{"id":5586,"date":"2013-06-15T10:24:21","date_gmt":"2013-06-15T18:24:21","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.fogcityjournal.com\/wordpress\/?p=5586"},"modified":"2023-01-05T20:08:34","modified_gmt":"2023-01-06T04:08:34","slug":"the-bradley-manning-matter","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.fogcityjournal.com\/wordpress\/5586\/the-bradley-manning-matter\/","title":{"rendered":"The Bradley Manning Matter"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"Private

Private First Class Bradley Manning.<\/p><\/div>\n

By Ralph E. Stone<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

June 15, 2013<\/p>\n

Bradley Manning, a U.S. Army soldier, admitted sending 700,000 government documents to Wikileaks<\/a> in 2010.\u00a0 It was the biggest leak of classified information in U.S. history.<\/p>\n

Manning is now charged under\u00a0Articles 92<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0134<\/a>\u00a0of the\u00a0Uniform Code of Military Justice<\/a>\u00a0(UCMJ), which incorporates parts of the Espionage Act in\u00a0Article 106a<\/a>\u00a0of the UCMJ. \u00a0The Manning case is ongoing at Fort Meade, Maryland.<\/p>\n

On April 10, 2013 Colonel Denise Lind, the military judge handling Manning’s case, imposed a demanding burden on the prosecution, ruling that prosecutors must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Manning had reason to believe his actions would harm the U.S. or aid a foreign power.<\/p>\n

Basically the government is saying that leaking classified information to a publication is the same as leaking to the enemy.\u00a0 Ironically, a publisher has a First Amendment right to publish leaked information, whereas Manning has no right to leak the information.<\/p>\n

The prosecution rejected Manning\u2019s offer to plead guilty to\u00a0several charges including misusing classified material, which would have meant up to 20 years in jail. \u00a0The government, instead, is playing hardball,\u00a0treating Manning like a traitor rather than a leaker. \u00a0This is the first time that someone is being charged with aiding the enemy simply for leaking information to the press.\u00a0 If he is found guilty of \u201caiding the enemy,\u201d Manning could receive a sentence of life in prison or even the death penalty.<\/p>\n

Clearly, there is a need for some government\u00a0secrecy. \u00a0For example,\u00a0military plans, intelligence sources, undercover agents, and the capabilities of weapon systems.<\/p>\n

Trouble is, when an individual decides to release classified documents, it is often done indiscriminately. That is, information that is classified because its release will embarrass the government as well as information that probably should be kept classified.<\/p>\n

According to Manning\u00a0testimony,\u00a0“Given all of the Department of State\u00a0information\u00a0that I read, the fact that most of the cables were unclassified, and that all the cables have a SIPDIS caption [messages intended for automatic Web publishing, according to the U.S. Department of State Foreign Affairs Manual],\u00a0I believed that the public release of these cables would not damage the United States;\u00a0however, I did believe that the cables might be embarrassing, since they represented very honest opinions and statements behind the backs of other nations and organizations.”<\/p>\n

It is important to note that Manning testified “most of the cables were unclassified\u201d indicating that possibly some were not.<\/p>\n

Thus, prosecutors will attempt to show that the release of some of the leaked information placed U.S. service personnel in harm’s way or exposed sensitive intelligence activities. \u00a0For example, the prosecution has already presented evidence that code words and the name of at least one enemy target were revealed, and a leaked video of a U.S. Apache helicopter attack<\/a> that ostensibly revealed sensitive information that could help enemies plan deadlier assaults.\u00a0 I expect the prosecution will present more such evidence.<\/p>\n