Chelsea Manning Op/Ed in NYT: The Fog Machine of War

[Hissyspit]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/15/opinion/sunday/chelsea-manning-the-us-militarys-campaign-against-media-freedom.html

The Fog Machine of War

By CHELSEA MANNING
June 14, 2014

- snip -

If you were following the news during the March 2010 elections in Iraq, you might remember that the American press was flooded with stories declaring the elections a success, complete with upbeat anecdotes and photographs of Iraqi women proudly displaying their ink-stained fingers. The subtext was that United States military operations had succeeded in creating a stable and democratic Iraq.

Those of us stationed there were acutely aware of a more complicated reality.

Military and diplomatic reports coming across my desk detailed a brutal crackdown against political dissidents by the Iraqi Ministry of Interior and federal police, on behalf of Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki. Detainees were often tortured, or even killed.

Early that year, I received orders to investigate 15 individuals whom the federal police had arrested on suspicion of printing “anti-Iraqi literature.” I learned that these individuals had absolutely no ties to terrorism; they were publishing a scholarly critique of Mr. Maliki’s administration. I forwarded this finding to the officer in command in eastern Baghdad. He responded that he didn’t need this information; instead, I should assist the federal police in locating more “anti-Iraqi” print shops.

I was shocked by our military’s complicity in the corruption of that election. Yet these deeply troubling details flew under the American media’s radar.

- snip -

The more I made these daily comparisons between the news back in the States and the military and diplomatic reports available to me as an analyst, the more aware I became of the disparity. In contrast to the solid, nuanced briefings we created on the ground, the news available to the public was flooded with foggy speculation and simplifications.

MORE AT LINK

[riderinthestorm]

1. Good thing this whistleblower is incarcerated for the next few decades

"Comrade Eddie" should come back and face "American" justice....

[Rosa Luxemburg]

2. You begin to wonder who is control in this country?

I hate to say it but there is something else the majority is not aware of

[truedelphi]

134. What majority?

People who feel they should be loyal to either party:

34% Democrats, 26% Republicans, a total of 60%.

The rest of the populace, at 40%, wants alternatives to the One Big Money Party.

And from someone who has been sitting in 90 degree temps to take the pulse of my community, the meme that "The Lesser of two evils should get our votes" has worn plum through. Folks are fed up, and they want real alternatives, not Republican lite.

BTW, the grocery store where I parked my table would not let me talk to people, unless they approached me. So any time I heard an opinion, it was the person's real, from the heart, opinion, and not something I fished for.

[Enthusiast]

145. +1 an entire shit load.

Thank you, truedelphi.

[sabrina 1]

172. That 40% is going to go up. Manning reported this, it was mentioned by her in the chat logs, that

Mailiki's police were torturing people who were just demonstrating having apparently bought the lie that we had created a democracy there.

But Manning isn't the only who mentioned how Maliki and his police were treating the Iraqis who eg, protested the signing of more than 80% of Iraq's oil over to the control of Global Oil Cartels. Or who joined the Arab Spring organizing peaceful protests, where rather than being free to do so, some were murdered by Maliki's police.

Imagine if the US had listened to people like Chelsea Manning? Imagine if they had intervened and warned about torture and murder etc. But we couldn't, could we, because we were doing it also.

Manning is in prison for doing the right thing, the war criminals are now passing the blame for their crimes to Obama, which of course was predictable once they knew there were not going to be any prosecutions.

[elleng]

3. This is a B F'n Deal!

[octoberlib]

4. Embedding of reporters started around 2002?

Professsor Bob Altemeyer of the University of Manitoba has been studying right-wing authoritarianism since the late 60's. He called the Bush Jr. presidency the most authoritarian administration in the history of the US.



When asked why the military decided to embed journalists with the troops, Lt. Col. Rick Long of the U.S. Marine Corps replied, "Frankly, our job is to win the war. Part of that is information warfare. So we are going to attempt to dominate the information environment."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embedded_journalism

[elleng]

5. YES. Thanks for mentioning his work.

[octoberlib]

7. I just recently read The Authoritarians. I found it frightening.

[elleng]

11. Yes. Very.

Professor (I FORGET HIS NAME) used his work, in explaining the way Dems could/should craft their messages.

[struggle4progress]

18. Blame Grenada

American invasion of tiny Caribbean island changed everything for press
From the Fall 2001 issue of The News Media & The Law, page 8

... Defense officials had long blamed press coverage for the failings of the Vietnam War. So when hostilities heated to boiling in Grenada, they used that war as their excuse to make sure that they had the press under control.

When American soldiers stormed the island's beaches at 5 a.m., journalists weren't there to document the invasion.

Even though State Department officials notified Cuba, the Soviet Union and Western European Allies about the invasion several hours before it happened, they left the nation's press corps in the cold until President Reagan announced the invasion at 9 a.m. that same day. Even then, they restricted reporters to Barbados for another 48 hours.

Armed forces scuttled attempts by reporters to access the island by boat or small plane ...

http://www.rcfp.org/browse-media-law-resources/news-media-law/news-media-and-law-fall-2001/blame-grenada

[octoberlib]

25. Interesting. Thanks for the info!

[struggle4progress]

34. The Vietnam War was the best reported war in US history. It was on the TV nightly

and images flooded the country. Throughout the 70s the rightwingers blamed "the liberal media" for "stabbing the country in the back." Reagan's election brought to power people concerned with control of press-coverage, and so new restrictions were imposed on war coverage; Bush I continued and refined such controls for the Panama invasion and the Gulf War

[MrMickeysMom]

38. Those are three pictures that speak 1,000s of words, s4p...

You are right.

What have we become? Who learned from Vietnam? Certainly the Joint Chiefs did. Make it tighter than a drum and control the message.

What have we become?

[grahamhgreen]

133. And where are the photos from Iraq in the age of cell phone cams???

[Enthusiast]

147. Yes. Where are they?

What did they do to our country.

Fightin' for our freedoms. LOL

[erronis]

167. I'm sure they are nicely stored in NSA's Utah bunkers

Or by Verizon.

But they are not available for the taxpayers who sent money to the defense industries and allies that commited these crimes. You know, National Interests.

I've been amazed that so many phone shots of police brutality have been allowed to pass throught the govt/corp-controlled wires. Pretty soon, they'll be nothing to see other than the equivalent of Leave it to Beaver. Take your meds, citizens.

[BetsysGhost]

159. thank you for posting

I really appreciate being able to see those photo's again.

[struggle4progress]

26. Press Censorship and Access Restrictions During the Persian Gulf War: A First Amendment Analysis

Michelle D. Boydston
4-1-1992
http://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1728&context=llr

This document also claims that the current system of military press controls originated with the Grenada invasion

[octoberlib]

36. Thanks for this!

I remember Grenada but wasn't paying that much attention at the time. Very informative.

[George II]

6. He was a freaking Private First Class...he goes on like he was a four star general!!!

[Hissyspit]

8. What the fuck are you raving about?

[MrMickeysMom]

39. What is that supposed to mean?

[Enthusiast]

148. Smoke screen, sockpuppet.

[moriah]

66. *Her* point is that the generals aren't always the first to know...

... and might never find out.

[m-lekktor]

73. he was an intelligience analyst you don't have to be a freakin Admiral for that fer chrissake!

jesus fucking christ.

[George II]

82. The army doesn't have admirals.

[Warren Stupidity]

87. She goes on like somebody with a brain

who knows how to use it to analyse events rather than just being, for example, a transphobic rightwing idiot mindlessly parroting talking points.

[noiretextatique]

138. nice example

[Enthusiast]

149. Pfft!

[rhett o rick]

104. What is your point? Seriously, do you even have a point? nm

[George II]

107. The point is that Manning acts like the most important person in the army...

....back then, when Manning was essentially just a lowly private under the spell of Julian Assange.

[bobduca]

117. ASSANGE IS A WIZZARD!!!!1111

BURN THE HERETIC!!! TRAITOR!!!11 eleventy

[rhett o rick]

121. What's the point of you telling us this? You apparently dont like Pfc Manning and choose

to disparage her. Ad hominem attack. You dont address what she says only telling us you dont like her.

[hfojvt]

122. there IS a large dose of "I am smarter than my bosses" in the piece

and even if it is true, that usually will get you in trouble at a job.

But if you extend the metaphor, the generals' bosses are the politicians and the politicians' bosses are supposed to be the American people.

And both the generals and the politicians have the attitude of "I am smarter than my bosses" and "I am gonna lie to my bosses".

I am not a big fan of what Manning did, but if generals and politicians are lying to the American people, then I generally think they should be called on it.

Same with generals and politicians lying to the British people.

And a private working as an analyst knows probably more than some general reading a bunch of reports.

[War Horse]

131. "Manning was essentially just a lowly private under the spell of Julian Assange"

That seems to have been the case, yes. But I found her op/ed to be quite interesting nonetheless.

[Zorra]

108. Did you know that in the US, using male pronouns to insult women in the workplace is harrassment?

And that this type of behavior is most common among RW conservative religious bigots?

You have the right to be treated with respect and not be harassed.

Sex-based harassment is unlawful when it is severe or pervasive and an employer does not take steps to stop it. Jokes or derogatory comments about transgender people, repeated and intentional use of the wrong name or pronouns, or intrusive, disrespectful
personal questions may constitute harassment, and supervisors should take steps to stop it.

http://transequality.org/Resources/EmploymentKnowYourRights_Sept2013.pdf

I believe posters should be banned for doing it here, since the majority of those who do this are exposing themselves as conservatives anyway.

[George II]

109. You don't appreciate my opinion on the subject, so...

....you make counterfeit claims about my political leaning? HAH! You're sorely incorrect and way off base.

And just a hint, Democratic Underground is NOT a "workplace", and even if it was Manning doesn't work here!

Back to the point of the discussion, please.

[Zorra]

110. Has nothing to do with your opinion, it has everything to do with your bigoted language. nt

[George II]

111. Well, you're 100% wrong. Let's get back to the substance of the discussion, ok?

[Zorra]

112. 7 Odious Right-Wing Statements This Week: The Ignorant Bash Gays in Even New Ways, Edition

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025100521

[George II]

114. Even FURTHER off the subject, and now you're getting quite insulting.

[Zorra]

118. Why don't you explain why you called her a he 3 times in your subject line?

"He was a freaking Private First Class...he goes on like he was a four star general!!!"

[George II]

119. What did Manning consider him/herself at the time he/she was an "analyst"?

It wasn't until AFTER the trial and conviction that Manning decided to be known as a woman. Regardless, the person's actions don't change simply because of the gender.

Again, you don't like my opinion about the incidents/crimes in question but can't counter it, so you latch onto the relatively insignificant (in the big picture) gender issue.

Will you EVER get back to the point of the discussion?

[Bluenorthwest]

124. You used the word 'he' toward the author of the Op Ed, 'he goes on as if he was'.

There are a few 'moderate centrists' on DU who like to use the wrong pronouns or say 'he/she' about LGBT people. I have had that done to me repeatedly. I have zero respect for folks who indulge in that arrogant tactic. Anything else they say is just sound and fury coming from a cold heart or an ignorant mind. It is without value.

[Zorra]

140. Thank you, Bluenorthwest. I rest my case. nt

[George II]

152. You're reading "arrogance" and "ignorance" into my words, knowing nothing about me....

....talk about arrogant and ignorant.

Sadly, the substance of the NYT piece has been lost on name calling, (false) assumptions and outright insults.

Too bad some come here with huge chips on their shoulders.

[billhicks76]

151. Muddy The Waters Much

Your words have no substance. Just distracting, shallow insults. A General like in all wars wouldn't offer an honest perspective on the ground. They are the bosses that send troops to the slaughter. Manning is the kind of troop we should support. That war was illegal, immoral and definitely wrong from any religious perspective. Anyone who advocated it advocated for evil pure and simple.

[MohRokTah]

9. I've got no interest whatsoever in what that traitor has to say, eom.

[NRaleighLiberal]

12. isn't it hard to breathe with your head buried so deeply in the sand?

[MohRokTah]

22. I'd ask you the same.

Traitors deserve no respect.

Ever.

[NRaleighLiberal]

31. you are clearly lost....

[Dragonfli]

164. I think he made a left when he should have made a right on his way home

I think he would be happiest in the cave, freeperville is (and I never thought I would ever say this about freeperville) too cerebral for him. A newbie that spends all of his time insulting board members and spreading right wing hyper nationalist propaganda.

[Dragonfli]

33. I agree, the traitors in government that these whistle blowers revealed

Deserve no respect, in fact, in many cases war crimes should be prosecuted. At least there are low ranking people that follow their oaths to the constitution and at least in this one case, had the courage to be tortured for revealing the traitors to us.

[cali]

69. really? ever? so those who were traitors under Hitler, for example, deserve nothing but contempt?

and don't even think of castigating me by bringing Hitler into this. I could have used Pinochet or the Khmer Rouge or any number of governments.

You seem to be saying that abject loyalty to a government is what is required at all times. That is as morally bankrupt as anything I can imagine.

[George II]

113. When in doubt use the ol' "Hitler" analogy!

[Cali_Democrat]

116. Well that didn't take long:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

Godwin's law (or Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies)[1][2] is an Internet adage asserting that "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1"?[2][3]—​ that is, if an online discussion (regardless of topic or scope) goes on long enough, sooner or later someone will compare someone or something to Hitler or Nazism.

[Hissyspit]

154. Godwin never said they weren't apt analogies.

[micraphone]

13. Umm would that be the one who is exposing Govt manipulation of news?

Sorry! For a moment there I thought you were defending Bushco!

[2banon]

15. He's just a reich winger who loves to weigh in with his "Amurka, love or leave it" meme.

When I'm not interested in what someone has to say, I ignore the OP altogether.

[MohRokTah]

21. You mean the one that disclosed national security secrets in violation of her oath?

Last edited Sun Jun 15, 2014, 08:22 PM - Edit history (1)

Yeah, that traitor is right where she belongs.

[Hissyspit]

29. Right-wing authoritarian apologist bullshit.

Big fan of war crimes, hunh?

[MohRokTah]

45. Far left equivalence with teabagging bullshit.

Big fan of treason, hunh?

[Hissyspit]

56. You have no argument.

Not reading the Op/Ed means you lose all arguments already.

Your rabid right-wing language just adds to it.

[Electric Monk]

58. "I know you are, but what am I" is about all they've got.

At least they keep kicking the thread, though

[MohRokTah]

166. Radical Far Left wing unrealistic bullshit

Big fan of hyperbole, hunh?

[xocet]

162. "...national secfurity..." is right up there with "Get A BRAIN, MORANS!" Congratulations.... n/t

[Hissyspit]

14. And people should care what you think because?

Thanks for you input, but Manning's seems much more informed, significant, and well thought-out.

[MohRokTah]

19. The traitor is in prison.

Nothing more needs to be said about the traitor.

[Hissyspit]

23. Bullshit.

I mean, really, what a pile of shit response on a progressive/liberal discussion board.

[MohRokTah]

24. She was convicted for her treason

And damned good that it happened.

She's right where she belongs.

[joshcryer]

59. Espionage, not treason.

And she'll be out of prison in around 8 years. Treason is a life sentence.

[wildbilln864]

60. bet you'd have said the same about...

General Smedley Butler.

[Bluenorthwest]

123. She was not even charged with treason, so you are just spouting falsehoods

for lack of any knowledge of the most basic facts. That sort of an error should be hugely embarrassing to a person who is attempting to preach from a place of certainty.

[Electric Monk]

16. If that were true, you wouldn't be here. I think what you mean to say is you wish they'd shut up.

I value their opinion on matters such as this far more than I do yours.

[2banon]

127. exactly.. n/t

[joshcryer]

20. It's a fantastic read.

It's a shame you allow your preconceived notions to stop you from reading an important piece by an important figure in US history.

[MohRokTah]

27. I don't read bullshit written by traitors. eom

[joshcryer]

28. Without reading it you cannot judge whether it is bullshit.

So feel free to substantiate or scurry off.

[MohRokTah]

43. She's a convicted traitor

No need to read it.

[joshcryer]

57. Then don't call it bullshit.

Just admit you're a close minded person who is ignorant and unable to make any sort of relevant commentary on the subject.

[Warren Stupidity]

143. You know that is a lie, right?

[Change has come]

61. I'm placing you on ignore now.

The donkey was a nice touch

[m-lekktor]

74. oh please. the REAL traitors are her DETRACTORS

the ones who spin and lie to cover up the war crimes she exposed!!

[2banon]

126. Yeah, you keep saying that a number of times, like a broken record you're done. you can leave now

go start your own thread repeating that propaganda. shoo fly, go away.

[bobduca]

30. your fucking loss super patriot.

USA USA USA USA!!!1111

[MohRokTah]

41. Why shoudl I believe anything a convicted traitor has to say?

[bobduca]

78. Maybe because you are not a brainwashed bulletheaded moran?

Last edited Sun Jun 15, 2014, 09:36 AM - Edit history (1)

There's always hope this is satire!

Such an amazing and entirely coincidental influx of new posters!

[MohRokTah]

83. No satire. I don't read bullshit written by traitors.

[MrMickeysMom]

40. Then, go back to sleep...

Join the slumber party. Let us know when your head arises from the hollow dark hole it's in.

[MohRokTah]

42. The only "slumber party" are those who have any interest in the words of a traitor.

[MrMickeysMom]

44. What makes her a traitor?

[MohRokTah]

46. She's in prison for her crimes.

Nuff said.

[MrMickeysMom]

48. So, being imprisoned makes her a traitor?

That is the same as giving credence to those who haven't been tried, but are serving years in Guantanamo.

What are her crimes?

[MohRokTah]

49. She;s a convict. She committed the crimes. There is NO denying that.

She's a traitor.

[MrMickeysMom]

50. What crimes?

[MrMickeysMom]

51. That's what I thought...

(crickets)

[Electric Monk]

52. Gunning down unarmed civilians and journalists. Oh, wait, no, leaking a video of that. Worse?

http://www.chelseamanning.org/learn-more/collateral-murder-video

[truedelphi]

135. Thanks for your post, Electric Monk. n/t

[George II]

158. Okay, how about the other 750,000 documents he gave to Assange?

[xocet]

163. Who is he? n/t

[George II]

168. The person who in 2010 gave 750,000 documents to Julian Assange. IN 2010!!!!

Why don't we stop this inane deflection from the crime that Manning (who WAS a man at the time) committed for which he was convicted.

This gender deflection is just ridiculous - he, she, whatever, that person DID commit crimes for which he/she was convicted. You can try to skew this away from those crimes any way you want, it doesn't change what happened.

[MohRokTah]

54. Violations of Article 92 and 134 of the UCMJ

She's a traitor.

[WillyT]

62. Pretty Sure You've Made Yourself Quite Clear... It's Just That Many Of Us Do Not Agree With You...

[2banon]

128. broken records are never "clear", it's just damaged goods.. n/t

[MrMickeysMom]

106. You have given us… in a word… horse shit here...

Ref: http://usmilitary.about.com/od/punitivearticles/a/134.htm

“Though not specifically mentioned in this chapter, all disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces, all conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, and crimes and offenses not capital, of which persons subject to this chapter may be guilty, shall be taken cognizance of by a general, special, or summary court-martial, according to the nature and degree of the offense, and shall be punished at the discretion of that court.”

(1) In general. Article 134 makes punishable acts in three categories of offenses not specifically covered in any other article of the code. These are referred to as “clauses 1, 2, and 3” of Article 134. Clause 1 offenses involve disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces. Clause 2 offenses involve conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. Clause 3 offenses involve noncapital crimes or offenses which violate Federal law including law made applicable through the Federal Assimilative Crimes Act, see subsection (4) below. If any conduct of this nature is specifically made punishable by another article of the code, it must be charged as a violation of that article. See subparagraph (5)(a) below. How-ever, see paragraph 59c for offenses committed by commissioned officers, cadets, and midshipmen.

You know, there comes a point in a man's life or a woman's life, where neglecting orders that defy superseding codes of military conduct is THE only patriotic duty.

Manning did it, and now she's serving 35 years for it. I'm so fucking glad this op-ed has appeared and so disappointed by we see the same bullshit responses from the same people on DU.

Shame on you.

[2banon]

129. You're wasting your time and energy, that poster is a robot. not a real person with a real brain.

[George II]

173. I'll give Manning credit however. Whereas Manning's cohorts have gone into hiding...

...or otherwise "unavailable" (Assange hiding out in an embassy in London, Snowden hiding out in some undisclosed location in Moscow - both reaping the financial "rewards" of their crimes), at least Manning faced the consequences of the crimes committed.

Bravo to Manning!

[George II]

174. Manning was convicted of 20 offenses, including six Espionage Act violations and five theft counts.

[MohRokTah]

55. Yes

That you need to ask her crimes indicates you failed to pay attention.

[micraphone]

65. Your response does not make sense

Just like all the rest of them.

Wrong board for you. Goodbye.

[MohRokTah]

84. What's Democratic about idolizing a traitor?

[bobduca]

85. And what the fuck is democratic about you except your avatar?

Such an amazing and entirely coincidental influx of new posters!

[MohRokTah]

86. Lifelong Democrat. Work campaigns for Democratic candidates like Barack Obama.

I will be working for a Democratic Campaign after Hillary Clinton announces.

I'm a member of the party and work for party principles.

unlike most on this board, I refuse to work AGAINST the party.

Few on this board are actual Democrats. Most are far left who wouldn't understand a Democratic principle if it bit them in the ass.

[bobduca]

88. Got it, I see you think you are the best kind of (D) here, A Sneering Centrist State Apologist

Democrats read information. Authoritarians close their eyes and yell traitor.

[MohRokTah]

91. "Sneering Centrist" HAH!

I'm a liberal. I am also a realist. There's a big difference.

Teabaggers are unrealistic right wingers. The left has it's own version of purists unwilling to compromise. Both ends of the spectrum are a disease in American politics.

[bobduca]

93. No. when you use the term 'far left' and attack the left with false equivalence canard

It shows your willful lack of comprehension.

When you shout traitor on DU, it shows your clear intention.

Keep moving that Overton window rightward, its hard work I know but with just more pragmatism we can achieve those bipartisan centrist objectives!!!

[MohRokTah]

99. There is no false equivalncy.

The purist left is to the left what the teabaggers are to the right.

Bith are unwilling to compromise.

Both are a disease on American politics.

Both need to be completely ignored and allow their agendas to die.

[bobduca]

103. Oh you are completely ignored, but thankfully DU still lets me reply to your bullshit.

[MohRokTah]

105. The pnly bullshit is the purist left.

[2banon]

130. poster is a robot.. no sign of intelligent life there.

[MrMickeysMom]

101. That you can't relate what the crimes were...

Makes you willfully ignorant of them.

Will you be getting a fitting for your nose ring soon?

[Warren Stupidity]

90. Aren't you a fucking champ.

Last edited Sun Jun 15, 2014, 11:38 AM - Edit history (1)

By the way Chelsea has neither been charged or convicted of treason. That would be because she is a patriot in the true sense of the word.

[Union Scribe]

94. Then why are you in this thread? "eom"

[MohRokTah]

100. Expressing my opinion. eom

[Hissyspit]

155. You have no valid opinion.

You didn't read it.

[Overseas]

10. K&R.

[2banon]

17. I must say, I'm rather stunned the Old Gray Lady published this piece, very commendable.

[elias49]

32. I'm surprised that the story left the prison, myself! nt

[2banon]

125. Yeah, that too, I'm very curious how that happened.

Must have been a surreptitious maneuver.. it was a success, thankfully.

[MadLinguist]

35. But you have to wonder, when it was submitted

My take is that the NY Times wants to be able to trumpet how front-line and brave they are, now that all the destabilization fall-out of the occupation of Iraq has come to the fore. This piece by Chelsea Manning is great and illuminating and splendid, but you see no references to current events. That is strange, in my view, given the timing of this op-ed. I would be willing to bet my retirement that this piece was submitted some years ago, but the NY Times in its wisdom withheld publication til this opportune moment.

[Laughing Mirror]

71. "As Iraq erupts in civil war and America again contemplates intervention,"

quoting from Chelsea, sounds pretty up-to-date, wouldn't you say?

[WillyT]

37. HUGE K & R !!! - Thank You !!!

[Uncle Joe]

47. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, Hissyspit.

[Ichingcarpenter]

53. ditto n/t

[WillyT]

63. Double Ditto !!!

Thanks for the ditto, Uncle Joe !

[struggle4progress]

64. It might have been interesting, if Manning had really decided to discuss the thought-process

behind the document disclosures, but this article is extraordinarily dishonest

Manning wants to explain the acts as results of current limits on press freedom and begins in March 2010. A problem with this narrative is that the decision to release material to Wikileaks was made before that:

... Johnson examined an external hard drive belonging to Manning that had been in his quarters in Baghdad. It included a document titled “wl-press.txt” created on Nov. 30, 2009, around the time Manning is said to have initiated contact with WikiLeaks. That document included the message ... “You can currently contact our investigations editor directly in Iceland at 354 862 3481, 24 hour service, ask for Julian Assange.” The memory card investigators found was among Manning’s belongings at his aunt’s home, in the Maryland suburb of Potomac, where Manning lived before joining the Army in 2009 and while on home leave in January 2010. On that card were four files, one containing 91,000 reports from a database of Afghanistan field reports, and a second containing 400,000 Iraq field reports, said Special Agent David Shaver, also with the Army’s Computer Crimes Investigative Unit ...

By December 2009, Manning had already downloaded large quantities of information. In January 2010, while still on leave at an aunt's home, Manning made several half-hearted efforts to contact more standard media outlets:

... He called the Washington Post. A woman answered who seemed to not take him seriously ... Then, he decided to contact the New York Times. Nobody answered the phone so he left a message ... He left the Times his email and a Skype address ... Manning .. considered going to POLITICO but the weather conditions hampered his travel ...

The first Wikileaks uploads were made while Manning was still on leave in the US. So events in March 2010 are entirely irrelevant to the decision to leak

In the NYT piece, Manning wants to discuss the system of embedding reporters. Many of us will agree that the current methods for controlling press coverage of military action are unnecessary and inappropriately restrict public access to reliable information. It was a rightwing innovation, developed in Reagan-Bush era, to increase Executive authority by imposing message-control from war zones

However, the 29 January 2013 statement Manning provided to the court-martial, explaining his motives, does not appear to discuss issues of war reporting. In fact, it does not really provide much indication of the thinking behind Manning's original Wikileaks upload

Manning's January 2013 might, however, provide some indication of Manning's reasons for later uploading of 100 000 diplomatic cables, which presumably have nothing whatsoever to do with war reporting: In February 2010, Manning read a diplomatic cable on Iceland, concluded "that Iceland was essentially being bullied .. by two larger European powers," believed the US was failing to help Iceland, felt outrage at this, and so immediately uploaded the cable to Wikileaks, which quickly published it

[micraphone]

67. It might have been interesting, if Manning had really decided to discuss the thought-process

Well sorry old chap... maybe nobody asked the question?

Your question: However, the 29 January 2013 statement Manning provided to the court-martial, explaining his motives, does not appear to discuss issues of war reporting.

Answer: She was in court, under questioning. (Court system - remember?). This is not a "discussion".

She wrote an OP. Which, to me, made perfect sense.

Try looking at it that way.

[struggle4progress]

68. Manning here pretends to address "the concerns that motivated me"

In January 2013, in the course of pleading guilty to a number of charges, Manning read the statement I linked, which also claims to address Manning's concerns and motivations

The motivations claimed here differ from the motivations claimed in January 2013

[Hissyspit]

76. Could be all of those motivations.

Also, you know well that Manning and her lawyers were trying to keep her out if prison for the rest of her life, and the trial comments were specifically geared towards that.

[Hissyspit]

75. Dramatic, not over-dramatic.

But, so what?

[bobduca]

79. Oooh burn!111111

If it's one thing DU needs more of it's feebleminded state apologia!

[bobduca]

81. Here's a mirror buddy

Do you know what Apologia is? I expect to see you bashing snowden soon, complaining about Greenwald, and recanting one of the many pro-nsa talking points ready to paste from your clipboard. Did I guess wrong?

Such an amazing and entirely coincidental influx of new posters!

[Kali]

102. she

[bobduca]

132. Hah.. bye "Right Angle" don't let the doorknob hit you!

[m-lekktor]

72. aah, Michael Hastings embedd status was pulled after criticism of Obama. that's a shocker.

very interesting read. none of this is a surprise. i hope Chelsea Manning writes more. i am surprised the New York Times would print such revealing info. must be doing it due to Chelsea's notoriety

[truedelphi]

137. I was surprised by that too. Also some prisoners are not allowed to

Communicate in any way any political thoughts, experiences and opinions. I hope that Chelsea continues to be able to relate her experiences.

[ProSense]

89. Interesting piece, but

it really destroys the claim that if Snowden had remained in the country, he'd have been silenced. Here is Manning writing a op-ed critical of the military, and doing so from prison.

Manning didn't flee. She also was in the military and tried under that system. Snowden would have been treated like those, the several prominent whistleblowers over the last several years who did not flee the country, who were prosecuted as civilians.

No charges for man who leaked surveillance program

WASHINGTON — The Justice Department has dropped its investigation into a former department attorney who tipped off the media about the Bush administration’s warrantless eavesdropping program.

The department informed Thomas Tamm’s attorneys that he will not be prosecuted for the leak that then-President George W. Bush called a breach of national security.

Tamm has said he called The New York Times about the program because it “didn’t smell right” and he thought the public had a right to know.

The Times won the Pulitzer Prize for its 2005 story exposing the program designed to catch terrorists by eavesdropping on international phone calls and emails of U.S. residents without court warrants.

<...>

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/no-charges-for-man-who-leaked-surveillance-program/2011/04/26/AFt9o6rE_story.html

Thomas Tamm:

“He’s in for a pretty overwhelming investigation,” Tamm, now a criminal defense attorney in Rockville, Md., told POLITICO in an interview. “I think the government will use a lot of their resources to try to find him.”

But if Snowden is returned to the United States, Tamm said, “I think with the right representation, and with the right way of presenting what he did, I think he’ll be able to put his life back together.” Tamm says he’d even be willing to be part of the defense team.

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=A9C45FF7-E7EB-44AD-9C5A-D2C7F0B7F276

William Binney, Thomas Drake, and Tamm are whistleblowers who stayed and faced the consequences of their actions. They were not persecuted, they faced prosecution. They are not in jail.

Releasing the information and remaining in the country would have sparked the same debate. Such a debate would have likely fueled his case for leniency.

Back to the Manning op-ed. It seems the point is hindsight to warn about how journalists should be treated if there is ever another conflict involving troops.

<...>

One clue to this disjunction lay in the public affairs reports. Near the top of each briefing was the number of embedded journalists attached to American military units in a combat zone. Throughout my deployment, I never saw that tally go above 12. In other words, in all of Iraq, which contained 31 million people and 117,000 United States troops, no more than a dozen American journalists were covering military operations...press access to a conflict begins when a reporter applies for embed status. All reporters are carefully vetted by military public affairs officials. This system is far from unbiased. Unsurprisingly, reporters who have established relationships with the military are more likely to be granted access.

Less well known is that journalists whom military contractors rate as likely to produce “favorable” coverage, based on their past reporting, also get preference. This outsourced “favorability” rating assigned to each applicant is used to screen out those judged likely to produce critical coverage.

Reporters who succeeded in obtaining embed status in Iraq were then required to sign a media “ground rules” agreement. Army public affairs officials said this was to protect operational security, but it also allowed them to terminate a reporter’s embed without appeal.


<...>

Opinion polls indicate that Americans’ confidence in their elected representatives is at a record low. Improving media access to this crucial aspect of our national life — where America has committed the men and women of its armed services — would be a powerful step toward re-establishing trust between voters and officials.

Get the hell out of Aghanistan, and stay the hell out of Iraq...this time. An illegal war doesn't need to be revisited.

Obama: We Will Not Send U.S. Troops Back Into Combat In Iraq
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/obama-no-us-troops-iraq

[Warren Stupidity]

92. Strawman with blue links.

Don't you feel miserable at your job sometimes? Here's the deal "pro", the Manning case is why Snowden avoided our injustice system, not because he would be silenced, his documents were safe and the revelations will continue even if he is assassinated, but because he would be spending the rest of his life in jail, and that was not a price he was willing to pay.

[ProSense]

95. Silliness about "blue links."

Don't you feel miserable at your job sometimes? Here's the deal "pro", the Manning case is why Snowden avoided our injustice system, not because he would be silenced, his documents were safe and the revelations will continue even if he is assassinated, but because he would be spending the rest of his life in jail, and that was not a price he was willing to pay.

"Here's the deal 'pro'"?

What's your "job"? Is it to post nonsense?

[Warren Stupidity]

96. My avocation.

Is to respond to disinformation.

[ProSense]

98. Thanks

"My avocation. Is to respond to disinformation like this"

...for confirming that your "avocation" is to post nonsense.

You seem to think that a response about "blue links" and invoking the words "job" and "pro" amount to something other than utter nonsense.

[bobduca]

115. +1000

It is appreciated.

[woo me with science]

141. [phone]

There, that's better.

[Warren Stupidity]

142. you had me worried.

[woo me with science]

144. Been that kind of day.

I dumped coffee grounds in the dishwasher by mistake, too.

[ProSense]

161. .

hi-five!!!

[Enthusiast]

150. Well done.

[Hissyspit]

156. It's still a straw man.

[ProSense]

160. No, it's not.

Still, it's interesting to see the little group here believing that there hi-five fest is relevant.

My point is spot on, and no amount of silliness will make it anything but spot on.

[Hissyspit]

169. In a thread about Manning talking about embedded journalists and the military

your point is spot on?

Who said Snowden would be silenced if he was imprisoned AFTER his leaks? I don't remember anyone saying that.

Equating NSA leaks with military leaks is spot on? Who says because Manning was allowed an op/ed, that Snowden would be?

[Cha]

170. "Silliness about "blue links." Really. You make a compelling case and all they can come

up with is " blue links". Like we're suppose to not honor links anymore because they're squeaking about them. And, making a personal attack about "pro" because they want to shut down discussion. Not gonna happen.. bullying doesn't fly around here.

[msanthrope]

139. Chelsea Manning isn't a coward. Comrade Eddie is. nt

[Warren Stupidity]

146. You do know that Russia, fucked up authoritarian state that it is, is not communist, right?

I mean seriously, that shit ended decades ago. You might have had a point about courage right up to the "comrade eddie" bullshit. To be effective you have to avoid simplistic irrelevant bullshit like that.

[Hissyspit]

157. Probably your most useless post ever.

Congrats on the milestone.

[Warren Stupidity]

120. all the usual suspects have mustered to respond to this emergency!

Plus an influx of brand new recruits!

How drole, or perhaps just dull.

[JoeyT]

153. With several once again proving nonsensical the claim

that their main objection to Snowden was that he fled to China/Russia, or that he fled at all.

And some naked, unashamed transphobia from one of 'em to boot.

[Zorra]

165. Yes, closing ranks once again with that most famous conservative DU troll of all time,

"Name Removed".