Obama and Bradley Manning

Manning’s just a “means” to a goal to them.
.
The real target is Assange, WikiLeaks, “Anonymous”, and anyone who, in the furture, might be tempted to identify with or support them.
.
My guess is that of the three, they’re “orders of magnitude” more concerned about “Anonymous”… WikiLeaks on steroids, hackers with a “bit in their teeth”.

Obama responded that if Manning’s treatment is good enough for the Pentagon, it is good enough for him.

Just a reminder that the actually ‘leadership’ of our country does NOT answer to the electorate. (or change between administrations)

True… but, in the not-to-distant past, they at least had the “courtesy” to appear to make a “good faith” attempt to reign them in.
.
Not sure they’re trying any more. The Pentagon/MIC is the closest thing we have to a “national jobs program” right now.

At moments like these (see also: FISA, GITMO), it’s hard to believe that President Obama was both a constitutional law professor and swore an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

I don’t like Manning but this does, as time goes by, appear as though we’re treating him like a drug dealer with less than an ounce of cocaine to 10 years of hard labor while the guy who owns the boatloads of it skates by.
.
Does BO even care?

Does BO even care?
.
Not really. Manning’s a “small fish” to them in all of this…
.
They’re hoping he’ll give them Assange…

Given all of the attention that’s being given to his “treatment”, let’s make the assumption that they DO get him to say “yes, Assange did everything you accuse him of doing”…
.
We’re back to the issue of statements obtained under torture or coercive treatment.
.
This time, the whole world knows some of the conditions of his incarceration, unlike at Gitmo, where they could plausibly deny what is being reported.
.
Where does THAT leave the government’s case against BOTH?

I am no fan of Bradley Manning’s conduct nor of what he is accused of doing. There is no excuse in this world for the brig officials to make this man stand naked for hours on end and in front of prisoners. Nothing justifiys this and Obama should be ashamed of his f%%$self for providing the lame a#@ excused and hiding behind DoD. The man never misses and opportunity to show how weak he is.

He asked the Pentagon and they told him everything was cool.. What an a@@hole.

“they have grown increasingly wary as the Obama administration has established itself as the most aggressive prosecutor of alleged government leakers in U.S. history.”
.
Let’s not lump all government leakers together. Manning did nothing noble here.

Of course he should believe them, gunny. After all… have they ever lied about anything?
.
(Now my cheek REALLY hurts…)

I thought that Bradley Manning was a soldier. I would think that his current treatment would be no worse than boot camp. It is certainly better than what some of our troops have to deal with in Afghanistan. Why all weeping and gnashing of teeth?

What did that JA expose that was detrimental to the security of the nation?
Far as I can tell, nothin’.
.
I don’t like him either but I don’t think he’s worth the trouble to reel in. I think he overplayed his had as far as self-importance goes.
.
Besides, he’s got women problems that are bigger than what he did.
Self-impotence might be a concern for him.

paulie,
.
Exactly WHAT would you know PERSONALLY about what the troops are dealing with in Afghanistan? Some of them sending you nude photos of themselves?
.
Do you know some that have to stand for hours naked with a female supervisor overseeing them?
.
I’d think their commander would frown on that.

I would think that his current treatment would be no worse than boot camp
.
Yes, you would. We’ll leave what that says about you as an exercise for the reader.

“Nothing justifiys this and Obama should be ashamed of his f%%$self for providing the lame a#@ excused and hiding behind DoD. The man never misses and opportunity to show how weak he is.”
.
Notwithstanding what I wrote earlier, let’s not lay all of the blame at his feet. I certainly haven’t seen any high dungeon from our media elites or the public at large over the fact that we have debased ourselves and everything we were supposed to stand for by constructing a torture program that did little more than provide a means for brutal revenge (mostly to people who had done nothing to us) and false confessions. Not to mention, the repeated constitutional travesties from the Clinton impeachment to Bush v. Gore, to FISA, to pretty much the entire tenure of the Robert’s Supreme Court. If the public-at-large has been shouting from the rooftops demanding that our elected leaders return to us to the moral high ground of the rule-of-law, I haven’t heard it.
.
The trouble with Obama is, no matter how much the times may have demanded one, he’s not a leader. He’s a very skilled politician who knew that, in our hyper-polarized electorate, the only people who mattered were those in the non-partisan middle. So Obama has made himself into pure vessel for our pathologically-bi-partisan, valueless centrist elites and independent swing voters. Liberals obviously hate his seemingly valueless relativism but it is a perfect reflection of at least the public face of our elite opinion-makers, as well as the third of the public that lives in the squishy, politically-vacuous middle, who mindlessly live by those opinions.

“Why all weeping and gnashing of teeth?”
.
Now there’s a Brown Shirt talking, if I ever heard one.

Under Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, acts of “violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment, …outrages upon personal dignity, [and] in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment” are prohibited. Furthermore, the U.S. Army Field Manual section 34-52 on interrogations states that the parameters described in the Convention are the “definite limits on measures which can be taken to induce an Enemy Prisoner of War to cooperate.

The prisoner is next subjected to a dehumanizing process in preparation for the interrogations.
.
“The HVD’s head and face are shaved,” the CIA report says. “A series of photographs are taken of the HVD while nude to document the physical condition of the HVD upon arrival. A Medical Officer interviews the HVD and a medical evaluation is conducted to assess the physical condition of the HVD. … A Psychologist interviews the HVD to assess his mental state.”
.
Then, if no “contraindications” are found, the interrogations begin, with continued emphasis on stripping the prisoner of his clothing, his self-respect and his ability to resist.
.
‘Learned Helplessness’
.
“Effective interrogation is based on the concept of using both physical and psychological pressures in a comprehensive, systematic, and cumulative manner to influence HVD behavior, to overcome a detainee’s resistance posture,” the CIA report said.
.
“The goal of interrogation is to create a state of learned helplessness and dependence conducive to the collection of intelligence in a predictable, reliable, and sustainable manner.”
.
The report said a typical “session one” would start as “the HVD is brought into the interrogation room, and under the direction of the interrogators, stripped of his clothes, and placed into shackles.”
.
After a round of questioning – that would include some slaps and slamming the prisoner against a wall – sleep deprivation and dietary manipulation (which along with nudity are regarded as “conditioning techniques”) are begun.
.
The report said: “The interrogators, assisted by security officers … will place the HVD in the center of the interrogation room in the vertical shackling position and diaper the HVD to begin sleep deprivation. The HVD will be provided with Ensure Plus … to begin dietary manipulation. The HVD remains nude.”

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/03/06-1

“I’ve actually asked the Pentagon whether or not the procedures that have been taken in terms of his confinement are appropriate and are meeting our basic standards,” *Bush* said, suggesting some of those procedures were to protect Manning’s safety. “They have assured me that they are.”
.
Not to go all SZ but…Is there any chance if the above was printed n 2007 there wouldn’t be outrage on every left leaning blog? And 100+ comments here.

Your information is wrong. He is made to SLEEP naked; he is not made to “stand naked for hours and in front of other prisoners”. This is being done because the brig staff was advised that he is suicidal, and by his own words he could accomplish suicide using an item of clothing. The 23 hour isolation is indeed for his own safety.

I’m outraged to be sure, I’m just also defeated. This is one more example proving that in reality there is no difference between the right and the left in this country. It really is the government versus the people and the more the government keeps the people fighting against each other, the more distracted we are and the more the government get away with.

afguy: I’ve read some of your other posts. You are snarky, partisan, arrogant and have no life. Get one. You’ll feel better.

shepherdwong, I don’t think that he made himself into it, I think he always was and that after Hillary was done he was the only choice.
.
Obama has made himself into pure vessel for our pathologically-bi-partisan, valueless centrist elites and independent swing voters. Liberals obviously hate his seemingly valueless relativism but it is a perfect reflection of at least the public face of our elite opinion-makers, as well as the third of the public that lives in the squishy, politically-vacuous middle, who mindlessly live by those opinions.
.
I think a lot of people projected onto him things that weren’t there. Can’t be sure what all Hillary would have done differently, although I think this situation might be one, however I know that Grampy Grumpy and Miss Prissy would have done it all much worse.

I just scanned the comments, and thanks as usual to shepherd, PD, af, pnnto, gunny, anybody I missed, but this is BS capital letters. I have nowhere to go but Obama, like I am going to vote for a right wing moron, yeah, don’t hold your breath. “He the man”, as they shout at golf tournaments. But this Manning thing is crap. I don’t need a scapegoat and resent this display. If I were Obama, and I know he has a busy schedule, but I would go to Manning, tell him he pissed me off and to explain himself. It is big enough to justify the President doing that.

And if not, I still support crowbars on government secrecy.

jazz, I am one of his fans. Same to you, buddy.

“I’m just also defeated. This is one more example proving that in reality there is no difference between the right and the left in this country”
.
I agree with the feeling of the first and as bad as the President and many of the DC Democrats are I live 30 miles and 9000 votes from what is going on in Wisconsin.
.
There ARE differences, important differences, between local and national r and l.

“…I don’t think that he made himself into it, I think he always was and that after Hillary was done he was the only choice.”
.
Ivy_B, Obama was in Washington long (but not too long) before he ran for the nomination. He’s also a very shrewd politician. Personally, I never had a clue what he was about, other than a remarkable reputation as a bi-partisan negotiator, But I knew that Hillary was a Third-way corporatist and a neo-neocon and felt we’d had quite enough of those. But I agree, many people did appear to project their own preconceived ideas on him. I chalk it up to hope for change.

Oh, and as far as projection goes, some credit has to go to Obama himself. He made some pretty important promises – or at least statements of first principle – that he either couldn’t, or knew he wouldn’t, keep.

It’s like Obama heard someone say he is a nazi and decided oh yeah, I guess I am, might as well act like one.

formerlyjames: Then you have your head as firmly inserted in your rear end as he (afguy) does. Manning is a traitor; his trial will prove this. Too bad that he had the misfortune to get caught. He will never get out of the stockade. It gives me great comfort. If it is proved that his treason cost one life, he should be shot. Be a fan of that.

afguy@7.1,
.
I doubt that Bradley Manning has to deal with the prospect of a bullet taking his head off or the possibility of being turned into chopped steak by a IED.

Paul Dirks@7.2,
.
If you do the crime, do the time. Did Manning believe he was going to get a movie of the week out of this as he just walks away?

shepherwong@7.3,
.
Bradley Manning is not covered by the Geneva Conventions.
He is covered by the UCMJ. Article 36 of the UCMJ allows the President to prescribe rules and procedures to implement the provisions of the UCMJ.

If it is proved that his treason cost one life, he should be shot. Be a fan of that.
.
Agreed, jerkwad… just a much as the sociopaths that lied us into that Godforsaken war deserve the same, and for the same reasons.
.
They have LOTS more blood on their hands than Manning does. Iraqis didn’t attack us on 9/11; Saudis did.
.
And no amount of “but Saddam was bad” is going to change that.
.
While you’re calling for Manning’s scalp, you might put THAT in your “right wing” pipe and puff on it.

And, unless you’re already over there, you might wander down to your local recruiter and volunteer to go show the Afghans and Iraqis how you roll as a soldier.
.
Those men and women over there are on their 4th or 5th deployments and could use a break. I’m sure the novelty of being the only ones fighting for their country is wearing a little thin at the moment.
.
Transfer from the 101st Keyboard Commandos to a real unit, with REAL fighting.

If you do the crime, do the time
In order to ‘do the time’ one needs to be convicted of a crime. Manning’s current custody is to prevent escape while he’s awaiting trial. Punishment doesn’t come until later IF he’s found guilty.
.
But, that’s in the Constitution. I keep forgetting that it doesn’t apply anymore.

If you do the crime, do the time. Did Manning believe he was going to get a movie of the week out of this as he just walks away?
.
OK, paulie, exactly WHAT has Manning been CONVICTED of… NOT charged, but convicted?
.
He is covered by the UCMJ. Article 36 of the UCMJ allows the President to prescribe rules and procedures to implement the provisions of the UCMJ.
.
Apparently, paulie, Manning’s punishment was NOT prescribed by the President of the U.S but by a female brig commander, Chief Warrant Officer-2 Denise Barnes. Don’t remember the President saying that forced nudity is an acceptable action. In fact, military lawyers have said it’s just the opposite.
.
As for your FIRST comment, YOU were defending how he was being treated, NOT relative dangers.
.
Are you saying that Iraq/Afghanistan-stationed troops are also forced to stand at attention for hours on end, naked, by others wearing the same uniform?
.
You’re rationalizing again, paulie.

Your information is wrong. He is made to SLEEP naked; he is not made to “stand naked for hours and in front of other prisoners”.
.
YOUR information is WRONG, dipsh!t. Gunny’s is right.
.
You MIGHT want to read a little further next time BEFORE you start to tell people what’s correct and what isn’t.
.
This is friom the website of the lawyer representing him:

Last night, PFC Manning was inexplicably stripped of all clothing by the Quantico Brig. He remained in his cell, naked, for the next seven hours. At 5:00 a.m., the Brig sounded the wake-up call for the detainees. At this point, PFC Manning was forced to stand naked at the front of his cell.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/04/us/04manning.html?_r=1

http://www.armycourtmartialdefense.info/2011/03/confinement-conditions-worsen.html
.
Another site says the following:

While not displaying any suicidal tendencies, and against the advice of military psychiatrists, Manning is being held under a prevention of injury order (POI).

You MIGHT want to be a little more careful WHAT you are defending and HOW.
.
Ignorance definitely isn’t blissful here in the Swamp.

Shoud have been a reply to 4.1.

formerlyjames: In reply to 13.2, I tried to enlist, (again; I first tried in 1967) they told me I was too old and took one of my children. She’s a petty officer in the Navy and is an applicant for Officers Candidate School. She’s protecting your right to freely insult (“jerkwad”?) other posters. Carefully withdraw your head from afguy’s posterior and take a shower. You stink.

Well, jazz, I enlisted in the AF in 1968 and stayed there for the next 20 years. Hence the name.
.
Glad your daughter is serving. But, as for you… blow it out your a$$! I owe you nothing but respect when I think you’ve earned it.
.
What I didn’t enlist to defend is the right of the military to abuse those prisoners under its control for political ends. I think I’ve earned the right to tell the military when I think its conduct is a disgrace.
.
This is one of those times. Manning should NOT have done what he did but I do think he’s a minor player in a larger “play”.

Afguy: Are you suffering withdrawal pain caused by formerlyjames’ head? Gee, he had to stand naked like the other detainees. Maybe he should have thought about this before he did what he did. You clearly prefer form over substance if you feel Manning is being mistreated. It’s virtually impossible given the level of scrutiny he’s receiving. Rest easy that he’s in an American jail with civil rights. In another country he would have already been executed for treason. And so it goes……..

As for formerlyjames, if I recall, he’s an ex-Marine. Also served.
.
I’m going to explain this very slowly to you. Manning has not been convicted of ANYTHING. Hence, supposed to be no punishment to this point. At least in the U. S. I enlisted to defend some 43 years ago.
.
Just admit it, jazz, you don’t like what he did so he needs to be punished for SOMETHING… and RIGHT NOW. Put down that flag for a minute and do some thinking… on your own.
.
Due process is supposed to be for EVERYONE, not just those YOU personally approve of.

Which part of “Manning has NOT been convicted of ANYTHING at this point” do you “right wing” clowns not “get”?
.
H*ll, he hasn’t even been tried, let alone sentenced.

Afguy: Thank you for service. I won’t attack veterans; they get enough of a raw deal when they get disrespected by civilians. As for me needing your “respect”, I have all I need. As you said, you’ve earned the right to scold the military.

jazz648, do you have a brother who posts under the name 3xfire3?
.
Because the two of you have the same narrow, authoritarian worldview.

jazz648, I don’t mind being taken to task when I deserve it. But I WILL defend my views.
.
The “civilians” I have problems with here are those who never tried to serve, have dedicated their lives to “acquiring”, and seem to support every war on the table.
.
I don’t support everything about Israel, but one thing I DO admire about them is their requirement for “universal service” from their citizens.
.
I am convinced that we wouldn’t be in a lot we are in if the children of the “powerful” were also getting their behinds shot at just like the others that are there now.
.
I am a military veteran with a decidedly moralistic streak a mile wide. Blame my mother for that.
.
People just aren’t used to hearing a veteran applying a moral, as opposed to strictly patriotic, filter to their views about the country.

Afguy@7.8 & Paul Dirks@7.7,
.
I am puzzled that you fellows show more concern for Bradley Manning than you do for troops that he may very well have put in harms way. I believe that your concerns are misdirected.

Afguy: You are overreacting. Nothing anybody says in any of these posts will convict or exonerate Manning. And yes, I admit it, I don’t like what he did but I know he’ll receive a fair trial under UCMJ rules. As a veteran, you should understand first-hand that he is receiving military due process and not due process provided by the Bill of Rights. He’s in the Army, therefore there’s no right to bail and he is subject to standard military operating procedures with respect to detention. You, of all people, should understand that. Had he not been in the military, he wouldn’t have had access to sensitive material. The military’s sloppy oversight is another story. Your vigilant concern about him being abused and not receiving due process is not justified by the facts we know. You are naive if you think the necessity for secrecy in diplomatic communications is not a valid policy. And you, a veteran, should know that our military is often the resource initially inserted in furtherance of foreign policy. Manning’s conspiratorial quest for government transaction transparency potentially may have put many at risk for their lives and in harm’s way. Let’s stop all the politically correct rhetoric. The weight of the evidence indicates that he may be guilty at least by the three civilian metrics: a preponderance of evidence, clear and convincing evidence, and evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. Research the government evidence. In any event, these blogs permit posters the opportunity to state an opinion. It is, in my opinion, impossible to characterize one’s politics as being left or right by a position on one issue. While my view is considered “narrow” (rightwing) on this issue , I may “expansive” on a different issue. In order to know that, however, one must be able to state those opinions even if they contain predictions that sound like conclusions.

I am puzzled….
.
Yes you are.
.
Here’s a hint. The issue isn’t Bradley Manning. The issue is the Constitution of The United States, which you may recall is what all those troops in harms way are sworn to protect. The fact that the Commander in Chief of the Armed forces who campaigned on ending the Constitutional abuses of his predecessor seems less interested in upholding his oath than Jake Tapper indicates that there’s a pretty big problem.

afguy: I won’t blame your mom for anything!

Let’s do a reset on this. One of the hazards of this format is that, sometimes, comments get read NOT in the order they were posted.
.
Manning did do something he should NOT have done. My point is that they are trying to get him to give statements incriminating to Julian Assange. THAT’s the real target. NOT Manning.
.
The greatest damage to this point has been to the “reputations” of some of our friendly governments and the egos of some of our own diplomats. Military leaders has minimized the damaged when pressed. It’s mainly the State Department that’s irate.
.
A lot of what happened in the ME recently was due to the revelation of the corruption of the governments. The citizenry got fed up with what they heard, esp. when compared to what they were told.
.
My personal opinion of our foreign policy can’t get much lower right now – and I haven’t read ANY of the WikiLeaks documents. I read… I listen… and I remember.
.
We have been flaming hypocrites for as long as I can remember. NO ONE actually believes the content of any of our foreign policy speeches anymore, esp. when we start to lecture others on human rights.
.
Our foreign policy in the ME has been one long clusterf*ck, with our backing one group after another, then having to turn around and fight them at some point.
.
We’ve sacrificed young men and women over feckless and short-sighted foreign policy goals. And we’ve backed one tyrant after another becasue it’s easier to deal with a single leader than a democratically-elected gov’t, who MAY not be willing to be “bought” and stay that way.
.
I HOPE that your daughter doesn’t get caught up in this. The military, esp. those on their 4th or 5th deployments, deserves better than an endless war for oil sources for our SUVs and air conditioners.

My first choice for President was (dare I say) John Edwards, believing his talk about the poor. In fact I wasted my primary vote on him. Then there was the choice between Hillary and Obama.
.
I chose Obama because I hoped he was not going to be a triangulator like Bill Clinton.
.
The night of his election and acceptance speech I cried as hard as I have over most anything. Tears of joy. We elected a black president. At my age I never believed I would witness that event.
.
He has disappointed me in so many ways. However, like Ivy_B stated, it would have been much worse under McCain/Palin. So once again, I have to settle for non-perfection.

.
Yes, how could you doubt the Pentagon?

How could dare you doubt the Pentagon.
.
Fixed it!

“The night of his election and acceptance speech I cried as hard as I have over most anything. Tears of joy. We elected a black president. At my age I never believed I would witness that event.”
.
Holy sheepsh!t! I’m laughing as hard as I have over most anything!

“I am puzzled that you fellows show more concern for Bradley Manning than you do for troops…”
.
I’m puzzled that you would like to see a US soldier suspected of a crime treated worse than a terrorist suspect and that you only care about the US Constitution and the rule of law when it can be used as a cudgel against Democrats. That was a lie. I understand you as a miserable, hypocritical, authoritarian-following piece of sh!t and you are behaving exactly as I would expect.

shepherdwong@7.11,
.
Make up your mind, champ. First you were talking about violations of the Geneva Conventions and when I pointed out that Bradley Manning was not covered by the Conventions you now claim that the Constitution is being violated.
.
Okay, put up or shut up. Specifically enumerate the constitutional rights that are being violated. Bear in mind that Manning is a soldier and not a civilian so you need to consult the UCMJ.
.
I await your reply.

Paul Dirks@7.10,
.
See my 7.12. You can put your head together with Wong’s and come up with the constitutional violations being inflicted on Bradley Manning.

Paul Dirks@19.1,
.
Barack Obama told Jake Tapper that the circumstances of Manning’s detention relate to his “safety” and that he has already consulted with the Pentagon on the matter and is apparently satisfied.
.
So what’s your beef?

Obama simply repeated in the presser what the Pentagon had told him. And the Pentagon gave the
“official” version, NOT what Manning’s own lawyer and military psychiatrists were saying – that he was NOT suicidal and did NOT need to be kept naked in his cell.
.
And we ALL know that the Pentagon will ALWAYS admit when they’re doing something off-kilter.

“I await your reply.
.
F@ck you, @sshole.
.
If you can’t read and understand the Bill of Rights of the US Constitution, you have no business commenting on this blog.

I’m tempted to say “right to a speedy trial”, but since paulie is not really interested in a discussion, that’s a waste of keystrokes.
.
He’s more interested in following the guidelines of the “Troller’s Handbook” than he is in a Consitiutional vs UCMJ discussion.
.
I doubt he’s got a lot of knowledge or interest in either document anyway.

shepherdwong@7.14,
.
Tsk, tsk, mind your blood pressure, Wong. Wouldn’t want to see you stoke out.
.
You have yet to list the specifications of any violations of Bradley Manning’s constitutional rights, so I suspect that you are merely talking through your hat as you so often do.
.
The Commander-in-Chief has looked into the matter of Manning’s detention and has no problem with it. He said this yesterday at his press conference in answer to a question from Jake Tapper.
.
Are you suggesting that you know better than constitutional scholar Barack Hussein Obama about the US Constitution?

afguy@7.15,
.
You are hitching your wagon to the wrong horse, afguy. What Wong knows about the Constitution wouldn’t fill a gnats nostril.
.
You people make vague allegations and then can’t back them up. Tell us specifically what rights of Bradley Manning are being violated?

But he didn’t “look into it”, did he, paulie?
.
He deferred to the Pentagon viewpoint.
.
Hardly the same, no matter how badly you want it to be.
.
Had he actually investigated the claim, he would have sent someone in independently or brought in the psychiatrists who did evaluate Manning for a chat.
.
He’s not interested in Manning per se. He and DOJ want Assange.
.
And to send a message to anyone else who might be tempted to try something similar.

afguy@7.18,
.
My heavens! You are saying that Barack Hussein Obama is being disingenuous and that he is flacking for the Pentagon? Why would he do that? What’s in it for him?

afguy@19.3,
.
Things you must believe if you agree with afguy.
.
1. Obama is a puppet who dances to the strings pulled by the Pentagon.

2. Manning’s lawyer is an impartial observer,
.
3. Manning’s military psychiatrist is an impartial observer.
.
4. That the US Military gives a rat’s a$$ about Julian Assange. There are a million dipsticks out there just like him.
.
5. That the military is upset that the State Department was made to look foolish.

afguy, do you have a brother who posts under the name shepherdwong?
.
Because you both react with the same vitriolic, hatefilled, profane namecalling drivel at anything remotely different from your warped ideology.
.
Personally I think you are one and the same. Talk about your trolls.

Well, paulie, IF (and that’s admitedly a very big IF) you are actually interested in getting to the truth, you would need to at least CONSIDER that the Pentagon has a vested interest in having the President accept their point of view as gospel. More viewpoints and more information = better informed decision-making.
.
That is, IF the TRUTH is what you want out of the process.
.
Stament 5 tells me you really don’t understand (care?) WHO Assange is. There’s hardly a million of him.
.
Anyway, “Anonymous” is much more of a threat that WikiLeaks or Manning. I’ve been in school with a lot of REALLY talented programmers. They love a challenge. The BRIGHTER ones frequently are only marginally “fit for public exposure”. They aren’t that much in awe of authority.
.
For the really exotic stuff, those are the types of programmers that make your world go around. A lot of what they do is probably over the heads of the “three-piece-suit” types that are tasked to oversee them. Some of those, although loyal corporately, probably wouldn’t recognize a “back-door” if it bit them in the a$$. But they WILL tell those above them what is required to get them up that corporate ladder.
.
I actually agree with you that the military doesn’t care if the SD is embarrassed. Given the competition between the two over foreign policy decisions from time to time, I’d say they enjoy it more than a little when it happens.
.
However, the military is not eager to have its OWN internal laundry aired in public – hence their interest in getting something on him. It’s absolutley vital to their cause that Manning and WikiLeaks be found to have released SOMETHING that they can show to have endangered the troops ON THE GROUND in some way.
.
Given the conduct of some of the “spooks” in the CIA recently (Davis, anyone?), I’m not sure that compromising one of them will have the same emotional cachet as causing the death of your next door neighbor’s son. Remember that the CIA’s reputation is now only marginally better than your typical banking CEO or local used-car-dealer.
.
Having their own “double-dealing” exposed for the world to see is NOT a suitable outcome. NO Egypts wanted here.

UPDATE: P.J. Crowley fired. Well, “stepping down as spokesman.” Can’t disagree with your bosses.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/03/13/state-departments-p-j-crowley-stepping-down/?hpt=T2

Ivy_B@20,
.
Diecash1 will have a bone to pick with you on your statement that Crowley was fired. Diecash believes that Crowley went voluntarily.

afguy@19.5,
.
More things that you must believe in order to agree with afguy.
.
6. That the White House must rely on the Pentagon as it’s only source on the treatment of Manning.
.
7. That Julian Assange is not a self-serving narcissist just like a million other self-serving narcissists.
.
8. That there is doubt that it was Bradley Manning who downloaded classified documents by the thousands. The military already has the goods on him and they know just what it was to which he had access.
.
9. That Bradley Manning is anything more than a petulant, adolescent minded geek who believes that life is a video game.
.
10. That there is some moral equivalence between the Julian Assanges and Bradley Mannings of this world and the men and women who put themselves in harms way to defend this country

paulie,
.
They don’t have to. They CHOSE to. For that I hold them morally responsible, to want to take what they were told at face value. (Yes, I just criticized the Omama admin. – shocking… I know.)
.
As for “moral equivalence”, paulie, what the h*ll would you know about the phrase?
.
There certainly IS a “moral equivalency” between how we tell others THEY should treat their “accused” and how we treat our own.
.
The opposite of “moral equivalency” is called “hypocrisy”. I take it you are in full-throated support for THAT concept?
.
After all, it DOES seem to be a strong RW trait these days.

i think manning was pretty careful what he put out there. it was mostly stuff that seemed silly to be classified in the first place.