4 ms·

> I'm not personally a big Manning fan Can you elaborate why? I am interested in hearing your point of view because maybe I just have one side of the story.

by thex86 13y ago

eli 13y ago
Sure, but I really only have a few quick minutes so this might be a little scattered. There are some interesting things in some of the cables he leaked (it's going to be great for historians). There were even a few troubling things in there that probably deserve investigation.... but the vast majority of the cables were, at most, embarrassing. They strained foreign relationships and embarrassed allies & various diplomats by name. I don't know if anyone was hurt or killed over them, but I think it's at least plausible. For what? Were there any documents that Manning had access to that he didn't try to take? The indiscriminate nature of what he took makes me seriously question his motives. What specifically was he blowing the whistle on? I admit that whistleblower protection sucks in the military, but he didn't even try to go through the proper channels. I agree the US overclassifies documents and is too secretive. I agree we need more transparency and I certainly agree we need better whistleblower protection and oversight...But I don't think that gives everyone with access the right to unilaterally declassify whatever they want without penalty. The military can't work like that. No organization can work like that.
venomsnake 13y ago
What Manning did was stupid. And while I agree that 35 years is harsh (mostly because I don't believe in prison terms above 5 years) he leaked a lot of stuff, not all of it related to warcrimes. The 1.5 gigabyte unecrypted file is in the torrents so you could take a look to see what is inside - if it is legal under your jurisdiction. Also WikiLeaks didn't released all cables that he gave them against - so he failed on that front too. He also didn't make a dead man's switch that he could leak additional material in case he is captured or convicted - that to use as bargaining chip. He called himself Bradass83 as a nickname and approached a hacker on im program. So - he leaked too much, too nondiscriminatory, failed to it properly and was behaving amateurish.

> I'm not personally a big Manning fan Can you elaborate why? I am interested in hearing your point of view because maybe I just have one side of the story.

by thex86 13y ago

> I'm not personally a big Manning fan Can you elaborate why? I am interested in hearing your point of view because maybe I just have one side of the story.

eli 13y ago

Sure, but I really only have a few quick minutes so this might be a little scattered. There are some interesting things in some of the cables he leaked (it's going to be great for historians). There were even a few troubling things in there that probably deserve investigation.... but the vast majority of the cables were, at most, embarrassing. They strained foreign relationships and embarrassed allies & various diplomats by name. I don't know if anyone was hurt or killed over them, but I think it's at least plausible. For what? Were there any documents that Manning had access to that he didn't try to take? The indiscriminate nature of what he took makes me seriously question his motives. What specifically was he blowing the whistle on? I admit that whistleblower protection sucks in the military, but he didn't even try to go through the proper channels. I agree the US overclassifies documents and is too secretive. I agree we need more transparency and I certainly agree we need better whistleblower protection and oversight...But I don't think that gives everyone with access the right to unilaterally declassify whatever they want without penalty. The military can't work like that. No organization can work like that.

venomsnake 13y ago

What Manning did was stupid. And while I agree that 35 years is harsh (mostly because I don't believe in prison terms above 5 years) he leaked a lot of stuff, not all of it related to warcrimes. The 1.5 gigabyte unecrypted file is in the torrents so you could take a look to see what is inside - if it is legal under your jurisdiction. Also WikiLeaks didn't released all cables that he gave them against - so he failed on that front too. He also didn't make a dead man's switch that he could leak additional material in case he is captured or convicted - that to use as bargaining chip. He called himself Bradass83 as a nickname and approached a hacker on im program. So - he leaked too much, too nondiscriminatory, failed to it properly and was behaving amateurish.