It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Suspected WikiLeaks source appears in court(Bradley Manning)

page: 1
6

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 11:19 PM
link   

FORT MEADE, Maryland (Reuters) - An American Army intelligence analyst suspected of being behind the largest leak of classified documents in U.S. history made his first court appearance on Friday, sitting stone-faced as military prosecutors launched their case against him. Private First Class Bradley Manning, 23, faces charges including aiding the enemy, which could send him to prison for life. He is suspected of being the source of documents that eventually were released on the Internet by WikiLeaks -- data dumps that Washington said jeopardized national security.


well..we knew it was coming sooner or later...

still on the fence with this one...

let's see how it turns out...




Prosecutors aim to show there is sufficient evidence to bring Manning to trial at a general court martial on 22 criminal charges. If convicted of all counts, Manning would face a maximum punishment of life imprisonment, reduction in rank to the lowest enlisted pay grade, forfeiture of all pay and allowances and a dishonorable discharge, the Army said in a statement. The most serious charge, aiding the enemy, is a capital crime that carries the death penalty but the Army has indicated it does not plan to seek that punishment. For much of the time since his detention beginning in May 2010 in Iraq, Manning was held on a charge of improperly obtaining a classified gunsight video that showed a 2007 helicopter attack that killed a dozen people in Iraq, including two Reuters journalists. The video was released publicly by WikiLeaks.


news.yahoo.com...

Thoughts?


edit on 16-12-2011 by baddmove because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-12-2011 by baddmove because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 12:58 AM
link   
thoughts?
ok i think the USA has every right to murder annyone they very well please
and lock up evryone that disagrees for the rest of their lives



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 01:03 AM
link   
I think the helicopter "gun ship" video was a big wake up call for everyone.

Unfortunately, most peoples attention spans are about 15 minutes long, so they have already forgotten about it.

"Manning who?" they will say.



On the defense side, aren't you legally obligated to disobey unjust orders? Like hiding the truth about what's happening in Iraq.


If the leaks were so benign, then why not just let him go? Oh, that's right, they gotta make an "example" out of him

edit on 17-12-2011 by v1rtu0s0 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 01:24 AM
link   
I don't see much to be on the fence about myself. If he had a conscience problem with something he was doing, he had options to make that known and work to get out of his position. However, while he freely accepted the trust placed in him, he was under an oath of loyalty he freely took and those around him would have assumed he continued to hold as meaningful. Instead he was being a traitor and a weasel, slipping everything he could literally hoover up out the back door.

He didn't publish the Pentagon Papers or something similar where he knew what he was putting out. He just hoovered EVERYTHING within his access in his job, regardless of what names or operational details it might contain. It took entire staffs of people weeks working full time to get through it all. There is no way he could have known even a small %..so there isn't even a half way decent comparison to Daniel Ellsberg.

I don't blame Assange and Wikileaks. It was reporting a story and leak as that site was designed to do by the time it got to that point...but the original source is a whole different animal...and I hope this individual dies in military prison, a very old man. We'll never even know how much damage his leaks actually have done and neither did he as he leaked them. That really is the whole point to this.



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 01:28 AM
link   
Ofcourse they no seeky seeky death punishment for Bradley. Torturing him was fun, wasn't it Mr. General?



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 01:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Wow, its good to see someone from misery believes in the freedoms this country used to represent. Guilty until proven innocent huh. Good thing idiots from ats have zero pull in the real world, a lot of people would just be shot on sight for suspicion alone. Bravo, you're a fine contribution to this state.



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 01:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by ludshed
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Wow, its good to see someone from misery believes in the freedoms this country used to represent. Guilty until proven innocent huh. Good thing idiots from ats have zero pull in the real world, a lot of people would just be shot on sight for suspicion alone. Bravo, you're a fine contribution to this state.

You're serious? On one hand we're horrified when police, military and other authorities go off the deep end and nothing is done...as well we should be.

However, we then want to praise a member of that same community who likewise violates his oath every bit as much as the others did, and likely got far more people killed by HIS actions? If we don't demand integrity from those we trust with the nation's defense and most powerful systems and weapons, then who do we ever demand it from? Integrity, Character and Honor are either a part of life or they aren't...and this individual had none of those things as he willfully put his service and everyone who'd worked with Americans at risk by his actions.

I could applaud Manning on the Apache gunship footage..although the violation of trust by leaking should have gotten him a dishonorable out the door for it, just the same. That, at least, he would have known the material and potential damage.

No....There is simply no defending what he did on any level and NO ONE likes a traitor. Even those who benefit from one, don't generally like them. In this case, I'm not even sure who could be said to have benefited beyond the public's apatite for details and secrets.



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 02:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Explanation: BS!
Or would you like me to drag you through a debate over Don't Ask Don't Tell!


Personal Disclosure: Who's unalienable rights were violated 1st?


Oh yeah it was Mr Mannings by the USA government and the Military!


UDHR [un.org]


Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,

Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,


He was sick of being made a bitch [under DADT] and he just turned the tables on the bullies!


If the USA had no secrets to leak then maybe the USA wouldn't end up so sodomized!

The USA lost ALL integrity when TPTB screwed Manning over and now its time for KARMA!




edit on 17-12-2011 by OmegaLogos because: Edited to fix spacing.

edit on 17-12-2011 by OmegaLogos because: Edited to fix a word which was then changed into TPTB for clarity.



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 03:29 AM
link   
reply to post by OmegaLogos
 

You aren't honestly suggesting that the most extreme case of domestic espionage/treason in military history came as the result of a disgruntled gay man who felt repressed, are you?

He was either deeply offended by the Iraq war and acting out of conscience, or he was severely disgruntled and serving 'payback' to the system he felt betrayed by, by betraying it. The two ARE mutually exclusive. The conscience possibility, while still reprehensible in the end results, at least suggests something one can understand in the motivation for treason at his level.

Doing this out of some kind of warped sense of activism is suggesting a path I'm not sure it's right to even suggest. If anyone were to take such a possibility seriously, many other gay men could be hurt by suspicions of who else may be disgruntled and looking to do harm to avenge such feelings.

While creative as a defense for Manning, it would be an insanely selfish one for the collateral damage it would likely cause innocent people. If you somehow meant DADT references some other way for this, I missed what that could be.



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 03:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Explanation: You have already judged him way before he has had a chance to defend himself!

Personal Disclosure: Does "Innocent unless proven guilty" ring a bell?


We're here to deny ignorance, not display ignorance!


Don't forget ...

UN Torture Investigator Denied Access to Bradley Manning (by kuai137 posted on 11-4-2011 @ 07:59 PM) [ATS]

P.S. As for his 'defence', yes I was completely serious! His inalienable human rights TRUMP national security or your Nations constitution wouldn't enable you to bear arms or have freedom of speech ok!



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 03:53 AM
link   
reply to post by baddmove
 


The man is a hero and should be given a medal....



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 04:19 AM
link   
reply to post by OmegaLogos
 

I'll say this much. I absolutely do feel he has the right to a fair trial, just as everyone else. I'm as hard against this new extra-judicial garbage as any card carrying ACLU member. I sure hope no one assumes that because my politics are to the right side of the center line, I somehow support the extreme things we're seeing in handling people without that due process. The UCMJ is different, to be sure...but it isn't outside legal process.

Having said that, IF he is found not guilty, I'll accept that finding and let it go. I find that unlikely given my own knowledge of computer networks and accountability systems far below what an operations center like he was in would be using...but anything is possible I suppose.

On that note, I'll wish you a good morning and agree to disagree on this one.



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 04:23 AM
link   
The young man committed a crime if he indeed did do as they accuse him of it. The embarrassment effect is one thing and not my concern. Passing on secret and confidential materials that have all the potential int he world of compromising the security, safety and inner workings of our Nation's diplomatic community is another thing and one I take very seriously.

I am not one of those people who hate my government and believe that I and everyone else is entitled to know every single thing. To me that is not realistic nor logical.

However, I don't love my government either, and one hand, the government needs to be accountable for a lot of it's misdeeds and covering up such terrible things such as the video that was released is not acceptable. So I find myself on one hand in the belief that if manning did in fact do this crime then he should be held accountable. I also believe that what is done is done and that our government should be held accountable for it's misdeed that were brought to light through these leaks just the same.

The leaks in question wreaked havoc in every aspect of our government and most of it was them being embarrassed and foreign relations being greatly damaged due to private communications from embassies and so forth being released as well as a lot of assessments and intelligence gather behavior from US diplomatic offices across the globe.

The implications for and against the US and it's allies are immense. Some bad and some good can come from this situation though. I hate to think this young man will rot away in a prison for the rest of his life though. Especially when there are violent criminals who get a way less years. It comes back to the implications though.



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 05:25 AM
link   
AFP - Manning defense takes offensive in WikiLeaks case
Dec 16 10:24 PM US/Eastern


www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.d13dc1d3795627ffae5f6b6be6df7523.131&show_article=1


(...)

A US Army legal expert told reporters the court could rule on Manning's appeal as early as Saturday, when the pre-trial hearing is set to reconvene at 10:00 am (1500 GMT). It could last up to a week.

(...)

Manning, who turns 24 on Saturday, spoke several times during the hearing, repeatedly answering "Yes, sir" when asked by Almanza whether he understood the charges, was aware of his rights and was satisfied with his defense counsel.

(...)



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 06:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
I don't see much to be on the fence about myself. If he had a conscience problem with something he was doing, he had options to make that known and work to get out of his position. However, while he freely accepted the trust placed in him, he was under an oath of loyalty he freely took and those around him would have assumed he continued to hold as meaningful. Instead he was being a traitor and a weasel, slipping everything he could literally hoover up out the back door.

He didn't publish the Pentagon Papers or something similar where he knew what he was putting out. He just hoovered EVERYTHING within his access in his job, regardless of what names or operational details it might contain. It took entire staffs of people weeks working full time to get through it all. There is no way he could have known even a small %..so there isn't even a half way decent comparison to Daniel Ellsberg.

I don't blame Assange and Wikileaks. It was reporting a story and leak as that site was designed to do by the time it got to that point...but the original source is a whole different animal...and I hope this individual dies in military prison, a very old man. We'll never even know how much damage his leaks actually have done and neither did he as he leaked them. That really is the whole point to this.


Quoted this whole post in case others missed it because I can't help but agree with what's being said in it.

It's great that psychos in the military were outed and their actions made public but those people are in the minority and by grabbing everything he could and handing it over regardless of what may be in those documents, Manning pretty much sealed his fate and betrayed the majority of good people in the military as well as the good people in politics whose names may have been dragged through the mud or put in danger thanks to him.

If he'd just leaked the unjust actions of his peers then I'd probably have supported him but he was reckless in giving Wikileaks everything.



posted on Dec, 18 2011 @ 09:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by OmegaLogos
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Personal Disclosure: Does "Innocent unless proven guilty" ring a bell?


We're here to deny ignorance, not display ignorance!



Allegedly and presumed are not in a couple of people in this threads limited vocabulary. In my opinion at least 2 of the people here support the NDAA and hate freedom. Which poses an interesting thought, Why? Could they be agents? Could they be that stupid? I'm starting to wonder if it matters what the difference is.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 08:49 PM
link   
I thought more people would be interested in this story..

really..I did....



new topics

top topics



 
6

log in

join