When do we execute Manning?

What about you let the political prisoner go is the great unUnited states of divided america in such fear as to be in trouble by the actions alledgedy of one man????

That feeble its amazing strength would see Manning FREE!

 

Wecome to Pol Forum its full to the brim with inane comment ,but hey keeping standards isn't its strength .welcome alice follow the White rabbit!i will be your virgil to dante.

Until you learn the ropes .i need a honest republican who hates the tea Party .Hey Santorum pulled a Rabbit out the Hat In Michigan!

Have you ever voted for the Democrats?

 

I say drop Manning off in Idaho and announce that they are doing it. I doubt he'd last an hour.

 

If he is executed his last words will be whatever the US government want them to be.

 

Sad to say, that would depend on where they drop him off at.

If they drop him anywhere in Southern Idaho, he would likely be lynched within minutes.

If they dropped him in some areas of Northern Idaho (say, Kootenai County), he might be welcomed with open arms for his attempt to take down ZOG.

 

Just drop him in my hometown of Emmett.

 

Yea, that is definately Southern Idaho. Being from Boise, I am pretty familiar with that area (my uncle lives in Emmett). His reception there would not be warm and cuddly at all.

 

Should give Manning a medal. The guy is a hero. People who do not like the truth to come out are the ones who hate him.

 

No doubt the morals of the people who carried out the Sydney Hilton bombing and the Bali bombing also told them it was the right thing to do. You down with that?

 

Morals ? Manning ???

The man wanted to improve his sex life, and was apparently delighted to betray his country, and his oath as a soldier, if it would promote that cause.

It's not exactly the first time someone has let his "little head" over-rule the one one his shoulders. (Think Benedict Arnold for an early example.)

 

why no baying for the blood of the US Soldier who killed 16 humans ,Alledgedy murdered them in cold blood!

Manning didn't kill anyone ?

Any one at all .

 

the hilton Bombing was proven to be a Botched ASIO operation according to the Court transcripts of the Amanda Marga kangaroo trials and freeing with compensation of all accused.

Convictions annulled not just overturned.

Anderson was a good speaker on the subject as well .innocent all Police frame up to cover ASIO stuff Up.

NSW Police special branch was disbanded from the fall out ..gee ,get it right its only something called living history ,oh sorry I was alive at the time you may have not been ,sorry.

 

Once the facts come out and it's proven said soldier killed civilians in cold blood then he deserves life in prison or the death sentence. Manning is a much more contentious issue and the point of the original thread. If you want to talk about the incident in Afghanistan this weekend start a new thread.

 

The actions alledgedy of manning which all the loony right call for execution for ,did not lead to the death of anyone ,yet why don't we have thread calling for the execution of the animal who killed 16 innocent people .

Manning = 0 deaths

Sgt flipout =16 deaths

who should be executed?

nothing has been proven about Manning he hasn't faced any charge.

I bet you that sgt flipout did slaughter 16 humans in cold blood .now when he gets off because he is insane ,what will be the response in Afghanistan ,yep ,his actions will lead to the deaths of many US personel ,whereas Mannings actions hurt no-one except governments who are not people .

 

If you want to do so, feel free to make such a thread. Nobody is stopping you.

However, I have nothing against killing both of them.

One for murder.

The other for Treason.

 

It appears he somehow thinks that this tragic shooting incident absolves Manning from treason.

 

Manning has not done any treason. You should really know what you are talking about before using such terms.

Oran's Dictionary of the Law (1983) defines treason as "...[a]...citizen's actions to help a foreign government overthrow, make war against, or seriously injure the [parent nation]." In many nations, it is also often considered treason to attempt or conspire to overthrow the government, even if no foreign country is aided or involved by such an endeavour.

Manning actions have not led to any of the above.

 

Very nice. However, Private Manning does not have to answer to a dictionary. What he has to answer to and is accountable to is the Uniform Code of Military Justice. And it defines his crime very specifically. Article 106e, Espionage:


(1) Any person subject to this chapter who, with intent or reason to believe that it is to be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of a foreign nation, communicates, delivers, or transmits, or attempts to communicate, deliver, or transmit, to any entity described in paragraph (2), either directly or indirectly, anything described in paragraph (3) shall be punished as a court-martial may direct, except that if the accused is found guilty of an offense that directly concerns (A) nuclear weaponry, military spacecraft or satellites, early warning systems, or other means of defense or retaliation against large scale attack, (B) war plans, (C) communications intelligence or cryptographic information, or (D) any other major weapons system or major element of defense strategy, the accused shall be punished by death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct.


(2) An entity referred to in paragraph (1) is—


(A) a foreign government;


(B) a faction or party or military or naval force within a foreign country, whether recognized or unrecognized by the United States; or

(C) a representative, officer, agent, employee, subject, or citizen of such a government, faction, party, or force.

(3) A thing referred to in paragraph (1) is a document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, note, instrument, appliance, or information relating to the national defense.

(b)


(1) No person may be sentenced by court-martial to suffer death for an offense under this section (article) unless—



(A) the m bers of the court-martial unanimously find at least one of the aggravating factors set out in subsection (c); and


(B) the members unanimously determine that any extenuating or mitigating circumstances are substantially outweighed by any aggravating circumstances, including the aggravating factors set out under subsection (c).

(2) Findings under this subsection may be based on— (A) evidence introduced on the issue of guilt or innocence; (B) evidence introduced during the sentencing proceeding; or


(C) all such evidence. (3) The accused shall be given broad latitude to present matters in extenuation and mitigation.

(c) A sentence of death may be adjudged by a court-martial for an offense under this section (article) only if the members unanimously find, beyond a reasonable doubt, one or more of the following aggravating factors:


(1) The accused has been convicted of another offense involving espionage or treason for which either a sentence of death or imprisonment for life was authorized by statute.


(2) In the commission of the offense, the accused knowingly created a grave risk of substantial damage to the national security.

(3) In the commission of the offense, the accused knowingly created a grave risk of death to another person.

(4) Any other factor that may be prescribed by the President by regulations under section 836 of this title (Article 36).”

Elements.

(1) Espionage.


(a) That the accused communicated, delivered, or transmitted any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, note, instrument, appliance, or information relating to the national defense;


(b) That this matter was communicated, delivered, or transmitted to any foreign government, or to any faction or party or military or naval force within a foreign country, whether recognized or unrecognized by the United States, or to any representative, officer, agent, employee, subject or citizen thereof, either directly or indirectly; and

(c) That the accused did so with intent or reason to believe that such matter would be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of a foreign nation.

(2) Attempted espionage.


(a) That the accused did a certain overt act;


(b) That the act was done with the intent to commit the offense of espionage;

(c) That the act amounted to more than mere preparation; and

(d) That the act apparently tended to bring about the offense of espionage.

(3) Espionage as a capital offense.


(a) That the accused committed espionage or attempted espionage; and


(b) That the offense directly concerned (1) nuclear weaponry, military spacecraft or satellites, early warning systems, or other means of defense or retaliation against large scale attack, (2) war plans, (3) communications intelligence or cryptographic information, or (4) any other major weapons system or major element of defense strategy.

Explanation.

(1) Intent. “Intent or reason to believe” that the information “is to be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of a foreign nation” means that the accused acted in bad faith and with-out lawful authority with respect to information that is not lawfully accessible to the public.

(2) National defense information. “Instrument, appliance, or information relating to the national defense” includes the full range of modern technology and matter that may be developed in the future, including chemical or biological agents, computer technology, and other matter related to the national defense.

(3) Espionage as a capital offense. Capital punishment is authorized if the government alleges and proves that the offense directly concerned (1) nuclear weaponry, military spacecraft or satellites, early warning systems, or other means of defense or retaliation against large scale attack, (2) war plans, (3) communications intelligence or cryptographic in-formation, or (4) any other major weapons system or major element of defense strategy. See R.C.M. 1004 concerning sentencing proceedings in capital cases.

Lesser included offense. Although no lesser included offenses are set forth in the Code, federal civilian offenses on this matter may be incorporated through the third clause of Article 134.

Maximum punishment.

(1) Espionage as a capital offense. Death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct. See R.C.M. 1003.

(2) Espionage or attempted espionage. Any punishment, other than death, that a court-martial may direct. See R.C.M. 1003.

Can you deny that this applies to this case?

 

Well for starters Espionage is not treason. So epic fail on your part. Why you bother I do not know but hey read this and you might learn something.

Treason is unique in American law because it is the only crime that is specifically defined in the Constitution:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

Congress has also passed a specific treason statute that adds additional requirements to those set forth in the Constitution:

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

” Bradley Manning, of course, is a citizen in addition to being a member of the military, but prosecuting him for treason successfully would be very, very difficult:

One must commit one of two acts in order to be guilty of treason against America — one must either levy war or one must adhere to an enemy, giving him aid and comfort. So seriously did the Founders take the crime of treason that they also laid down special hurdles for convicting someone of treason.

They established that conviction for treason can be made only on the testimony of two witnesses. The witnesses must testify to the actual act of treason. And the two witnesses must have witnessed the same act. And it can’t be any act. It has to be an overt act. And just to mark the point, an American court can’t convict someone on the basis of a confession made to, say, the police or in a signed written document sent to a judge. A confession of treason has to be made in court. And it can’t be done, say, in a judge’s chambers or a secret session. It has to be open court.

All that is in the Constitution. It turns out that America’s founding document leaves the Congress and the Courts almost no wiggle room in defining treason. The Founders just didn’t trust the Congress, and to listen to Senator Lieberman, one can understand why.

In Manning’s case, it strikes me that it would be very difficult to prove the offense of treason in the manner that the Constitution requires. It seems fairly clear that Manning acted alone and covertly when he retrieved the documents that were ultimately turned over to Wikileaks. We’ve all heard by now how he supposedly transferred files to a DVD-ROM which he had altered to make it look like a Lady Gaga CD. Presumably, nobody actually saw him do anything at all and unless there are two witnesses who witnessed him commit an overt act. For that reason alone, a treason prosecution would be likely to fail.

It’s far more likely that Manning, and possibly Assange, will be charged under the Espionage Act. While a prosecution for espionage is not an easy task either, it doesn’t have the same Constitutional limitations as a treason charge would. So, no, neither Julian Assange nor Bradley Manning are going to be convicted of treason, even if they are likely to see the inside of a Federal courtroom at some point in the near future.

 

Treason might be defined in the Constitution. However, that is used for charging and convicting civilians. And in case you did not realize it, Private Manning is not a civilian.

Therefore, he is charged under the charge that most fits the crime under the UCMJ. And in Military Law, that crime falls under Espionage.

Once again, spouting off about something you have absolutely no knowledge about. Private Manning is not a civilian, he is a member of the military. He is not being charged as a violation of US Civil Code, or any kind of Federal Statutes. He is being charged as a member of the military, under a crime that violated military law.

So nice fail from your side, bringing in more nonsense from a legal system that does not apply to Private Manning.

This is what he swore to uphold. The same oath I have taken 5 times now:

I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

 

There is actually no UCMJ article for treason. There is "aiding the enemy" and "Espionage".

Maximum punishment.

Death or such other punishment as a court-martial or military commission may direct

Manning has been charged with Article 104 as well as multiple other ones. 104 is the closest to treason though.

 

Thanks, I forgot about the actual charge. And yes, it is Article 104.

Of course, they could always just forget the entire "Death Penalty" part, and simply charge him with Article 134.

Of course there is my favorite article. Years ago, I was going through a promotion board, and the Company First Sergeant asked me what Article 114 was. I admit, I drew a total blank. When I got out, I went and looked it up.

Article 114: Dueling

Any person subject to this chapter who fights or promotes, or is concerned in or connives at fighting a duel, or who, having knowledge of a challenge sent or about to be sent, fails to report the fact promptly to the proper authority, shall be punished as a court-martial may direct

 

Not treason then. Ignorance(very good name for him) claimed treason and he was wrong and you by running to his aid have proven him wrong. Manning never was not a spy either so therefore no espionage. You people would not know a good guy if you fell over him.

 

So why are you claiming treason above then?

 

Why are you going on and on constantly about things you have no knowledge about?

Private Manning does not fall under civilian law. He is a Soldier, and is being treated as such.

His crime is Treason, but he is charged with a different crime. Just as a "Murderer" is often charged with Manslaughter. Or somebody who dies in an accident may have on his death certificate "Homocide".

You are playing stupid word games, and it is rather idiotic if you ask me. Why not go troll someplace else.