Bradley Manning found not guilty on "Aiding the enemy".

Is this just one Not guilty of many charges.
Wonder if the MSM are going to run this story 24-7 now that he has one win on his side. Doubtful

reply to post by roadgravel


Even if he only gets 20 years his life is over.

Originally posted by faust833
Being found "Not Guilty" on aiding the enemy only means he will not face Life in prison.

News link:
www.theguardian.com...

edit on 30-7-2013 by faust833 because: (no reason given)

Partially correct.. The other charges he was found guilty of / pleaded guilty to total 154 years. We need to watch the sentencing to see how much time and if the judge allows for them to be served concurrently or consecutively.

Good news is that he evaded the worst charge, bad news is the others are stuck to him now.

he can face up to 130 years in prison.... but that's determined during the mini trial tomorrow. (Sentencing hearing)

I don't know how some can see good in this. He didn't or doesn't deserve 130 years for what he did.

Well good. I've felt from the start that this trial was overcharging to make a political point and work to get Assange through Manning...not about Manning himself. He's already plead out to charges good for 20 years BEFORE he stepped foot into this courtroom. Immediately before, as a matter of fact. 20 years for a kid his age is most of his natural, productive life.

That should have been plenty. He damn sure was a traitor, but to his nation, oath and integrity. He didn't run to Al Qaeda. No one but some paranoid freaks in Government ever claimed he did and the fact Al Qaeda had his stuff is part of what should earn him every DAY of the 20 years ......but that doesn't mean it was his intent, to execute him or give Life in prison for. Just nasty unintended consequence he was expected to hold the intelligence to consider.

Military Intelligence though.... :shk: Even Manning proves it's a contradiction in terms for more than passing reference.

Originally posted by thesaneone
reply to post by roadgravel

 

Even if he only gets 20 years his life is over.

I find your attitude extremely disturbing.

So you support the military regardless of their actions?

If it wasn't for people like Manning we would have no idea about atrocities happening abroad like those actions of the AH64 attacks on not only reporters but also people coming to provide medical assistance, (which by the way is against the Geneva convention.) Manning is a hero, the public worldwide deserves to know and understand what is happening in conflicts. The Mainstream media doesn't do its job well enough highlighting these issues and it takes martyrs to stand up against the status quo and do what is right.

More soldiers should be doing this if they really had honour and respect for the values they supposedly fight for.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
Well good. I've felt from the start that this trial was overcharging to make a political point and work to get Assange through Manning...

The UCMJ does not apply to Assange. If anything comes of it, it will be Federal charges, not military.

Also, one would think they could have offered Manning reduced charges / dropping certain charges for help in getting Assange. Something they did not do, which kind of undermines Assanges arguments about the US with his rape bs out of Sweden.

reply to post by Wyrdnews


Its sad that some want our soldiers to blindly follow orders. I'm glad that there are military members like Bradley Manning who are willing to go against the grain when they see something that isn't right... The kid jeopardized his whole future based off this one story. More soldiers probably want to come forward but don't want to deal with the backlash we see today.

Originally posted by jhn7537
reply to post by Wyrdnews

 

Its sad that some want our soldiers to blindly follow orders. I'm glad that there are military members like Bradley Manning who are willing to go against the grain when they see something that isn't right... The kid jeopardized his whole future based off this one story. More soldiers probably want to come forward but don't want to deal with the backlash we see today.

Uhm, he didnt jeopradize his future over one story. He jeopradized it when he leaked information that was classified that did not contain any illeagl actions

reply to post by jhn7537


Orders are orders don't want to follow them then join a mercenary group and not the U.S military.

reply to post by thesaneone


Honor,,what do u Honor,, when u take your Oath,,?,,and if not honor,,then resign.
Isn't that really what it is all about.
A persons perception of honoring right from wrong.
was there a wrong commited,,,yes,,
so do u uphold honor ,, by killing the protectors/redcross/red cresent/u.n peacekeepers?,,muslums,christians,bystanders,zealots,rabble rousers,,where does the killing stop?,,it stops at the guy pulling the trigger.
was it Honourable?

Originally posted by jhn7537
reply to post by Wyrdnews

 

Its sad that some want our soldiers to blindly follow orders. I'm glad that there are military members like Bradley Manning who are willing to go against the grain when they see something that isn't right... The kid jeopardized his whole future based off this one story. More soldiers probably want to come forward but don't want to deal with the backlash we see today.

I agree. The truth is that most military members in combat op's though are so brainwashed that they can't see what they are doing is wrong. They are so well and truly institutionalised that they see their unit as extended family and this is unfortunately why so few people go against the grain.

I joined the British military myself for a short while but found the people I was with to be lacking so much critical thinking it would have drove me mad.

reply to post by BobAthome


Nobody has ever said war and conflicts are pretty or fair.

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
Well good. I've felt from the start that this trial was overcharging to make a political point and work to get Assange through Manning...

The UCMJ does not apply to Assange. If anything comes of it, it will be Federal charges, not military.

Also, one would think they could have offered Manning reduced charges / dropping certain charges for help in getting Assange. Something they did not do, which kind of undermines Assanges arguments about the US with his rape bs out of Sweden.

edit on 30-7-2013 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

I'm well aware of the fact the UCMJ has no application to Assange. The two are worlds apart and TOTALLY unrelated.

However, if you'd followed the trial closely with the daily material, you'd know they were counting on a connection established here between Manning and Assange for intent and purpose, to carry a prosecution in CIVILIAN LAW against Assange. A few days of analysis among trial watchers and media were all but dedicated to the question and issue. I'm surprised you were't fully aware of the subtext in this trial. It seemed to play a major role in decisions and direction.

@Thread

Here is the charge sheet for Manning with verdict/plea for each charge. I guess he's regretting the plea bargain now ...but too bad. He paid his money, he can now get what be purchased. About 20 years (minus time served, I'd imagine) to consider things.

Originally posted by thesaneone
reply to post by jhn7537

 

Orders are orders don't want to follow them then join a mercenary group and not the U.S military.

LOL orders are orders... you would have fit in nicely with the Nazis

SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT .....

Although I'm glad Bradley Manning was found NOT guilty on charges of "aiding the enemy" he has been found guilty to various charges for Espionage.

Let's think about this for a second.

Rhetorical question :

If what Bradley Manning did was espionage, does that mean whistle blowing is espionage? Is that how this government views us?

reply to post by Wyrdnews


"are so brainwashed that they can't see what they are doing is wrong.",,but if your Government sanctions it,,ie:Commander in Chief,, then it is not wrong.
Thats why Congress had too declare an Act of War,,,on terroists.
signed,sealed,and approved.

So where does it stop?

Originally posted by thesaneone
reply to post by jhn7537

 

Orders are orders don't want to follow them then join a mercenary group and not the U.S military.

So what if the American colonists followed the orders of the British Monarchy?

Have you never heard of the Oath of Office? Are you a politician? because 99% of them haven't heard of it either.

reply to post by jhn7537


I don't think they would except me I'm a little dark for them. Again you don't join the military to make your own rules you obey them, don't want to take orders then don't enlist its that simple.

Originally posted by eLPresidente

Originally posted by thesaneone
reply to post by jhn7537

 

So what if the American colonists followed the orders of the British Monarchy?

Uh what?