So After Torturing Bradley Manning For Months, US Officials Offer Him A Deal If He Says Assange 'Conspired' With Him

from the dirty-tricks dept

This is hardly a surprise, but after locking up Bradley Manning in solitary confinement for seven months -- a condition that much of the world has deemed to be torture -- and looking for ways to use a computer hacking law to charge Julian Assange, rumors are that officials have offered Bradley Manning a plea deal, in which he would claim that Assange "conspired" with him to get and leak the documents. From all the info that's come out already, there's been little to suggest that there was any actual conspiring, but it appears that our Justice Department has decided (incorrectly) that Julian Assange is the more important target than Bradley Manning, and so it wants to bring Assange down.

Of course, as many have been saying all along, bringing charges against Assange, even with Manning accepting a plea bargain, will do serious harm to the US. It will highlight how the Justice Department twists laws in an attempt to harm the publisher of information, very much against the basic principles of the First Amendment. If this does come to pass, it will represent a massive chilling of free speech rights, from an administration that has put itself forth as a champion of such free speech rights around the globe. However, the one thing it won't do is actually chill such leaks from happening. As more and more competitors to Wikileaks pop up, you can bet that a legal attack on Assange will only increase the resolve of some of the folks behind those other offerings.

Filed Under: bradley manning, conspiracy, julian assange, plea bargain, wikileaks
Companies: wikileaks


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  1. icon
    Gabriel Tane (profile), 17 Dec 2010 @ 10:21am

    Re: Allways trying to justify crime..

    Hi Darryl... make yourself comfy...

    "months, he's a traitor, he'll be there for years, and after that, he's screwed. who is going to trust a moron, traitor, who put his follow military 'friends' in mortal danger.:
    Once again... for however many times this is... be so kind as to produce even a shred of evidence that this has caused or could cause any harm to American soldiers.


    "He's in solitary because if he was mixed with the rest in military prison. They would kill him."
    I'm glad you're an expert on prison psychology. But even if you're right (yeah, I know...), solitary is not the only option for keeping him separated from general population.


    "there is a military disipline act, that hold those who sign onto it, to a higher legal standard that civil laws."
    Feel free to post a reference. I'm glad you would hold our soldiers to a higher standard. Personally, I would hold my elected officials to the higher standard. But that's neither here nor there. What is here is which crime he broke. If itís just being unethical, thatís called Conduct Unbecoming and is not treason.


    "If you break those laws, you face military court, and receive military punishment in a military prison."
    And the fact that he hasn't had a trial yet factors into your reasoning how?


    "This manning, like everyone else who is in the military SIGNED this document, and are bound by its rules and laws."
    So you do have basic understanding of the concept of contractual obligation... now, care to point out where in that contract it states solitary confinement as the pre-trial holding for supposed treason?


    "There is no doubt therefore that he is guilty of breaking both military and civil laws. And the fact that he handed or made availible that information to assange, means he conspired with him."
    So because he is being held by authorities, he's 'obviously guilty'. Wow Darryl, I haven't seen a abortion of justice so horribly exemplified in a loong time. And, how does any of what you've said back up a claim that just because he leaked documents he was 'obvioulsy conspiring'? I'll wait for proof from you, but I'm not holding my breath.


    I'm not sure what you mean by 'complicit agreement'... did he agree to allow Assange to post the documents? Yeah, I'm pretty sure he did. In fact, I think he even admitted to that. So, what are you getting at?


    "The conspiracy to gather secrets and make them public is what wikileaks is. so yes, to give wikileaks information, without even talking to them, is conspiring to commit."
    No... that's what you accuse them of being. Me, Mike, DH, hell, a lot of people around here... not to mention all over the damned world... including the people who gave Wikileaks an award for uncovering conspiracies in the past... yeah we all believe that Wikileaks is about transparancy of goverment actions.


    "If you find something in the street, of value, if you keep it you have conspired to commit a crime, and you have commited a crime. If you take that item and hand it into police you have not commited a crime, and you have conspired with yourself or any other group to commit a crime."
    Do I even have to try on this one? Wow man. Try here: http://www.lectlaw.com/def/c103.htm. According to 18 U.S.C. 371, a conspiracy must have multiple people who have reached an agreement to act in such a way as to break another law. Someone just picking up something on the street is not a conspiracy. And before you mention that he's a soldier under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 18 of the UCMJ states that there must be more than one person. You can't 'conspire with yourself'.
    Jezzus Darryl... how bad are you trying to stretch here?


    "As soon as manning made that information available to wikileaks he conspired with assange and wikileaks to release that information, which is an illegal act because its the use of stolen goods (at the least) for the purpose of making money.."
    So now we're talking about what? Theft? Copyright infringement? Darryl, we're talking about an accusation of treason... which is NOT what you just described. I wish it was just theft... then the poor guy would be facing a bit of brig-time and be done.

    As far as your statement there of it being a conspiracy... if it was a conspiracy, and they had proof (look out! that's a dirty word apparently!), why would the be offering him a deal if he admits to conspiracy? Hmm... good question.


    In case you missed this, weíre talking about the fact that heís being held in solitary before being found guilty and sentenced. Which is outside of due-process.


    Now that you've been let out and had a bit of exercise, why don't you go lay down again before you hurt yourself.

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Shop Now: I Invented Email
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.