Bradley Manning Hearing Ends with No Clear Sign of Harm Done to US

[nanook 1]

Quote

An exercise if you will. . .

shut down the wars, bring the troops home. 1/2 the 'secrets' we keep will no longer be necessary.

Now I'm with you

_____________________________

"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln

[normiss 806]

One more nail today

[RonD1120 62]

Quote

One more nail today

On NPR today, a lawyer stated that a not guilty plea is required if the charges are capital offenses. He must choose to proceed with a full courts martial.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[tkhayes 348]

hmm, did not see 'treason' in there....so much for THAT angle.

[nanook 1]

"treason" is not a charge in itself. "Aiding the Enemy", which is what he is being charged with is a type of treason.

_____________________________

"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln

[RonD1120 62]

Quote

"treason" is not a charge in itself. "Aiding the Enemy", which is what he is being charged with is a type of treason.

Thank you for pointing that out.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[tkhayes 348]

From the UCMJ:

Quote

904. ART. 104. AIDING THE ENEMY

Any person who--

(1) aids, or attempts to aid, the enemy with arms, ammunition, supplies, money, or other things; or

(2) without proper authority, knowingly harbors or [protects or gives intelligence to or communicates or corresponds with or holds any intercourse with the enemy, either directly or indirectly;

shall suffer death or such other punishment as a court-martial or military commission may direct.

He gave no information to the enemy, he gave it to Wikileaks. Wikileaks has not been declared an enemy. For that matter, Afghanistan, the Taliban have not been declared enemies either......given that no formal declaration of war was implemented with either Iraq nor Afghanistan, I expect that the definition of 'enemy' is pretty muddled here.

But as usual, the right wing is welcome to take away civil and human rights and avoid the Constitution when it suits them.

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

But as usual, the right wing is welcome to take away civil and human rights and avoid the Constitution when it suits them.

Our goobermint...gotta love 'em.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[matthewcline 0]

Quote

From the UCMJ:

Quote

904. ART. 104. AIDING THE ENEMY

Any person who--

(1) aids, or attempts to aid, the enemy with arms, ammunition, supplies, money, or other things; or

(2) without proper authority, knowingly harbors or [protects or gives intelligence to or communicates or corresponds with or holds any intercourse with the enemy, either directly or indirectly;

shall suffer death or such other punishment as a court-martial or military commission may direct.

He gave no information to the enemy, he gave it to Wikileaks. Wikileaks has not been declared an enemy. For that matter, Afghanistan, the Taliban have not been declared enemies either......given that no formal declaration of war was implemented with either Iraq nor Afghanistan, I expect that the definition of 'enemy' is pretty muddled here.

But as usual, the right wing is welcome to take away civil and human rights and avoid the Constitution when it suits them.

Does the declaration by the POTUS and Congress need to be in writing or on TV?

if it never happened, it makes all the flip flop arguments pretty stupid now.

But Manning still violated the UCMJ, and was charged as such. 904 -2, "indirectly"

You don't have to agree, but he signed a contract to follow those additional rules. He admitted he was acting out not because he was trying to expose any thing, he was troubled by HIS demons (what ever those are).

The deep cover intel assets that did or did not get burned will take years in some cases to figure out.

The amount of money spent flying around the world kissing ass was a huge waste, but as it is, some countries are now back to hating us since the leak, like they did years before.

I agree the GOV should be accountable, I agree the GOV does stupid and bad shit. But in this case I agree with Manning being prosecuted under the UCMJ.

Matt

An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!

[nanook 1]

Quote

From the UCMJ:

Quote

904. ART. 104. AIDING THE ENEMY

Any person who--

(1) aids, or attempts to aid, the enemy with arms, ammunition, supplies, money, or other things; or

(2) without proper authority, knowingly harbors or [protects or gives intelligence to or communicates or corresponds with or holds any intercourse with the enemy, either directly or indirectly;

shall suffer death or such other punishment as a court-martial or military commission may direct.

He gave no information to the enemy, he gave it to Wikileaks. Wikileaks has not been declared an enemy. For that matter, Afghanistan, the Taliban have not been declared enemies either......given that no formal declaration of war was implemented with either Iraq nor Afghanistan, I expect that the definition of 'enemy' is pretty muddled here.

But as usual, the right wing is welcome to take away civil and human rights and avoid the Constitution when it suits them.

Right Wing? Nope, its the military courts that is prosecuting him. How would you know the individual political leanings of the people in the JAG community?


Reread (2) again. Especially the"directly or indirectly" part. Assange may not be the enemy but his organization allows for the enemy to have access. And Manning allowed for that the happen intentionally and purposely. Is this a stretch? It just may be. But the treason charge is one of several and being found not guilty for "aiding the enemy" by itself will not exonerate him. He broke a lot of rules that by themselves will keep him in jail for a long while.

Besides, who says you have to be at war with the "enemy"? Remember the Cold War? And who said an enemy has to be a Nation?

_____________________________

"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

He gave no information to the enemy, he gave it to Wikileaks.

You mean, he gave it to an entity he knew would publish to the world, including "the enemy."

I'd say it's a good thing you're not his attorney, but I've heard his and it's not pretty at all. Of course, polishing a turd is a tall order for anyone.

[tkhayes 348]

with these last three responses, I rest my case - well said in fact.

publishing the stuff to anyone is not that same as aiding the enemy. GIVING it to the enemy might and only might be aiding the enemy. Nothing that was leaked actually aided anyone - hence the title of the thread.

The enemy has NOT be declared, and a large part of the backlash within the USA over these wars was in fact the lack for a formal declaration of any sort of war.

So am I splitting hairs?. you fucking bet I am. Are the military splitting hairs trying to prosecute him? You fucking bet they are.

[devildog 0]

Quote

But as usual, the right wing is welcome to take away civil and human rights and avoid the Constitution when it suits them.

*cough* National Defense Authorization Act. *cough*

You stop breathing for a few minutes and everyone jumps to conclusions.

[tkhayes 348]

Quote

You don't have to agree, but he signed a contract to follow those additional rules.

Then he is guilty of dereliction of duty, not treason or aiding the enemy.

The soldier that murdered 24 civilians just got off with dereliction of duty, no jail time and did not even get a dishonorable discharge.

[tkhayes 348]

Quote

...Especially the"directly or indirectly"....

So let me see.

he is guilty of treason....

well, actually 'aiding the enemy' is a form of treason...

well actually maybe not directly, but 'indirectly'......

Just how far away from 'evidence' are you trying to get? You just verified that his case is based on an opinion. You just made the case for the defense. thanks for that.

If that is 'aiding the enemy', then anyone who has ever made a comment or wrote a post or an op-ed piece about the wars, good or bad, is by the same logic, guilty of treason.

[RonD1120 62]

You realize that you are arguing against someone's imagined utopia, don't you?

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[matthewcline 0]

Quote

Quote

You don't have to agree, but he signed a contract to follow those additional rules.

Then he is guilty of dereliction of duty, not treason or aiding the enemy.

The soldier that murdered 24 civilians just got off with dereliction of duty, no jail time and did not even get a dishonorable discharge.

Both will be tried in the system they agreed to follow by contract. Both will be punished in the same system.

For the sake of clarity, Congress gave the POTUS the authority in Sept 2001 to do as he needed. AQ Declared War on the US and all it western allies. Germany, France and numerous other Countries (86?) said it was a paraphrased "a war declared on the US and Western Society".

IMO, that seems sufficient.

Again, he is being tried in a military court for military infractions.

Matt

An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!

[nanook 1]

Quote

You realize that you are arguing against someone's imagined utopia, don't you?

Yup. but I like the exercise. We get some alternative or inexperienced opinions in the Navy sometimes. When they make mistakes and on their way up to an "Article 15" (We call it Captains Mast) we get some Speaker's Corners-esque validation of how things should be like. I don't blame them or hold an opinion on them, they just don't understand and are inexperienced in their area. When you don't have to live with the life or consequences, its easy to make an uninformed opinion.

_____________________________

"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln

[tkhayes 348]

Quote

...they just don't understand and are inexperienced in their area.

what sort of 'experience' does one need when they see videos of helicopter gunships mowing down unarmed civilians and then thinks its OK that someone made that public?

And I 'understand' the need for that...

But sure I also 'understand' the need for the 'military' or any other organization to NOT want that to be seen, otherwise, OMG, someone might want to end the war or some such crazy idea like that. CRAZY TALK...I know!!

[normiss 806]

When you are on the receiving end of weapons fire, from an enemy that hides in plain sight within the civilian population, THEN you can address what you see on the packaged news.

Me, I give the military quite a bit of leeway with their rules of engagement. I understand how urban fighting has changed what we think we see.