E
estesbob
Guest
Common misconcpetion You are innocent until proven guilty in the Courts. That does not forbiod us to have an opinion of his guilt-the evidence is overwhelming. Even his lawyer is not contending he is innocent
- Status
N
Nine_Two
Guest
I had a discussion with someone not long ago, they complained that Bradley’s treatment violated the Geneva Accords. My reply was that the Geneva Accords do not apply in this case as he is not a Prisoner of War, but that if they did apply, they allow for summary execution of those caught spying. That shut him up.
N
Nine_Two
Guest
As I already mentioned, everyone on both sides has already convicted him. It’s a question of whether or not treason should be a crime.
G
gamewell45
Guest
Suppose they find him not guilty by reason of insanity?? Then what?
D
Dale_M
Guest
It might be more complicated than that. Under the limits spelled out in the US Constitution, I am not sure that what Manning has been accused of constitutes treason.
From Article III, Section 3
US Constitution:
archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html
The theft of documents was not an act of war, nor has Manning waged war on the US. Perhaps it could be argued that he indirectly provided aid and comfort to enemies of the US, but it would have been indirect effect. And he certainly didn’t adhere to those enemies.
N
Nine_Two
Guest
Do you have a story showing his lawyers making that argument? Because if not it’s a moot point. I personally haven’t even heard anyone saying he is insane.
N
Nine_Two
Guest
As far as I’m aware, having not seen a full list of his charges, “treason” is not one of the charges levelled against him, however I was speaking not of the U.S. legal definition. The traditional definition of treason is acting against ones country. I’ve yet to hear anyone argue he didn’t.
D
Dale_M
Guest
Early this month a large number of new charges were filed against him, including “aiding the enemy,” which is a capital offense. I think that charge is basically one of treason, however I lack an understanding of the exact nature of what that charge entails. I’m not even sure if the prosecution has revealed who “the enemy” is.
washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/03/02/AR2011030206272.html
Hmm… okay. I guess I am not comfortable with such an expansive concept. Just about anything involving foreign dealings could be alleged to be acting against one’s country, at least by one’s political or economic opponents.
I’ve read, on other sites, claims that he was a patriotic whistleblower. But I don’t find that convincing at all. The theft and release of those classified documents has caused hardship for the US government.
N
Nine_Two
Guest
But even calling him a patriotic whisleblower is acknowledging he passed on information. Which is my point, everyone has already prejudged that he is guilty of what he is accused of, people just disgree on whether that’s a good thing or not.
D
Dale_M
Guest
Oh, yes. That seems to be the nature of online discussions. If someone has been arrested, the internet community seems to assume guilt. I see that all the time at the website of a local television news station. I suppose it makes for easier discussion, since care doesn’t have to be exercised in saying things like “what he has been alleged to have done.” But the rush to judgment isn’t laudable, even if it is natural.
N
Nine_Two
Guest
I meant in general actually. I’ve yet to run into anyone who will say they think he is innocent or that they don’t know.
J
JimG
Guest
A PFC in the U.S. Army who takes it upon himself to violate the law and his orders by stealing and distributing thousands of classified documents, is, if not acting treasonably, at least displaying a height of arrogance unbecoming to a military man.
Let’s see, just because I’ve got access to all these classified documents, how about if I copy and distribute them. What fun!
During my time in the USAF, no one in my outfit would have conceived of disclosing even one iota of classified information, not even that which had already been publicly reported in Time magazine.
And no, I’m not pronouncing Manning guilty, since I have no direct knowledge of the evidence. I’m just saying that if he actually did give classified documents to Assange, he is at a minimum, naive, clueless and a discredit to the Army.
Let’s see, just because I’ve got access to all these classified documents, how about if I copy and distribute them. What fun!
During my time in the USAF, no one in my outfit would have conceived of disclosing even one iota of classified information, not even that which had already been publicly reported in Time magazine.
And no, I’m not pronouncing Manning guilty, since I have no direct knowledge of the evidence. I’m just saying that if he actually did give classified documents to Assange, he is at a minimum, naive, clueless and a discredit to the Army.
G
gamewell45
Guest
You kidding me? You have to be insane if you did what he allegedly did. There would be no other logical explanation for it.
C
canadianguy1143
Guest
I thought you were talking about legal insanity and not just clinical insanity. If you are speaking about the latter, then I agree it would have to be that. However, I could argue that every person who commits murder (not self-defense) would have to be insane as well as how can you logically explain that?
G
gamewell45
Guest
Without getting too much farther off thread, to murder someone you have to be insane; its obvious that they are not thinking rationally; what person in their right mind would kill another living, breathing individual? You risk going to jail for live or in some cases, suffer the death penalty and I know of no one who’d risk it all for murdering someone.
That may sound a bit far-fetched to you, but if you really think about it, there’s some merit to my reasoning.
G
gilliam
Guest
State Department’s P.J. Crowley stepping down
**(CNN) **– P.J. Crowley is abruptly stepping down as State Department spokesman under pressure from White House officials because of controversial comments he made last week about the Bradley Manning case, CNN has learned from senior officials familiar with the matter.
politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/03/13/state-departments-p-j-crowley-stepping-down/
**(CNN) **– P.J. Crowley is abruptly stepping down as State Department spokesman under pressure from White House officials because of controversial comments he made last week about the Bradley Manning case, CNN has learned from senior officials familiar with the matter.
politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/03/13/state-departments-p-j-crowley-stepping-down/
R
Rich_Olszewski
Guest
What do you mean by earlier times? The early 1800s?
A few rightwingers love to throw around the charge of treason. Their legal knowledge is nil. Treason is an almost impossible charge to prove and invariably fails. Even the famous Rosenbergs were only charged with and found guilty of Conspiracy to commit espionage. Had they been charged with treason, the prosecution wold not have been able to prove every element of the charge, and they’d have been free now or dead of natural causes.
G
Gift_from_God
Guest
They are torturing Manning. They are destroying his mind. You Americans are supposed to despise those who torture and keep political prisoners, yet it’s happening to one of your own.
Read the Catechism about torture
Read the Catechism about torture
G
Gift_from_God
Guest
He’s not on suicide watch
R
Rich_Olszewski
Guest
I am often perturbed by the disconnect between what my country professes and what it practices when it comes to things like that. Even during the disgusting Abu Ghraib tortures, numerous Americans sided with the torturers on the grounds that those Iraqis were, Geneva Convention be dam…d, our enemies and deserved what they got.
- Status