Page 2 of 14 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 140

Thread: US judge rules not to drop Manning charge

  1. #11
    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 TheDemSocialist View Post
    Read more @: US judge rules not to drop Manning charge - Americas - Al Jazeera English

    This could seriously cause a very very slippery slope to define what "aiding the enemy is". [/FONT][/COLOR]
    Manning was an Intelligence Analyst, with intimate knowledge of security classifications of data. I realize he was a low ranking soldier (PFC), however he was trained and knows that such leaks would be exploited by the enemy. He can't play the "I didn't know card". Even basically trained soldiers receive training on counter-intel measures, therefore the charge is appropriate.

  2. #12
    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 TheDemSocialist View Post
    He didnt directly give it to the enemy thats my whole point. He gave it to Wikileaks. The whole thing has to reveal around is that if he knowingly gave it to the enemy (Wikileaks), then one has to ask is Wikileaks the enemy of the US
    ART. 104. AIDING THE ENEMY
    Any person who--
    (1) aids, or attempts to aid, the enemy with arms, ammunition, supplies, money, or other things; or
    (2) without proper authority, knowingly harbors or [protects or gives intelligence to or communicates or corresponds with or holds any intercourse with the enemy, either directly or indirectly;
    shall suffer death or such other punishment as a court-martial or military commission may direct.

    Note that it says "gives intelligence" and that it applies whether is directly or indirectly.

    So the panel has to decide if his release of intelligence could of been an aid to the enemy. Going through Wikileaks or any other agency in no way changes anything.

    You will notice also that the judge is not even going for a maximum sentence as the UCMJ clearly allows Death. I personally think that is BS, the panel should simply read the UCMJ and decide appropriate sentence based upon it, not the Judges or anyone else "instructions". Not even the President can arbitrarily suspend any portion of the UCMJ.
    Only a fool measures equality by results and not opportunities.

  3. #13
    Guru

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    In a Blue State
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    4,733

    Re: US judge rules not to drop Manning charge

    I feel he will not get aiding the enemy. The kids life is over. They won't kill him, but he is going to be jailed for the rest of his life.
    We went from sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me to safe spaces.

  4. #14
    Sage

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    8,358

    Re: US judge rules not to drop Manning charge

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist View Post
    Read more @: US judge rules not to drop Manning charge - Americas - Al Jazeera English

    This could seriously cause a very very slippery slope to define what "aiding the enemy is". [/FONT][/COLOR]
    If find it interesting when compared to how the country handled the person who leaked the Pentagon papers. That was a really terrible war with over 60K kids killed. The leaker was never put in jail versus what is happening to this kid.

    I find it ironic that people are so willing to give away their liberties, in the name of suppressing terrorism. Being cowards we will allowed OBL to win.

  5. #15
    Sage


    Thoreau72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    20,285

    Re: US judge rules not to drop Manning charge

    The judge is a female enabler of the gross injustice perpetrated against Manning.

    Funny in a perverse way that 6 women would not deliver justice in the Zimmerman case, and 1 woman will not deliver justice in the Manning case. A dark time for women of conscience.

  6. #16
    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
    The judge is a female enabler of the gross injustice perpetrated against Manning.

    Funny in a perverse way that 6 women would not deliver justice in the Zimmerman case, and 1 woman will not deliver justice in the Manning case. A dark time for women of conscience.
    F that! He's lucky he didn't get the Death Penalty!

  7. #17
    Sage


    Thoreau72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    20,285

    Re: US judge rules not to drop Manning charge

    Quote Originally Posted by greyhat View Post
    F that! He's lucky he didn't get the Death Penalty!
    Ya reckon he ought to be drawn and quartered? Or just a daily waterboarding?

  8. #18
    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
    Ya reckon he ought to be drawn and quartered? Or just a daily waterboarding?
    No, he should and will be tried under the UCMJ as he is a soldier. The applicable punishment will be adjudicated accordingly; he should be glad that the Death Penalty, was not brought against him.

  9. #19
    Professor

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Last Seen
    10-28-16 @ 07:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,526

    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.
    I prefer to stick with the charge language (aiding the enemy) in lieu treason but your posts pretty much sums it up. Manning was an Intel Specialist which would make him privy to various briefings of the enemy's internet habits and what not. This isn't some civilian that stubbled up on this information and released it who gets to shrug their shoulders and say "I didn't know." This was a trained Intelligence Specialist given top secret access.

  10. #20
    Gradualist

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    09-25-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    34,949
    Blog Entries
    6

    Re: US judge rules not to drop Manning charge

    Quote Originally Posted by DVSentinel View Post
    ART. 104. AIDING THE ENEMY
    Any person who--
    (1) aids, or attempts to aid, the enemy with arms, ammunition, supplies, money, or other things; or
    (2) without proper authority, knowingly harbors or [protects or gives intelligence to or communicates or corresponds with or holds any intercourse with the enemy, either directly or indirectly;
    shall suffer death or such other punishment as a court-martial or military commission may direct.


    Note that it says "gives intelligence" and that it applies whether is directly or indirectly.
    This all comes back down to does this make Wikileaks a "enemy of the US"?
    So the panel has to decide if his release of intelligence could of been an aid to the enemy. Going through Wikileaks or any other agency in no way changes anything.
    Yes it does because, they have to prove that Manning had "actual knowledge" that by passing documents to WikiLeaks he was giving information to an enemy of the US.

    You will notice also that the judge is not even going for a maximum sentence as the UCMJ clearly allows Death. I personally think that is BS, the panel should simply read the UCMJ and decide appropriate sentence based upon it, not the Judges or anyone else "instructions". Not even the President can arbitrarily suspend any portion of the UCMJ.
    But a legal judge can. Thats why they are called judges.


Page 2 of 14 FirstFirst 123412 ... 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
  •