By publishing secret documents, would you say Julian Assange and Chelsea Manning are patriots or a traitors?
Patriot or traitor are attributes dependent on motive and consequences.Julian Assange is a sociopathic political vandal who sought to (and arguably did) influence the U.S.’s 2016 presidential election, therefore destroying the U.S.’s opportunity of electing the best qualified candidate for its presidency ever presented in its history.As private Bradley Manning, Chelsea Manning sought to and did expose the U.S.’s war crimes and policy hypocrisy in its conduct of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Manning is apparently considered to be heroic, given that he has been honored as "Whistleblowerpreis" by the German Section of the International Association of Lawyers against Nuclear Arms and the Federation of German Scientists.In 2012, she was awarded "People's Choice Award" awarded by Global Exchange.In 2013, she was awarded the Sean MacBride Peace Prize by the International Peace Bureau.In 2014, she was awarded the Sam Adams Award by Sam Adams Associates for Integrity in Intelligence.Icelandic and Swedish Pirate Party MPs nominated Manning and fellow whistleblower Edward Snowden for the 2014 Nobel Peace Prize. In a statement to the Nomination Committee, the Pirate Party members said Manning and Snowden "have inspired change and encouraged public debate and policy changes that contributed to a more stable and peaceful world".In 2013, Roots Action launched a petition nominating Manning for the prize that received more than 100,000 supporting signatures.ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chelsea_Manning#Awards_and_tributes
Was the information Bradley Manning revealed dangerous or embarrassing?
The information was embarrassing to US authorities because it revealed crimes committed by US personnel.The documents containing that information should never have been classified!“In no case shall information be classified… in order to: conceal violations of law, inefficiency, or administrative error; prevent embarrassment to a person, organization, or agency… or prevent or delay the release of information that does not require protection in the interest of the national security.”—Executive Order 13526, Sec. 1.7. Classification Prohibitions and LimitationsHere are some of the crimes revealed by Manning to WikiLeaksThanks to Rupert Baines for alerting me to this great WikiLeaks site revealing the embarrassing information Manning is being prosecuted for revealing.
Whistleblowing: Why do Julian Assange and Bradley Manning have so much popular support?
If the allegations against him are true, Bradley Manning caused the illegal shooting of unarmed civilians, journalists and children by the US military in Baghdad in 2007 to be made public. It's essential for citizens in a democracy to know what elected officials and the military are doing on our dime and in our name. If there is wrongdoing, we need to know about it. That is why Daniel Ellsberg has been so vocal in defending Manning, and in pointing out that Manning was motivated by conscience. Manning is suffering the same kind of persecution that Ellsberg did, and for much the same reasons.This brings us to what makes Julian Assange's work so valuable. The stated aim of WikiLeaks is to let any corrupt person in power know that he is at risk of exposure; to create a curb against corruption. Because too many in the media, in corporations and governments, either ignore or actively collude with corrupt officials and executives in order to conceal wrongdoing. Even if the media refuses to do its job, organizations like WikiLeaks can step in to protect the public.There is a benefit to the public, too, in that the very existence of WikiLeaks is shaming the mainstream media out of its long nap, and encouraging conventional journalists to begin taking some risks and telling us the truth again.
What are your thoughts about the Manning case?
Bradley Manning knowingly forfeited government secrets to someone who was not cleared to have them. It's treason. He should be shot.I'm not trying to be cold. But there are simple lines here.1. Manning turned over hundreds of files to which he could not possible have known all of the ramifications/implications of. This does not indicate that he was doing it with the intent of exposing a wrong doing by the US, he was acting at best irresponsible, at worst maliciously.2. If Manning believed there was something for which a member or members of the US government should be exposed for, there are dozens of checks and balances within the system he could have gone to which would have both corrected the problem AND maintained national security.3. He may be young, but he isn't a child. He is a grown man, fully trained in the armed forces. He swore an oath to his country and is part of an unspoken brotherhood in arms which he knowingly betrayed.4. Releasing documents like this is NOT a victimless crime. Classified information, when leaked, causes huge back blow. At best, some operations were exposed and abandoned which would leave holes in our national security. At worst, people who were working clandestinely to benefit the security of American citizens were exposed and killed.This kind of crime is against Bradley Manning's brothers in arms, his country, his family, and everyone else that put their faith in him, as a uniformed serviceman, to protect our Nation. As a society, we can't allow that kind of treachery.
What is the difference between Snowden and Assange? If secrets are to be exposed at the expense of possible war/ soured relations, is the leakage of secrets really right?
Snowden is a source. Assange is a publisher. Both had somewhat unusual starts to their careers. Assange is more than a decade older. Both are highly accomplished computer security experts. Assange is probably a better hacker, while Snowden knows more about operational methods.No leak derived from Snowden's material or publications by wikileaks has been shown to cause a death to anyone. On the other hand, both sources have provided evidence for a LOT of official law breaking and many tens of thousands of previously unacknowledged deaths in the war on terror.Personally, Snowden is described as quiet, calm, confident, and affable. Assange has a more prominent public persona, but is almost certainly not equal to all the slander that has been bandied about. He is paranoid (but often correct), didactic but knowledgeable, and like Snowden confident and capable. The activities of wikileaks are protected in the US by the first amendment, which recognises the vital necessity of a free press to democracy. And wikileaks has certainly revealed a lot of information that should be in the public domain - and not all of it is just from the US state department! Similarly, whistleblowers and leakers have a long and storied tradition in providing accountability and vital public information about official wrongdoing.
Is Julian Assange now facing US federal charges related to one of the largest ever leaks of government secrets?
yes…this goes back to the massive leaks by that traitor Manning , who btw was PARDONED by Obama!!!the only ones comparable were Snowden and the massive OPM breach.Obama idiots lost the most personal info of 22 MILLION Americans including every officer in the military all the way to the top, the head of every department and millions of civilians with clearances. did we "get them" who did it? naa it was swept under the freaking rug.Hacks of OPM databases compromised 22.1 million people"Federal authorities say Two major breaches last year of U.S. government databases holding personnel records and security-clearance files exposed sensitive information about at least 22.1 million people, including not only federal employees and contractors but their families and friends, U.S. officials said Thursday. The total vastly exceeds all previous estimates, and marks the most detailed accounting by the Office of Personnel Management of how many people were affected by cyber intrusions that U.S. officials have privately said were traced to the Chinese government. [What you need to know about the hack of government background investigations] But even beyond the rising number of apparent victims, U.S. officials said the breaches rank among the most potentially damaging cyber heists in U.S. government history because of the abundant detail in the files. Officials said hackers accessed not only personnel records of current and former employees but also extensive information about friends, relatives and others listed as references in applications for security clearances for some of the most sensitive jobs in government."https://www.washingtonpost.com/n...OPM: The worst hack of all timeThe federal government personnel security breach is bigger and worse than you can imagineOPM: The worst hack of all timeObama Backs Away From Sanctions on China for Cyber AttacksObama Backs Away From Sanctions on China for Cyber Attacks - Washington Free BeaconHere is the SF-86 form - China stole 22.1 MILLION of them including the info on every officer in the military, everyone in the Pentagon and millions of contractors with security clearances....a total disaster for us.https://www.opm.gov/forms/pdf_fi...
What is the significance of PFC Chelsea Manning's defense attorneys trying to get "aiding the enemy" charges dropped?
Simply put, the phrase "aiding the enemy" is a specific wording which is used as part of determining the offense of treason, which carries the death penalty. Acquittal removes the possibility of execution. So would getting the charges dropped. As a corollary, NOT getting the charges dropped serves to remind the members of the court martial , the defendant, and anyone considering like activity that the UCMJ considers this the ultimate wrongful behavior, and causes the defendant to know the decision of potentially being executed rests with the members of the court martial. In other words, the defendant has to "sweat" through the chance of being found guilty and then being executed. The acquittal is not the same as if the charges had been preemptively dropped in that proceeding to trial serves also to warn others of the stakes involved and to proclaim to others intent on releasing classified documents that it is indeed a life-or-death decision, as the vote may have been different and may be different in the future. Military leaders sometimes win spectacular victories by being able to "read" their opposite's intentions, so it is largely impossible for lay people to know why official secrets are secrets. The location and distribution of troops, their type, level of training are pretty obvious. Whether or not your water filter works doesn't seem quite so obvious, yet the Battle of Midway hinged on that question.