Is WikiLeaks source Bradley Manning a hero or a traitor?

Current Events

Bradley Manning has been arrested as the source of the Collateral Murder video and the Afghan War Diary. Did he betray his country or did his country betray him?

Views: 1119     Votes: 2

Nailed it!
1
Logic
3
Responses

WilliamSqualus Posted on Friday, 08:01 PM


Tools:
 login
|

A hero is someone who takes a grave personal risk to do the right thing. It’s clear that Manning took a grave personal risk as he is now held incommunicado in a military holding facility. So we must then ask if Manning did the right thing by releasing the “Afghan war diary” and the collateral murder video of U.S. soldiers murdering civilians to WikiLeaks.

To those that say he is a traitor, I must ask what he is betraying? A group of murdering thugs? An illegal war of occupation? Stop me if I get it right...

The real traitors are the American soldiers who have invaded another country and murder innocent people. The real cowards are the soldiers who see this everyday and remain silent. Soldiers who refuse to be deployed to far away lands and murder folks and those that speak out about the holocaust in Afghanistan and Iraq are true American heroes. Our country was never meant to become an American Empire that expands by invading other countries and murdering their citizens indiscriminately.

Besides the murdering, can anyone tell me the purpose of being “over there?” Is it so the terrorists don’t come over here and murder civilians? Isn’t that exactly what we see in the video? So what exactly does that make us? And when one of our soldiers stands up and says, “killing innocent people is wrong” we toss him in jail and throw away they key. No wonder they hate us...

Manning has taken a grave risk to do the right thing and expose these atrocities. Without him we may never have known the extent of the crimes being committed by Imperial American Stormtroopers. I feel pity for anyone who believes a hero is someone who murders people who can do them no harm from a helicopter. Courage is having the strength to do what you must. Bradley Manning has given the citizens of the United States a wake up call to what has been happening in Afghanistan and Iraq. There are no book deals, no one paid him for his information, he doesn’t have a movie deal lined up. He has lost nearly everything to do what he feels is right. At this very moment he sits alone in a prison cell facing decades more of imprisonment while the murderers he exposed face no consequences for their crimes. Disgusting.

  • WilliamSqualus Posted on yesterday 10:32 AM

    I'd like to respond to those who say I'm being too hard in my criticism of US soldiers in my response:

    When you are a part of an immoral system you become immoral. If you refuse to speak out then you condone every atrocity around you. While it is good that some soldiers refused to fire into a crown of innocent people, this is not a heroic action. They shouldn't be over there in the first place, but hey, everyone needs a paycheck right? If enough soldiers refused to follow illegal orders then we wouldn't have this illegal war of occupation.

    I'm not impressed with the soldiers refusing to render aid to children that were just shot from a gunship. They call the Iraqi police to come get them and transport them to an Iraqi hospital instead of offering immediate medical attention. The Iraqi police were not even on the scene yet and they would have to wait for them to come and then transport them to an Iraqi hospital. The honorable thing to do would have been to bring them to the U.S. hospital, no matter what the higher ups said. What separates a man of honor and a coward is doing the right thing, no matter what the consequences. Let me tell you what I see in this video. I see U.S. soldiers shooting unarmed children from half a mile away and then other U.S. soldiers refusing to give them medical treatment. I won't make excuses for that. These are the actions of cowards.


  • EveryOneLovesHotDogs Posted on yesterday 10:23 PM

    Intriguing article. Why are we are at war?


  • okami Posted on 02:45 AM

    while i won't get into Manning's status at present (although the only reasonable answer is 'yes'), i can provide a bit of information about why we are at war, at least in Afghanistan. . .

    oil is the number one reason. i had suspicions about the convenient 'discovery' of oil in Afghanistan around the time Obama took office. Just prior to 911, Congress had been about to subpoena Cheney for his secret energy meetings with big oil, which makes me suspect they knew about it then.

    after all, the bordering Pakistani province of Baluchistan has a very great amount of oil; there had been plans to lay a pipeline across the province. the people there almost went into full rebellion against the Pakistani government, because they felt they weren't getting a fair share of the profits.

    this is a nice little monograph from the US Army War College's Strategic Studies Institute, downloadable as a PDF:

    'Baloch Nationalism and the Geopolitics of Energy Resources: The Changing Context of Separatism in Pakistan', authored by Dr. Robert J. Wirsing.

    http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/display.cfm?PubID=853

    we all need to remember that, upon our initial invasion of Iraq in 2003, troops were ordered to guard refineries and pipelines.

    not the government buildings and their documents, which could have proved the case for crimes against humanity, WMD programs, and more.

    not the weapons caches, which had been largely located prior to the invasion by civilian groups.

    not the museums and archaeological sites, documenting 7000 years of history, in the area where civilization first rose.

    . . .and we all know how THAT turned out. . .

    the recent so-called 'revelation' of the discovery of precious metals, etc in Afghanistan is a basic political lever, in the sense that it's a further rationalization for our being there. . .we "have to help" the Afghans develop this wealth. . .

    but it had been known to be there since, at least, the Soviet invasion decades earlier.

    our supposed purpose for going to Afghanistan was to hunt down bin Laden and al Qaeda, and remove the Taliban as a source of power.

    bin Laden was allowed to escape, al Qaeda was allowed to scatter across the world and form or inspire splinter groups, and the Taliban was allowed to regroup and regain the strength and power it had lost.

    so, like all the lies the American people believed about Iraq, we have now, basically, the same situation in Afghanistan.

    yet there are other reasons, less obvious and less visible.

    one is the continuing fear/rivalry of the nations in the region. for instance, Afghanistan is afraid of Pakistan. Pakistan is afraid of India. India is afraid of China. China is afraid of Russia.

    similar fears exist, in differing amounts, among the Central Asian nations recently formed from the breakup of the former Soviet Union.

    Pakistan and Bangladesh (former West & East Pakistan) were parts of India prior to 1947. since then, Pakistan and India have been involved in several wars and smaller conflicts, as well as suffering from terrorist groups supported by their opposite numbers.

    global warming is reducing the amount of fresh water worldwide, and it's being felt deeply in India and Pakistan. they've come close to war over it. and they're both nuclear armed states. the US is supposedly an ally of both countries. this gives us the opportunity to defuse any aggressions before they lead to war.

    our presence in Afghanistan also gives us unparalleled opportunites for espionage against China and Russia. the Chinese PLA (People's Liberation Army) has been modernizing at a fantastic rate, although it is still no match for us. on the other hand, they are years--maybe more--ahead of us at cyberwarfare.

    the US and NATO announced last year that perceived cyberattacks might be met with conventional force, which implies they don't have the cybersavvy necessary to deal with them.

    it's believed that many of the cyberattacks on the government or military of this country originate in either China or Russia.

    Afghanistan makes a fairly good staging platform for espionage into either Russia or China.

    other resources--oil, natural gas, etc--exist in the nations of Central Asia. both Russia and China are interested in them, as well as us.

    the United States is by far the greatest consumer of energy, and our needs--as well as those of the world--are increasing with the population.

    the implications are obvious.


    . . .'course, this is just my opinion; ah don' know nothin'. . .ah's jes' th' po' ol' sonuva shahcroppah. . .



    peace out, yo.


  • + More responses...
0
Logic
1
Responses

patriot Posted on yesterday 12:43 AM


Tools:
 login
|

your a fool, and evident of military law. whether the war is legit or not. as far asthe innocent civilians are concerned, how do you know this were u there? I don't think so. there are ways for these things to be handle and as the (so called commander n chief) Obama has said that the controversial information has already been delt with.

  • WilliamSqualus Posted on yesterday 12:57 AM

    Are you suggesting I'm ignorant of military law? My understanding is that if a soldiers are REQUIRED to ignore illegal orders. If they follow them then they are responsible for the consequences. Is this not correct?

    As far as them being innocent or not, the video clearly shows they are non-combatants. The papers from the wikileak document all kinds of "incidents" where US soldiers murder civilians.

    While I wasn't there for this incident, if I were I wouldn't have shot a group of people who weren't hostile. The "soldiers" in that helicopter weren't in any danger, it's not like this was a heat of battle mistake. They calmly observed a group of people walking around and then got excited about murdering them and pulled the trigger. Were we watching 2 different videos?

    A real "patriot" would never support murdering people who were doing no harm. I suppose you think it's quite heroic when they shot up a van that came on the scene to take a wounded photographer to the hospital. Wow, we've spent a trillion dollars to have US soldiers murder a Reuters photographer and then shoot up a van with children in it. I feel safer already!

    Oh I guess those kids sitting in the mini-van were evil "terra-rists" and that's why the soldiers on the scene refused to get them medical attention after they shot them. This is your version of patrotism?


Is WikiLeaks source Bradley Manning a hero or a traitor?


Manning’s arrest information from Wikipedia:

Bradley Manning (born 1987) is a US Army intelligence analyst, PFC (formerly SPC) accused of leaking classified documents to the media. Manning was arrested by the United States Army Criminal Investigation Command in May 2010 and detained without charge for over a month in a military jail at Camp Arifjan in Kuwait.[1][2][3] In early July, two misconduct charges were brought against him for "transferring classified data onto his personal computer and adding unauthorized software to a classified computer system" and "communicating, transmitting and delivering national defense information to an unauthorized source".[2][4] The maximum jail sentence is 52 years.[1] Lieutenant Colonel Eric Bloom has said that "as part of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the next step in proceedings would be an Article 32 Hearing, which is similar to a grand jury. An investigating officer will be appointed, and that officer looks into all facts of the matter, does an investigation, and upon conclusion, the findings will be presented to a convening court martial authority. The division commander will consider based on what is in that, what the next steps are. Either there is enough evidence or not enough evidence to proceed to a court-martial ... A date has not yet been set. We haven't even identified the investigating officer. We're still in the early stages of this case".[1]

Manning allegedly told journalist and former hacker Adrian Lamo via instant messaging that he had leaked the "Collateral Murder" video (of the July 12, 2007 Baghdad airstrike), in addition to a video of the Granai airstrike and around 260,000 diplomatic cables, to the whistleblower website Wikileaks.[5][6] Lamo handed the instant messenger chat logs to U.S. investigators, who began searching for evidence to determine whether Manning's apparent statements to Lamo were true.[3] The "Collateral Murder" video showed an attack by a U.S. helicopter crew on a group of men presumed to be insurgents. Two children were wounded, and several men were killed, including the father of the children and two men who were later identified as Reuters employees.[2][7][8] Manning reportedly said that the diplomatic documents expose "almost criminal political back dealings" and that they explain "how the first world exploits the third, in detail".[9][10] He said that he hoped the release of the videos and documents would lead to "worldwide discussion, debates, and reforms".[11] Manning reportedly wrote, "everywhere there’s a U.S. post, there’s a diplomatic scandal that will be revealed."[5] However, Wikileaks said "allegations in Wired that we have been sent 260,000 classified US embassy cables are, as far as we can tell, incorrect".[10][12] Wikileaks have said that they are unable as yet to confirm whether or not Manning was actually the source of the video, stating "we never collect personal information on our sources", but saying also that "if Brad Manning [is the] whistleblower then, without doubt, he's a national hero"[10] and "we have taken steps to arrange for his protection and legal defense".[6][13] On June 21, Julian Assange told The Guardian that WikiLeaks had hired three US criminal lawyers to defend Manning but that they had been denied access to him.[14][1] Boing Boing asked Lieutenant Colonel Eric Bloom whether Manning was "represented by any civilian attorney" and Bloom responded, "I do not know of any rebuffing. I've been in the military for 26 years, and I've never heard of any party's attempt to secure legal representation being denied. We don't rebuff representation".[1]


From WikiLeaks:

Sunday, July 26 5pm EST.


WikiLeaks today released over 75,000 secret US military reports covering the war in Afghanistan.

The Afghan War Diary an extraordinary secret compendium of over 91,000 reports covering the war in Afghanistan from 2004 to 2010. The reports describe the majority of lethal military actions involving the United States military. They include the number of persons internally stated to be killed, wounded, or detained during each action, together with the precise geographical location of each event, and the military units involved and major weapon systems used.

The Afghan War Diary is the most significant archive about the reality of war to have ever been released during the course of a war. The deaths of tens of thousands is normally only a statistic but the archive reveals the locations and the key events behind each most of these deaths. We hope its release will lead to a comprehensive understanding of the war in Afghanistan and provide the raw ingredients necessary to change its course.

Most entries have been written by soldiers and intelligence officers listening to reports radioed in from front line deployments. However the reports also contain related information from Marines intelligence, US Embassies, and reports about corruption and development activity across Afghanistan.

Each report consists of the time and precise geographic location of an event that the US Army considers significant. It includes several additional standardized fields: The broad type of the event (combat, non-combat, propaganda, etc.); the category of the event as classified by US Forces, how many were detained, wounded, and killed from civilian, allied, host nation, and enemy forces; the name of the reporting unit and a number of other fields, the most significant of which is the summary - an English language description of the events that are covered in the report.

The Diary is available on the web and can be viewed in chronological order and by by over 100 categories assigned by the US Forces such as: "escalation of force", "friendly-fire", "development meeting", etc. The reports can also be viewed by our "severity" measure-the total number of people killed, injured or detained. All incidents have been placed onto a map of Afghanistan and can be viewed on Google Earth limited to a particular window of time or place. In this way the unfolding of the last six years of war may be seen.

The material shows that cover-ups start on the ground. When reporting their own activities US Units are inclined to classify civilian kills as insurgent kills, downplay the number of people killed or otherwise make excuses for themselves. The reports, when made about other US Military units are more likely to be truthful, but still down play criticism. Conversely, when reporting on the actions of non-US ISAF forces the reports tend to be frank or critical and when reporting on the Taliban or other rebel groups, bad behavior is described in comprehensive detail. The behavior of the Afghan Army and Afghan authorities are also frequently described.

The reports come from US Army with the exception most Special Forces activities. The reports do not generally cover top-secret operations or European and other ISAF Forces operations. However when a combined operation involving regular Army units occurs, details of Army partners are often revealed. For example a number of bloody operations carried out by Task Force 373, a secret US Special Forces assassination unit, are exposed in the Diary -- including a raid that lead to the death of seven children.

This archive shows the vast range of small tragedies that are almost never reported by the press but which account for the overwhelming majority of deaths and injuries.

We have delayed the release of some 15,000 reports from total archive as part of a harm minimization process demanded by our source. After further review, these reports will be released, with occasional redactions, and eventually, in full, as the security situation in Afghanistan permits.

Additional information from our media partners:

Login to Post your Argument!

To begin, please login here. Don't have an account? Register here.

  • of
  • 0