In a case that has intrigued me greatly for some time, Army Intelligence Analyst Bradley Manning faces the same charges he initially faced- Aiding the enemy, Wrongfully causing intelligence to be published on the Internet, Transmitting national defense information and Theft of public property or records- when he was charged in December. Personally, I've yet to see a case where the reaction by both government and civilian alike has been so vastly different. But more on that later.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/26/justice/manning-wikileaks-case/index.html?hpt=ju_c2
Manning was arrested in May 2010 after it was discovered in online chats that Manning had passed sensitive material to WikiLeaks. It was the largest amount of sensitive material ever leaked to the public, and included videos of a July 2007 Baghdad airstrike and a May 2009 Granai airstrike in Afghanistan, and also included 500,000 army reports about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Supporters of Manning claim that what he leaked were intense cover-ups.
The first item Manning supposedly uncovered and released was an "official" policy to ignore torture in Iraq. Medical evidence detailed how prisoners had been whipped with heavy cables across the feet, hung from ceiling hooks, suffered holes being bored into their legs with electric drills, urinated upon, and sexually assaulted. In the leaks Manning sent, there was discovered an order implemented in 2004 not to investigate allegations of abuse against the Iraqi government., which is in direct violation of the UN Convention Against Torture.
The second item uncovered is that U.S. officials were told to cover up evidence of child abuse by contractors in Afghanistan. DynCorp — a powerful defense contracting firm that claims almost $2 billion per year in revenue from U.S. tax dollars — threw a party for Afghan security recruits featuring boys purchased from child traffickers for entertainment. DynCorp had previously faced human trafficking charges before this incident took place.
Other supposed conspiracies that were supposedly leaked by Manning to WikiLeaks include "evidence" that Guantanamo prison is used primarily to imprison mostly innocent people and low-level operatives, the fact that there is an official tally of civilian deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan, and that President Obama has authorized a secret drone bombing campaign in Yemen. Manning has been lauded for uncovering so mucb "corruption" that he's been nominated for Nobel Peace Prizes in 2011 and 2012.
However, the judge in the case isn't buying into Manning as a hero, at least not in his ruling on Thursday. The major criticism of Manning is that he placed the lives of American soldiers and Afghan informants in danger. Col. Denise Lind, the judge in the case, said the following in denying Manning's request that some of the charges against him be consolidated, as they were duplicates, and that the most serious charge Aiding The Enemy, be thrown out:
This has been the lynchpin of the prosecutions argument against Manning. Intentions and damage aside, the possibility did exist that the information leaked could have put lives in danger due to Manning giving information to the enemy. The fact that little to no danger- which the defense has argued- occurred is irrelevant to the charges at hand. Manning has been painted as a profoundly unhappy Army soldier due to "Dont Ask, Dont Tell"(Manning is openly gay), and abuse he supposedly suffered during training due to his size, both physical and emotional. Manning faces life in prison if convicted.
For two reasons, Manning's lawyer David Coombs had requested that the "aiding the enemy" charge be dropped.
As previously noted, the judge has rejected the motions, stating that aiding the enemy has been a violation of military code for 200 years, and that the charges are specific. She also denied the motion that some of the specifications of the second charge,(sixteen in all) wrongfully causing intelligence to be published on the Internet, which carry ten years apiece, be thrown out due to being similar. She ruled that they were seperate specifications, and all charges would stand.
Manning's trial is scheduled to start on September 21st. He has yet to enter a plea, nor has he decided on whether his trial will be by jury, or by judge.
I've rarely seen a case where people are so divided on him. Personally, he broke the law, and he deserves to do time and be discharged dishonorably for it. He was in a position of power, somewhat, and he used that positon to leak sensitive material. Regardless of his intention, or what was included inside, he broke the law, and potentially put lives in danger. But life in prison? Just going too far.
However, if what he leaked is true, there's something to be said for that. I DO think motivation is important here, although it appears as if it wont be a factor. I don't think he's a traitor, nor do I think he was trying to endanger lives. He was simply a guy who got in over his head, and possibly thought he was doing the right thing. His mental status needs to be considered as well, IMO.
Free Manning, send him away for life, or something in between?
All other thoughts on this case are welcomed and encouraged.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/26/justice/manning-wikileaks-case/index.html?hpt=ju_c2
Manning was arrested in May 2010 after it was discovered in online chats that Manning had passed sensitive material to WikiLeaks. It was the largest amount of sensitive material ever leaked to the public, and included videos of a July 2007 Baghdad airstrike and a May 2009 Granai airstrike in Afghanistan, and also included 500,000 army reports about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Supporters of Manning claim that what he leaked were intense cover-ups.
The first item Manning supposedly uncovered and released was an "official" policy to ignore torture in Iraq. Medical evidence detailed how prisoners had been whipped with heavy cables across the feet, hung from ceiling hooks, suffered holes being bored into their legs with electric drills, urinated upon, and sexually assaulted. In the leaks Manning sent, there was discovered an order implemented in 2004 not to investigate allegations of abuse against the Iraqi government., which is in direct violation of the UN Convention Against Torture.
The second item uncovered is that U.S. officials were told to cover up evidence of child abuse by contractors in Afghanistan. DynCorp — a powerful defense contracting firm that claims almost $2 billion per year in revenue from U.S. tax dollars — threw a party for Afghan security recruits featuring boys purchased from child traffickers for entertainment. DynCorp had previously faced human trafficking charges before this incident took place.
Other supposed conspiracies that were supposedly leaked by Manning to WikiLeaks include "evidence" that Guantanamo prison is used primarily to imprison mostly innocent people and low-level operatives, the fact that there is an official tally of civilian deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan, and that President Obama has authorized a secret drone bombing campaign in Yemen. Manning has been lauded for uncovering so mucb "corruption" that he's been nominated for Nobel Peace Prizes in 2011 and 2012.
However, the judge in the case isn't buying into Manning as a hero, at least not in his ruling on Thursday. The major criticism of Manning is that he placed the lives of American soldiers and Afghan informants in danger. Col. Denise Lind, the judge in the case, said the following in denying Manning's request that some of the charges against him be consolidated, as they were duplicates, and that the most serious charge Aiding The Enemy, be thrown out:
This has been the lynchpin of the prosecutions argument against Manning. Intentions and damage aside, the possibility did exist that the information leaked could have put lives in danger due to Manning giving information to the enemy. The fact that little to no danger- which the defense has argued- occurred is irrelevant to the charges at hand. Manning has been painted as a profoundly unhappy Army soldier due to "Dont Ask, Dont Tell"(Manning is openly gay), and abuse he supposedly suffered during training due to his size, both physical and emotional. Manning faces life in prison if convicted.
For two reasons, Manning's lawyer David Coombs had requested that the "aiding the enemy" charge be dropped.
As previously noted, the judge has rejected the motions, stating that aiding the enemy has been a violation of military code for 200 years, and that the charges are specific. She also denied the motion that some of the specifications of the second charge,(sixteen in all) wrongfully causing intelligence to be published on the Internet, which carry ten years apiece, be thrown out due to being similar. She ruled that they were seperate specifications, and all charges would stand.
Manning's trial is scheduled to start on September 21st. He has yet to enter a plea, nor has he decided on whether his trial will be by jury, or by judge.
I've rarely seen a case where people are so divided on him. Personally, he broke the law, and he deserves to do time and be discharged dishonorably for it. He was in a position of power, somewhat, and he used that positon to leak sensitive material. Regardless of his intention, or what was included inside, he broke the law, and potentially put lives in danger. But life in prison? Just going too far.
However, if what he leaked is true, there's something to be said for that. I DO think motivation is important here, although it appears as if it wont be a factor. I don't think he's a traitor, nor do I think he was trying to endanger lives. He was simply a guy who got in over his head, and possibly thought he was doing the right thing. His mental status needs to be considered as well, IMO.
Free Manning, send him away for life, or something in between?
All other thoughts on this case are welcomed and encouraged.
