Bradley Manning Accused Of Aiding [Classified Enemy]

from the even-our-enemies-are-secret? dept

Okay, so in Orwell's 1984, the powers that be may have switched who the "enemy" was arbitrarily and then rewritten history to argue we were always at war with Eurasia or Eastasia. But, at least there was a defined enemy. In the court martial case against Bradley Manning, for supposedly "aiding the enemy" by releasing State Department cables and other documents to Wikileaks, he's being charged with aiding a "classified enemy" along with aiding Al-Qaida. We've already explained why the aiding the enemy charge is highly dubious, since that charge is normally reserved for directly handing information to an enemy, not leaking it to the press. But the fact that one of "the enemies" is secret is completely messed up, and has legal scholars scratching their heads as well.
Three professors of military law - Yale Law School's Eugene Fidell, Duke University School of Law's Scott Silliman and Texas Tech University School of Law's Richard Rosen - told Courthouse News they had never heard of a case involving a "classified enemy."
When Courthouse News asked the military to explain how there could be a "classified enemy," they were told the enemy is not actually classified, but it's classified that this "known" but unnamed enemy had "classified info" that Manning is accused of leaking. Have fun deciphering this one:
"What 'is' classified is that our government has confirmed that this enemy is in receipt of certain compromised classified information, and that the means and methods of collection that the government has employed to make that determination are classified," the spokeswoman said in an email.
But, that makes no sense. After all, the documents were released publicly. Everyone could have had them. Naming the enemy here wouldn't compromise how the government "confirmed" that the enemy had the classified info. The whole case, once again, seems to resolve around some highly questionable assertions to try to make this into an "aiding the enemy" case, when it's clearly nothing of the sort.

Filed Under: aiding the enemy, bradley manning, classified, espionage act, national security
Companies: wikileaks

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

  1. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 31 May 2013 @ 9:18pm

    It's because they are CHARGING Manning, not the people who used the information he made available too. (via Wikileaks).

    Manning is being charged for "aiding the enemy" not for aiding a specific enemy, or a classified enemy, the charges are directed at manning, not the enemy.

    So all that has to be established, is 1) is there an enemy ?? (yes)
    2) Did Manning 'aid' them? (Yes).

    Manning did not release these documents to the media, he in conjunction with Wikileaks set out to publish in public documents, IF these documents are released to the public, that is the crime, if they are released to the public, then any "enemy" group you care to define, is considered the enemy.

    It is all the groups that use that (now) publicly available information (made public illegally) who AIDS ANY group who would seek to use that information to 'aid' their cause.

    it's not the 'enemy' being charged for these crimes, it's manning, he was and is the person who made this information available (via Wikileaks), he is guilty of that crime (if proven), he (via wikileaks) made that information available and public.

    So the prosecution, has little problems in the definition of who the 'enemy' is, as it does not matter, the enemy is anyone who is willing to use that information (illegally provide) to 'aid' their cause.

    they don't have to prove if they are the enemy, they simply have to prove that Manning made the information available.

    This is an easy thing to do, and is something they WILL DO.

    Then all they have to prove is that the nature of those documents and their contents could be used by any enemy to aid them. That also appears quite easy to do.

    What they don't have to do, is prove that the information was actually USED for that purpose, they just have to prove it was available, and capable of providing aid to groups that would be considered the enemy.

    It would be so nice to see TD "writers" displaying a little knowledge of the laws.

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: Copying Is Not Theft
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads


Email This

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