Why are Bob Woodward's WH sources - or Woodward himself - not on trial next to Bradley Manning?
Why are Bob Woodward's WH sources - or Woodward himself - not on trial next to Bradley Manning? The extremist prosecution of Manning, accused of 'aiding and abetting al-Qaida', poses a real threat to US press freedom
Journalist Bob Woodward has spilled far more sensitive secrets than WikiLeaks, including in his 2010 book, Obama's Wars, praised by Osama bin Laden. Photograph: Brad Barket/AFP
There are numerous travesties defining the ongoing prosecution of accused whistleblower Bradley Manning, but none more dangerous than the accusation that by leaking classified information, he "aided and abetted the enemy" (al-Qaida) - a capital offense. Not even the government claims he intended to help al-Qaida. The theory is that, even though it was not his intent, the information Manning disclosed may end up being of value to the terrorist organization: a claim that applies to virtually every leak of classified information to any media organization, thus transforming standard whistle-blowing into the equivalent of treason.
In late September, I wrote about documents obtained from the Air Force relating to an investigation of a systems analyst suspected of communicating with WikiLeaks and Julian Assange. The documents listed the suspected crime as "Communicating With the Enemy" under Article 104 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice - almost certainly the same theory the government is employing in an attempt to put Bradley Manning in prison for life. I wrote then about why this theory poses such a towering threat to investigative journalism:
"It seems clear that the US military now deems any leaks of classified information to constitute the capital offense of 'aiding the enemy' or 'communicating with the enemy' even if no information is passed directly to the 'enemy' and there is no intent to aid or communicate with them. Merely informing the public about classified government activities now constitutes this capital crime because it 'indirectly' informs the enemy.
"The implications of this theory are as obvious as they are disturbing. If someone can be charged with 'aiding' or 'communicating with the enemy' by virtue of leaking to WikiLeaks, then why wouldn't that same crime be committed by someone leaking classified information to any outlet: the New York Times, the Guardian, ABC News or anyone else? In other words, does this theory not inevitably and necessarily make all leaking of all classified information - whether to WikiLeaks or any media outlet - a capital offense: treason or a related crime?"
-SNIP-
In order to demonstrate that Manning's leaks aided al-Qaida, the government yesterday said, for the first time, that it intends to introduce "evidence that Osama bin Laden requested and received from a Qaeda member some of the State Department cables and military reports that Private Manning is accused of passing to WikiLeaks." Bin Laden and other al-Qaida members almost certainly had an interest in reading the vast majority of national security leaks over the last decade published by the New York Times, the Washington Post and other media outlets. The very notion that their mere interest in leaks proves the "aiding and abetting" charge demonstrates just how menacing this theory is.
More at......
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jan/10/manning-prosecution-press-freedom-woodward
MADem
(135,425 posts)And he's always been one.
KoKo
(84,711 posts)But....well a three letter man starting with "C"....got it. The rumors have been strong...
Bernstein was the Good Guy...the "tool?" Ya' think?
It will come out for our Great Grandchildren...given how long they've taken to release the JFK investigation. (I don't think even the Kennedy kids even knew or will know).
He did his military service in Naval Intelligence.
He always seems to land on his feet.
I don't think he's without resources, and if he's not in the club, he's an associate member, as it were.
IMO, anyway. I could be wrong, though!
jerseyjack
(1,361 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)struggle4progress
(118,282 posts)Larrymoe Curlyshemp
(111 posts)another incisive post from GG, who had to leave this country in order that his anti-neocon voice be heard!
struggle4progress
(118,282 posts)to Brazil because it was easier for him to get residency there than for his partner to get residency in the US
struggle4progress
(118,282 posts)The Guardian's Glenn Greenwald gets it wrong by comparing the two
By Jeb Golinkin
January 11, 2013
... Greenwald's primary argument strikes me as dangerously extreme.
Essentially, Greenwald argues that the government's theory that Manning is guilty of a crime for revealing classified information that eventually found its way into the hands of al Qaeda leaders applies with equal force to the country's most prolific investigative journalist, Bob Woodward, who regularly manages to pry classified information out of his sources and almost as regularly publishes it on the front page of The Washington Post or in one of his many best-selling books ... Put simply, Bob Woodward never had a duty, and never took an oath, to protect the government's secrets or follow the orders of anyone in the government ...
... Woodward's job is to try to acquire and reveal government secrets for the benefit of the public at large, even though this often involves compromising government priorities.
Bradley Manning had very different responsibilities as a member of the United States Army. When Private Manning joined the service, he swore an oath ...
Pointing to the oath may seem overly legalistic or even a bit naïve, but its importance cannot be overstated. Had Manning not sworn that oath, and had the military not perhaps far too blindly believed that he intended to abide by it, the government would never have allowed Private Manning within a country mile of any of the sensitive information Manning dealt with for hours each day. In breaching that trust, Manning breached the same public trust that Aldrich Ames and Robert Hansen did ...
http://theweek.com/article/index/238689/bob-woodward-is-no-bradley-manning
struggle4progress
(118,282 posts)By Philip Caulfield / NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
Published: Thursday, January 10, 2013, 11:28 AM
Updated: Thursday, January 10, 2013, 12:19 PM
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/bin-laden-wikileaks-material-article-1.1237371