4 ms·

Yes, really. No one has died and I have never heard of anyone of those being in danger. Michael Kozak, whom you quote, works for the State Department.

by flexie 13y ago

jaegerpicker 13y ago
How could you possibly know that? I'm all about war crimes being exposed but Manning did not do it the right way. 95% of the stuff he released was not needed and did put people in danger. A lot the people you and I have never heard of. I don't know for sure that no one died but you can't possibly know that no one has died. It seems very likely that if an informant or other foreign national in Iran(or other similar type country) was working with the US and was exposed that their fate isn't looking real healthy at the moment.
- veridies 13y ago
  > 95% of the stuff he released was not needed It is my personal opinion (and the intent of the FOIA and laws regarding classification) that everything should be released unless it is damaging, which almost nothing Manning released could have been. The fact that the US government hasn't been able to point to a single death resulting from Manning's leaks implies to me that everything he released should have been public to begin with. You say that "95% of the stuff he released was not needed". I would argue that 95% of it needed to be released.
  - jaegerpicker 13y ago
    >>which almost nothing Manning released could have been Again how do we know that? How do we as not involved in the Intelligence game at that level know? I'm not about letting anyone off on war crimes. They need brought up on charges and now. However little details can easily lead to lots of other bits of information. Manning didn't think about that, he just opened the firehose. There is no clear answers but endangering others for no real reason has to have consequences. >>The fact that the US government hasn't been able to point to a single death resulting from Manning's leaks implies to me that everything he released should have been public to begin with. Again how do you know that? Just because they haven't doesn't mean they can't. To point to deaths mean they but the others in the chain of intelligence at risk.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- joering2 13y ago
  > How could you possibly know that? okay, but how would YOU possibly know otherwise?? Just because state official told you?? like those don't lie?? Just pay attention exactly to their words: they can say anything they want to, unless they "show me the money", give me a proof, they can keep blabbing regardless if they are state employee or president of the Milky Way himself!
  - jaegerpicker 13y ago
    I get your point but these are peoples lives, you have HAVE to side on caution. Getting people killed just because we believe, that the government MIGHT be lieing with no proof the other way, isn't good enough. That's more blood that we as American people don't need.
    - aqme28 13y ago
      This is indeed peoples lives. Should Manning be prosecuted aggressively and have his life ruined because he may have caused vague damages?
      - jaegerpicker 13y ago
        There is nothing vague about endangering others when disclosing large amount of data. If he had just wanted to disclose the war crimes then I'd be incredibly outraged at his prosecution but he was reckless and put others into danger because of it. A whistle blower also has the responsibility to only disclose the important data, he failed at that.
        aqme28 13y ago
        Again, he didn't put anyone in danger so stop saying he did.
        jaegerpicker 13y ago
        He did, he released info that could, COULD, have lead to other informants directly. You have no idea rather or not anyone actually came to harm, neither do I, but the possibility is plain because of his actions and irresponsibility. If I drive drunk I'm arrested because I MIGHT harm someone with my irresponsibility. No different here, he released info that could lead directly to other intelligence agents, that puts them directly into harms way.
kbradero 13y ago
and what about all the people already killed by drones and collateral's? who in gov is in prison at least 35 years ?

Yes, really. No one has died and I have never heard of anyone of those being in danger. Michael Kozak, whom you quote, works for the State Department.

by flexie 13y ago

Yes, really. No one has died and I have never heard of anyone of those being in danger. Michael Kozak, whom you quote, works for the State Department.

jaegerpicker 13y ago

How could you possibly know that? I'm all about war crimes being exposed but Manning did not do it the right way. 95% of the stuff he released was not needed and did put people in danger. A lot the people you and I have never heard of. I don't know for sure that no one died but you can't possibly know that no one has died. It seems very likely that if an informant or other foreign national in Iran(or other similar type country) was working with the US and was exposed that their fate isn't looking real healthy at the moment.

veridies 13y ago
> 95% of the stuff he released was not needed It is my personal opinion (and the intent of the FOIA and laws regarding classification) that everything should be released unless it is damaging, which almost nothing Manning released could have been. The fact that the US government hasn't been able to point to a single death resulting from Manning's leaks implies to me that everything he released should have been public to begin with. You say that "95% of the stuff he released was not needed". I would argue that 95% of it needed to be released.
- jaegerpicker 13y ago
  >>which almost nothing Manning released could have been Again how do we know that? How do we as not involved in the Intelligence game at that level know? I'm not about letting anyone off on war crimes. They need brought up on charges and now. However little details can easily lead to lots of other bits of information. Manning didn't think about that, he just opened the firehose. There is no clear answers but endangering others for no real reason has to have consequences. >>The fact that the US government hasn't been able to point to a single death resulting from Manning's leaks implies to me that everything he released should have been public to begin with. Again how do you know that? Just because they haven't doesn't mean they can't. To point to deaths mean they but the others in the chain of intelligence at risk.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
joering2 13y ago
> How could you possibly know that? okay, but how would YOU possibly know otherwise?? Just because state official told you?? like those don't lie?? Just pay attention exactly to their words: they can say anything they want to, unless they "show me the money", give me a proof, they can keep blabbing regardless if they are state employee or president of the Milky Way himself!
- jaegerpicker 13y ago
  I get your point but these are peoples lives, you have HAVE to side on caution. Getting people killed just because we believe, that the government MIGHT be lieing with no proof the other way, isn't good enough. That's more blood that we as American people don't need.
  - aqme28 13y ago
    This is indeed peoples lives. Should Manning be prosecuted aggressively and have his life ruined because he may have caused vague damages?
    - jaegerpicker 13y ago
      There is nothing vague about endangering others when disclosing large amount of data. If he had just wanted to disclose the war crimes then I'd be incredibly outraged at his prosecution but he was reckless and put others into danger because of it. A whistle blower also has the responsibility to only disclose the important data, he failed at that.
      - aqme28 13y ago
        Again, he didn't put anyone in danger so stop saying he did.
        jaegerpicker 13y ago
        He did, he released info that could, COULD, have lead to other informants directly. You have no idea rather or not anyone actually came to harm, neither do I, but the possibility is plain because of his actions and irresponsibility. If I drive drunk I'm arrested because I MIGHT harm someone with my irresponsibility. No different here, he released info that could lead directly to other intelligence agents, that puts them directly into harms way.

kbradero 13y ago

and what about all the people already killed by drones and collateral's? who in gov is in prison at least 35 years ?