Brian Williams Makes the Case for Putting NBC on Trial

[G_j]

http://www.fair.org/blog/2013/06/05/brian-williams-makes-the-case-for-putting-nbc-on-trial/

Brian Williams Makes the Case for Putting NBC on Trial
Posted by Jim Naureckas

U.S. Army Private Bradley Manning is facing a court martial for making classified information public by giving it to the website WikiLeaks. NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams (6/3/13), reporting the first day of Manning's trial, called him "the man who may have put U.S. military secrets in the hands of Osama bin Laden"–referring to the U.S. government's legal theory that by making secrets public, Manning allowed Al-Qaeda to have access to them, and was therefore "aiding the enemy" (FAIR Blog, 6/4/13).

But giving classified information to the public is something that news outlets–including NBC News–routinely do, and each time they do it they too could be accused of "aiding the enemy." For example, NBC's Michael Isikoff reported on February 4 that a "confidential memo" produced by the Justice Department held that "the U.S. government can order the killing of American citizens if they are believed to be 'senior operational leaders' of Al-Qaeda or 'an associated force'–even if there is no intelligence indicating they are engaged in an active plot to attack the U.S."

Now, U.S. citizens obviously have a compelling interest in knowing when their government believes it can kill them without a trial–but such information is clearly of interest to Al-Qaeda as well. There's no reason that the same legal theory that accuses Manning of "aiding the enemy" couldn't be applied to NBC News for "supporting terrorism" by putting classified information on TV where Al-Qaeda could see it. And, given the Obama administration's declaration that Fox News' James Rosen is a "co-conspirator" for publishing classified information, no particular reason to be confident that they wouldn't do so.

[MH1]

1. at least 2 major differences between Manning and NBC

1) Manning is in the military.

2) Manning stole the information and gave it to a publisher. NBC is the publisher, not the thief. NBC is more like WikiLeaks in this case than they are like Manning.

[John2]

2. It is up

to the military command structure to make sure, they are carrying out the War legally. It is up to Congress for oversight of the military, to make sure they are. The Press has the responsibility to oversee the Government are doing things legally. They all failed in their responsibilities leading up to the War in Iraq. If the Press had done their jobs and outed the military and Congress, they would have probably been accused of aiding the enemy, just like in Vietnam. I think Manning's guilt, should be decided primarily on his intent. Was it to aid the enemy, or the Public about illegalities, by the military and Government? If anything, what Manning is guilty of is recklessness. His superiors should be part of the problem also, because of Manning's rank. I'm very surprised a PFC had such access with secret material, without proper oversight of him. That is the mistake made by the military, if they wanted to keep these things secret and from Public scrutiny. PFC Mannings real problem or guilt, might be his honesty and moral conscience to go along with the things he knew was going on. I think that he should have took the conscientious objector route and gotten out of the military. He could have talked to a priest and reported, what he thought was illegal to his immediate supervisors. That would have been a good case for him to be released from his duties. He could have went to outside sources and had protection, from the chain of command. Did PFC Manning steal information, that he already had access to, or did he just break an oath in violation of his contract with the military? What would you do if you found the entire Government was covering up illegal acts in a War? And if these illegal acts had caused the Deaths of innocent people? That is why I think, this might be a case of his moral conscience, rather than his intent to aid the enemy.