Some on DU claim that Manning ONLY released video of warcrime and not other material.

[Statistical]

I guess that makes him a more likable hero. I mean disclosure of a war crime is one thing but randomly releasing hundred thousand documents is another thing. It might complicate the hero worship. No way he read them or knew completely what he was disclosing. This indicates a complete disregard for the potential ramifications of his action. A government official in another country has already been charged with treason from the results of a single cable and only a tiny fraction of the cables have been released.

Another common claim is that manning hasn't been charged with anything.
A variation of that claim is that Manning has only been charged with releasing the Helicopter video.

Since this is a common set of memes (repeated over and over) I am wondering if anyone actually read the charges against Manning.

Here they are:
http://www.fas.org/irp/news/2010/07/manning070510.pdf

There are actually 8 counts (in two seperate charges) against him.

This one is an interesting read:

SPECIFICATION 7: In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, U.S. Army, did, at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq. on divers occasions, between on or about 19 November 2009 and on or about 27 May 2010, intentionally exceed his authorized access on a Secret Internet Protocol Router network computer and obtain infonnation from an the United States Department of State, to wit: more than 150,000 diplomatic cables, in violation of 18 U.S. Code Section 1030(a)(2), such conduct being prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed forces and being of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces

The SIPRNET logs everything. Every keystroke, every login, every logoff, every reboot, every crash, every timeout, every command, every file accessed, opened, read, copied, or moved. Everything. The idea that Manning only released war crime material is a joke. The idea that the govt won't be able to prove Manning released hundreds of thousands of unrelated docs is a joke.

It is one thing to release a single item being covered up by the US govt. It is another thing to take a shotgun approach and dump as many docs as will fit on a CD-R into the open. That is indefensible behavior.

[Bonobo]

1. OK, so what?

Some of also believe that we have a right to know exactly what our government is doing in our name.

[Freddie Stubbs]

7. Perhaps, but what does the law say regarding this matter?

[Bonobo]

10. The laws are there to support justice for all.

So they are or should be fluid to accomodate changing societal issues.

[Freddie Stubbs]

24. Who decides how the law changes?

[Bonobo]

26. You mean in a FUNCTIONING democracy? nt

[Freddie Stubbs]

27. I mean in a constitution republic

[truedelphi]

12. You wanna talk about Law? Okay, which law? The law of man? or the law of God?

Growing up with a rather expensive Catholic education, I clearly remember what we students were taught by the time we were juniors in HS about the requirements for a "Moral War."

Among them were the stipulation that for a war to be moral, the civilian population would not be targeted, that the infrastructure would not be wiped out, that the war would be winnable, with a definite goal, that would be achieved.

And of course, although the matter was not discussed, the Jesuits who had formulated these standards would have been appalled by the notion that a George W Bush could simply lie a nation into war. And of course, taking our nation into war against another nation solely of rthe purpose of attaining control over an oil resource would also have labeled this war immoral.

So now seven years later, we are still In Iraq, after our super duper Shock and Awe campaign of late March 2003. This military campaign totally annihilated the nation's infrastructure, such that the normal electrical grid was down, the utilities providing electricity and clean water no longer functioned, and the only thing that was heavily protected by the US troops was the Oil refineries!

Although there is a definite deadline for "combat troops" to pull out, the mercenaries are taking the place of the GI's. So so much for winnable. Iraq War II is an on going debacle.

And the cost to civilians in Iraq has been unacceptable as well - 100,000 to 1 million people dead, and four million refugees. This war would Be considered IMMORAL by the standards applied in my junior year catechism class.

And the war also fails the standards set up as humanity's legal provisions to be examined by both the civilian leaders that involve their nation in a war, and the military personnel who conduct the war under provisions of law established by the Nuremberg Trial and the Geneva Convention.

[Freddie Stubbs]

25. Manning was required to obey the laws of the United States of America

Those laws were passed by Congress. Civilian control of the military is an important aspect of our system.

[Statistical]

28. I know it is a crazy concept.

The sad thing is if people looked at it logically they would realize Manning HAS to be punished.

In some people minds they like what Manning released so therefore he is innocent.

The law doesn't work that way. If you murder someone hated it is still a crime despite what popular opinion might think.

So either unlawful release of classified material IS A CRIME or it ISN'T A CRIME. If it is a crime then the people who think he is a hero (someone innocent as in didn't release material isn't a hero) is guilty.

On the other hand if releasing classified material IS NOT or SHOULDN'T BE A CRIME then that opens up a whole different can of worms. What if next time the material releases isn't something people on DU like. Say information of building nuclear weapons, reports on poorly guarded fissile material, deficiencies in airliner cockpit door, bridges that are highly vulnerable to terrorist explosives, etc.

It can't be both. The law can't be written such that "if we like it then it isn't a crime".

They want their cake and to eat it too.

[truedelphi]

33. Here is where all rational reasoning falls apart:

You say according to law that Manning has to be punished. That may be so. it is quite possible that Manning knew that his actions would result in imprisonment. Just as Daniel Ellsberg beleived that he would be facing at least a twenty year sentence.

Yet according to the new Obama Doctrine of "Move on forward, nothing to see" the really culpable people, that is George W Bush, Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, et al, can continue to be free citizens, moving about where they will at will. Whatever they did, was done in the past; move along, leave them be.
Never mind that they master minded such atrocities s lying a nation into war, (That was achieved in part by creating a Reichstag-like master event,) taking away our supposed inalienable rights such as habeus corpus, stealing elections, perhaps murdering Wellstone and all the others on his two person piloted private jet, and countless other notorious crimes against humanity, but they are part of the new "Move Forward" doctrine and won't be tired, not if Eric Holder has anything to say about it.

Something in this nation's system of justice stinks to high heaven.

[Freddie Stubbs]

38. I guess that President Obama hasn't yet ordered the military to stop enforcing laws

[truedelphi]

47. Uh, Mr Stubbs, the military does not exist to enforce laws.

The military exists to defend this country and to go to war in the nation's defense, after Congress has voted on such a war.

It is the police who are to enforce our laws.

Your entire premise shows your lack of rationale and/or education.

[treestar]

49. They could do both

Though we'd need a very large Justice Department. The Bush debacle is a quagmire and is in the past, whereas if Manning keeps leaking things, he could cause harm in the future. So there is some prioritizing to prevent future harm.

[booley]

51. I see both as true

Manning DID break the law

AND manning did the right thing by breaking the law.

The law ha soften been used to protect those in power as much as if not more then the people.

This doe snto mean we shouldn't have laws. But we do need to understand the context of WHY the law was broken.

[treestar]

48. Why does that section of 18 US Code exist then?

You don't get to just suspend laws you don't like. You are free to argue for their repeal.

The purpose of classified documents is not to do things in our name without our knowing. There's no reason for paranoia on this subject. No nation could exist with complete openness on such subjects.

[Luminous Animal]

2. Some people say.....

Butch up and face your adversaries head on.

[hlthe2b]

3. I could be wrong, but I suspect what people may be distinguishing

is between "war crime" or governmental leaks versus commercial documents. I don't know what the relevant difference would be their either, but for some I guess there may one. I certainly don't understand how he would have had access to commercial docs.

That said, I have no doubt they will be able to confirm every document he released. What I do doubt (if Assange is being truthful) is that there is any direct trail to Wikileaks that could be used to suggest collusion, coordination, or even conversation.

[TexasObserver]

4. Pentagon Papers.

Of course he can be accused and probably convicted of releasing classified information.

That begs the question, however.

The issue should be whether we think it's ok for the government to hide its war conduct behind a wall of secrecy and keep such information from the citizenry. Any discussion that does not include as its major point the use of secrecy by government to control the flow of political information is a flawed discussion.

[Statistical]

5. The 150,000+ documents had nothing to do with "war conduct".

[Luminous Animal]

6. That would be 250,000+... which deal with imperial conduct.

Although, strong arming other countries to drop war crimes investigations could be considered war documents.

[TexasObserver]

9. Perhaps by your definitions.

They have everything to do with war conduct.

[Luminous Animal]

11. And as if "war conduct" is the only nefarious conduct our government engages in.

[Ellipsis]

8. Thanks for posting this.

I had seen the first page but not the supplementals.


For me though it's all about his pretrial treatment, actually really solitary in general and it's overuse in the prison system.

[RandomThoughts]

13. Interesting metaphor. Function not data.

What if the intent was to show how wide spread something is. There are some that think it is only a few people, or not them also.

So by being able to show anyone can be part of some situation it shows what is meant to be shown, not only a few conversations, but the overall arch of existence of a larger concern.



To release them randomly is the whole point. It can be anything or anyone, because it is everyone, we all have good and bad. Some use there gifts for more good, some not so much. But the problem is people thinking they are different or not knowing there is a supernatural.



The reason the Bankers did not understand their own banking issues is because it was not them doing it. And they were not using 2nd or 3rd defense, so they were following orders, and getting rewards for some bigger future effect.


Many of the musicians I respect know the love and caring they are sharing with many people. I respect them more.

[Alamuti Lotus]

14. the content of those documents is, in itself, indefensible behavior

In context, that null and voids anything Manning did to the right-honourable Government of the United States of America. A microcosmic fraction of crimes he has (allegedly!) helped to expose far exceeds whatever he is alleged to commit. That should be the primary focus, not the witchhunt against him. Shame on you for supporting the cowardly, hypocritical lynch mob in excuse of the inexcusable status quo!

[Kaleko]

23. Exactly.

[SidDithers]

15. K&R...nt

Sid

[JDPriestly]

16. Manning's actions may be indefensible. A court will decide,

but he must still be treated like any other prisoner in the military system. It is unclear why he is being held under the poor conditions that his friends describe.

A person is innocent until found guilty no matter what he has done. And a person may not be subjected to cruel and unusual punishment no matter what.

You present the charges as if they were already proved. Let's see what, if any, defense Manning provides.

I once worked for a judge in a court. I would read the papers from a plaintiff and then from the defendant or very often from the defendant and then from the plaintiff. If I started with, let's say, the plaintiff's papers, I would, at the end of my reading always wonder how in the world the defendant could possibly answer them. Sometimes the defendant's response was not persuasive. Sometimes I was amazed to find that the defendant's view was more persuasive than the plaintiff's (or vice versa). So, I know it's hard, but you have to wait until all the facts are in. The charges tell you half the story. Don't approach these things with your mind made up.

Remember Blagojevich? He was convicted of one count out of many. That is exactly what I figured would happen. There was only one valid count.

Manning is in serious trouble if he was the source for the one video whether he was also the source for the cables or not, but we have to wait and see. The court will review the evidence and decide on his guilt or innocence.

I too would, at this point, guess a guilty verdict just as you would, but sometimes what appears to be decisive evidence is flawed. Sometimes it is not admissible. Sometimes the evidence is not as it first appears. So you have to wait.

In the meantime, Manning should not be subjected to treatment that could place his life or his mental capacity in jeopardy. Manning could be you some day. You probably cannot imagine that, but it is true.

Sometimes acts that people consider to be perfectly innocent are deemed criminal. Don't be too smug about the crimes of others. We are all human. We all make mistakes, and we must all treat each other with respect. The shoe could be on your foot next time, Statistical. We do not know what the future will bring.

[msongs]

17. dont recall him being in any court rm recently, just the hole while drones kill civilians and those

killers get raises and weekends off. nt

[jeanpalmer]

18. Is obtaining "infonnation"

on "divers" occasions really a crime? Is this a copy of the charge?

As for bringing "discredit upon the armed forces," are they serious? How could he have brought discredit to something that was already discredited in so many ways?

[JackRiddler]

52. (probably a scan from a print copy)

[Catherina]

19. Indefensible in your opinion. In mine the wars that the criminals are perpetrating

and covering up are the indefensible behavior.

Free Manning now. He's an American hero and patriot.

[jeanpalmer]

20. Yes

The criminals want us to obey the frivolous laws that are convenient for them and facilitate their crimes, while they commit major crimes against humanity. This charging sheet is just further evidence of that.

Free Manning now.

[Kaleko]

22. Manning is a courageous whistleblower.

A man with a conscience acting not from self-interest but motivated by a desire to help the world see what is being done in the name of patriotism and God. I only wish there were more of his kind everywhere.

[lamp_shade]

21. Rec.

[DirkGently]

29. Gov't lying to its citizens such that they and others die is indefensible. Let's punish that FIRST.

[Scurrilous]

30. Thanks.

K & R :thumbsup:

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Statistical]

32. Pathetic personal attack. Isn't that against DU rules?

Well when one has to resort to name calling they have already lost the argument.

[Forkboy]

36. Yeah, but a lot of times it means they have a good handle on things as well.

[xchrom]

34. Unrec

[Warren Stupidity]

35. This is pathetic.

Did you want a match for that strawman? I like fires.

[Forkboy]

37. I'm not sure how we can survive with him being free.

[gratuitous]

39. And tortured. Don't forget he must be tortured

And if that sort of scotches a prosecution because some namby-pamby judge gets all bent out of shape, then we just have him declared an enemy combatant, and voila! life in prison. No charges or trial necessary. And if we can drive him insane enough, he'll execute himself.

God bless America! :patriot:

[Toucano]

40. There is no rule of law in the U.S.

They make up the rules as they go along.

Manning pissed in Uncle Sam's eye.

For that, he's a hero.

[sendero]

41. People ..

... whose brains are so small that they equate "lawful" with "right" are not worth arguing with.

[msanthrope]

42. Manning gave a foreign entity access to SIPRNET--access, not a 'leak.'

I direct you to charge 1, specification 4---

where he got that software from will be the focus of the grand jury in the rocket docket.

[Number23]

43. "A government official in another country has already been charged with treason from the results

of a single cable and only a tiny fraction of the cables have been released."

Would love to have a link to that. Thanks

[Luminous Animal]

45. It has only happened in the same way that Assange has been charged with treason...

from the mouths of blustering political hacks.

(This is in reference to Zimbabwe's dictator's reaction to a leaked cable.)

[H2O Man]

44. oh

[girl gone mad]

46. The joke is..

all of the usual water carriers for our corrupt political class.

Fortunately, most of the people paying attention can see right through the bullshit.

[grahamhgreen]

50. It is the duty of those who are sworn to defend the constitution to report these crimes

[SharksBreath]

53. LOL Who was the last President to uphold the Constitution.

I can't think of any including Carter.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

54. He's a a real skeery danger to 'Murka!! He threatens us with Knowledge!! Eeek!!

[xchrom]

55. bushco goes free, banksters and financialists go free, drones continue adding up

innocent bystanders, depleted uranium continues to ruin lives, the u.s. spies on anything and everything and grows in paranois --
and manning goes to jail.

moderates are the great evil in modern american political life.