Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Judge sentences Bradley Manning to 35 years

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 484 posts

Re: Judge sentences Bradley Manning to 35 years

#41

Post by WalterSear »

jamesroseman wrote: post #15
Zikes wrote: post #10

> including 112 days of credit for abusive treatment he was subjected to at the Marine Corps brig in Quantico, Va. They openly acknowledge abusive treatment, but has anyone received criminal disciplinary action over it? 112 days also seems a tad low considering what I've heard of his experience.

I'm sure there will be punishment, but that it'll be out of the courts. The last thing they want publicized is a case about American Marines mistreating a convict.

No one involved in meting out that punishment has an iota of motivation to do anything but reward him. It's a deterrent they have control over.

Re: Judge sentences Bradley Manning to 35 years

#43

Post by lucisferre »

kevincennis wrote: post #22
monsterix wrote: post #2

Very sad. So the guys who murdered innocents in another country using machine guns sitting on top of a helicopter are yet to be tried. While the guys who stood up for humanity and true spirit of serving forces for good is sentenced 35 years. And I know a lot of people would troll me on this opinion itself.

I totally understand that sentiment, but at the same time, the whole concept of classified information breaks down pretty quickly if you start saying it's okay for people to exercise their own judgement and break the rules. There are always paths to responsible disclosure. From what I understand, many of them are pretty badly broken, and we certainly need to fix that. But ultimately, you really don't want to set a pr…

I think you have to provide exceptions for exceptional circumstances. Uncovering serious war crimes from by a nation that purports to holds itself and others to a higher standard should qualify as exceptional and be treated as such.

If those in power don't want to justify leaks and whistleblowers they should think harder about justifying and covering up murder and other crimes.

Re: Judge sentences Bradley Manning to 35 years

#44

Post by ck2 »

joering2 wrote: post #31
flexie wrote: post #14

This is a disgrace. They send a young man to prison for 35 years for uncovering possible war crimes and a bunch of diplomatic fiddle-faddle. He is not eligible for parole until he has served 1/3 of the time.

Seing how they treated him pre-trial, I was really thinking this will be Kangoro court with rubber stamp and maximum possible sentencing for all the "crimes" that Bradley did. Glad that the judge was semi-reasonable. Think on the positive side; 1/3 out of 35 years is about 10 years! (he already served 3).

They will never let him out in 10, imagine the crimes they will have to cover up by then and they will need examples to threaten the rest of the military with.

They will make a show of his parole trial and be sure to send him back in for the next 20.

Re: Judge sentences Bradley Manning to 35 years

#45

Post by wjk »

harrytuttle wrote: post #39
aspensmonster wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obama could fix this with the stroke of a pen. Surely he will deliver. I'll wait.

I think Obama would open a meth lab before he did that. And if he did it would only be self-serving.

Any US president. Not just Obama.

Re: Judge sentences Bradley Manning to 35 years

#46

Post by coldcode »

flexie wrote: post #14

This is a disgrace. They send a young man to prison for 35 years for uncovering possible war crimes and a bunch of diplomatic fiddle-faddle. He is not eligible for parole until he has served 1/3 of the time.

And what penalty did his superiors receive? Nothing. Privates should never have access to secret information without supervision. If he did someone else should be responsible and take the penalty.

Re: Judge sentences Bradley Manning to 35 years

#47

Post by pinaceae »

zeteo wrote: post #35

>Manning, 25, was convicted last month [...] The government had asked [for] 60 years. “There is value in deterrence, your honor; this court must send a message [...] National security crimes that undermine the entire system must be taken seriously.” This is not the rule of law. It is a government that is increasingly relying on citizen ignorance to secretly make and implement policy, and on savage reprisals to terror…

No, this is the Armed Forces code of conduct. He broke the laws of his organization, was before a court of that same org. This is internal. Once you wear a uniform, other rules apply. secrecy has a different impact, loyalty as well.

Civilians might not like it or even understand, but Manning hopefully did when he chose to join the Armed Forces.

Snowden is different, just a contractor. But Manning joined the club, broke its rules. Knowingly. Hence a court martial. Not so long ago he would have been executed for it, 35 is a soft ruling.

Re: Judge sentences Bradley Manning to 35 years

#48

Post by dombili »

ACLU's response: https://www.aclu.org/free-speech/aclu-comment-bradley-mannin...

> "When a soldier who shared information with the press and public is punished far more harshly than others who tortured prisoners and killed civilians, something is seriously wrong with our justice system."

Daunting.

Re: Judge sentences Bradley Manning to 35 years

#49

Post by thex86 »

eli wrote: post #5
monsterix wrote: post #2

Very sad. So the guys who murdered innocents in another country using machine guns sitting on top of a helicopter are yet to be tried. While the guys who stood up for humanity and true spirit of serving forces for good is sentenced 35 years. And I know a lot of people would troll me on this opinion itself.

I agree it's sad. I'm not personally a big Manning fan, but that feels like a stiff sentence. (By the way, I think a lot of people would disagree with you. That doesn't mean they're "trolling" you.)

> I'm not personally a big Manning fan

Can you elaborate why? I am interested in hearing your point of view because maybe I just have one side of the story.

Re: Judge sentences Bradley Manning to 35 years

#50

Post by Amadou »

kevincennis wrote: post #22
monsterix wrote: post #2

Very sad. So the guys who murdered innocents in another country using machine guns sitting on top of a helicopter are yet to be tried. While the guys who stood up for humanity and true spirit of serving forces for good is sentenced 35 years. And I know a lot of people would troll me on this opinion itself.

I totally understand that sentiment, but at the same time, the whole concept of classified information breaks down pretty quickly if you start saying it's okay for people to exercise their own judgement and break the rules. There are always paths to responsible disclosure. From what I understand, many of them are pretty badly broken, and we certainly need to fix that. But ultimately, you really don't want to set a pr…

But ultimately, you really don't want to set a precedent of "well, if you leak something and you really believe in your heart that it was morally justified, then we won't send you to jail."

The precedent would be, "Go ahead and break the law, if you think your cause is worth serving the time. Then when it is all over and done, we will judge if your cause was worth breaking the law. If your cause was worthy, then we won't send you to jail."

It isn't about what he felt deep down inside, it is about what the result of his actions were. I'd hold guys like Dick Cheney to the same standard - he broke the law because he genuinely believed that terrorists were an existential threat to the US. But what he believed is irrelevant, the question is were terrorists really an existential threat? If not, he needs to do the time. But if he was correct, then walk free with our thanks for making the right call.

Post reply on HN