After three years in the brig and at least a year of
torture enhanced incarceration, Bradley Manning has been
found guilty of five counts of violating the Espionage Act and five counts of theft – but NOT guilty of aiding the enemy.
Opinions about this are inevitably going to vary, and you pretty much know what people are going to say about it – i.e. exactly the same things they’ve been saying since Manning was identified as the person who leaked things to Wikileaks. Everyone made up their mind about this case and what it means on a macro level years ago, and I don't expect that to change with this verdict.
As for my own view, I’ll start by highlighting
this comment from Elizabeth Goitein, co-director of the Liberty and National Security Program at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University Law School.
“Manning is one of very few people ever charged under the Espionage Act prosecutions for leaks to the media. The only other person who was convicted after trial was pardoned. Despite the lack of any evidence that he intended any harm to the United States, Manning faces decades in prison. That’s a very scary precedent.”
I do think the Manning case sends a message to would-be whistleblowers hoping to unmask cover-ups of govt shenanigans – make sure you hole up in a Moscow airport transit terminal before they find out who you are.
Okay, I’m being flip. But not entirely. Presidente Obama has made it clear throughout this case and also the Fast Eddie Snowden saga that when he said back in 2008 that he thought govt whistleblowers were patriotic heroes who should have more protection under the law, he meant “so long as you don’t go blowing any whistles at me”.
Not that Obama ever actually promised anything like that. You won’t find anything like that on any of his official web sites.
Not anymore. And in the 21st century, deleting stuff is the same thing as having never said it.
And so here we are, in a world where the US Govt does no wrong, and anyone who can demonstrate otherwise with classified documents is an enemy of the state.
As for Manning, I understand his motivations, and I think the whole “traitor” label was overblown and overused by people silly enough to believe that the War On Terrorz is an actual war. Also, it’s fairly obvious that his real crime in the eyes of the govt isn’t so much what he leaked as who he leaked it to, though the prosecution has long since made it clear that if Manning had gotten the New York Times to take him seriously, they’d
still have charged him with treason.
Even if we accept the idea that Manning technically broke the law and therefore has to go to jail no matter his intentions, it’s also worth mentioning that of all the misdeeds and possible war crimes Manning exposed, none of them have been investigated or prosecuted.
So there’s another message from Team Obama to you: if the US govt ever does anything illegal, we promise to prosecute the hell out of the person who tells you, and make an example of them until you forget what it was they were trying to tell you in the first place.
And then there’s that
torture enhanced incarceration I mentioned in the first paragraph. But never mind that.
The US does not torture, ever, and Manning actually got a
112-day prison credit out of it, so it’s not like he has anything to complain about.
BONUS TRACK: Bruce Schneier has a very good argument for whistleblowing. It is
here.
Blame the messenger,
This is dF