Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Bradley Manning: A Hero, Not a Traitor [View all]Whisp
(24,096 posts)80. lots of them out there, isn't there?
just because dick is a dick, does that mean Manning should be an irresponsible one?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
231 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
"If Manning had committed war crimes instead of exposing them, he would be a free man today."
Better Believe It
Dec 2011
#13
Yes, he could have done that. But he did report to his superior officer, the fact that detainees
sabrina 1
Dec 2011
#136
"But do you think the material would ever have been made public had he done that?"
cstanleytech
Dec 2011
#143
I think we do know. The actions of this government when it comes to war crimes, tells us what
sabrina 1
Dec 2011
#153
Manning admits he released classified information into the public domain. That is against the law.
MjolnirTime
Dec 2011
#2
And do you also believe that Daniel Ellsberg was a traitor? How many years do you think
Better Believe It
Dec 2011
#7
So if Manning released the video of U.S. troops gunning down civilians what lives were endangered?
Better Believe It
Dec 2011
#23
It was the tens of thousand of others things he never bothered to screen that concern me.
hack89
Dec 2011
#27
Let's hope that many others follow Manning and Ellsberg's example of courage, patriotism and heroism
Better Believe It
Dec 2011
#62
No. Nixon sought prior restraint but did not prosecute the Times for publishing.
Luminous Animal
Dec 2011
#116
Lol, Manning is an editor and publisher of a multiple award-winning International News Organization.
sabrina 1
Dec 2011
#129
And so will the NYT, the Washington Post, The Guardian and all other newspapers
sabrina 1
Dec 2011
#178
Well, if you ignore the toppling of dictators, eg, he 'has accomplished nothing'.
sabrina 1
Dec 2011
#198
He may not have been a blip on your conscience, but he most certainly has been
sabrina 1
Dec 2011
#223
Wikileaks donated a paltry 15k, while it raked in millions, according to WAU Holland.
msanthrope
Dec 2011
#195
I blame Wikileaks, for taking in millions, but only donating 15k to Manning.
msanthrope
Dec 2011
#221
Kindly cite the paid staff of Wikileaks figure? Because the WAU Holland Report
msanthrope
Dec 2011
#224
He stole 260,000 messages - none of which had anything to do with his job as a low level analyst.
hack89
Dec 2011
#71
he stole over 250k cables to see if he could find a gotcha. not the same. at all. or kinda. nt
seabeyond
Dec 2011
#40
what is confusing. 250k cable, clueless what is in them. gave to someone else
seabeyond
Dec 2011
#94
He clearly states in the chat logs why he decided to blow the whistle & compile
Luminous Animal
Dec 2011
#117
Not 250, 250 thousand cables. Trust me, he did not read each of them before he released
SlimJimmy
Dec 2011
#187
of course he didnt. but we are going to pretend he read them all, and felt putin as alpha male so
seabeyond
Dec 2011
#191
I'm not going to pretend that he vetted 250k in material. Others can make that argument if they
SlimJimmy
Dec 2011
#218
Sorry, I left off the "K". I know it is 250,000 and I believe that he read enough
Luminous Animal
Dec 2011
#199
Unless he vetted them all before he released them, he didn't exercise due dilligence.
SlimJimmy
Dec 2011
#207
That's not the point. By not vetting the material, he didn't know for certain what he was releasing
SlimJimmy
Dec 2011
#217
If you don't take the trouble to find out the facts, true, then there would be no point in arguing.
sabrina 1
Dec 2011
#138
he did not know that was in over 250K cables. that is bullshit. now, regardless of the rest you
seabeyond
Dec 2011
#141
Yes, he did and he spoke about what was in them on the chat logs. So, I'm afraid you are wrong.
sabrina 1
Dec 2011
#157
so, he did not know what was in them, general feel and expressed what he felt would be found. right
seabeyond
Dec 2011
#158
Did you read my post? Yes, he did know what was in them. He said so and described accurately
sabrina 1
Dec 2011
#161
yes i have. i have read the facts. not story selling to create him as a hero. nt
seabeyond
Dec 2011
#165
Then can you present the facts, because what you have presented so far is so removed from the
sabrina 1
Dec 2011
#172
the only fact i have supplied is he did not KNOW what was in EVERY ONE of those 250k cables.
seabeyond
Dec 2011
#177
And that is not a fact. Please provide something to back it up. You have repeated it
sabrina 1
Dec 2011
#180
ok, so manning knew how important and criminal it was telling world putin an alpha male
seabeyond
Dec 2011
#190
that is your spin sabrina. always the spin..... you know he didnt read over 250k cables
seabeyond
Dec 2011
#204
Yes, a file dump, pure and simple. Saying anything else is being disingenuous to the extreme.
SlimJimmy
Dec 2011
#208
Government officials will decide what they will permit the public to know under the new transparency
Better Believe It
Dec 2011
#66
And just what did he think Wikileaks was going to do with it? Besides making it public that is?
hack89
Dec 2011
#37
Wikileaks record is better than the government's. Do you trust the government?
EFerrari
Dec 2011
#173
Perhaps - in any case Manning will be in jail for a long time and that is a good thing. nt
hack89
Dec 2011
#188
We need to know the truth and the people should be cleared to know the truth.
Better Believe It
Dec 2011
#68
"Intelligence agencies"? Do you include government spy agencies that violate our civil liberties?
Better Believe It
Dec 2011
#99
If I call him a hero, does that mean I can be locked up too for 'supporting terrorism'?
Electric Monk
Dec 2011
#9
And will you please post the oath to the military commanders that Manning took?
Better Believe It
Dec 2011
#102
If you believe that it's ok to lie to people to avoid unrest, he's a traitor
cowcommander
Dec 2011
#18
Sadly, whistleblowing on murderers is considered a crime by this administration.
Tierra_y_Libertad
Dec 2011
#39
I stopped having Heroes a long time ago....but until Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, Woo and
Pachamama
Dec 2011
#41
I believe its on the Greatest Page because this is "The Democratic" Underground...
Pachamama
Dec 2011
#49
I think he's still looking for an apostrophe for the contraction in his screen name
DisgustipatedinCA
Dec 2011
#227
The post was taken off the Greatest Page due to your protest I assume.
Better Believe It
Dec 2011
#72
If there were no consequences for doing what was right, he would not be hero.
sabrina 1
Dec 2011
#59
If you are ordered to involve yourself in the commission of a crime that violated
sabrina 1
Dec 2011
#60
If these people took personal risks in order to leak evidence of war crimes..
girl gone mad
Dec 2011
#104
Maybe he felt he couldnt trust the Inspector General? Other than that I am
cstanleytech
Dec 2011
#114
He could have gone to any member of Congress - he could have by-passed the military completely. nt
hack89
Dec 2011
#115
But Ellsberg tried first. Do you think Kucinich or Sanders would have turned Manning away?
hack89
Dec 2011
#127
"He could have gone to any member of Congress" Sure. Anyone. Leiberman for example.
Better Believe It
Dec 2011
#135
You think Kucinich or Sanders would have turned Manning away? They would cover up war crimes?
hack89
Dec 2011
#140
Well, my view of him is tied to the Bush era war crimes. During that time many people wished
sabrina 1
Dec 2011
#134
Rosa Parks, and many others, "broke the law" when other means were available.
Tierra_y_Libertad
Dec 2011
#150
No, I do not. The Bush administration tried to make that claim, that their intent was good so
sabrina 1
Dec 2011
#151
Well, breaking bad laws, such as Rosa Parks did (and I'm sure there were people who condemned
sabrina 1
Dec 2011
#154
He certainly isn't. The federal government is trying to put him in prison for life!
Better Believe It
Dec 2011
#162
Just when I thought your comments saying the woman that Manning punched "deserved it"
Number23
Dec 2011
#164
Hey, dont yell at me instead yell at the ones trying to claim he is like her.
cstanleytech
Dec 2011
#174
The video of the helicopter attack? Well ok I suppose I could see mitigating circumstances
cstanleytech
Dec 2011
#179
Not my hero. Boy the "hero bar" is awful low if Manning's actions can be considered "heroic". n/t
cherokeeprogressive
Dec 2011
#146
WHAT???? How was he forced to join the military???? Please explain this? nt
msanthrope
Dec 2011
#194