General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe Liberal Betrayal of Bradley Manning...
http://news.salon.com/2012/04/10/the_liberal_betrayal_of_bradley_manning/singleton/How uncouth. How vulgar. On the center-left, the position is much more sensible: dont outright murder the guy, at least not without a show trial, but dont you dare let him see the light of day again. As Obama himself pronounced, He broke the law, which is something that must be obeyed by everyone but bankers and torturers and presidents. We cant just expose the state-sanctioned torture and murder of innocents willy-nilly. We cant just listen to our own consciences when confronted with institutional evil. Thatd be anarchy. Which is bad.
To be fair, liberals cant really be blamed for their reaction to Manning. What he did was fundamentally radical, not reformist. He didnt settle for working within a system explicitly designed to thwart the exposure of wrongdoing, through a chain of command that callously ignores concern for non-American life. Having access to evidence of grotesque crimes no one around him seemed to care about, he engaged in direct action, exposing them for the benefit of the world and those paying for them, the U.S. taxpayer.
(I)f you had free reign over classified networks for long periods of time, Manning reportedly wrote to the man who ultimately turned him in, and you saw incredible things, awful things things that belonged in the public domain, and not on some server stored in a dark room in Washington DC what would you do? We know what his answer was. And we know what the guardians of establishment liberalism would have had him do: Nothing.
Judge for yourself which is more defensible.
Lionessa
(3,894 posts)"...What he did was fundamentally radical, not reformist. He didnt settle for working within a system explicitly designed to thwart the exposure of wrongdoing, through a chain of command that callously ignores concern for non-American life. Having access to evidence of grotesque crimes no one around him seemed to care about, he engaged in direct action, exposing them for the benefit of the world and those paying for them, the U.S. taxpayer. ..."
I didn't think he'd been legitimately convicted of anything yet, nor confessed. Am I wrong?
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)Charles Davis (the author of the post) is indeed jumping the gun.
What do you think of Manning's chances of escaping conviction?
Angleae
(4,493 posts)Military prosecutors are more anal-retentive about their conviction record than their civilian counterparts. They won't even file charges unless they have a slam-dunk or are forced to by their superiors.
sudopod
(5,019 posts)If the case is open and shut, why deny him the right to a timely trial and, if appropriate, a conviction?
If there is no case, then how can they hold him?
Regardless of the above, why lock him up in solitary for the better part of a year and leak nasty innuendos about his personal life?
Angleae
(4,493 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)Laughing Mirror
(4,185 posts)I doubt if many around here will be comfortable reading it, however. It's not what they want to hear.
saras
(6,670 posts)and then spent all the rest of the money, time, and energy on prosecuting the orders-of-magnitude-larger criminals he exposed.
Fair's fair, after all. He DID break the law.
kenny blankenship
(15,689 posts)a martyr to Bush's imperialist & racist war for world domination and his fascist subversion of the American republic.