

Bradley Manning’s case is about more than freedom of speech - gridscomputing
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/06/bradley-mannings-case-about-more-freedom-speech

======
mosqutip
Yes, the US gets away with human rights atrocities, and yes, Manning should
not be tortured. However, one can't ignore the fact that he released US
government secrets to a non-government entity. That is treason. Manning will
receive some sort of punishment because he committed treason, and treason is
breaking the law. It's fairly simple.

~~~
baddox
> he released US government secrets to a non-government entity. That is
> treason.

That's not what treason is in the USA. Treason is defined in the US
Constitution as such:

"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against
them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person
shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the
same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court."

~~~
bradhe
> giving them Aid

~~~
baddox
Aiding the enemy is a separate offense than treason, and a less serious one.
Bradley Manning is actually being charged with aiding the enemy, but is not
being charged with treason.

~~~
bradhe
Ah, so your argument is a semantic one.

~~~
baddox
Well, yes, it's obviously a semantic argument. I'm arguing about what
"treason" means.

