Quote from: Luckybit on June 06, 2013, 02:41:17 PM

Quote from: Wolf0 on June 03, 2013, 06:33:16 PM

Quote from: jackjack on June 03, 2013, 06:29:44 PM

Quote from: SEC agent on June 03, 2013, 06:12:39 PM

Quote from: jackjack on June 03, 2013, 06:05:47 PM

Quote from: SEC agent on June 03, 2013, 05:31:31 PM

Quote from: jackjack on June 03, 2013, 05:14:48 PM

So saying publicly and proving that USA kills and tortures people undermines your freedom?

So what? Did anything happen thanks to that?

He stole and released critical intelligence that could result in harming diplomatic relations, and put American soldiers lives at risk during wartime (which is aiding and abetting the enemy). He intentionally violated the Espionage Act, and as someone with a security clearance, he knew the risks. Violation of the Espionage Act carries with it a penalty of death.

If he was unprepared to accept those consequences, he should've kept his treasonous mouth shut.

Wow. Is it that tough to answer?

Hint: the red question just needs a Yes or a No
Hint: the green question just needs a Yes or a No

The first is not a "yes or no" question, because it is a leading question. It doesn't really matter what the classified documents reveal, because stealing and releasing classified documents is illegal and a clear act of espionage. If he felt that something illegal was happening, he should've gone through the proper channels and had it investigated.

For your second question, yes.

Does saying publicly and proving that USA kills and tortures people undermines your freedom?

Apparently, he thinks yes. Even though the government is abusing the ability to classify things to hide their crimes, exposing those crimes to the people should totally still be punishable by death. Roll Eyes

The problem with exposing the crime to the people is that it helps the enemy government. So I understand SEC Agent's concern. I also understand the concern about governments abusing citizens killing and torturing them. There has to be a balance where SEC Agent admits that in the case of murder and torture the information has to be leaked but in the case of damn near everything else, what business does the general public have to know it and what right does Bradley Manning or whomever else have to leak it?

A government which kills and tortures people, it might be worth risking going to jail to protect people from that. At the same time anyone who is brave enough to leak that might not live to see the jail, it's not like it's safe to leak stuff like that.

I think the world is better off knowing that the US government uses torture because now the US government cannot keep lying and saying it never tortured anyone. The documents are out there whether they got leaked or were declassified they are out there. The fact that torture ever was allowed should be reason enough to never trust the US government, how do you trust any institution which tortures innocent people or terrorists?

The issue is that releasing classified documents that endanger american lives is the wrong way to bring attention to acts that may be illegal.

If manning was concerned that illegal acts were being performed by his peers in the military, he should have gone through the proper channels and had it investigated. We even have whistleblower protection laws to prevent any retaliation from the Feds as a result.

By taking it into his own hands (and knowingly committing treason in the process), he sealed his own fate.