Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution ... [View all]arely staircase
(12,482 posts)2. if he uncovered war crimes, why not just release those cables?
how does that justify releasing all the other stuff?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
81 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution ... [View all]
tk2kewl
Jun 2013
OP
You're begging the question which was whether Ellsberg releasing more than
CharlesInCharge
Jun 2013
#25
Manning did not have a TS clearance. He didn't have access to TS information. (nt)
jeff47
Jun 2013
#21
Oh, Manning most certainly did have TS clearance. Manning CHOSE to release
CharlesInCharge
Jun 2013
#28
Then the question would be 'why did he not go to Congress'. I believe he explained
sabrina 1
Jun 2013
#37
And the same elements that got Ellsberg's case dismissed exist here and, according
sabrina 1
Jun 2013
#70
He had an obligation to abide by his oath which he tried to do. Why didn't Ellsberg
sabrina 1
Jun 2013
#42
Technical note: Ellsberg did go to Congress first but was blown off. Likewise, Manning did
CharlesInCharge
Jun 2013
#48
And if this was only about that Collateral Damage video he probably would not be charged now however
cstanleytech
Jun 2013
#59
Then he made a principled choice and is willing to pay the price of this actions.
hack89
Jun 2013
#38
Funny how we ignore the 'legal obligations' of our elected officials in this country. Can you
sabrina 1
Jun 2013
#46
Please provide a link to the supposed Wikileaks pointing to "the guy with an AK-47". Otherwise,
CharlesInCharge
Jun 2013
#32
Wikileaks pointed out CAMERA EQUIPMENT. If what was revealed in that video was
sabrina 1
Jun 2013
#51
The military probably classified it I bet because they knew they screwed up and they were
cstanleytech
Jun 2013
#62
Well, killing people isn't a mistake. And once it is known that two of the people killed
sabrina 1
Jun 2013
#76
No one is arguing that Manning was required to obey a law to coverup a war crime though.
cstanleytech
Jun 2013
#77
If he'd handed the documents to the Government of China, would he have been as honorable?
brooklynite
Jun 2013
#61