Tuesday, August 20, 2013

A Very Good Summary of the Sentencing Phase



in the Bradley Manning trial has been made available by Soonergrunt at Balloon Juice here.

Please note that the trial, the sentencing and, presumably, the appeal are carried out under the jurisdiction of the United States Army under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.  I say this because apparently there are many people who believe this fact to be a trivial irrelevancy to be waved away...or that civilians and members of the military are subject to identical judicial systems and consequences...or that Pfc. Manning was tried by Spartans or Klingons...or that all whistleblowers are automatically whisked away to Rura Penthe  never to be heard from again.

And since none of that is true, continuing to insist that it is just makes a person, oh, what is that word I'm looking for...





25 comments:

Lumpy Lang said...

"...the trial, the sentencing and, presumably, the appeal are carried out under the jurisdiction of the United States Army under the Uniform Code of Military Justice"

Don't worry kids, Droneglass says everything's all ok!

The war criminals, torturers, mass murderers et al. walk free while Manning - who exposed their crimes - will rot in prison for decades... ('cause he's the one who 'broke the law,' see?)

mahakal said...

Hey, how's Barrett Brown doing these days? Because I hear it's just those military guys who might face being silenced and imprisoned forever for revealing secrets of the Nat-Sec state.

And by the way, didn't Bradley Manning have a legal duty to expose war crimes?

Anonymous said...

He didn't expose war crimes, Mahakal, he exposed what happens in war.

There is also a proper way to report war crimes. Everyone in uniformed service is made aware of it. Go ask someone who has served.

-- Nonny Mouse

mahakal said...

He did that, Nonny Mouse, and he was ignored by the chain of command. He had an obligation to expose war crimes notwithstanding any command structure. That you deny these were war crimes at all is very telling.

Anonymous said...

Your comment section is now 3/4 troll.

mahakal said...

^meant to say any command structure notwithstanding

zombie rotten mcdonald said...

That you deny these were war crimes at all is very telling.

5:37 PM


Actually, I defy you to point to a place where NM has done any such thing.

Anonymous said...

What is it very telling about, Mahakal? That I am better informed than you about what Manning did?

The mil-bloggers I follow are all pretty much in agreement that Manning stepped outside the chain of command rather than try to go through channels. Moreover, they're pretty much in agreement that what Manning revealed *wasn't* a war crime either.

I'm sorry, I'm going to take their opinions over yours, as I am pretty sure they know better than you.

-- Nonny Mouse

Anonymous said...

Stonekettle Station has a good round up of what Manning did wrong. Go read his take.

-- Nonny Mouse

zombie rotten mcdonald said...

He did that, Nonny Mouse, and he was ignored by the chain of command.

Please to be providing evidence that he did this.

Also, it may be noted that Barrett Brown's situation is pretty much completely different from Bradley Mannings, in that one is being tried in a military jurisdiction, and the other hasn't even made it to a trial yet, and when it does, will be in a not-military jurisdiction.

Carmelo Clandestine said...

Why, Driftglass?

Your occasional jokes to the contrary, I don't think you're getting paid even one cent to defend the Empire.

You opposed the Empire back when the Chimp was its nominal Caesar and Darth Cheney was its actual Caesar.

So why do you defend it now?

What has the Empire ever done for you, to deserve the loyalty you are giving it?

Anonymous said...

If I literally gave you an actual website... and domain..with the corresponding disques comment control.or whatever you want to use...and potential for monetization
Would you weed these guys out?
I am not talking about actually desenting / debating voices...just these god awful, name calling no account trolls...
Would you do it?
Hell..I would build it for you ...

Lumpy Lang said...

"they're pretty much in agreement that what Manning revealed *wasn't* a war crime either"

Ya... who ya gonna believe - nm's military 'experts' ...or your lyin eyes?

Repulsive.

Not only U.S. citizens, but the entire world owes a debt to Bradley Manning for exposing (some of) U.S. imperialism's crimes. He should never have spent one day in prison.

zombie rotten mcdonald said...

35 years.

Certainly Lumpifer will be outraged, because he is resolute in his ability to be outraged at the US Military operating within its defined parameters, but the "Bradley Manning will be getting 160 years!!!!!!111!!!" crowd will be "yes, butting" their way through the day...

Anonymous said...

Yeah Lumpy, I'm going to believe people who understand something about the rules of engagement in a war zone and who know from experience that the slaughter you saw in that video is a feature of war, not a bug.

What Manning saw was an argument against starting stupid, unnecessary wars, not in favor of joining the war effort and then sabotaging the efforts of your comrades. If you can't understand why a private in a war zone is not allowed to hold a personal referendum on state policy, then I'm done talking to you you waste of oxygen.

-- Nonny Mouse

Lumpy Lang said...

News flash to Dim Bulb:

In an imperialist war - the imperialists are the bad guys.

Anyone striking a blow against their forces has my support. Their defeat is always the 'lesser evil.'

mahakal said...

If the Nonny Mouse and Zombie Liar McDonald aren't professional sock puppets, they should be.

And if you don't think this is a war crime, fuck you very much.

Anonymous said...

Your cartoonishly reductive framing of life and death issues is incorrect and you are being glib about the lives of your fellow Americans.

-- Nonny Mouse

Anonymous said...

Christ on toast you are such a fucking imbecile, Lumpy.

Do you honestly think the men and women who do the fighting are imperialists, even if you chose to label the war as such? For that matter, do you imagine that any war becomes a moral enterprise under the right circumstances?

The answer is no in both cases.

The men (and women) who actually have dreams of empire are not much effected by the "lesser evil" you bandy about -- the maiming and death of the people who fight under your flag. No good outcome comes from casualties, on either side, in a fucked up unnecessary war-- except to make people like you feel like your country is being appropriately punished. Oh, not you personally of course, just your country.

You know what, if you had the courage of those abstract convictions of yours you would go and put them into action, rather than offering those poor fuckers on the other side of the world your "support".

What a colossal joke you are.

-- Nonny Mouse

zombie rotten mcdonald said...

accusations of lying without any actual proof are defamatory, as you yourself have pointed out mahakal.

zombie rotten mcdonald said...

also, you have an incorrect handle on what a sockpuppet is.

as you have, I have been consistent in my nym and my commenting, and never made a comment that claimed as a different person.

Anonymous said...

Shocking, tragic, disgusting, and unnecessary: yes to all. A war crime? No. Slaughtering people from the air as they try to retrieve the bodies of their fallen is fair game if they come in a vehicle not marked properly (red cross or red crescent). This is just warfare; the "civilized" rules of warfare, you understand. Just warfare.

And inevitable, that and worse, the moment the decision was made to occupy a couple of foreign countries. And it continues too, because the current guy has to give the counterinsurgency crew rope to hang themselves with and preserve his strong on defense cred.

And you know what? It really *should* be a war crime to send soldiers into a fucking war of aggression. Supposedly it is already, but men as powerful as the POTUS never pay the price for their venal acts.

But none of the above changes the fact that Manning put his fellow soldiers at risk and betrayed his oath doing what he did. Both his oath and those rules he disregarded have good reasons for existing. You may be grateful to him for opening your eyes and your fellow traveler, Lumpy Lang, may think the safety of American soldiers is worth less than shit, but Manning's carelessness has consequences and none of the vast trove of data he leaked justifies his misdeeds.

Feel free to be offended.

-- Nonny Mouse

mahakal said...

I have actually proven you are a liar, Zombie Liar McDonald. Truth is an absolute defense to claims of defamation.

Anonymous said...

Except that your favorite thread doesn't prove what you think it does. Thanks for posting it again though. I'm sure Zombie is reeling under the terrible hiding you are giving him.

-- Nonny Mouse

zombie rotten mcdonald said...

I will only say that my nym does NOT include the intercap D in the last name.

Let's just be clear on that, shall we?

in fact, most places, I do it with no caps at all. Also, the middle part is "rotten". there's a reason for that, actually, and I would ask that you respect that.

Be drinkable, dude.