US Military Admits No One Died Because Of Manning's Leaks
from the right,-so... dept
One of the key talking points against Bradley Manning was how his leaks "put people in danger" and we've even seen some of the defenders of his prosecution claim that people had lost lives because of them. In fact, Army Chief of Staff Mike Mullen had directly stated that Manning (and Wikileaks) "might already have on their hands the blood of some young soldier or that of an Afghan family." Guess what? That was all FUD. As Manning's sentencing hearing kicked off, a key government witness admitted that there were no deaths that were attributable to those leaks. That came straight from Brig. Gen. Robert Carr, who was in charge of the response to the leaks. Among other things, he also noted that since the names did not appear in Arabic, it was unlikely that our enemies would have figured out who they really were anyway.The retired general added that some of these contacts could not be found, others had died before the WikiLeaks disclosures, and others had been insurgents rather than cooperators with coalition forces.The report also notes that while, in the past, some have claimed that an Afghani man killed by the Taliban was a result of those leaks "the supposed informant the Taliban claimed to have executed was not in fact named in the leaked materials." In other words, all the talk of people dying because of his leaks? Not true. Yet why do we trust the government every time there's a leak when they insist that everyone's lives are at risk?
Carr acknowledged that none of the names of Iraqi and Afghan contacts appeared in the original Arabic.
To this point, Manning's military defenders, Maj. Thomas Hurley, asked: "We don't share an alphabet with either of those countries, do we, Sir?"
"No," Carr replied.
Hurley also prompted Carr to concede that Iraqi and Afghan nationals tend not to be "not as plugged in" as Westerners.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: bradley manning, deaths, fud, impact, robert carr, wikileaks
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in thread ]
People have died in the past because of the release of classified information, and likely it will happen again. From the military's perspective, and from a statistician's perspective, any time you release information that traces back to an individual, their risk of exposure, capture, and death are increased. That does not make the statement a lie.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
People have died in the past because of the release of classified information, and likely it will happen again. From the military's perspective, and from a statistician's perspective, any time you release information that traces back to an individual, their risk of exposure, capture, and death are increased. That does not make the statement a lie.
But given how many documents were released, and how strongly people insisted it would lead to deaths... the fact that no one died from ANY of the 700,000 documents... suggests... that perhaps the claim was massively overstated
[ link to this | view in thread ]
their actions might just maybe perhaps have increased the likelihood or possibility that an American(tm) might be killed?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Did said release put Valerie Plames' life in danger?
The answers to these questions are obvious, but it points to a large hypocrisy festering upon the body politic.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Difference
"The retired general added that some of these contacts could not be found, others had died before the WikiLeaks disclosures, and others had been insurgents rather than cooperators with coalition forces. "
This means Bradley Manning may have lied about his sources....while it doesn't constitute a life scentence, it does constitute some sort of punishment. Even if nobody's hurt related to the leaks, he still gave vital intel out. The only way you get Capital Punisment through the Rspionage Act is when a death occurs as a result of your treasonous actions. Manning leaked classified information, ergo he has to face a punishment for it...might not be death...but he still has to face it.
"Hurley also prompted Carr to concede that Iraqi and Afghan nationals tend not to be "not as plugged in" as Westerners."
That's quite a disturbing statement considering that the insurgents often use cell phone detonators. It's ignorant to assume they are incapable of doing things...look at the North Vietcong in the Vietnam War....they were aided by the most reliable gun in the world and were masters of kludging technology to make traps.
"Carr acknowledged that none of the names of Iraqi and Afghan contacts appeared in the original Arabic. "
And for good reason...we don't want the CIA or MI-5 to get hurt doing their jobs do we...
Is this article trying to prove things the public already knows? I mean really...what the heck.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
beyond reasonable doubt, none proved..
That they were aware of, but with nearly 750,000 leaked documents, there is simply NO WAY they (or you) can be sure.
None you are aware of, and none at all are two different things.
But most certainly the potential for that to have happened is there.
Just as there is no way for anyone to really know what damage was done with that large number of un vetted documents released.
It's simply impossible for Manning or wikileaks to review ever one of those 750000 documents and determine what damage was caused because of them, and what actions resulted from their release.
Just as it's impossible to attribute one particular deaths from the releases.
But common sense would tell most people there is a high probability that people were killed as a result.
But it's almost impossible to confirm that or prove it in a court.
It simply cannot be shown "beyond reasonable doubt", but that does not mean, 'the balance of probabilities' shows there could have well been several or many deaths as a result.
What is clear, is that the US military, and the fighting men and women were betrayed by manning and his quest for fame.
None proved in a court does not mean none at all, or none beyond the balance of probability.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Difference
Sure, they did not find someone in the middle east, who after just killing someone, was arrested and found with a leaked document with the name of the person he just killed highlighted.
But you can make some assumptions that will such a large number of leaks, and with names being released that it is VERY, VERY possible that people have been killed as a result of these leaks.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lots of people killed indirectly
These leaked documents increased hostility between the waring parties, hostility in war = deaths.
Inciting hostilities in groups at war will result in a higher death count.
Can you attribute specific death on that actual incitement, probably not, does not mean they don't exist.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
The fact that they couldn't find a single one though, despite how hard they had to have been looking speaks volumes to how 'dangerous' those leaks actually were to anything other than the reputations and careers of those the leaks exposed.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Lots of people killed indirectly
Perhaps I'm just hung up on that whole "Innocent until Proven guilty thing" and actually finding evidence to prove guilt rather than assuming "Guilty until Proven Innocent", coming up with a scary story that endangers people lives, wait for defendant to not be able to disprove it, secure guilty verdict as clearly they can't be innocent!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: beyond reasonable doubt, none proved..
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Lots of people killed indirectly
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: beyond reasonable doubt, none proved..
Argument from probability aka 'the balance of probability' is a fallacy.
You've got nothing but errors in logic to try to rationalize the shit you've made up.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Difference
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Lots of people killed indirectly
Clean up your own backyard, you model citizen with above average intelligence.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Difference
The point I'm making is potential harm to individuals in accordance to articles in the Espionage Act. While potential harm cannot be measured by the information leaked and while it is not grounds for the death penalty in any way because no deaths occurred that were related to his info leak...he still leaked classified information.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Difference
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: beyond reasonable doubt, none proved..
Also the key word in "beyond a reasonable doubt" is reasonable. It's more reasonable to assume that in the 750,000 documents leaked, there was information that could end up harming someone. Therefore I reasonably doubt your claims or (Ret.) Brigg. General Robert Carr'a words on the matter.
It should be noted that if any evidence did show up that harm came to somebody as a result of these leaks....that charge under the Espionage Act would be known as Aiding the Enemy. That doesn't mean he's not guilty of leaking classified information.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
It's a pretty far reaching and global statement you are making, without any hard facts to back it up.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
The government probably spent $200,000 just to administer the billions of dollars spent on looking for a single death. They could have spent that money on cancer research instead, potentially saving lives.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Lots of people killed indirectly
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: beyond reasonable doubt, none proved..
[ link to this | view in thread ]
why do we trust the government ever?
FTFY
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: beyond reasonable doubt, none proved..
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Fucking hypocrites like that makes me sick.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
What they're saying is...
"In the west, if you release a large amount of information (in English) on the internet and make the public aware of it, then the majority of people will a) have access to it, and b) be able to read it. In the arabic speaking world, a smaller proportion of people will have access because a)fewer people have net access and b) fewer people speak english."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
why this article ?
clearly, if there was evidence it would have been submitted, and if that evidence was enough to prove beyond reasonable doubt then he would have been charged for it.
There clearly was not, and he was therefore not charged.
he was charged for quite a number of other things, including the ones he pled guilty too.
Do you want to argue that he was not guilty of what he said he was guilty too ? It's just as pointless.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: beyond reasonable doubt, none proved..
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
I will freely admit that some of the documents that he released did uncover things that needed to be uncovered and really should not have been classified. But that was not Manning's decision to make. What civilians do not understand is that there is a legal, protected way to be a whistleblower. Sure, we all know that it is not super safe and career-enhancing, but he would never go to jail for following the process. Every soldier and civilian working for the DoD must do mandatory training on the process annually. I know some contractors must take the training too, but can't speak for all of them.
I have no way of knowing whether anybody was killed or not. But what I do know is that if somebody was killed because of these documents, that fact itself could be classified because it could lead to pointing out which of the documents point to active intelligence and case even more damage. Even then there would be know way to prove without a doubt that these documents caused any deaths.
I feel bad for Manning. I do not consider him a traitor. He does not seem to be a really bright person, and he does not deserve a life sentence for his crime.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Difference
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: why this article ?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
But not one that actually works. By the way, Manning did try going that route first.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Some Perspective Please
They say that they did not know of anyone that had died as a result of the leaks. That does not equate to saying that no one did. It also doesn't say that no one didn't. It just says that they do not know of anyone that had.
This, however, is a sidenote to two important things.
First, this is not a trial about whether Manning got anyone killed. This was a trial about how he broke laws that are designed to keep people from the risk of being killed. Whether you believe that those laws are necessary or not is not a factor. If you don't like it, call your congressman and senator or, better yet, run for office.
Second, Manning was guilty of breaking these laws. He was going to jail. And we are forgetting that the names of anyone who died as a result of those leaks would also be classified.
This means that Manning was going to jail no matter what. His lawyers were going for leniency, so that Manning wouldn't serve 60 years instead of the 35 he got.
So what incentive would the government, or specifically Brig. Gen. Robert Carr, have for releasing this information? The example was made. Manning is going to prison. Why would they release that information? Unless they want to go through what Manning is now.
I am not saying necessarily that Manning deserves what he is getting, but the debate needs to stay on point. And this is a sidenote that has no relevance whatsoever.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Manning
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The Essence of Journalism- Verification
During cross-examination, Carr stated, "The Taliban killed him and tied him to the disclosures. We went back and looked for the name in the disclosures. The name of the individual killed was not in the disclosures."
Clever move by the defense attorney, but it is disingenuous to insinuate that the latter statement contradicts the first and that therefore the "US Military Admits No One Died." There are more ways to identify someone than just a name. Carr's statement was that the Taliban "associated him with information in the logs," not that the logs specifically named him. The Taliban apparently recognized the agent through actions described in the disclosures, which would be evidence that the disclosures resulted in his death.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
GBP
I like your truth.
Some people are so scared of the truth being known and spread by people like me!
But I will continue to do it!
[ link to this | view in thread ]