How would you know? You must not listen to the butts around here very much. :lol:toast
Printable View
How would you know? You must not listen to the butts around here very much. :lol:toast
http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt...anning_615.jpg
The Case Against Alleged WikiLeaks Supplier Bradley Manning Takes a Strange Turn
DEC 19 2011, 2:44 PM ET
--
If the cables found on Manning's computer don't match the ones WikiLeaks has, the defense can argue that Julian Assange's outfit may have had a different source for the documents. Wired's Kim Zetter was in the courtroom and filed a report on this dramatic moment, which could become a lynchpin of the defense's case.
Special Agent David Shaver, a forensic investigator with the Army's Computer Crimes Investigations Unit, testified Sunday that he'd found 10,000 U.S. diplomatic cables in HTML format on the soldier's classified work computer, as well as a corrupted text file containing more than 100,000 complete cables...
But Shaver said none of the documents that he found on Manning's computer matched those that WikiLeaks published.
Shaver wasn't asked how many cables he compared to the WikiLeaks cables. In re-direct examination, however, he noted that the CSV file in which the cables were contained was corrupted and suggested this might indicate that it had not been possible to pass those cables to WikiLeaks for this reason. The defense objected to this assumption, however, noting that Shaver could not speculate on why the cables were not among those released by WikiLeaks.
--
full- http://www.theatlantic.com/technolog...e-turn/250216/
Truth is the first casualty of war..
the question is, htf did a scrub like him got access to such information?
lax security plus abuse of trust leads to major embarrassments
Not necessarily.Quote:
Originally Posted by Winehole23
He has some pretty high clearance access, and thumb-drives are small. I don't see any of this boding well for him. Personally, I think a guilty verdict will come about, and I think he should be executed for treason.
from you I would expect nothing less. you've fulfilled my expectations again, WC. :tu
Even if he only had the classified material, and as the article suggests, someone else was the leak... he deserves a long jail sentence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Winehole23
he deserved death a second ago. you gettin squishy?
Death if he was the actual leak. The article not to many posts back suggest they might not be able to make the case he was the source of information to wikileaks. Or did i read it wrong?Quote:
Originally Posted by Winehole23
um, Manning is the alleged source. the specifications could fail, like you suggest, but in this case I tend to doubt it.
I doubt it too. Still, he betrayed this nation. The extent is what the court marshal will determine.Quote:
Originally Posted by Winehole23
he's not up for treason, boss. at least not yet.
Yes, I understand that. I was expressing my opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Winehole23
you seldom fail to. that's a relative virtue.
"He has some pretty high clearance access,"
the access was badly designed, seemed like that if you had his access, you had access to everything rather than just your specific operations area and data.
Did any (contractor? Colonel hackjob?) get screwed for such a bad system design?
"betrayed his nation"
his data was a much greater "force for good" (as Yoni calls USA) than the official US govt, the govt that invaded and destroyed Iraq "for good" of the US/UK oilcos.
the UN special rapporteur disagrees:Quote:
Originally Posted by MannyIsGod
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012...t-un?fb=optOutQuote:
The UN special rapporteur on torture has formally accused the US government of cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment towards Bradley Manning, the US soldier who was held in solitary confinement for almost a year on suspicion of being the WikiLeaks source.
Juan Mendez has completed a 14-month investigation into the treatment of Manning since the soldier's arrest at a US military base in May 2010. He concludes that the US military was at least culpable of cruel and inhumane treatment in keeping Manning locked up alone for 23 hours a day over an 11-month period in conditions that he also found might have constituted torture.
"The special rapporteur concludes that imposing seriously punitive conditions of detention on someone who has not been found guilty of any crime is a violation of his right to physical and psychological integrity as well as of his presumption of innocence," Mendez writes.
Quote:
Mendez told the Guardian that he could not reach a definitive conclusion on whether Manning had been tortured because he has consistently been denied permission by the US military to interview the prisoner under acceptable circumstances.
Of course Its torture and anyone who disagrees deserves Manning style 'solitary confinement"'Quote:
Originally Posted by Winehole23
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012...ry-code-lawyerQuote:
"Manning was awoken at 0500 hours and required to remain awake in his cell from 0500 to 2200 hours," Coombs claims in the motion, adding that he "was not permitted to lie down on his rack during the duty day. Nor was Manning permitted to lean his back against the cell wall; he had to sit upright on his rack without any back support".
The motion further states that Manning was only allowed 20 minutes of "sunshine call" a day. In addition, he was permitted by guards to take no more than five minutes in the shower. On the rare occasions that he was allowed out of his cell, Manning was forced to wear shackles with metal hand and leg restraints. At least two guards accompanied him at all times.
Manning was handed a pair of running shoes without laces for his trips outside, but they would fall off when he attempted to walk. As a result he "elected to wear boots instead", the document alleges.
What kinda country have we become when a guy who exposes US war crimes get a harsher treatment than a guy who committed war crimes?
By stark contrast, Staff Sgt. Robert Bales — the prime suspect in the slaughter of 16 Afghan civilians — is already at Fort Leavenworth and is receiving this treatment:
Bales arrived at Fort Leavenworth last Friday and is being held in an isolated cell. He is “already being integrated into the normal pretrial confinement routine,” prison spokeswoman Rebecca Steed said.
.Quote:
An ABC News article back when Manning was transferred to Fort Leavenworth included these details:
Quote:
The 150 inmates at the facility — including eight who are awaiting trial — are allowed three hours of recreation a day, she said, and three meals a day in a dining area.
That likely means that there will be some substantial interaction between Bales and Manning. Think about that: if you expose to the world previously unknown evidence of widespread wanton killing of civilians (as Manning allegedly did), then you will end up in the same place as someone who actually engages in the mass wanton killing of civilians (as Bales allegedly did), except that the one who committed atrocities will receive better treatment than the one who exposed them. That’s a nice reflection of our government’s value system (similar to the way that high government officials who commit egregious crimes are immunized, while those who expose them are aggressively prosecuted). If the chat logs are to be believed, Manning decided to leak those documents because they revealed heinous war crimes that he could no longer in good conscience allow to be concealed, and he will now find himself next to a soldier who is accused of committing heinous war crimes.
http://www.salon.com/2012/03/20/iron...ing/singleton/
Ray McGovern introduces a short documentary deconstructing events revealed by Wikileaks
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=aOIPGRUL1CU
Those dickless military, "just following orders", torturing Manning would turn on the gas in the showers.
What a bullshit program, starting off where they did. Don't you remember the video from the beginning that we discussed some time back?Quote:
Originally Posted by Nbadan