Bradley Manning Pleads Guilty

[WildCat]

And yet, the Pentagon Papers were released to the press with no such repercussions.

There were, but the government badly botched the case and it was dismissed after a mistrial, Ellsberg and Russo were not acquitted.

No chance of that happening here, at least as far as what he's already plead guilty to.

 

[Babbylonian]

And yet, the Pentagon Papers were released to the press with no such repercussions. There was absolutely nothing related to operational security released that amounted to a hill of beans. The Army is upset because they're embarrassed and nothing else.

I think you should read something about the Pentagon Papers before you compare that leak with this guy's semi-random dump of information. Also, Daniel Ellsberg and Anthony Russo were prosecuted for the leak, and they might have been convicted if it weren't for serious governmental misconduct of the sort that ended up causing Nixon to resign.

 

[Sam.I.Am]

I think you should read something about the Pentagon Papers before you compare that leak with this guy's semi-random dump of information. Also, Daniel Ellsberg and Anthony Russo were prosecuted for the leak, and they might have been convicted if it weren't for serious governmental misconduct of the sort that ended up causing Nixon to resign.

Thanks for the response, I was going to say something similar. I'll add that the Pentagon Papers were primarily based upon years old information (decades old in some cases) and were specifically targeted at the history of the war in Vietnam. Mannings document dump had plenty of stuff that was completely unrelated to the war in Iraq (obstinately the opposition to which Manning claims is the reason for the document dump). The two really aren't comparable.

 

[Sabrina]

You're of course correct. (not that I have to tell you that... )

I have a good friend who was in the Navy, and was a submariner. I once asked him how much food a sub could carry, and how much it cost to supply a nuclear sub with food for a deployment, and he explained he couldn't discuss either of those things. Didn't make sense to me, till he explained it.

It's amazing what is considered classified. The supplier to the White House, is HIGHLY classified.

The system I worked with right after I went on active duty is similarly classified. And then there's the controlled unclassified information (CUI) that needs to be similarly safeguarded (information such as troop strength, a soldier's personal identifiable information (PII) like his address or phone number and his SSN, the number of weapons a unit has, etc).

Upwards of 80% of all the information the enemy gathers on us is considered unclassified, but that doesn't make it any less useful to them. Contrast that with information that IS classified and you begin to see the issue.

I'll be the first to admit that often the US does overclassify things, but the default position has always been to classify documents in order to safeguard them. However, it is NOT Manning's call to decide what should and should not be classified, and it is DEFINITELY not his call to release the information to the general public via any means. I don't have enough information to definitively determine the harm his actions caused, but the fact remains that he could have caused irreparable damage to the US peacekeeping efforts overseas. His actions, in my opinion, were those of a child wanting to shift the blame for his problems onto anyone other than himself; he didn't want to take responsibility for the problems he was encountering in his life and took it out on his fellow soldiers. IANAP (psychologist) either, but I view his actions as those of someone transferring his anger and frustration over personal issues onto an entity that bears no responsibility for them.

The long and the short of it is, Manning is guilty of releasing information he was not authorized to release. It's a stretch to accuse him of espionage, and I don't think that's even mentioned in the charges against him anyway, but it is difficult to deny the truth that he did the deed, and his actions may very well have indirectly aided enemies of the US. In my opinion he will be going away for a long time. But again, IANAL.

 

[Peephole]

Cool, but Manning didn't uncover any coverups.

That's just an incredibly ignorant statement. Plenty of stuff in there that was illegal, lied about, or part of a cover-up:

Iraq war logs: Secret order that let US ignore abuse

A prisoner was kneeling on the ground, blindfolded and handcuffed, when an Iraqi soldier walked over to him and kicked him in the neck. A US marine sergeant was watching and reported the incident, which was duly recorded and judged to be valid. The outcome: "No investigation required."

That was a relatively minor assault. Another of the leaked Iraqi war logs records the case of a man who was arrested by police on suspicion of preparing a suicide bomb. In the station, an officer shot him in the leg and then, the log continues, this detainee "suffered abuse which amounted to cracked ribs, multiple lacerations and welts and bruises from being whipped with a large rod and hose across his back". This was all recorded and judged to amount to "reasonable suspicion of abuse". The outcome: "No further investigation."

Other logs record not merely assaults but systematic torture. A man who was detained by Iraqi soldiers in an underground bunker reported that he had been subjected to the notoriously painful strappado position: with his hands tied behind his back, he was suspended from the ceiling by his wrists. The soldiers had then whipped him with plastic piping and used electric drills on him. The log records that the man was treated by US medics; the paperwork was sent through the necessary channels; but yet again, no investigation was required.

This is the impact of Frago 242. A frago is a "fragmentary order" which summarises a complex requirement. This one, issued in June 2004, about a year after the invasion of Iraq, orders coalition troops not to investigate any breach of the laws of armed conflict, such as the abuse of detainees, unless it directly involves members of the coalition. Where the alleged abuse is committed by Iraqi on Iraqi, "only an initial report will be made … No further investigation will be required unless directed by HQ".

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/oct/22/iraq-detainee-abuse-torture-saddam

Iraq to reopen probe of deadly 2006 raid

Iraqis in the town of Ishaqi have long claimed that U.S. military forces executed at least 11 people there — including women and children — and then hid the crime by directing an airstrike to the area, about 60 miles north of Baghdad.

A Pentagon spokesman dismissed the claims on Friday, saying that, from the U.S. military’s viewpoint, nothing had changed.

In the document released by WikiLeaks, Philip Alston, a human rights official for the United Nations, appears to support the Iraqi claims. He cabled the State Department about two weeks after the incident to describe how U.S. forces approached a house in the early hours of March 15, 2006, and found a family inside, then “handcuffed all the residents and executed all of them.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...-ishaqi-raid/2011/09/02/gIQAT0hSwJ_story.html

US diplomats spied on UN leadership

Washington is running a secret intelligence campaign targeted at the leadership of the United Nations, including the secretary general, Ban Ki-moon and the permanent security council representatives from China, Russia, France and the UK.

A classified directive which appears to blur the line between diplomacy and spying was issued to US diplomats under Hillary Clinton's name in July 2009, demanding forensic technical details about the communications systems used by top UN officials, including passwords and personal encryption keys used in private and commercial networks for official communications.

It called for detailed biometric information "on key UN officials, to include undersecretaries, heads of specialised agencies and their chief advisers, top SYG [secretary general] aides, heads of peace operations and political field missions, including force commanders" as well as intelligence on Ban's "management and decision-making style and his influence on the secretariat". A parallel intelligence directive sent to diplomats in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi said biometric data included DNA, fingerprints and iris scans.

Washington also wanted credit card numbers, email addresses, phone, fax and pager numbers and even frequent-flyer account numbers for UN figures and "biographic and biometric information on UN Security Council permanent representatives".

The secret "national human intelligence collection directive" was sent to US missions at the UN in New York, Vienna and Rome; 33 embassies and consulates, including those in London, Paris and Moscow.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cables-spying-un

Yemen offered US 'open door' to attack al-Qaida on its soil

But a cable dated 21 December from the ambassador Stephen Seche recorded that "Yemen insisted it must 'maintain the status quo' regarding the official denial of US involvement. Saleh wanted operations to continue 'non-stop until we eradicate this disease.'" A second attack took place on 24 December.

A few days later, in a meeting with General David Petraeus, then head of US central command, Saleh admitted lying to his population about the strikes.

"We'll continue saying the bombs are ours, not yours," Saleh told Petraeus on 2 January. That prompted the deputy prime minister, Rashad al-Alimi, who was also at the meeting, to joke he had just "lied" by telling parliament the bombs in Arhab, Abyan, and Shebwa (the al-Qaida strongholds) were American-made but deployed by Yemen.

Petraeus had flown to Sana'a to tell Saleh that Barack Obama would allow US ground forces "armed with direct-feed intelligence" from satellites or surveillance aircraft to be deployed in Yemen on counter-terrorist operations. But in contrast to his suggestion of an " open door", Saleh rejected the offer, expressing concerns about US casualties.

Instead it was agreed to have "US fixed-wing bombers circle out of sight outside Yemeni territory ready to engage Aqap targets should actionable intelligence become available". US personnel would have to stay in the Yemeni command centre.

Saleh said "mistakes had been made" in the earlier strikes, lamented the use of US cruise missiles that were "not very accurate" and welcomed the use of aircraft-deployed, precision-guided bombs instead.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/03/wikileaks-yemen-us-attack-al-qaida

Turkey let US use airbase for rendition flights

Turkey allowed the US to use its airbase at Incirlik in southern Turkey as part of the "extraordinary rendition" programme to take suspected terrorists to Guantánamo Bay, according to a US diplomatic cable.

Turkey's involvement in the controversial programme was revealed in a cable dated 8 June 2006, written by the then US ambassador to Turkey, Ross Wilson. The cable described Turkey as a crucial ally in the "global war on terror" and an important logistical base for the US-led war in Iraq.

"The Turkish military had allowed us to use Incirlik as a refuelling stop for Operation Fundamental Justice detainee movement operations since 2002, but revoked this permission in February of this year. We understand OSD [office of the secretary of defence] and JCS [joint chiefs of staff] have been discussing whether to approach Turkey to seek to reverse this decision," the cable said.

"We recommend that you do not raise this issue with TGS [Turkish general staff] pending clarification from Washington on what approach state/OSD/JCS/NSC [national security council] wish to take."

The cable contradicts statements made at the time by Turkish officials. On 14 June 2006, a spokesman for Turkey's foreign ministry told reporters: "The Turkish government and state never played a part [in the secret transfers] ... and never will."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/17/wikileaks-cables-turkey-rendition-flights

The (Not So) Secret (Anymore) US War in Pakistan

Despite sustained denials by US officials spanning more than a year, US military Special Operations Forces have been conducting offensive operations inside Pakistan, helping direct US drone strikes and conducting joint operations with Pakistani forces against Al Qaeda and Taliban forces in north and south Waziristan and elsewhere in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas, according to secret cables released as part of the Wikileaks document dump. According to an October 9, 2009 cable classified by Anne Patterson, the US ambassador to Pakistan, the operations were "almost certainly [conducted] with the personal consent of [Pakistan's] Chief of Army Staff General Kayani." The operations were coordinated with the US Office of the Defense Representative in Pakistan. A US special operations source told The Nation that the US forces described in the cable as "SOC(FWD)-PAK" were "forward operating troops" from the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), the most elite force within the US military made up of Navy SEALs, Delta Force and Army Rangers.

The cables also confirm aspects of a Nation story from November 2009, "The Secret US War in Pakistan," which detailed offensive combat operations by JSOC in Pakistan. In response to the Nation story, Pentagon spokesperson Geoff Morrell called it "conspiratorial" and explicitly denied that US special operations forces were doing anything other than "training" in Pakistan. More than a month after the October 2009 cable from the US embassy in Pakistan confirming JSOC combat missions, Morrell told reporters: "We have basically, I think, a few dozen forces on the ground in Pakistan who are involved in a train-the-trainer mission. These are Special Operations Forces. We've been very candid about this. They are—they have been for months, if not years now, training Pakistani forces so that they can in turn train other Pakistani military on how to—on certain skills and operational techniques. And that's the extent of our—our, you know, military boots on the ground in Pakistan." According to the October 2009 cable, Morrell's statement was false.

http://www.thenation.com/blog/156765/not-so-secret-anymore-us-war-pakistan

Iraq war logs reveal 15,000 previously unlisted civilian deaths

Leaked Pentagon files obtained by the Guardian contain details of more than 100,000 people killed in Iraq following the US-led invasion, including more than 15,000 deaths that were previously unrecorded.

British ministers have repeatedly refused to concede the existence of any official statistics on Iraqi deaths. US General Tommy Franks claimed in 2002: "We don't do body counts."

The mass of leaked documents provides the first detailed tally by the US military of Iraqi fatalities. Troops on the ground filed secret field reports over six years of the occupation, purporting to tot up every casualty, military and civilian.

Iraq Body Count, a London-based group that monitors civilian casualties, told the Guardian: "These logs contain a huge amount of entirely new information regarding casualties. Our analysis so far indicates that they will add 15,000 or more previously unrecorded deaths to the current IBC total. This data should never have been withheld from the public."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/oct/22/true-civilian-body-count-iraq

Obama and GOPers Worked Together to Kill Bush Torture Probe

In its first months in office, the Obama administration sought to protect Bush administration officials facing criminal investigation overseas for their involvement in establishing policies the that governed interrogations of detained terrorist suspects. A "confidential" April 17, 2009, cable sent from the US embassy in Madrid to the State Department—one of the 251,287 cables obtained by WikiLeaks—details how the Obama administration, working with Republicans, leaned on Spain to derail this potential prosecution.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2010/12/wikileaks-cable-obama-quashed-torture-investigation

U.S. Pressured Germany Not To Prosecute CIA Officers For Torture And Rendition

The Bush administration pressured Germany not to prosecute CIA officers responsible for the kidnapping, extraordinary rendition and torture of German national Khaled El-Masri, according to a document made public Sunday night by Wikileaks. The document, a 2007 cable from the U.S. Embassy in Berlin, describes a meeting during which the then-deputy chief of the U.S. mission to Germany, John M. Koenig, urged German officials to "weigh carefully at every step of the way the implications for relations with the U.S." of issuing international arrest warrants in the El-Masri case.

http://www.aclu.org/national-securi...-prosecute-cia-officers-torture-and-rendition

WikiLeaks Exposes Rumsfeld's Lies

"The country is not awash in sectarian violence,'' the top U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. George Casey said, on talk show after talk show, making the rounds to tell the American home-front not to worry. Civil war? "I don't see it happening, certainly anytime in the near term,” he said, as he denied the surge in sectarian violence.

...

Thanks to WikiLeaks, though, I now know the extent to which top American leaders lied, knowingly, to the American public, to American troops, and to the world, as the Iraq mission exploded.

The American troops, who were risking their lives on the ground, witnessed and documented it themselves.

Heavily redacted, the log entries offer surreal but chilling glimpses of the chaos that followed the Samarra bombing on Feb. 22. Within hours of the bombing, U.S. troops reported gunmen attacking; open street fighting between Shia and Sunni militias; rocket-propelled grenade attacks on mosques; assassinations and kidnappings.

Later, one U.S. military patrol happens on militia members dumping bodies on the side of the street. The killers speed away, leaving the American soldiers with a grim discovery: “bodies shot in the face…still warm,” according to one log.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...-about-the-iraq-war.html#sthash.MsOunREJ.dpuf

WikiLeaks Honduras: US Linked to Brutal Businessman

Since 2009, beneath the radar of the international media, the coup government ruling Honduras has been collaborating with wealthy landowners in a violent crackdown on small farmers struggling for land rights in the Aguán Valley in the northeastern region of the country. More than forty-six campesinos have been killed or disappeared. Human rights groups charge that many of the killings have been perpetrated by the private army of security guards employed by Miguel Facussé, a biofuels magnate. Facussé’s guards work closely with the Honduran military and police, which receive generous funding from the United States to fight the war on drugs in the region.

New Wikileaks cables now reveal that the US embassy in Honduras—and therefore the State Department—has known since 2004 that Miguel Facussé is a cocaine importer. US “drug war” funds and training, in other words, are being used to support a known drug trafficker’s war against campesinos.

http://www.thenation.com/article/16...inked-brutal-businessman#sthash.rU1PfRlc.dpuf

WikiLeaks Honduras: State Dept. Busted on Support of Coup

By July 24, 2009, the U.S. government was totally clear about the basic facts of what took place in Honduras on June 28, 2009. The U.S. embassy in Tegucigalpa sent a cable to Washington with subject: "Open and Shut: The Case of the Honduran Coup," asserting that "there is no doubt" that the events of June 28 "constituted an illegal and unconstitutional coup." The Embassy listed arguments being made by supporters of the coup to claim its legality, and dismissed them thus: "none... has any substantive validity under the Honduran constitution." The Honduran military clearly had no legal authority to remove President Zelaya from office or from Honduras, the Embassy said, and their action -- the Embassy described it as an "abduction" and "kidnapping" -- was clearly unconstitutional.

It is inconceivable that any top U.S. official responsible for U.S. policy in Honduras was not familiar with the contents of the July 24 cable, which summarized the assessment of the U.S. Embassy in Honduras on key facts that were politically disputed by supporters of the coup regime. The cable was addressed to Tom Shannon, then Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs; Harold Koh, the State Department's Legal Adviser; and Dan Restrepo, Senior Director for Western Hemisphere Affairs at the National Security Council. The cable was sent to the White House and to Secretary of State Clinton.

But despite the fact that the U.S. government was crystal clear on what had transpired, the U.S. did not immediately cut off all aid to Honduras except "democracy assistance," as required by U.S. law.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/wikileaks-honduras-state_b_789282.html

WikiLeaks: US Lied About Bala Baluk Massacre, Red Cross Concealed Truth

The Norwegian newspaper Aftenposten has published an article on NATO, US, and the Red Cross and the Bala Baluk massacre on May 4, 2009. The article features a cable that shows the Red Cross put together a report that raised significant doubt about military reports on the number of civilians killed. The cable reveals how a PR campaign kicked into gear to sell the idea that the deaths were not intentional and to skew coverage of the event to fit the interests of NATO and US forces in Afghanistan.

The June 13, 2009 cable describes a remarkable meeting that took place at the US Embassy in Kabul. Leader of the Red Cross in Afghanistan, Reto Stocker, has compiled a report with exact figures on the deaths of civilians in an attack that just took place in the village of Bala Baluk Grenari region. US and NATO forces, which contend they were attacking Taliban, dropped bombs leaving a mosque in ruins. They turned the village into “an inferno of screaming, mangled and bloody people.”

In the aftermath, the Taliban and Afghan officials claimed “over 140 civilians had been killed.” Karl W. Eikenbarry, US ambassador in Kabul, said at a news conference, “We will never know the exact number” of those killed. Red Cross commander Reto Stocker said, “‘Dozens’ of people were killed.”A commission investigated the incident and concluded, “26 civilians and 78 Taliban fighters were killed.”

The claims by the US and other military forces were blatant lies, according to the cable.

http://current.com/community/930132...-baluk-massacre-red-cross-concealed-truth.htm

Yemen diverted US counterrorism aid meant to tackle Al Qaeda, WikiLeaks reveals

According to a December 2009 cable from the US embassy in Sanaa, a counterterrorism unit (CTU) trained and funded by the Americans to hunt down Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) operatives was deployed instead against militant Houthi rebels in the northern governorate of Saada during a surge in fighting last year.

“Increasingly desperate to defeat the Houthis, the [Yemeni government] continues to insist that fighting the Houthis is a legitimate component of CT [counterterrorism] operations, thus justifying the use of CTU forces in Saada," reads the State Department cable. "Untrained to fight this type of conflict, the overstretched CTU has reportedly sustained significant casualties, missed training opportunities and been derailed from its principal mission: to combat AQAP.”

The cable underscores – and appears to at least partially validate – concerns that millions of dollars in US counterterrorism aid may be used not only to fight Al Qaeda, but to address other Yemeni priorities not shared by Washington.

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Midd...id-meant-to-tackle-Al-Qaeda-WikiLeaks-reveals

US secretly supplied weapons to help Saudi Arabia fight Yemen rebels

The US supplied arms and intelligence to Saudi Arabia in a war against Yemen rebels, despite Washington’s counter-terrorism chief stating that American assistance was illegal.

Emergency weapon shipments were sent to Saudi Arabia for attacks on Yemen’s Houthi rebel group, according to a diplomatic document leaked by the WikiLeaks website. The Riyadh cables also confirm that US satellite imagery was provided to Saudi Arabia for airstrikes against the separatist movement in north Yemen.

After a request for assistance from the Saudi military the US responded by “flying in stocks of ammunition for small weapons and artillery”, according to the cable.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/americas/article2841906.ece

Whether leaking a collection of stuff like this -when part of a large, indiscriminate dump- is enough to be considered as a whistleblower is a different question. But the idea that there wasn't anything valuable in these files is just wrong.

 

[WildCat]

That's just an incredibly ignorant statement. Plenty of stuff in there that was illegal, lied about, or part of a cover-up:
Whether leaking a collection of stuff like this -when part of a large, indiscriminate dump- is enough to be considered as a whistleblower is a different question. But the idea that there wasn't anything valuable in these files is just wrong.

Yes, thanks for demonstrating that there was no "there" there. Cute how you post a wall of text and hoped I wouldn't notice there's nothing in there.

Not a single charge because of anything Manning leaked.

 

[Sam.I.Am]

That's just an incredibly ignorant statement. Plenty of stuff in there that was illegal, lied about, or part of a cover-up:
Whether leaking a collection of stuff like this -when part of a large, indiscriminate dump- is enough to be considered as a whistleblower is a different question. But the idea that there wasn't anything valuable in these files is just wrong.

Lots of innuendo with little to no meat. And a lot of it has nothing at all to do with Mannings supposed beef, the war in Iraq.

I don't recall anyone claiming that things were perfect in Iraq, if anything there were plenty of reports about when things went terribly wrong or even if they smelled a bit "Funny" to some segments of the media that had an axe to grind with the Bush Administration.

Embassies have spies in their midst? Really? That's supposed to be a surprise to anyone?

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Silly Peephole! Coverups of mass murder, kidnapping and torture are just innuendo. There's nothing there. Nothing at all. If we keep saying that it will be true.

 

[Virus]

Silly Peephole! Coverups of mass murder, kidnapping and torture are just innuendo. There's nothing there. Nothing at all. If we keep saying that it will be true.

Because there aren't any. You just fell for the old "It's in there somewhere" trick.

 

[WildCat]

Silly Peephole! Coverups of mass murder, kidnapping and torture are just innuendo. There's nothing there. Nothing at all. If we keep saying that it will be true.

Name a single incident in Peephole's post that was unknown prior to Manning releasing it.

 

[PhantomWolf]

One that baffles me is that several of the articles seem to be based around the idea that it is shocking that the Coalition Forces refused to investigate the actions of Iraqis against other Iraqis. Imagine that, the coalition forces not being allowed to tell Iraqis what they can and can't do in their country.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

balancing self-governance and national security

As part of a discussion related to this incident Professor Geoffrey R. Stone wrote, "The most vexing problem arises when the public disclosure of secret information is both harmful to the national security and valuable to self- governance. Suppose, for example, the government undertakes a study of the effectiveness of security measures at the nation’s nuclear power plants. The study concludes that several nuclear power plants are especially vulnerable to terrorist attack. Should this study be kept secret or should it be disclosed to the public? On the one hand, publishing the report will reveal our vulnerabilities to terrorists. On the other hand, publishing the report would alert the public to the situation, enable citizens to press government officials to remedy the problems and empower the public to hold accountable those public officials who failed to keep them safe. The public disclosure of such information could both harm and benefit the nation. Should the study be made public?" In discussing the proposed SHIELD act (in response to Wikileaks), Professor Stone draws a distinction between what restrictions may apply to the average citizen versus to a government employee. "The bottom line is this: the proposed SHIELD Act is plainly unconstitutional."

 

[WildCat]

One that baffles me is that several of the articles seem to be based around the idea that it is shocking that the Coalition Forces refused to investigate the actions of Iraqis against other Iraqis. Imagine that, the coalition forces not being allowed to tell Iraqis what they can and can't do in their country.

The important thing is that the US gets blamed. Facts are secondary.

 

[WildCat]

As part of a discussion related to this incident Professor Geoffrey R. Stone wrote, "The most vexing problem arises when the public disclosure of secret information is both harmful to the national security and valuable to self- governance. Suppose, for example, the government undertakes a study of the effectiveness of security measures at the nation’s nuclear power plants. The study concludes that several nuclear power plants are especially vulnerable to terrorist attack. Should this study be kept secret or should it be disclosed to the public? On the one hand, publishing the report will reveal our vulnerabilities to terrorists. On the other hand, publishing the report would alert the public to the situation, enable citizens to press government officials to remedy the problems and empower the public to hold accountable those public officials who failed to keep them safe. The public disclosure of such information could both harm and benefit the nation. Should the study be made public?" In discussing the proposed SHIELD act (in response to Wikileaks), Professor Stone draws a distinction between what restrictions may apply to the average citizen versus to a government employee. "The bottom line is this: the proposed SHIELD Act is plainly unconstitutional."

So it was proper to out Valerie Plame as a CIA agent?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Madison's warning

So it was proper to out Valerie Plame as a CIA agent?

Professor Stone wrote, "As Madison warned, if citizens do not know what their own government is doing, then they are hardly in a position to question its judgments or to hold their elected representatives accountable. Government secrecy, although sometimes surely necessary, can also pose a direct threat to the very idea of self-governance...The disclosure of other confidential information, however, may be of little or no legitimate value to public debate (for example, the publication of the specific identities of covert American agents in Iran for no reason other than exposure)." I see the harm in identifying Ms. Plame, but I do not see a counterbalancing value in the public's having this information.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

conditions of detention

In addition, Manning was suicidal before his arrest, a fact not known to the public at that time.

One reporter said that he was never on suicide watch during his detention, however. In 2010 Glenn Greenwald wrote, "From the beginning of his detention, Manning has been held in intensive solitary confinement. For 23 out of 24 hours every day — for seven straight months and counting — he sits completely alone in his cell. Even inside his cell, his activities are heavily restricted; he’s barred even from exercising and is under constant surveillance to enforce those restrictions. For reasons that appear completely punitive, he’s being denied many of the most basic attributes of civilized imprisonment, including even a pillow or sheets for his bed (he is not and never has been on suicide watch). For the one hour per day when he is freed from this isolation, he is barred from accessing any news or current events programs. Lt. Villiard protested that the conditions are not 'like jail movies where someone gets thrown into the hole,' but confirmed that he is in solitary confinement, entirely alone in his cell except for the one hour per day he is taken out."

Manning's lawyer David Coombs was quoted: "'Manning was awoken at 0500 hours and required to remain awake in his cell from 0500 to 2200 hours,' Coombs claims in the motion, adding that he 'was not permitted to lie down on his rack during the duty day. Nor was Manning permitted to lean his back against the cell wall; he had to sit upright on his rack without any back support'.

The motion further states that Manning was only allowed 20 minutes of 'sunshine call' a day. In addition, he was permitted by guards to take no more than five minutes in the shower. On the rare occasions that he was allowed out of his cell, Manning was forced to wear shackles with metal hand and leg restraints. At least two guards accompanied him at all times.

Manning was handed a pair of running shoes without laces for his trips outside, but they would fall off when he attempted to walk. As a result he 'elected to wear boots instead', the document alleges."

 

[Sam.I.Am]

Manning's lawyer David Coombs was quoted: "'Manning was awoken at 0500 hours and required to remain awake in his cell from 0500 to 2200 hours,' Coombs claims in the motion, adding that he 'was not permitted to lie down on his rack during the duty day. Nor was Manning permitted to lean his back against the cell wall; he had to sit upright on his rack without any back support'.

The motion further states that Manning was only allowed 20 minutes of 'sunshine call' a day. In addition, he was permitted by guards to take no more than five minutes in the shower. On the rare occasions that he was allowed out of his cell, Manning was forced to wear shackles with metal hand and leg restraints. At least two guards accompanied him at all times.

Manning was handed a pair of running shoes without laces for his trips outside, but they would fall off when he attempted to walk. As a result he 'elected to wear boots instead', the document alleges."

This is more commonly known as "Spending time in the Brig". That's what it's like for the people that get sent there. I had an occasion to do some work inside several ballast tanks on the USS Kitty Hawk. One of the tank accesses was inside the Brig. That place had the shiniest safety chains you will ever see, because that's the "Work" that they were given. Cleaning the Brig with tooth brushed sized wire brushes, over and over again. Up at reveille, down at taps. No rack time inbetween, no entertainment, rigid schedules and just plain overall suckage. It's a jail and a military one at that. Imagine the worst possible boot camp experience that can legally be done to you and that's your expected daily routine during your stay there. That's why people don't want to go there, it's a punishment and as such it's intentionally harsh on those being punished. The solution is to not screw up so bad that you get sent there. Complaining that it's hard is like complaining that the sky is blue.

Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

 

[The Big Dog]

This is more commonly known as "Spending time in the Brig". That's what it's like for the people that get sent there. I had an occasion to do some work inside several ballast tanks on the USS Kitty Hawk. One of the tank accesses was inside the Brig. That place had the shiniest safety chains you will ever see, because that's the "Work" that they were given. Cleaning the Brig with tooth brushed sized wire brushes, over and over again. Up at reveille, down at taps. No rack time inbetween, no entertainment, rigid schedules and just plain overall suckage. It's a jail and a military one at that. Imagine the worst possible boot camp experience that can legally be done to you and that's your expected daily routine during your stay there. That's why people don't want to go there, it's a punishment and as such it's intentionally harsh on those being punished. The solution is to not screw up so bad that you get sent there. Complaining that it's hard is like complaining that the sky is blue.

Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

What really puts this in perspective was the fact that Poor Brad's Division, the 10th Mountain, was in combat for virtually the entire time that Poor Brad was whining about not being able to nap, or whatever else the bull **** artists like Glenn Greenwald compare to torture.

Poor Brad had to wear boots instead of sneakers. In other news, two Lt Colonels from the 10th Mountain were blown up in another IED attack.

 

[BenBurch]

In addition, Manning was suicidal before his arrest, a fact not known to the public at that time.

Somebody here (work conversation) said they actually had to cut him down from a hanging attempt at the brig he was first incarcerated in. No source for that.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

putting the cart before the horse

Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

At this point (circa 2010) Manning was legally innocent. Speaking only for myself, If I were put under those conditions for an indefinite period of time, I might consider suicide.