Wikileaks - Bradley Manning

[John81]

Hi

Just want to add this remark because some postings here seem to imply that the guy deserves whatever treatment he is getting because he is a spy, a traitor and/or gay.

HappyChristian: "He's bragged about spilling secrets. He's a traitor to the country he swore to protect. "
DennisD: "This guy is a spy and a homosexual, he is living a wicked life."
Jerry Numbers: "...he has turned on the country he swore to protect, so of course it will be harsher on him than just a normal citizen."

This is back-to-front. A person should be punished after they are found guilty by trial, not before. If they are incarcerated before trial then it shouldn't represent some sort of pre-trial punishment as HappyChristian and others are implying. 1Tim115's post affirms this:

"The commander shall direct the prisoner’s release from pretrial confinement unless the commander believes upon probable cause, that is , upon reasonable grounds, that:
(i) An offense triable by a court-martial has been committed;
(ii) The prisoner committed it; and
(iii) Confinement is necessary because it is foreseeable that:
(a) The prisoner will not appear at trial, pretrial hearing, or investigation, or
( b ) The prisoner will engage in serious criminal misconduct; and
(iv) Less severe forms of restraint are inadequate."

In other words, lock them up before trial if there is a risk they otherwise might flee or commit more crimes. Nothing to do with punishing them. If the opposite were true, it would be ok to hang a person who had been accused of a capital offence before their trial!

Judge: "The session has started--where's the prisoner?"

Warder: "We hanged him, guv. He was accused of murder after all."

Innocent until PROVEN guilty. Until one has been convicted they should be treated as an innocent citizen, or soldier.

[Kubel]

I had it worse sleeping in a HuMVee in an Iraqi landfill where I had to eat my food within 30 secs or the flies would cover it en masse...that was in 100 degree weather with MOPP gear and armor on.

The July 2007 airstrike video that Manning allegedly released showed the murder of Iraqi civilians and journalists. He acted not out of treason, but because he saw a warcrime and blew the whistle to the public. Manning is a political prisoner. No foreign power or enemy gained from what he released, it was meant to expose to the People the acts that the government doesn't want us to see. We the People gain from what he released because we are given a glimpse into the truth of our foreign relations and the result of our foreign policy. If he had released classified information to China to weaken our position and increase theirs, I would be in support of seeing him go on trial for treason. But what Manning did, he did for us- so that more young people wouldn't have to go through what you went through (or worse) in a pointless, illegal, unsustainable, unwinable war. He will have to face the consequences for his actions, yes, but any punishment on him is punishment on us.

I am in support of seeing Manning released and all attempts at bringing a case against Assange dropped immediately.

[Covenanter]

The July 2007 airstrike video that Manning allegedly released showed the murder of Iraqi civilians and journalists. He acted not out of treason, but because he saw a warcrime and blew the whistle to the public. Manning is a political prisoner. No foreign power or enemy gained from what he released, it was meant to expose to the People the acts that the government doesn't want us to see. We the People gain from what he released because we are given a glimpse into the truth of our foreign relations and the result of our foreign policy. If he had released classified information to China to weaken our position and increase theirs, I would be in support of seeing him go on trial for treason. But what Manning did, he did for us- so that more young people wouldn't have to go through what you went through (or worse) in a pointless, illegal, unsustainable, unwinable war. He will have to face the consequences for his actions, yes, but any punishment on him is punishment on us.

I am in support of seeing Manning released and all attempts at bringing a case against Assange dropped immediately.

I agree.

I hadn't realized that that was the video he is in trouble for. The soldiers on the scene, who picked up the children shot up in the rescue van only got abuse from the c/o when he asked for help for being traumatized.

[Covenanter]

Is the LA times an unreliable & prejudiced news source?

Editorial
Soldier's inhumane imprisonment

Some see Manning as a whistle-blower who deserves leniency for exposing official duplicity; others believe that, like anyone who engages in civil disobedience, Manning, if guilty, should accept punishment for his actions. But regardless of one's view of his alleged conduct, the conditions under which he is being held are indefensible.

Copyright © 2011, Los Angeles Times

[1Timothy115]

The July 2007 airstrike video that Manning allegedly released showed the murder of Iraqi civilians and journalists. He acted not out of treason, but because he saw a warcrime and blew the whistle to the public. Manning is a political prisoner. No foreign power or enemy gained from what he released, it was meant to expose to the People the acts that the government doesn't want us to see. We the People gain from what he released because we are given a glimpse into the truth of our foreign relations and the result of our foreign policy. If he had released classified information to China to weaken our position and increase theirs, I would be in support of seeing him go on trial for treason. But what Manning did, he did for us- so that more young people wouldn't have to go through what you went through (or worse) in a pointless, illegal, unsustainable, unwinable war. He will have to face the consequences for his actions, yes, but any punishment on him is punishment on us.

I am in support of seeing Manning released and all attempts at bringing a case against Assange dropped immediately.

No matter whose good or for what purpose he released the clasified material, according to the letter of the law, he is guilty under the Uniformed Code of Military Justice.

Section 881. Art. 81. Conspiracy
SubPara b
Any person subject to this chapter who
conspires with any other person to commit an
offense under the law of war, and who knowingly
does an overt act to effect the object of the conspiracy,
shall be punished, if death results to
one or more of the victims, by death or such
other punishment as a court-martial or military
commission may direct, and, if death does not
result to any of the victims, by such punishment,
other than death, as a court-martial or
military commission may direct.

Section 906a. Art. 106a. Espionage
(a)(1) Any person subject to this chapter who,
with intent or reason to believe that it is to be
used to the injury of the United States...

For sure he conspired with someone outside the military, that is conspiracy. Possibly, he is also guilty of espionage, if it can be proved he meant to do injury to the United States.

There are a whole bunch of lessor articles this guy will be charged with. The UCMJ is accessable on line from many sources just run down through chapter 47 and you'll see that he may be charged with malingering and many others. Whatever you may think, the UCMJ is real blind justice and it is not a terror unto good works.

[JerryNumbers]

No we have a principle that you are innocent till proven guilty.

Those under suspicion can only be held for a limited time, and police have to take them before a court to extend that time. The time for terrorist susoects is longer, but I believe it is 28 days. But all suspects have to be treated humanely.

When you take th oath to the Military Services of the United States, you sign away such rights, and its a different game.

[HappyChristian]

Is the LA times an unreliable & prejudiced news source?

It's an editorial, Covenanter, and thus a personal opinion (whether liberal or not, opinion is simply that). That last sentence is interesting: regardless of one's views of his conduct, yet an emphatic statement of indefensible conditions. Opinion of the writer, trying to be passed off as incontrovertible fact. Indefensible? It's been shown that statements about the conditions are not accurate. That is what is indefensible.

[Kubel]

No matter whose good or for what purpose he released the clasified material, according to the letter of the law, he is guilty under the Uniformed Code of Military Justice.

Section 881. Art. 81. Conspiracy
SubPara b
Any person subject to this chapter who
conspires with any other person to commit an
offense under the law of war, and who knowingly
does an overt act to effect the object of the conspiracy,
shall be punished, if death results to
one or more of the victims, by death or such
other punishment as a court-martial or military
commission may direct, and, if death does not
result to any of the victims, by such punishment,
other than death, as a court-martial or
military commission may direct.

Section 906a. Art. 106a. Espionage
(a)(1) Any person subject to this chapter who,
with intent or reason to believe that it is to be
used to the injury of the United States...

For sure he conspired with someone outside the military, that is conspiracy. Possibly, he is also guilty of espionage, if it can be proved he meant to do injury to the United States.

There are a whole bunch of lessor articles this guy will be charged with. The UCMJ is accessable on line from many sources just run down through chapter 47 and you'll see that he may be charged with malingering and many others. Whatever you may think, the UCMJ is real blind justice and it is not a terror unto good works.

His actions have not resulted in deaths, nor was his intent or reason to cause injury to the US. It was the exact opposite. He exposed to the people a crime that had been committed by the military and hidden by the government. Journalists were shot and killed, innocent people attempting to come to the aid of the people shot were also shot and killed, and a car with two children was shot up with both children being injured. That's not something the government wants released, but if it's happening, I want to know about it.

He may have released information to the press, and it's the military's job to keep classified information classified (to the point of punishing those who do it), there's no question about that. But the government is attempting to punish him (and others) AT THE EXPENSE of the People- and that is the problem that I have with this whole thing. He saw what he thought was a war crime, he released evidence of that war crime to the media, now he is being punished.

When you take th oath to the Military Services of the United States, you sign away such rights, and its a different game.

When you take the Oath of Enlistment, you first swear your loyalty to defend the Constitution. They specifically worded it this way so as to make it clear that the People are in charge, and only in the service to the People through protecting the Constitution can you obey the President and commanders over you. When you sign up for the military, you sign away you rights- but you should never sign away your loyalty to the People. I would hope that any member of the armed services, when faced with the choice of being loyal to the military or to the People, would chose the People without a moments thought. Manning did this- exposing the government to the truths that it did not want its people to know about. And now, amazingly, some sheeple are calling for him to be hanged. Edited January 15, 2011 by Kubel

[Invicta]

I thought you had freedom of information?

[John81]

I thought you had freedom of information?

:Bolt:

[1Timothy115]

His actions have not resulted in deaths, nor was his intent or reason to cause injury to the US. It was the exact opposite. He exposed to the people a crime that had been committed by the military and hidden by the government. Journalists were shot and killed, innocent people attempting to come to the aid of the people shot were also shot and killed, and a car with two children was shot up with both children being injured. That's not something the government wants released, but if it's happening, I want to know about it.

He may have released information to the press, and it's the military's job to keep classified information classified (to the point of punishing those who do it), there's no question about that. But the government is attempting to punish him (and others) AT THE EXPENSE of the People- and that is the problem that I have with this whole thing. He saw what he thought was a war crime, he released evidence of that war crime to the media, now he is being punished.



When you take the Oath of Enlistment, you first swear your loyalty to defend the Constitution. They specifically worded it this way so as to make it clear that the People are in charge, and only in the service to the People through protecting the Constitution can you obey the President and commanders over you. When you sign up for the military, you sign away you rights- but you should never sign away your loyalty to the People. I would hope that any member of the armed services, when faced with the choice of being loyal to the military or to the People, would chose the People without a moments thought. Manning did this- exposing the government to the truths that it did not want its people to know about. And now, amazingly, some sheeple are calling for him to be hanged.

If he's innocent then that is what the facts will show. If he is guilty then he will get the punishment he deserves. However, just between me and you...he is guilty of conspiracy no matter what other charges are brought against him. There is circumstantial evidence he was a malingerer, from the fact he appeared to be down loading songs during work time. He deceived officers appointed over him by the deception so, I'm guessing he knew he was wrong. He misused government property by downloading government data to be taken outside the Dept. of Defense. He could have shared tatics used in battle which will put our brave soldiers (my son) at risk in the future. You see, we don't know everything he released to wikileaks. We do know that wikileaks likes to put our country and our allies in the worst possible light. Most people sitting at a desk have no clue that, as we said in the U.S. Navy, loose lips sink ships.