|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,802
Dawg Talker
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,802 |
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/feb/04/bradley-manning-court-martial-wikileaksBradley Manning: US general orders court martial for WikiLeaks suspect Soldier charged with biggest leak of classified information in US history to face 22 counts, including aiding the enemy -------------------------------------------- A US army officer has ordered a court martial for Bradley Manning, the soldier charged in the biggest leak of classified information in American history. Military district of Washington commander Major General Michael Linnington referred all charges against Manning to a general court martial on Friday, the army said in a statement. The referral means Manning, 24, will stand trial for allegedly giving more than 700,000 secret US documents and a classified combat video to WikiLeaks for publication. He faces 22 counts, including aiding the enemy, and could be imprisoned for life if convicted of that charge. A judge yet to be appointed will set the trial date. Defence lawyers say Manning was clearly a troubled young soldier whom the army should never have deployed to Iraq or given access to classified material while he was stationed there from late 2009 to mid-2010. At a preliminary hearing in December, military prosecutors produced evidence that Manning downloaded and electronically transferred to WikiLeaks nearly half a million sensitive battlefield reports from Iraq and Afghanistan, hundreds of thousands of diplomatic cables, and video of a 2007 army helicopter attack that WikiLeaks dubbed "Collateral Murder". Manning's lawyers countered that others had access to his workplace's computers. They say he was in emotional turmoil, partly because he was a gay soldier at a time when homosexuals were barred from serving openly in the US armed forces. The defence also claims Manning's apparent disregard for security rules during training in the US and his increasingly violent outbursts after deployment were red flags that should have prevented him from having been given access to classified material. Manning's lawyers also contend that the material WikiLeaks published did little or no harm to national security. In the December hearing at Fort Meade, Maryland, prosecutors also presented excerpts of online chats found on Manning's personal computer that allegedly document collaboration between him and the founder of WikiLeaks, Julian Assange. Federal prosecutors in northern Virginia are investigating Assange and others for allegedly facilitating the disclosures.
Politicians are puppets, y'all. Let's get Geppetto!
Formerly 4yikes2yoshi0
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,682
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,682 |
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong ![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,556
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,556 |
Firing squad sounds about right in this situaiton. It is what should have happened to Scooter after the Valarie Plame name was leaked. This stuff is treason anyway you cut it and the penalty for treason should be death.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,433
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,433 |
J/C
Despite him leaking confidential info, how was what he did ethically wrong? I know there's the whole "putting agents at danger" argument but is it completely bad he exposed a few shady practices?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
Quote:
J/C
Despite him leaking confidential info, how was what he did ethically wrong? I know there's the whole "putting agents at danger" argument but is it completely bad he exposed a few shady practices?
If a person leaks nuclear codes to the enemy, causing them to set off our nuclear weapons on US soil ....... isn't it possible that he just exposed a few lax security practices?
I know that's an extreme version of the same type of situation ...... but it is the same illegal action being taken. Where do you draw the line?
The guy knowingly and willfully took part in allowing US military and security secrets to be released to the Wiki-Leaks guy. (and who knows what else he gave away?)
Yeah, firing squad does sound about right. There are plenty of ways to protest US government actions that don't approach treason.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,201
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,201 |
How does the content of what was leaked matter in any way?
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,144
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,144 |
Quote:
They say he was in emotional turmoil, partly because he was a gay soldier at a time when homosexuals were barred from serving openly in the US armed forces. The defence also claims Manning's apparent disregard for security rules during training in the US and his increasingly violent outbursts after deployment were red flags that should have prevented him from having been given access to classified material.
Ignoring red flags should be dealt with also, but it in no way removes blame from the criminal. If they let this treasonous . off lightly, others will weigh the risk vs. reward of selling classified material.
And into the forest I go, to lose my mind and find my soul.
- John Muir
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,744
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,744 |
Quote:
How does the content of what was leaked matter in any way?
Because what you leaked is as important that you did leak for example Killing is bad in our society however there is a vast difference of punishment between killing a fly, dog, or a human even tho its still killing.
The punishment of the law is always based on what damage was caused. If you paralyze a person you pay a lot more damages than if you just break their jaw...etc.
This guy should be prosecuted but a firing squad is a bit extreme because the damage caused doesn't seem worth taking a man's life. In full disclosure I must admit I generally agree with Justice Brennan that Capital punishment is unconstitutional under the 8th and 14th amendment therefore I am a bit biased.
Go Browns!!![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/BrowniePoints/AndersonSnowPic.jpg)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,433
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,433 |
Quote:
I know that's an extreme version of the same type of situation ...... but it is the same illegal action being taken. Where do you draw the line?
I completely understand that as well. I'm not sure where we need to draw the line. Part of the problem is my tendency to not view situations as totally black and white.
Quote:
How does the content of what was leaked matter in any way?
Plenty of it showed that our government, along with other national governments, doesn't necessarily act in the best interests of its citizens. Take Iraq dissent for example.
A group was passing out flyers which were critical of the Iraqi prime minister. The U.S. government stated these individuals needed to be detained because they went against the interest of the U.S. government.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Quote:
Plenty of it showed that our government, along with other national governments, doesn't necessarily act in the best interests of its citizens. Take Iraq dissent for example.
That's irrelevant I think, because weather government officials are wrong or not, it's not the politicians who are putting their lives on the line for their respective governments, it's our men and women in uniform, so for a service man to compromise the security of his peers is nothing short of treason.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,210
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,210 |
Quote:
J/C
Despite him leaking confidential info, how was what he did ethically wrong? I know there's the whole "putting agents at danger" argument but is it completely bad he exposed a few shady practices?
You are aware that as a member of the military he swore that "I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice."
That part about the UCMJ is the big issue here. There's plenty of things in there that are a crime for a member of the armed forces to do that is perfectly legal for you to do. Adultery, not showing up at work, lying on your application, being drunk at work, and faking sickness or intentionally injuring yourself just to name a few.
There are plenty of things that he did that are crimes. Articles 91 (Insubordinate Conduct) and 92 (Failure to Obey an Order or Regulation) for starters, and he's dangerously close to Article 106 (Espionage).
As a fellow member of the military I find what he has done to be utterly despicable. He willfully gave confidential information to the enemy. Frankly the defense his lawyers are using makes no sense to me and I don't see how it will work in the Court-martial.
LIbertatem Defendimus!!
2010 Dawgtalkers NCAA Bracket Challenge Champ!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960 |
he leaked secrets.. end of story
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,682
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,682 |
The constitution doesn't fully apply in a military tribunal.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Quote:
The constitution doesn't fully apply in a military tribunal.
I agree that there are certain rights that do not apply. You give up some of your personal rights when you inter into a contract with the military.
I was a key witness in one ... Two from my unit killed another from my unit.
The death sentence was handed down to one of the two defendants (although I can find no record that it was ever carried out).
It was an exhausting process to say the least. I could not take a leave or be deployed and missed out on Grenada too.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,802
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,802 |
Quote:
I completely understand that as well. I'm not sure where we need to draw the line. Part of the problem is my tendency to not view situations as totally black and white.
Count me part of the club. The early extremes from this thread alone are laughable. Clamoring instantly for a death by firing squad from plenty of the same people fancying themselves as "pro life". The whole thing's become pretty reflective on our populace as a whole. That's not limited to or based off of this thread, but it's just sad that with so little investigation into the matter, we're so passively eager to eat up the concept of security as one of our leaders instantly regarded as protective father with a shotgun to greet Junior with on that first date. It isn't as overly simple as, "Okay. National Security! Any classified military and diplomatic cables/videos/logs/documents can't be leaked under any circumstance. End of discussion." The content of whatever leaks has to be objectively looked at since they're the source of the crime and very information the crime was chosen to be committed based off of. How do we not for one millisecond feel like hypocrites for the witch hunts we embark on globally- oft in the name of terrorism, human rights violations, overall oppression and subjection to tyranny- if we ourselves can be documented to be shown as eerily similar in conduct at times? It's naive and grandiose to think anything that goes against the United States- regardless of the realistic and known consequences of many of our actions- is irrefutably evil and against our self interests. Suppression of information has been going on in our media for awhile, mostly through the massive consolidation the industry's been at in the ladder half of the TV news era. The result of that's been a minimized scope of issues covered and overall limited avenues of informing the public to make their (and ultimately society's ) decisions on. You can bet with a misinformed, docile, and overall naive voter base, the idea of a true democracy- or even a republic- will shift toward's an oligarchical playing field where a tiny, constant contingency run amok at the behest of the majority's interest.
That's what I think makes this so much bigger of an issue than a bloated good vs. evil danger motif. A huge part of our problem is that we make these crucial decisions as a society so half-assedly off little information, easily manipulated by an entertainment news and divisive propaganda menu to go with a spoon-feeding of our opinions. The scrutiny Wikileaks and Manning are getting for this is a direct punch to the jaw of expanding information we're not considering well enough. This is all escalating to a crackdown on dissidence and honest retrospection. It's unhealthy for us, and it really sucks for the majority around the globe who we dictate how to live for our own purpose before theirs. To simply ignore information- be it reflective, spontaneous, gloomy, whatever- as it pertains to our leaders and the acts we as a people have inherently endorsed via the ballot polls, is an apathetic approach to self interest and that of fellow humanity. Just connecting a limited sample of dots of information and dismissing it as treason in the name of national security is why Ben Franklin is turning in his grave and mumbling under his breath that by sacrificing liberty for safety, we're worthy of neither and why the fellow founding fathers said, "....IF you can keep it" in reference to our Republic.
Last edited by 4yikes2yoshi0; 02/04/12 11:07 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,744
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,744 |
Quote:
The constitution doesn't fully apply in a military tribunal.
Good observation. Honestly under some treason acts I think the death penalty would be appropriate for example the guy who leaked the Atomic bomb info. I know its weird and I feel conflicted but I feel that capital punishment is illegal under most circumstances other than treason. To be honest I can't really justify that position either.
When you're brought up on treason is it always under a military tribunal?
Go Browns!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Quote:
Quote:
I completely understand that as well. I'm not sure where we need to draw the line. Part of the problem is my tendency to not view situations as totally black and white.
Count me part of the club. The early extremes from this thread alone are laughable. Clamoring instantly for a death by firing squad from plenty of the same people fancying themselves as "pro life". The whole thing's become pretty reflective on our populace as a whole. That's not limited to or based off of this thread, but it's just sad that with so little investigation into the matter, we're so passively eager to eat up the concept of security as one of our leaders instantly regarded as protective father with a shotgun to greet Junior with on that first date. It isn't as overly simple as, "Okay. National Security! Any classified military and diplomatic cables/videos/logs/documents can't be leaked under any circumstance. End of discussion." The content of whatever leaks has to be objectively looked at since they're the source of the crime and very information the crime was chosen to be committed based off of. How do we not for one millisecond feel like hypocrites for the witch hunts -we embark on globally- oft in the name of terrorism, human rights violations, overall oppression and subjection to tyranny- if we ourselves can be documented to be shown as eerily similar in conduct at times? It's naive and grandiose to think anything that goes against the United States- regardless of the realistic and known consequences of many of our actions- is irrefutably evil and against our self interests. Suppression of information has been going on in our media for awhile, mostly through the massive consolidation the industry's been at in the ladder half of the TV news era. The result of that's been a minimized scope of issues covered and overall limited avenues of informing the public to make their (and ultimately society's ) decisions on. You can bet with a misinformed, docile, and overall naive voter base, the idea of a true democracy- or even a republic- will shift toward's an oligarchical playing field where a tiny, constant contingency run amok at the behest of the majority's interest.
That's what I think makes this so much bigger of an issue than the good vs. evil motif. A huge part of our problem is that we make these crucial decisions as a society so half-assedly off little information, easily manipulated by an entertainment news and divisive propaganda menu to go with a spoon-feeding of our opinions. The scrutiny Wikileaks and Manning are getting for this is a direct punch to the jaw of expanding information we're not considering well enough. This is all escalating to a crackdown on dissidence and honest retrospection. It's unhealthy for us, and it really sucks for the majority around the globe who we dictate how to live for our own purpose before theirs. To simply ignore information- be it reflective, spontaneous, gloomy, whatever- as it pertains to our leaders and the acts we as a people have inherently endorsed via the ballot polls, is an apathetic approach to self interest and that of fellow humanity. Just connecting a limited sample of dots of information and dismissing it as treason in the name of national security is why Ben Franklin is turning in his grave and mumbling under his breath that by sacrificing liberty for safety, we're worthy of neither and why the fellow founding fathers said, "....IF you can keep it" in reference to our Republic.
I think that you are missing the point and that is that this is a military procedure and by that you are bound by a different and higher sets of standards then Joe civilian is.
It's not Manning's place nor is it his right (he gave up certain personal rights) to decide what information should be made available to the public, right or wrong in his mind or anyone else's.
Weather it is a little security breech or monumental one, it is of no consequence as far a the charges before him are concerned.
It's pretty obvious that he acted out of vengeance motivated by his life style choice and his intent was not a question of liberty and made in the best interest of that liberty, so let's not make him out to be some form of a whistle blowing hero here ... Please!
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/FL_Dawg/Logo5_1.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,643
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,643 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
There's a HUGE difference between killing an unborn child, and executing a traitor who broke the law ....... and which, if proven guilty, could call for execution. I find it funny that so many people are against the death penalty for criminals, but perfectly happy to see unborn babies killed before they can even take a single breath .. or smile ...... Yeah, that makes sense to me.  
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521 |
Quote:
but perfectly happy to see unborn babies killed before they can even take a single breath .. or smile
Because everyone gets all giddy and full of delight at the thought of an aborted fetus...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 34,622
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 34,622 |
j/c
Those calling for the firing squad are clueless. There is NO WAY the US is going to execute this guy. That would kill our global Human Rights Crusade and make us look like extremist. No, he will get sent to prison, a very dark kind of prison.
As for what he did, it was wrong and punishment is deserved BUT I don't think death or even life behind bars is deserved. I think a fitting punishment would be prison (say 10 years) followed by banishment. Strip his citizenship, set him adrift.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
It depends on what all he leaked ..... and if he leaked anything beyond what we know about. Revealing any military and diplomatic secrets is punishable by execution.
I do doubt that this President would sign off on an execution.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,802
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,802 |
I don't know where to start as you seem so ablaze and flabbergasted with my opening pro life reference to let anything about the totality of the Bradley Manning situation come into play. Quote:
There's a HUGE difference between killing an unborn child, and executing a traitor who broke the law
The wording you use to describe the first kill is over-exaggerated and the second semantically justifies it. Someone terminating a pregnancy when the baby is the size of a tic-tac sucks. It's a painful procedure, the result of either poor planning, or a simple medication conflict, surprise, whatever, but it is absolutely nowhere near the moral equivalent of taking a tomahawk to a child's head people try to paint on the hyperbole canvas. It takes place within a woman's body and until a child is born it is through-out the process a potential life, therefore not the government's concern. There's nothing real "small government" in either abortion or capital punishment. If you like fiscal responsibility and the ultimate punishment for crime, you favor solitary confinement in life sentences over the excessive funds and time spent through the appeals system. That aside, why the bellicose knee-jerk reaction to call for his life over leaking documents? Capital punishment usually is in response to a murder is it not? Why the justification to off him? He's a bad person and traitor. How about the revelations of many of those documents? We sure are gleeful to grab pitchforks over Manning but aren't more appalled by the heinous events including two Reuters reports, execution style kills on 9 women and children in a village, crude diplomatic information on how we view those in the middle east and interact with them and others in power (which was actually a critical part in getting information out and sparking the revolution in Tunisia; through the real props go to the guy with the balls to set himself on fire for not being in a world to live in decency). You say Manning's "offenses" and following results are worse than those of the aforementioned crimes and have him in constant solitary confinement and sub-par conditions like he's Jack the Ripper meets Rambo? You don't remotely consider, "Hey. Maybe our economic framing of maintaining expansive regional hegemony (similarly a crucial pillar to fall in the Roman Empire) is of detriment to those in the region and living reasonably going forward. Perhaps we're mortgaging our youth's future" while you peg this guy to a death row fate? I know it went against what he signed up for and he will get some legal reprimand for that, but I would view anything over 10 years as unnecessary. Burying our head in the sand on all info we have available- especially if it helps us honestly evaluate our foreign policy and corrupt leaders and schemes worldwide- is not going to change us from the crumbling downslide we're in. We need more acts of revolution as Jefferson said we need one every generation. Silence of dissent is hemlock to democracy.
Politicians are puppets, y'all. Let's get Geppetto!
Formerly 4yikes2yoshi0
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,507 |
Not all abortions take place when the baby is "the size of a tic tac". In fact, I would bet that most don't. (a baby is about 1 1/2 inches in length from head to bottom at 10 weeks)
Roughly half of all abortions take place after this time frame.
As far as Manning, I read a bit about the code of military justice, and if he is prosecuted and convicted of espionage, then he cannot be sentenced to death. (except under certain limited instances involving military plans, weapons, and such) If he is sentenced under treason, then he could. Reading the definitions, it seem most likely that he would be tried under espionage.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,523
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,523 |
My goodness,a real live Jeffersonian Anarchist.I thought all you guys went underground or died out after the 60's.
As I said to most of them,show us you got a pair run out there and perform those acts of revolution,or just shut the hell about it.
Indecision may,or maynot,be my problem
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 6,331
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 6,331 |
Quote:
It depends on what all he leaked ..... and if he leaked anything beyond what we know about. Revealing any military and diplomatic secrets is punishable by execution.
I do doubt that this President would sign off on an execution.
It's a very weird situation, because just as people said, he exposed truths that I wanted to know.
But we can't set a precedent to allow what he did (leaking confidential info) to continue. Leaking confidential information is unacceptable. That must be made clear.
Not taking the right action could lead someone to give/sell confidential information like launch codes, long-term strategy, etc. So, I think he should be executed. Although I doubt our president will allow it to happen. 30 years, no visitors (so NO reporters doing specials/interviews), and stripped of citizenship sounds okay to me.
Also, executing him would give sympathizers of his a hero/martyr. I want this guy to simply be forgotten
UCONN HUSKIES 2014 Champions of Basketball
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 72
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 72 |
It's been 48 years (1964) since I was drafted into the Army. If I rememeber correctly we all had to take oath to protect this country. Leaking top level secrets falls under the part of protecting this country. This turd should just be shot, screw the court martial.
The major from the Fort Hood shootings can stand next to him. We can take care of business.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... Bradley Manning Ordered to Court
Martial
|
|
