc taken by our own government in our name, many of them are illegal, many of them are semi-legal, many of them are simply bizarre.

The majority on this thread choose to punish the lone law-breaker - higher motives notwithstanding.

So, I have a question for you, Dear Majority: why is that? Why do you focus on the little man's misdeeds, and not the BIG GOV't misdeeds? Why are you so upset that the little man open the secrecy curtain and showed you how awful our own beloved government can be? Are you upset by what you see behind that curtain? Are you shooting the messenger?

And pls, save the digital matter and spare me the lecture me on how he "betrayed" others, and undermined our national security, and put our "brave men and women in danger".

You know of none who were put in danger buy WikiLeaks; you don't want to see the ugliness our government does in the name of our "national security", you prefer to not know the ugly, bloody, disturbing stuff that goes on in your name. We get it. The best way to achieve this is to not read any news at all, just go hide in your home/church/community/your own world.

And hope this never happens to you, or your child, or your brother, or his child. Yes, go do the greatest evil that only the good men can do - do nothing.

Live this bloody, nasty, disturbing developments to others who have the cajones to stomach it, and do something about it. Even if it lands them all in a solitary confinement, aka Bradley Manning

Peace, y'all

ANV

Not only may he be subject to article 106a, but also quite possibly articles 98; non compliance with procedural rules. 108;loss, damage, destruction or wrongful disposition of military property. and the ever popular article 134 which covers anything not covered by the other 133. Whatever the cout decides is what they decide. He's still a wimpy little jerk that violated more than one article of the UCMJ. And that's that.

"spark a domestic debate on the role of our military and foreign policy in general,"

Liar, liar. pants on fire...

He did it because he a lover's spat with his boyfriend and wanted to spit in the eye of that which he blamed for getting between them. There was no higher motive than this involved. He as angry and he was going to show them all...

Considering the location, I take it he was a member of the Central Security Service, the military branch of the National Security Agency. I know for a fact that before he received his TS/SCI clearance, he signed a nondisclosure agreement to keep secret all classified information for the rest of his life or until it became declassified.

Hang the lying, treasonous bastard. And then let Pvt. Manning go. I was referring to Bush n Cheney, in the first part.

I distinctly remember my government telling me that terrorists killed that news crew. They were right. They just didn't mention that it was an Army Apache that was the terrorist. Free Manning for whistle blowing, not same as treason as no soldiers were harmed in any released information. Even backed up by statements made by the Pentagon.

@Trust2112

You Sir, are a dumb ass. Good Day.

XDm9mm:

What should a patriotic American do when they've witnessed illegal acts performed by their own military, even though they've signed a military document stating they would keep that information secret? Manning took that information to his superiors and was blown off. Btw, I too have watched the recording of the Apache killings and it disgusts me.

Where is the patriotic American's ultimate allegiance? To the U.S. military or the United State of America's government/people/Constitution?

Frankly, anyone who signs a military document to keep secret illegal acts performed by publicly paid employees from the United States government/people should themselves be charged with treason, or the very least, lose their citizenship.

Let's not confuse immoral with illegal. The purposeful killing of unarmed civilians is illegal and immoral. However, the killing of unarmed civilians that YOU THOUGHT were armed, is not illegal. Until you've been in a war zone, don't judge what you see in those videos too harshly. Better that that information stay within the confines of the military review. ROE are established to mitigate tragedies such as these. However, mistakes still happen. For PFC Manning to determine on his own that this material should be released to the public (however noble his intentions) is simply misguided.

On the broader question of alleged illegal actions taken by the U.S. Military and Government. It simply doesn't hold water. If anything here were blatantly illegal, it would have already been picked up by Congress or SCOTUS.

Attacking another country for real or imagined reasons isn't illegal--believe it or not. Just because the general population believes they have been lied to or because they don't agree with the reasons, doesn't change that fact. The morality of that decision may be debated, but we voted these people into office. We (not they) bear the brunt of those decisions. It plays out with how other countries treat us. We must influence our leaders by voting and peacefully communicating OUR will to change policy.

You may feel that exposure of our government's most inner mechanistic processes is a good thing, but not in this context. And, even if it were, it doesn't change that pfc Manning broke the law to make that happen. Moral or immoral, he must pay the penalty for breaking the law.

No need to patronize GatorChE. This country has veered so far away from operating as a Democratic Republic, "of the people, by the people and for the people" should be redacted from the Gettysburg Address as it no longer defines this country, from the meaningless votes of the people, to the military sovereignty and unstated control of our government.

I would like for Hillary Clinton to have to explain why security was so lacking on the supposedly secure state department network, that a private could download files created before he was born (obviously no need to know), save those files to a flash drive (big no no in network ?security), and no network monitoring was in place to detect that he was doing this.

But then again,most likely all you would get from Hillary would be another "what difference does it make " why there was no security?

Sadly, a lot of people think Hillary is presidential material. What a bad joke on the country that is.

Have not seen too many being presidential material but then, we need to rewrite the constitution first.

If the DOD is so important to blow 15 % of their budget and no one knows what happened and where it went, and no one can speak against them...then are we a republic? Do citizens have more rights or the systems we created to govern and protect us? Is defense budget another way to funnel money and pursue global colonialism?

Based on past history and many unnecessary wars I am wondering if the illusion of freedom and government by the people is still alive and well....of course we have mental cases...we operate out of moral schizophrenia. Sorry, the utilitarian philosophy that human beings, including Americans can be thought of collateral damage.

We need ethics, truth, prepare for peace, stop bullying others and sanction nations who have done nothing. Last time we sanctioned Iran, thousands of children died for lack of food...why do we agree to this inhumane treatments? Is it justified...?

We need more people disagreeing in congress , no less.

The execution, if that is the sentence of the court, should be in front of a full complement of his command and televised live to the general public.

it doesn't matter what his motives were, he committed treason period!

Manning knew the rules and agreed with them and also had to sign and acknowledged them in writing when he got his security level increase to handle sensitive materials !

"Colon Commando"? What sparkling wit! Is it getting a bit cramped, living in your parent's basement? Good thing you have an internet connection down there!

Cliffy, are you a fag as well?

Lol Chaos, 5 Stars for "colon commando" quip.

I vote Death penalty. Aiding and abetting the enemy in time of war! Please, Someone tell me we are not at war!

Cliff? I've come to see that when a person tries to put someone down with the "parent's basement" thing, that the one trying to put down another by saying it, is in fact living that very life themselves.

True isn't it? Thought so.

You do realize, of course, that the country is not "at war" currently. There was no formal declaration of war ever made. See, that's the problem; for a war to be a "war", Congress must formally declare war. Certainly, they authorized the use of military force, but that has been used for things like "police actions" and the like, which were absolutely stated by the government to not be wars. Therefore, you can't presume that we are "at war" simply because we are using military force somewhere in the world. Unfortunatly for you, if we are not at war, then there can be no "treason" charges.

That is incorrect, Treason is treason, wartime or not. Being at war is not a pre-requisite to the charge.

Hey Rev,

Take off your rose colored glasses, my man, and stay up to date on current events. I watch President Bush announce (on national TV) that we were invading Iraq. My recollection is that two senators and one representative opposed. The rest of congress approved. This is the classical constitutional declaration of war. Reading may be fundamental but comprehension is golden!!

It was treason for Cheney to let Novak, Miller, Armitage and Libby know that Valerie Plame was an undercover operative. No one was executed for that little blunder. All 4 of them blurted out various stories pertaining to Plame in an effort to discredit her husband, Joe Wilson. All of them were a party to the treason. It was a matter of who committed treaon first.

All of Plame's connections, present and past,as well as the businesses that served as fronts in overseas operations were compromised, because of the leaks.

Joe Wilson reported the truth about the Niger documents being forgeries. Funny how no effort was made by the Bush administration to determine who forged the documents. Some people in the Bush administration clearly wanted an excuse for war.

Manning's treatment is a disgrace to the country. We are becoming a totaliaran police state.

RalphH

totally agree that the outing of Plame was against Federal law,and all of those guys should have been much more seriously punished...

she was previously NOC so her employers and associates in Europe never knew until years afterward, nor were any contacts she had revealed so really really hard to make a treason case...

in the Manning case... he is in a completely different legal circumstance than a US Citizen serving in the West Wing.... and he violated many many orders and he definitely knew he was releasing a lot of info about specific people who were concurrently working with us in SW Asia and around the world for that matter..

a soldier doesn't have the Bill of Rights... they completely do not have a right to be a whistleblower... and he's going to jail for a very long time for it.... as he should

the military has very hard rules for very very good reasons...

Why am I not surprised that the loser left would let him go with a slap on the hand? You people are more about slobbering over the criminals and punishing the innocent. He committed a serious offense and for that he must be punished. We are at war, he supplied secret information that compromised national security, regardless of whether is was so-called "whistle blowing". This information can be used for blackmale purposes by enemies of the US.

At some point the loony left has got to step up and admit when people are wrong and need to be punished.

....left....right....who cares for this story. Just putt his butt in jail and lose the keys.

No just a former service member who followed the rules and stood by his oath to service.

No sir, No sir. But no matter my political activities, I understand that my word is my bond. His words meant (or should have) meant much more. He took a solemn oath of his own free will and went back on his oath. He knew all the while that his actions could harm the mission of his comrades and the security of his country. Again, there is no reason waste any tears here. By-the-way, you don't have be a lefty or a righty to understand this -- a patriot can get it.

why do I get the distinct feeling that you "He's a good boy" idiots are as gay as extreme gay exist ? ( Not that there is anything wrong with that) I'm just saying

Careful about the "loser" left man... I consider myself extremely liberal and I would personally hang this traitor.

Be careful? Oh? You going to do something over the internet? I'm sure he is hiding from you now.

In case you don't know, and obviously you don't, EVERYTHING in the military is classified. There are several classification levels and levels within those. I worked at an installation where the daily newspaper was 'classified' and could not be removed from the compound. It was placed in a burn bag every day.

Totally agree with you and will add this. When you blow the whistle, you usually, blow to someone who is in a position to take action on what you are blowing about. You can't give secrets to a foreign entity (that cannot fix the blow) and then claim to be a whistle blower. Now, if he had run and told a Chaplin, he would be looking at spending the rest of his life in a mental institution versus Fort Leavenworth.

As both the US Congress and the UN both authorized the use of force to remove Saddam Hussein by vote and resolution, your assertion that this was an illegal war are in fact wrong. As for your belief that PFC Manning is a hero you are entitled to that, however wrong that may be to myself and the countless thousands of proudly serving veterans of both Iraq and Afghanistan. The only debt we owe PFC Manning is a conviction and hard labor at the US Disciplinary Barracks at Ft. Leavenworth, KS.

The UN never authorized the invasion of Iraq. It was the reason we changed the term French Fries into Freedom Fries. France sat on the Security Council and their vote denied the US UN authorization to invade Iraq. Too bad we didn't listen to them, for if we had all the men you served with you and the thousands of Iraqi lives who died for nothing would still be alive today. That war served no purpose at all. I am sorry for those that were caught up in that insane thing, both on our side and theirs - but it is time we face the truth.

Manning is NO hero. He is a traitor to his country and a coward. NO one in our military (or our country for that matter) should be giving anyone, ever, documents that aren't meant for anyone outside the military - for ANY reason. He needs to rot in Leavenworth.

William Swartz - thank you for your service.

Radar- "It was the reason we changed the term French Fries into Freedom Fries"

Huh? who's "We"? You got a mouse in your pocket? I've never heard anyone use that term and I'm sure I never will again. To the rest of the country, they are still french fries. Where do you get your warped ideas?

Manning is a traitor, pure and simple. If you'd ever served in the military you'd understand.

Yearight - they say those who fail to remember the mistakes of the past, comdemn themselves to relive them. Forgetting that once we renamed French Fries into Freedom Fries probably isn't going to hurt us much, but I hope you and others learn the important details of how we got tricked into that damn stupid war by a bunch of traitors. For example, some people claim that Congress authorized the war in Iraq. Nope, that didn't happen either, nor did the UN authorize that war as I explained above. George W Bush appealed to Congress and asked them to give him the authority ON HIS OWN the decision to invade Iraq, saying that Saddam needed to know we meant business this time to convince him that UN weapons inspectors be able to look anywhere they wanted for WMD and finish their job. Bush also promised he would only use force if necessary and use that force only if Saddam failed to comply that time. BUSH VIOLATED THAT PROMISE!!!! Saddam finally complied and allowed the UN to look anywhere they wanted, even in his own presidential palaces. The UN said they were satisfied with Saddam's compliance, but GUESS WHAT? Bush invaded anyway!

Hey Swartz, since every reason given to prosecute the war was based on lies, the war itself was really a war crime. Bush, Cheney and the neocons who worked in the Pentagon, should be procecuted for war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Manning should be held up as a hero for releasing any evidence of the war crimes.

He is not prosecuted because of soldiers who might have suffered. He is being procecuted to protect higher ups of criminal actions.

It simply is not legal to conduct massive air attacks and invade a nation for trumped up reasons, especially when they all turn out to be lies. The MSNBC special by Raechel Maddow and David Corn last week, exposed those lies for all to see. Our intelligence agencies didn't believe any of the garbage intelligence the neocons in the Pentagon were providing to justify the war.

Over 4500 US troops have been killed in the Iraq war, based on lies. Over 32,000 have had serious injuries, including lost limbs and you jerk offs worry about Bradley Manning. Amazing!

Zionist
warmongers like Ken Adelman and the Zionist Washington Post pushed the war in
an editorial titled, “Cakewalk in Iraq.” Jewish supremacists Richard Perle and
Paul Wolfowitz told you that Iraq would “Welcome us as liberators.” Iraq became
the longest war in American history. Here is a report from USA Today: “Pentagon
officials estimated for the first time Wednesday that up to 360,000 Iraq and
Afghanistan veterans may have suffered traumatic brain injuries.” Now that’s
not counting tens of thousands who have suffered maiming, amputations, or death
in this war based on lies.

Hey radar, I could retort that your reasoning is off the radar, but I would never do that???? Manning's responsibilities and position allowed him to ascertain two things: 1) Did he understand his orders? 2) How he could best carry out the orders given. He failed to ascertain that! Some of us need to get a Grip!

Radar,

I don't know where you get your information, but you might want to start looking at other places. Congress did indeed vote to go to war with Iraq. The President of the United States can NOT send in Military force for longer than 60 days without approval on Congress.

Also, as you are obviously not aware, the UN can NOT make us or deny the United States anything. They can request, but can't force anything.

Ralph,

It is clear that you never served, if you had you would understand that manning is no hero, the true heros are the men and women he betrayed by releasing all of that information. He took an oath, and he failed to live up to it, it isn't up to him to decide what is right and what is wrong, he signed that right, amoung many others, away when he joined the Army.

You're absolutely right, Radar. Anyone here disagreeing might want to read "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man" by John Perkins.

Iraq did not - repeat - did not attack the US. Bush/Cheney had an agenda there apart from the events of 9/11.

While I agree that what Bradley Manning did was wrong, asking our troops to participate and die in an illegally declared war based on known false information is heinous to say the least. There is no excuse for that. Unfortunately, we are in a perpetual "State of Emergency" in this country and Obama refuses to overturn that ruling. Welcome to the two-party dictatorship/fascist state.

Fenst - You are wrong. I did serve in the US Navy, 1958-1962.

I researched the reasons for war at least 4 months prior to the authorization given by our Congress and told everyone I knew, we would not find WMD in Iraq. I knew Bush and Cheney were lieing every time they opened their mouths.

I did not want thousands of people to die for lies, on either side. The war was illegal, immoral and a disgrace to our country. Anyone who opposed the war is a hero.

The persons who turned out to be right were Michael Moore, and the rest of his crowd, who were all vilified by the right wing.

Look at how many died for those proven lies and not one person in power is paying for those poor souls lives. Not one of the liars has so much as received a slap on the wrist. Wolfowitz and his cabal of neocons, who fabricated the false intelligence and the spin, arenow trying the same tactics to start a war with Iran.

It is apparent that you don't care about the soldiers who died as a result of Bush's lies. He sent them to die. You and others here, now want to add Manning to the list.

troll

He's already spent time in Leavenworth. Although he is awaiting trial and not convicted of any crime (except in the minds of some of the dumbasses posting here), he was placed in custody along with the convict population.

Leavenworth isn't exactly filled with those types of people. I'm sure he'll be right at home with all those morons in there.

Sorry queer, leaking classified documents so North Korea, Iran, Russia, China doesn't make you a hero. What they leaked on Iraq, was nothing new, and did nothing to change any statistics on who did the majority of killing of innocents over there...the people we were fighting.

Yes! He also revealed what the State Department really thought of Syria! What a Hero!

Ummmm, no.

Manning probably murdered a lot of Afghans too whose names were listed in the leaks, and who had been helping us. So it was a victory for the Taliban. Good job, heroes. Lol.

"to North Korea, Iran, Russia........"

Chesty, you certainly seem to engage in a great deal of name calling, particularly concerning sexual orientation. Such behavior almost always manifests itself in those that are insecure about their own sexuality. Is there something you are trying to tell us?

well said, best post on here

Not really, queer, but you shouldn't be lionizing this guy who assisted dictators and terrorists with the leaks, and hurt free societies.

reporters scanning the reports for just a couple hours found hundreds of Afghan names mentioned as aiding the U.S.-led war effort.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503543_162-20011886-503543/wikileaks-reportedly-outs-100s-of-afghan-informants/

Yes! What a Hero! Now the Taliban knows all those names of people who helped the US. Maybe the Taliban can burn their daughters' faces with acid. That'd be awesome! Wouldn't it, ya dumb homo?

Rador01:

Yes, you are off of your radar!

Yet another adolescent, tiresome comment on the soldier's sexuality. But, such is the intellectual capacity of the Tea Bagger crowd, linking treason with sexual orientation and screaming "Obama Lies".

I feel offended you would associate Obama Lies comment with the Tea Party movement.
This is the B.S. over which the Tea Partiers left the mainstream Republican party to escape.

And what, other than inflict pointless torture, would "waterboarding this gay" achieve? Your avatar seems to promote "Liberte', Egaite' and Fraternite". Do you even know what that means? Of course, if you do, I am certain that you believe that such a philosophy only applies to white, heterosexual super-patriots such as yourself.

He's a traitor who leaked classified Defense and State Dept info which helped dictators and terrorists worldwide and hurt free countries. He helped nations that don't allow liberty and equality, and hurt his own country, which does have liberty.

Announcing to the world that the State Dept thinks Karzai is weak, and Sarkozy is an emperor with no clothes, and whatever negative opinions we have on anyone else, hurts our ability to conduct diplomatic negotiations with them.

If you're for peace, like allegedly leftwingers are (it's just an act, as we can see here), hamstringing the State Dept by telling every country exactly what their plans, strategies and opinions are, isn't the way to go.

The support of Manning and Wikileaks is totally mindless, and strictly for mentally deficient far left types.

@Dr v:

Then, he should have declared himself a conscientious objector. That would equate to having a conscience. What he did equates to a crime, one that he should pay dearly for.

The President is in charge of the military and national defense, according to the Constitution, so he has some wiggle room there.

We should have declarations of war, but it gets tricky for small scale operations.

thank you! you are absolutely correct! Americans have been churned through the socialists' public indoctrination systems for over 3 generations now, and the ONLY thing anyone under 50 seems to know how to do is FOLLOW OTHERS INSTRUCTIONS...blindly.

Oh, yes! Exactly! Such as those that blindly follow Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh!...oh, wait, that's the white-and-over-65 demographic.

Henry,

You are trying to equate divulging Top Secret and other classifed documents so violating Copyright laws? WTF? I am a former Canadian citizen and you are so far off base that its not even laughable. In case you and others do not realize when you join an organization like the US Army, you swear an oath to support and defend. In no part of the oath does it say to do so at your discretion based on what you like or dislike. I am pretty sure the Canadian armed forces have a similar oath. Your really showing your ignorance.

Hey Canadian,

You did not read my post above. We have a 455 member congress. President Bush did go to congress and all but 3 congress persons approved the actions he was under taking. In my mind that is a declaration; maybe we just speak different English?

I made the COPYRIGHT comparison because that is something many people
have been made aware of and are likely familiar with. On a civilian criminal
liability basis, I would expect he would get a long (consecutive counts) sentence
for the large-scale "Infringements" he has committed.

In a Courts Martial, the penalties are far more severe and since
he has disclosed sensitive government documents that may/will be proven
to have military-centric value...he will get 50+ years in a MILITARY prison
facility which is definitely no picnic. On a legal basis, his best bet is to plead
out and get transferred into the FEDERAL prison system but NOT to that
SuperMAX in Colorado. If he pleads out NOW, he just might make it out
when he's around 75 years old.

But again my earlier argument is NOT comparing civilian to military justice
OTHER THAN the fact that there MIGHT BE PRECEDENT within the civilian
criminal system in terms of peacetime penalties on disclosure of
sensitive information for nefarious purposes.

In my earlier comments, I was merely expounding on the non-likelihood
that he will get the death penalty due to Wartime Treasonous acts,
since as far as I know NO FORMAL DECLARATION OF WAR has been
ratified by Congress. "Police Actions" and "Applications of Military Force"
have been asked for and DEBATED within Congress...BUT NO FORMAL
DECLARATION OF WAR as per the circumstances outlined in the
United States Constitution have been ratified.

ERGO...we are at a time of "Peace" (Ha!) not war ...ergo...he'll get
50+ years in the Pen and not Death!

Hey look. COPYRIGHT talk by someone from canada. go figure...

Yah, there we go, a Lefty that doesn't lionize sending State Dept secrets to the world at large, as if it's some great service to the country.

Sending out classified State Dept dossiers on what we think of world leaders helps us how?

I thought lefties were supposed to be gung ho on the State Dept solving things instead of the Defense Dept. Well, queers, undercutting them by leaking what they think of every global leader to the man or woman themselves, greatly damages the State Department's diplomatic position, you ridiculous homos.

A medal? For what? For betraying his oath? For betraying his comrades? Your like so many others ranting and raving here, you want your freedom of speech and you want your freedom of many other things you hold close. But you don't like how that freedom is protected. So your probably one of those people that think President Bush attacked the Twin Towers on 9/11. I do not always agree with the decisions of the President but when I was on active duty I sure followed those orders. Its our ability to agree or disagree with what happens in our country, but its people like you who think that not living up to sworn oaths or abide by the rules is important. You are one disillusioned individual. Maybe you should go to prison with the traitor, I am sure you two would get along quite famously.

Go back under the bridge and take your meds!!!!

I think you would be wise to go back before 2001 and look at the comments by leading liberal Democrats regarding Saddam Hussein and Iraq's WMD. The ask yourself.. if it was bad intell, who collected it?

What "crimes against cilvilians" did he report. Most were diplomatic exchanges. The apache video has been on you tube for years. It was first reported on NBC and it was not a war crime.

I will say it plainly this time. I Am Not A Conservative. You are wrong about reporting, totally wrong. See if you saw a crime in commission, you would not run and tell a bunch of criminal -- would you? Why? Because you would be talking to a bunch that did not have your interest at heart, and zero interest in catching criminals. I could easily compare this thought to manning's situation. There are many, in and out of his command, he could have reported wrong doings to. Many other soldier do, and if you have being paying attention to the news, you have seen the details of their deeds and their punishments Now, what was that spill about illegal atrocities? Oh yeah...

If you are so certain of the ethics of the situation can you tell me why its okay for the US military to hide that fact an Apache pilot killed civilian reports, shot at children and then tried to cover it up??

Only the US military can do illegal things and call it legal, right, just, and moral. Or that's what they've lead us to believe.

Shane C. I would have to disagree, having served many years in the military. The U.S. military is completely and totally under civilian control. They do what the President, the Secretary of Defense, and the military Department Secretaries tell them to do. How these "leaders" may choose to spin their orders could be questioned, but should any military member disobey an order, he/she would quickly take up residence in the stockade.

Shane C.

Only the US military can do illegal things and call it legal...

You are more then free to take them on any day you wish. Go for it.

Unauthorized release of classified documents is not treason. The definition of treason is pretty specific. And because information is classified doesn't mean at all it is necessarily helpful o the enemy and injurious to the nation. What we learned from the Pentagon Papers is the more likely reason to keep information classified is to keep it from the American public, not the enemy.