Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post) NewsFlash Bradley Manning gets 35 years in the hole   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 422
    More: NewsFlash, Bradley Manning, WikiLeaks, David Coombs, revelations, Quantico, Fort Leavenworth, United Nations Special Rapporteur, Arab Uprisings  
•       •       •

6531 clicks; posted to Main » on 21 Aug 2013 at 10:57 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»


Want to get NewsFlash notifications in email?

422 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-08-21 10:30:29 AM  
Damn. I can't even crack a joke about that.
 
d23 [TotalFark]
2013-08-21 10:31:58 AM  
Gee.. what are the odds that the people that throw around the term "statism" are the same people already crying "not enough" about the Bradly Manning sentence?
 
2013-08-21 10:36:15 AM  
That's actually something of a win for him. His attorneys were hoping for 25 yrs while the prosecution asked for 60.
 
2013-08-21 10:36:59 AM  
considering "Death" could have been on the table, that's not that bad.   is there the possibility for early release?
 
2013-08-21 10:41:25 AM  
I can't help but feel a little sad about the whole thing. Our government is doing a lot of shady sh*t and these guys are exposing them for it, and this is what they get for it.

There isn't even a way to expose the government now for all this secret sh*t without being labeled a terrorist or traitor.
 
2013-08-21 10:46:03 AM  

d23: Gee.. what are the odds that the people that throw around the term "statism" are the same people already crying "not enough" about the Bradly Manning sentence?


I would have been happy with 20-25. But I can't feel too bad about 35 either.

bdub77: I can't help but feel a little sad about the whole thing. Our government is doing a lot of shady sh*t and these guys are exposing them for it, and this is what they get for it.

There isn't even a way to expose the government now for all this secret sh*t without being labeled a terrorist or traitor.


Had he simply released stuff that concerned him, I could have written it off as misguided at worst. Dumping 250k documents without knowing the contents thereof is not exposing shady shiat. It's showing depraved indifference.
 
2013-08-21 10:48:13 AM  

vygramul: Had he simply released stuff that concerned him, I could have written it off as misguided at worst. Dumping 250k documents without knowing the contents thereof is not exposing shady shiat. It's showing depraved indifference.


THIS!
 
2013-08-21 10:49:14 AM  
vygramul:
Had he simply released stuff that concerned him, I could have written it off as misguided at worst. Dumping 250k documents without knowing the contents thereof is not exposing shady shiat. It's showing depraved indifference.

Yeah, as much as I love a good whistle blower, who knows it's conceivable that people's lives could have been put in danger.  At BEST it's reckless and irresponsible.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-08-21 10:52:02 AM  

skinnycatullus: That's actually something of a win for him. His attorneys were hoping for 25 yrs while the prosecution asked for 60.


It seems a bit much.  His defense actually had a point when they pointed out that he shouldn't have had a security clearance because the Army knew he had mental problems.
 
2013-08-21 10:52:07 AM  

vygramul: d23: Gee.. what are the odds that the people that throw around the term "statism" are the same people already crying "not enough" about the Bradly Manning sentence?

I would have been happy with 20-25. But I can't feel too bad about 35 either.

bdub77: I can't help but feel a little sad about the whole thing. Our government is doing a lot of shady sh*t and these guys are exposing them for it, and this is what they get for it.

There isn't even a way to expose the government now for all this secret sh*t without being labeled a terrorist or traitor.

Had he simply released stuff that concerned him, I could have written it off as misguided at worst. Dumping 250k documents without knowing the contents thereof is not exposing shady shiat. It's showing depraved indifference.


This happens to me my view on it too. I'm not saying I think what he did was wrong, but I'm pretty disheartened by the way in which our government is acting.
 
2013-08-21 10:54:37 AM  
Facebook is interesting today about this.

There are conspiracy theories claiming that he would get life no matter what (because the administration would intervene) and will be tortured the whole time
 
2013-08-21 10:55:40 AM  

bdub77: This happens to me my view on it too. I'm not saying I think what he did was wrong, but I'm pretty disheartened by the way in which our government is acting.


That's where I'm at with the whole thing as well.
 
d23 [TotalFark]
2013-08-21 10:56:48 AM  

cman: Facebook is interesting today about this.

There are conspiracy theories claiming that he would get life no matter what (because the administration would intervene) and will be tortured the whole time


It would be a much better world if I could believe this was totally impossible.  Instead it gets relegated to "unlikely."
 
2013-08-21 10:57:01 AM  

vpb: skinnycatullus: That's actually something of a win for him. His attorneys were hoping for 25 yrs while the prosecution asked for 60.

It seems a bit much.  His defense actually had a point when they pointed out that he shouldn't have had a security clearance because the Army knew he had mental problems.


What mental issues?

I haven't kept up on the case that much but the only mental issues I have heard was someone claiming his transgenderism was a mental illness.
 
2013-08-21 10:57:02 AM  

nekom: vygramul:
Had he simply released stuff that concerned him, I could have written it off as misguided at worst. Dumping 250k documents without knowing the contents thereof is not exposing shady shiat. It's showing depraved indifference.

Yeah, as much as I love a good whistle blower, who knows it's conceivable that people's lives could have been put in danger.  At BEST it's reckless and irresponsible.


I agree.  Plus, this sentence shows some leniency.  He'll have some time as a free man to look forward to after he gets out.
 
2013-08-21 10:58:52 AM  

make me some tea: Damn. I can't even crack a joke about that.


I can, screw the traitor.
 
2013-08-21 10:59:35 AM  

freak7: make me some tea: Damn. I can't even crack a joke about that.

I can, screw the traitor.


A traitor? No

An attention whore? Yes
 
2013-08-21 10:59:45 AM  
the lesson here, folks, is to let the assholes in power do what they want and never question it....

..everyone who questioned Shrub's lack of evidence/judgement/sobriety were not being patriotic at *all*.
 
2013-08-21 11:00:02 AM  

TuteTibiImperes: He'll have some time as a free man to look forward to after he gets out.


Book deals, movie deals. endorsements for toilet paper.
 
2013-08-21 11:00:41 AM  

freak7: make me some tea: Damn. I can't even crack a joke about that.

I can, screw the traitor.


So....telling folks about war crimes that US troops commit is bad...right, gotcha.

Moran.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-08-21 11:00:44 AM  

cman: What mental issues?

I haven't kept up on the case that much but the only mental issues I have heard was someone claiming his transgenderism was a mental illness.


http://www.newschannel5.com/story/23116665/manning-defense-keys-on-m en tal-health-leadership
 
2013-08-21 11:00:52 AM  
*sigh* Was it worth it?  I mean if he knew he was gonna get caught, instead of only proving once and for all that Dubya needs to go to The Hague, he should've told us who killed JFK as well.
 
2013-08-21 11:01:17 AM  
farm4.staticflickr.com

However you feel about this, he's truly f•cked.
 
2013-08-21 11:01:20 AM  
35 years for a man who caused fewer deaths than George Zimmerman.
 
2013-08-21 11:01:33 AM  
The big house, the slammer, the clink, the hoosegow...
 
2013-08-21 11:01:34 AM  
Another murderer football player?

/DRTFA
 
2013-08-21 11:01:55 AM  
It's longer than the American Taliban.  He got 20.
 
2013-08-21 11:02:27 AM  

IlGreven: 35 years for a man who caused fewer deaths than George Zimmerman.


The difference being there is proof Manning broke the law. There is no proof Zimmerman did.
 
2013-08-21 11:02:32 AM  

elffster: So....telling folks about war crimes that US troops commit is bad...right, gotcha.


The issue is sliiiiightly more complicated than your bumper sticker version allows for.
 
2013-08-21 11:02:46 AM  
I submitted this with a better headline.  So sad.
 
2013-08-21 11:02:49 AM  
www.uu.edu
RIP Eli Manning
 
2013-08-21 11:03:10 AM  
This just in: if you break the law and get caught there is a good chance you'll go to jail!


It will be interesting to see if Obama pardons him on his last day in office.
 
2013-08-21 11:03:26 AM  
If this was the guy who exposed the Bush bullshiat, free this hero.
If this was the guy who exposed the Obama bullshiat, you can rot, traitor.
 
2013-08-21 11:04:06 AM  

Cletus C.: If this was the guy who exposed the Bush bullshiat, free this hero.
If this was the guy who exposed the Obama bullshiat, you can rot, traitor.


If you're a guy who thinks false equivalencies like this are somehow clever, stop it. Stop. No.
 
2013-08-21 11:04:13 AM  
I look forward to a rational discussion thread devoid of Schadenfreude and sociopathy.
 
d23 [TotalFark]
2013-08-21 11:04:45 AM  

Eddie Adams from Torrance: [www.uu.edu image 275x391]
RIP Eli Manning


oh wow.  total, total failure.
 
2013-08-21 11:05:01 AM  

LasersHurt: Cletus C.: If this was the guy who exposed the Bush bullshiat, free this hero.
If this was the guy who exposed the Obama bullshiat, you can rot, traitor.

If you're a guy who thinks false equivalencies like this are somehow clever, stop it. Stop. No.


So, hero?
 
2013-08-21 11:05:04 AM  
Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.
 
2013-08-21 11:05:29 AM  

bdub77: vygramul: d23: Gee.. what are the odds that the people that throw around the term "statism" are the same people already crying "not enough" about the Bradly Manning sentence?

I would have been happy with 20-25. But I can't feel too bad about 35 either.

bdub77: I can't help but feel a little sad about the whole thing. Our government is doing a lot of shady sh*t and these guys are exposing them for it, and this is what they get for it.

There isn't even a way to expose the government now for all this secret sh*t without being labeled a terrorist or traitor.

Had he simply released stuff that concerned him, I could have written it off as misguided at worst. Dumping 250k documents without knowing the contents thereof is not exposing shady shiat. It's showing depraved indifference.

This happens to me my view on it too. I'm not saying I think what he did was wrong, but I'm pretty disheartened by the way in which our government is acting.


The military really doesn't have an institutional sense of humor. They kinda take this stuff seriously.
 
2013-08-21 11:05:38 AM  

bdub77: I can't help but feel a little sad about the whole thing. Our government is doing a lot of shady sh*t and these guys are exposing them for it, and this is what they get for it.

There isn't even a way to expose the government now for all this secret sh*t without being labeled a terrorist or traitor.


Let me take on your comments by paragraph.

1) What poopy stuff? We're at war in Afghanistan presently and with extreme Muslim cultists worldwide. We were at war with Iraq but not anymore. Can you be more specific? Or are you complaining about the local DMV branch office?

2) Utter BS. The kid passed along classified data without screening it throughly for, oopies, information valuable for our enemies, allies and all those inbetween. Methods exist for whisleblowing and/or calling out serious problems within the system. The young idiot didn't try them first.

/I'm cool with 35 years in prison.
//He could have gotten worse and may have deserved more time.
 
2013-08-21 11:05:42 AM  

Cletus C.: LasersHurt: Cletus C.: If this was the guy who exposed the Bush bullshiat, free this hero.
If this was the guy who exposed the Obama bullshiat, you can rot, traitor.

If you're a guy who thinks false equivalencies like this are somehow clever, stop it. Stop. No.

So, hero?


I am pretty hungry, so sure, but around here we call them subs.
 
2013-08-21 11:05:49 AM  

elffster: freak7: make me some tea: Damn. I can't even crack a joke about that.

I can, screw the traitor.

So....telling folks about war crimes that US troops commit is bad...right, gotcha.

Moran.


War crimes? Don't blame the troops for a couple stupid journalists who thought it would be cool to walk around a combat zone with dudes carrying rifles and rpg's. As for the children in the van, blame the dummy who brought his kids along to evacuate shot up terrorists.
 
2013-08-21 11:05:57 AM  

Moral of the story: don't leak things the boss hasn't asked you to leak.

Attention whoring with government data has a steep price if you're poorly connected.

 
2013-08-21 11:06:03 AM  

ManateeGag: considering "Death" could have been on the table, that's not that bad.   is there the possibility for early release?


Yep, halfway through
 
2013-08-21 11:06:05 AM  

Cletus C.: If this was the guy who exposed the Bush bullshiat, free this hero.
If this was the guy who exposed the Obama bullshiat, you can rot, traitor.


What about reality where he exposed sensitive information from both of their presidencies? A hero who can rot?
 
2013-08-21 11:06:06 AM  

d23: Eddie Adams from Torrance: [www.uu.edu image 275x391]
RIP Eli Manning

oh wow.  total, total failure.


LOL that made me laugh!
 
2013-08-21 11:06:14 AM  
Anyone got the popcorn going yet? I predict this thread will require a gigantic bag of it...
 
2013-08-21 11:06:24 AM  
Obama doesn't pardon people.
 
2013-08-21 11:06:25 AM  

Carth: IlGreven: 35 years for a man who caused fewer deaths than George Zimmerman.

The difference being there is proof Manning broke the law. There is no proof Zimmerman did.


I OBJECT!

*plays the race card*
 
2013-08-21 11:06:46 AM  
i.usatoday.net

I like where this thread is going.
 
2013-08-21 11:06:46 AM  
bdub77: I can't help but feel a little sad about the whole thing. Our government is doing a lot of shady sh*t and these guys are exposing them for it, and this is what they get for it.

There isn't even a way to expose the government now for all this secret sh*t without being labeled a terrorist or traitor.

Had he simply released stuff that concerned him, I could have written it off as misguided at worst. Dumping 250k documents without knowing the contents thereof is not exposing shady shiat. It's showing depraved indifference.


Agreed.  When you're releasing 250k documents, you really have no way of knowing what's in every one of those.  You're not whistle blowing, you're throwing shiat out and seeing what sticks.
 
2013-08-21 11:06:47 AM  

TuteTibiImperes: nekom: vygramul:
Had he simply released stuff that concerned him, I could have written it off as misguided at worst. Dumping 250k documents without knowing the contents thereof is not exposing shady shiat. It's showing depraved indifference.

Yeah, as much as I love a good whistle blower, who knows it's conceivable that people's lives could have been put in danger.  At BEST it's reckless and irresponsible.

I agree.  Plus, this sentence shows some leniency.  He'll have some time as a free man to look forward to after he gets out.


50 and a felon doesn't have a lot of prospects. Society, I think, overreacts to this to some degree. You have to give felons a way to reintegrate or they are just left with monster incentives to prey upon others.
 
2013-08-21 11:06:57 AM  
a sad day for justice indeed
 
2013-08-21 11:07:06 AM  

elffster: freak7: make me some tea: Damn. I can't even crack a joke about that.

I can, screw the traitor.

So....telling folks about war crimes that US troops commit is bad...right, gotcha.

Moran.


Releasing secret documents irrespective of whether they show US wrongdoing or not is bad.  That's what Bradley Manning did.  Had he limited it to just those documents that show the US doing something wrong, I'd be right there with you.  But that's not what he did.

Moran.
 
d23 [TotalFark]
2013-08-21 11:07:08 AM  

d23: Eddie Adams from Torrance: [www.uu.edu image 275x391]
RIP Eli Manning

oh wow.  total, total failure.


Eli Manning
a.espncdn.com

Peyton Manning
a.espncdn.com
 
2013-08-21 11:07:11 AM  

LasersHurt: Cletus C.: LasersHurt: Cletus C.: If this was the guy who exposed the Bush bullshiat, free this hero.
If this was the guy who exposed the Obama bullshiat, you can rot, traitor.

If you're a guy who thinks false equivalencies like this are somehow clever, stop it. Stop. No.

So, hero?

I am pretty hungry, so sure, but around here we call them subs.


It's pronounced 'gyro'.
 
2013-08-21 11:07:31 AM  
so if you have evidence that your employer breaks the law, but you've signed a contract keeping everything you see at work secret, what are you supposed to do?
 
2013-08-21 11:07:32 AM  

Carth: This just in: if you break the law and get caught there is a good chance you'll go to jail!

It will be interesting to see if Obama pardons him on his last day in office.


First paragraph - Obvious

Second paragraph - Unlikely. Sounds like a Tea Party fantasy from Penthouse Forum.
 
2013-08-21 11:07:37 AM  
It's criminal that exposing crimes is a criminal offense.
 
2013-08-21 11:07:40 AM  

JohnAnnArbor: It's longer than the American Taliban.  He got 20.


What bothers me is he got 35 years longer than the people whose crimes he exposed.
 
2013-08-21 11:07:48 AM  
Grumpycatgood.jpg
 
2013-08-21 11:08:08 AM  

Carth: This just in: if you break the law and get caught there is a good chance you'll go to jail!


It will be interesting to see if Obama pardons him on his last day in office.


If you're putting money on it, I'll call your bet.
 
2013-08-21 11:08:09 AM  

Cletus C.: LasersHurt: Cletus C.: If this was the guy who exposed the Bush bullshiat, free this hero.
If this was the guy who exposed the Obama bullshiat, you can rot, traitor.

If you're a guy who thinks false equivalencies like this are somehow clever, stop it. Stop. No.

So, hero?


Both Dems and Repugs have crazies that do bad things.

The difference is, Democrats throw their crazies under the bus, the GOP let's their crazies drive the bus.
 
2013-08-21 11:08:43 AM  

ModernPrimitive01: a sad day for justice indeed


Nah - 35 years was enough. No need for 60.
 
2013-08-21 11:08:44 AM  
This is a win for him.  There was a time when he'd be immediately marched out behind the courthouse and shot.
 
2013-08-21 11:08:52 AM  
He's not a hero, nor is he a traitor. He's a dumb kid. The irresponsible thing was giving him a security clearance in the first place, and I really hope he gets early release. A very heavy and very public sentence makes sense as a deterrent, but he should be allowed to leave after 10 years on condition of good behavior and he agrees to no book, no movie, etc.
 
2013-08-21 11:09:01 AM  
Should have gotten more. I can't believe you put fellow service members lives at risk and potentially give valuable information to the enemy and you only get 35 years? Fark that.
 
2013-08-21 11:09:02 AM  

Lady J: so if you have evidence that your employer breaks the law, but you've signed a contract keeping everything you see at work secret, what are you supposed to do?


I would hope I had the courage to come forward, especially if my employers was killing people on a global scale
 
2013-08-21 11:09:20 AM  

Smeggy Smurf: It's criminal that exposing crimes is a criminal offense.


Wrong thread. This one's about Bradley Manning.
 
2013-08-21 11:09:34 AM  
He will be eligible for parole apparently.  If I'm reading it correctly he would qualify in approximately 10 years.  I would not be surprised to see him make his first parole.
 
2013-08-21 11:09:42 AM  
dittybopper

Releasing secret documents irrespective of whether they show US wrongdoing or not is bad.

The Pentagon Papers.
 
2013-08-21 11:09:46 AM  
www.bunkermuseum.de

"Thirty-Five years??  That's harsh"
 
2013-08-21 11:09:46 AM  

elffster: freak7: make me some tea: Damn. I can't even crack a joke about that.

I can, screw the traitor.

So....telling folks about war crimes that US troops commit is bad...right, gotcha.

Moran.


What "war crimes" did he expose?

Do tell.

I watched RT news show the same tired clip over and over again.  War is hell and sometimes innocent people die.  It doesn't make it a war crime.
 
2013-08-21 11:09:55 AM  

freak7: elffster: freak7: make me some tea: Damn. I can't even crack a joke about that.

I can, screw the traitor.

So....telling folks about war crimes that US troops commit is bad...right, gotcha.

Moran.

War crimes? Don't blame the troops for a couple stupid journalists who thought it would be cool to walk around a combat zone with dudes carrying rifles and rpg's. As for the children in the van, blame the dummy who brought his kids along to evacuate shot up terrorists.


The previous administration admitted to war crimes publicly.

Now you might think that they are little war crimes and that they don't matter and it was worth it and so on. That's a perfectly acceptable point of view. But at least have the strength of character to own that point of view rather than pretending that there weren't any. It just makes you look weak.
 
2013-08-21 11:09:56 AM  

zinny: This is a win for him.  There was a time when he'd be immediately marched out behind the courthouse and shot.


Courthouse?
 
2013-08-21 11:10:04 AM  
Pour encourager les autres
 
2013-08-21 11:10:15 AM  
Carth


It will be interesting to see if Obama pardons him on his last day in office.

This will not happen because of the spring board it could give the GOP on how if you aren't Republican you are a terrorist, traitor or sympathizer.
 
2013-08-21 11:10:15 AM  
I don't know a ton about this case but what I do is messed up. I agree that the dude broke the law and jail time seems fair. But at the same time what kind of crappy computer system does the US Army have where it allows someone to bring a writable CD to their computer which is used for military intelligence and start burning stuff onto it without any kind of checking or alarm going off?
 
2013-08-21 11:10:27 AM  

freak7: elffster: freak7: make me some tea: Damn. I can't even crack a joke about that.

I can, screw the traitor.

So....telling folks about war crimes that US troops commit is bad...right, gotcha.

Moran.

War crimes? Don't blame the troops for a couple stupid journalists who thought it would be cool to walk around a combat zone with dudes carrying rifles and rpg's. As for the children in the van, blame the dummy who brought his kids along to evacuate shot up terrorists.


Blaming the victims will always earn you lots of internets.
 
2013-08-21 11:10:40 AM  
Pro Tip: When leaking evidence of a war crime, stop at the war crime, no matter what an attention whore from another country tells you to do.
 
2013-08-21 11:10:52 AM  
Eddie Adams from Torrance:

RIP Eli Manning

d23:

Eli Manning

Peyton Manning



You guys must be new here.
 
2013-08-21 11:10:59 AM  

RockSteadyUSMC: Should have gotten more. I can't believe you put fellow service members lives at risk and potentially give valuable information to the enemy and you only get 35 years? Fark that.


can you or anyone else in this thread give me one shred of credible information that anyone came to harm as a result of the leak?

/making America look like a murderous bully doesn't count
 
2013-08-21 11:11:08 AM  

Carth: This just in: if you break the law and get caught there is a good chance you'll go to jail!


si.wsj.net
"Oh, aren't you cute!"
 
2013-08-21 11:11:12 AM  
a57.foxnews.com
Meanwhile, these three bastards will prolly get out in less than 12.
 
2013-08-21 11:11:14 AM  
Well, THAT seems a tad excessive!
 
2013-08-21 11:11:34 AM  

Charletron: He's not a hero, nor is he a traitor. He's a dumb kid.


I'd be willing to give him some latitude if he had been selective in his releases, even as misguided as they were. But 250k documents? At some point, it really is possible to be criminally stupid.
 
2013-08-21 11:11:37 AM  
"The US government should turn its attention to investigating and delivering justice for the serious human rights abuses committed by its officials in the name of countering terror."


faqsmedia.ign.com
 
2013-08-21 11:11:43 AM  

Eddie Adams from Torrance: [www.uu.edu image 275x391]
RIP Eli Manning


Well, if he doesn't get the Giants into the Superbowl this year which is being played at their own stadium, you better believe it's RIP Eli Manning!
 
2013-08-21 11:12:03 AM  

AirForceVet: Carth: This just in: if you break the law and get caught there is a good chance you'll go to jail!

It will be interesting to see if Obama pardons him on his last day in office.

First paragraph - Obvious

Second paragraph - Unlikely. Sounds like a Tea Party fantasy from Penthouse Forum.


I don't think is it very likely either but there has been a surprising amount of articles talking about it for the past month.
 
2013-08-21 11:12:08 AM  

bdub77: I can't help but feel a little sad about the whole thing. Our government is doing a lot of shady sh*t and these guys are exposing them for it, and this is what they get for it.





i.imgur.com

R.I.P. VAN HALEN


 
2013-08-21 11:12:13 AM  

Lady J: so if you have evidence that your employer breaks the law, but you've signed a contract keeping everything you see at work secret, what are you supposed to do?


Blackmail your employer?
 
2013-08-21 11:12:29 AM  

d23: Gee.. what are the odds that the people that throw around the term "statism" are the same people already crying "not enough" about the Bradly Manning sentence?


Some people just don't like treasonous activity.
 
2013-08-21 11:12:40 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: [www.bunkermuseum.de image 184x331]

"Thirty-Five years??  That's harsh"


And a lot of those guys were released early by the West German government.
 
2013-08-21 11:12:55 AM  

elffster: freak7: make me some tea: Damn. I can't even crack a joke about that.

I can, screw the traitor.

So....telling folks about war crimes that US troops commit is bad...right, gotcha.

Moran.


What war crimes? None of what Manning released exposed anything illegal. It was just more detailed versions of the battle reports, and a farkton of diplomatic cables. The video of the journalists getting killed by the helo made it clear they thought they were engaging armed baddies.

Also, subby, he's not going to the hole. He's going to gen pop at Leavenworth, which is a hell of a lot safer and more livable than a civilian federal pen.
 
2013-08-21 11:12:56 AM  

make me some tea: Damn. I can't even crack a joke about that.


I can.

"Wait, I thought the guy LIKED it in the hole?"
 
2013-08-21 11:12:57 AM  
I like the idea that exposing the government's illegal activities is now considered treason.  U. S. A.! U. S. A.!
 
2013-08-21 11:13:13 AM  

Private_Citizen: Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.


In order to avoid breaking any law at all, ever, it's best that you kill yourself before age 12, and you had better be successful at that.
 
2013-08-21 11:13:15 AM  

vygramul: Smeggy Smurf: It's criminal that exposing crimes is a criminal offense.

Wrong thread. This one's about Bradley Manning.


Are you telling me that in none of those documents was a crime exposed?
 
2013-08-21 11:13:20 AM  

Random Anonymous Blackmail: Carth


It will be interesting to see if Obama pardons him on his last day in office.

This will not happen because of the spring board it could give the GOP on how if you aren't Republican you are a terrorist, traitor or sympathizer.


Not to mention that it's the wrong thing to do.
 
2013-08-21 11:13:27 AM  

ModernPrimitive01: RockSteadyUSMC: Should have gotten more. I can't believe you put fellow service members lives at risk and potentially give valuable information to the enemy and you only get 35 years? Fark that.

can you or anyone else in this thread give me one shred of credible information that anyone came to harm as a result of the leak?

/making America look like a murderous bully doesn't count


Many would consider a 35-year prison sentence harm.
 
2013-08-21 11:13:32 AM  

IlGreven: 35 years for a man who caused fewer deaths than George Zimmerman.


still mad bro? Proof is a motherfarker
 
2013-08-21 11:13:39 AM  

mechgreg: I don't know a ton about this case


And that's alll that needs to be said about most of the American public.  Most of us aren't paying attention.  A few of us are, but we're a small minority.  Manning is no hero.  He may have been a confused little boy who our military placed too much trust in and acted foolishly, but he's certainly not a hero.
 
2013-08-21 11:13:47 AM  

mechgreg: what kind of crappy computer system does the US Army have


really?
you want to know what kind it is?
they bought it off of Drew via Craig's List.
It came preinfected.
They are still figuring out how to attach files in AOL emails.
If you can defrag a windows 98 box, they will give you a warrent officer rank.
 
2013-08-21 11:13:50 AM  

m1ke: I like the idea that exposing the government's illegal activities is now considered treason.  U. S. A.! U. S. A.!


Again, that's not all that went on here. Either being ignorant of or just ignoring the rest doesn't serve anyone.
 
2013-08-21 11:14:03 AM  

Outrageous Muff: Pro Tip: When leaking evidence of a war crime, stop at the war crime, no matter what an attention whore from another country tells you to do.


Good advice.
 
2013-08-21 11:14:21 AM  
Remember folks, it's the government's job to keep us safe. They just can't have an secrets when doing it.
 
2013-08-21 11:14:46 AM  

Lady J: so if you have evidence that your employer breaks the law, but you've signed a contract keeping everything you see at work secret, what are you supposed to do?


Among other things, release only the stuff pertinent to him breaking the law?

Again. He released a lot of shiat *that did not have to do with US wrongdoing*. Things that contained, *unredacted*, the names of, say, informants who were tipping off the US to terror plots.

shiat that you kind of want to keep secret to keep *folks, and their families from getting murdered*.
 
2013-08-21 11:14:47 AM  

EyeballKid: Carth: This just in: if you break the law and get caught there is a good chance you'll go to jail!

[si.wsj.net image 553x369]
"Oh, aren't you cute!"


Yeah, THAT bastard deserves farking life in an Afghan prison.
 
2013-08-21 11:14:59 AM  

Random Anonymous Blackmail: Carth


It will be interesting to see if Obama pardons him on his last day in office.

This will not happen because of the spring board it could give the GOP on how if you aren't Republican you are a terrorist, traitor or sympathizer.


It would be after the elections already happened so the fallout isn't as big. They tried bring up Clinton's pardons in the midterms but it never stuck. Most likely they'd gnash their teeth about it for 6-12 months and the next Dem candidate would talk about how irresponsible it was and how they would never do it.
 
2013-08-21 11:15:09 AM  
The real crime is that our government could classify 250k documents out of reach of the public.
 
2013-08-21 11:15:19 AM  

vygramul: Carth: This just in: if you break the law and get caught there is a good chance you'll go to jail!


It will be interesting to see if Obama pardons him on his last day in office.

If you're putting money on it, I'll call your bet.


Not a chance, Barry has that drunk uncle and that crazy aunt that need to stay in the country.
 
2013-08-21 11:15:49 AM  

A legal system that doesn't distinguish between leaks to the press in the public interest and treason against the nation will not only produce unjust results, but will deprive the public of critical information that is necessary for democratic accountability. This is a sad day for Bradley Manning, but it's also a sad day for all Americans who depend on brave whistleblowers and a free press for a fully informed public debate.

-  Ben Wizner, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Speech, Privacy & Technology Project

 
2013-08-21 11:15:49 AM  

mbillips: elffster: freak7: make me some tea: Damn. I can't even crack a joke about that.

I can, screw the traitor.

So....telling folks about war crimes that US troops commit is bad...right, gotcha.

Moran.

What war crimes? None of what Manning released exposed anything illegal. It was just more detailed versions of the battle reports, and a farkton of diplomatic cables. The video of the journalists getting killed by the helo made it clear they thought they were engaging armed baddies.

Also, subby, he's not going to the hole. He's going to gen pop at Leavenworth, which is a hell of a lot safer and more livable than a civilian federal pen.


so because his prison accommodations aren't horrible, it's not that bad?
 
2013-08-21 11:16:41 AM  

Carth: AirForceVet: Carth: This just in: if you break the law and get caught there is a good chance you'll go to jail!

It will be interesting to see if Obama pardons him on his last day in office.

First paragraph - Obvious

Second paragraph - Unlikely. Sounds like a Tea Party fantasy from Penthouse Forum.

I don't think is it very likely either but there has been a surprising amount of articles talking about it for the past month.


Just like Obama is simultaneously an empty suit and a tyrant, he's also a man who viciously pursues Snowden but is looking to pardon Manning.
 
2013-08-21 11:17:09 AM  

Carth: This just in: if you break the law and get caught there is a good chance you'll go to jail!



Unless you're a politician. Or related to one. Or a cop. Or a hedge fund manager/ Wall Street type. Or anyone with money. Or any rank above "Private". But I digress....

As for Manning, 20 years would have been enough.
 
2013-08-21 11:17:18 AM  
Incidents like this will end up increasing.  There are a few individuals in the world who will risk everything to follow a path they think is right.
People will not agree with it and that is fine.  But it will keep happening.
The government has lost the moral high ground by violating the spirit of the constitution and that is why.

Glad I was never in a position to be tempted to do something like this.
 
2013-08-21 11:17:22 AM  

ManateeGag: considering "Death" could have been on the table, that's not that bad.   is there the possibility for early release?


I read somewhere this morning (pre-sentencing) that he would have to serve at least 1/3 his sentence before eligible for parole. Plus he gets about 3 years credited for time served, so he's looking at 9 years minimum.
 
2013-08-21 11:17:33 AM  

LasersHurt: Cletus C.: If this was the guy who exposed the Bush bullshiat, free this hero.
If this was the guy who exposed the Obama bullshiat, you can rot, traitor.

If you're a guy who thinks false equivalencies like this are somehow clever, stop it. Stop. No.


Ah, "False Equivalency."  The last and desperate cry of someone confronted with their own hypocrisy.
 
2013-08-21 11:17:38 AM  

Embden.Meyerhof: Eddie Adams from Torrance:

RIP Eli Manning

d23:

Eli Manning

Peyton Manning


You guys must be new here.


Seriously.  That is clearly a picture of noted victim of Nazi genocide, Helen Keller.
 
2013-08-21 11:17:48 AM  

vygramul: zinny: This is a win for him.  There was a time when he'd be immediately marched out behind the courthouse and shot.

Courthouse?


/fark?
//i am not disappoint.
/// slashies!!!
 
2013-08-21 11:18:13 AM  
You guys need to remember that he is in the military.  Before you join, they explain to you that you will fall under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.  Normal rules of US law do not always apply.  On top of that, any time you are given a security clearance, you have the consequences of releasing that information explained thoroughly.  He signed a contract acknowledging all of that, then released the documents.  He knew exactly what was going to happen.  Or at least he should have, if he is not a moron.  Trying to equate this with civilian whistleblowing is completely unreasonable.  Military clearances are given because a lot of the classified information, if released, can easily result in the deaths of US military personnel.  Is all classified stuff classified for that reason?  No, but a lot is, and indiscriminately releasing it is a bad thing.

TL;DR  He is in the military, and military justice comes down like a ton of bricks on releasing classified information.  And he knew that going in.
 
2013-08-21 11:18:51 AM  

vygramul: Carth: AirForceVet: Carth: This just in: if you break the law and get caught there is a good chance you'll go to jail!

It will be interesting to see if Obama pardons him on his last day in office.

First paragraph - Obvious

Second paragraph - Unlikely. Sounds like a Tea Party fantasy from Penthouse Forum.

I don't think is it very likely either but there has been a surprising amount of articles talking about it for the past month.

Just like Obama is simultaneously an empty suit and a tyrant, he's also a man who viciously pursues Snowden but is looking to pardon Manning.


Yea, I don't see how he can pardon Manning and not Snowden. From what I've read Snowden at least reviewed what documents he released before doing it.
 
2013-08-21 11:19:08 AM  

Felgraf: Lady J: so if you have evidence that your employer breaks the law, but you've signed a contract keeping everything you see at work secret, what are you supposed to do?

Among other things, release only the stuff pertinent to him breaking the law?

Again. He released a lot of shiat *that did not have to do with US wrongdoing*. Things that contained, *unredacted*, the names of, say, informants who were tipping off the US to terror plots.

shiat that you kind of want to keep secret to keep *folks, and their families from getting murdered*.


so is there going to be a similar trial of those repsonsible for the 'US wrongdoing'?
 
2013-08-21 11:19:40 AM  
not enough
 
2013-08-21 11:20:29 AM  

Felgraf: Lady J: so if you have evidence that your employer breaks the law, but you've signed a contract keeping everything you see at work secret, what are you supposed to do?

Among other things, release only the stuff pertinent to him breaking the law?

Again. He released a lot of shiat *that did not have to do with US wrongdoing*. Things that contained, *unredacted*, the names of, say, informants who were tipping off the US to terror plots.

shiat that you kind of want to keep secret to keep *folks, and their families from getting murdered*.


also. do you think if he had only released those documents pertinent to US wrongdoing he'd be a free man right now?

im genuinely asking.
 
2013-08-21 11:21:05 AM  

Smeggy Smurf: vygramul: Smeggy Smurf: It's criminal that exposing crimes is a criminal offense.

Wrong thread. This one's about Bradley Manning.

Are you telling me that in none of those documents was a crime exposed?


That's like saying that one of the Japanese-Americans FDR imprisoned was actually a criminal and complaining that, "incarcerating a criminal is a criminal offense."
 
2013-08-21 11:21:07 AM  
t1.gstatic.com
Tampering with government documents is a felony offense.
 
2013-08-21 11:21:15 AM  
Well, there's always petitioning for Presidential Pardon.

... who am I kidding. That'll never happen.
 
2013-08-21 11:21:31 AM  
If only he had gone though the proper internal channels like Gina Gray, he wouldn't be going to prison.
 
2013-08-21 11:21:39 AM  

Embden.Meyerhof: Eddie Adams from Torrance:

RIP Eli Manning

d23:

Eli Manning

Peyton Manning


You guys must be new here.


Much like AA, the newcommer on Fark is the most important person in the thread.
 
2013-08-21 11:22:03 AM  
Is it any wonder Snowden stayed in Russia?
 
2013-08-21 11:22:29 AM  

m1ke: I like the idea that exposing the government's illegal activities is now considered treason.  U. S. A.! U. S. A.!


Do any of you Manning defenders actually have any examples of "illegal activities" that Manning exposed? I've yet to see one.
 
2013-08-21 11:22:32 AM  

Random Anonymous Blackmail: Carth


It will be interesting to see if Obama pardons him on his last day in office.

This will not happen because of the spring board it could give the GOP on how if you aren't Republican you are a terrorist, traitor or sympathizer.


No, it wont happen because Obama would very much like for whiatleblowers to go to prison and suffer for daring to expose the state's actions.
 
2013-08-21 11:22:33 AM  

Eddie Adams from Torrance: [www.uu.edu image 275x391]
RIP Eli Manning


Geez, Patriots fans sure do hold a grudge, don't they?  It was just a game people! Get over i- ...
wut?  It's not the same gu- ...

my bad.
 
2013-08-21 11:22:45 AM  

vygramul: Charletron: He's not a hero, nor is he a traitor. He's a dumb kid.

I'd be willing to give him some latitude if he had been selective in his releases, even as misguided as they were. But 250k documents? At some point, it really is possible to be criminally stupid.


You gotta admit the document about the "dancing boys" paid for by DynCorp to "entertain" Afgani leaders was pure gold.
 
2013-08-21 11:23:04 AM  

freak7: make me some tea: Damn. I can't even crack a joke about that.

I can, screw the traitor.


It's always good to see a citizen showing the proper levels of due deference, unquestioning loyalty, and the prescribed levels of bitterness. Well done, sir, you rank highly on our lists. And believe me, we observe a great many citizens when checking our lists for compliance.
 
2013-08-21 11:23:17 AM  
See what happens when you post stuff online?

IT'S TIME TO STOP POSTING
 
2013-08-21 11:24:20 AM  
They tortured him into a confession and an apology. This 'conviction' doesn't mean jack sh*t in terms of justice.

1. Political 'crimes' must be heard by a civilian court, not court martial
2. Jurors must always review and approve plea bargains for fairness, and have the ability to force a trial
3. Jurors must have the power to subpoena, fine, and imprison government officials for misconduct, including torture
 
2013-08-21 11:24:25 AM  

Cataholic: LasersHurt: Cletus C.: If this was the guy who exposed the Bush bullshiat, free this hero.
If this was the guy who exposed the Obama bullshiat, you can rot, traitor.

If you're a guy who thinks false equivalencies like this are somehow clever, stop it. Stop. No.

Ah, "False Equivalency."  The last and desperate cry of someone confronted with their own hypocrisy.


Ah, "hypocrisy," the last and desperate cry of someone who got called out on a ridiculously oversimplified and pointless comparison.
 
2013-08-21 11:24:31 AM  

r1niceboy: freak7: make me some tea: Damn. I can't even crack a joke about that.

I can, screw the traitor.

It's always good to see a citizen showing the proper levels of due deference, unquestioning loyalty, and the prescribed levels of bitterness. Well done, sir, you rank highly on our lists. And believe me, we observe a great many citizens when checking our lists for compliance.


In his defense, Manning is quite literally a traitor.  Military personnel who release classified data and put people at risk are, by definition, traitors or spies, take your pick.
 
2013-08-21 11:24:43 AM  
The sentence is totally appropriate, but I still feel sorry for the stupid, naive kid. He signed up. He was aware of the rules. Why the fark didn't he just release the farking helicopter video?
I hope he gets out early, anyway.
 
2013-08-21 11:25:00 AM  

Carth: Yea, I don't see how he can pardon Manning and not Snowden. From what I've read Snowden at least reviewed what documents he released before doing it.


If the rumor that Snowden took the job in order to expose the NSA is true, there's less reason to like Snowden, because he either didn't understand the documents or it is an exercise in confirmation bias or he just plain didn't care.
 
2013-08-21 11:25:20 AM  

Lady J: Felgraf: Lady J: so if you have evidence that your employer breaks the law, but you've signed a contract keeping everything you see at work secret, what are you supposed to do?

Among other things, release only the stuff pertinent to him breaking the law?

Again. He released a lot of shiat *that did not have to do with US wrongdoing*. Things that contained, *unredacted*, the names of, say, informants who were tipping off the US to terror plots.

shiat that you kind of want to keep secret to keep *folks, and their families from getting murdered*.

so is there going to be a similar trial of those repsonsible for the 'US wrongdoing'?


Sure, other countries can hold whatever trial they want and put "the US" on trial for its wrongdoings.

Sovereignty how does it work?
 
2013-08-21 11:25:24 AM  
Not bad. They went from death to 60 years to 35 years...Not bad at all.
 
2013-08-21 11:25:26 AM  

ManateeGag: considering "Death" could have been on the table, that's not that bad.   is there the possibility for early release?


25 years I'd rather be killed
 
2013-08-21 11:25:43 AM  

WhoopAssWayne: They tortured him into a confession and an apology. This 'conviction' doesn't mean jack sh*t in terms of justice.

1. Political 'crimes' must be heard by a civilian court, not court martial
2. Jurors must always review and approve plea bargains for fairness, and have the ability to force a trial
3. Jurors must have the power to subpoena, fine, and imprison government officials for misconduct, including torture


Please explain how this is 'political'?  He violated regulation by releasing classified documents.  That's a one-way ticket to Court Martial.
 
2013-08-21 11:25:58 AM  
Wait, Obama is actually going to pardon this POS?!

Wow.
 
2013-08-21 11:26:08 AM  
Prison sucks.
Military prison sucks even more.
He's got that transgender thing going for him so he's probably going to be popular with the other prisoners.
 
2013-08-21 11:26:54 AM  
vygramul:
Had he simply released stuff that concerned him, I could have written it off as misguided at worst. Dumping 250k documents without knowing the contents thereof is not exposing shady shiat. It's showing depraved indifference.

So how do you feel about the Defense Department classifying all of those documents and exempting them from the FOIA without regards to their contents?
 
2013-08-21 11:27:43 AM  
Good. Don't share secrets.

Governments have been doing shady things for centuries. Hence why there are intelligence agencies. You expect them to stop? It's never going to happen.

As for Bradley Manning, he'll enjoy the soap getting dropped on the floor.
 
2013-08-21 11:27:52 AM  
Someone help me out here:
Does 35 years actually mean 35 years?

i.e. when civilians get sentenced to "X" years, it's almost always reduced with parole/good-behaviour/whatever, but I don't know how military courts work. He got credit for 3.5 years already served, so does that mean the day he's going to be able to walk around outside of guarded walls is actually 31.5 years from now?
 
2013-08-21 11:28:08 AM  

LasersHurt: Cataholic: LasersHurt: Cletus C.: If this was the guy who exposed the Bush bullshiat, free this hero.
If this was the guy who exposed the Obama bullshiat, you can rot, traitor.

If you're a guy who thinks false equivalencies like this are somehow clever, stop it. Stop. No.

Ah, "False Equivalency."  The last and desperate cry of someone confronted with their own hypocrisy.

Ah, "hypocrisy," the last and desperate cry of someone who got called out on a ridiculously oversimplified and pointless comparison.


It is simly impossible to over-simplify the simple-mindedness of this country's politically automatized  simpletons.
 
2013-08-21 11:28:17 AM  

mbillips: m1ke: I like the idea that exposing the government's illegal activities is now considered treason.  U. S. A.! U. S. A.!

Do any of you Manning defenders actually have any examples of "illegal activities" that Manning exposed? I've yet to see one.


Trying to talk out Collateral Murder is like trying to have a conversation about a recent famous shooting. It descends into a shiatfest with no end in sight.
 
2013-08-21 11:28:21 AM  

RangerTaylor: WhoopAssWayne: They tortured him into a confession and an apology. This 'conviction' doesn't mean jack sh*t in terms of justice.

1. Political 'crimes' must be heard by a civilian court, not court martial
2. Jurors must always review and approve plea bargains for fairness, and have the ability to force a trial
3. Jurors must have the power to subpoena, fine, and imprison government officials for misconduct, including torture

Please explain how this is 'political'?  He violated regulation by releasing classified documents.  That's a one-way ticket to Court Martial.


You don't understand. putting things in 'quotes' means you can just make shiat up and no one is allowed to call you on it. So what if Manning was a military personal who violated the UCMJ and tried in accordance with those laws.
 
2013-08-21 11:28:58 AM  
...and this ladies and gentlemen ... is what happens if you are a patriot.
 
2013-08-21 11:29:20 AM  
good.  next time dont betray your employer or country.


and if you do..

have the good sense to get the hell out of said country before they arrest you.
 
2013-08-21 11:29:26 AM  

mcreadyblue: vygramul: Charletron: He's not a hero, nor is he a traitor. He's a dumb kid.

I'd be willing to give him some latitude if he had been selective in his releases, even as misguided as they were. But 250k documents? At some point, it really is possible to be criminally stupid.

You gotta admit the document about the "dancing boys" paid for by DynCorp to "entertain" Afgani leaders was pure gold.


Doesn't Larry Craig now work for DynCorp?
 
2013-08-21 11:30:11 AM  

sudo give me more cowbell: Someone help me out here:
Does 35 years actually mean 35 years?

i.e. when civilians get sentenced to "X" years, it's almost always reduced with parole/good-behaviour/whatever, but I don't know how military courts work. He got credit for 3.5 years already served, so does that mean the day he's going to be able to walk around outside of guarded walls is actually 31.5 years from now?


reading the article....

its says he gets credit and they are apparently very generous with time off for good behaviour
 
2013-08-21 11:30:15 AM  

sudo give me more cowbell: Someone help me out here:
Does 35 years actually mean 35 years?

i.e. when civilians get sentenced to "X" years, it's almost always reduced with parole/good-behaviour/whatever, but I don't know how military courts work. He got credit for 3.5 years already served, so does that mean the day he's going to be able to walk around outside of guarded walls is actually 31.5 years from now?


it's a 1000 word(give or take) article and it explains that part within the first 200.
 
2013-08-21 11:30:39 AM  
He wanted to be a martyr for whatever reason and committed the first part when he released hundreds of thousands of classified documents without knowing what they contained. Now he has the second part. Good for him. If he thought this would have any other outcome he was seriously delusional.
 
2013-08-21 11:30:40 AM  

Voiceofreason01: vygramul:
Had he simply released stuff that concerned him, I could have written it off as misguided at worst. Dumping 250k documents without knowing the contents thereof is not exposing shady shiat. It's showing depraved indifference.

So how do you feel about the Defense Department classifying all of those documents and exempting them from the FOIA without regards to their contents?


We desperately need to reform how we classify data right now it is expensive and a pain in the butt for employees as well. Good luck getting the billions of dollars needed to revamp the IT infrastructure and clearance processes though since most politicians don't think it is much of a problem.
 
2013-08-21 11:30:42 AM  

cman: vpb: skinnycatullus: That's actually something of a win for him. His attorneys were hoping for 25 yrs while the prosecution asked for 60.

It seems a bit much.  His defense actually had a point when they pointed out that he shouldn't have had a security clearance because the Army knew he had mental problems.

What mental issues?

I haven't kept up on the case that much but the only mental issues I have heard was someone claiming his transgenderism was a mental illness.


isn't it? Or is it a physical mutation? Or brain chemical imbalance?
 
2013-08-21 11:30:51 AM  

d23: Eddie Adams from Torrance: [www.uu.edu image 275x391]
RIP Eli Manning

oh wow.  total, total failure.


Oops...

Let me try that again.

i236.photobucket.com
RIP Peyton Manning
 
2013-08-21 11:31:12 AM  

Aristocles: Wait, Obama is actually going to pardon this POS?!

Wow.


No he isn't.
 
2013-08-21 11:32:20 AM  

mbillips: m1ke: I like the idea that exposing the government's illegal activities is now considered treason.  U. S. A.! U. S. A.!

Do any of you Manning defenders actually have any examples of "illegal activities" that Manning exposed? I've yet to see one.


Some of the safeguards put into place after the Abu Grab photos got released were being ignored and prisoner abuse was still on going.  There were also a couple of oops our bad friendly fire incidents that they buried
 
2013-08-21 11:32:22 AM  

spentshells: ManateeGag: considering "Death" could have been on the table, that's not that bad.   is there the possibility for early release?

25 years I'd rather be killed


No, he's up for parole in nine. Doubt he'll get it, though; he's gonna be a celebrity inmate just like the Manson family. Patricia Krenwinkle and Leslie Van Houton have practically become saints while in prison, but they're never getting out because the case is so high profile.
 
2013-08-21 11:32:40 AM  

MadMattressMack: He wanted to be a martyr for whatever reason and committed the first part when he released hundreds of thousands of classified documents without knowing what they contained. Now he has the second part. Good for him. If he thought this would have any other outcome he was seriously delusional.


This is what happens when you give young idealistic kids a security clearance. They think if they just expose the truth people will rise up and overthrow the oppression and they'll be hailed as heroes!
 
2013-08-21 11:32:50 AM  
He knew (or could have looked up easily) what the charges and sentences would be.  He also knew he would be caught easily.  So I guess he thought it was worth it.

Easily fooled dumbasses end up in jail all the time.  He's no different.

Some of the information he released is of use to the public, but the way he went about doing it and his apparent lack of any plan for how to avoid being caught means this is a fairly predictable and inevitable result.
 
2013-08-21 11:33:19 AM  
RIP Ron Paul

/someone had to say it
 
2013-08-21 11:33:28 AM  
cdn.streamzoo.com

Bradley go down the hooole.

/first thing I thought of.
 
2013-08-21 11:33:29 AM  
Manning was wrong in doing what he did. His actions was clearly reckless...as well as the Monday Morning Quarterbacking that has gin on. The video tape of the Rueters reporters deaths, while sad, showed me that no matter how good technology gets, innocents will get harmed in war.

I couldn't tell that one guy had a TV camera, I thought it was a law rocket. It's one thing to do an analysis of a situation from the comfort of your desk... It's another thing to be in the feild.

As for Mannings motives, I think he was trying to do the right thing... But did it in the worse way possible.

Chances are, he'll be let out in 10 years for good behavior. One of the Falcon and snowman guys got out after a few years...far less time than what he was sentenced to.
 
2013-08-21 11:33:33 AM  

MadMattressMack: He wanted to be a martyr for whatever reason and committed the first part when he released hundreds of thousands of classified documents without knowing what they contained. Now he has the second part. Good for him. If he thought this would have any other outcome he was seriously delusional.


This. It's one of the reasons why I don't have any sympathy towards him.
 
2013-08-21 11:33:50 AM  

Voiceofreason01: vygramul:
Had he simply released stuff that concerned him, I could have written it off as misguided at worst. Dumping 250k documents without knowing the contents thereof is not exposing shady shiat. It's showing depraved indifference.

So how do you feel about the Defense Department classifying all of those documents and exempting them from the FOIA without regards to their contents?


DoD's national security exemption was abused from the get-go. For those not familiar, the first use of the national security exception was in response to a lawsuit over a B-29 crash. Decades later, it turned out that there was no actual national security interest - the military just didn't want to get sued. So DoD certainly abuses its classification authority. Most of the "unnecessary" classifications are because it's simply easier to be safe than sorry than it is to spend the time and man-hours to figure out if something should be classified.

But that's not the point. I can put my skid-marked tighty-whities in a safe. That doesn't mean that some guy cracking into my safe is now innocent of a crime.
 
2013-08-21 11:33:56 AM  
I just hope that she'll be able to start taking hormones in prison.  Being trapped in the wrong body is much worse than being trapped in federal prison.

/would know
 
2013-08-21 11:34:17 AM  

Carth: IlGreven: 35 years for a man who caused fewer deaths than George Zimmerman.

The difference being there is proof Manning broke the law. There is no proof Zimmerman did.


does everything have to somehow involve George Zimmerman?
 
d23 [TotalFark]
2013-08-21 11:34:42 AM  

Nutsac_Jim: d23: Gee.. what are the odds that the people that throw around the term "statism" are the same people already crying "not enough" about the Bradly Manning sentence?

Some people just don't like treasonous activity.


AND corporate controlled oligarchy, I am guessing.
 
2013-08-21 11:34:45 AM  
 
2013-08-21 11:35:31 AM  
He should be thankful his ass wasn't drone striked.
 
2013-08-21 11:35:32 AM  
I sincerely everyone keeps this in mind:  The courts didn't throw Manning in jail.  They threw US in jail.  You see, no one really cares what happens to one individual.  But they do want to make damn sure there are no copycats out there.  So, the 35 years behind bars thing is a message TO US.  SUBMIT, DON'T QUESTION, WE HAVE EVERYTHING UNDER CONTROL, IF YOU DON'T COMPLY, THIS WILL HAPPEN TO YOU.
 
2013-08-21 11:35:34 AM  

vygramul: Most of the "unnecessary" classifications are because it's simply easier to be safe than sorry than it is to spend the time and man-hours to figure out if something should be classified.


Also because if you're working on something it is usually easier to just save on the database your currently logged into. Oh that database contained classified files? Well yours is too now even if it didn't really need to be.
 
2013-08-21 11:35:38 AM  
Fort Leavenworth
Joint Base Lewis-McChord
Fort Carson

So, which one will he end up in?
 
2013-08-21 11:35:45 AM  

Voiceofreason01: vygramul:
Had he simply released stuff that concerned him, I could have written it off as misguided at worst. Dumping 250k documents without knowing the contents thereof is not exposing shady shiat. It's showing depraved indifference.

So how do you feel about the Defense Department classifying all of those documents and exempting them from the FOIA without regards to their contents?


Those were State Department diplomatic cables, and they were properly classified because disclosure could damage relations with the countries we were talking about. Classification is done page by page, and nothing is exempt from FOIA; they just redact the classified parts. It's a violation of FOIA to store classified material with lower-classified material in order to conceal the releasable stuff (although Cheney violated that all the time).
 
2013-08-21 11:36:10 AM  

Cletus C.: If this was the guy who exposed the Bush bullshiat, free this hero.


you sound butthurt, are you butthurt?
 
2013-08-21 11:36:14 AM  

Myria: I just hope that she'll be able to start taking hormones in prison.  Being trapped in the wrong body is much worse than being trapped in federal prison.

/would know


Has Manning actually declared it, or are we speculating?
 
2013-08-21 11:36:44 AM  
In the Military they don't care why you broke the rules only that you did. There kind of anal that way.
 
2013-08-21 11:36:48 AM  
Sorry make that 8 (with time served)
 
2013-08-21 11:36:51 AM  

Voiceofreason01: sudo give me more cowbell: Someone help me out here:
Does 35 years actually mean 35 years?

i.e. when civilians get sentenced to "X" years, it's almost always reduced with parole/good-behaviour/whatever, but I don't know how military courts work. He got credit for 3.5 years already served, so does that mean the day he's going to be able to walk around outside of guarded walls is actually 31.5 years from now?

it's a 1000 word(give or take) article and it explains that part within the first 200.


Crap. I read the article on CNN and nytimes and they didn't explain it. I came here assuming it was also missing from HuffPo.  Whaddaya know? HuffPo is more explanatory than CNN or nytimes, and I should read more before posting...
 
2013-08-21 11:37:29 AM  
One helluva troll thread.
 
2013-08-21 11:37:33 AM  
I'm wondering how many of the people here denigrating Manning for being too stupid to have an escape plan also called Snowden a coward for not staying to face the music.
 
2013-08-21 11:37:34 AM  

vpb: skinnycatullus: That's actually something of a win for him. His attorneys were hoping for 25 yrs while the prosecution asked for 60.

It seems a bit much.  His defense actually had a point when they pointed out that he shouldn't have had a security clearance because the Army knew he had mental problems.


Actually it sounds about right to me:

Added to the military's extensive credits for good behavior, Manning could be eligible for parole in about 8 years, when he is 33.
 
2013-08-21 11:37:40 AM  

SuperTramp: dittybopper

Releasing secret documents irrespective of whether they show US wrongdoing or not is bad.

The Pentagon Papers.


There is a difference between leaking a single (though large) classified summary of a war totalling at most 7,000 pages, and releasing something like three quarters of a *MILLION* documents without even an attempt to filter out those that might be irrelevant to US wrongdoing.

Also, I'd point out that the actual leaker of the Pentagon Papers was in the process of being prosecuted for it, but the charges were thrown out because the investigation by the government involved illegal wiretapping of the suspect, Daniel Ellsberg, and therefore much of the evidence against him was the "fruit of the poisoned tree" and thus inadmissible in court.

There was no such problem with Bradley Manning, and I'm willing to bet if the evidence against Ellsberg hadn't been collected in an unconstitutional matter, he would have been convicted.

There are also other differences:  Bradley Manning was subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice.  You lose many of your rights when you sign up for the military.  Daniel Ellsberg was a civilian at the time he leaked the papers.
 
2013-08-21 11:37:58 AM  

FrankenPC: I sincerely everyone keeps this in mind:  The courts didn't throw Manning in jail.  They threw US in jail.  You see, no one really cares what happens to one individual.  But they do want to make damn sure there are no copycats out there.  So, the 35 years behind bars thing is a message TO US.  SUBMIT, DON'T QUESTION, WE HAVE EVERYTHING UNDER CONTROL, IF YOU DON'T COMPLY, THIS WILL HAPPEN TO YOU.


im still trying to understand the in's and out's of the whole thing (without making enormous effort, in fairness), but this is definitely true
 
2013-08-21 11:38:02 AM  

2wolves: Fort Leavenworth
Joint Base Lewis-McChord
Fort Carson

So, which one will he end up in?


Reuters says Leavenworth.
 
2013-08-21 11:38:13 AM  

2wolves: Fort Leavenworth
Joint Base Lewis-McChord
Fort Carson

So, which one will he end up in?


Relatively certain Leavenworth's the answer here.  They like to put the big names there.  And the reeeeal nasties.
 
2013-08-21 11:38:36 AM  

ManateeGag: Carth: IlGreven: 35 years for a man who caused fewer deaths than George Zimmerman.

The difference being there is proof Manning broke the law. There is no proof Zimmerman did.

does everything have to somehow involve George Zimmerman?


No shiat. I think I'll petition Drew to have mentioning him in an unrelated thread be filtered to randomly replace Zimmerman with Trayvon and vice-versa. (Sorry, WWI now has a Trayvon Telegram.)
 
2013-08-21 11:38:38 AM  

Carth: Voiceofreason01: vygramul:
Had he simply released stuff that concerned him, I could have written it off as misguided at worst. Dumping 250k documents without knowing the contents thereof is not exposing shady shiat. It's showing depraved indifference.

So how do you feel about the Defense Department classifying all of those documents and exempting them from the FOIA without regards to their contents?

We desperately need to reform how we classify data right now it is expensive and a pain in the butt for employees as well. Good luck getting the billions of dollars needed to revamp the IT infrastructure and clearance processes though since most politicians don't think it is much of a problem.


because if there's one arm of the US Government that's chronically underfunded it's the Department of Defense.

/The attitude that it's OK to classify basic operational information about the US Government or to classify something simply because it might make the USA look bad(and then exempt said info from the FOIA on national defense grounds) is a problem.
 
2013-08-21 11:38:50 AM  
Well, that'll make sure nobody hates us for our freedom for quite some time.
 
2013-08-21 11:38:54 AM  
He will be found hanging in his cell in a week.
 
2013-08-21 11:39:51 AM  
img.fark.net
 
2013-08-21 11:40:01 AM  
i wonder what the venn diagram of attitude to guns and attitude to bradley manning sentence looks like
 
2013-08-21 11:40:56 AM  

vpb: skinnycatullus: That's actually something of a win for him. His attorneys were hoping for 25 yrs while the prosecution asked for 60.

It seems a bit much.  His defense actually had a point when they pointed out that he shouldn't have had a security clearance because the Army knew he had mental problems.


Yeah, how dare he take any responsibility for what was essentially a temper tantrum because his feelings were hurt about the military's DADT policy, which he knew before he enlisted.

He'll be in jail for about 10 years, tops.  That's too little if you ask me.  They should have locked him up for 50.
 
2013-08-21 11:41:04 AM  
Without Manning the Broncos are screwed this year!
 
2013-08-21 11:41:28 AM  

Ned Stark: I'm wondering how many of the people here denigrating Manning for being too stupid to have an escape plan also called Snowden a coward for not staying to face the music.


Someone can both be a coward and have a stupid escape plan.
 
2013-08-21 11:41:48 AM  

Lady J: so if you have evidence that your employer breaks the law, but you've signed a contract keeping everything you see at work secret, what are you supposed to do?


you don't release 250K documents which may or may not contain, customer records, trade secrets, employee health records, etc.  You bring the relevant documents to police.
 
2013-08-21 11:42:04 AM  

Aristocles: Wait, Obama is actually going to pardon this POS?!


If enough chemtrailed random internet libertarians say so, it MUST be true.
 
2013-08-21 11:42:09 AM  

Lady J: i wonder what the venn diagram of attitude to guns and attitude to bradley manning sentence looks like


sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net
 
2013-08-21 11:42:15 AM  
The guy broke the law, and he deserves to be sentenced. He did take one for the team though.
 
2013-08-21 11:42:22 AM  

bdub77: I can't help but feel a little sad about the whole thing. Our government is doing a lot of shady sh*t and these guys are exposing them for it, and this is what they get for it.

There isn't even a way to expose the government now for all this secret sh*t without being labeled a terrorist or traitor.


Is that what you're being told?  There are clearly defined, legal means of blowing the whistle.  He didn't go that route, nor have most of the other recent whistleblowers.
 
2013-08-21 11:42:33 AM  

Voiceofreason01: /The attitude that it's OK to classify basic operational information about the US Government or to classify something simply because it might make the USA look bad(and then exempt said info from the FOIA on national defense grounds) is a problem.


Yes. But it's also an unsolvable one.
 
2013-08-21 11:42:51 AM  
vygramul:
But that's not the point. I can put my skid-marked tighty-whities in a safe. That doesn't mean that some guy cracking into my safe is now innocent of a crime.

And Manning should be punished for committing the crime but there needs to be an discussion about the underlying issues i.e. why you're stealing people's dirty underwear and locking them up in a safe.
 
2013-08-21 11:43:50 AM  

Lady J: i wonder what the venn diagram of attitude to guns and attitude to bradley manning sentence looks like


Republicans? - probably a heavy overlap.
Libertarian? - probably almost no overlap.
Liberal? - probably impossible to guess.
 
2013-08-21 11:44:08 AM  
The FBI had an opening for an assassin. After all the background checks, interviews and testing were done, there were 3 finalists. For the final test, the FBI agents took one of the men to a large metal door and handed him a gun. 'We must know that you will follow your instructions no matter what the circumstances.'

Inside the room you will find your wife sitting in a chair . . . Kill her!!' The man said, 'You can't be serious. I could never shoot my wife.' The agent said, 'Then you're not the right man for this job. Take your wife and go home.'

The second man was given the same instructions. He took the gun and went into the room. All was quiet for about 5 minutes. The man came out with tears in his eyes, 'I tried, but I can't kill my wife.' The agent said, 'You don't have what it takes. Take your wife home.'

Finally, the last man was given the same instructions, to kill his wife. He took the gun and went into the room. Shots were heard, one after another. They heard screaming, crashing, banging on the walls. After a few minutes, all was quiet. The door opened slowly and there stood the man, wiping the sweat from his brow. 'Some idiot loaded the gun with blanks' he said. 'I had to strangle the biatch to death'.
 
2013-08-21 11:45:08 AM  

Evil Mackerel: He will be found hanging in his cell in a week.


Naw, they'll keep him in solitary confinement and alive for a few years first.  He'll have to be really sneaky to get out that fast.
 
2013-08-21 11:45:42 AM  
To anyone saying he did not screen it properly; he could not do that and have the same impact. The whole point of what he did was to expose the fact that everything is being placed behind the wall of secrecy without any good reason. We, as American people, are being denied even the most basic information in an unfiltered form. The only actual info we get has been put through so many spin cycles that what comes out has as much in common with the facts as orange soda does to an orange. In order to expose the ridiculousness of the situation he had to put it all out there. Notice how there were no lives lost when 30K+ documents were released in bulk. We had no significant set-backs in our military or diplomatic apparatus reported upon, which I am sure would have been trumpeted had that been the case.

What you are left with is the argument that he could have caused significant harm. Speeding could cause significant harm and cost a lot of lives in the wrong scenario. People are made to pay a fine and at worst perform community service. Drunk driving might result in a few weekends in jail. Both of those crimes have the potential for significant harm, but carry with them much lighter sentences. A multi-car wreck can result in half a dozen fatalities. That handful of lives lost is a tragedy and yet for the punishment people are given next to nothing in relative comparison to what Bradley Manning got. Justice must be blind, impartial and even handed in order for it to be just. He had no malice of intent and there was no actual harm. His motives seemed noble even if his actions were illegal. To me, in my understanding of things, those factors deserve heavy consideration when determining sentence. He did deserve to be found guilty, however being the liberal that I am, I think sentencing him to time served + 1000 hours of community service would have sufficed.

Yes, he broke the law... however the law was being used in such a way so as to arguably circumvent first amendment. By putting everything done behind the wall of secrecy you deny the press the ability to do it's job. Essentially, you elect to spoon feed to choice organizations the cherry picked information you want them to have, and to hell with the rest. No one can take the time to sift through documents because there are no documents through which to sift. You use one law to basically render an amendment to the constitution impotent. It is only in abstract these days, but the constitution ought to be considered the highest law of the land and be used as the guide for setting all other laws. It is impractical, inefficient and more prone to creating conflict between government and citizenry; but it is also the best way to keep a country free from government over-reach. At this point in our history it is an idealized notion... something antiquated and only paid lip service to. I know this, I understand this. I am a realist about it. It still hurts and angers me on some fundamental level when I see such blatant examples of it. It goes even deeper when I see so many of my fellow citizens defend something so against the spirit of our nation. Eh, but what do I know?
 
2013-08-21 11:45:44 AM  

ManateeGag: Cletus C.: If this was the guy who exposed the Bush bullshiat, free this hero.

you sound butthurt, are you butthurt?


Hardly on the level of Manning. But he'll get used to it.
 
2013-08-21 11:45:59 AM  
I expected that he would get jail time..
After all remember how long the sentenced the guys who committed war crimes in Abu Ghriab for.
Oh wait.
 
2013-08-21 11:46:40 AM  

vygramul: Voiceofreason01: /The attitude that it's OK to classify basic operational information about the US Government or to classify something simply because it might make the USA look bad(and then exempt said info from the FOIA on national defense grounds) is a problem.

Yes. But it's also an unsolvable one.


why
 
2013-08-21 11:46:49 AM  
FTA: "The 1,182 days he has spent in confinement since he was arrested in May 2010 will be applied toward his term. Added to the military's extensive credits for good behavior, Manning could be eligible for parole in about 8 years, when he is 33."
 
2013-08-21 11:47:04 AM  

mechgreg: what kind of crappy computer system does the US Army have where it allows someone to bring a writable CD to their computer which is used for military intelligence and start burning stuff onto it without any kind of checking or alarm going off?


that depends on his access level.  if his access level allowed him to do this, no alarm bells would go off.  if joe blow with low level clearance tried to fire up the burner, there might be a different reaction.
 
2013-08-21 11:47:09 AM  

Voiceofreason01: Carth: Voiceofreason01: vygramul:
Had he simply released stuff that concerned him, I could have written it off as misguided at worst. Dumping 250k documents without knowing the contents thereof is not exposing shady shiat. It's showing depraved indifference.

So how do you feel about the Defense Department classifying all of those documents and exempting them from the FOIA without regards to their contents?

We desperately need to reform how we classify data right now it is expensive and a pain in the butt for employees as well. Good luck getting the billions of dollars needed to revamp the IT infrastructure and clearance processes though since most politicians don't think it is much of a problem.

because if there's one arm of the US Government that's chronically underfunded it's the Department of Defense.

/The attitude that it's OK to classify basic operational information about the US Government or to classify something simply because it might make the USA look bad(and then exempt said info from the FOIA on national defense grounds) is a problem.


You'd need to update at hell of a lot more than the Department of Defense. CIA, DoE, DoJ, DHS, DoS Treasury and about two dozen other departments all produce and consume classified data and would need to be included in changes.
 
2013-08-21 11:47:15 AM  

Lady J: Felgraf: Lady J: so if you have evidence that your employer breaks the law, but you've signed a contract keeping everything you see at work secret, what are you supposed to do?

Among other things, release only the stuff pertinent to him breaking the law?

Again. He released a lot of shiat *that did not have to do with US wrongdoing*. Things that contained, *unredacted*, the names of, say, informants who were tipping off the US to terror plots.

shiat that you kind of want to keep secret to keep *folks, and their families from getting murdered*.

also. do you think if he had only released those documents pertinent to US wrongdoing he'd be a free man right now?

im genuinely asking.


I honestly don't know. They would not have been able to try him on *nearly* as many counts as they did, at the very least. Even if he were not a free man, I *could* say with confidence that his sentence would be shorter.

I cannot say for sure if he would be a free man or not, though. I vaguely recall hearing they *didn't* charge him with the bits that could have/were actual whistleblowing-but that could be me misremembering. Even if I'm *not* misremembering, it doesn't mean they wouldn't have charged him with that if it was the only thing he'd released. I do not have a ball that lets me peek into alternate universes, so I do not generally like to state with confidence what would have happened in alternate timelines.
 
2013-08-21 11:48:15 AM  

bdub77: I can't help but feel a little sad about the whole thing. Our government is doing a lot of shady sh*t and these guys are exposing them for it, and this is what they get for it.

There isn't even a way to expose the government now for all this secret sh*t without being labeled a terrorist or traitor.


^ THIS ^

The enemy of the United States Government has been identified, and that enemy is us - the citizens of the United States.
 
2013-08-21 11:48:34 AM  

vygramul: Lady J: i wonder what the venn diagram of attitude to guns and attitude to bradley manning sentence looks like

Republicans? - probably a heavy overlap.
Libertarian? - probably almost no overlap.
Liberal? - probably impossible to guess.


so is it the case that the people who shout loudest about the right to bear arms to protect themselves against the government and their sneaky ways, are the least likely to ever actually question the government's sneaky ways

maybe i should get a gun
 
2013-08-21 11:49:20 AM  

Mcavity: I expected that he would get jail time..
After all remember how long the sentenced the guys who committed war crimes in Abu Ghriab for.
Oh wait.


Yea 10 years and 3 years.
 
2013-08-21 11:49:42 AM  

Voiceofreason01: vygramul:
But that's not the point. I can put my skid-marked tighty-whities in a safe. That doesn't mean that some guy cracking into my safe is now innocent of a crime.

And Manning should be punished for committing the crime but there needs to be an discussion about the underlying issues i.e. why you're stealing people's dirty underwear and locking them up in a safe.


Again, can somebody cite a single specific example of what was supposedly wrong about the classification of the documents Manning released? I went to Wikileaks and read some of the unclassified documents. One was about sending F-14s to Iran in the early '70s. A sensitive topic we rightly wanted to keep confidential at the time, but properly declassified later. All the reports I read after the mass release were about similarly sensitive discussions of State Department actions and policy.

BTW, if you think the release of diplomatic cables involves DOD security policy, then you're too dumb to join the conversation. Manning had access to State Department files, which made up much of the data dump. The rest were mostly reports from lower-level commanders, which some claimed contradicted the strategic-level statements of the administration, but that hardly constitutes a crime.
 
2013-08-21 11:49:53 AM  

Dughan: The whole point of what he did was to expose the fact that everything is being placed behind the wall of secrecy without any good reason.


So much for war crimes being the motivation. I guess I shouldn't be surprised there wasn't an honorable motive after all.

/It also doesn't help that the material released demonstrates the opposite of your claim.
 
2013-08-21 11:50:59 AM  

bdub77: I can't help but feel a little sad about the whole thing. Our government is doing a lot of shady sh*t and these guys are exposing them for it, and this is what they get for it.

There isn't even a way to expose the government now for all this secret sh*t without being labeled a terrorist or traitor.


(with a sigh)....Sorry bdub, but that ship sailed several years ago.  I suggest you pick up a copy of "The Prince."  Even though it was written 500 years ago, it's an extraordinary blueprint for keeping the population in check.
 
2013-08-21 11:51:00 AM  

elffster: freak7: make me some tea: Damn. I can't even crack a joke about that.

I can, screw the traitor.

So....telling folks about war crimes that US troops commit is bad...right, gotcha.

Moran.


Really.  so this is the limit of the documents ?
 
2013-08-21 11:53:30 AM  
That's excessive.
 
2013-08-21 11:53:54 AM  

Carth: Sov


Carth: Lady J: Felgraf: Lady J: so if you have evidence that your employer breaks the law, but you've signed a contract keeping everything you see at work secret, what are you supposed to do?

Among other things, release only the stuff pertinent to him breaking the law?

Again. He released a lot of shiat *that did not have to do with US wrongdoing*. Things that contained, *unredacted*, the names of, say, informants who were tipping off the US to terror plots.

shiat that you kind of want to keep secret to keep *folks, and their families from getting murdered*.

so is there going to be a similar trial of those repsonsible for the 'US wrongdoing'?

Sure, other countries can hold whatever trial they want and put "the US" on trial for its wrongdoings.

Sovereignty how does it work?


I don't know. how does it work in this context?

so are you saying that if he did leak evidence of war crimes, no one in the US would bring anyone in the US to trial? it's up to, I don't know... sweden to do it?
 
2013-08-21 11:54:08 AM  

gaslight: A legal system that doesn't distinguish between leaks to the press in the public interest and treason against the nation will not only produce unjust results, but will deprive the public of critical information that is necessary for democratic accountability. This is a sad day for Bradley Manning, but it's also a sad day for all Americans who depend on brave whistleblowers and a free press for a fully informed public debate.

-  Ben Wizner, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Speech, Privacy & Technology Project


An ironic statement, because Manning's prison sentence is evidence that the government did exactly that: properly distinguish between good and bad leaks.  And it made it unambiguously clear that indiscriminately dumping hundreds of thousands of documents on Julian Assange falls squarely on the bad side.
 
2013-08-21 11:56:13 AM  
Maybe he'll get pardoned like Scooter did
 
2013-08-21 11:56:22 AM  
freak7:
War crimes? Don't blame the troops for a couple stupid journalists who thought it would be cool to walk around a combat zone with dudes carrying rifles and rpg's.

Oh, you mean standing around interviewing people with the Reuters reporters carrying no RPGs or rifles.

Unless you think this is a Glock, of course.

media.digitalcameraworld.com
 
2013-08-21 11:56:56 AM  

Rixel: Maybe he'll get pardoned like Scooter did


Well, they already forced him to apologize.
 
2013-08-21 11:57:05 AM  
When I was active duty with a security clearance part of my job consisted looking at country assessments before port visits. A sentence that says "There is a chance of Al Qaeda cells could be active in [some generic country]" could basically turn a basic tourism brochure into a Secret document. NCIS who did the reports were notorious for doing this. No sources or methods were described (I was a shipboard Crypto tech)
 
2013-08-21 11:57:41 AM  
mbillips:
Again, can somebody cite a single specific example of what was supposedly wrong about the classification of the documents Manning released?

You mean like classifying a video of a US helicopter firing on unarmed reporters?
 
2013-08-21 11:57:49 AM  

Tigger: freak7: elffster: freak7: make me some tea: Damn. I can't even crack a joke about that.

I can, screw the traitor.

So....telling folks about war crimes that US troops commit is bad...right, gotcha.

Moran.

War crimes? Don't blame the troops for a couple stupid journalists who thought it would be cool to walk around a combat zone with dudes carrying rifles and rpg's. As for the children in the van, blame the dummy who brought his kids along to evacuate shot up terrorists.

The previous administration admitted to war crimes publicly.

Now you might think that they are little war crimes and that they don't matter and it was worth it and so on. That's a perfectly acceptable point of view. But at least have the strength of character to own that point of view rather than pretending that there weren't any. It just makes you look weak.


Manning leaked the video of the Apache attack which Wikipedia then titled "collateral murder". That's what's being talked about here.
 
2013-08-21 11:58:37 AM  

FrankenPC: I sincerely everyone keeps this in mind:  The courts didn't throw Manning in jail.  They threw US in jail.  You see, no one really cares what happens to one individual.  But they do want to make damn sure there are no copycats out there.  So, the 35 years behind bars thing is a message TO US.  SUBMIT, DON'T QUESTION, WE HAVE EVERYTHING UNDER CONTROL, IF YOU DON'T COMPLY, THIS WILL HAPPEN TO YOU.


Yes. I believe this is exactly what you sign up for when you enlist. In any military, at any time, anywhere in the world. This is not a secret.
 
2013-08-21 11:59:19 AM  

Private_Citizen: Cletus C.: LasersHurt: Cletus C.: If this was the guy who exposed the Bush bullshiat, free this hero.
If this was the guy who exposed the Obama bullshiat, you can rot, traitor.

If you're a guy who thinks false equivalencies like this are somehow clever, stop it. Stop. No.

So, hero?

Both Dems and Repugs have crazies that do bad things.

The difference is, Democrats throw their crazies under the bus, the GOP let's their crazies drive the bus.


How did Pelosi get the keys then?
 
2013-08-21 12:00:35 PM  

Voiceofreason01: vygramul: Voiceofreason01: /The attitude that it's OK to classify basic operational information about the US Government or to classify something simply because it might make the USA look bad(and then exempt said info from the FOIA on national defense grounds) is a problem.

Yes. But it's also an unsolvable one.

why


It's way too complex a problem. First, consider the information itself. Sometimes something that has no significance in and of itself, but the nature of how we must have arrived at the information, or the fact that we know it (or knew it since time x) would be a big reveal in and of itself. Take, for example, CLASSIFIED: TOP SECRET! "Harry likes red socks, even though he can never find an appropriate time to wear them." Now, that seems silly and trite, unless Harry, China's finance minister, only told his secretary that. So it turns out his secretary is in our pocket. And the information might turn out useful to know if it turns out he likes them so much he can be bribed with red socks. (I'm picking something deliberately absurd to illustrate the point.)

Now, it'd be stupid to attach how we know each piece of information to every classified document. In fact, we intentionally don't. As an analyst, it was useful for me to know what frequencies would mean which Russian sub. But knowing who got us that information or which sensor is usually unimportant.

That's just the first problem. The discretion and context makes it impossible for a dispassionate third party to judge a given piece of information.

The second problem is that the people in charge of fixing this will be operating with the same set of incentives the people currently doing the classification have. They'll end up classifying all the same things for all the same reasons - expediency, uncertainty, and embarrassment. Only with maybe a different proportion.
 
2013-08-21 12:01:39 PM  

Lady J: Carth: Sov

Carth: Lady J: Felgraf: Lady J: so if you have evidence that your employer breaks the law, but you've signed a contract keeping everything you see at work secret, what are you supposed to do?

Among other things, release only the stuff pertinent to him breaking the law?

Again. He released a lot of shiat *that did not have to do with US wrongdoing*. Things that contained, *unredacted*, the names of, say, informants who were tipping off the US to terror plots.

shiat that you kind of want to keep secret to keep *folks, and their families from getting murdered*.

so is there going to be a similar trial of those repsonsible for the 'US wrongdoing'?

Sure, other countries can hold whatever trial they want and put "the US" on trial for its wrongdoings.

Sovereignty how does it work?

I don't know. how does it work in this context?

so are you saying that if he did leak evidence of war crimes, no one in the US would bring anyone in the US to trial? it's up to, I don't know... sweden to do it?


If he did leak irrefutable proof of "US" war crimes any country  (Sweden, China, Russia, North Korea),  the ICCt or the UNSC (but the US would obviously veto any attempt there) could put the US on trial. I put  US in quotes because generally you need a person who ordered the criminal action to be in court you can't just say "the untied states did it lets try it".

The problem in all these cases is the United States is  sovereign country and as such doesn't have to abide by any sentence handed down by another sovereign country and it can refuse hand over anyone convicted by an international court. Sure, Sweden could try Bush, Obama, Cheney or anyone else for war crimes but Obama can just say "sorry we're not giving them to you" and the only recourse they'd have would be to impose trade restrictions, expel our diplomats or  something similar.
 
2013-08-21 12:02:11 PM  
OK, since none of the Manning supporters seem to know what he actually leaked, here's a synopsis. The attack helicopter video (which Manning's lawyers argued had already been released, so what's the big deal?) War logs from Iraq with names of Iraqis who talked to us, putting their lives in danger. War logs from Afghanistan, with names redacted. Diplomatic cables that often embarrassed foreign governments because their private conversations didn't match their public statements (duh; that's sometimes how diplomacy works).

No war crimes. No evidence of overclassification. The most "damning' claim about the war logs is that they supposedly show a higher level of civilian deaths than the high-level assessments of the war. That claim has never been proven, despite those documents being in the hands of many major news outlets, some antagonistic to the U.S.
 
2013-08-21 12:02:29 PM  

mbillips: elffster: freak7: make me some tea: Damn. I can't even crack a joke about that.

I can, screw the traitor.

So....telling folks about war crimes that US troops commit is bad...right, gotcha.

Moran.

What war crimes? None of what Manning released exposed anything illegal. It was just more detailed versions of the battle reports, and a farkton of diplomatic cables. The video of the journalists getting killed by the helo made it clear they thought they were engaging armed baddies.

Also, subby, he's not going to the hole. He's going to gen pop at Leavenworth, which is a hell of a lot safer and more livable than a civilian federal pen.


Double entendre, how does it work?
 
2013-08-21 12:02:32 PM  

Lady J: vygramul: Lady J: i wonder what the venn diagram of attitude to guns and attitude to bradley manning sentence looks like

Republicans? - probably a heavy overlap.
Libertarian? - probably almost no overlap.
Liberal? - probably impossible to guess.

so is it the case that the people who shout loudest about the right to bear arms to protect themselves against the government and their sneaky ways, are the least likely to ever actually question the government's sneaky ways

maybe i should get a gun


Like I said - the libertarian gun nuts will champion Manning.
 
2013-08-21 12:05:07 PM  

gaslight: freak7:
War crimes? Don't blame the troops for a couple stupid journalists who thought it would be cool to walk around a combat zone with dudes carrying rifles and rpg's.

Oh, you mean standing around interviewing people with the Reuters reporters carrying no RPGs or rifles.

Unless you think this is a Glock, of course.

[media.digitalcameraworld.com image 610x458]


Yeah, because if you're standing next to a guy holding a rifle or RPG, the people who want to kill that guy should just call "Time Out! Journalists on the battlefield! No fighting today!"
 
2013-08-21 12:05:16 PM  

Lady J: FrankenPC: I sincerely everyone keeps this in mind:  The courts didn't throw Manning in jail.  They threw US in jail.  You see, no one really cares what happens to one individual.  But they do want to make damn sure there are no copycats out there.  So, the 35 years behind bars thing is a message TO US.  SUBMIT, DON'T QUESTION, WE HAVE EVERYTHING UNDER CONTROL, IF YOU DON'T COMPLY, THIS WILL HAPPEN TO YOU.

im still trying to understand the in's and out's of the whole thing (without making enormous effort, in fairness), but this is definitely true


Look, I'm going to keep this really, really simple:

Part of the oath that Manning took- twice- included the phrase "according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice". He hasn't been punished under Federal, state, or local law. He's being punished under military law, and the rules are different.

To make a freaking extreme example, imagine someone falling asleep at work. Chances are, they'd get a reprimand, maybe even fired. Under the UCMJ, there are certain times (when you're on guard, for example) where the maximum penalty for doing that is death.

If you don't want to risk punishment under the UCMJ, don't join the military. It's pretty simple, really.
 
2013-08-21 12:05:28 PM  
He knew he was breaking the law. He knew that exposing top secret material is considered treason. He knew the consequences for exposing those secrets would likely result in a long jail term (at best). He did it anyway. Justice was served.
 
2013-08-21 12:06:15 PM  
Which team did he QB for ?
 
2013-08-21 12:06:58 PM  

Nick Nostril: Which team did he QB for ?


The Saints, I think.
 
2013-08-21 12:07:00 PM  

Shakespeare's Monkey: [farm4.staticflickr.com image 432x240]

However you feel about this, he's truly f•cked.


I feel he deserves to be truly f*cked.  So...there
 
2013-08-21 12:07:50 PM  

Funk Brothers: As for Bradley Manning, he'll enjoy the soap getting dropped on the floor.


Just because someone is gay doesn't mean they "enjoy" being raped.

Guess you assume all straight women "enjoy" being raped too.
 
2013-08-21 12:08:03 PM  
Seems heavy-handed to me. But I support the death penalty in other cases so WTF do I know?
 
2013-08-21 12:09:03 PM  

ariseatex: Funk Brothers: As for Bradley Manning, he'll enjoy the soap getting dropped on the floor.

Just because someone is gay doesn't mean they "enjoy" being raped.

Guess you assume all straight women "enjoy" being raped too.


Well there go my plans for the evening.
 
2013-08-21 12:10:59 PM  

fonebone77: He will be eligible for parole apparently.  If I'm reading it correctly he would qualify in approximately 10 years.  I would not be surprised to see him make his first parole.


There is no parole for federal crimes - for civilians - since parole was banned during the Reagan administration. Manning actually lucky to have been convicted in the military in this regard.
 
2013-08-21 12:11:26 PM  
vygramul:
Had he simply released stuff that concerned him, I could have written it off as misguided at worst.
Dumping 250k documents without knowing the contents thereof is not exposing shady shiat. It's
showing depraved indifference.


Agreed.  On the one hand, fark the Global Corporate Elite and their lackeys in government but
you can't really call it "whistle blowing" when the guy had no idea what data he was releasing.
 
2013-08-21 12:14:16 PM  

freak7: ariseatex: Funk Brothers: As for Bradley Manning, he'll enjoy the soap getting dropped on the floor.

Just because someone is gay doesn't mean they "enjoy" being raped.

Guess you assume all straight women "enjoy" being raped too.

Well there go my plans for the evening.


50% of all participants enjoy rape.
 
2013-08-21 12:17:25 PM  

RangerTaylor: r1niceboy: freak7: make me some tea: Damn. I can't even crack a joke about that.

I can, screw the traitor.

It's always good to see a citizen showing the proper levels of due deference, unquestioning loyalty, and the prescribed levels of bitterness. Well done, sir, you rank highly on our lists. And believe me, we observe a great many citizens when checking our lists for compliance.

In his defense, Manning is quite literally a traitor.  Military personnel who release classified data and put people at risk are, by definition, traitors or spies, take your pick.


I agree he's committed espionage, but not with a mind towards harming US interests. He was certainly reckless, but doesn't deserve the casual hatred he's receiving. He should be punished, and his sentence is just. None of that takes away from the fact the US has a massive culture of secrecy that in many cases is entirely based on agencies wielding power. That the FBI can hand a letter to a person saying that we can take any information on any person, and if you even ask a lawyer whether this is legal, you can be prosecuted, is near the bottom of the slippery slope towards a police state. That is horrifying, and any American (or Brit, for that matter) talking about their freedom is completely deluded to think they have any. You can vote for this politician or that one, both of whom roll over for the NSA, the CIA, the DoD, or FBI on command. There's a reason J. Edgar Hoover stayed in his position for so long. He had more power than any of the politicians that thought they could knock him down a peg, and he used that power. as a result the culture of secrecy, and power, and spying domestically, became an industry. Now people think the real freedom in this country is whether or not they can buy a gun. The real freedom of standing up for what you believe, and being able to act on that peacefully, has long gone. We have undercover officers infiltrating peace movements, civil rights advocates and leaders gunned down, and people still believe they live in a free society because you are free to buy a car with heated seats.

George Carlin was right about the illusion of freedom and the illusion of choice. You don't have any.
 
2013-08-21 12:18:29 PM  
I bet he gets more time than the guy about to go on trial for murdering 16 civilians in Iraq.

Uncovering war crimes is worse than committing war crimes. "Murrica.
 
2013-08-21 12:19:11 PM  

vygramul: Lionel Mandrake: [www.bunkermuseum.de image 184x331]

"Thirty-Five years??  That's harsh"

And a lot of those guys were released early by the West German government.


Yup.  Usually for "poor health."  Many lived several seemingly healthy lives, though.

But that specific guy (Speer) served his full 20 year term.

I guess Bradley Manning's crimes are almost twice as bad as running a slave-labor industry as Nazi Minister of Armaments.
 
2013-08-21 12:19:16 PM  
How many years were the people in the video sentenced to?
 
2013-08-21 12:19:42 PM  

Voiceofreason01: mbillips:
Again, can somebody cite a single specific example of what was supposedly wrong about the classification of the documents Manning released?

You mean like classifying a video of a US helicopter firing on unarmed reporters?


You mean the video of a US helicopter firing on a group of 8-9 men, some armed? After a call for fire from ground troops who'd been fired on from that direction? My understanding is that the video wasn't released immediately because it was evidence used in an investigation of the journalist's deaths, which resulted in these reports.

There's no doubt that DoD and other agencies often slow-roll FOIA requests, particularly during the Bush administration, and that they overclassify things. But that video shows an almost archetypical example of collateral civilian casualties. Civilians are intermingled with armed combatants DURING combat. They're not identifiable as journalists (no PRESS markings on their cars or clothing). Sucks to be them, but you really can't expect anything else to happen in that situation.

Releasing that video wasn't whistle-blowing. It was just ignorant, dickish, recklessness. It provoked an emotional response without shedding any new light on the case.
 
2013-08-21 12:20:02 PM  

Nem Wan: fonebone77: He will be eligible for parole apparently.  If I'm reading it correctly he would qualify in approximately 10 years.  I would not be surprised to see him make his first parole.

There is no parole for federal crimes - for civilians - since parole was banned during the Reagan administration. Manning actually lucky to have been convicted in the military in this regard.



A little refresher:

http://www.justice.gov/uspc/faqs.html
 
2013-08-21 12:22:12 PM  
He'll be out on parole in 10 years.
 
2013-08-21 12:22:54 PM  

Carth: MadMattressMack: He wanted to be a martyr for whatever reason and committed the first part when he released hundreds of thousands of classified documents without knowing what they contained. Now he has the second part. Good for him. If he thought this would have any other outcome he was seriously delusional.

This is what happens when you give young idealistic kids a security clearance. They think if they just expose the truth people will rise up and overthrow the oppression and they'll be hailed as heroes!


I joined the Army when I was 18 without a good ideological reason (kicked out of the house for irresponsibly partying all the time and just wanted security to have a house and income) and would have never considered doing something like this. If you didn't have the ideals in your head they drill it into you.

Though I do blame his command as well for not pulling him when it became obvious he was unfit. Plus they put you through psych evaluations and that should've picked up on this. From the documents I've briefly looked at and footage I've seen it seems some back door government normal BS to get the upper hand and grey area engagements. I don't see command ordering the targeting civilians for indiscriminate killing or genocide.

There's some bad and damaging stuff in the released documents, but the military's a broad sword designed for fighting other broad swords. It's not a scalpel. There are some scalpel teams, but they're not numerous enough to be effective theater wide, which is what the broad sword is designed for. Because of that there will be mistakes. It's not pretty but it's how the job gets done. And we're far better at limiting collateral damage than most, if not all, millitaries. We worry about how our guys are going to live with themselves when they get back.

In basic one of the things they went over was not doing something you're not supposed to do. That it is OK, and your duty, to refuse an order to do things like kill civilians. Our troops aren't mindless killing machines (well, maybe the USMC) but have a conscious as well. Though I don't think Manning got this and it seems he thought this was the case. That he thought command was complicit in mass murder and he was going to be some sort of hero, or at least show the world something new, by exposing it. But that wasn't the case. He exposed dark side of the military doing military stuff. That we can't 100% prevent killing innocent people. But that was nothing new and is something that is actively being worked on to minimize. And that knowledge

No matter what his ideals were, short of an overthrow of the government he had to know he was going to get punished severely for this. Security is a big concern in the military for some reason
 
2013-08-21 12:24:53 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: I guess Bradley Manning's crimes are almost twice as bad as running a slave-labor industry as Nazi Minister of Armaments.


William Calley served 3.5 years of house arrestfor his conviction of murdering 22 Vietnamese civilians at My Lai.
.
Manning might serve ten times that amount in prison.
 
2013-08-21 12:25:44 PM  

southpawtn: I bet he gets more time than the guy about to go on trial for murdering 16 civilians in Iraq.

Uncovering war crimes is worse than committing war crimes. "Murrica.


One of the guys who raped and murdered a 14 year-old Iraqi girl and then murdered her family only barely escaped the death penalty.
 
2013-08-21 12:26:16 PM  

Somacandra: Aristocles: Wait, Obama is actually going to pardon this POS?!

If enough chemtrailed random internet libertarians say so, it MUST be true.


I didn't know people still believed this.

Anyway, I didn't read that Obama was going to pardon Manning from any Libertarian comments. I read about Obama pardoning Bradley Manning from a comment posted by a Democrat.

Nice try at getting in a jab and Libertarians, tho.
 
2013-08-21 12:28:09 PM  
One down, two more to go
 
2013-08-21 12:28:26 PM  

southpawtn: I bet he gets more time than the guy about to go on trial for murdering 16 civilians in Iraq.

Uncovering war crimes is worse than committing war crimes. "Murrica.


They're gonna give that guy life without parole, if you mean the one who murdered all those people in Afghanistan. He's already pleaded guilty to avoid the death penalty. The prosecutors tried to give Stephen Green, the Mahmudiya rapist/murderer the death penalty, but he had been discharged and was tried in civilian court, and the jury wouldn't go for it. All the other soldiers in that case got 90 years or more. So your argument is invalid.
 
2013-08-21 12:29:11 PM  

The Irresponsible Captain: Well, there's always petitioning for Presidential Pardon.

... who am I kidding. That'll never happen.


Well he is gay, and Obama's in office...my guess would be presidential pardon with promotion to Brigadier General.
 
2013-08-21 12:29:35 PM  

mbillips: Civilians are intermingled with armed combatants DURING combat. They're not identifiable as journalists (no PRESS markings on their cars or clothing). Sucks to be them, but you really can't expect anything else to happen in that situation.


What's the calculation you would use to determine if you would open fire on a suspected militant among civilians? How many Iraqi civilians is a US soldier worth? 10, 15? Do children count as more or less than an adult?
 
2013-08-21 12:30:44 PM  

Cubicle Jockey: Lionel Mandrake: I guess Bradley Manning's crimes are almost twice as bad as running a slave-labor industry as Nazi Minister of Armaments.

William Calley served 3.5 years of house arrestfor his conviction of murdering 22 Vietnamese civilians at My Lai.
.
Manning might serve ten times that amount in prison.


I would suggest there was something wrong with Calley and Speer's sentences rather than there being something wrong with Manning's. But, then, I think murdering people deserves more than 3.5 years of house arrest. YMMV.
 
Ant
2013-08-21 12:31:10 PM  

ManateeGag: considering "Death" could have been on the table, that's not that bad.   is there the possibility for early release?


Do you really think death is still something that could be given for this type of thing? I don't think that would fly anymore.
 
2013-08-21 12:32:03 PM  

Cubicle Jockey: Lionel Mandrake: I guess Bradley Manning's crimes are almost twice as bad as running a slave-labor industry as Nazi Minister of Armaments.

William Calley served 3.5 years of house arrestfor his conviction of murdering 22 Vietnamese civilians at My Lai.
.
Manning might serve ten times that amount in prison.


Calley was sentenced to life in Leavenworth by the Army, but Nixon had him transferred to house arrest and later pardoned him. The morale of the story? Don't vote for Nixon.
 
2013-08-21 12:33:17 PM  
And yet the War criminals he exposed are probably about to get more Billion dollar no-bid contracts.
 
2013-08-21 12:33:28 PM  

Aristocles: Somacandra: Aristocles: Wait, Obama is actually going to pardon this POS?!

If enough chemtrailed random internet libertarians say so, it MUST be true.

I didn't know people still believed this.

Anyway, I didn't read that Obama was going to pardon Manning from any Libertarian comments. I read about Obama pardoning Bradley Manning from a comment posted by a Democrat.

Nice try at getting in a jab and Libertarians, tho.


As a Libertarian, I think the blind support many Libertarians give Manning is pretty pathetic.

Snowden had a principled beef over a policy most Americans take issue with, which he made public while not a sworn member of the military.

Manning was upset because of don't ask don't tell(a policy he agreed to when he enlisted) and just blindly slung whatever dirt he had access to for the media dogs to scoop up.
 
2013-08-21 12:33:47 PM  

mbillips: Cubicle Jockey: Lionel Mandrake: I guess Bradley Manning's crimes are almost twice as bad as running a slave-labor industry as Nazi Minister of Armaments.

William Calley served 3.5 years of house arrestfor his conviction of murdering 22 Vietnamese civilians at My Lai.
.
Manning might serve ten times that amount in prison.

Calley was sentenced to life in Leavenworth by the Army, but Nixon had him transferred to house arrest and later pardoned him. The morale of the story? Don't vote for Nixon.


But he always carries the robot vote:

theinfosphere.org
 
2013-08-21 12:34:07 PM  

mbillips: Cubicle Jockey: Lionel Mandrake: I guess Bradley Manning's crimes are almost twice as bad as running a slave-labor industry as Nazi Minister of Armaments.

William Calley served 3.5 years of house arrestfor his conviction of murdering 22 Vietnamese civilians at My Lai.
.
Manning might serve ten times that amount in prison.

Calley was sentenced to life in Leavenworth by the Army, but Nixon had him transferred to house arrest and later pardoned him. The morale of the story? Don't vote for Nixon.


No wonder Republicans are so worried Obama will pardon Manning. That's what they would do.
 
2013-08-21 12:37:52 PM  
He's not getting out until 2048 if he serves the full 35 years. Most of you guys here will be in your 70's, 80's or dead by then.

/he should've never gotten any prison time
//not one person died or was injured by his whistle-blowing
 
2013-08-21 12:39:07 PM  

netgamer7k: He's not getting out until 2048 if he serves the full 35 years. Most of you guys here will be in your 70's, 80's or dead by then.

/he should've never gotten any prison time
//not one person died or was injured by his whistle-blowing


If someone empties a clip into the air, he's going to serve time even if none of the bullets hurts anyone when they come back down.
 
2013-08-21 12:41:46 PM  

Elvis Presleys Death Throne: Aristocles: Somacandra: Aristocles: Wait, Obama is actually going to pardon this POS?!

If enough chemtrailed random internet libertarians say so, it MUST be true.

I didn't know people still believed this.

Anyway, I didn't read that Obama was going to pardon Manning from any Libertarian comments. I read about Obama pardoning Bradley Manning from a comment posted by a Democrat.

Nice try at getting in a jab and Libertarians, tho.

As a Libertarian, I think the blind support many Libertarians give Manning is pretty pathetic.

Snowden had a principled beef over a policy most Americans take issue with, which he made public while not a sworn member of the military.

Manning was upset because of don't ask don't tell(a policy he agreed to when he enlisted) and just blindly slung whatever dirt he had access to for the media dogs to scoop up.


Me too. I lean libertarian, and, believe it or not, a little to the right, and while I feel that some of our policies are less than perfect, to say the least, that does not mitigate betraying a sworn oath and recklessly disseminating confidential documents, i.e., being a traitor.
 
2013-08-21 12:42:22 PM  

Cubicle Jockey: mbillips: Civilians are intermingled with armed combatants DURING combat. They're not identifiable as journalists (no PRESS markings on their cars or clothing). Sucks to be them, but you really can't expect anything else to happen in that situation.

What's the calculation you would use to determine if you would open fire on a suspected militant among civilians? How many Iraqi civilians is a US soldier worth? 10, 15? Do children count as more or less than an adult?


I don't know; I'm not a combat soldier. It would depend on the Rules of Engagement. If I incidentally kill 10 civilians to get a guy who is likely to kill hundreds (say, I know that this guy is the lead VBIED expert in a region), then that calculation might be different. In this case, there were no indication of journalists or other innocent civilians being involved in that group, just some guys who didn't seem to be armed. There was an active small arms fight going on, with U.S. troops taking incoming fire. The children who were allegedly killed were inside a building where the armed combatants had taken refuge, again, during an active firefight, and not visible to the helo pilots.

The best way to avoid civilian casualties is to plan your operations to do so. Once you plan an operation that's going to include air support in an densely populated urban area, some civilians are going to die. That's completely unavoidable. I was in Iraq when that incident happened, and it just sort of blended in with the 100 Iraqis who were found EVERY MORNING with their hands bound and a bullet in their heads (Sunnis killed by shiate militia), and the daily car bombs that killed about 50 to 100 people (mostly in shiate neighborhoods). A good buddy of mine, an Iraqi translator, died in one of those car bombings.

My opinion was that we were relying too much on direct combat and other kinetic force, and not enough on soft power, which turned out to be vindicated, as the "Surge" was basically a wholesale purchase of Sunni gunmen with U.S. money to fight Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia.
 
2013-08-21 12:43:23 PM  

mbillips: Calley was sentenced to life in Leavenworth by the Army, but Nixon had him transferred to house arrest and later pardoned him. The morale of the story? Don't vote for Nixon.


vygramul: I would suggest there was something wrong with Calley and Speer's sentences rather than there being something wrong with Manning's. But, then, I think murdering people deserves more than 3.5 years of house arrest. YMMV.



I agree. So why do you believe Nixon pardoned him?
 
2013-08-21 12:44:53 PM  

vygramul: mbillips: Cubicle Jockey: Lionel Mandrake: I guess Bradley Manning's crimes are almost twice as bad as running a slave-labor industry as Nazi Minister of Armaments.

William Calley served 3.5 years of house arrestfor his conviction of murdering 22 Vietnamese civilians at My Lai.
.
Manning might serve ten times that amount in prison.

Calley was sentenced to life in Leavenworth by the Army, but Nixon had him transferred to house arrest and later pardoned him. The morale of the story? Don't vote for Nixon.

No wonder Republicans are so worried Obama will pardon Manning. That's what they would do.


You're getting today's rugged individualist Reagan Republicans confused with the Republicans of the Socialist Nixon regime.
 
2013-08-21 12:45:26 PM  

MadMattressMack: mbillips: Cubicle Jockey: Lionel Mandrake: I guess Bradley Manning's crimes are almost twice as bad as running a slave-labor industry as Nazi Minister of Armaments.

William Calley served 3.5 years of house arrestfor his conviction of murdering 22 Vietnamese civilians at My Lai.
.
Manning might serve ten times that amount in prison.

Calley was sentenced to life in Leavenworth by the Army, but Nixon had him transferred to house arrest and later pardoned him. The morale of the story? Don't vote for Nixon.

But he always carries the robot vote:

[theinfosphere.org image 511x384]


Ah-rooooo!
 
2013-08-21 12:47:13 PM  

Cubicle Jockey: mbillips: Civilians are intermingled with armed combatants DURING combat. They're not identifiable as journalists (no PRESS markings on their cars or clothing). Sucks to be them, but you really can't expect anything else to happen in that situation.

What's the calculation you would use to determine if you would open fire on a suspected militant among civilians? How many Iraqi civilians is a US soldier worth? 10, 15? Do children count as more or less than an adult?


Given the cost of investment (school/medical/social programs) and earning potential of the average American on top of their specialized training cost investment each one is worth several hundred of any given third world country in terms of both investment spent on them by society that would be lost on death and in terms of potential return to society (taxes, spent income, etc). That's just way it works.
 
2013-08-21 12:49:02 PM  

r1niceboy: I agree he's committed espionage, but not with a mind towards harming US interests. He was certainly reckless, but doesn't deserve the casual hatred he's receiving. He should be punished, and his sentence is just. None of that takes away from the fact the US has a massive culture of secrecy that in many cases is entirely based on agencies wielding power. That the FBI can hand a letter to a person saying that we can take any information on any person, and if you even ask a lawyer whether this is legal, you can be prosecuted, is near the bottom of the slippery slope towards a police state. That is horrifying, and any American (or Brit, for that matter) talking about their freedom is completely deluded to think they have any. You can vote for this politician or that one, both of whom roll over for the NSA, the CIA, the DoD, or FBI on command. There's a reason J. Edgar Hoover stayed in his position for so long. He had more power than any of the politicians that thought they could knock him down a peg, and he used that power. as a result the culture of secrecy, and power, and spying domestically, became an industry. Now people think the real freedom in this country is whether or not they can buy a gun. The real freedom of standing up for what you believe, and being able to act on that peacefully, has long gone. We have undercover officers infiltrating peace movements, civil rights advocates and leaders gunned down, and people still believe they live in a free society because you are free to buy a car with heated seats.

George Carlin was right about the illusion of freedom and the illusion of choice. You don't have any.


I do hope that I never actually become that cynical, but I don't disagree with a lot of this either. So far, we still have freedom of the press, although the armor in that is starting to get chinked away as well...
 
2013-08-21 12:49:36 PM  

vygramul: mbillips: Cubicle Jockey: Lionel Mandrake: I guess Bradley Manning's crimes are almost twice as bad as running a slave-labor industry as Nazi Minister of Armaments.

William Calley served 3.5 years of house arrestfor his conviction of murdering 22 Vietnamese civilians at My Lai.
.
Manning might serve ten times that amount in prison.

Calley was sentenced to life in Leavenworth by the Army, but Nixon had him transferred to house arrest and later pardoned him. The morale of the story? Don't vote for Nixon.

No wonder Republicans are so worried Obama will pardon Manning. That's what they would do.


I hope he does, just before leaving office.  Three and a half years on top of time-served is good for me.
 
2013-08-21 12:53:39 PM  
Don't you mean "down the rabbit hole", Subby?

Which Lewis Carroll quotation best expresses your feeling for the "traitor", aka whistle-blower, Manning?

a) We're through the Looking Glass here, people.
b) Off with his head!
c) Eat me.

Unlike a true traitor or a leaker, he had a misplaced faith in the US military and government. I sign up for (c). Anybody who accepts the designation "traitor" will automatically select (b).
 
2013-08-21 12:54:38 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: vygramul: mbillips: Cubicle Jockey: Lionel Mandrake: I guess Bradley Manning's crimes are almost twice as bad as running a slave-labor industry as Nazi Minister of Armaments.

William Calley served 3.5 years of house arrestfor his conviction of murdering 22 Vietnamese civilians at My Lai.
.
Manning might serve ten times that amount in prison.

Calley was sentenced to life in Leavenworth by the Army, but Nixon had him transferred to house arrest and later pardoned him. The morale of the story? Don't vote for Nixon.

No wonder Republicans are so worried Obama will pardon Manning. That's what they would do.

I hope he does, just before leaving office.  Three and a half years on top of time-served is good for me.


What deluded fantasy land are you living in?  Obama is probably the worst anti-whistleblower president in the history of the US.  He's probably sad that he couldn't personally execute Manning, the last thing he's going to do is pardon Manning
 
2013-08-21 12:55:01 PM  

pag1107: He'll be out on parole in 10 years.


now that dont make sense.

parole is basically a ...you are free.. but we are going to watch you closer so you dont commit the same crime or types of crime again.

how is he going to commit the same crime or type of crime again?  aint no way he is ever getting security clearance again is there?

hell his grandkids wont ever get security clearance
 
2013-08-21 12:55:31 PM  

Aristocles: Me too. I lean libertarian, and, believe it or not, a little to the right


You said "Republican" twice.
 
2013-08-21 12:56:40 PM  

Cubicle Jockey: mbillips: Calley was sentenced to life in Leavenworth by the Army, but Nixon had him transferred to house arrest and later pardoned him. The morale of the story? Don't vote for Nixon.

vygramul: I would suggest there was something wrong with Calley and Speer's sentences rather than there being something wrong with Manning's. But, then, I think murdering people deserves more than 3.5 years of house arrest. YMMV.


I agree. So why do you believe Nixon pardoned him?


It was part of Nixon's campaign against the anti-war movement. Calley had a LOT of defenders in America, including Jimmy Carter. Even some people who were anti-establishment thought Calley had been made a scapegoat for policies created well above his rank. Speer's sentence was quite severe for the times; these ridiculously long sentences that you see in the U.S. are a product of generations of politicians winning votes by being tuff on crime.
 
2013-08-21 12:56:53 PM  

brantgoose: Don't you mean "down the rabbit hole", Subby?

Which Lewis Carroll quotation best expresses your feeling for the "traitor", aka whistle-blower, Manning?

a) We're through the Looking Glass here, people.
b) Off with his head!
c) Eat me.

Unlike a true traitor or a leaker, he had a misplaced faith in the US military and government. I sign up for (c). Anybody who accepts the designation "traitor" will automatically select (b).


Please explain how an active duty servicemember with a security clearance deliberately releasing classified material in contravention of stated orders is not treason.  As soon as you can do that, we'll move forward.  Well-intentioned or not (I personally think he was throwing a tantrum more than anything) that is still treason.
 
2013-08-21 12:57:01 PM  

ShadowKamui: Lionel Mandrake: vygramul: mbillips: Cubicle Jockey: Lionel Mandrake: I guess Bradley Manning's crimes are almost twice as bad as running a slave-labor industry as Nazi Minister of Armaments.

William Calley served 3.5 years of house arrestfor his conviction of murdering 22 Vietnamese civilians at My Lai.
.
Manning might serve ten times that amount in prison.

Calley was sentenced to life in Leavenworth by the Army, but Nixon had him transferred to house arrest and later pardoned him. The morale of the story? Don't vote for Nixon.

No wonder Republicans are so worried Obama will pardon Manning. That's what they would do.

I hope he does, just before leaving office.  Three and a half years on top of time-served is good for me.

What deluded fantasy land are you living in?  Obama is probably the worst anti-whistleblower president in the history of the US.  He's probably sad that he couldn't personally execute Manning, the last thing he's going to do is pardon Manning


Um...the fantasy land where I'm allowed to express a hope, I guess.
 
2013-08-21 12:59:00 PM  

EyeballKid: Aristocles: Me too. I lean libertarian, and, believe it or not, a little to the right

You said "Republican" twice.


Maybe pictures will help

www.placergop.org
 
2013-08-21 01:04:10 PM  
Private_Citizen:

Both Dems and Repugs have crazies that do bad things.

The difference is, Democrats throw their crazies under the bus, the GOP let's their crazies drive the bus.


The Dems put their crazies in charge of the Democratic National Committee, and make them Speaker of the House.
 
2013-08-21 01:06:00 PM  
mbillips:
Yeah, because if you're standing next to a guy holding a rifle or RPG, the people who want to kill that guy should just call "Time Out! Journalists on the battlefield! No fighting today!"

Which might work if you also hadn't been bombing and strafing the allied nations that go in with you. Only imperial stormtroopers are so precise. As far back as 2005, only two years after the invasion, a dozen journalists had been killed and even CNN was asking if this was deliberate.

(Won't post links to blood spattered camera gear as people are just coming back from lunch.)
 
2013-08-21 01:06:07 PM  

RangerTaylor: brantgoose: Don't you mean "down the rabbit hole", Subby?

Which Lewis Carroll quotation best expresses your feeling for the "traitor", aka whistle-blower, Manning?

a) We're through the Looking Glass here, people.
b) Off with his head!
c) Eat me.

Unlike a true traitor or a leaker, he had a misplaced faith in the US military and government. I sign up for (c). Anybody who accepts the designation "traitor" will automatically select (b).

Please explain how an active duty servicemember with a security clearance deliberately releasing classified material in contravention of stated orders is not treason.  As soon as you can do that, we'll move forward.  Well-intentioned or not (I personally think he was throwing a tantrum more than anything) that is still treason.


Disobedience to orders isn't treason. You have to betray the country to the enemy for that, and the judge threw out that charge. Manning's argument was that he was releasing secrets to EVERYONE, and that the enemy got them only incidentally. Treason, btw, isn't an offense under the UCMJ; it's mentioned under the Espionage article, but it's not a named offense. Manning was found guilty of espionage and disobeying orders, but it's a matter of opinion whether what he did constitutes treason.
 
2013-08-21 01:06:48 PM  

Surool: He knew that exposing top secret material is considered treason.


Not by the court that tried him.
 
2013-08-21 01:08:35 PM  

gaslight: mbillips:
Yeah, because if you're standing next to a guy holding a rifle or RPG, the people who want to kill that guy should just call "Time Out! Journalists on the battlefield! No fighting today!"

Which might work if you also hadn't been bombing and strafing the allied nations that go in with you. Only imperial stormtroopers are so precise. As far back as 2005, only two years after the invasion, a dozen journalists had been killed and even CNN was asking if this was deliberate.

(Won't post links to blood spattered camera gear as people are just coming back from lunch.)


CNN asking about stuff is not a recommendation as to its meaningfulness.
 
2013-08-21 01:08:56 PM  

MadMattressMack: EyeballKid: Aristocles: Me too. I lean libertarian, and, believe it or not, a little to the right

You said "Republican" twice.

Maybe pictures will help

[www.placergop.org image 555x532]


Does this picture help any?

farm4.static.flickr.com
 
2013-08-21 01:10:01 PM  

MadMattressMack: EyeballKid: Aristocles: Me too. I lean libertarian, and, believe it or not, a little to the right

You said "Republican" twice.

Maybe pictures will help

[www.placergop.org image 555x532]


Now THAT is funny, claiming the GOP encompasses much of the center. Wow.
 
2013-08-21 01:14:10 PM  

vygramul: MadMattressMack: EyeballKid: Aristocles: Me too. I lean libertarian, and, believe it or not, a little to the right

You said "Republican" twice.

Maybe pictures will help

[www.placergop.org image 555x532]

Now THAT is funny, claiming the GOP encompasses much of the center. Wow.


Wait, this isn't the politics tab. I'm not going to get involved in this one.
 
2013-08-21 01:14:12 PM  
 
2013-08-21 01:23:36 PM  

Ant: ManateeGag: considering "Death" could have been on the table, that's not that bad.   is there the possibility for early release?

Do you really think death is still something that could be given for this type of thing? I don't think that would fly anymore.


for the most serious of charges against him when he went to trial, the penalty is death.  For what they found him guilty of, no.   no death penalty.  For what he was charged with initially, yes, they would have hung (hanged?) him if they found him guilty.
 
2013-08-21 01:26:25 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: ShadowKamui: Lionel Mandrake: vygramul: mbillips: Cubicle Jockey: Lionel Mandrake: I guess Bradley Manning's crimes are almost twice as bad as running a slave-labor industry as Nazi Minister of Armaments.

William Calley served 3.5 years of house arrestfor his conviction of murdering 22 Vietnamese civilians at My Lai.
.
Manning might serve ten times that amount in prison.

Calley was sentenced to life in Leavenworth by the Army, but Nixon had him transferred to house arrest and later pardoned him. The morale of the story? Don't vote for Nixon.

No wonder Republicans are so worried Obama will pardon Manning. That's what they would do.

I hope he does, just before leaving office.  Three and a half years on top of time-served is good for me.

What deluded fantasy land are you living in?  Obama is probably the worst anti-whistleblower president in the history of the US.  He's probably sad that he couldn't personally execute Manning, the last thing he's going to do is pardon Manning

Um...the fantasy land where I'm allowed to express a hope, I guess.


The word you're looking for is mental illness not hope
 
2013-08-21 01:31:09 PM  
Did anybody notice the part where the longstanding claims asshats have been making that he had BLOOD ON HIS HANDS!! were shown to be bullshiat?

The sentencing phase of Manning's trial revealed that contrary to the claims of pundits and politicians, Manning had no blood on his hands -- the Departments of Defense and State were unable to tie his releases to the deaths of any U.S. informants.

He revealed illegal behavior on the part of our military up and down the chain of command.

Iraqi civilians were murdered. Nothing was done.

Our troops who reported torture were told to stand down and their reports were illegally ignored.

That's whistle blowing.

dl.dropboxusercontent.com

Meanwhile...

The officer in charge of interrogations at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, where prisoners were abused and humiliated, has been cited for two counts of dereliction of duty, received a formal reprimand and an $8,000 fine, Army officials said yesterday.

In case you've forgotten what all went on in Abu Ghraib:

From late 2003 to early 2004, during the War in Iraq, military police personnel of the United States Army and the Central Intelligence Agency[1] committed human rights violations against prisoners held in the Abu Ghraib prison. They physically and sexually abused, tortured,[2][3][4] raped,[2][3] sodomized,[4] and killed[5] prisoners.

A wrist slap fine for overseeing murder, but decades in prison for blowing the whistle on torture?

Seems legit.
 
2013-08-21 01:36:11 PM  
35 years feels fair to me , i would prefer he was in ineligible  for early release though.
 
2013-08-21 01:46:21 PM  

ShadowKamui: Lionel Mandrake: ShadowKamui: Lionel Mandrake: vygramul: mbillips: Cubicle Jockey: Lionel Mandrake: I guess Bradley Manning's crimes are almost twice as bad as running a slave-labor industry as Nazi Minister of Armaments.

William Calley served 3.5 years of house arrestfor his conviction of murdering 22 Vietnamese civilians at My Lai.
.
Manning might serve ten times that amount in prison.

Calley was sentenced to life in Leavenworth by the Army, but Nixon had him transferred to house arrest and later pardoned him. The morale of the story? Don't vote for Nixon.

No wonder Republicans are so worried Obama will pardon Manning. That's what they would do.

I hope he does, just before leaving office.  Three and a half years on top of time-served is good for me.

What deluded fantasy land are you living in?  Obama is probably the worst anti-whistleblower president in the history of the US.  He's probably sad that he couldn't personally execute Manning, the last thing he's going to do is pardon Manning

Um...the fantasy land where I'm allowed to express a hope, I guess.

The word you're looking for is mental illness not hope


You have a laughably broad definition of mental illness.  Which may itself be a mental illness.
 
2013-08-21 01:48:32 PM  
Oh, I should point out that the officer who oversaw torture at Abu Ghraib was never even prosecuted, even though people died under torture.

The $8,000 fine was from a disciplinary hearing.

There never was a trial for the torture and murder he oversaw.
 
2013-08-21 01:49:08 PM  

MOGGEE: [a57.foxnews.com image 660x371]
Meanwhile, these three bastards will prolly get out in less than 12.


I find it odd that nothing was greenlit on this story since it developed.  I could be wrong.
 
2013-08-21 01:54:17 PM  
What Sentence Would Snowden Face If He Returned To The US?
 
2013-08-21 01:54:28 PM  

vygramul: MadMattressMack: EyeballKid: Aristocles: Me too. I lean libertarian, and, believe it or not, a little to the right

You said "Republican" twice.

Maybe pictures will help

[www.placergop.org image 555x532]

Now THAT is funny, claiming the GOP encompasses much of the center. Wow.


Wow.  Reality hurts you, doesn't it.  Your average citizen is slightly conservative.
 
2013-08-21 02:01:48 PM  

Carth: IlGreven: 35 years for a man who caused fewer deaths than George Zimmerman.

The difference being there is proof Manning broke the law. There is no proof Zimmerman did.


There is proof General James Clapper broke the law when he was under oath and lied to US Congress about surveillance. Where's his indictment? Oh wait, he got promoted to chair the NSA oversight committee!
 
2013-08-21 02:04:26 PM  

dervish16108: Carth: IlGreven: 35 years for a man who caused fewer deaths than George Zimmerman.

The difference being there is proof Manning broke the law. There is no proof Zimmerman did.

There is proof General James Clapper broke the law when he was under oath and lied to US Congress about surveillance. Where's his indictment? Oh wait, he got promoted to chair the NSA oversight committee!


There's plenty of proof that the fraudulent bankers who destroyed our economy broke the law, including many convictions in civil trials.

Obama sure refused to prosecute any of them.
 
2013-08-21 02:05:29 PM  

ManateeGag: vygramul: Had he simply released stuff that concerned him, I could have written it off as misguided at worst. Dumping 250k documents without knowing the contents thereof is not exposing shady shiat. It's showing depraved indifference.

THIS!


But no harm? It might have been stupid, but not 35 years stupid. Fall in line, citizen, or you're next.
 
2013-08-21 02:06:25 PM  
Poor Katy
www.standard.co.uk
 
2013-08-21 02:21:53 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: ShadowKamui: Lionel Mandrake: ShadowKamui: Lionel Mandrake: vygramul: mbillips: Cubicle Jockey: Lionel Mandrake: I guess Bradley Manning's crimes are almost twice as bad as running a slave-labor industry as Nazi Minister of Armaments.

William Calley served 3.5 years of house arrestfor his conviction of murdering 22 Vietnamese civilians at My Lai.
.
Manning might serve ten times that amount in prison.

Calley was sentenced to life in Leavenworth by the Army, but Nixon had him transferred to house arrest and later pardoned him. The morale of the story? Don't vote for Nixon.

No wonder Republicans are so worried Obama will pardon Manning. That's what they would do.

I hope he does, just before leaving office.  Three and a half years on top of time-served is good for me.

What deluded fantasy land are you living in?  Obama is probably the worst anti-whistleblower president in the history of the US.  He's probably sad that he couldn't personally execute Manning, the last thing he's going to do is pardon Manning

Um...the fantasy land where I'm allowed to express a hope, I guess.

The word you're looking for is mental illness not hope

You have a laughably broad definition of mental illness.  Which may itself be a mental illness.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delusional_disorder

That's pretty much you in a nut shell if you have any serious belief that Obama is going to do a complete 180 and suddenly pardon Manning
 
2013-08-21 02:26:16 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: vygramul: MadMattressMack: EyeballKid: Aristocles: Me too. I lean libertarian, and, believe it or not, a little to the right

You said "Republican" twice.

Maybe pictures will help

[www.placergop.org image 555x532]

Now THAT is funny, claiming the GOP encompasses much of the center. Wow.

Wow.  Reality hurts you, doesn't it.  Your average citizen is slightly conservative.


Yes, yes, I'm sure. You keep right on with that assumption. It's adorable.
 
2013-08-21 02:33:32 PM  

LucklessWonder: What Sentence Would Snowden Face If He Returned To The US?


Hard to say, because we still don't know what all he stole.  AFAIK, we're all pretty sure of the extent of Manning's thefts.
 
2013-08-21 02:36:04 PM  

Carth: This just in: if you break the law and get caught there is a good chance you'll go to jail!


And if the government breaks the law and gets caught....?
 
2013-08-21 02:36:11 PM  
He should have gotten 100 years, but got off with 35. Every dog has his day i guess.
 
2013-08-21 02:51:17 PM  

robbiex0r: Carth: This just in: if you break the law and get caught there is a good chance you'll go to jail!

And if the government breaks the law and gets caught....?


Shhhh...

We're all supposed to pretend it doesn't matter that the rich and powerful, and those working in their interests are not even prosecuted for their crimes.

dl.dropboxusercontent.com
 
2013-08-21 02:52:46 PM  

mechgreg: I don't know a ton about this case but what I do is messed up. I agree that the dude broke the law and jail time seems fair. But at the same time what kind of crappy computer system does the US Army have where it allows someone to bring a writable CD to their computer which is used for military intelligence and start burning stuff onto it without any kind of checking or alarm going off?


Sounds like someone that has never worked with classified material.  CDs are the only media that would even have the remotest chance of working.  USB sticks, external hard drives, flash media, cell phones all are banned and will flag immediately.
 
2013-08-21 03:19:05 PM  
LasersHurt

Cletus C.: If this was the guy who exposed the Bush bullshiat, free this hero.
If this was the guy who exposed the Obama bullshiat, you can rot, traitor.

If you're a guy who thinks false equivalencies like this are somehow clever, stop it. Stop. No.

That's g.d. right. It's only heroic when a republican is in office. When a democrat attacks innocent americans it's a necessity.

upl.co
 
2013-08-21 03:20:38 PM  
If only Manning had done something innocent and harmless, like covering up the friendly fire death of a fellow soldier, he wouldn't be in this mess!
 
2013-08-21 03:24:45 PM  

LucklessWonder: What Sentence Would Snowden Face If He Returned To The US?


The way were heading?  Public stoning to death.
 
2013-08-21 03:25:14 PM  
With time served, he's eligible for parole in FIVE YEARS. Waaaay better than I was expecting.

And the world gets to laugh derisively every time a US official (or citizen) proclaims that OTHER countries need more transparency and press freedom.

Pathetic.
 
2013-08-21 03:28:47 PM  
Mirrors my sentiments

Ben Wizner, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Speech, Privacy & Technology Project:

When a soldier who shared information with the press and public is punished far more harshly than others who tortured prisoners and killed civilians, something is seriously wrong with our justice system. A legal system that doesn't distinguish between leaks to the press in the public interest and treason against the nation will not only produce unjust results, but will deprive the public of critical information that is necessary for democratic accountability. This is a sad day for Bradley Manning, but it's also a sad day for all Americans who depend on brave whistleblowers and a free press for a fully informed public debate.
 
2013-08-21 03:31:13 PM  

jakomo002: Mirrors my sentiments

Ben Wizner, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Speech, Privacy & Technology Project:

When a soldier who shared information with the press and public is punished far more harshly than others who tortured prisoners and killed civilians, something is seriously wrong with our justice system. A legal system that doesn't distinguish between leaks to the press in the public interest and treason against the nation will not only produce unjust results, but will deprive the public of critical information that is necessary for democratic accountability. This is a sad day for Bradley Manning, but it's also a sad day for all Americans who depend on brave whistleblowers and a free press for a fully informed public debate.


this, This, THIS, THIS
 
2013-08-21 03:43:27 PM  

jakomo002: A legal system that doesn't distinguish between leaks to the press in the public interest and treason against the nation


It's not like being personally unable to distinguish between the two is a good life choice, either.
 
2013-08-21 03:44:25 PM  

MadMattressMack: EyeballKid: Aristocles: Me too. I lean libertarian, and, believe it or not, a little to the right

You said "Republican" twice.

Maybe pictures will help

[www.placergop.org image 555x532]


That picture must be of some OTHER Republican party...the one I'm familiar with has expanded the size of the state whenever they've been in charge lately.    Let's put it this way:  their most impressive accomplishment is actually making the Democrats look palatable.
 
2013-08-21 03:46:48 PM  

nekom: vygramul:
Had he simply released stuff that concerned him, I could have written it off as misguided at worst. Dumping 250k documents without knowing the contents thereof is not exposing shady shiat. It's showing depraved indifference.

Yeah, as much as I love a good whistle blower, who knows it's conceivable that people's lives could have been put in danger.  At BEST it's reckless and irresponsible.


Not really.  Years after the fact, and the prosecution couldn't name ONE person who was even threatened, let alone actually harmed?

We're talking "abducted by aliens" levels of probability at this point.
 
2013-08-21 03:47:44 PM  

freak7: make me some tea: Damn. I can't even crack a joke about that.

I can, screw the traitor.


Go re-read your Constitution.

- Thanks, the Founding Fathers.
 
2013-08-21 03:50:55 PM  

JohnAnnArbor: It's longer than the American Taliban.  He got 20.


Now THERE was a chickenshiat case.  He got charged for aiding the Taliban?  fine...lock him up AFTER you lock up every congressman who gave the Taliban money for years.

And the grenade charge?  in Afghanistan, never mind illegal, they're practically part of the dress code, ffs.
 
2013-08-21 04:01:24 PM  

PunGent: nekom: vygramul:
Had he simply released stuff that concerned him, I could have written it off as misguided at worst. Dumping 250k documents without knowing the contents thereof is not exposing shady shiat. It's showing depraved indifference.

Yeah, as much as I love a good whistle blower, who knows it's conceivable that people's lives could have been put in danger.  At BEST it's reckless and irresponsible.

Not really.  Years after the fact, and the prosecution couldn't name ONE person who was even threatened, let alone actually harmed?

We're talking "abducted by aliens" levels of probability at this point.


Yabut Manning didn't know that. Just because it turns out the person's house you shot up was empty doesn't mean that you weren't reckless and irresponsible.
 
2013-08-21 04:02:02 PM  

PunGent: JohnAnnArbor: It's longer than the American Taliban.  He got 20.

Now THERE was a chickenshiat case.  He got charged for aiding the Taliban?  fine...lock him up AFTER you lock up every congressman who gave the Taliban money for years.


There's a difference between hoping you can bribe someone into not attacking you and giving money to someone who is.
 
2013-08-21 04:05:01 PM  

PunGent: freak7: make me some tea: Damn. I can't even crack a joke about that.

I can, screw the traitor.

Go re-read your Constitution.

- Thanks, the Founding Fathers.


img360.imageshack.us

Some people use "traitor" in the dictionary definition of, "1: one who betrays another's trust or is false to an obligation or duty," rather than, "2: one who commits treason"

i179.photobucket.com
 
2013-08-21 04:12:24 PM  

robbiex0r: Carth: This just in: if you break the law and get caught there is a good chance you'll go to jail!

And if the government breaks the law and gets caught....?


Than they change the law. That is the nice thing about being the people who decide what is legal.
 
2013-08-21 04:13:25 PM  

dervish16108: Carth: IlGreven: 35 years for a man who caused fewer deaths than George Zimmerman.

The difference being there is proof Manning broke the law. There is no proof Zimmerman did.

There is proof General James Clapper broke the law when he was under oath and lied to US Congress about surveillance. Where's his indictment? Oh wait, he got promoted to chair the NSA oversight committee!


How much money should be spent prosecuting someone who would instantly be pardoned if found guilty?
 
2013-08-21 04:16:52 PM  

vygramul: PunGent: freak7: make me some tea: Damn. I can't even crack a joke about that.

I can, screw the traitor.

Go re-read your Constitution.

- Thanks, the Founding Fathers.

[img360.imageshack.us image 122x91]

Some people use "traitor" in the dictionary definition of, "1: one who betrays another's trust or is false to an obligation or duty," rather than, "2: one who commits treason"

[i179.photobucket.com image 325x214]


Would it make sense to call him a traitor to the U.S. government, but a whistleblower for the American people? Because I believe those two things are both true.
 
2013-08-21 04:19:03 PM  

make me some tea: Would it make sense to call him a traitor to the U.S. government, but a whistleblower for the American people? Because I believe those two things are both true.


If he had only released stuff pertaining to potential war crimes, I could see that. But he didn't. He betrayed the trust not only the government put in him, but the American people, to use discretion rather than vomiting out any secret he could get his hands on.
 
2013-08-21 04:24:27 PM  

make me some tea: Would it make sense to call him a traitor to the U.S. government, but a whistleblower for the American people? Because I believe those two things are both true.


Worse. An EMBARASSMENT to the government.

He thought he was exposing atrocities and things the public needed to know about what the government was doing in America's name.  Something about Consent of the Governed.

The US government saw it as profoundly embarrassing and severely punished him for it.  They weren't hiding stuff from the world , they were hiding it from the American public.
 
2013-08-21 04:31:38 PM  

vygramul: make me some tea: Would it make sense to call him a traitor to the U.S. government, but a whistleblower for the American people? Because I believe those two things are both true.

If he had only released stuff pertaining to potential war crimes, I could see that. But he didn't. He betrayed the trust not only the government put in him, but the American people, to use discretion rather than vomiting out any secret he could get his hands on.


Totally.  Stuff you have absolutely no right to know, citizen.  Actions by your military, in your name, and with your money and votes.

It's to keep you safe from the ugly, ugly truth that might upset you.  Better you don't know any of it so you can mean it when you wave your lil flag.

Goebbels would be beaming with pride
 
2013-08-21 04:33:31 PM  

jakomo002: vygramul: make me some tea: Would it make sense to call him a traitor to the U.S. government, but a whistleblower for the American people? Because I believe those two things are both true.

If he had only released stuff pertaining to potential war crimes, I could see that. But he didn't. He betrayed the trust not only the government put in him, but the American people, to use discretion rather than vomiting out any secret he could get his hands on.

Totally.  Stuff you have absolutely no right to know, citizen.  Actions by your military, in your name, and with your money and votes.

It's to keep you safe from the ugly, ugly truth that might upset you.  Better you don't know any of it so you can mean it when you wave your lil flag.

Goebbels would be beaming with pride


That, of course, would be the kind of post that inspired Godwin.

You do know he released secrets unrelated to the military but to diplomacy, right?
 
2013-08-21 04:51:31 PM  

PunGent: Not really. Years after the fact, and the prosecution couldn't name ONE person who was even threatened, let alone actually harmed?

We're talking "abducted by aliens" levels of probability at this point.


When somebody does something reckless and it turns out with the benefit of hindsight that nobody was harmed as a result on that particular occasion, that person doesn't just a pass.
 
2013-08-21 04:53:15 PM  

vygramul: You do know he released secrets unrelated to the military but to diplomacy, right?


Yes.  EMBARASSING secrets that showed the US government was disrespectful of other countries' ambassadors and policies.  Nothing dangerous or deadly, just showing some of the arrogance and disrespect the US  diplomatic corps uses when representing the US around the world.

Again, embarrassments classified as secret because they're embarrassments, not secrets.
 
2013-08-21 05:00:38 PM  

vygramul: PunGent: nekom: vygramul:
Had he simply released stuff that concerned him, I could have written it off as misguided at worst. Dumping 250k documents without knowing the contents thereof is not exposing shady shiat. It's showing depraved indifference.

Yeah, as much as I love a good whistle blower, who knows it's conceivable that people's lives could have been put in danger.  At BEST it's reckless and irresponsible.

Not really.  Years after the fact, and the prosecution couldn't name ONE person who was even threatened, let alone actually harmed?

We're talking "abducted by aliens" levels of probability at this point.

Yabut Manning didn't know that. Just because it turns out the person's house you shot up was empty doesn't mean that you weren't reckless and irresponsible.


True.  But I don't think he was charged with being "reckless and irresponsible".  :)

Again, I have no problem with Manning getting the book thrown at him...he volunteered, he's an adult, he knew the responsibilities that came with his clearance.
 
2013-08-21 05:02:14 PM  

vygramul: PunGent: JohnAnnArbor: It's longer than the American Taliban.  He got 20.

Now THERE was a chickenshiat case.  He got charged for aiding the Taliban?  fine...lock him up AFTER you lock up every congressman who gave the Taliban money for years.


There's a difference between hoping you can bribe someone into not attacking you and giving money to someone who is.


Sure...THAT difference means we can lock up Bush and every member of Congress who voted to pay Iraqi insurgents during the "Surge"

Give me that, you can keep Johnny locked up as long as you like   :)
 
2013-08-21 05:06:08 PM  

vygramul: PunGent: freak7: make me some tea: Damn. I can't even crack a joke about that.

I can, screw the traitor.

Go re-read your Constitution.

- Thanks, the Founding Fathers.

[img360.imageshack.us image 122x91]

Some people use "traitor" in the dictionary definition of, "1: one who betrays another's trust or is false to an obligation or duty," rather than, "2: one who commits treason"

[i179.photobucket.com image 325x214]


Silly me...I thought we were discussing U.S. jurisprudence.

You want a kangaroo trial, move somewhere else, or lobby to change the Constitutional definition.

Don't like it, take it up with the Founders...they had good reason to define treason so narrowly...and given the reactions of a lot of people I've run into over the years, it's a good thing.

"Joe Blow protested the Iraq War?  he's a TRAITOR!!!!"

Screw that shiat.
 
2013-08-21 05:09:06 PM  

Biological Ali: PunGent: Not really. Years after the fact, and the prosecution couldn't name ONE person who was even threatened, let alone actually harmed?

We're talking "abducted by aliens" levels of probability at this point.

When somebody does something reckless and it turns out with the benefit of hindsight that nobody was harmed as a result on that particular occasion, that person doesn't just a pass.


Actually, depending on the particular offense and jurisdiction, sometimes they DO get a pass.
 (Why, it's almost like I'm a lawyer or something.)


Again, no problem with the final sentencing here...I'm responding to those who think he was UNDER charged, mostly.
 
2013-08-21 05:16:08 PM  

jakomo002: vygramul: You do know he released secrets unrelated to the military but to diplomacy, right?

Yes.  EMBARASSING secrets that showed the US government was disrespectful of other countries' ambassadors and policies.  Nothing dangerous or deadly, just showing some of the arrogance and disrespect the US  diplomatic corps uses when representing the US around the world.

Again, embarrassments classified as secret because they're embarrassments, not secrets.


So, what, blunt assessments shouldn't be made or blunt assessments should be shared with those with whom we're conducting diplomacy? Neither option makes sense, even if that was what made up all 250,000 pages of material. You really have to go a long way to hand-wave away the criminal aspect of Manning's actions in order to make this entirely about embarrassing the government.
 
2013-08-21 05:17:59 PM  

PunGent: vygramul: PunGent: freak7: make me some tea: Damn. I can't even crack a joke about that.

I can, screw the traitor.

Go re-read your Constitution.

- Thanks, the Founding Fathers.

[img360.imageshack.us image 122x91]

Some people use "traitor" in the dictionary definition of, "1: one who betrays another's trust or is false to an obligation or duty," rather than, "2: one who commits treason"

[i179.photobucket.com image 325x214]

Silly me...I thought we were discussing U.S. jurisprudence.

You want a kangaroo trial, move somewhere else, or lobby to change the Constitutional definition.

Don't like it, take it up with the Founders...they had good reason to define treason so narrowly...and given the reactions of a lot of people I've run into over the years, it's a good thing.

"Joe Blow protested the Iraq War?  he's a TRAITOR!!!!"

Screw that shiat.


I didn't realize Fark was bestowed with judicial power. Must be all the wood panelling.
 
2013-08-21 05:19:18 PM  

PunGent: Again, no problem with the final sentencing here...I'm responding to those who think he was UNDER charged, mostly.


I don't think he was under charged. I think this worked out pretty much as it should have. Maybe even a little in the upper-end of the range of what seems to me to be reasonable.
 
2013-08-21 05:25:55 PM  

vygramul: You do know he released secrets unrelated to the military but to diplomacy, right?


Further proving that there was no need for the vast majority of that to even be declared secret in the first place.

We are a democracy and are supposed to be able to hold our officials accountable for their actions.

Then among all that banality there was the State Department cable showing that the US had conspired with the President of Yemen to lie to the American people about our military attacks there and the large number of civilian casualties they caused.

"If you go to the village of Al-Majalah in Yemen, where I was, and you see the unexploded clusterbombs and you have the list and photographic evidence, as I do--the women and children that represented the vast majority of the deaths in this first strike that Obama authorized on Yemen--those people were murdered by President Obama, on his orders, because there was believed to be someone from Al Qaeda in that area. There's only one person that's been identified that had any connection to Al Qaeda there. And 21 women and 14 children were killed in that strike and the U.S. tried to cover it up, and say it was a Yemeni strike, and we know from the Wikileaks cables that David Petraeus conspired with the president of Yemen to lie to the world about who did that bombing. It's murder--it's mass murder--when you say, 'We are going to bomb this area' because we believe a terrorist is there, and you know that women and children are in the area. The United States has an obligation to not bomb that area if they believe that women and children are there. I'm sorry, that's murder.".

Can you say lying to the public about War Crimes?
 
2013-08-21 05:34:11 PM  

PunGent: Biological Ali: PunGent: Not really. Years after the fact, and the prosecution couldn't name ONE person who was even threatened, let alone actually harmed?

We're talking "abducted by aliens" levels of probability at this point.

When somebody does something reckless and it turns out with the benefit of hindsight that nobody was harmed as a result on that particular occasion, that person doesn't just a pass.

Actually, depending on the particular offense and jurisdiction, sometimes they DO get a pass.
 (Why, it's almost like I'm a lawyer or something.)


Again, no problem with the final sentencing here...I'm responding to those who think he was UNDER charged, mostly.


Sure, but we're not even talking about charging and sentencing. You were, apparently, taking issue with somebody who stated that:

Yeah, as much as I love a good whistle blower, who knows it's conceivable that people's lives could have been put in danger.  At BEST it's reckless and irresponsible.

That person was absolutely correct. Sensible people simply don't judge recklessness and irresponsibility by looking at outcomes with the benefit of hindsight - if somebody indiscriminately reveals information related to informants, that action doesn't magically become not reckless or irresponsible if none of those informants are harmed within some arbitrary time frame.
 
2013-08-21 05:40:34 PM  

Carth: dervish16108: Carth: IlGreven: 35 years for a man who caused fewer deaths than George Zimmerman.

The difference being there is proof Manning broke the law. There is no proof Zimmerman did.

There is proof General James Clapper broke the law when he was under oath and lied to US Congress about surveillance. Where's his indictment? Oh wait, he got promoted to chair the NSA oversight committee!

How much money should be spent prosecuting someone who would instantly be pardoned if found guilty?


Well, we'll find out when Obama pardons Bradley Manning, won't we?

/Yeah, I'm not holding my breath either.
 
2013-08-21 05:45:13 PM  

vygramul: So, what, blunt assessments shouldn't be made or blunt assessments should be shared with those with whom we're conducting diplomacy? Neither option makes sense, even if that was what made up all 250,000 pages of material. You really have to go a long way to hand-wave away the criminal aspect of Manning's actions in order to make this entirely about embarrassing the government.


ONE MORE TIME.

These were classified secret because they're embarrassments.  From military atrocities to actions in contravention of international law and basic morals.  Showing what the USA actually does, not what they say they do.  Full stop.
 
2013-08-21 05:48:19 PM  
If you're asking is it a crime to expose crimes, Obama says Hells Yeah.

So would any good wiseguy high up in the mob...
 
2013-08-21 05:51:50 PM  

vygramul: PunGent: JohnAnnArbor: It's longer than the American Taliban.  He got 20.

Now THERE was a chickenshiat case.  He got charged for aiding the Taliban?  fine...lock him up AFTER you lock up every congressman who gave the Taliban money for years.


There's a difference between hoping you can bribe someone into not attacking you and giving money to someone who is.


We didn't give the Taliban money in the '80s. We gave the Pakistani intelligence service money, and THEY partially funded the Taliban (with a lot of private money coming from Saudi Arabia). Our direct contributions were to the anti-Taliban mujahedeen who later became the northern Alliance and kicked the Taliban out of Afghanistan in 2001.
 
2013-08-21 05:58:30 PM  

jakomo002: vygramul: So, what, blunt assessments shouldn't be made or blunt assessments should be shared with those with whom we're conducting diplomacy? Neither option makes sense, even if that was what made up all 250,000 pages of material. You really have to go a long way to hand-wave away the criminal aspect of Manning's actions in order to make this entirely about embarrassing the government.

ONE MORE TIME.

These were classified secret because they're embarrassments.  From military atrocities to actions in contravention of international law and basic morals.  Showing what the USA actually does, not what they say they do.  Full stop.


To claim they're mere embarrassments is to pretend that there's no valid reason for blunt assessments. Carter used to publicly state the Shah was a good man while, in private, telling him to stop torturing people. Would the release of Carter saying that the Shah tortures people be embarrassing? Of course. But to pretend that alone is the value of keeping those private is misleading AT BEST.

And I'm not interested in re-litigating the military aspect.
 
2013-08-21 06:09:06 PM  

vygramul: To claim they're mere embarrassments is to pretend that there's no valid reason for blunt assessments. Carter used to publicly state the Shah was a good man while, in private, telling him to stop torturing people. Would the release of Carter saying that the Shah tortures people be embarrassing? Of course. But to pretend that alone is the value of keeping those private is misleading AT BEST.

And I'm not interested in re-litigating the military aspect.


Um, this wasn't just blunt assessments.  This was US diplomats showing in some cases open disdain for their counterparts.  YOUR representatives.  Representing you.

Since they were embarrassingly candid they got classified secret.  How exactly can you judge how a government employee is performing if when they fark up the government just buries it?


NO accountability without transparency.
 
2013-08-21 06:14:22 PM  

jakomo002: vygramul: To claim they're mere embarrassments is to pretend that there's no valid reason for blunt assessments. Carter used to publicly state the Shah was a good man while, in private, telling him to stop torturing people. Would the release of Carter saying that the Shah tortures people be embarrassing? Of course. But to pretend that alone is the value of keeping those private is misleading AT BEST.

And I'm not interested in re-litigating the military aspect.

Um, this wasn't just blunt assessments.  This was US diplomats showing in some cases open disdain for their counterparts.  YOUR representatives.  Representing you.

Since they were embarrassingly candid they got classified secret.  How exactly can you judge how a government employee is performing if when they fark up the government just buries it?


NO accountability without transparency.


So, what, we let the other country know how our diplomats talked about them? That's nonsense. You wouldn't do that in any other context.

"Two managers were fired today for inappropriate behavior. By the way, Tanya, they said you were a slut and Bob is gay."

Yeah - not.
 
2013-08-21 06:27:05 PM  

vygramul: So, what, we let the other country know how our diplomats talked about them? That's nonsense. You wouldn't do that in any other context.

"Two managers were fired today for inappropriate behavior. By the way, Tanya, they said you were a slut and Bob is gay."

Yeah - not.


So NOBODY should EVER know?  The diplomat should never pay any price for being terrible at their job.  This is not Walmart, this is the government that reflects YOUR values and attitude across the world.

If the government is doing bad, illegal , irresponsible things, nobody needs to know,huh?

I have no response to that other than : Move to an actual repressive regime ASAP.  Your sheep DNA cries out for it.
 
2013-08-21 06:31:36 PM  

jakomo002: If the government is doing bad, illegal , irresponsible things, nobody needs to know,huh?


Are you suggesting people should be held responsible for their actions when they are NOT blowing the whistle on those in power???
 
2013-08-21 06:32:15 PM  
"In no case shall information be classified... in order to: conceal violations of law, inefficiency, or administrative error; prevent embarrassment to a person, organization, or agency... or prevent or delay the release of information that does not require protection in the interest of the national security."

-Executive Order 13526, Sec. 1.7. Classification Prohibitions and Limitations

"Is this embarrassing? Yes. Is this awkward? Yes. Consequences for U.S. foreign policy? I think fairly modest."

-Robert Gates, Unites States Secretary of Defense


"The "Iraq War Logs" published by WikiLeaks revealed that thousands of reports of prisoner abuse and torture had been filed against the Iraqi Security Forces. Medical evidence detailed how prisoners had been whipped with heavy cables across the feet, hung from ceiling hooks, suffered holes being bored into their legs with electric drills, urinated upon, and sexually assaulted. These logs also revealed the existence of "Frago 242," an order implemented in 2004 not to investigate allegations of abuse against the Iraqi government. This order is a direct violation of the UN Convention Against Torture, which was ratified by the United States in 1994. The Convention prohibits the Armed Forces from transferring a detainee to other countries "where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture." According to the State Department's own reports, the U.S. government was already aware that the Iraqi Security Forces engaged in torture (1).


http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/08/21/what-bradley-manning-revealed /
 
2013-08-21 06:33:59 PM  

jakomo002: So NOBODY should EVER know? The diplomat should never pay any price for being terrible at their job. This is not Walmart, this is the government that reflects YOUR values and attitude across the world.


I don't think everybody would agree with your suggestion that confidential statements made by diplomats, recorded for strictly internal viewing, somehow have the kind of bearing on the quality of their diplomatic work that you seem to be implying.
 
2013-08-21 06:49:08 PM  
<b>Biological Ali</b>:<i> I don't think everybody would agree with your suggestion that confidential statements made by diplomats, recorded for strictly internal viewing, somehow have the kind of bearing on the quality of their diplomatic work that you seem to be implying.</i>

Because that was the LEAST of it.

<i>The State Department authorized the theft of the UN Secretary General's DNA.

According to the "National Humint Collection Directive," a secret document that was signed by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and published by WikiLeaks, US diplomats were authorized to collect "biometric" and other sensitive information from top UN officials as well as UN representatives from other nations. The leaked documents show that "biometric data" specifically included samples of the officials' DNA, among other forms of personally identifying information. They also ordered diplomats to collect credit card information and secure passwords. These activities contravene the 1946 UN Convention (9).</i>

And no, I don't believe every single internal diplomatic memo should be public nor does it always reflect the quality of the person's work.  Like I said, small potatoes though.

BullBearMS: Are you suggesting people should be held responsible for their actions when they are NOT blowing the whistle on those in power???

? I don't follow you.  And my pc is having an HTML meltdown.  brb
 
2013-08-21 06:56:15 PM  

jakomo002: BullBearMS: Are you suggesting people should be held responsible for their actions when they are NOT blowing the whistle on those in power???

? I don't follow you.


I'm being sarcastic, because people in power should be held responsible for their actions.
 
2013-08-21 07:01:55 PM  

BullBearMS: I'm being sarcastic, because people in power should be held responsible for their actions.


A big AMEN to that.

After the Manning verdict I am curious to see something :  that US Army guy (Bales?) who massacred those 19 Afghanis awhile back is being sentenced very soon.  I wonder how long he'll get put away for.

My guess is a lot less than 35 years but we'll see.
 
2013-08-21 07:18:15 PM  

jakomo002: And no, I don't believe every single internal diplomatic memo should be public nor does it always reflect the quality of the person's work. Like I said, small potatoes though.


Just to clarify, before we move on to a separate topic - your earlier comment seemed to suggest that you were defending the leaking of these diplomatic cables because they somehow contained evidence that the diplomats were "terrible at their jobs". Are you not actually making that claim?
 
2013-08-21 07:19:18 PM  

jakomo002: vygramul: So, what, we let the other country know how our diplomats talked about them? That's nonsense. You wouldn't do that in any other context.

"Two managers were fired today for inappropriate behavior. By the way, Tanya, they said you were a slut and Bob is gay."

Yeah - not.

So NOBODY should EVER know?  The diplomat should never pay any price for being terrible at their job.  This is not Walmart, this is the government that reflects YOUR values and attitude across the world.

If the government is doing bad, illegal , irresponsible things, nobody needs to know,huh?

I have no response to that other than : Move to an actual repressive regime ASAP.  Your sheep DNA cries out for it.


That's why we have a president and secretary of state. Just like stockholders don't get to find that out about the company they own, but expect their board to exert control.

And nice ad hominem about the sheep. I'm not the one blindly believing what I'm told just because some random guy I don't know whose expertise I'm not qualified to judge told me a fairy tale about monsters that confirmed my beliefs.

Any other calumnies you wish to throw out there while you're at it?
 
2013-08-21 07:27:44 PM  

jakomo002: BullBearMS: I'm being sarcastic, because people in power should be held responsible for their actions.

A big AMEN to that.

After the Manning verdict I am curious to see something :  that US Army guy (Bales?) who massacred those 19 Afghanis awhile back is being sentenced very soon.  I wonder how long he'll get put away for.

My guess is a lot less than 35 years but we'll see.


Given that the guy in charge of torture in Iraq got a disciplinary hearing and a fine, but no trial, it's almost shocking that anyone got a trial.

When Obama tried to extend the Iraq war past the negotiated date for total withdrawal, the Iraqis main reason for not allowing it was the huge number of their citizens murdered with nobody held responsible.
 
2013-08-21 08:02:17 PM  

vygramul: d23: Gee.. what are the odds that the people that throw around the term "statism" are the same people already crying "not enough" about the Bradly Manning sentence?

I would have been happy with 20-25. But I can't feel too bad about 35 either.

bdub77: I can't help but feel a little sad about the whole thing. Our government is doing a lot of shady sh*t and these guys are exposing them for it, and this is what they get for it.

There isn't even a way to expose the government now for all this secret sh*t without being labeled a terrorist or traitor.

Had he simply released stuff that concerned him, I could have written it off as misguided at worst. Dumping 250k documents without knowing the contents thereof is not exposing shady shiat. It's showing depraved indifference.


Depraved indifference is what Bush did going into Iraq. Where's his prison sentence?
 
2013-08-21 08:38:09 PM  
Sad.  This guy was a gay Klinger, and punched an officer in the face.

You invite a homeless man in your home, he punches your wife in the nose, shows up to dinner in your daughters panties and so you.... give him a key to the house and access to your finances?   I don't think the insurance company would help cover your losses.

He should not do even one day, and he should be paid a million dollars per year he was wrongly incarcerated.

Get real - you treat people like shiat and they get you back, duh.  Look at 9/11!
 
2013-08-21 08:45:31 PM  

Serious Post on Serious Thread: vygramul: d23: Gee.. what are the odds that the people that throw around the term "statism" are the same people already crying "not enough" about the Bradly Manning sentence?

I would have been happy with 20-25. But I can't feel too bad about 35 either.

bdub77: I can't help but feel a little sad about the whole thing. Our government is doing a lot of shady sh*t and these guys are exposing them for it, and this is what they get for it.

There isn't even a way to expose the government now for all this secret sh*t without being labeled a terrorist or traitor.

Had he simply released stuff that concerned him, I could have written it off as misguided at worst. Dumping 250k documents without knowing the contents thereof is not exposing shady shiat. It's showing depraved indifference.

Depraved indifference is what Bush did going into Iraq. Where's his prison sentence?



Depraved indifference is what they showed him by keeping him imprisoned in their organization.  He was shat on by his own country and he shat back.   He was basically a prisoner of war, so it was his DUTY to fight back in whatever way he could find.   Case dismissed.
 
2013-08-21 08:48:10 PM  

Serious Post on Serious Thread: vygramul: d23: Gee.. what are the odds that the people that throw around the term "statism" are the same people already crying "not enough" about the Bradly Manning sentence?

I would have been happy with 20-25. But I can't feel too bad about 35 either.

bdub77: I can't help but feel a little sad about the whole thing. Our government is doing a lot of shady sh*t and these guys are exposing them for it, and this is what they get for it.

There isn't even a way to expose the government now for all this secret sh*t without being labeled a terrorist or traitor.

Had he simply released stuff that concerned him, I could have written it off as misguided at worst. Dumping 250k documents without knowing the contents thereof is not exposing shady shiat. It's showing depraved indifference.

Depraved indifference is what Bush did going into Iraq. Where's his prison sentence?


Hey - I wanted him held accountable, too. But just because he didn't get sent to prison doesn't mean we fling all the prison doors open because, hey, none of them made decisions that killed six-figure numbers of people. We still convict them, and we still send them to prison. Just like Manning.
 
2013-08-21 08:53:56 PM  

from my blood: Depraved indifference is what they showed him by keeping him imprisoned in their organization.  He was shat on by his own country and he shat back.   He was basically a prisoner of war, so it was his DUTY to fight back in whatever way he could find.   Case dismissed.


HAHAHAHAHA!

He threw a homosexual temper tantrum and they caught him and sentenced him.  He's lucky he wasn't executed.
 
2013-08-21 08:58:28 PM  
http://lareviewofbooks.org/review/a-nation-unhinged-the-grim-realitie s -of-the-real-american-war

"...interesting finds is an official army investigation of the "Torture of Prisoners of War by US Officers," which concluded that such torture was "standard practice" among US troops. And the study Defense Secretary William McNamara commissioned in 1969 that found more "than 96 percent of Marine Corps second lieutenants [...] surveyed [...] indicated that they would resort to torture to obtain information." "

"We will almost certainly never see an outpouring of truth-telling about Vietnam approaching that of the Second World War era for the simple reason that "we" were not on the side of the angels in Vietnam."

"...as a graduate student researching post-traumatic stress disorder among Vietnam veterans, he happened upon the records of the Vietnam War Crimes Working Group. This was "a secret Pentagon task force that had," he writes, "been assembled after the My Lai massacre to ensure that the army would never again be caught off-guard by a major war crimes scandal." The papers "documented a nightmare war that is essentially missing from our understanding of the Vietnam conflict.""
 
2013-08-21 08:59:49 PM  

Lsherm: He's lucky he wasn't executed.


On what charge?
 
2013-08-21 09:31:11 PM  

vygramul: Serious Post on Serious Thread: vygramul: d23: Gee.. what are the odds that the people that throw around the term "statism" are the same people already crying "not enough" about the Bradly Manning sentence?

I would have been happy with 20-25. But I can't feel too bad about 35 either.

bdub77: I can't help but feel a little sad about the whole thing. Our government is doing a lot of shady sh*t and these guys are exposing them for it, and this is what they get for it.

There isn't even a way to expose the government now for all this secret sh*t without being labeled a terrorist or traitor.

Had he simply released stuff that concerned him, I could have written it off as misguided at worst. Dumping 250k documents without knowing the contents thereof is not exposing shady shiat. It's showing depraved indifference.

Depraved indifference is what Bush did going into Iraq. Where's his prison sentence?

Hey - I wanted him held accountable, too. But just because he didn't get sent to prison doesn't mean we fling all the prison doors open because, hey, none of them made decisions that killed six-figure numbers of people. We still convict them, and we still send them to prison. Just like Manning.


Your viewpoint is rigid. And therefore flawed. Morality and ethics are situational and fluid. And messy and complex. You have a formula. It lacks nuance and therefore validity.

In light of circumstances, Manning is a farking hero. A beacon of light. A siren call to those that are victims of abuse of power to do something. Even if that something isn't perfect.

If I knew right now that my own sister died in a terrorist IED attack DIRECTLY because of Manning's actions, I would want him dead. By court order or otherwise. I know that about myself. But it still would not change the fact that at the end of the day I also know it's only through the actions of Mannings that thousands of sisters/brothers/loved ones will be saved.

We've grown up with the BS talk of the 'awful price of war'. It's time to stop paying the 'awful price' of lies to justify war. Maybe by any means necessary.
 
2013-08-21 09:51:38 PM  

Serious Post on Serious Thread: If I knew right now that my own sister died in a terrorist IED attack DIRECTLY because of Manning's actions, I would want him dead. By court order or otherwise. I know that about myself. But it still would not change the fact that at the end of the day I also know it's only through the actions of Mannings that thousands of sisters/brothers/loved ones will be saved.


How exactly are the actions of people like Manning supposed to save "thousands" of people?

Difficulty: Manning himself doesn't seem to know the answer to the question. Nor, as far as I can tell, did he even put forward the argument that he was trying to save lives - he was just a deeply troubled man who, in the midst of career-related frustrations piled on top of whatever mental illnesses he was (unsuccessfully) dealing with, somehow got the idea that leaking piles of random classified documents would spark some kind of national debate on the war.
 
2013-08-21 09:55:29 PM  

Serious Post on Serious Thread: Your viewpoint is rigid. And therefore flawed. Morality and ethics are situational and fluid. And messy and complex. You have a formula. It lacks nuance and therefore validity.


Morality may be fluid, but like molasses, not like quicksilver. You don't get to declare something ok just because you like it. Otherwise, morality and ethics are meaningless. In fact, if it always matches your liking, it's probably anything but morality and ethics.

In light of circumstances, Manning is a farking hero. A beacon of light. A siren call to those that are victims of abuse of power to do something. Even if that something isn't perfect.

I see, imperfection is only ok if you're betraying a trust, but not ok in any other circumstance. Got it.

If I knew right now that my own sister died in a terrorist IED attack DIRECTLY because of Manning's actions, I would want him dead. By court order or otherwise. I know that about myself. But it still would not change the fact that at the end of the day I also know it's only through the actions of Mannings that thousands of sisters/brothers/loved ones will be saved.

Yeah - I'm sure that some of the same people in this thread who can't find any way how Manning's release of secret information could possibly harm someone would rush to subscribe that things have changed and that thousands of lives were saved by Manning's actions. Right.

We've grown up with the BS talk of the 'awful price of war'. It's time to stop paying the 'awful price' of lies to justify war. Maybe by any means necessary.

That horrible cost should have prevented the vote for that war. I have less respect for people like Rockefeller, who said he didn't understand the justification and voted for it anyway, than politicians who were convinced it was the right thing to do.
 
2013-08-21 10:18:38 PM  

Biological Ali: Serious Post on Serious Thread: If I knew right now that my own sister died in a terrorist IED attack DIRECTLY because of Manning's actions, I would want him dead. By court order or otherwise. I know that about myself. But it still would not change the fact that at the end of the day I also know it's only through the actions of Mannings that thousands of sisters/brothers/loved ones will be saved.

How exactly are the actions of people like Manning supposed to save "thousands" of people?

Difficulty: Manning himself doesn't seem to know the answer to the question. Nor, as far as I can tell, did he even put forward the argument that he was trying to save lives - he was just a deeply troubled man who, in the midst of career-related frustrations piled on top of whatever mental illnesses he was (unsuccessfully) dealing with, somehow got the idea that leaking piles of random classified documents would spark some kind of national debate on the war.


Jebus, I'll just swipe at the low hanging fruit here. Have you seen Collateral Murder (a Manning video release)? Quite possibly not, wasn't a really covered. Now, have you seen the Vietnam war pictures of the girl in Vietnam running down the road with her skin on fire from Napalm? Or the Vietnamese officer point blank executing another man? Or hell even pictures of WWII vets hanging on barbed wire?

War is being whitewashed for profit. More so than ever. Before the 60s it was tough to get the truth out about what lies really did. But post the 70s the gov't learned it's lesson: lie, cover up, and kill with impunity.

This is information bucko. And the only reason to hide it is to cover up crimes and collusion to commit crimes. And teh farking press aint doing it's job. So people like manning have to.
 
2013-08-21 10:26:42 PM  

Serious Post on Serious Thread: Have you seen Collateral Murder (a Manning video release)?


I've seen "Collateral Murder" (one of the shiattiest titles possible; whoever came up with that bit of shameless editorializing should be ashamed). It shows a door gunner going about his job as normal doing absolutely nothing wrong.

You know who I can tell hasn't seen it? Most of the pro-Wikileaks people claiming that it shows some kind of war crime taking place. The ones who have seen it at generally have the sense not to make stupid claims like that - they instead focus on other irrelevant details like how one of the guys laughs at some point.
 
2013-08-21 10:29:21 PM  
vygramul: Serious Post on Serious Thread: Your viewpoint is rigid. And therefore flawed. Morality and ethics are situational and fluid. And messy and complex. You have a formula. It lacks nuance and therefore validity.

Morality may be fluid, but like molasses, not like quicksilver. You don't get to declare something ok just because you like it. Otherwise, morality and ethics are meaningless. In fact, if it always matches your liking, it's probably anything but morality and ethics.

I don't like it. It's necessary. And your argument is recursive and therefore null.

In light of circumstances, Manning is a farking hero. A beacon of light. A siren call to those that are victims of abuse of power to do something. Even if that something isn't perfect.

I see, imperfection is only ok if you're betraying a trust, but not ok in any other circumstance. Got it.

Wut? No, srsly, wut?

If I knew right now that my own sister died in a terrorist IED attack DIRECTLY because of Manning's actions, I would want him dead. By court order or otherwise. I know that about myself. But it still would not change the fact that at the end of the day I also know it's only through the actions of Mannings that thousands of sisters/brothers/loved ones will be saved.

Yeah - I'm sure that some of the same people in this thread who can't find any way how Manning's release of secret information could possibly harm someone would rush to subscribe that things have changed and that thousands of lives were saved by Manning's actions. Right.

See my point above. Subversion of governments is only possible in a democracy when the the objective of that gov't is deception. He's opened a door and shed some light. And like I said above, the whitewashing of war has grown to great to ignore; it's causes, it's effects, it's lying fark politicians who support it for corporate greed. Just rolling over and taking by saying one man's act wasn't good enough for you is cowardice at it's worst.

We've grown up with the BS talk of the 'awful price of war'. It's time to stop paying the 'awful price' of lies to justify war. Maybe by any means necessary.

That horrible cost should have prevented the vote for that war. I have less respect for people like Rockefeller, who said he didn't understand the justification and voted for it anyway, than politicians who were convinced it was the right thing to do.

Um. OK. So I guess the answer is what? Hire smart politicians who will be tough enough to stop all the corporate greed and institutionalized lies? I'm all for it! Til then, leak til they bleed the truth for all to see.
 
2013-08-21 10:49:47 PM  

Biological Ali: Serious Post on Serious Thread: Have you seen Collateral Murder (a Manning video release)?

I've seen "Collateral Murder" (one of the shiattiest titles possible; whoever came up with that bit of shameless editorializing should be ashamed). It shows a door gunner going about his job as normal doing absolutely nothing wrong.

You know who I can tell hasn't seen it? Most of the pro-Wikileaks people claiming that it shows some kind of war crime taking place. The ones who have seen it at generally have the sense not to make stupid claims like that - they instead focus on other irrelevant details like how one of the guys laughs at some point.


Your poor reading comprehension and inability to grasp basic concepts is telling. Where did I say "war crime" or even say shiat about the soldiers?? Point was, and still is, all this shiat is happening because of a lie, told by politicians, to create a war, to support corporate cronies. And we're not supposed to see any of the fallout because that just might shock enough people (like it has in past wars) to motherfarking think twice about letting it happen again, or stop it, or consider the reasons. And then god forbid, actually think about starting to remove money from politics.

It's links in a chain doofus. And you want to keep cutting the chain because one of the links isn't good enough for you.
 
2013-08-21 11:03:54 PM  

Serious Post on Serious Thread: Your poor reading comprehension and inability to grasp basic concepts is telling. Where did I say "war crime" or even say shiat about the soldiers??


So, what exactly did you mean when you said the following:

And the only reason to hide it is to cover up crimes and collusion to commit crimes.

What "crimes" or "collusion to commit crimes" would be "covered up" if door gunner footage like that wasn't made public?

If you aren't making that assertion, then you need work on properly defining your arguments, and making sure your eventual claims link back to your initial statements in a way that makes sense and is intelligible to others.
 
2013-08-21 11:14:18 PM  
sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net
 
2013-08-21 11:16:59 PM  

Biological Ali: It shows a door gunner going about his job as normal doing absolutely nothing wrong murdering innocent civilians including reporters for Reuters, all while cracking jokes about it.


On the morning of July 12, 2007, the crews of two United States Army AH-64 Apache helicopters observed a gathering of men near an open air section of Baghdad from a distance of up to 800 meters.[7][19] The crews estimated that group was made up of twenty men.[23] This group included two members of staff from the Reuters news service, Namir Noor-Eldeen and Saeed Chmagh.[19][24][25][26][27] While the two were carrying media cards, identifying themselves as journalists, an Army investigation states that they were not wearing distinctive clothing identifying themselves as such.[28] The helicopter crews mistook the photographic equipment carried by Chmagh and Noor-eldeen for weapons.[29]

A crew member reported seeing "five to six individuals with AK-47s" and requested authorization to engage.[19] The men then became obscured behind a building.[19] Once some men became visible again, both helicopters strafed a group of around ten men with 30 mm rounds.[18][19][30] Several men were killed, including Noor-Eldeen, and others wounded, including Chmagh.[7][19][25]

The wounded Chmagh was crawling on the ground,[25][31] when a van appeared at the scene.[19][25][31] In the van was Saleh Mutashar, taking his two children age nine and six to visit his brother.[32] They saw an injured man lying on the street.[33] The van had no visible markings to suggest it was an ambulance or a protected vehicle.[9] Mutashar said to "take him to [a] hospital".[33] In the helicopter, the crew saw unarmed[25] men attempted to carry Chmagh into the van.[19][25][31] The watching helicopter crews requested permission to engage, stating "... looks like [the men] possibly uh, picking up bodies and weapons" from the scene,[34] and after repeating their request by "Let me engage" and "Come on, let us shoot!",[35][36][37][38][39] received permission to open fire on the van and its occupants.[19][25][31] From the 30 mm fire shot at the van, sitting in the front seat, both children were wounded but survived.[19][25][31] Chmagh was killed[19][25][31] along with the children's father.[33] Sajad Mutashar, one of the surviving children later told a reporter: "We were coming back and we saw an injured man
 
2013-08-21 11:17:47 PM  

Biological Ali: What "crimes" or "collusion to commit crimes" would be "covered up" if door gunner footage like that wasn't made public?


The murder of innocent civilians.
 
2013-08-21 11:25:15 PM  

BullBearMS: The murder of innocent civilians.


I can put up with a lot for the sake of spirited argument, even when arguing against people who I suspect not to be entirely sincere, but this is just a bit too much. You can't actually expect me to believe that you genuinely don't know what "murder" means.
 
2013-08-21 11:36:39 PM  
Manning violated his oath. Period.
His reason are not relevant.
So.............Bye!
 
2013-08-21 11:42:49 PM  

Serious Post on Serious Thread: vygramul: Serious Post on Serious Thread: Your viewpoint is rigid. And therefore flawed. Morality and ethics are situational and fluid. And messy and complex. You have a formula. It lacks nuance and therefore validity.

Morality may be fluid, but like molasses, not like quicksilver. You don't get to declare something ok just because you like it. Otherwise, morality and ethics are meaningless. In fact, if it always matches your liking, it's probably anything but morality and ethics.

I don't like it. It's necessary. And your argument is recursive and therefore null.


I don't think you understand what recursive arguments are.

In light of circumstances, Manning is a farking hero. A beacon of light. A siren call to those that are victims of abuse of power to do something. Even if that something isn't perfect.

I see, imperfection is only ok if you're betraying a trust, but not ok in any other circumstance. Got it.

Wut? No, srsly, wut?


I am not surprised you didn't follow your own argument.

If I knew right now that my own sister died in a terrorist IED attack DIRECTLY because of Manning's actions, I would want him dead. By court order or otherwise. I know that about myself. But it still would not change the fact that at the end of the day I also know it's only through the actions of Mannings that thousands of sisters/brothers/loved ones will be saved.

Yeah - I'm sure that some of the same people in this thread who can't find any way how Manning's release of secret information could possibly harm someone would rush to subscribe that things have changed and that thousands of lives were saved by Manning's actions. Right.

See my point above. Subversion of governments is only possible in a democracy when the the objective of that gov't is deception. He's opened a door and shed some light.


And that saved thousands of lives?

Please. You can't even begin to support that. Nor have you tried, I've noticed.
 
2013-08-21 11:46:50 PM  

Biological Ali: BullBearMS: The murder of innocent civilians.

I can put up with a lot for the sake of spirited argument, even when arguing against people who I suspect not to be entirely sincere, but this is just a bit too much. You can't actually expect me to believe that you genuinely don't know what "murder" means.


It's a typical position tactic where you stake out an extreme position in the belief that the center moves based on the aggregate "pull" of the arguments. If you advocate moving one step to the left, they won't move but half an inch. Advocate moving a mile, and you might get the one step you secretly want anyway.
 
2013-08-21 11:56:20 PM  

vygramul: It's a typical position tactic where you stake out an extreme position in the belief that the center moves based on the aggregate "pull" of the arguments. If you advocate moving one step to the left, they won't move but half an inch. Advocate moving a mile, and you might get the one step you secretly want anyway.


True, that kind of thinking would explain many of these comically extreme remarks. All the same, I find people who misuse the term "murder" in this context to be almost as loathsome as the douchebags protesting outside abortion clinics. Not only do they both use terms like "murder" incorrectly, they're alike in other ways as well - most notably in their apparent beliefs that appeals to emotion and displays of context-free graphic imagery are an acceptable substitute for rational discussion.
 
2013-08-22 12:01:25 AM  

Biological Ali: You can't actually expect me to believe that you genuinely don't know what "murder" means.


Killing innocent civilians is murder and a war crime.

It's not really a difficult concept.

Even for an Obama shill desperate to make excuses for his bad behavior.
 
2013-08-22 12:22:20 AM  
It's always interesting to read how prior to WW2 so many Americans were heavily pro-fascist and thrilled about the fantastic authoritianism of Hitler and Mussolini.

And here are their descendants, applauding the imprisonment of a whistleblower.

Your country has a rotten, jackboot-licking core. Such a shame.
 
2013-08-22 12:27:53 AM  

BullBearMS: Biological Ali: You can't actually expect me to believe that you genuinely don't know what "murder" means.

Killing innocent civilians is murder and a war crime.

It's not really a difficult concept.

Even for an Obama shill desperate to make excuses for his bad behavior.


I'm sorry - this is the point at which I can no longer suspend my disbelief. I just have too hard a time believing that you actually feel, unironically, that the unintended deaths of civilians during a legitimate military action as "murder". If you want any more serious responses, you'll have to do a better job pretending than that - either dial the rhetoric down a notch, or put more some feeling into it.

The other option, of course, is to drop the serious pretense altogether and just straight up post your comments as jokes. You're already halfway there - accusing somebody of being an "Obama shill desperate to make excuses for his bad behavior" while discussing an incident that happened in 2007 was definitely chuckle-worthy.
 
2013-08-22 12:40:09 AM  

Biological Ali: I'm sorry - this is the point at which I can no longer suspend my disbelief. I just have too hard a time believing that you actually feel, unironically, that the unintended deaths of civilians during a legitimate military action as "murder".


A war crime is a serious violation of the laws applicable in armed conflict (also known as international humanitarian law) giving rise to individual criminal responsibility. Examples of war crimes include "murder
 
2013-08-22 01:01:52 AM  

BullBearMS: A war crime is a serious violation of the laws applicable in armed conflict (also known as international humanitarian law) giving rise to individual criminal responsibility. Examples of war crimes include "murder


Bill Harkleroad, known professionally as Zoot Horn Rollo (born December 12, 1948),[1] is an American Guitarist. He is best known for his work with Captain Beefheart and the Magic Band. In 2003 he was ranked #62 in a Rolling Stone Magazine list of "the 100 greatest guitarists of all time".[2]
 
2013-08-22 03:43:26 AM  

Joe Blowme: cman: vpb: skinnycatullus: That's actually something of a win for him. His attorneys were hoping for 25 yrs while the prosecution asked for 60.

It seems a bit much.  His defense actually had a point when they pointed out that he shouldn't have had a security clearance because the Army knew he had mental problems.

What mental issues?

I haven't kept up on the case that much but the only mental issues I have heard was someone claiming his transgenderism was a mental illness.

isn't it? Or is it a physical mutation? Or brain chemical imbalance?


Nope. It isn't.
It's an orientation as legitimate as homosexuality.
 
2013-08-22 05:09:55 AM  
"Bradley Manning acted on the belief that he could spark a meaningful public debate on the costs of war, and specifically on the conduct of the US military in Iraq and Afghanistan,"

Which is exactly why the US government had to silence him.
 
2013-08-22 06:38:22 AM  

Biological Ali: PunGent: Biological Ali: PunGent: Not really. Years after the fact, and the prosecution couldn't name ONE person who was even threatened, let alone actually harmed?

We're talking "abducted by aliens" levels of probability at this point.

When somebody does something reckless and it turns out with the benefit of hindsight that nobody was harmed as a result on that particular occasion, that person doesn't just a pass.

Actually, depending on the particular offense and jurisdiction, sometimes they DO get a pass.
 (Why, it's almost like I'm a lawyer or something.)


Again, no problem with the final sentencing here...I'm responding to those who think he was UNDER charged, mostly.

Sure, but we're not even talking about charging and sentencing. You were, apparently, taking issue with somebody who stated that:

Yeah, as much as I love a good whistle blower, who knows it's conceivable that people's lives could have been put in danger.  At BEST it's reckless and irresponsible.

That person was absolutely correct. Sensible people simply don't judge recklessness and irresponsibility by looking at outcomes with the benefit of hindsight - if somebody indiscriminately reveals information related to informants, that action doesn't magically become not reckless or irresponsible if none of those informants are harmed within some arbitrary time frame.


No, but legally it tends to become LESS reckless or irresponsible.

It's like the difference between driving drunk but not getting into an accident, and driving drunk and killing a schoolbus full of orphans.

Drunk A is getting a lesser penalty, most places...and I think that's OK.
 
2013-08-22 08:12:41 AM  
It's not death, but it's not bad
 
2013-08-22 10:17:51 AM  

vygramul: PunGent: Again, no problem with the final sentencing here...I'm responding to those who think he was UNDER charged, mostly.

I don't think he was under charged. I think this worked out pretty much as it should have. Maybe even a little in the upper-end of the range of what seems to me to be reasonable.


Agreed.  (fist bump)
 
2013-08-22 10:19:54 AM  

cegorach: It's always interesting to read how prior to WW2 so many Americans were heavily pro-fascist and thrilled about the fantastic authoritianism of Hitler and Mussolini.

And here are their descendants, applauding the imprisonment of a whistleblower.

Your country All countries has have a rotten, jackboot-licking core. Such a shame.


FTFY.

"The dark cloud of fascism...always descending on America, yet somehow always landing on Europe..."
 
2013-08-22 10:24:31 AM  

sudo give me more cowbell: Joe Blowme: cman: vpb: skinnycatullus: That's actually something of a win for him. His attorneys were hoping for 25 yrs while the prosecution asked for 60.

It seems a bit much.  His defense actually had a point when they pointed out that he shouldn't have had a security clearance because the Army knew he had mental problems.

What mental issues?

I haven't kept up on the case that much but the only mental issues I have heard was someone claiming his transgenderism was a mental illness.

isn't it? Or is it a physical mutation? Or brain chemical imbalance?

Nope. It isn't.
It's an orientation as legitimate as homosexuality.


In fact, it's demonstrable. Turns out the brains of transgendered persons are physically the same as the gender they are asserting. Ever wonder what it's like to have your brain put into a body of a different gender? Ask a transgendered person. They'll tell you.
 
2013-08-22 10:26:02 AM  

chiett: Manning violated his oath. Period.
His reason are not relevant.
So.............Bye!


Probably.

Query:  How do you feel about the Pentagon Papers case?

Corollary:  do you think it's OK for the Army to lie to it's own chain of command, and its civilian overseers?

/sometimes, reasons ARE relevant
//you are still free to disagree with those reasons, mock them, etc.
 
2013-08-22 10:27:10 AM  

jim32rr: It's not death, but it's not bad


Let's see if any of the war crimes that were in the data dump are prosecuted.  Equal justice for all.
 
2013-08-22 10:34:03 AM  

2wolves: jim32rr: It's not death, but it's not bad

Let's see if any of the war crimes that were in the data dump are prosecuted.  Equal justice for all.


Just for clarity's sake, is there anything OTHER than the Collateral Murder video that is asserted to be a war crime?
 
2013-08-22 12:22:22 PM  
Now Manning says he wants to live the rest of his life as a woman.

Good for him, because as a small man going to a big prison, that was going to happen anyway.
 
2013-08-22 01:14:24 PM  

studebaker hoch: Now Manning says he wants to live the rest of his life as a woman.

Good for him, because as a small man going to a big prison, that was going to happen anyway.


Because prison rape is really justice and not a dim witted revenge fantasy.
 
2013-08-22 01:15:48 PM  

vygramul: 2wolves: jim32rr: It's not death, but it's not bad

Let's see if any of the war crimes that were in the data dump are prosecuted.  Equal justice for all.

Just for clarity's sake, is there anything OTHER than the Collateral Murder video that is asserted to be a war crime?


Depends on who you ask.  Some folks say yes while others say no, and still there's a third group that just wants to change the subject.
 
2013-08-22 01:55:04 PM  
The mods should change the insensitive headline now that she wants to be known as Chelsea.
 
2013-08-22 01:59:39 PM  

Carth: The mods should change the insensitive headline now that she wants to be known as Chelsea.


Does not matter, he is soon to be forgotten and another name will take his place in the headlines
 
2013-08-22 09:08:17 PM  

Carth: dervish16108: Carth: IlGreven: 35 years for a man who caused fewer deaths than George Zimmerman.

The difference being there is proof Manning broke the law. There is no proof Zimmerman did.

There is proof General James Clapper broke the law when he was under oath and lied to US Congress about surveillance. Where's his indictment? Oh wait, he got promoted to chair the NSA oversight committee!

How much money should be spent prosecuting someone who would instantly be pardoned if found guilty?


Let Obama pardon him, then. That's on Obama's conscience. We already spend tons more on an unlawful surveillance program than we'd spend prosecuting anyone for a crime. Why do we always have to acquiesce to injustice?
 
2013-08-22 09:37:35 PM  

dervish16108: Let Obama pardon him, then. That's on Obama's conscience. We already spend tons more on an unlawful surveillance program than we'd spend prosecuting anyone for a crime. Why do we always have to acquiesce to injustice?


Seems a better use for the money would be bringing the 'unlawful surveillance' programs before the SCOTUS. However if they rule in favor of them I don't think people will stop complaining about them just because they are ruled legal.
 
2013-08-22 09:43:30 PM  

Carth: dervish16108: Let Obama pardon him, then. That's on Obama's conscience. We already spend tons more on an unlawful surveillance program than we'd spend prosecuting anyone for a crime. Why do we always have to acquiesce to injustice?

Seems a better use for the money would be bringing the 'unlawful surveillance' programs before the SCOTUS. However if they rule in favor of them I don't think people will stop complaining about them just because they are ruled legal.


The costs of bringing charges against Clapper AND bringing the unlawful surveillance programs before the SCOTUS are insignificant compared to the prices of these programs and our war ventures that at least partially justify these programs. If they are ruled legal, then the SCOTUS will demonstrate itself to be a kangaroo court. If the people don't stop complaining about these programs and they are declared and/or reaffirmed to be legal, then it is crystal clear that we live under tyranny.
 
2013-08-22 10:06:36 PM  

jim32rr: Carth: The mods should change the insensitive headline now that she wants to be known as Chelsea.

Does not matter, he is soon to be forgotten and another name will take his place in the headlines


And the MSM will fall in line and the White House will fall in line, and most of the U.S. will not give a damn,
 
2013-08-22 11:38:55 PM  

2wolves: vygramul: 2wolves: jim32rr: It's not death, but it's not bad

Let's see if any of the war crimes that were in the data dump are prosecuted.  Equal justice for all.

Just for clarity's sake, is there anything OTHER than the Collateral Murder video that is asserted to be a war crime?

Depends on who you ask.  Some folks say yes while others say no, and still there's a third group that just wants to change the subject.


Well, what is it?
 
Displayed 422 of 422 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report