Re:Judge sentences Bradley Manning to 35 years
by aclevernickname on Wednesday August 21, 2013 @06:55PM
(#6253860)
> And really, the thing that got him most in trouble were the hundreds of thousands of diplomatic cables that exposed no wrongdoing
You've clearly not read the cables. they were responsible for at least two revolutions [1][2], and we're still learning from them.
[1] http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/may/13/amnesty-interna...
[2] http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/article/wikihistory-did-l...
Re:Judge sentences Bradley Manning to 35 years
by mpyne on Wednesday August 21, 2013 @08:54PM
(#6254396)
The cables themselves didn't express any American wrongdoing though. It expressed American opinions regarding other nations' governments and internal politics.
And either way I wouldn't be so quick to claim that inciting those revolutions is on the balance a positive thing for either Manning or Wikileaks, for the same reason that toppling Saddam's despotic regime was not (on the balance) a good thing.
Also, whistleblowing doesn't always include breaking a law or contract. Also, he also exposed things that WEREN'T wrongdoing, and even the "wrong" things he "exposed" were pretty much already known and "wrong" is VERY subjective in this circumstance. The "wrongdoing" was not in what happened in the video, nor the number of civilian casualties, those are accidents and mistakes, but in the misrepresentation of those events. That is not really in and of itself wrong.)
And really, the thing that got him most in trouble were the hundreds of thousands of diplomatic cables that exposed no wrongdoing but still exposed state secrets.