Page 12 of 14 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 140

Thread: US judge rules not to drop Manning charge

  1. #111
    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
    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.
    But he CAN be punished for breaking the rules and probably some oaths that he took as well. I'm quite sure he signed confidentiality clauses, etc. You don't screw over the U.S. military unless you're prepared to pay the price I guess. Lol! 200 or so years ago, he probably would have been shot on sight!

  2. #112
    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
    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.
    There's a reason why they were classified right? Obviously for infosec...Manning, Snowden and the like are not adjudicators of what should and shouldn't be classified.

    WL and the like may think there is no harm in certain disclosures; however the impact from a CI damage is one they're not trained or capable of making a proper determination on.

  3. #113
    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
    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.
    Absolutely. I certainly didn't mean that the press should be prosecuted for those rare occasions when it actually does its job and tries to hold powerful entities accountable (rather than supporting and defending them, as the press more often tends to do).

    I only meant that the attack on Manning, and for that matter on Wikileaks, are conveniently selective, and that there must be a lesson in that fact somewhere.
    ...for perhaps the most admirable among the admirable laws of Nature is the survival of the weakest.
    --Vladimir Nabokov

  4. #114
    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
    But he CAN be punished for breaking the rules and probably some oaths that he took as well. I'm quite sure he signed confidentiality clauses, etc. You don't screw over the U.S. military unless you're prepared to pay the price I guess. Lol! 200 or so years ago, he probably would have been shot on sight!
    Good thing we're more civilized than that now, huh?

    Quote Originally Posted by greyhat View Post
    There's a reason why they were classified right? Obviously for infosec...Manning, Snowden and the like are not adjudicators of what should and shouldn't be classified.

    WL and the like may think there is no harm in certain disclosures; however the impact from a CI damage is one they're not trained or capable of making a proper determination on.
    And why do you allow people who have a vested personal interest in secrecy to be the only ones who can decide those things? And are you seriously suggesting that it takes specific training in order to have an opinion on your government's policies?

    You two are going so far out of your way to justify punishing this man. He didn't harm anyone. He acted to benefit the people of his nation. Kick him out of the military, fine. But don't you dare call loyalty to the American people treason. Stop trading your freedom for security. You end up with neither.
    Liberté. Égalité. Fraternité.

  5. #115
    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
    Good thing we're more civilized than that now, huh?



    And why do you allow people who have a vested personal interest in secrecy to be the only ones who can decide those things? And are you seriously suggesting that it takes specific training in order to have an opinion on your government's policies?

    You two are going so far out of your way to justify punishing this man. He didn't harm anyone. He acted to benefit the people of his nation. Kick him out of the military, fine. But don't you dare call loyalty to the American people treason. Stop trading your freedom for security. You end up with neither.
    That makes no sense; if you aren't qualified to handle TS info then you aren't- period, and even if you are, you need a "need to know" basis.

    We have laws and in a democracy we transfer power to our representative government who has created the laws Manning broke; the appropriate punishment will now be dealt. This isn't a direct democracy, we don't get to sit around and discuss this as a group..

    If you don't like the law- take it up with your congressmen!

  6. #116
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The Republic of Texas.
    Last Seen
    11-15-17 @ 11:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,647

    Re: US judge rules not to drop Manning charge

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    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.
    A positive in your opinion. And, yes, he can, if the panel finds him guilty of the charge. In this case, their opinions do matter and may not be the same as yours.
    Only a fool measures equality by results and not opportunities.

  7. #117
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The Republic of Texas.
    Last Seen
    11-15-17 @ 11:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,647

    Re: US judge rules not to drop Manning charge

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    Good thing we're more civilized than that now, huh?
    A matter of opinion. Considering the number of traitorous socialist people in America today, my opinion is that we would be better off being "less civilized" (probably your opinion) or more civilized by eradicating them (my opinion).
    Only a fool measures equality by results and not opportunities.

  8. #118
    Sage


    Thoreau72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    20,305

    Re: 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?
    People keep bringing that up because they actually believe it. Even though Robert Gates SecDef said on camera that no US individual or troop was harmed by the info Manning released, some people convince themselves he was.

    It would be interesting to know if Manning released any info that was Top Secret. As I recall, he did not. It was classified, but today's government classifies how much toilet paper it buys in a year.

    Daniel Ellsberg, OTOH, released mostly TS material.

  9. #119
    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 Henry David View Post
    People keep bringing that up because they actually believe it. Even though Robert Gates SecDef said on camera that no US individual or troop was harmed by the info Manning released, some people convince themselves he was.

    It would be interesting to know if Manning released any info that was Top Secret. As I recall, he did not. It was classified, but today's government classifies how much toilet paper it buys in a year.

    Daniel Ellsberg, OTOH, released mostly TS material.
    Secret, Top Secret etc it doesn't matter...it is still classified and for a reason; this may be a factor consider at trial but it doesn't change the fact that he broke the law.

    It seems like very few of you supporters are willing to absorb this inconvenient truth: the guy is a trained intelligence specialist- hello!??

    You are taught that ANY LEAK of CLASSIFIED info is of CI value to the enemy!!

    Holy jumping jelly beans- is that so hard to understand??

  10. #120
    Sage


    Thoreau72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    20,305

    Re: US judge rules not to drop Manning charge

    Quote Originally Posted by greyhat View Post
    Secret, Top Secret etc it doesn't matter...it is still classified and for a reason; this may be a factor consider at trial but it doesn't change the fact that he broke the law.

    It seems like very few of you supporters are willing to absorb this inconvenient truth: the guy is a trained intelligence specialist- hello!??

    You are taught that ANY LEAK of CLASSIFIED info is of CI value to the enemy!!

    Holy jumping jelly beans- is that so hard to understand??
    What you apparently fail to consider is that these days the federal government classifies virtually everything. Sorry I can't provide a "link", but there have been many articles written about that.

    You also fail to realize, or prefer to pretend otherwise, that the war in which Manning was involved was brought under fraud. Manning revealed the criminal actions of the government.

    Is that so hard to understand? Or is it easier to just pretend otherwise?

Page 12 of 14 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 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
  •