Bradley Manning VS. The NSA Leaker

Finger_Shocker

Finger_Shocker

CAGiversary!
Feedback
7 (100%)
Well it seems the gov't is trying to hunt down one of their own who exposed what the gov't was doing..

I however did notice on all the message board as to what a hero this guy/gal was for exposing the wiretapping, yet many people on the same message board are ok with condemning Manning as a traitor...

Manning was the one who exposed how the US army MURDERED innocent AP journalists and covered it up, scapegoating the journalists as terrorists because they were loading weapons ( camera equipment ) on to their truck

I don't see how the same people who applaud the NSA leaker would condemn Manning...

 
It's that selfish mentality that has become the backbone of "real" Americans.  They don't care if the military or its cronies killed a lot of innocent people in a country they can't find on a map, what they care is if their own rights, or what they believe to be their rights, infringed.  They're complaining about the Verizon mess because their "privacy" is at stake, even though they'll be A-OKAY on snitching on their neighbor if someone tells them they may be involved in some suspicious activities.

 
Snowden himself made a compelling case.

Snowden said that he admires both Ellsberg and Manning, but argues that there is one important distinction between himself and the army private, whose trial coincidentally began the week Snowden's leaks began to make news.

"I carefully evaluated every single document I disclosed to ensure that each was legitimately in the public interest," he said. "There are all sorts of documents that would have made a big impact that I didn't turn over, because harming people isn't my goal. Transparency is."

He purposely chose, he said, to give the documents to journalists whose judgment he trusted about what should be public and what should remain concealed.
Click to expand...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/09/edward-snowden-nsa-whistleblower-surveillance?guni=Network%20front:network-front%20full-width-1%20bento-box:Bento%20box:position1

Snowden was moved by something that he felt was wrong and acted out of a sense of patriotism. He carefully selected only the documents pertaining to that issue AND which would not cause harm to anyone, and provided them to those he considered to be responsible journalists. He was also fully prepared to accept the consequences of his actions.

Manning's motives are questionable at best, he claims to have been moved by an event but also blames his behavior on emotional instability and gender issues. Whatever the case may be, instead of selecting only the information relevant to his cause he simply dumped ALL of the classified data he had access to with absolutely no consideration for what was in the public interest.

Ellsberg and Snowden are heroes. Manning at best was misguided and irresponsible.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree completely with the OP it is ridiculously hypocritical to call Manning a traitor and this guy a hero.  Both are heroes in my book.  Manning more so for the simple fact that he held nothing back and dumped everything he could get his hands on.  Snowden has already said he held back things that were also pretty big just because they endangered lives.  Many may see that as a good thing, I personally don't.  If you are involved in something shady hidden from the American public you deserve to be outed and have to accept whatever punishment comes your way.

 
While it doesn't dimish what he did, the fact that he ran to China is hilariously stupid..considering Hong Kong has similar surveillance in place .

Typical millennial

 
usickenme said:
While it doesn't dimish what he did, the fact that he ran to China is hilariously stupid..considering Hong Kong has similar surveillance in place .

Typical millennial
Click to expand...
I am sure the guy that works with cyber security and deals with classified documents knows a little about hiding than you.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
usickenme said:
Oh the hero worship is ADORABLE.

Its not about "hiding" out. His problem was with gov't policy/ internet freedom. GET IT?

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/07/world/asia/07hong.html?_r=0

Perhaps he should've picked Estonia or Iceland
Click to expand...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2013/06/09/icelandic-legislator-im-ready-to-help-nsa-whistleblower-seek-asylum/

Snowden, who left his home in Hawaii in May and is taking refuge in a Hong Kong hotel, noted his interest in seeking asylum in Iceland in the Guardian’s interview, telling the newspaper that his ”predisposition is to seek asylum in a country with shared values, The nation that most encompasses this is Iceland,” he said. “They stood up for people over internet freedom.”
Click to expand...
As for the OP: Manning, Snowden, and Ellsberg are all heroes.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am curious as to where in the world this guy could ever hide...

He is not hiding from some wank ass backward country because he exposed them, he exposed the CURRENT SUPERPOWER in the world, the WORLD POLICE... You think a country like Iceland or Estonia or whatnota land can ever protect him from the might of the USA?

I wonder when Obama will sign his death warrant, I hear the president can authorize citizen assassination these days.

 
Piggybacking on what Finger_Shocker said, I think Snowden's days are numbered, but he will not be assassinated right away, in my opinion. I think that if he travels his plane will end up going down due to mechanical error, even if there are innocent people aboard. We should start a betting pool.

mrsilkunderwear said:
Interesting tidbit about Edward Snowden here.
Click to expand...
Was anyone really wondering if he was a mainstream Republican or Democrat?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
usickenme said:
Oh the hero worship is ADORABLE.

Its not about "hiding" out. His problem was with gov't policy/ internet freedom. GET IT?

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/07/world/asia/07hong.html?_r=0

Perhaps he should've picked Estonia or Iceland
Click to expand...
So you consider him a traitor?

So if this is because of the government policy/internet freedom automatically means he has to travel to the most anarchic country there is instead of seeking a country where he might get some limited protection? Hmm ok...

Spokker said:
Piggybacking on what Finger_Shocker said, I think Snowden's days are numbered, but he will not be assassinated right away, in my opinion. I think that if he travels his plane will end up going down due to mechanical error, even if there are innocent people aboard. We should start a betting pool.

mrsilkunderwear said:
Interesting tidbit about Edward Snowden here.
Click to expand...
Was anyone really wondering if he was a mainstream Republican or Democrat?
Click to expand...
That link wasn't about party affiliation.

 
I think you are missing my point here. 

I think what he did was stand-up. I don't think he is a traitor and I think he should be free to return to the USA without consequence.  I am not "demanding" that he go to some archaic country to be safe. (although I wouldn't consider either be such)

But if his issue with government surveillance of the internet, the choice of Hong Kong (China) is stupid and hypocritical. It's like a vegan quitting work at McDonalds because they serve meat and going to work for Burger King. 

It is entirely possible to criticize one element of this guys story without criticizing the rest, ya know. 

 
I respect the fuck out of both these guys for what they've done. I know I wouldn't have the intestinal fortitude to pull what they did, knowing that it could more or less mean the end of my life. In Snowden's case, making his identity public was likely the smartest move he could have made. I think it gives him an extra layer of protection, that and it helps get the American people on his side (which seems to be working if the internet is any indication).

 
usickenme said:
I think you are missing my point here.

I think what he did was stand-up. I don't think he is a traitor and I think he should be free to return to the USA without consequence. I am not "demanding" that he go to some archaic country to be safe. (although I wouldn't consider either be such)

But if his issue with government surveillance of the internet, the choice of Hong Kong (China) is stupid and hypocritical. It's like a vegan quitting work at McDonalds because they serve meat and going to work for Burger King.

It is entirely possible to criticize one element of this guys story without criticizing the rest, ya know.
Click to expand...
Hong Kong doesn't have the same restrictions on free speech that mainland China does.

 
usickenme said:
I think you are missing my point here.

I think what he did was stand-up. I don't think he is a traitor and I think he should be free to return to the USA without consequence. I am not "demanding" that he go to some archaic country to be safe. (although I wouldn't consider either be such)

But if his issue with government surveillance of the internet, the choice of Hong Kong (China) is stupid and hypocritical. It's like a vegan quitting work at McDonalds because they serve meat and going to work for Burger King.

It is entirely possible to criticize one element of this guys story without criticizing the rest, ya know.
Click to expand...
Oh I get what your saying. Hong Kong as Clak funnily mentioned is actually much better when it comes to restrictions even compared to some European countries. Nonetheless I do not think you should focus so much on the China's policies as I think the main reason he went there is to be temporarily safe. He could have gone to Canada for example but I doubt they would offer any protection therefore why not go to US's biggest competitor? Now if he is smart he will keep moving until everything dies down and hopefully the government will not pursue vengeance.

 
I can't honestly hope that any juries would dare convict him if he came back to America to face justice..

If a jury would dare convict someone over holding the gov't accountable we are in real deep shit where this country is headed.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
usickenme said:
While it doesn't dimish what he did, the fact that he ran to China is hilariously stupid..considering Hong Kong has similar surveillance in place .

Typical millennial
Click to expand...
Of course they have surveillance and I'm sure his expertise lends him to be far more knowledgeable than you or I on this especially since he decided to take this position. He has made his point by leaking this info and now he needs to go somewhere where he is SAFE from US tentacles. Who cares if the Chinese are watching him? If they are, then you know what? He might be SAFER. You think the Chinese would tolerate US covert agents on their soil? Would be a GREAT plan for them to catch the US on their soil.

Some good points which might make more sense to you that a commenter posted on the RP donation article:


1) If I’m Snowden, Hong Kong is perfect. Chinese air space so no drone strikes on his hotel room.
2) U.S. doesn’t have very many operatives of Chinese or Asian ethnicity to blackbag him off the street either, something they might’ve tried had he gone to any European country, Switzerland included.
3) Hoping and praying he can get to an embassy in Hong Kong, maybe that of Ecuador since they’ve already offered Assange asylum
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
He maybe safe for now, but I'm sure the Chinese will keep him safe because he is a valuable tool...  I wonder when the Chinese will kidnap and torture him for info?

Hong Kong has a long history of protecting the press ....LOLZ!!!!  He must not have remember the whole Edison Chen scandal

He know operatives who works for the USA, ever country will want a piece of him, he basically have no real place to run, what he knows put him in danger and every country will want to get this info out of him.

Giving a interview to the BBC, the media runned by the same country who is even worst then the USA when it comes to citizens privacy rights?

His family member could never travel overseas again, because they are now all targets by foreign gov'ts who can use them as blackmail

And I'm sure the FBI, NSA, and every secret US ops ain't all over his family and friends...  Unless your family and friends are physically and emotionally strong, FBI tactics will surely push them to the breaking point...  They did it to Bruce Edwards Ivins

The sad point in all of this, is that NO ONE in gov't have come out to stand up for this guy, everyone who opposed or are angry at Obama and his admin, have not said one word about this leaker, or even offer their support.

We are all sheeps and pawns of our gov't....

It is truely sad that the ones who are standing up for YOUR RIGHTS and PROTECTING your rights,   Stand alone at the end

 
If you're questioning the wisdom of his choice of Hong Kong...  The port of Hong Kong is the busiest port in the fucking world.  They do not pretend to try to control what flows in and out, trivial to slip in and slip out, and now he has not been seen in some time...

If there's one thing that's clear, he's thought this through.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well I hope Hong Kong police are good at stopping the Triads....

The USA CIA/FBI have no problem working with criminals and terrorists when it suits them.

His death ain't going wake anyone up...  Most people already prove that they rather have a job, a home and some money in the bank...  To them freedom has no value.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
dafoomie said:
If you're questioning the wisdom of his choice of Hong Kong... The port of Hong Kong is the busiest port in the fucking world. They do not pretend to try to control what flows in and out, trivial to slip in and slip out, and now he has not been seen in some time...

If there's one thing that's clear, he's thought this through.
Click to expand...

oh boy. You've been playing too many games. This guys isn't Sam Fisher or some super genius (GED much?).

Singapore, Shanghi, perhaps Rotterdam, Shenzen are busier with 5 Other chinese ports being larger.

--------------

and at least one Senator gets it...

Sen. Jon Tester (D-MT)

""The information that they wrote about was just the fact that NSA was doing broad sweeps of foreign and domestic phone records, metadata. First of all, Snowden probably shouldn't have done what he did. But the fact of the matter is is I don't see how that compromises the security of this country whatsoever," Tester said. "And quite frankly, it helps people like me become aware of a situation that I wasn't aware of before because I don't sit on that Intelligence Committee." "

 
Last edited by a moderator:
And people here wonder why conspiracy exists.....

The gov't have long conspire and lied to us.....they are worst then the mob... At least I can throw the mob in prison, where can we throw gov't officals to... They never lose their job, they just become corporate lobbyists.

Maybe if some of you people pay attention, THE GOV'T IS NOT SPYING ON YOU, it is the the GOV'T who work toe in toe with PRIVATE CORPORATIONS that are doing that...  The regular gov't employee to senator to congressmen is too stupid to even know how to possibly turn on a computer.  This is all work done in a gov't-quasi private business venture: corporatism just like Nazi Gemany

 
Here is some interesting tibit...

Michael Hastings, the fearless journalist whose reporting brought down the career of General Stanley McChrystal, has died in a car accident in Los Angeles, Rolling Stone has learned. He was 33.......While covering the Iraq war for Newsweek in early 2007, his then-fianceé, an aide worker, was killed in a Baghdad car bombing. ........A contributing editor to Rolling Stone, Hastings leaves behind a remarkable legacy of reporting, including an exposé of America's drone war, an exclusive interview with WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange at his hideout in the English countryside, an investigation into the Army's illicit use of "psychological operations" to influence sitting Senators and a profile of Taliban captive Bowe Bergdahl, "America's Last Prisoner of War." http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...k=mostpopular3

 
The US Prosecutors have rested their case on Bradley Manning in case you were too busy wondering if Snowden has become Tom Hanks in the Terminal. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jul/02/bradley-manning-wikileaks-trial-government-rests  It looks like the Army screwed up big in trying their case against the soldier, as they purposefully destroyed evidence that would've made their case super rock hard solid, especially the agreements that Manning signed stating that he would not leak information.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
If it's a crime to expose a crime then we're run by criminals.  I don't agree with all his actions, but he shouldn't be given punishments bigger than rape and other such stuff

 
UncleBob said:
I'm thrilled the courts figured out that the American people aren't the enemy. :D
Click to expand...
It's neither here nor there, but I think Snowden's a turd and Manning is a fucking American hero for the ages. No sarcasm. The balls it took to release that shit is legendary.

Having said that, that dude dropped a shit ton (and shit ton doesn't even cover it) of unredacted information describing operations and individuals giving us intelligence. Aiding the enemy was a pretty logical charge against him.

 
speedracer said:
...Manning is a fucking American hero for the ages. No sarcasm. The balls it took to release that shit is legendary.

Having said that, that dude dropped a shit ton (and shit ton doesn't even cover it) of unredacted information describing operations and individuals giving us intelligence. Aiding the enemy was a pretty logical charge against him.
Click to expand...
It seems like I agree with you, but are you saying Manning should have done things a bit differently? Meaning, should he have had someone (himself?) look over the information and exclude some before delivering it in one big batch?

I'm just curious since I don't know a lot of what was contained in all those files aside from a few of the most notorious documents, like some of the war crimes videos.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
ID2006 said:
It seems like I agree with you, but are you saying Manning should have done things a bit differently? Meaning, should he have had someone (himself?) look over the information and exclude some before delivering it in one big batch?

I'm just curious since I don't know a lot of what was contained in all those files aside from a few of the most notorious documents, like some of the war crimes videos.
Click to expand...
The number of docs was so gigantic that no one person could possibly vet them all before release. It turns out that some of them had the names of people providing intelligence to us. That's a serious, serious issue.

I don't know what the answer is. I understand why he chose to go to Wikileaks. I don't think not releasing was an option given his motivation. When all said and done, I think he did the right thing, but there was certainly some bad things released along with the good. Like virtually everything, this isn't unambiguously good.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/08/14/20020933-im-sorry-that-i-hurt-the-united-states-bradley-manning-apologizes-in-court?lite

Manning has made his plea to the judges regarding his sentencing.  The article details how much stress he was put under while in service, especially to the point where he thought he should live as a woman, according to a military psychiatrist.  Of course the media pundits are going to jump on this and start attacking Manning's "predilection" toward transsexuality, even though that's not the real point of his story.  Were they really expecting him to get suicidal or homicidal like the veterans in our country today, where they barely get enough help?

 
I think something on the order of 10 years would be appropriate.  Low enough in consideration of his circumstances and contrition but severe enough to deter others and to reflect the recklessness of his actions.  He would be a free man at 35.

 
BBC guy just asked this question on twitter. I think it's a fucking great question.

Arriving at Fort Meade for Manning sentence - what will he get compared to Bales (Afghan massacre) ?
Click to expand...
Bales is that soldier that freaked out and killed 16 civilians in cold blood.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top