RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Excerpt: "The judge at US soldier Bradley Manning's sentencing hearing rejected some government evidence Wednesday that the classified information he disclosed through the anti-secrecy website WikiLeaks had a 'chilling effect' on US foreign relations."

Bradley Manning being escorted from the courtroom. (photo: Scott Galindez/RSN)
Bradley Manning being escorted from the courtroom. (photo: Scott Galindez/RSN)


Manning Judge Rejects Claim Leaks Had 'Chilling Effect'

By Associated Press

09 August 13

 

RSN Special Coverage: Trial of Bradley Manning

rsn fr splash promo

 

Judge rules that State Department testimony is admissible only if the effect came directly after leaks were published

he judge at US soldier Bradley Manning's sentencing hearing rejected some government evidence Wednesday that the classified information he disclosed through the anti-secrecy website WikiLeaks had a "chilling effect" on US foreign relations.

The judge ruled that such testimony is admissible only if the effect came directly after the information was published.

She threw out State Department undersecretary Patrick Kennedy's testimony that leaked information published more than two years ago continues to hurt US foreign relations and policymaking.

The judge also has rejected acting assistant secretary Michael Kozak's testimony that the leaks had made some foreign citizens, including human rights activists, less willing to speak privately with US diplomats.

Manning faces up to 90 years in prison for leaking more than 700,000 diplomatic cables and Iraq and Afghanistan battlefield reports, plus some battlefield video, while working as an intelligence analyst in Iraq in 2010.

The judge heard testimony Wednesday from a military intelligence official, civilian James McCarl, who leads a Pentagon effort to analyze information about the enemy's use of homemade bombs, or improvised explosive devices, which McCarl said accounted for 60 to 80% of all casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The battlefield reports Manning leaked included five years' worth of detailed information about roadside bomb and IED attacks.

Earlier Wednesday, Manning's lawyers released a schedule of the 20 sentencing witnesses they plan to call next Monday through Wednesday. Manning is not on the list, but his lawyers can call him to the stand without notice.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

 
+20 # fredboy 2013-08-08 08:29
Manning put the US military in panic mode, so they are throwing everything they can dream up at him.

He violated the thing they most love--the chain of command, yes sir, tattle tale tit process of cowardice.
 
 
+6 # Jack Gibson 2013-08-08 23:57
He didn't violate the chain of command. He tried to go up the chain of command about his concerns over what he discovered, but they basically told him to "shut-up and go back to work". And no doubt the officer who he allegedly "assaulted" was one of them, and that person set Manning up and sought to provoke such an altercation to use against Bradley. I hope he now realizes that he made a big mistake going into the U.S. military, and that he realizes that they're much too evil to have anything to do with; but it doesn't appear that he has; for, if he had, he would likely refuse to put on the uniform anymore for his court appearances, whether it brought further court martial charges against him for doing so or not.
 
 
+1 # Lowflyin Lolana 2013-08-09 15:01
In a way I like that he wears the uniform with pride, because, he has served his country, and the Constitution, with moral and physical courage and integrity.
His wearing of the uniform is a visual reminder, at least to me, that some soldiers are soldiers for the right reasons.
 
 
+2 # Jack Gibson 2013-08-09 23:45
But one cannot be part of an evil organization without being complicit in its evil(s). All of U.S. "wars" now, as has been the case for many decades, are wars of aggression, "the supreme international crime" according to the Nuremberg Protocols made part of U.S. law, and thus joined to the supreme law of the land, the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights, under the supremacy clause. Therefore, NO ONE who is completely facing all of that and more, could have ANY part with it; especially wearing the uniform of such a mass- murderous institution that has mass-murdered over ten million innocent civilians since and including World War Two. Any other response, including rationalization s such as yours, at least indirectly makes those who defend ANY of it, guilty of supporting that mass-murder, when NONE OF US should have ANY part in it, period. I for one will not be in the least bit complicit in any of it (thank God, during Vietnam, I was one year too young for the draft, or I too probably would have come back in a body bag and/or aluminum casket, and my name would probably now be on the Vietnam Memorial wall); and I am so grateful that I was never in the military. The ONLY way I, and that ANY of us should, support the troops, is for them to be brought home in one piece. To support them otherwise is to support illegal wars of aggression and all of the mass-murder they carry out therein. But there are absolutely NO rationalization s that excuse, justify and/or legitimize ANY of that.
 
 
+7 # soularddave 2013-08-09 01:24
The thing about "rank" in the military, is that it lets those with the most seek the safety of rear positions. What Private Manning did was put their rears out on front street for a while.

The *might* have been worried, but has anyone lost their job or any rank on account of the disclosures? Has anyone been called to account for their war crimes?

A lot of politicians, and maybe some military brass may have been a bit embarrassed, but their huffing and puffing just played the blame game, redirecting their feigned anger at our "little" GI. Typical "Chicken Hawk" behavior
 
 
+16 # walnut13 2013-08-08 09:57
I'm impressed with the objectivity that this military judge has displayed.
 
 
+24 # Uranus 2013-08-08 14:12
Quoting walnut13:
I'm impressed with the objectivity that this military judge has displayed.



____________


Call me a drunk, but if the judge were actually objective, she'd have used language like "judgments vacated...charg es dismissed...rem ove the handcuffs..."
 
 
+18 # dickbd 2013-08-08 14:40
Well, she sounds better with these recent actions, but remember that she was quite restrictive in regard to Manning's defense.

It's too much to hope for, I suppose, but a really principled judge would denounce Manning's lengthy detention, as well as the conditions involved. Basically, it involved torture. Obviously.

I would be happy if he were released with time served; however, a truly just outcome would provide him with a substantial financial compensation and an apology.
 
 
+5 # LizR 2013-08-08 15:58
In "Cities in Flight" written in the 1950s James Blish predicted that the USA would become indistinguishab le from the USSR (as it then was) by 2018.

I just hope his other predictions (flying cities, immortality) turn out to be as accurate.
 
 
-1 # Lowflyin Lolana 2013-08-09 15:44
Thank you for the suggestion. I just bought it from Amazon.
 
 
+5 # Lowflyin Lolana 2013-08-09 14:56
Are those handcuffs? Seriously? He's being handcuffed for this?!!!
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN