Topic: Bradley Manning
You are viewing the most recent posts on this topic.
August 8, 2013 at 4:33 PM
Manning is a traitor
Pfc. Bradley Manning was a volunteer; he was not drafted. [“Editorial: Manning no precedent,” Opinion, Aug. 6.]
Manning took an oath; there was no coercion. He made a decision not in keeping with that oath. He knew the regulations and the laws that governed his military activities. He did not comply with those regulations and laws.
He made a decision that was not his to make. He is not a hero; he is perhaps more of a traitor than Edward Snowden.
Bill Ward, Redmond
August 6, 2013 at 7:22 PM
Who is the enemy?
Both Pfc. Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden have been accused of “aiding and abetting the enemy.”
I’ve noticed that the powers that be are a little vague on who, exactly, this enemy is. Who is the enemy in the case of National Security Agency (NSA) wiretapping? Is it al-Qaida? No, they already know they’re being spied upon, and switched to satellite phones and human couriers long ago.
Who is the enemy in Manning’s case? Is it the Afghan people, the ones we are supposedly there to rescue? No, the war is happening in their back yard. They already know about the war crimes committed against their people. Is it al-Qaida? No, they’ve got the same front-row seats, and they can easily see that all is proceeding according to plan.
So who is the enemy? Who are these nameless people who must be kept in the dark about government waste, war crimes, and wholesale spying on the American people?
Perhaps Walt Kelly gave us a hint when he said, “we have met the enemy and he is us.”
Howard Hance, Snohomish
August 5, 2013 at 7:04 AM
Manning endangered troops
I am a liberal without a bleeding heart. Pfc. Bradley Manning will receive a punishment that he has righteously earned. [“Northwest Voices: Bradley Manning,” Opinion, Aug. 2.]
He was given an unjustifiable reprieve when acquitted of directly aiding and abetting the enemy. It is clear that he set out to harm the dear old United States of America by revealing thousands of sensitive documents to WikiLeaks.
It is no coincidence that some of what he revealed wound up on Osama bin Laden’s computer when it was confiscated during the Abbottabad raid, as prosecutors argued.
If any of his revelations harmed one hair on my son’s head while he served his two tours in Iraq, I would advocate for the death penalty.
LeRoy Loiselle, Seattle
August 1, 2013 at 4:19 PM
Manning should not be the one on trial
Pfc. Bradley Manning was anything but naive. [“Manning guilty of most charges; didn’t aid enemy,” page one, July 31.]
Manning knew that getting the truth out (facts about U.S. war crimes) may well lead to jail, but heroically, he did it anyway.
While avoiding the most serious charge, this truth-teller still faces decades of jail time, and that is an abomination of justice. The war criminals in the Pentagon and the White House should be behind bars instead.
Doug Barnes, Seattle
March 5, 2013 at 4:01 PM
Manning’s actions are a public good
Pfc. Bradley Manning is on trial — and facing 20 years in prison — for releasing classified information on American troop actions in Iraq ["Private saw WikiLeaks as chance to start a debate," News, March 1]. One video shows American forces killing civilians — including children — then firing on those who came to their rescue. These actions are war crimes under the Geneva Convention.
Yet Manning is the only one being punished, while the [shooters] go free. They are even referred to as “heroes” because they wear the uniform. They give our real heroes a bad name.
Manning has done us a good turn by bringing war crimes to light.
–Anne Thureson, Seattle
Trending with readers