The Real WikiLeaks Villian Is Not Julian Assange
The Berkeley City Council plays a handy role in contemporary American politics: If you want to know what your opinion should be regarding any particular event, note carefully what the Berkeley City Council has voted on that week, and whatever they’re for, that’s what you should be against. In this instance, Berkeley is voting to give Bradley Manning — the traitorous ex-soldier who was the original source of all the “Wikileaks” documents — an award for heroism.
Berkeley’s sickening municipal resolution has received a smattering of media coverage here and there, but it hasn’t aroused the national outrage it deserves, for the simple reason that most Americans still don’t know who Bradley Manning even is. Bradley who? Shouldn’t Berkeley be giving an award to Julian Assange, just as so many other leftists have lavished praise on Wikileaks’ Australian-born head honcho?
Well, no. Say what you want about Berkeley, but they got it right this time, in their own sick way: If you’re going to praise the America-hating traitor responsible for this incident, your award should go to Manning, who actually leaked the secret government files, rather than Assange, who merely put them on his Web site.
The very fact that this incident is usually dubbed “the Wikileaks case” by the media is absurd; it’s not about Wikileaks. It should be called “The Manning Incident” or “The Manning Files.”
Julian Assange is a bit player in this case. His crime, if any, is minor. I can’t fathom why there has been so much media attention focused on him as opposed to Manning, who after all is the one who stole the secret documents.
The focus should be on the leaker, not the leakee. When the Rosenbergs “leaked” nuclear secrets to the Soviet Union, did we put Stalin on trial for treason? Of course not. He was simply the recipient of the leak. Even though Stalin benefited from the treachery, it was neither his fault, nor was he under U.S. jurisdiction, so he could not be (nor should he have been) prosecuted. Instead, the law and the nation’s attention were correctly directed at the people who actually did commit treason and who were under United States jurisdiction: the Rosenbergs.
Antiquated Espionage Laws Inadequate to Handle Stateless Anti-American Sentiment
Just as our honor-based rules of war are not equipped to handle our interactions with stateless amoral opponents in an age of terrorism, so too are our laws against treason and espionage not equipped to deal with stateless opposition in the Internet era.
Despite the much-mocked phrase “war on terror,” we’ve never officially declared war on anyone since 9/11, because you can’t declare war on an individual, an ideology or a tactic. And now it’s becoming clear that it may be difficult to prosecute someone like Bradley Manning as a traitor or a spy because there is no foreign government to which he has betrayed his nation.
In an age of non-state players, “leaking” government secrets to the Web plays the same role that traditional espionage played in the Cold War.
If Julius and Ethel Rosenberg had lived in the 21st century, they would have given atom-bomb secrets to Julian Assange, not the Soviet Union.
Fury is now being directed at Assange due to the lack of a tangible nation-state opponent in this case. Someone has to fill the role of “bad guy.” But the public’s anger is misdirected. Julian Assange is not the source of the leaks; he is simply the mechanism through which they have been publicized. Bradley Manning is the real villain here, since he is the one who violated his oath to protect and serve his country, and to guard national secrets. Assange has never sworn to protect the United States; not only is he not in the U.S. military, but he was never given access to classified documents, and he’s not even an American citizen. Consequently, he has no allegiance to the United States, nor should we expect him to respect our laws or defend our national interest.
Nihilism Is Not a Crime
It’s not that I like Julian Assange or have sympathy for him; in my opinion, he’s an anti-American political nihilist who takes adolescent pleasure in tearing everything down just for the fun of it. But that doesn’t mean I think he’s committed a crime. Is he malicious? Certainly. Unethical? Probably. But criminal? Not so much.
As much as I hate his politics, I can’t bring myself to zero in on Assange as the supervillain here. He is simply a name we have affixed to a tactic — the tactic of disseminating information on the Internet. As you may know, by now there are innumerable “mirrors” of the Wikileaks files — identical duplicates put online and hosted by sympathetic anarchists and hackers all over the world. Even if Julian Assange and Wikileaks had never existed, the same information would have been available on the Internet; all Assange provided was a brand name and publicity. If it had not been Assange putting the leaked documents online, it would have been someone else. Once the information is leaked, it has been leaked — the horse is out of the barn. There’s no point in chasing it around the field, because you’ll never be able to catch it; nor will you be able to build a new enclosure fast enough and big enough to capture it. Nor do you curse the field for playing host to the horse. Just assume that once the horse is out, it’s gone. Instead, try to find out who left the barn door open in the first place, to make sure it doesn’t happen again. And (if the news reports are true), that person is Bradley Manning.
To borrow a phrase from Bob Dylan: Julian Assange is the Wicked Messenger, the man who takes glee in bringing bad news. Yet despite his ill-intent, his sanctimonious attitude, and his undeserved attention, he is in the final analysis just a messenger. We may hate him and hate his message and hate the pleasure he derives from delivering it, but he did not create the message. He should be dismissed from the stage and quickly forgotten.
They’re both villains. But you’re right–Bradley Manning is the criminal.
The nice thing prosecution is that one doesn’t have to limit one’s pursuit to a single individual. Bradley Manning is already incarcerated and will be put away for a long time. Julian Manning is not a state advancing it’s own interests, he’s an individual who has openly admitted to committing espionage. Let’s put him away, too.
The other reason this poster boy for DADT is that he is unlikely to be the sole perpetrator, but there is going to be a network of leakers, hackers and collaborators. At a blog on Blaze.com a couple of ex-security folks labeled x and y discuss how it is virtually impossible that this little man actually obtained all this information. I am sure there are a lot of investigations following the trail to some of the other treasonous individuals. Some will be arrested….those that messed with the Russians and the Israelis will have their carbon footprints zeroed.
The are both criminals, the person who stole the documents, and the person who maintains possession of the stolen property, both should be put in the pen, or executed for espionage.
They both need to be in jail[hard labor] for the rest of their miserable lives.
I think you nailed it Zombie.
Why has so much attention been paid to Assange? That’s not hard to understand. Assange invites celebrity, Manning does not. Assange is a nice fit with several memes where technology and culture intersect, Manning is not. Assange’s acts are morally gray, Manning’s is not. Is a movie more likely to be made about Assange or Manning?
“Julian Assange is the Wicked Messenger”, you write. That describes rather well the likely self-image of many who front the media. Can there really be any wonder why Assange is where he is, and is likely to remain, for the foreseeable future?
“And now it’s becoming clear that it may be difficult to prosecute someone like Bradley Manning as a traitor or a spy because there is no foreign government to which he has betrayed his nation.”
But, he will be prosecuted, whether classified as spy, or traitor, or not. Mishandling classified materials carries federal, and military, penalties: The government doesn’t classify a document saying “pretty-please” keep this document “Secret”; it’s more like, keep it secret – or, else… And I suspect that, if they wish, they can charge for each and every classified document disclosed – they’re not obliged to give volume discounts – and effectively levy a life-sentence should the government win on all or most charges.
It may be that Americans and US residents have an obligation to keep your government’s secrets, though I doubt your journalists would agree that that should apply to them (Pentagon Papers?). But why should a non-American, who is not in the USA, have any obligation at all to keep your government’s secrets?
Oliver—– How is releasing information that can lead to the death of soldiers and Afghan informers different than publishing information that would have aided Hitler in WWII? Isn’t this a struggle between a coalition of democracies and terrorist murderers? Would Assange have released stolen U.S. cables in 1944? It’s OK now, because people like Manning, Assange, and those who support them believe the U.S. is the evil power in the world. The San Francisco city council just passed a resolution calling PFC Manning a hero. They once called U.S. military recruiters “aliens”. Wake up, America!
Note that the passage quoted refers to Manning not Assange. I doubt that the laws apply to Assange – as attested to by calls in Congress for new laws. I also wouldn’t claim – and haven’t claimed – that the laws apply to those not charged with “handling” classified documents. That’s why I referred to laws regarding “mishandling” of documents – by those whose responsibility under law, or military code, it is to handle such documents properly.
Assange is a legend in his own mind, and an Australian anti-American – a breed unto itself. (Yawn)
Foreign nationals stealing or publishing classified documents from any nation are called spies and are tried for espionage, when you capture spies you punish them to the fullest extent possible to try and stop other spies from stealing your data. And don’t quote the Pentagon Papers, that was bad law written by bad lawyers, they were writting law based on their political ideology and not basing the decision on the original intent of the Founding Fathers. Using any method other then the original intent is a road to the destruction of all of our right, point in case we are discussing if the US can prosecute someone for publishing stolen data. If we can’t we might as well surrender to the Moslems right now because more traitors to humanity will steal data and publish it if not stopped.
Oliver, I might consider your statement worthwhile if not for one minor detail: Assange is strictly anti-American, and not a freedom fighter. Several of his own associates have left him to start up their own version of Wikileaks, except this one will be equal opportunity. They have stated that the country of origin will not matter. Assange posts ONLY US leaks.
Personally, I assume from your post that you are not American. That you have access to post here tells me that you are not in Burma (Myanmar or whatever they wish to call themselves), China, N Korea, Syria, or myriad other countries. When Mr Assange decides to leak the secrets of a country that will not hesitate to kill him, then I will accept him as a possible freedom fighter.
Erisian your ignorance and bias on the issue is painfully obvious. Wikileaks has ALWAYS been opened to leaks from ANYWHERE in the world and that include leaks in language other than english! Check out http://wikileaks.enzym.su/about.html for a list of important stories they’ve broken, you’ll see quite a few non-US leaks there. I’m going to take a stab in the dark and say you haven’t ever even been to the wikileaks website. Why don’t you give it a shot (http://mirror.wikileaks.info)? You might be surprised at what you’ll find.
Also in the literal sense of the word, Assange IS a freedom fighter in that he is fighting the freedom from secrecy (which too often is used to cover up government malfeasance). Since you like to assume things here’s one for you: You must be of the commie scientologist sympathizer with a penchant for corruption since you’re on the same side against wikileaks as “the Chinese Public Security Bureau, the Former president of Kenya, the Premier of Bermuda, and [The Church of] Scientology”. And does leaking a secret document from the Islamic Courts Union in Somolia count as coming from a country which wouldn’t hesitate to kill him? (see: http://web.archive.org/web/20080209175330/wikileaks.org/wiki/Inside_Somalia_and_the_Union_of_Islamic_Courts)
Now please, don’t be just another net user who is too ignorant to realize it and thus posts lies and slander with confidence and conviction. Open your mind and educate yourself.
@Anonymous (at least try an original handle if you want to remain unknown), I have been to Wikileaks several times (count double digits) and find that 99.99% of the posts are from US sources. Assange is really nothing more than an anti-capitalist thug. A real freedom fighter is willing to face the consequences of their actions, whatever the ‘punishment’.
As for sourcing other leaks, there are ALWAYS exceptions to the rules. Wikileaks is not known for posting leaks from Russia, N Korea, Syria, Libya, Burma…. Why, these countries do not have the same respect for others (no, we are not perfect but sure as h*ll freer than these and most others), and would be considerably less hesitant to have their secret services kill Assange without a flinch.
When the thug faces his responsibilities I will consider revising my opinion.
By the way, just because you disagree does not make me ignorant. I do not practice epistemic closure, nor do I ridicule (first) those with whom I do not agree. My suggestion to you, grow up, get out of your mom’s basement, see the REAL world, and open your mind to other concepts than exist in your currently closed universe.
On a treason charge, Assange cannot be prosecuted unless it is under Australian law, since that is where his citizenship lies. It is doubtful it could be done because while he has undoubtedly aided the enemies of Australia (which are the same enemies of the U.S.), the material damage has not been against Australia. It is interesting that there are apparently no Wikileaks postings of U.S. – Australian cables. Probably not a coincidence.
On a U.S. espionage charge, one does noy need to be a U.S. citizen or to be present in the U.S. when the crime was committed to be prosecuted. The law does require proof of intent to harm the U.S., and Assange’s own public comments give such proof. The only real legal question is that the crime must be in a venue under U.S. jurisdiction. The Manning theft definitely was, and Assange’s posting definitely were not, so the issue boils down to conspiracy: did the two men coordinate the theft before the postings? If not then under U.S. law Assange can’t be touched.
“so the issue boils down to conspiracy: did the two men coordinate the theft before the postings?”
Quite possibly, yes:
http://boingboing.net/2010/06/19/wikileaks-a-somewhat.html
(1:51:14 PM) Adrian: Anything unreleased?
(1:51:25 PM) bradass87: i’d have to ask assange
So where’s Manning, what’s happening to him, what’s he being charged with, when does his court martial start?
If the Army’s anything like where I work, Manning has broken enough security regulations to AT LEAST guarantee he loses his job and never gets a security clearance again. I’m hoping he gets more punishment than that – a lot more. Treason? No, not unless we expand the definition of treason to include non-state actors. (Maybe not a bad idea.) But he deserves a stretch in Leavenworth.
Unfortunately, I think we’ll be watching him on “Dancing With The Stars” in a couple of years. He’s a prima donna. I don’t think he has the good taste or humility to disappear.
No problems. Throw Manning into Leavenworth’s general population (military) and he’s got his life sentence, although it won’t be long. Not only is he a traitor, but a poofter as well. Two strikes and he’s out, faster than Jeffrey Daumer(?).
According to wikipedia, Manning is in the brig (military prison) in Quantico, Virginia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Manning
Manning was arrested by agents of the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command in May 2010 and held in pre-trial confinement in a military jail at Camp Arifjan in Kuwait. On July 5, 2010, two misconduct charges were brought against him for “transferring classified data onto his personal computer and adding unauthorized software to a classified computer system” and “communicating, transmitting and delivering national defense information to an unauthorized source”. The charges included unauthorized access to Secret Internet Protocol routers network computers, download of more than 150,000 United States Department of State diplomatic cables, download of a classified PowerPoint presentation, and downloading a classified video of a military operation in Baghdad on July 12, 2007. Manning is also charged for forwarding the video and at least one of the cables to an unauthorized person. The maximum jail sentence is 52 years.
Manning faces a pretrial hearing under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, following which his lawyer expects a court-martial in the spring of 2011.
Wikileaks have refused to identify Manning as the source of the leaks, but claim that their effort to arrange for Manning’s legal defense was rebuffed, a claim the military has denied.
Manning has selected former military attorney David Coombs to lead his defense team. Manning has been held at the Marine Corps Brig, Quantico since July 29, 2010.
Julian Assange is the Wicked Messenger, the man who takes glee in bringing bad news. Yet despite his ill-intent, his sanctimonious attitude, and his undeserved attention…
Well, he cashed in on his celebrity to score with two female groupies in rapid succession, and they in turn parlayed their diddlings, plus Interpol, into some curious variant of PC celebrity for themselves. Everyone to their 15 minutes of fame!
I think the claim that “I did not leak information to our enemies, I just posted it on the Web” sounds pretty lame. Of course I am not a lawyer, but if I were Manning I would not expect that defense to get me off. Treason, of course, requires a declared war and a couple of witnesses.
As for why Assange gets all the press and not Manning, well that’s simple. Nobody doubts that releasing a ton of secret documents after you promised to keep them secret is wrong. And even the most dim wit Progressive understands that rewarding soldiers for breaking all the rules like Manning did is a bad idea. Soldiers all have guns; we really really want them to obey the rules.
Giving aid and comfort to the enemy doesn’t require a declared war, that is why the law was passed.
yeah, who is the real “villian?”
why don’t you put your freedom on the line for something you believe is right? manning did. he believes that the american people have a right to the truth about the wars it’s fighting. sounds like you’re on the wrong side of history.
You bozo, if anything the cables and other documents illegally stolen and released by Manning SUPPORT the case for war. At least the 5% of the ones released which relate to the post-9/11 wars at all. The Other 95% of the diplomatic cables are just an attempt to embarrass the United States, but mostly only ended up embarrassing all the other countries in the world. And lastly, if you are a Manning supporter, we can assume that you also support Obama more than Bush, but these documents have destroyed the Obama Administation’s reputation more than anything else. You’re very quick to assume what “history” will say about this security breach — we likely won’t know for many decades.
But mostly, he violated the oath he took, and also broke several laws. That’s all we need to know.
You fools are so reflexively anti-American, you never even pause to think of the ramifications of every random ideological bomb-throwing.
Nonsense on several counts.
1.You assume that anyone who supports the actions of Manning (allegedly) and Assange supports Obama. That is simply not the case. I personally despise both men.
2.You wrote that war was not declared after Sept,11. That is true. In fact, war has not been legally declared since 1941, but there have been fairly continuous actions going on for most of that time. I would think that someone who claims to support the Constitution would be at least a little bit bothered by that.
3.You call Bill anti-American (along with fool and bozo). This is not just childish and unprofessional, it’s unjustified. You are making the distressingly common mistake of mistaking the American government for America. A man can love his country while believing that the federal government is a murderous criminal organization. If you really have a decent argument, you won’t have to resort to name-calling to get your point across.
Point 1, bleah
Point 2, OT and pathetic
Point 3, What Manning did was egotistically vindictive, malicious and vengeful – and also childish. If those are the characteristics you seek in your heroes, it reflects back on the shallowness and immaturity of your persona. “Loser” is the quickest term that comes to mind. Worrying about “sticks and stones” instead of a person’s lack of character. I thought “Z” went pretty easy on the idiot.
Well said, this was a terror attack against the US and most people refuse to admit this because it would upset their nice little fantasy world.
This ugliness is Manning’s fault. He couldn’t possibly know what was in over a quarter of a million cables. It is one thing to disclose this because of something secret that he feels the public should know. However, these were disclosed for vindictive reasons that had nothing to do with their content.
Assange had better not enter the US, though. First Amendment rights were extended to those who published the Pentagon Papers and to the Washington Post during the Watergate scandal because they were clearly acting in the public interest. However, wholesale disclosure of these cables without careful review is dishonest, irresponsible, and probably can not be protected by the First Amendment.
That said, Julian Assange is in another country. As long as he isn’t violating their laws, he is free to publish whatever is allowed. I hope he enjoys watching the fur fly. If he had real guts, he ought to reside here while all this is going down.
“First Amendment rights were extended to those who published the Pentagon Papers and to the Washington Post during the Watergate scandal because they were clearly acting in the public interest.”
Definitely not true.
First, your “because” was in no way mentioned in the U.S. Supreme court ruling on the Nixon administration’s attempt to use prior restraint to prevent the NY Times from publishing the Pentagon Papers. The Court simply ruled that the First Amendment prevented prior restraint. In concurrent rulings several Justices issued dicta opinions that prosecution of the NY Times under the Espionage Act after publication might be warranted.
Second, the prosecution of Daniel Ellsberg and his assistant for the release of classified information was later dismissed due to government misconduct. In no way did any court rule on any other legal matter. Your statement is reflective of a common political and historical perception of the case; it is not a legal view.
Third, the Washington Post and Watergate have nothing to do with this, since there were no national security implications (yes, Nixon had national security motives, but that is not the same thing).
BTW, it is true that release of the Pentagon Papers was “in the public interest”, but only because it showed the government was lying. Ellsberg found this when he was asked to review the documents. The Wikileaks trove shows that both the Bush and Obama administrations are not lying, that our overseas personnel in State and Defense are not lying, and that there is no disinformation blowback into our intelligence reporting (as happened in Vietnam, where we picked up and reported our own propaganda). There is no public interest here, except to prove the government right and its critics wrong.
Most of these leaks prove US Policy is shockingly sincere.
Many of the leaks put innocent Iraqis and Afghans in bowel-evacuating danger.
PFC Bradley Manning will likely spend the rest of his productive years in federal custody.
The question is, who allowed a mentally unstable twenty-something access to all this information?
Who indeed. My understanding is that he wanted to either impress his boyfriend, get him back or he was in a hissy fit over his boyfriend dating a sailor.
Am I wrong?
Well, Bill, if you think he was standing up for principle, fair enough. He knew the consequences of his actions and should proudly spend many years in a military prison, knowing he did what he thought was the right thing… despite the fact that he was at the least going against his oath, and more likely buying himself the title Traitor. (Yes, I understand the legal definition requires specific things to happen. That doesn’t remove the label, any more than if I were to cut my wife’s throat then hire a bunch of high-priced lawyers who managed to get me off would affect the fact that I was a murderer.)
Bradley Manning is mostly being ignored because he is gay. A right-wing whack job would receive much more attention. It is rumored that Manning did not exactly abide by the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policies of the U.S. military. He apparently sought attention. The odds are that Manning would have minimally been ordered to report to a psychiatrist some thirty years ago—and immediately have his security clearance revoked. Once again, the military is probably screwed due to its “diversity goals.”
Exactly, I think you hit the nail on the head. Manning’s behavior reinforces far too many negative stereotypes about gay people for the press to want to make any mention of the inconvenient fact that Manning is gay. The debate over Don’t Ask-Don’t Tell would be further hampered by the news if they did.
Damn! It’s time somebody said this! (Somebody other than ME, that is. I’ve been feeling lonely out here!)
As I posted a couple days ago on this very site to someone named Mike Stone who was singing hosannas to Assange, “If everytime you say ‘Assange’ you said ‘Assange & Manning’ you might think twice about what you’re saying.” Why is no one pointing out how much power is being allowed these leakers and, subsequently, the next leakers who will come down the pike? All they have to do is post something and… “It’s TRUE! Yeah, baby! It’s the complete truth! We don’t even ask for verification!”
How can anyone think policy should be run by mentally unstable, low-level, petulent children like Manning? That’s what anarchy is, folks.
And like the Rosenbergs, Manning should be executed if he’s found guilty. Treason is treason no matter what foreign individual or entity classified info. is disclosed to.
You got my vote, execute him and do it soon.
Manning is already facing UCMJ action. Assange is not only free, but he’s flaunting his actions.
The main reason that low class manning has been ignored by the lame stream media is that he is a flaming faggot homosexual. Reporting this maggots actions would cause the public to even further resist the leftist attempt to allow open homos in the military. This worm should be on the cover of the new york slimes with the headline ‘Military homo betrays America’, but that wouldn’t fit their agenda. This is the leftist media version of ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’.
Ahh… From my short stay here it has become apparent that your despicable comment is pretty much the content of this site in a nutshell.
Actually, “Steven Johnson”‘s comment was likely left by a moby seeking to smear PJM by association. There are several attempts (at least) at this on every thread. Par for the course. And part of the gimmick is then to have other leftists come on and point out the offending comment. Tiresome, really.
Thank you for the disclosure, but why let him post?
Steve Johnson and There it is are most likely the same poster
Go away troll. Nobody is buying your attempt to create a straw man here. Run back to Hufpo or DUh.
Michael Yon has a list of the precise charges that Bradley Manning is (currently) facing
http://www.michaelyon-online.com/pfc-bradley-manning-s-charge-sheet.htm
Why has so little attention been paid to the thief who stole the files, Bradley Manning?
Because he’s in the brig being tortured by our finest, they are forcing him to wear underwear on his head, bray like a donkey, and making him look at pictures of nude men.
“Oh the humanity!”
…they are forcing him to wear underwear on his head, bray like a donkey, and making him look at pictures of nude men.
Or, as Manning would normally call it: “Friday night out.”
Pfffffffffffffffftttttttttt…..you owe me a new keyboard.
When I was in the Navy, 40 years ago (ahem!), a trip to the brig was a trip to unmitigated hell due to treatment by America’s finest – the United States Marine Corps guards. Bray like a donkey? You’re kidding. Three days in the brig was enough to reform the most hardened criminal who dared steal from his shipmates. Not like that now, I’ll bet.
Yes “bray like a donkey” In this tough on crime PC world, our finest will go all out “abu ghraib” style on this traitor. In fact it think they will even make him balance a Bible on his head, and sit on a cold stainless-steal head to go pee pee.
PFC Manning released Secret and Top Secret documents into a public arena available to all of our enemies, and his intention was to damage or undermine the US and US foreign policy. Does anyone question giving a 21 year old gay PFC a Top Secret clearance? Where was his supervision? Who decided such wide access to this information? Could he have downloaded several hundred thousand documents without being flagged? In my not so humble opinion he should die if convicted. A pant load of his supervision should suffer terminal career damage, and a bunch of political hacks that set policy should be fired with prejudice.
Wikileaks? Make releasing any Secret information penalties so severe that no sane person would contemplate this action. Make publishing secret documents a felony for everyone. Include the esteemed press in this criminal law. Here this Washington Post and NY Times.
Manning didn’t release anything above SECRET. He never had that TOP SECRET nor was any data at that level ever at his access. Him being gay, in no way plays into his actions, nor should be held as a reason or justification. Manning had access to the SIPRNET, the same way over a million Americans, both military and civilian do. Nor should his age be viewed in the same manner. I served as a nuclear machinist mate and at 19, had his same clearance. I couldn’t very well operate a nuclear reactor if I couldn’t read the tech manuals could I?
I do agree however,that whoever allowed him to have anything hooked up to a SIPRNET computer or allowed him to us a SIPRNET computer for anything not related to his job needs to be punished. This includes his fellow soldiers that did nothing as he sat at his station “listening” to music. I can’t comment about overseas, but from the locations stateside that I have worked, using a SIPRNET computer with so much as anything able to plug into it on your desk is considered to be grounds to get yelled at.
The thing that bothers me is that Manning is being portrayed as a hero(among much of the internet)…he isn’t. He was basically a lonely kid, getting kicked out of the army (for assault, not for being gay) and he connected to some people on the internet. He gave them what they wanted and they used him like the fool he is. The diplomatic crap…I don’t really care. What frightens me is that there is a lot of technical data, in the wrong hands, that could do a tremendous amount of damage. Manning should have his Court Martial…and serve the full extent of his punishment.
“‘Manning didn’t release anything above SECRET. He never had that TOP SECRET nor was any data at that level ever at his access…”
Thanks for reminding me of that. I have now updated the post to remove the one mistaken (but offhand) reference to “top-secret” information.
OK, so he ONLY released Secret documents? That makes it maybe a minor issue? So a Secret Clearance was a good idea? In a don’t ask don’t tell environment being gay is or should be a factor in a persons ability to get a clearance. If you could be openly gay then it would be much less of a factor. What ever his reasons are I don’t care. If he is convicted he will have a really interesting live an some place like Ft.Leavenworth.
OK, I can understand you don’t like it, but I’m with Romeo on this. The age and gayness would not be valid reasons for withholding a “Secret” security clearance. I once held a “Top Secret” rating, which included access to both, and part of my job was to submit new staff members for either one or the other level of clearance. But to work for me they all had to have some class of access. Lots of units are similar to that today.
I’m going to agree with Bill on this one- his homosexuality has nothing to do with this. I have several gay friends, some who have served with dignity and honor in various branches of the US military. They are true patriots – men and women of great integrity and pride in their nation and service, and I am ashamed to see fellow political conservatives lashing out at these people who chose service and hardship because of their beliefs.
What we have here is an immature result of the ‘my child needs high self-esteem and therefore can do no wrong’ culture that developed in the mid-80s (and continues today…sigh), coupled with a commmand structure that also needs it’s butt handed to it in a very significant and meaningful way.
Manning should be prosecuted. I’ll leave it up to the military lawyers to determine what the proper level is, but his failure isn’t being gay, it’s being a selfish, immature twit with no sense of personal responsibility (I bet he’s learning fast though) and having commanders that were not paying any attention. Where’s the outcry and investigation into that? Where’s the investigation into information control, his ability to carry portable media into and out of a supposedly secure area? Who is banging heads (figuratively) to figure out HOW and WHY the chain of command failed? That’s what I want to know. Yes, ripping a large amount of text to a cd is pretty fast, but why the hell did he have recordable media with him at all? Heads need to be rolling here (figuratively- it’s unfortunate that he may have well caused some to roll literally out in the war zones).
Manning is a traitor the rosenbergs did less damage than manning did. He had absolutely no right to do what he did. and now they want to honor him in his home town. I want to Puke after hearing this.
Actually the Rosenbergs were quite naughty. During the War Jules snuck out of a defense plant and gave to his handler a proximity detonator intact. He and Ethel recruited, set up and handled several active “Cells” that were very productive. Of which one’s members were Joel Barr and Al Serrant, both should be synonamous with Benadict Arnold in
American Lexicon, another case where the Press missed their job. And ZOMBIE is incorrect, the Rosenbergs were dedicated Communists who perfered their children grow up orphans than roll over on their ideology. According to Marc Thiessen their granddaughter represents detainees at Gitmo Pro-Bono, go figure.
Maybe treachery is in their DNA
Congrats-youve read the two commie subversives correctly. I for one, do not weep for Julius and Ethel Rosenberg. Personally, Bradley Manning deserves the same fate they received , and for the same reasons. The Rosenbergs knew they were communist traitors. So does Bradley Manning. He knew what he was doing was wrong.
C’mon, JR. The Rosenbergs gave Stalin the ability to make the atom bomb. Manning has basically just caused the US embarrassment – so far.
But it’s not only liberal media who are ignoring the two issues of our security incompetence (nothing new here) and the real traitor, PFC Manning, but also most conservative media.
Well, as to the incompetence, it probably started under President Bush and the Republicans who created Homeland Security. As to Manning, he is gay, and his culpability cannot be discussed without bringing up the gay reasons for his action – and the liberal media never want to portray gays negatively – even when they are serial killers who eat their victims like Jeffrey Dahmer.
So we have a diversion, attack Assange as the cause of the entire event.
No one will ever know how many people have already died and how many more are going to die because of Manning, all we can say is it will be a lot.
they will not focus on manning because:
1. hes gay and that might cause a “backlash” – read – cause others to seriously question if there is some problem in the wiring – ref a recent column by ann coulter where she points out that 80% of the spies that turned coat and helped the russians in the cold war were gay – all of the important ones except for Kim Philby
2. this would negatively impact the dadt debate
3. manning would start fingering others and that would ultimately lead to ———– you fill in the blank as this was in part a hit on hillary
“manning would start fingering others”
This thread certainly turned pornographic quickly!
LMAO
We’ve also got a “HoneyPot” on this thread.
*takes mind out of the gutter*
The fact that he is gay has nothing to do with what he has done. Even assuming that every person with a SIPRNET access in the military is heterosexual (which you would have completely ignorant of reality), there are countless civilians with the same level of access, with even less restrictions on their personal lives. There are over a million people in the US who have the same access level as Manning did(I believe its around 1.5 million but I don’t know the exact number so lets just go with a million). Even assuming a percentage of just 1.5% (consistent to the low end estimate of homosexuals among the US population), that’s over 15,000 homosexuals that never felt the urge to compromise their principles. The simple truth is that Manning being gay is neither a reasonable excuse or rational for what he did. There is no point to focus on him being gay. We may as well focus on him being white for a much as that has to do with his actions.
So let’s focus on him being white, gay and despicable.
Let’s focus on him being an immature twit with criminally negligent commanders.
What was it they called Philby and his gang? The gang of five or something like that? BTW, Im wondering if Philby(an alcoholic , who like his fellow traitor BENEDICT ARNOLD died lonely, drunk and completely disrespected-I guess even the Russians didnt care for traitors)ever thought about what he did was wrong. And PC nearly got Philby to the top of British counter-intelligence.
This kid Manning, a mere private, didn’t download the Embassy Cables and you’ll note not even the US government claims he did. The encrypted, nuclear hardened US diplomatic network has been compromised by a foreign country. That country saw an opportunity to play Manning as a patsy as he was already arrested for one leak and this foreign country passed on a mere sample of what they stole to Wikileaks. This is like mailing the ear of a kidnap victim to the family to prove they’re still alive. What scares the crap out of the US right now is, they know they’ve been hacked but they don’t know what they lost. Maybe all the military data?
Evidence?
I think she saw it in a script for a Sean Penn movie. You can tell by the way basic facts, like Mannings rank, are wrong.
If you don’t punish your traitors you just encourage more treachery. Its as simple as that. Don’t trip over yourselves protecting homegrown scum.
And Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Rice are not guilty of war crimes?
Correct.
NO but your community organizer and his comrades are guilty of treason! When you can prove where Obama is from, then you might have something intelligent to talk about!
I’m seriously glad you brought this up, Zombie.
This is such a bizarre and baffling story unfolding all the way around.
Will any good come of this at all or will this incidence be used to ram nanny-state “net-neutrality” down our throats? After all, if someone truly wants to do something bad, well, there are limitlessly creative ways to achieve that end and not enough ‘police’ in the universe to be prepared for all of those possibilities. I’ll take my freedom over fear tyvm.
“Why has so little attention been paid to the thief who stole the files, Bradley Manning?”
Why? What a question! Because Bradley Manning is homosexual.
The immediate cause of this silence about pfc. Manning’s inclinations is:
a) the conflict over DADT (fortunately just closed with the liberals in despair), and
b) fears of the liberal establishment about what his conduct, associations within the Army, AND OUTSIDE THE ARMY might say about his actions, and about the actual perils posed by “what’s personal is political” on the homosexual line in the Armed Forces…
… a frank general debate about this being completely forbidden by the current, politically correct and open-minded cultural atmosphere -
Yes – we reached the point where satisfying the demands of the homosexual lobby is more important for Pentagon than the integrity and safety of military personel -
Situation which just echoes the larger, oppressive cultural context we live in where anything that might put homosexuality under an unfavorable spotlight is immediately pushed aside, regardless the severe consequences of not discussing/ exposing that or that situation -
In a pretty short period of time, the USA managed to build an untouchable aristocracy whose deeds are beyond commoners’ critical commentary –
Examples of how gingerly homosexuals’ misdeed are treated by law or MSM are to numerous to mention here – as far as about pfc. Manning (a young man “who hates injustice” as CNN quickly issued the hymn page), we do not know anything about these two things:
* his Army homosexual associates -
* his outside Army friends (for someone stationed in Iraq, Cyprus is the closest place of perdition – and Cyprus is also a hotbed of Russian activity, legal and otherwise, commercial, intelligence and military) -
“Spying’s for ever” said Markus Wolfe, head of late DDR’s Stasi – and Kamrade Wolfe he spoke about his crews of Romeos, used to ensnare diplomats and military in BRD -
Not novelty, the masculine Mata-Hari-s – it happened to US personnel in Hungary, it happened in Russia, it happened in Rumania, it happened in Britain, too -
Yet in Manning’s case, the current atrmosphere created by the DADT brouhaha will mitigate greatly the punishment for his misdeeds -
Be sure of that -
Question. How do you think Manning got in contact with Assange? And why Assange?
That part of the story is already pretty well-known, but was outside the scope of this essay.
In short (as far as I remember): While still enlisted, Manning was dumped by his transvestite boyfriend (seriously) and was so upset that he lost his temper and got into fistfights with other soldiers, and was dishonorably discharged for his violent outbursts. Before leaving his post, he downloaded all the secret files he could get his hands on, out of spite. Once back in the civilian world, he fell in with a crew of radical gay activists, to whom he bragged that he had these secret files. These activists were already aware of Wikileaks from earlier cases, and it was they who contacted Assange on Manning’s behalf, and eventually the two hooked up and Manning gave him the files on the promise that Assange would publicize them. As for Manning’s “motivation,” that’s anybody’s guess, but the general assumption is that he was “getting revenge” on the Army for kicking him out after his fistfights. Very childish behavior, needless to say.
Muggeridge’s Law: ‘No satire can compete with real life for sheer absurdity’
I didn’t know this story. So, Assange did not engage in any conspiracy or criminal solicitation with Manning. My guess is there is no grounds to prosecute him. Too bad.
“Yet in Manning’s case, the current atrmosphere created by the DADT brouhaha will mitigate greatly the punishment for his misdeeds.”
All the more reason for the cowards and backers of DADT to push for this despicable revocation of this law. They’ll now claim that it was the “pressure” of hiding his perversion that caused him so much anguish…that he felt compelled to betray his oath, his country, his “honor” ( questionable at best ) for his homosexual quest for “equality” and respect for his choice of that lifestyle.
I can just imagine his defense now…he was an abused and misunderstood man who’s loyalties lie with his boyfriend.
I agree with your assessment Zombie about Manning, though I’m not willing to as easily let Assange off the hook. I wish we would grab a set like Putin and treat Assange with an ingested polonium-210 cocktail.
I’m not satisfied about having to clothe and feed a traitor, and that is exactly what Manning is. If found guilty, Manning is worth four bullets and blank.
We don’t have the stones to do that either anymore and we are lesser for it.
“If everytime you say ‘Assange’ you said ‘Assange & Manning’ you might think twice about what you’re saying.”
You left out Manning’s boss, and her boss, and the other bosses right on up to the top. Unless some officers get nailed for this wholesale leakage, the concept of ‘security’ and ‘chain of command’ just become a sick joke.
Do please remember that the General in command of Abu Ghraib was busted over the acts of the enlisted soldiers who did the deeds – and the lefties of the world were yowling for the heads of the chain of command right up to Rumsfeld and Bush. So, lefties, we’re listening for your righteous wrath… listening… still listening…
What degenerate times we live in. Why do we focus upon the “why” of what PFC Manning did? That is immaterial. Its what he did that counts. Did he do it, or did he not? That is the question. Who cares about his motives?
How come a private had access to a quarter of a million secret documents?
Was it him REALLY? or does the US security leak like a sieve?
Answer 1. Read the whole thread and most of the comments. It’s covered.
Answer 2. Read the whole thread and most of the comments. It’s covered.
Roll over, now, and go back to sleep.
Thanks for this article which leaves me with a troubling question. Why would any American city consider Manning a hero? Those people represent the antithesis of my communitiy’s values. How many share their opinion? Is it time to split the USA into multiple countries?
Wow. I’m not alone. I think about that every single day.
Both left and right keep using the line “take our country back.” (Which is weird coming from the left, since they haven’t been proud of America – EVER.) And what do you do when you take it back? You have a huge mass of disgruntled people who will never agree with you and will agitate day and night. I don’t think it’s ever been at such a split.
My only trouble is if we split into red and blue states, my beloved Washington state would be all leftie. Well… I guess it already is, so what am I bitching about?
The eastern 2/3 of the state could for a new state a la WV and leave the left coast to it’s own devices.
Emma, The Lefties would love to completely destroy any and all ideas of “American Values” and “American exceptionalism” into the dustbin of “everybody gets a gold star and wins” Politically INcorrect history.
RKae, I hear ya as a fellow born-n-raised WA-stater. It’s sad to see what has become of this wonderful state since all of the Cali transplants took over.
I mean, almost 18 damned years of PATTY FREAKIN’ MURRAY? WTF????????
I say, Fuck the Lefties and send them to another damned planet altogether where they can all saw each other’s heads off to be the most bestest master.
el, it already has split apart. The section between Oakland and El Cerrito, California, and most of the City of San Francisco have been foreign nations for at least four decades. For evidence look through these archives.
California is already a de facto separate nation. It is full of Latinos, people who grow weed and brag about it in the media as if the law can’t touch them, L.A. shanty towns and will soon vote to change its name to Aztlan or Huehuatezingohuatlioxtl. Soon, Euro Americans will flee to the US and bye-bye 50th state.
I say hang them both after a military trial.
I agree with Zombie- there’s not much we could even try JA for. He made it known he’d publish, but he didn’t actively solicit, documents. He’s not a citizen (therefore, not a traitor), and he didn’t ask for, nor participate in, the actual security breach (not a spy- so no espionage). At most we could get him for receiving stolen property. If he colluded with Manning, that is another manner. Although, considering the sheer volume of memos and texts, I suppose that a maximum sentence for receiving theft of stolen property could earn him a very long stay indeed (served concurrently that is). But that’s a hazarded guess
On December 25, 2010 we need all citizens of the world to rise up and to defend Julian Assange and our RIGHT TO KNOW.
Sharing information and revealing facts ARE NOT CRIMES.
Seeking peace is NOT A CRIME.
Wanting a global community based on peace and trust is NOT A CRIME.
No nation has the right to deny information to others, especially the United States. We live in a global community it is time for the U.S. to stop acting like the Earth is a pyramid and that it is on top. The Earth is round.
Global fucking community? You have GOT to be kidding, you moronic moonbat!
Please, go suck a Dictator’s dick.
Well THAT was constructive! When in doubt and you don’t know how to argue a point, start calling names…
But prattling on like a completely brain dead PC, MC, Islamophile left wing moonbat is a crime against humanity of which YOU are guilty as hell Lara
Just imagine how much worse its going to get when flouncing Gays like Bradley and his boyfriends are allowed to openly mince in the Military.
Interesting choice of words: “citizens of the world” and “global community” are soft words for Marxist means, but who would want to be up front about that, anyway? Better to be touchy-feely-squishy – and devious.
Actually, none of the three pursuits you cite are inherently criminal or inherently licit, but may bloody well BE crimes depending on
A) Whose information you’re revealing/seeking
B) How one chooses to seek peace, between what/whom, and under what terms
C) How one defines “peace and trust,” and how one proposes to impose it upon a “global community”
If all the above pursuits are INHERENTLY licit, then A makes every blackmailer, industrial spy, inside trader, or stool pigeon innocent. (Under this reading, Peter Pettigrew is the real hero of the Harry Potter franchise!) And an expansive reading of B and C exonerates Pol Pot. Come to think of it, though, if the Berkeley council hasn’t honored him yet, they will eventually.
My name is Lara Spenzak. I am a young transgender person living near America in the Bay Area. I believe that diversity, tolerance and health care are basic human rights. I look forward to seeing America transformed into a progressive and rational nation that respects all peoples and declares peace, not war.
isn’t that special?
Please take your “progressive” and “Transgender” ass to an already well-established “Progressive” and “Communist/Socialist” country and leave this country the fuck alone, dipshit.
Honeypot #19 might be right.
Just look at the timeline according to these story links:
APRIL: “Nearly 15 percent of the world’s Internet traffic, including that of many U.S. government and military sites, was briefly redirected through computer servers in China in April, according to a congressional commission report due out this week.”
APRIL: “Wikileaks releases video of a United States Army assault in Baghdad in 2007 that left 12 people dead, including two employees of the news agency Reuters.”
MAY: “U.S. Intelligence Analyst Arrested in Wikileaks Video Probe.”
“…Manning was turned in late last month by a former computer hacker with whom he spoke online…He said he also leaked three other items to Wikileaks: a separate video showing the notorious 2009 Garani air strike in Afghanistan that Wikileaks has previously acknowledged is in its possession; a classified Army document evaluating Wikileaks as a security threat, which the site posted in March; and a previously unreported breach consisting of 260,000 classified U.S. diplomatic cables that Manning described as exposing “almost criminal political back dealings.”
JUNE: “3 Weeks After Arrest, Still No Charges in Wikileaks Probe.”
JUNE?: “WikiLeaks’ Assange Tells FNC’s Napolitano He Offered Docs to Unresponsive White House ‘Weeks’ Before Release”
JULY: “Wikileaks Founder Julian Assange Releases 92,000 Top Secret Documents on Afghan War.”
JULY: “Military airstrike video leak suspect [now charged] in solitary confinement.”
“…Requests for comment from Manning’s attorney, Capt. Paul Bouchard, were not returned.”
The wiley gooks are at it again and manned with an over-abundance of lonely penises, hacker 101 is child’s play.
I’m not a lawyer, just a simple retired Chief Petty Officer. I don’t have a college degree and except for some electronics and computer classes that I was required to attend I don’t have much in the way of advanced education. So my understanding of Manning and maybe his superiors is at a very basic and simple level. Manning took a recording device into an area that contained classified documents. He deliberately downloaded the documents and turned them over to a foreign national with the express intention of doing serious and/or grave damage to the security of the United States. He did this during a period of time when the United States was engaged in not one but two wars. To me that sounds like the very definition of treason, and I’m hoping and maybe even expecting him to be sent to court martial for treason. And if found guilty I fully expect that he would be executed.
Because he’s a homosexual period!
At least he’s into humans:
Man Marries Dog
“He should be dismissed from the stage and quickly forgotten.”
That might well be the ideal punishment for Assange, to be ignored and forgotten. His ego would expire like a salted slug.
How is an e-3, who was busted from an e-4,
allowed unsupervised access to a machine
with writable ports?
I don’t believe it. When I worked in classified environments
there was ALWAYS a number of people around.
He supposedly took 250k docs on 3 writable DVDs –
and NOBODY notices. Where are the logfiles?
I don’t believe he could have done all by himself.
You can photograph docs and not even have to take them from the premises via cellphone cameras or hidden pin-cams.
C’mon, think outside the box.
f47: How long have you been out? In the past, it was difficult to get at and record classified information.
In the last 10 years access and supervision have relaxed to increase information flow, mainly due to the war. He was in a war zone and those groups were very vocal in their calls for open information flow to get the most up to date information to the planners and decision makers closest to the battle.
The lack of opsec on siprinet can surely be debated (it is buttoned up now) but all I know close to it believe it was from a place of best intentions.
FWIW, Manning is a traitor and should get the death penalty but will settle for 50 years in a dark hole. They sure did “disappear” him.
Most hackers are bored math geniuses with a kazillion thoughts running around in their heads and anything they can do to drown out their own voice dictating to them is a win-win even if it doesn’t always make much sense.
The creative mind is a dangerous weapon and nobody can find a way to disarm that…yet.
It’s been asked before, but, I will reiterate the plea that we need to harness the power of “Anonymous” to unearth the vast vaults of information on Barack 0bama that he’s been hiding.
C’mon, Anon! DO IT, baby! DO IT!
My personal plea to “Anonymous” from a fellow geeky girl:
Please find a way to access all of Barack 0bama’s information he has paid to hide and share it with the public. The United Stated of America citizens need to know and just as importantly the WORLD needs to know because this whackadoodle is clueless.
Pretty please, Anon?
It would be the bestest Christmas present to the American people, EVER!
DO it DO it DO it!
Wow! Now you’re cooking with gas. If Assange did that I’d pin a medal on him myself. I suspect I might anyway after he releases the upcoming bank data.
Please Mr. Assange – an Obamaleak, please oh please oh please. I just want to know if this moron had half his brain taken out in Hawaii or Indonesia as part of some welcome to the non-white community hazing.
You need to present it in a form that’s a challenge. Besides- they are defending JA, not Manning, and Manning wasn’t a hacker or cracker that I can tell from the media- He had access already, and a lax commander that let him (and presumably others) take recordable media into work. Not exactly something that requires high skill level.
My plea was an honest one.
pin cameras in a classified environment?
if you tell me that on o-4 or higher was involved,
maybe I’ll believe, but an e-3?
come on.
Button cam. Pen cam. Eyeglass-cam. Hat-cam.
You are behind on spy vs. spy, I see.
your not making sense, he admitted taking the
files out on the “lady gaga” DVDs.
If he’s such a geeky genius, he would have just
waited and gotten out of the army and then
released the data.
It just doesn’t fly.
He should be prosecuted and jailed for a long long
time, but he was not alone.
This was not a one man job.
Do you mean he absconded the evidence/photos/yadda burned to a DVD he ‘named’ as “Lady Gaga” to get past the doofuses in charge of our national security?
And, I agree this turd should be flushed.
And, I agree again that he wasn’t the only one involved in this fiasco.
Does anyone think it somewhat strange that a PFC has access to such information. Manning may have leaked the information but how flawed is the process that lets such a junior person access to sensitive data?
(Sigh) No. Read the thread or go back to sleep.
I have written two articles on Bradley Manning and the Berkeley vote next week to elevate him to hero. I did an interview on Russia Today television yesterday versus CodePink’s Medea Benjamin on the topic of “Bradley Manning, hero or traitor?” at http://politicsandfinance.blogspot.com/2010/12/my-wikileaks-berkeley-debate-on-russia.html.
Far easier to understand as to why former PFC Manning’s coverage has been so scant is the knowledge he’s gay.
Period.
With Don’t Ask Don’t Tell in the news it’s no wonder they don’t want this piece of garbage as the face of a “gay” military.
Guys… could this all just be a created crisis? These aren’t national secrets, just diplomatic mumbo jumbo from the State Dep’t. Earlier in this administration you learned that those in charge should “never let a crisis go to waste”, and if you’re prepared to do that, then I would suggest that if one doesn’t come along that you want – then you would be prepared to make one.
Me thinks the desired goal is control information flow on the unregulated peoples channel – the internet. If I’m right (and I hope I’m not), then we could expect to hear stuff like. “We can’t afford another devastating blow like that to our national security, so we’ll need to introduce some controls… maybe it would be in everyone’s best interest if we regulate the internet”. It shouldn’t take long for some legislation.
Something about the way he grabbed files does not bell out to me. Manning was ‘allowed’ to take that data, as everything those PC users look at in a Dep’t like that is flagged to the attention of others higher up. This is either inconceivable incompetence, or it was engineered. we’ll know in time.
Just how long would it have taken to trawl the archives, sort out the juicy bits and copy them onto a couple of CDs?
Someone needs to do a “time and motion” study here. Every file transfer would have been logged and those logs are kept on the backup tapes that most REAL computer networks archive every 24 hours.
Could it be that Manning was directed to several caches of goodies that had been lodged there by a third party, still, no doubt, quietly “working” at his/her post?
Another thing: are not “secure” networks, or even a basic “government” network so arranged that special authorisation is needed to connect ANY external device, especially a storage device? Furthermore, what is with this CD business? How many “Discman” or equivalent devices have data recording capability? On the other hand, quite a few folk I work with use their heavy-duty iPods for their portable data storage and transfer; gigabytes in an instant.
This basket of fish is starting to smell even more.
There are several issues which are exposed by this fiasco. The sole reason for the US military is to kill and destroy the enemies of our nation. In order to accomplish this harsh mission, they, and other government organizations, withhold information, the open release of which would benefit our enemies. This secrecy has been destroyed. Those who praise this release must be motivated by one of two judgments. They either want our nation to be defeated, and/or consider us an evil society. The first reason is treason, the second must be considered, in open debate. To date, with a fraction of the claim information released, we can hold some tentative judgments: A significant fraction of the information should never have been classified. In a open society based on free exchange of information, classification solely due to CYA reasons, is both wrong and harmful to our social dialog. The content, and release, exhibits, not evil, but gross incompetence. Manning maybe a traitor, but his chain of command is an absurd joke. Officers who permitted a lowly private to down load 250,000 classified documents, must face a bleak future. In the age of live or die by electronic intelligence, our military stands naked, defenseless, and inept.
One issue, discussed above, is the emotional stability of a homosexual in the military with access to classified material. IF the reports are true, the fundamental reason for this historic injury to our official secrets security is the act of a homosexual, due to his sexual drive. This must be considered in regards to military effectiveness. High level officials in DoD state that friendlies will die and that war will needlessly be continued, due to this leak. Every member of the military surrenders freedoms when they take the oath to defend our nation. One may be the freedom of action, by sexual choice. The deciding issue is not morality, but survival of our nation.
Once again…it has nothing to do with the “pressures of being gay in the military”- there are plenty of gay men and women serving with honor, pride and integrity now, and probably a good number of them have died in the line of duty.
It has everything to do with him being immature and the product of “the self esteem’ generation. Anyone can be upset at the loss of a lover, straight or gay. It takes an immature brat to turn that into a pique that leads to doing what he did. Now- I will say that yes, there are radicalized homosexuals, but they are basically marxists and anti-us/anti-western, and they wear their gayness as a badge (probably frustrating gay people that are main stream/centrist) but then again, living in a smurf blue area, I’ve met plenty of radicalized-leftist straight people as well (sigh…I need to move). The one thing they all have in common? Immaturity and a delusion of ‘I can do no wrong, and I’m brilliant, just ask Mom/my professor/fellow progressives’- i.e., they are immature twits, just like Manning.
“And now it’s becoming clear that it may be difficult to prosecute someone like Bradley Manning as a traitor or a spy because there is no foreign government to which he has betrayed his nation.”
Bullcrap. The fact that Manning released information to a person or persons for whom it was not intended to view violates the oath he took to protect the info.
The fact Manning is a faggot has EVERYTHING to do with him also being a traitor. Why do you think that the CIA and other intelligence agencies never allowed homosexuals in their ranks years ago? THEY WERE TOO EASILY BLACKMAILED FOR THEIR SEXUAL DEVIANCY. They were a security risk then and they still are and always will be. Now this little sissy gets pissy over a boyfriend or some other thing and decides to turn all of the secrets he has access to over to a total stranger. We should stretch the bastard’s neck and throw all of the remaining lot out of the military as soon as they reveal themselves in some manner and re-institute the ban on them in the military and let this be a lesson to us as a nation: NO GOOD WILL EVER COME OF MOLLYCODDLING HOMOSEXUALS. Treat them like the deviants they are.
The morality issue here is complex. Like a lot of (well-informed) people, including even our enemies (however begrudgingly), I consider military action in Afghanistan to have been wholly justified as a reaction to what happened on 9/11; whereas the Iraq situation, though, was/is a complete end-to-end clusterf*ck of lies, death and destruction — there is absolutely nothing good to say about it.
However, thanks to the magic of abysmal news reporting, the Afghanistan and Iraq wars have been jumbled up in most people’s minds, and fatigue over Iraq includes Afghanistan. And while there have been many polls showing huge public confusion over Iraq, there hasn’t been as many showing what soldiers believed, but what there was showed even more confusion.
Manning is 22 yrs old, which makes him as being only 13 when 9/11 happened. Imagine being 13 and watching the (horribly confused) news coverage that day, and then imagine enlisting in the Army 5 years later, which was about when average folk were slowly realizing that the Iraq war was not quite what it was sold to be. As an intelligence analyst, he very likely starting having all sorts of WTF! moments in relation to what he naively thought had been going on since 9/11. What’s even less known in the general population than the true Iraq situation is what happened behind the scenes involving the intel agencies after 9/11: as with the military, contractors were unwisely brought in, key functions were outsourced (usually to friends of former high-ranking military and government personnel), and things like SIPRNet were expanded hastily and unwisely. All of which made things just ripe for a disaffected person being in the wrong place at the wrong time (at least as far as the U.S. government and military goes.)
You can very easily look at all this Wikileaks business as just blowback for years of government deception and lying, whether justified or not. My main beef is that the releases don’t really differentiate between gossip and hard info, unconscionable behavior or normal government workings, but if there wasn’t such bad, bad behavior by the U.S. government and others in the first place, chances are there would have been no reason for someone like Bradley Manning to do what he did, and for someone like Assange to be so motivated to make the most of it.
“the Iraq situation, though, was/is a complete end-to-end clusterf*ck of lies, death and destruction — there is absolutely nothing good to say about it.”
Are you trying to be satirical? The Iraq War was entirely successful, and had an extremely beneficial outcome to the U.S. Prior to 2003, Iraq was a powerhouse totalitarian police state controlled by a power-mad dictator whose stated sole intention was to destroy America and Israel. He also had the largest and (purportedly) most powerful army in the Middle East. He had committed genocide on several ethnic populations in his own country. Now, after the U.S. obliterated the Iraqi Army and then suppressed three or four failed insurgencies, Iraq is a muddled, sloppy powerless mess of a disjointed country (which I see as a good thing) — and one that poses essentially no military threat to the U.S. or Israel (or any other country, for that matter). However you slice it, I’d much prefer Iraq in the state it’s in now than the state it was in under Saddam.
Zombie wrote: Are you trying to be satirical? The Iraq War was entirely successful.
!?!
Are you the one trying to be satirical? Maybe you haven’t been keeping up on current events, but that little pre-emptive invasion into Iraq used 9/11 fear & anxiety as a cover for a cynical, braindead execution of a braindead policy wish concocted by braindead members of a braindead organization of a-holes called the PNAC, many members of which ended up on braindead Bush’s little team of braindead ne’er-do-wells. Bush wasn’t victimized by bad intel, either: the friggin CIA and the other intel agencies let themselves be pressured into coming up with braindead “evidence” to justify the invasion, the details of which has been slowly eeking out in documents being obtained by the National Archive.
Everything put out by Bush and his Republican enablers about Iraq was a lie, including the ghastly number of civilian casualties and the overall progress of the war. Even the suppose success of “the surge” was more like firemen who themselves had started a fire that spread out of control in a neighborhood, and which they belatedly managed to only get mostly but not completely under control, and even then only after most of the neighborhood had already burned down and with many sad victims. But even here, there is some serious doubt that the surge itself was the main reason things calmed down a little bit.
It takes a special sort of braindead person to call a situation like this a “success.”
It doesn’t matter what the stated reason for the war was — the removal of Saddam was historically necessary.
As for the rest: here is my reply.
From your link: By every measure, The United States and coalition forces have conclusively defeated all enemies in Iraq, pacified the country, deposed the previous regime, successfully helped to establish a new functioning democratic government, and suppressed any lingering insurgencies. The war has come to an end. And we won.
WTF?!? Seriously. If anyone truly “won,” it was bin Laden. Not only is he still on the loose 9+ yrs later after successfully committing by far the biggest single act of terrorism against this country, and not only has he and his buddies caused a massive, expensive and frustrating surge in security protocols at airports and elsewhere, but he got his biggest wish: the U.S. pulled out of Saudi Arabia, and it was the U.S. having military bases in that country that had really infuriated him.
So if anyone was going to declare a “victory day, it would be bin Laden, and he would be fully justified to use April 30, 2003.
You have the typical expertise of the brainwashed liberal class: A PhD in “Changing the Subject.”
The hunt for Bin Laden is not the same thing as the war in Iraq. The coalition invaded due to Iraq’s violation of the U.N.’s sanctions, not because Iraq has anything to do with Bin Laden.
It doesn’t matter to this discussion of you successfully ejaculate at the fantasy of Bin Laden “winning.” The fact is we won in Iraq by the end of 2008. Sorry if that induces flaccidity.
Zombie wrote: The coalition invaded due to Iraq’s violation of the U.N.’s sanctions, not because Iraq has anything to do with Bin Laden.
BS, BS, more BS, and yet more BS.
Not to mention that ultimate result of all this, aside from widespread death and destruction, was an emboldened Iran. That really made the world safer, eh?
The Iraq invasion was voted on and approved by a DEMOCRATIC PARTY controlled congress. So if you don’t like the war and are looking for someone to blame, then blame them. And not a single link you provided made any reference to the rationale for the Iraq invasion having anything to do with Bin Laden. So, massive fail, as expected.
As for your second point about Iran –again, making use of your PhD in Changing the Subject. WWII emboldened Stalin, too. Guess that war was also a mistake, by your reasoning.
Just BitChie being bitchy. Your Be Crack files are up next.
Goldstein knows more. He was 13 once.
Smile.
You’re right, and amidst all that he also suddenly realized he wanted to touch hairy things. Too much for a young man. He obviously snapped, the twin towers became an anti-erection and he probably thought he actually was giving Assange Lady Hee Haw CDs.
Why can’t we support Wikileaks? They are doing a job that is supposed to be done by journalists worldwide. Wikileaks have published more classified documents then the rest of the world’s media combined. I think that this is a failing on the part of the current media. But what confuses me most is the ridiculousness of the American people (or at least those who I have seen on message-boards). The term “Don’t shoot the messenger” comes into mind. Besides, its dangerous to let the government decide what we can and cannot hear. There is no such thing as a country with too much free speech. None of the things that Wikileaks have published has hurt anyone. So why all the drama. The files reveal wrongdoing on the behalf on governments and corporations. Wikileaks is not shouting fire in a crowded room. It is stopping us sleepwalking into the fire. Besides, I think that Julian Assange and Bradley Manning should be rewarded for for their bravery and conviction in doing what they think is right. Bradley has revealed corruption and hypocrisy in the US Government. Julian hasn’t committed any crimes at all. I thought the publication of the Pentagon Papers solved this years ago.
“None of the things that Wikileaks have published has hurt anyone.”
Um, hate to break the news to you, but many many people have been killed and/or have had their lives ruined by these leaks. By Assange’s own admission, 1,200 were killed in Kenya alone as a result of the documents Wikileaks published. Unknown numbers of Iraqis and Afghans have also been killed.
Your argument fall apart on this point, so the rest I’ll leave unrebutted.
Correction. As a result of the riots in Kenya as a result of the people revolting against a corrupt regime. Wikileaks didn’t directly kill those people. The people of Kenya chose to act and the govt. there chose to kill the people. But I’m sorry. Wikileaks shouldn’t be allowed to tell people that their government is corrupt, because they might actually try to do about it. Oh well, let’s go like lambs to the slaughter.
No Afghanis/ Iraqis have been killed. In the last round of leaks, Wikileaks withheld 15,000 documents because they might directly endanger people. Are you really going to believe what the US Government tells you? It’s in their interest to lie to you.
Thanks, Zombie, for bringing Manning back into a story that was becoming one-dimensional around Assange. That gets us a little closer to understanding the broader issue.
Still, as several posters have implied, one must question why the US government is routing, according to what is being reported, seemingly the entire spectrum of its diplomatic traffic through military stations where people like Bradley (meaning rank, not proclivities) have access. How does the State Department’s instruction to its diplomats to spy on their counterparts concerning climate change have any possible value to military affairs in the Middle East? Where is compartmentalization and layered security access? As previously stated, it appears to me more that Manning picked up an unattended briefcase than that he cracked a bank vault.
From what is being reported, it sounds as if raw intelligence on a very broad scale was being routinely circulated to a local military commands. Maybe I’ve missed something, but there’s much here that doesn’t seem to add up (even after reading the entire thread and having being up and alert for some time). What is the State Department saying (other than the predictable condemnation of Assange)? Were these communication policies carefully considered by State and Manning just happened to be in the right place to exploit them? Or is Manning merely a cut-out of anyone who might have harvested the insecure, low-hanging fruit (no double entendre) of critical information, the routing of which was ill-considered and inadequately protected by our government? As regards chain-of-command, this is a key issue.
The barn door is indeed open, and the horse in the field is attracting all the attention. But has anyone gone to close the barn door, or to see if, in fact, the barn door is even still there, so as to keep the rest of the horses where we’d rather they be? Is State and the rest of the Obama administration taking steps to prevent a recurrence, or are immigration, card-check, carbon-trading, and a mutinous left wing of the party occupying all of its time and apparently meager resources? Is the administration protecting America or only its own internal political prerogatives?
Sorry to elevate BG’s blood pressure, but I’m really interested in learning what created the situation for Manning being able to steal whatever he wanted. I sincerely think the biggest perps are those people. They ought to be charged with treason or whatever and – your most favorite punishment here – punished severely.
As to Manning, a quick trial and hanging would be nice.
How anyone can declare that Assange’s part in this crime is ‘minimal’ is beyond me. He has aided and abetted getting people – Americans — killed.
I must admit, though, that the leaks have provided many interesting facts. I was very happy to read today that the Swedes finally confessed that their Muslim invasion is a fiasco: ‘Integration a fiasco’
http://www.thelocal.se/30740/20101210/
Trying to have a discussion with a leftie about anything serious reminds me of the scene from Spinal Tap where Nigel is talking about his amplifier collection:
Nigel Tufnel: The numbers all go to eleven. Look, right across the board, eleven, eleven, eleven and…
Marty DiBergi: Oh, I see. And most amps go up to ten?
Nigel Tufnel: Exactly.
Marty DiBergi: Does that mean it’s louder? Is it any louder?
Nigel Tufnel: Well, it’s one louder, isn’t it? It’s not ten. You see, most blokes, you know, will be playing at ten. You’re on ten here, all the way up, all the way up, all the way up, you’re on ten on your guitar. Where can you go from there? Where?
Marty DiBergi: I don’t know.
Nigel Tufnel: Nowhere. Exactly. What we do is, if we need that extra push over the cliff, you know what we do?
Marty DiBergi: Put it up to eleven.
Nigel Tufnel: Eleven. Exactly. One louder.
Marty DiBergi: Why don’t you just make ten louder and make ten be the top number and make that a little louder?
Nigel Tufnel: These go to eleven.
How can you argue with that?
Wikileaks is a good example. Lefties want somethg vaugely like ‘world peace’ (and of course nobody else does) so anything can be justified as long as say it promotes that. In a world without confidentiality increased violence is much more likely, but Berkeley never thinks that far. You can argue all day that 11 is not ‘one louder’ but that is only further evidence that you are an anti-loudness bigot.
I have a solution for Bradley Manning. Let his fellow soldiers decide. let the soldiers whose lives have been endangered by this faggot decide his “fate”. Im sure that the little filthy traitor wont like the results.
Let’s let Berkeley’s finest hear our voices. This guy is NOT a Hero. Sign the petition and we’ll lay it in their lap early next week – personally.
We at MoveAmericaForward.org are going to send a message to them during their city council meeting. What a bunch of nut jobs.
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/traitors_are_not_heroes/
#50 Spindok wrote “Trying to have a discussion with a leftie about anything serious reminds me of the scene from Spinal Tap where Nigel is talking about his amplifier collection:”
Whereas having a discussion with half (or more?) of the righties here yields an inordinate amount of homophobia and calls for hanging, shooting, ingestion of a Putin cocktail etc. Zombie tried to spin it that one of the first of the outrageous remarks was from a plant, but enough of the regulars chimed in with their own homicidal, homophobic rants so that it is tough to make the case that it is outsiders who are bringing down the level of discussion here. I will grant you that the term “civil discourse” is a bit quaint, but half of the people here are so far from that that it is virtually irrelevant. Some day, if I have the stomach for it I will try to analyze right rant, as opposed to lefty rant. Off the top of my head, lefty rant is bluer and righty rant is more violent. Yet again, we are reminded of why we need a decent center (where I would place both GWB and Obama.) Another basic difference is that they speak in public and their words have consequences, whereas on the internets it’s more like burping and farting. I value the people here who stick to the issue and avoid bluster, or at least have enough rational thought to offset small amounts of bluster. One could make a reasonable point that the guy is getting some slack from the press because he is gay, but when that is followed by anti-gay spewing, the earlier point gets lost.
“Whereas having a discussion with half (or more?) of the righties here yields an inordinate amount of homophobia and calls for hanging, shooting, ingestion of a Putin cocktail etc.”
Obviously false. Few of the posts here (definitely less than 1/2) contain anti-gay slurs or calls for Manning to be killed.
You’re right that it is less than half, but it is more than a few.
Wake up people. I love how politicians exclaim exposing THEIR crimes is criminal. Empire is wrong. Manning was doing a public service, because he was standing up to what is WRONG. Just like our founding fathers did to the British’s subjugation of the colonies.
Want a real news source? Try http://www.democracynow.org.
Just drop your egos, and think back to the values your parents taught you. Justice for all!
“NavyVet” is a nice touch. More likely you’re a 19-year-old “social justice” activist. Who else listens to Democracy Now!!! ?
“Empire is wrong.” It is to laugh.
“NavyVet”?
If you really want to ‘brang’ the TRUTH then let’s get 0bama’s shit-sammich exposed once and for all and let’s get the FED insiders exposed and let’s expose every dirty deal done by EVERY politician of EVERY party and let’s get the dirt on the dealings of foreign countries too. Exposing ONLY the USA’s shit is LAME…let’s blow the whole shit-load of PHONY crap wide open!
Let’s see EVERY country mortified and embarrassed by leaks…
Do it fair or STFU.
Technically he’s not a thief.
He had legal access to the files. A thief doesn’t.
Truth, it BURNS.
An employee standing at a supermarket cash register has “legal access to the money.” But that doesn’t mean he gets to TAKE IT HOME. Though he may have “access” to the money, it does not belong to him, nor does it give him permission to take possession of it. ESPECIALLY if he has signed an oath to not take it. If he takes the money, he is a thief, regardless of the level of “access” he was granted to it.
Truth, it SIZZLES.
I’m guessing you’ve seen his personnel records then. So you obviously know the wording and structure of what he, not “normally a person has” access to and what he’s legally allowed to do with that access.
Not, “generally.” Him.
No?
You know I know the answer. I can try to get Ben Firecracker over at Politico to write a whole story about what little you actually know about Manning (He’s still getting used to the idea of changing it from Smith, give him some time).
Another analogy:
A male gynecologist has legal access to a female patient’s vagina but that doesn’t mean he has the right to insert his penis instead of a speculim and impregnate the woman who upon finding out she is with child believes it was her husband who is the father until giving birth reveals that the baby is…erm obviously not his.
Okay. That was gross.
Stupidity- it’s painful.
Oh, how I wish that were true.
Tell ya what Jeff, you get yourself a job as a teller at a bank, any bank will do. Get access to all that money and say, give away a few thousand here and there. Then…there’s all those lovely little account numbers. Give a few to your friends (along with the cash you had been given access to).
Better yet, publish them all on the net. You have free access, remember? It’s not theft since, as you so brialliantly reasoned, you had access. And when the trial comes, I’m sure you’ll be acquitted. And of course, your friends that took the money couldn’t be charged with receipt of stolen goods. The bank gave you access, and you were just acting in the name of social justice. Right?
Right?
How about I just sit my ass on unemployment sending out my resume for 2 years until somebody pays me enough money to convince me to get off my ass and stop playing my video games and eating my food that you pay for with your taxes?
I’ll try not to laugh too hard at you.
Unlike liberals I’m not disinclined to rub salt into an injury.
Get this Christie Christopher:
Unemployment = 1600/month
Rent/Utilities = 650/month
What do I do with the rest of your tax dollars?
Buy diapers? Don’t have children.
Buy much needed health care? Kind of healthy.
Buy stocks that I then resell when they rebound? Only through a corporation I own so it doesn’t show up on my personal income.
How completely stupid, please zombie let me use my favorite terms…
Erm, this is a family website.
You felt so smug when you wrote your comment didn’t you Christopher. Until you realized that I am building my wealth on your tax dollars.
Um, no, I don’t feel the least bit of shame. I’d prefer you just write a check for $10,000.00 to Jeff Barea, but then you’d rather we play this game so you don’t feel violated.
Um, yeah, one other thing. There used to be this law called the Alien & Sedition Act.
On a website that continuously calls out the unconstitutional actions of this progressive movement that attempts to bury the Constitution at every corner, it’s poor form to then lay claim to laws that progressives enacted to assuage the butt hurtness of actions that actually restore confidence that there are patriots who are willing to expose these progressive traitors to the Constitution.
Yes. That is what I am saying.
All in the name of national security. The national security of the progressive movement. Stand up and be counted already. Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord.
“I say hang them both after a military trial.”
I second that emotion. Espionage and/or treason should be dealt with harshly, especially when it involves a war.
And, despite Zombie’s erroneous assertions, Manning could be brought up on treason and espionage charges, and Assange could be brought on espionage charges.
Of course, in Assange’s case, we have to catch him first.
Julian Assange and PFC Manning are both pawns being played by George Soros.
Yes, that is correct. This is the Soros ploy to get the net neutrality accomplished. I understand from another site that Assange atty is Soros atty working for Assange pro bono. The entire affair was probably (even down to the boyfriend breakup) engineered to embarrass the US, Hillary, the military, etc. Manning could not have done this alone. But we will be the lesser for it if Manning does not hang. Let’s bring back the phrase: make an example of him.
I think Eric Blair summed it all up at number 47.
By the way, the hate in these comments, most prominently featured in the homophobic remarks are despicable. I am surprised that there have been no reprimands from an editor of this site.
I let people speak for themselves, and don’t “reprimand” people for comments I think are unwise. We’re all adults here — I’m not a kindergarten teacher enforcing speech codes.
But mostly I assume that everyone by now has a built-in “Moby Detector” at this stage in Internet history; look for clues of overdone suspiciously stereotypical “hate speech.” In such instances, more often than not, it is done insincerely by a troll.
As for the dividing line between authentic comments by people here not wanting gays in the military, and “pushing the limit” comments by mobys seeking to undermine PJM’s credibility (in their own minds) — I no longer concern myself with the distinction. Part of the game is to drain our time and resources trying to monitor and distinguish phony comments from real comments. I don’t play that game. Let the comments speak for themselves, and let each reader decide if they regard any specific comment as authentic or an act.
What is “homophobic” about wanting to bring a criminal to justice?
Stop treating “Gays” as precious snow-flakes who can do no wrong.
Good grief.
The other day I went to the supermarket and bought some vegetables from the dreaded Julia Assange-like (or if you prefer the dreaded stenographer-like Woodward/Bernstein-like) Middle Man.
Which peddler of other peoples’ produce (much of it dug up by Bradley-Manning-like criminal-alien farm laborers) called himself a vegetable salesman.
Please do not believe in what our government is showing you. Be very worried about what they are doing behind the closed doors or curtain. Anyone who thinks our government could not stop these leaks, it it time for you to take your meds..
Request for more information.
Would not all of these cables eventually have been released anyway? Isn’t there some sort of FOI timeline? 10 years or something? So we are really only talking about timing of the release right?
And if the information released is dangerous only because it is fresh?
The Berkley Council is on record with anti-war resolutions, and this one supporting Manning is of the same tone. They also state that diplomacy is more effective than military options in conflict resolution.
But doesn’t diplomacy require assurances of privacy? And has not Manning’s actions hurt diplomacy world-wide? Since no ambassador is ever going to be completely honest in what he writes in his cables again if he has a fear that it might be exposed?
If Berkley really was anti-war and pro-diplomacy, then they should damm this release of state dept cables.
The guya from oxford who ripped up the British intelligence were all homosexual. Allowing that most gay guys would not undo the country some are so angry at prejudice and lack of support that they act this out in treachery. This happened due to us because insufficient vetting and a failure to learn from history.
Not Oxford, they were the Cambridge spies.
Timing is everything. What if the Jap’s and Nazi’s knew we had their code cracked? The war would have costed many more US and allied lives. Loose lips sink ships.