Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Bradley Manning Charged With Aiding the Enemy

samzenpus posted more than 3 years ago | from the 21-gun-slap-on-the-wrist dept.

United States 844

Hugh Pickens writes writes "The Washington Post reports that the army has brought twenty-two new charges — including the Article 104 offence of 'aiding the enemy' that carries a potential death sentence — against Pfc. Bradley E. Manning, a former intelligence analyst accused of leaking hundreds of thousands of classified military and diplomatic documents to the anti-secrecy Web site WikiLeaks. The new charges, filed under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, include wrongfully causing intelligence to be published on the Internet, knowing that it will be accessed by the enemy, that US officials have asserted could put soldiers and civilians at risk. However the prosecution has notified Manning's attorneys that it will not recommend the death penalty and the charge sheet, like the original set of accusations, contains no mention by name of the enemy to which the US military is referring. Manning's supporters reacted to the new charges with dismay. 'I'm shocked that the military opted to charge Pfc. Bradley Manning today with the capital offense of 'aiding the enemy,' says Jeff Paterson, project director of Courage to Resist, which has raised money for Manning's defense. 'It's beyond ironic that leaked US State Department cables have contributed to revolution and revolt in the Middle East, yet an American may be executed, or at best face life in prison, for being the primary whistleblower.'"

cancel ×

844 comments

Good. He's a fucking traitor and a disgrace (-1, Troll)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367424)

Manning sold out his own country for nothing more than self-satisfaction. I'm glad to see him getting charged with aiding the enemy.

I hope he gets the death penalty.

Re:Good. He's a fucking traitor and a disgrace (2)

alen (225700) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367434)

but he gave the info to wikileaks which is cool, so they should just like let him go and tell him not to do it again

Re:Good. He's a fucking traitor and a disgrace (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367444)

Bad analogy guy once again lives up to his name!

Re:Good. He's a fucking traitor and a disgrace (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367452)

Yeah, because US people are way more important and deserve to be alive. The rest of us are less important and our lives are disposable.

Re:Good. He's a fucking traitor and a disgrace (0)

benjfowler (239527) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367468)

Nice strawman.

Re:Good. He's a fucking traitor and a disgrace (5, Insightful)

tomthepom (314977) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367456)

And his disclosures to wikileaks are arguably responsible for triggering the revolution in Tunisia, which set off Egypt and Libya. Maybe he should get a peace prize before you go and kill him.

Re:Good. He's a fucking traitor and a disgrace (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367490)

Pretty sure that the GUY WHO SET HIMSELF ON FIRE was the catalyst for the revolution in Tunisia.

Re:Good. He's a fucking traitor and a disgrace (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367622)

Apparently, so did Manning... Maybe he'll be the catalyst for the revolution in America. Which is long overdue, by the way.

Re:Good. He's a fucking traitor and a disgrace (0)

benjfowler (239527) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367536)

"Arguably". That's a weasel word, and you're talking bullshit and you know it.

There's no proof that Wikileaks caused anything, and this stupid little idiot will have had himself jailed for the rest of his life for nothing.

The reason why the Middle-East and North Africa is exploding, is because food and energy prices have recently surged, and that coupled with a long history of bad government turned the region into a powder keg, set off by the self-immolation of a humble fruit vendor in Tunisia.

Food and energy prices have gone up because of exploding demand from countries like India and China, freak bad weather, and the financial crises caused by the US.

Re:Good. He's a fucking traitor and a disgrace (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367670)

Eh? How the fuck did you conclude that?!

Re:Good. He's a fucking traitor and a disgrace (1)

bunratty (545641) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367752)

Obvious. It occurred after the leak, so it was obviously because of the leak [wikipedia.org] .

No sympathy here, sorry (0, Flamebait)

benjfowler (239527) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367430)

Rules are made for a reason. He knew the rules. He did the crime, and he's going to do the time.

And I don't believe for a second that 1) he was doing this for some higher cause, more like blatent teen narcissism; or that 2) disagreeing with a law morally entitles somebody to break it.

I hope he gets his arse kicked.

Re:No sympathy here, sorry (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367476)

He did beak the law. Whatever his motives were, his law-breaking has made him an international hero. He deserves a pardon. Too many secrets stifle democracy.

Re:No sympathy here, sorry (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367546)

There are too many non-secrets that have stifled democracy. Let's try to focus on those first instead of potentially putting innocent folks in harms way.
 
The truth of the matter is that there are far too many people who think that embarrassing the government into fixing it's own mistakes is somehow going to happen. The reality is that the government is now just looking for a better way to hide these mistakes.

Re:No sympathy here, sorry (0)

benjfowler (239527) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367552)

Secrecy is indisrcriminate. While it can shield wrongdoing, it also saves lives.

Re:No sympathy here, sorry (2, Insightful)

e70838 (976799) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367656)

In the absolute, I would agree. The world would be a nightmare if everything was public. Big governmental agencies needs privacy.
The problem is all the wrongdoing that has been shielded this way. When someone is the witness of so much abuse, it is a civic behaviour to violate secrecy agreement and divulgate all the wrong doing.
This is a risky behaviour, but in this case, it was heroic. Governmental agencies shall be warned that secrecy shall not be used for hiding wrongdoing. They shall have ethic and behave well, otherwise they will lose all secrecy.
Bradley E. Manning deserves a reward for his good action.

Re:No sympathy here, sorry (1)

C_amiga_fan (1960858) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367662)

How many lives were saved by making the document "secret" which revealed Hillary had stolen credit card numbers from visiting dignitaries?

Re:No sympathy here, sorry (5, Insightful)

darjen (879890) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367502)

2) disagreeing with a law morally entitles somebody to break it.

The law also forced Rosa Parks to sit in the back of the bus because of her skin color. Some laws are immoral and need to be broken for the greater good.

Re:No sympathy here, sorry (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367562)

And who gets to decide if a law is moral or not?

Re:No sympathy here, sorry (5, Insightful)

DigitalSorceress (156609) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367606)

And who gets to decide if a law is moral or not?

The People.

Ask an Egyptian

Ask a Tunisian.

Ask someone who marched in Selma.

Re:No sympathy here, sorry (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367646)

Society does. It's called

Re:No sympathy here, sorry (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367572)

Keeping a secret is not inherently immoral. We all agree that individuals have a right to privacy. Corporations and yes even the government also deserved a limited right to privacy. Do you really think its in the world's best interests to have every government completely transparent? Think about how well your personal life would work out if there was a mandate that you and everyone you know's internal, personal thoughts were broadcasted on billboards 24/7. That's about how well international politics would run under the same rules.

I agree with the sentiment that we should try to promote more open-ness in governmental affairs than there is today, but leaking a bunch of private diplomatic cables is not the way to go about this. It's illegal for a reason, and it really is damaging.

Re:No sympathy here, sorry (1)

tehcyder (746570) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367736)

Keeping a secret is not inherently immoral. We all agree that individuals have a right to privacy.

Individuals do not have a right to keep crimes private, any more than government does.

Re:No sympathy here, sorry (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367620)

And this was not one. Insightful? Pfft.

Re:No sympathy here, sorry (1)

Dasuraga (1147871) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367634)

Classification laws are not Jim Crow laws. While I'm for whistle blowing, it's naive to think that keeping certain information classified(at least for a small period of time) isn't probably the best stimulus for serious diplomacy, especially between nations who have serious concerns.

Re:No sympathy here, sorry (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367660)

Giving you home countries military intel to some asshat with a grudge against America for being awesomesauce. HOPEFULLY, Assleakage will learn what rape feels like soooooon enough.

Re:No sympathy here, sorry (2)

AdrianKemp (1988748) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367688)

1) Manning signs up with the military... in doing so he specifically agrees to be held accountable for pesky little things like treason.
2) Manning commits treason.

Why shouldn't he be held accountable?

Your analogy is missing a big element... Rosa Parks was being discriminated against for no reason. Manning willingly agreed to those rules, so it's not enough to say "he did good by breaking the rules". He still broke something he agreed to uphold and the punishment is warranted on that grounds alone.

In a perfect world he would have gotten many people in the US military/government tried for war crimes, but he still leaked military secrets to the public and no matter the content that is treason. Just because other people did really bad stuff doesn't give him card blanche to do it too (unless you believe it does, in which case it's a different though equally interesting conversation).

I invite you to change my mind on this, but you'll have to do a lot better than racism for your analogy.

Re:No sympathy here, sorry (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367554)

He did the crime, and he's going to do the time.

What, no presumption of innocence? No due process? We've made so much progress!

Re:No sympathy here, sorry (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367772)

He did the crime, and he's going to do the time.

What, no presumption of innocence? No due process? We've made so much progress!

Read about it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Manning

He's guilty of Article 92 under the UCMJ at the very least.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_Code_of_Military_Justice

Re:No sympathy here, sorry (2)

Skywings (943119) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367584)

Also in this case, since it was a capital crime, "doing the time" could very well mean he would be executed. The punishment seems very much disproportionate to what he actually did. All he did was expose corruption and for that he should get the firing squad?

Re:No sympathy here, sorry (1)

gtvr (1702650) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367598)

Mostly he did not expose corruption. He provided a wholesale dump of classified government data to someone who was going to publish it on the internet. And if you think this was good, look at what Mugabe has done with this information in Zimbabwe.

Re:No sympathy here, sorry (1)

Jaysyn (203771) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367728)

Isn't it funny that we (the US) don't care about Mugabe, but do care so much about Libya? I wonder why?

Re:No sympathy here, sorry (1)

benjfowler (239527) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367748)

The media has already said that it's unlikely prosecutors will press for a 21-gun salute to the head.

Re:No sympathy here, sorry (5, Insightful)

digsbo (1292334) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367588)

The supreme law of the land is not the whim of the commander-in-chief or the doings of his underlings, or even that of the legislature. It is the Constitution. When those in power break that law, as they have done routinely since Lincoln, it is the DUTY of all citizens and service members to disobey their orders.

Re:No sympathy here, sorry (1)

BisexualPuppy (914772) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367592)

" I don't believe for a second that (...) disagreeing with a law morally entitles somebody to break it."

So you are a state-robot. The law says this, so you do this. That's part of a bigger problem of our system : noone is responsible of anything anymore. "That was the order !". Can't you just assume what you do ? I respect the law, most of the time, for a stupid-simple reason : that's logical. I stop at "stop" signs, I pay my taxes, etc. But I smoke pot, too. That's illegal where I live, and I can't think of *one* reason not to do so if I like to.
So I break the law, should I go to prison because that's not moral to you ? Fuck no. It does not concern you, at all, ever.
Be clever, and stop mixing "moral" with "law", that's stupid.

Re:No sympathy here, sorry (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367600)

Jesus, get out of my country. (Briton here)
People like you are what gives retards in power the power they have.

Not only will he not get his arse kicked, he is likely going to be killed because America are embarrassed that such secrets got out to "the enemy" and want to make an example of him.
I bet you'd probably cover for cops abusive powers as well.

You are one sad example of a human. I hope you aren't in a position of power.

Re:No sympathy here, sorry (0)

benjfowler (239527) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367700)

Don't be silly. Government has oversight, and gets oversight already -- especially if the likes of you and I do our jobs as citizens and ensure they remain accountable. Accountability is a good thing. However, what Pfc Manning did goes WAY beyond that. What he did was essentially sabotage the work of honest and hard-working diplomats purely to boost his own ego.

I argue that this has got nothing to do with rage and embarrassment, as so many of the angry little basement dwellers on Slashdot claim -- it's simply go to do with the incredible amount of damage that leaking all those cables did to the US' public policy, and diplomacy. Governments are essentially shameless, since individuals come and go -- but if our diplomats can't do their jobs, because some stupid twit leaked all their private communications online, then that's obviously bad. You're essentially saying that all secrecy is bad, and that because of that, our people have to work with their hands tied behind their back.

Put it this way: if you have a partner, you're going to be as honest as you can, but you're NOT doing to tell her that her arse looks big in those jeans, are you? Not all secrecy is bad. Real life defies teen basement-dweller logic.

Re:No sympathy here, sorry (4, Insightful)

Antisyzygy (1495469) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367604)

2) disagreeing with a law morally entitles somebody to break it.

That is ridiculous. Ever read "Civil Disobedience"? Few would argue the American revolution wasnt a moral case of breaking laws, or that the civil rights movement wasnt a moral case of breaking the laws. I can think of several laws off the top of my head that should be broken regularly if it suites a person. Marijuana use, prostitution, and buying alcohol on Sundays.

Re:No sympathy here, sorry (1)

C_amiga_fan (1960858) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367608)

>>>He did the crime,

I doubt it. The docs were also being leaked to the New York Times, and they say their source was not a private. This looks like a frame job to me.

Re:No sympathy here, sorry (0)

benjfowler (239527) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367722)

CONSPIRACY!!!!1!!ONE

Re:No sympathy here, sorry (1)

Jaysyn (203771) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367734)

I haven't heard that. Do you have a reference for that?

Re:No sympathy here, sorry (3, Insightful)

dextrose77 (2008082) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367672)

Rules are made for a reason.

Yes - but the fact that a rule exists doesn't make it a good rule or correct to use in every situation. How would you like a rule that had a dealth penalty for posting dumb comments?

Re:No sympathy here, sorry (1)

tehcyder (746570) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367696)

And I don't believe for a second that 1) he was doing this for some higher cause, more like blatent teen narcissism; or that 2) disagreeing with a law morally entitles somebody to break it.

Point 1 is a baseless ad hominem attack, and as for point 2, that is complete and utter bullshit. Some laws need to be broken, Rosa Parks was not just a criminal.

And the highest rule is (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367704)

And the highest rule is: uphold the constitution and protect america from enemies foreign and domestic.

If keeping the rule about shutting up breaks the constitution or aids domestic enemies of american people to get away with, literally, murder, he goes with the conscience.

The war crimes that the USA signs up to also insists that a serving member of the millitary must refuse an immoral command or become equally liable.

PS WHAT enemies did he help?

Aiding the enemy (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367432)

That "enemy" being the American people.

Re:Aiding the enemy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367770)

And terrorists.

And who, exactly, is the enemy? (5, Insightful)

Magada (741361) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367446)

It'll be interesting to watch the prosecution try to weasel out of this simple question.

Re:And who, exactly, is the enemy? (5, Insightful)

Haedrian (1676506) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367504)

The public of course.

The American public are the greatest threat to the rest of the US doing whatever the hell they want.

Re:And who, exactly, is the enemy? (2)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367658)

The American public are the greatest threat to the rest of the US doing whatever the hell they want.

Are the "rest of the US" not members of the public? While I'm on the subject, I have some further questions pertaining to the pledge of allegiance, which I have never understood .

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands

Is the republic here comprised of citizens or the corrupt institutions that govern them?

one nation under God

Which God and why would anybody pledge allegiance to some nebulous yet murderous entity responsible for so many natural disasters?

indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Does "Liberty and justice for all" really mean that bankers and politicians get away with criminal acts while people they don't like get persecuted?

Re:And who, exactly, is the enemy? (0, Troll)

damn_registrars (1103043) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367574)

The enemy is the same in this third Bush Administration as it was during the previous two. The enemy, of course, is anyone who the administration doesn't like, or anyone who doesn't like them.

Opposed to invading Iraq / Afghanistan? You're an enemy

Opposed to tax cuts for the rich? You're an enemy

Support single-payer health care? You're an enemy

That pretty well covers everyone who doesn't live in the US - and at least half of the people who do.

Re:And who, exactly, is the enemy? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367742)

Now put the bong down and move away slowly.

Re:And who, exactly, is the enemy? (2)

Dasuraga (1147871) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367684)

IANAL, but I don't think that "aiding the enemy" in the legal world needs to be a specific group. Considering how Manning (supposedly) leaked a list of critical infrastructure sites (including but not limited to hospitals and gas pipelines), I'd say that the prosecution has a good basis for such charges.

making an example (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367450)

did anybody think he would get off with a warning? at least the prosecutor said he would not seek the death penalty. guess the US doesn't want a martyr's blood on its hands.

Death Penalty (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367518)

Remember that to stand any hope of getting their sticky mits on Julian Assange they have to say

"honest, we sure ain't gonna shoot him".

UK extradition LAw (An afaik European as well) states that extradtition is not on the card where the death penalty is involved.
So Pfc Manning has to avoid the death penalty just so the judges over here can say, "off you jolly well go Mr Assange".
Then they sentence both of them to 999years without parole in Gitmo after a 30min sham trial in Cuba having given the EU two very big fingers and a dose of 'we don't care'.
then Pres Obama can tell the Americans, 'Job Done'.

Competition (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367454)

If there's one thing the business of government will not tolerate, it's competition -- especially when that competition exposes government as the incompetent, self-serving elite which they are. The plain fact is that Manning and Wikileaks did what government could not -- and in the process exposed their corrupt objectives -- and now the elite at the top of the pyramid are absolutely fuming.

I don't know if there's anything I enjoy more than watching the power pyramid squirm with jealousy and embarrassment.

Re:Competition (0)

benjfowler (239527) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367578)

Typically paranoid and deluded world-view of a sheltered basement dweller. Not everyone is conspiring against you. Try to go outside more often.

Re:Competition (2)

Evtim (1022085) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367638)

Nonsense. He is right. When authority feels threatened it responds with overwhelming force. Without mercy. Especially towards "our people". So that nobody ever thinks of repeating what this soldier did. It is not exactly news you know, just read a bit of history...

BTW, why realists in the western culture are called either cynical or paranoid?? Brainwashed much?

Indoctrination (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367652)

It's amazing that even after so much corruption in government has been exposed, the common man simply brushes it off and reverts to blindly trusting authority. If that doesn't illustrate the power of indoctrination, I don't know what does.

Egg on their face (0)

guruevi (827432) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367470)

That's what you get for embarrassing the communist republicrat party. Freedom of speech, bah, if you embarrass the wrong people you don't have no right to it, it says it right there in the patriot act.

Re:Egg on their face (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367544)

That's what you get for embarrassing the communist republicrat party. Freedom of speech, bah, if you embarrass the wrong people you don't have no right to it, it says it right there in the patriot act.

What exactly does freedom of speech have to do with treason?

Re:Egg on their face (1)

digsbo (1292334) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367594)

Are you kidding? When the powers that be commit treason by disregarding the Constitution, it is freedom of speech, like that exercised by Manning, that allows us to tell the world about it.

Which is the enemy?. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367472)

Taliban?, Al-qaida? Wikileaks?. The Public Opinion?.

Good! (1)

LDAPMAN (930041) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367478)

It does not matter what the content of the leak was or what supposedly beneficial effect it had. Breaking faith with your country and failing to follow orders cannot go unpunished.

Re:Good! (5, Interesting)

santax (1541065) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367534)

Befehl ist Befehl! You know the problem with the US? They haven't had a war on their own soil for too long. It's about time they get one. It will teach them that war is a bit less 'fun' when it's your kids that are being shot at from an apache. BTW: not following orders (or: befehl is befehl) was the nr. 1 argument that SS-soldiers had to say for themselves on the Nuremberg-trials.

Re:Good! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367550)

That's sounds like a remarkably fascist statement. I'm not surprised. In maximum 10-20 years the civil war and public uprising we'll talk about over coffee in the rest of the world will be taking place in USA.

Re:Good! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367560)

It does not matter what the content of the leak was or what supposedly beneficial effect it had. Breaking faith with your country and failing to follow orders cannot go unpunished.

You're right. The evidence in the leaked cables should be used to prosecute the people who broke faith with their countries.

Manning deserves a medal.

Re:Good! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367568)

I guess that's what people like Gadaffi also feel about the unpatriotic scum who is trying to overthrow him. That makes it okay to kill them all, i guess.

It depends. (1)

Joe U (443617) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367582)

I disagree, if you have clear evidence of a crime, you are obligated to disclose that information. If not by US law, then by the 'be a fucking human being' law. Let the courts sort it out later.

I have not read the leaked documents, so I can't comment about how many, if any, fall under the above.

Re:It depends. (2)

LDAPMAN (930041) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367730)

If you have clear evidence of a crime there a myriad of ways to take action that do not involve knowing disclosing classified information.

Re:Good! (2)

digsbo (1292334) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367654)

Country, or government? The government started an illegal war with Iraq based on faked "evidence" and the testimony of an Iraqi dissident. Even the Bush administration admitted there were no WMDs, and changed it to a "war of liberation". That's illegal, wrong, and violates the Constitution, and is the real treason here (along with Bush II and Obama's continuing war on civil rights). You place more importance on orders than right or wrong, which is just plain wrong, and EXACTLY the thing that led the Germans to atrocities. Are you kidding? What world do you live in where it's OK for my government to order killings of people who have never threatened me on my behalf in secret?

Re:Good! (1)

LDAPMAN (930041) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367766)

Absolutely Not. You MUST take action to oppose injustice and immorality. However, there are many ways to do it that do not involve dumping a random load of classified information on the internet. Taking a stand does not require you to do that.

Re:Good! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367776)

Way to be unthankful or the men and women losing their LIVES to get rid of evil dictators, so that you can have your morning coffee.

If it wasn't for the United States ARMY, the entire world would be speaking germany.

Brats like Manning should never get away with traitoring like that, against his fellow heroes.

Re:Good! (1)

Threni (635302) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367692)

> Breaking faith with your country

Country? The mud and the trees? Or the government? What if the government does bad things. You have to go along with it? "Just following orders", right?

Re:Good! (1)

C_amiga_fan (1960858) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367720)

>>>Breaking faith with your country

I have not sworn an oath to protect my country or politicians.
I have sworn an oath to uphold the Supreme law of the land, known as the US and State Constitutions. AKA the will of the people, written down in black-and-white.

Re:Good! (1)

ACS Solver (1068112) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367726)

This is what makes the militaries so dangerous around the world, how they train people to obey orders above all. I'm well aware that no military unit can function unless the soldiers know how to follow orders, but it does have the nasty side effect of conditioning at least some portion of the military to really obey any order, no matter how illegal or immoral.

failing to follow orders cannot go unpunished

Look at some recent examples from world news. In the last week, some Libyan pilots refused the order to bomb protestors, crashing their planes or flying to Malta. Are these the people that should be punished for not following orders? Are they more deserving of punishment than the other Libyan soldiers have obeyed orders to fire on protesters?

Re:Good! (4, Insightful)

Evtim (1022085) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367758)

The real defenders of a society are the people who are not afraid to stand against the ones that stain, lie, cheat and ultimately disgrace said society. Especially when their actions run against the will of the powerful or the law (which defends first and foremost the powerful).

Look into your own history - you greatest heroes were "terrorists". Jesus was terrorist too (to the Jewish priests). In the history of my people our greatest heroes were rebels and "terrorists". Hanged for treason and helping the enemy....

Re:Good! (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367774)

What if the country breaks faith with it's citizens? Huh? What then? Who gets punished?

Oh, that's right, it's the government. Those people "in charge" obviously know what's best for the lot of us. Right? You can't punish people who are blatantly doing good things for everyone else in the world, right? They're thinking of everyone else before themselves, right? *snicker*

Piece of advice....... THINK FOR YOURSELF. Don't let someone else in a suit and tie live your life for you.

where theres a whip theres a way. (1)

bakamorgan (1854434) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367506)

Hes not going to get the death penalty, but he better get the book thrown at him and along with everything else AND the kitchen sink. on a side note.. with all the info he leaked what no info on the states having UFOs or stuff on the MIBs geez. at least leak something worth while to read.

The "enemy" (1, Troll)

damn_registrars (1103043) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367508)

Just as in the previous two Bush administration (this being the third Bush administration currently), the "enemy" is whoever is not "with us". Anyone who did not aid in invading Afghanistan or Iraq can be counted as an "enemy". Anyone who doesn't view tax breaks for the rich as the pathway to economic salvation is an "enemy". Anyone who uses a god-forsaken and wholly Un-American "socialized" single-payer health care system can be an "enemy".

Sure, Manning aided someone from at least one of those categories.

Re:The "enemy" (1)

Haedrian (1676506) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367524)

Makes you kinda wonder who "us" is in this context doesn't it?

Re:The "enemy" (0)

damn_registrars (1103043) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367632)

Makes you kinda wonder who "us" is in this context doesn't it?

That's pretty easy, really. "Us" is just the Bush Administration and their closest supporters. Everyone else is a potential enemy.

Re:The "enemy" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367640)

Obvious answer "US" (U)nited (S)tates

American Public message: (1)

SlashDread (38969) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367522)

YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE THRUTH

Re:American Public message: (5, Funny)

lightbox32 (1903946) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367586)

YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE THRUTH

Maybe not. But I can handle the 'truth'.

The right charges (0)

clay_shooter (1680300) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367548)

He provided raw operational and tactical data to groups shooting at his fellow soldiers and people cooperating with them.

Re:The right charges (4, Insightful)

digsbo (1292334) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367630)

Really? Even the feds admitted there were no tactical threats from his release, and that it consisted largely of embarrassing diplomatic emails. If you make this claim, you should back it up, because when even the feds admit there was no threat. Innocent until proven guilty, so you need to provide proof.

Re:The right charges (5, Informative)

digsbo (1292334) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367686)

"We have yet to see any harm come to anyone in Afghanistan that we can directly tie to exposure in the WikiLeaks documents," Morrell told the Washington Post on Aug 11. Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/11/28/104404/officials-may-be-overstating-the.html#ixzz1FXksZKgb [mcclatchydc.com]

Re:The right charges (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367666)

I need proof that the supposed enemy actually used it. It is best to be skeptical of any law/charge/etc. involving something that could happen. I need 110% proof that it would have aided the enemy; that the supposed enemy did use this information to end friendlies lives. Otherwise, it's just a guessing game.M

Re:The right charges (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367702)

Agreed. This case is quite clear. Sure, random positive side effects may have come from it, but there's no getting around the fact that this guy handed out information to anyone (which of course includes bad guys).

The ends... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367580)

"...'It's beyond ironic that leaked US State Department cables have contributed to revolution and revolt in the Middle East, yet an American may be executed, or at best face life in prison, for being the primary whistleblower.'"

The ends do not justify the means. The guy took a risk for his beliefs, and got called on it. Now he can go be the virtual martyr he wanted to be, by rotting in prison for the rest of his life.

babys do head count, declare overwhelming majority (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367648)

as soon as they find one of themselves who can talk, or write, they will be submitting their list of intentions for US. they surmise of course, that as the by far highest # & most valuable of the population, they will not be dissed. there is a little more to it than that, but it might be a good idea to pay attention (which is very affordable, even in 'these times') to THEM, & possibly avoid a whole bunch more murder & mayhem as only we are able to conjure up. one thing is crystal clear. majority rules in this case, & their #'s are staggering. probably why they're so interested in being in crowds, helping us laugh, staying alive/undamaged, stuff like that.

aiding the enemy (-1, Troll)

das3cr (780388) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367664)

While I applaud the new charges I am dismayed that they opted not to have him executed. If we get lucky we can expect that someone inside the prison will execute him for us after a long and thorough introduction to PMITA prison life. Pfft ... justice is strange though. He deserves a painful existence with a swift but equally painful execution but will likely be put up in some supermax solitary confinement, safe, sound and forgotten.

Hopefully they can get a hold of the wikleakers and have them charged too.

Re:aiding the enemy (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35367738)

People like you are why the rest of the world hates the US.

Starting unlawful wars, stealing, lying, murdering, even your own citizens are targets if they 'deflect' by telling broadcasting the horrific truth.

You ought to be ashamed of yourself and your justice system. You choose to ignore all that makes you Human.

The Enemy (4, Informative)

tverbeek (457094) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367680)

Failing to name "the enemy" is standard military procedure. Referring to them by a name would humanize them more than a generic noun like "the enemy" would.

Its shocking I say. (0)

Stumbles (602007) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367698)

How could his supporters possibly be "shocked"? They are dimwitted as he if they cannot see the connection. This guy has committed treason, any country has very very stiff penalties for such an action. However, it is curious the accusation completely ignores just "who" the enemy is; though that should be obvious and I do not mean Wikileaks.

This is reasonable (2, Insightful)

Myopic (18616) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367718)

Wow, a lot of dumb posts for this article. I'm not a lawyer of military justice, but releasing sensitive classified documents onto the internet is certainly, in layman's vernacular, "aiding the enemy". We are currently fighting two actual declared hot wars, and we have enemies in each of those, and in each of those the enemies gained operable knowledge they otherwise wouldn't have. How is that NOT aiding the enemy?

To me it is a plain case of treason and capital punishment seems reasonable, but a life sentence could also be reasonable if the prosecution is feeling generous.

A stain on my country's tattered honor (5, Insightful)

Dasher42 (514179) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367724)

A mere forty years ago a great whistleblower did his work and risked all, but did not get placed in brutal imprisonment and danger of death for putting his country's moral character to a test, and even a corrupt President would voluntarily resign upon the revelation of his lawbreaking. I speak of course of Danny Ellsberg and President Nixon.

Anyone who could become privy to what Pvt. Manning did, that is that the USA conducts thinly veiled torture with electric shock, waterboarding, psychological torture, and that it renditions prisoners to regimes like the recently deposed one in Egypt which engage in blatant torture including drills,

anyone who could see that this is a blatant exercise of power meant to subdue the disadvantaged of the world and mold the economics to the advantage of America's elite to the detriment of everyone else, including future generations,

anyone who could see the brutality of willful shoot-ups of civilians and journalists by snickering, racist Apache gunship crews,

anyone who could see the contravention of international law and agreements we are assigned to and to which our national honor is affixed by deliberate scheming,

anyone who could see that the nature of our government's policies is hidden, distorted, or misrepresented to its constituents

and hold their peace, working in silent assent to atrocities, and not speak out, would have been convicted at Nuremberg, would have made themselves directly share responsibility for monstrous crimes, and would be no guardian of liberty or law, but a tool to those who corrupt both. If the letter of the law is all that is right and Bradley Manning is a criminal for blowing the whistle on the corrupt exercise of power, then everyone who signed the American Declaration of Independence ought to have hung too, and apologies are due for this nation's existence altogether with its rights and wrongs, and a ridiculous and futile exercise - thus the powers that would have Manning punished are discredited.

They who would sacrifice essential freedom for a little security will gain neither, and lose both, quoth Ben Franklin.

They who would sacrifice basic humanity and law for obedience to tyrants are heirs to tyranny and the stain that brings, and none of the things that have ever made this country worth fighting for. We'll need more people like Manning to get our country back from the plutocrats and propaganda that have already plundered its wealth for their wars.

Whatever he is, it isn't a whistleblower (-1, Flamebait)

MikeRT (947531) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367732)

Whistleblowers fit this basic description:

1) They see a specific act of crime or a whole culture of crime.
2) They see what their options are for working within the legal system to address it.
3) They gather the evidence needed to prove their case.
4) They release it to outside sources if they can't work within the system.

What Manning did:

1) Couldn't deal with Don't Ask, Don't Tell.
2) Got very angry at having to be a closet homosexual, even though the military is generally not interested in punishing people who are "discrete homosexuals."
3) Grabbed 250k pages of documentation from a classified network.
4) Dumped it on the public.

His supporters are being emotional nutjobs about this. He did what he did as an act of revenge against a policy he disliked. There was no "crime" for him to reveal, no unethical behavior, and he certainly did not try to either work within the system first or limit the amount of damage his leak would cause. It was indiscriminate in a "you screwed with me, so I'll screw you right back" way.

All he did was make it that much easier to tarnish legitimate whistleblowers and make their supporters look like unpatriotic people.

Sorry, the cables aren't the reason for revolution (3, Insightful)

Shivetya (243324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367754)

unless your smoking the same stuff which Krugman of the NYT is because he claims its because Obama is President and our audacity and courage to elect him empowered the people of the Middle East to revolt.

As for aiding the enemy, well, pick one. I am sure we can make one up if we need it. There were certainly documents and such that put the lives of many soldiers and civilians in danger but I understand how quickly many here dismiss them. Its far better to portray it as Us vs The Man even though half the place is willing to hand over all rights and money provided they think someone else gets the shaft.

Observation on moderating this thread (-1, Redundant)

david.emery (127135) | more than 3 years ago | (#35367756)

I note that opinions expressed in support of the charge are marked as trolls, while opinions expressed in opposition to the charge are modded up.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...