Bradley Manning - 35yrs in the slammer :(

Labelling Manning a traitor will just make people question your intellectual capacity for any debate on the subject. It's like when someone on TV speaks out about Islam and the host or interviewer immediately spins the racist line of questions.

Not a traitor, just someone who went about outing awful practices in a war-zone the wrong way.
 
Evangelion said:
I'm going to say this again: Manning was never accused of treason, and was acquitted of aiding the enemy.
Click to expand...

That wont matter the Chris. He made his mind up from whatever the Mail or Express told him at the time. You wont persuade him that a judge has a better legal opinion than him on what constitutes treason.

And then he is surprised I am against the death penalty if people like him were the ones making decisions.
 
tres said:
No sympathy for traitors even if it highlighted illegal activities and the murder of civilians, which would otherwise have gone undetected and unopposed?
Click to expand...
That's not what Manning did though is it? She had a duty to her country not to betray confidentiality, if she was aware of illegal activities then whistleblowing them alone may have been justifiable, leaking everything isn't. If Obama commuted the sentence of Chelsea Manning then why not also Robert Hanssen? Both the same in my book.
 
scorza said:
If Obama commuted the sentence of Chelsea Manning then why not also Robert Hanssen? Both the same in my book.
Click to expand...

Robert Philip Hanssen (born April 18, 1944) is a former U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agent who spied for Soviet and Russian intelligence services against the United States for 22 years from 1979 to 2001. He is currently serving 15 consecutive life sentences at ADX Florence, a federal supermax prison near Florence, Colorado.

Hanssen was arrested on February 18, 2001, at Foxstone Park] near his home in Vienna, Virginia, and was charged with selling U.S. secrets to the Soviet Union and subsequently the Russian Federation for more than US$1.4 million in cash and diamonds over a 22-year period.
Click to expand...

(Source)

You seriously can't see the difference between this guy and Manning?

:confused:
 
She had a duty to her country not to betray confidentiality
Click to expand...

Didn't Trump with the Israeli intelligence that they did not want sharing, and he named the city where the source came from (I know he's allowed to declassify)?
 
scorza said:
That's not what Manning did though is it? She had a duty to her country not to betray confidentiality, if she was aware of illegal activities then whistleblowing them alone may have been justifiable, leaking everything isn't. If Obama commuted the sentence of Chelsea Manning then why not also Robert Hanssen? Both the same in my book.
Click to expand...

Whistleblow to who? The US media? Ha!
 
Great counter argument there scorza! That made no sense.

My point was, if you saw things that were illegal and immoral, people dying, and completely hidden from public knowledge, how would you do something about it?

A) Do nothing. Which is what the vast majority of people do/would do.
B) Whistleblow (as you suggested) - but to who? Media? As I'm sure you know, media source anonymity is a romantic idea from a bygone era
C) Publish it. Leak it. People will see, and demand answers. Which is what happened.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not 100% agreeing with his/her actions. As has been mentioned, the exposed events seem to happen a lot. Some may argue are even necessary for 'country security' etc. There is the very real risk that US soldiers (in this case) would get hurt in retribution.

But you seem very black or white. No thought about why it was done, other than it was wrong in your eyes therefore throw away the key.
 
Well when the NSA hide vulnerabilities such that the NHS basically collapsed for a day, yes... it's time it was made public.

Otherwise i'll be asking why potentially people died because of some crappy ideology, when the agencies should be protecting us.
 
tres said:
Great counter argument there scorza! That made no sense.

My point was, if you saw things that were illegal and immoral, people dying, and completely hidden from public knowledge, how would you do something about it?

A) Do nothing. Which is what the vast majority of people do/would do.
B) Whistleblow (as you suggested) - but to who? Media? As I'm sure you know, media source anonymity is a romantic idea from a bygone era
C) Publish it. Leak it. People will see, and demand answers. Which is what happened.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not 100% agreeing with his/her actions. As has been mentioned, the exposed events seem to happen a lot. Some may argue are even necessary for 'country security' etc. There is the very real risk that US soldiers (in this case) would get hurt in retribution.

But you seem very black or white. No thought about why it was done, other than it was wrong in your eyes therefore throw away the key.
Click to expand...
Yeah you're right, I would do A) nothing because I'm not a traitor, but as said - that isn't what happened. Manning simply released whatever he could because it suited his purposes - to hurt the USA, his own country. The fact there was evidence of illegal activity is irrelevant, if he was so concerned then he should have released that and only that - I personally doubt he even saw anything like that, he was just a misfit who had had enough of the programme and wanted to be a rebel.
 
tres said:
Are you saying you would never "become a traitor" as you put it? No matter what you saw?
Click to expand...
No I'm saying I wouldn't download as much classified info as possible and publish it on the open internet, and if I did I wouldn't start crying about how unfair it all is that I'm locked up for the next 35 years. Manning is lucky that she isn't in ADX Florence with some of the people her actions aided.

Tefal said:
So scorza is going for the Guards of Auschwitz "i was only following orders" defense?
Click to expand...
Straw man fallacy there I'm afraid, do try harder.
 
scorza said:
Straw man fallacy there I'm afraid, do try harder.
Click to expand...


nope not at all you said if you saw


things that were illegal and immoral, people dying, and completely hidden from public knowledge
Click to expand...


you would do nothing.

that scenario exactly describes the guards position at Auschwitz and your response exactly describes their actions.

"im not a traitor, i just follow orders".



or are you saying its a straw man due to it being a question of scale?

if so where is your threshold for treachery?

10 deaths?

100?

1000?

etc, what level of "illegal and immoral" killings is required before you stop "doing nothing"?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom