

Bradley Manning verdict to be announced Tuesday - asn0
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/world/56661378-68/manning-counts-material-wikileaks.html.csp

======
pvnick
>Prosecutors called him an anarchist hacker and traitor who indiscriminately
leaked classified information he had sworn to protect, knowing it would be
seen by al-Qaida. They showed that al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden obtained
copies of some of the documents WikiLeaks published before bin Laden was
killed by U.S. Navy Seals in 2011.

This is a terrifying precedent and opens the door to charge _any_
whistleblower with "adhering to [the United States's] Enemies, giving them Aid
and Comfort," and thus treason. Even if Manning is not given the death
penalty, depending on tomorrow's verdict, we may see one of the final nails in
the coffin of investigative journalism. I am honestly very nervous right now.

~~~
anologwintermut
Well, no. Lets apply that test to two other famous Whistleblower .

Snowden: Did he leak information he was supposed to protect ? Yes. Did he do
so indiscriminately, no. He knew exactly what he was leaking and believed it
would not cause damage.

How about Daniel Elsberg? Leak info he was supposed to protect. Most
certainly. Did he do so indiscriminately?An even more resounding no.

Manning, on the other hand literally leaked stuff he never read and which he
had no way of knowing couldn't do damage. Is that an absurd standard to apply
to a random person, to a journalist even, sure. Not to people under
obligations to protect classified information. Certainly not someone subject
to the UCMJ.

If he had just leaked the "collateral murder" video or anything else that he
had read and found damning, it would be a hell of a lot harder to argue he was
reckless. But he leaked everything and is lucky that there wasn't anything in
there that would have gotten someone killed.

------
tvtime15
I do not like comparisons between Manning and Snowden. Two very different
cases and fact patterns.

~~~
PavlovsCat
They both poked at the garments covering the underbelly of power; exactly the
same thing, depending on your basis of comparison.

~~~
pfisch
What exactly was Bradley Manning trying to whistleblow about? It seems more
like he just released a huge amount of classified data arbitrarily. Its hard
to say that that is not treason.

~~~
monsterix
> What exactly was Bradley Manning trying to whistleblow about?

Seen collateral murder [1]?

> Its hard to say that that is not treason.

Really? It's so easy to kill the messenger. Not to bring in the emotional
aspect of this typical power structure vs. single human issue here, but then
treason would be the last word I'd want to use for the guy who uncovered
killing of innocents and wrong doings of _some_ (I think most soldiers are not
trigger-happy rather good people who love peace) stupid crazy soldiers in our
army (who should be behind bars instead!).

Let's not forget that we pay the bills for all this.

[1]
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0)

~~~
pfisch
When wars happen there is collateral damage and innocent people will be in the
crossfire. We all knew this. We also already know we are fighting wars on
behalf of oil companies like we always have. A lot of America's power has come
from the exploitation of other countries, this is how America has functioned
for at least 100 years. None of this is really unconstitutional but it is
immoral.

When you join the military you are pretty much agreeing to proactively aid in
this whether you are aware of the reality of America or not. Lots of
information about how the US behaves is readily available.

He just released tons of classified information with very vague intent because
he didn't like what the US does. This was not really a whistle blower
situation because we basically already knew this stuff was happening and it
isn't unconstitutional. We voted for the Iraq war because the populace is not
really very smart. It is what it is though.

~~~
monsterix
Okay if all of this is _known_ and _understood_ then Manning is not even a
whistleblower by any definition. Why crucify for a crime that never occurred?

------
h0bz
did manning blow the whistle on somethig unco stitutional? Yes, i believe so.
Manning wanted to show that the government lied to the world about the extent
of civilian causulties. that's why he released so much. also there was
systematic cover up where initial reports from field were being "Toned down"
later. did he blindly release stuff? no, he trusted that wikileaks would
research and investigate as to not releaase anything that could harm people.
wikileaks has a flawless record doing that. i'm pretty terrified to read the
other comments in this thread. my arguments, even if invalid or wrong should
have been brought up by someone. seems like you all have been affected by
media brainwashing.. scary and sad. i thought people on hn was of higher
caliber...

------
pstuart
Death would be a little bit too messy right now. I'm betting on life in prison
with no possibility of parole.

------
cinquemb
Is anyone else wondering how a rag tag group of individuals goes from being
funded by the DoD to becoming its public enemy #1? At least we know what to
expect to come from syria and the horn of africa in the next decade…

