• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Bradley Manning lawyer: White House review found 'leak' did no real damage

T

TheDemSocialist

Gradualist
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
34,951
Reaction score
16,311
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Socialist
The US army intelligence analyst suspected of giving classified material to Wikileaks says a White House review has concluded that the alleged leaks did no real damage to national security.

Bradley Manning's defence attorney made the claim in a court filing he released publicly on Monday.

The filing also claims a defence department review found that all the information allegedly leaked was either dated, represented low-level opinions, or was already known because of previous public disclosures.
Manning is seeking the reports to aid in his defence.
His lawyer also contends it was common for soldiers to add unauthorised software to their work computers. Two of the 22 counts Manning faces allege he added unauthorised programs to his work station.
Manning's first hearing is set for 16 December at Fort Meade.
Click to expand...


Read more @: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/nov/28/bradley-manning-wikileaks-national-security

Soo there goes that myth that if we release secret documents its going to cause "so much harm".. I thought if people did this kind of stuff we will all be screwed? I guess it was just another fear tactic... Oh well..

Thoughts?
Comments?
Response?
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Read more @: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/nov/28/bradley-manning-wikileaks-national-security

Soo there goes that myth that if we release secret documents its going to cause "so much harm".. I thought if people did this kind of stuff we will all be screwed? I guess it was just another fear tactic... Oh well..

Thoughts?
Comments?
Response? [/FONT][/COLOR]
Click to expand...

It did no real damage...this time. Besides, with the idiocy of the current regime, it's scary to think what they would consider, "real", damage.

It's still illegal, though and Manning needs to marched to the gallows and executed for treason.
 
Deciding what is and what is not damaging is waaaaaay above his pay grade. Unless it was earth shattering gospel he was stupid to leak any information...if that is what he did. He is not guilty. He hasn't gone to court yet.

Therein lies the FIRST issue. Manning has been held for almost 2 years if memory serves me in solitary without being charged. That's wrong. That is not the action of the country I grew up in and believed in. He should have been charged long, long ago. Those rights are soon to no longer exist as the Senate passed another "security" bill today. Land of the free ain't what it used to be.

If Manning is guilty then he deserves whatever the court decides. Up to now his rights as an American have been violated while Washington gave America the finger.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Read more @: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/nov/28/bradley-manning-wikileaks-national-security

Soo there goes that myth that if we release secret documents its going to cause "so much harm".. I thought if people did this kind of stuff we will all be screwed? I guess it was just another fear tactic... Oh well..

Thoughts?
Comments?
Response? [/FONT][/COLOR]
Click to expand...

Perhaps it did no real damage, maybe it did. But he should still be punished for what he did regardless.
 
The Manning situation is absurd. He should have been taken to trial for releasing classified information, easily convicted and sentenced. The lack of real harm from the leaked documents should have been a mitigating factor in his sentencing. Justice would have been served and the law upheld. There is absolutely no reason to blatantly violate both the constitution and the UCMJ by holding him so long. Its completely insane to undermine our entire legal system to hold someone prisoner when you have him nailed on an open and shut case that will land him in prison anyway.
 
rathi said:
The Manning situation is absurd. He should have been taken to trial for releasing classified information, easily convicted and sentenced. The lack of real harm from the leaked documents should have been a mitigating factor in his sentencing. Justice would have been served and the law upheld. There is absolutely no reason to blatantly violate both the constitution and the UCMJ by holding him so long. Its completely insane to undermine our entire legal system to hold someone prisoner when you have him nailed on an open and shut case that will land him in prison anyway.
Click to expand...

You would hope that any prison time he has already served would be deducted from the sentence - though I don't know what kind of sentence he will receive.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Read more @: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/nov/28/bradley-manning-wikileaks-national-security

Soo there goes that myth that if we release secret documents its going to cause "so much harm".. I thought if people did this kind of stuff we will all be screwed? I guess it was just another fear tactic... Oh well..


Thoughts?
Comments?
Response? [/FONT][/COLOR]
Click to expand...




Doesnt matter how much harm its done...its the intent...Manning is a class A traitor and should be treated just like one.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Read more @: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/nov/28/bradley-manning-wikileaks-national-security

Soo there goes that myth that if we release secret documents its going to cause "so much harm".. I thought if people did this kind of stuff we will all be screwed? I guess it was just another fear tactic... Oh well..

Thoughts?
Comments?
Response? [/FONT][/COLOR]
Click to expand...

Several thoughts:

1) His lawyer claims? So it is not fact, just the claim of some one trying to make a case

2) Even if true, "no real damage to national security" is not the same thing as "no damage".

3) None of that changes the fact he broke the law. A drunk driver does not have to do damage to be guilty of drunk driving.

4) He is still, thankfully, never going to ever be free again in his life. I almost regret that they no longer make big rocks into little rocks at Leavenworth.
 
I would add something, but Redress about summed it up there. Actually, I would add it's a shame it's so hard to get the proper penalty for treason these days. Manning's earned it.
 
was he a traitor who exposed military secrets to the detriment of our nation

or

was he a patriot who exposed wrong doing, conducted in our name, which was cloaked with security classifications

we may know his motivations after the article 32 hearing in a couple of weeks. incarcerate the traitor. praise the whistleblower
 
rathi said:
The Manning situation is absurd. He should have been taken to trial for releasing classified information, easily convicted and sentenced. The lack of real harm from the leaked documents should have been a mitigating factor in his sentencing. Justice would have been served and the law upheld. There is absolutely no reason to blatantly violate both the constitution and the UCMJ by holding him so long. Its completely insane to undermine our entire legal system to hold someone prisoner when you have him nailed on an open and shut case that will land him in prison anyway.
Click to expand...

The guy that shot at the White House a couple weeks ago didn't kill anyone and no one was ever in danger of being killed, or even injured.

Is he any less guilty of making an attempt on the president's life?
 
justabubba said:
was he a traitor who exposed military secrets to the detriment of our nation

or

was he a patriot who exposed wrong doing, conducted in our name, which was cloaked with security classifications

we may know his motivations after the article 32 hearing in a couple of weeks. incarcerate the traitor. praise the whistleblower
Click to expand...

And what wrong doing did Pvt Manning "expose"? Specifically?
 
justabubba said:
was he a traitor who exposed military secrets to the detriment of our nation

or

was he a patriot who exposed wrong doing, conducted in our name, which was cloaked with security classifications

we may know his motivations after the article 32 hearing in a couple of weeks.
Click to expand...

He broke the law and put lives in danger. Even if no one was killed, he's guilty of treason. Was Benedict Arnold any less of a traitor, because the Colonials won the war?

incarcerate the traitor. praise the whistleblower
Click to expand...

But...but...but...the law...

Was the occutard shooter at the White House trying to murder the president, or protect the country from more of his damaging policies?
 
Redress said:
Several thoughts:

1) His lawyer claims? So it is not fact, just the claim of some one trying to make a case

2) Even if true, "no real damage to national security" is not the same thing as "no damage".

3) None of that changes the fact he broke the law. A drunk driver does not have to do damage to be guilty of drunk driving.

4) He is still, thankfully, never going to ever be free again in his life. I almost regret that they no longer make big rocks into little rocks at Leavenworth.
Click to expand...

I agree. It is one thing if someone comes forward to bring light on a lawor leaders are breaking, and quite another to simply leak a ton of information. And if he really believes what he did was right, he should do it in the open and accept the consequences of breaking the law. In any case, he did break the alw.
 
justabubba said:
was he a traitor who exposed military secrets to the detriment of our nation

or

was he a patriot who exposed wrong doing, conducted in our name, which was cloaked with security classifications

we may know his motivations after the article 32 hearing in a couple of weeks. incarcerate the traitor. praise the whistleblower
Click to expand...

Shoot the bastard and send a message:

"Treason is not tolerated."

Don't give a **** what his motives were, he released classified data, to a foreign entity. Whistle blowers contact media organizations and the appropriate legal entities.
 
apdst said:
Was the occutard shooter at the White House
Click to expand...

There was no "occutard" shooter at the white house, any more than there was a "Teatard" shooter of gabby giffords. ****ing ridiculous.
 
Fishstyx said:
And what wrong doing did Pvt Manning "expose"? Specifically?
Click to expand...

Sure. He exposed the fact that US soldiers were committing war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan. (Cables Reveal 2006 Summary Execution of Civilian Family in Iraq -- News from Antiwar.com) (New Statesman - One year in jail, Bradley Manning is a hero) Also that the US was ignoring torture (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/oct/22/iraq-war-logs-military-leaks).

Some high-up people are even supporting him (US Intelligence Veteran Defends Bradley Manning And WikiLeaks - OpEd) (WH forces P.J. Crowley to resign for condemning abuse of Manning - WikiLeaks - Salon.com).

The US government should be on trial for having Bradley Manning in solitary confinement for approximately two years. Solitary confinement amounts to torture (Prolonged solitary confinement is torture, says expert | United Nations Radio) (http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/fi...finement and Mental Illness in US Prisons.pdf) (Solitary Confinement: The Invisible Torture | Wired Science | Wired.com).


I find it quite disturbing that so many people are angry that he released files that showed the horrid things that were going on in Iraq and Afghanistan. We should be happy that these things have been revealed that so we can correct them rather than keep them in the darkness.
 
Zyphlin said:
There's ways to legally "whistleblow". He didn't follow them. He's not a whisteblower in any sense that matters in this case.
Click to expand...
interesting perspective
what was the proper and specific method for someone in the military to blow the whistle about committed atrocities and violations of international conduct
 
justabubba said:
interesting perspective
what was the proper and specific method for someone in the military to blow the whistle about committed atrocities and violations of international conduct
Click to expand...

He can follow the steps laid out in the Military Whistleblower Protection Act, which he would've recieved training on as a DOD employee.
 
justabubba said:
interesting perspective
what was the proper and specific method for someone in the military to blow the whistle about committed atrocities and violations of international conduct
Click to expand...

Jesus christ. It's the military, there are procedures for how to wipe your ass(see note) for god's sake. There are procedures for everything, including specific situations like this.

Note: military procedure for wiping ass.

1) take one square of military issue toilet paper.

2) fold the paper in half

3) turn paper 90 degrees, fold the paper in half again.

4) at the corner with the most fold, tear the corner out.

5) place finger through corner

6) wipe

7) remove paper from finger, removing feces from finger as you go
 
Redress said:
Jesus christ. It's the military, there are procedures for how to wipe your ass(see note) for god's sake. There are procedures for everything, including specific situations like this.

Note: military procedure for wiping ass.

1) take one square of military issue toilet paper.

2) fold the paper in half

3) turn paper 90 degrees, fold the paper in half again.

4) at the corner with the most fold, tear the corner out.

5) place finger through corner

6) wipe

7) remove paper from finger, removing feces from finger as you go
Click to expand...

I once wrote:

"There was an ABC to everything. There were films on how to brush your teeth. There were films on VD. There were films on lose lips and bullet tips. Anything a know-nothing couldn't care less about knowing was shown in films and written without style in thousands of Army manuals. And the powers that ran my life often pointed this out to me." -- Reflections Spring 1996
 
apdst said:
The guy that shot at the White House a couple weeks ago didn't kill anyone and no one was ever in danger of being killed, or even injured.

Is he any less guilty of making an attempt on the president's life?
Click to expand...

The guy who shot at the white house was almost certainly guilty as is Manning. The fact that nobody was hurt as a result of their actions is simply a mitigating circumstance to be used in determining their sentencing.
 
I dont see how exposing war crimes and acts of murder is a crime?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom