Page 11 of 14 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 140

Thread: US judge rules not to drop Manning charge

  1. #101
    Uncanny
    Paschendale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    New York City
    Last Seen
    03-31-16 @ 04:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    12,510

    Re: US judge rules not to drop Manning charge

    Quote Originally Posted by DiAnna View Post
    Manning gave classified material to Wikileaks knowing that it would then be disseminated over the internet. Manning knew that the USA's enemies have access to the internet; therefore, Manning knowingly provided classified material to USA's enemies. That's treason.
    So you're arguing that any public dissemination of classified information, because Al Qaeda can read it, is treason. Keeping secrets from Al Qaeda is more important, in your opinion, than the government being honest with the American people. Manning did not give any information to Al Qaeda or any other terrorist organization. He gave information to journalists to publish it to the American people.

    Tell me, how do we define enemies, in this instance? We're not officially at war with anyone. Shouldn't the criteria for a criminal charge require legally defined terms? If this goes through than any publication of any information that any possible terrorist could obtain is potentially giving aid to the enemy. Our domestic journalism, any publication over the internet, is suddenly subject to criminal penalty, possibly death, if deemed to be be "aiding" any potential enemy. Doesn't that idea scare the crap out of you?

    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    So you say. I, on the other hand, say you're wrong. No jury in their right minds is going to buy that argument. They will buy the argument that a reasonable man would foresee Wiki publishing the information; and, for that reason, he will be found guilty. You're splitting hairs.
    Then intent doesn't matter and publicly informing on the government to the American people is treason.

    Quote Originally Posted by greyhat View Post
    The technicalities you disagree with are THE LAW. Who the hell are Manning, Asange and Snowden to determine what the US should and should not keep secret- who the F made them the adjudicators of information security?!

    The answer: NO ONE

    You're freedom of speech stops at the "Classified" stamp!!
    They're American citizens. Well, Manning and Snowden are. They're the ones that the government is supposed to be by, for, and of. The government is supposed to sacrifice for their benefit. Not the other way around.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    Hey, listen - I don't think Manning should get a tough sentence but are you saying that he didn't realize WikiLeaks was going to release the information to the world - which I'll remind you - includes enemies of the US?
    There is no practical way to release information to just loyal Americans. If Manning is a traitor than anyone who uncovers any dirty government secret and tells the American people about it is also a traitor. This means that loyalty to the people is criminal when it conflicts with loyalty to the government. How can ANYONE advocate that position?

    Quote Originally Posted by greyhat View Post
    Wikilieaks is not a journalist organization- thats an insult to journalists. WL is an anti-secrecy cult.
    And cable news, our "mainstream media" is a beacon of journalistic integrity.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    They're global publications. Which pretty much ensures that they would have. Unless of course NK, Iran etc, don't have internet. Which then, all cool. I guess.
    So then, like the others in this thread, you're saying that keeping secrets from potential enemies (which North Korea and Iran would be, since we're not at war with them) trumps any efforts to inform the American people of the illegal or improper actions of the government.

    How are liberals okay with this? How are conservatives okay with this? How is anyone okay with the precedent that telling the American people what our government is doing is treason!?!?
    Liberté. Égalité. Fraternité.

  2. #102
    Advisor greyhat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Last Seen
    08-31-13 @ 01:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    562

    US judge rules not to drop Manning charge

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    So you're arguing that any public dissemination of classified information, because Al Qaeda can read it, is treason.
    Giving it to ANY ONE not authorized and not REQUIRED to is illegal- period, simple. In fact just holding a Top Secret clearance doesn't entitle you to access to classified information; you have to have a need to know. This is why info is marked TS SCI; sensitive compartmentalized information is meant to be accessed only by those who need to. The same applies to other classifications such as "Secret".

    Manning violated the law, and this is why he will be punished; is that so hard to see?

    He isn't being charged with treason by the US Gov. He is being charged with Aiding the enemy amongst other things, which makes sense given that some if the information he leaked was from CIDNE, a military intelligence database which contains tactical information on troops.

  3. #103
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Last Seen
    08-04-13 @ 05:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    459

    Re: US judge rules not to drop Manning charge

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    So you're arguing that any public dissemination of classified information, because Al Qaeda can read it, is treason. Keeping secrets from Al Qaeda is more important, in your opinion, than the government being honest with the American people. Manning did not give any information to Al Qaeda or any other terrorist organization. He gave information to journalists to publish it to the American people.

    Great points.

    And as some others have asked...why aren't the NYTimes, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, and the thousand other media outlets who used and published the leaked information...why aren't they liable as well?
    ...for perhaps the most admirable among the admirable laws of Nature is the survival of the weakest.
    --Vladimir Nabokov

  4. #104
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    07-16-14 @ 01:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    47,571

    Re: US judge rules not to drop Manning charge

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    So you're arguing that any public dissemination of classified information, because Al Qaeda can read it, is treason. Keeping secrets from Al Qaeda is more important, in your opinion, than the government being honest with the American people. Manning did not give any information to Al Qaeda or any other terrorist organization. He gave information to journalists to publish it to the American people.
    Yes IMO, when it comes to certain things. This isn't something new you know. Released secrets has the potential to put American and allied troops in danger, or just our national security in general. The world is a complicated place. Every single president and administration has had to keep "secrets" from the American people. It doesn't take a genius to understand why.

  5. #105
    Sage


    Thoreau72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    20,322

    Re: US judge rules not to drop Manning charge

    Quote Originally Posted by DiAnna View Post
    You're making presumptions again. I was against the war in Iraq, and will never forgive Bush for going after bin Laden in Afghanistan with only half the troops needed, which allowed Al Qaeda and the Taliban to escape Tora Bora. That's a truth I can certainly deal with. However, accusing the President of the United States of being guilty of every crime ever committed by military personnel is not only ludicrous, it speaks to an agenda, using any stretch to discredit and smear the entire government. So, what's your agenda? You keep your own location secret while you slander and defame. Interesting.
    I fail to see my home address as being relevant to the discussion. Are you that desperate as you defend the Global War On Terror and what it has brought us?

    Your anger and lack of forgiveness for Bush are personal problems. I am not angry, just disgusted and sadly disappointed about what my country has become, what with so many citizens calling for the hanging of whistleblowers like Manning. "Hanging" is a figure of speech here.

    Whether he intended it or not, the President is the C-in-C, and he took us to war under fraud, in very large part so that his cronies could line their pockets with taxpayer dollars. And Obama governs like Bush on steroids. It's not my fault, I've been arguing against it for years.

  6. #106
    Sage


    Thoreau72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    20,322

    Re: US judge rules not to drop Manning charge

    Quote Originally Posted by greyhat View Post
    Giving it to ANY ONE not authorized and not REQUIRED to is illegal- period, simple. In fact just holding a Top Secret clearance doesn't entitle you to access to classified information; you have to have a need to know. This is why info is marked TS SCI; sensitive compartmentalized information is meant to be accessed only by those who need to. The same applies to other classifications such as "Secret".

    Manning violated the law, and this is why he will be punished; is that so hard to see?

    He isn't being charged with treason by the US Gov. He is being charged with Aiding the enemy amongst other things, which makes sense given that some if the information he leaked was from CIDNE, a military intelligence database which contains tactical information on troops.
    You know what's so funny about your post and chosen position?

    You rail about "the law requires this and the law requires that, and Manning broke the law", but you never ever mention the Supreme Law of the Land, aka the US Constitution, which has been violated steadily by at least 2 Presidents, Congresses, and Supreme Courts.

    Why do you not object to THEIR breaking the law? Why do you defend their criminal actions by your silence?

  7. #107
    Uncanny
    Paschendale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    New York City
    Last Seen
    03-31-16 @ 04:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    12,510

    Re: US judge rules not to drop Manning charge

    Quote Originally Posted by greyhat View Post
    Giving it to ANY ONE not authorized and not REQUIRED to is illegal- period, simple. In fact just holding a Top Secret clearance doesn't entitle you to access to classified information; you have to have a need to know. This is why info is marked TS SCI; sensitive compartmentalized information is meant to be accessed only by those who need to. The same applies to other classifications such as "Secret".

    Manning violated the law, and this is why he will be punished; is that so hard to see?

    He isn't being charged with treason by the US Gov. He is being charged with Aiding the enemy amongst other things, which makes sense given that some if the information he leaked was from CIDNE, a military intelligence database which contains tactical information on troops.
    And yet he didn't release troop information. None. Not a bit of it. Why does everyone keep bringing that up? It didn't happen. Most of what he released was communications by our state department that demonstrated shady dealings by them. How is this any different than exposing Watergate? That wasn't treason or aiding the enemy merely because the Vietnamese could get a copy of the Washington Post. What makes this different?

    Quote Originally Posted by Strucker View Post
    Great points.

    And as some others have asked...why aren't the NYTimes, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, and the thousand other media outlets who used and published the leaked information...why aren't they liable as well?
    I hope you use that to show why Manning should not be liable, rather than use this as an attempt to destroy the American press.

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisL View Post
    Yes IMO, when it comes to certain things. This isn't something new you know. Released secrets has the potential to put American and allied troops in danger, or just our national security in general. The world is a complicated place. Every single president and administration has had to keep "secrets" from the American people. It doesn't take a genius to understand why.
    None of the information released by Manning and WikiLeaks actually did that. No troop information was released. Nor was anything that damaged our security. They read the documents and parsed out any such information before releasing it. How can we punish someone over hypothetical damage that their actions didn't and couldn't case?

    Again, no troop information that put anyone in danger was released. None of the information lead to any risk to military operations from enemy combatants. That seems to be the big thing that defines the need to keep secrets: military supremacy over our enemies. Our poorly defined and not legally specified enemies. None of that was endangered by Manning and WikiLeaks. So what's the big deal?
    Liberté. Égalité. Fraternité.

  8. #108
    Advisor greyhat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Last Seen
    08-31-13 @ 01:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    562

    US judge rules not to drop Manning charge

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    And yet he didn't release troop information. None. Not a bit of it. Why does everyone keep bringing that up? It didn't happen. Most of what he released was communications by our state department that demonstrated shady dealings by them. How is this any different than exposing Watergate? That wasn't treason or aiding the enemy merely because the Vietnamese could get a copy of the Washington Post. What makes this different?



    I hope you use that to show why Manning should not be liable, rather than use this as an attempt to destroy the American press.



    None of the information released by Manning and WikiLeaks actually did that. No troop information was released. Nor was anything that damaged our security. They read the documents and parsed out any such information before releasing it. How can we punish someone over hypothetical damage that their actions didn't and couldn't case?

    Again, no troop information that put anyone in danger was released. None of the information lead to any risk to military operations from enemy combatants. That seems to be the big thing that defines the need to keep secrets: military supremacy over our enemies. Our poorly defined and not legally specified enemies. None of that was endangered by Manning and WikiLeaks. So what's the big deal?
    The CIDNE info was leaked; it may have been redacted by WL, but it was leaked nonetheless that's why the charge stands; furthermore, you missed the point- even if all he leaked was the SD cables, that is still breaking the law- period! Those cables were classified and their release, whether you agree with it or not, warrants the charge.

  9. #109
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    07-16-14 @ 01:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    47,571

    Re: US judge rules not to drop Manning charge

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    Again, no troop information that put anyone in danger was released. None of the information lead to any risk to military operations from enemy combatants. That seems to be the big thing that defines the need to keep secrets: military supremacy over our enemies. Our poorly defined and not legally specified enemies. None of that was endangered by Manning and WikiLeaks. So what's the big deal?
    Well, we just can't have military personnel releasing classified information. That sets a pretty bad precedent and needs to be corrected. IOW, they want to set an example of types of behavior that will not be tolerated, ever or for any reason.

    He should have done what others have done, wait and write a book about it. That would have been the smart move on his part.

  10. #110
    Uncanny
    Paschendale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    New York City
    Last Seen
    03-31-16 @ 04:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    12,510

    Re: US judge rules not to drop Manning charge

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisL View Post
    Well, we just can't have military personnel releasing classified information. That sets a pretty bad precedent and needs to be corrected. IOW, they want to set an example of types of behavior that will not be tolerated, ever or for any reason.
    Quote Originally Posted by greyhat View Post
    The CIDNE info was leaked; it may have been redacted by WL, but it was leaked nonetheless that's why the charge stands; furthermore, you missed the point- even if all he leaked was the SD cables, that is still breaking the law- period! Those cables were classified and their release, whether you agree with it or not, warrants the charge.
    Releasing classified documents and aiding the enemy are two very different things. I'm not arguing that he shouldn't be held accountable for the mere release of information. But I am arguing that his efforts were a net positive and he can't be punished for harm he didn't cause.
    Liberté. Égalité. Fraternité.

Page 11 of 14 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •