People Who Got Shorter Sentences Than Bradley Manning: Spies Selling Secrets To Russians & Active Terrorists

from the disproportionate dept

Thu, Aug 22nd 2013 7:42am — Mike Masnick

By now, of course, you've heard that Bradley Manning received a sentence of 35 years, and lots of people are arguing over whether or not this is reasonable. In fact, we've even seen some people arguing that he got off easy. Okay, well, let's explore that line of reasoning. Over at the Huffington Post, there's a good article looking at the sentences that eight actual spies received from the US. These are people who actively sold or tried to sell key US secrets to enemies, such as the Russians, as opposed to revealing wrongdoing to the public via the press. Guess what? The actual spies got off with lighter sentences.

Take, for example, the case of David Henry Barnett, a CIA agent who directly sold secrets to the Russians, including but not limited to outing around 30 active CIA agents to the KGB. Oh, and at the urging of the KGB, he also tried to get a job on Capitol Hill in order to get access to more secrets. He was eventually caught and charged with espionage in 1980... and received an 18 year sentence. Got that? Directly sell the identity of CIA agents to the KGB and you get about half the time that Manning got, not for revealing the identity of any intelligence agents, but basically for embarrassing the State Department and the military. That doesn't seem right.

Okay. And how about people, including Americans, who actively tried to hurt America? Remember, Manning made it quite clear his goal was to help America. But that's not true for these five people who joined the Taliban or teamed up with terrorists working on plans to attack America. Those people actively wanted to harm America. And they got shorter sentences.

David Hicks: An Australian national who was captured fighting alongside the Taliban and sent to Guantanamo Bay prison in 2002, Hicks plead guilty to material support for terrorism in a Gitmo military commission in 2007 and was sentenced to seven years confinement. That sentence was reduced to nine months given time already served.

John Walker Lindh: Lindh was convicted of a slew of terrorism and conspiracy charges in 2003 for fighting with the Taliban against the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan. He was sentenced to 20 years in prison.

Or, for a different type of comparison, how about how other countries have treated leakers of key government information? Once again, we discover people who appear to have revealed much more damaging information... and got off with much lighter sentences.

Had he been born in Denmark, he might have gotten four months for disclosing information a Danish court found highly damaging to national security. That’s the penalty Danish Defense Intelligence analyst Frank Grevil received in 2005 for disclosing threat assessments concerning Iraq’s possession of weapons of mass destruction.

Or, had he been British, he could have been released after serving seven weeks of a six month sentence, as was David Shayler, the former MI5 member who gave a newspaper 28 security and intelligence files on a variety of topics, including on Libyan links with the IRA, Soviet funding of the Communist party of Great Britain, agents’ names and other highly sensitive information.

Or, given his military status, he might have received a sentence of 12 months in jail – the penalty a British judge gave to Navy petty officer Steven Hayden in 1998 for selling significant security and intelligence information to a newspaper concerning a plot by Saddam Hussein to launch anthrax attacks in the UK. That sentence was the heaviest awarded to any of the eight Britons convicted of disclosing sensitive information since the current Official Secrets Act was passed in 1989.

In fact, the article notes that, after looking at the laws of 20 European countries, they discovered that while all have criminal penalties for disclosing classified national security info, most have a top penalty of just a few years in jail, so long as the person leaked the information, rather than delivering it directly to a foreign state. In the UK and Great Britain, for example, the longest time allowed under law is two years in prison. France is the most aggressive punisher, where leakers can face up to 7 years in jail.

Now, compare that to the truth about Bradley Manning. There's no evidence he put anyone in danger. Nothing he leaked was "top secret" (even though he had top secret clearance). His intent was clear from the beginning and it was not to aid our enemies or to harm America. Yet guess who gets the longer sentence?

Given all of these comparisons, it's difficult to see how the sentence that Manning received is anywhere even close to proportionate or reasonable. It seems fairly obvious: Bradley Manning was not punished so harshly for harming the US. He was punished for embarrassing the government. That's not how things are supposed to happen in an open and free society.

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, leaks, prison, punishment, sentences, sentencing, spies, terrorists

58 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

silverscarcat (profile), 22 Aug 2013 @ 6:23am

What the hell...
Obama, seriously?

Are you TRYING to go down as the worst President ever? Because you're WELL on your way to doing so. Right now I'd rather have Zombie Richard Nixon in the White House than you. I'll take Futurama's version of Richard Nixon over you.

Hope and Change?

More like "You better Hope I don't Change how I feel about you right now, because all of you are criminals to me."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Pixelation, 22 Aug 2013 @ 7:48am

Our government wants you to fear them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Aug 2013 @ 7:48am

There is only one unforgivable crime
And that is making the powerful elite uncomfortable.

This has always been true -- in all civilizations, going back as far as recorded history allows us. Embarrassing Caesar or forcing Napoleon to look in a mirror, exposing the Emperor's foibles or putting a parking ticket on the Governor's car: all of these will be punished far more ruthlessly than even the most vicious, brutal crime against ordinary citizens.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Aug 2013 @ 7:48am

Re: What the hell...
Ahhhh, it was a court martial. Are you implying that the prez being supreme commander directly influenced the sentencing portion of same? I think a citation is needed for that sort of assertion.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Aug 2013 @ 7:54am

"outing around 30 active CIA agents to the KGB."
for profit = 18 years

outing one active CIA agent to the world
for political gain = no big deal

The blindfolded lady holding a scale symbolizes the complete opposite of reality.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 22 Aug 2013 @ 8:01am

Re: What the hell...
I think we haven't seen the bottom of the pit yet...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Wally (profile), 22 Aug 2013 @ 8:11am

Bradley Manning should have been set to Section 8. He Suffers from Gender Dysphoria. The condition has nothing to do with social gender roles or being LGBT. It is often found in such cases as those as Bradley Manning's tend to feel like they are trapped in the wrong body or gender due to untreatable physiological and neurological wiring of the brain.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Wally (profile), 22 Aug 2013 @ 8:13am

Re: Re: What the hell...
The US President is Commander and Chief of the Armed Forces. If we want to go to war, Congress must approve to do so. Outside of that, the buck stops at President Obama.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
allengarvin (profile), 22 Aug 2013 @ 8:14am

Lindh
Of course, a lot of the evidence against John Walker Lindh was obtained after he was repeatedly denied access to a lawyer, and when he was threatened with denial of pain medicine and treatment for agonizing wounds. He was kept in the conditions that make Manning's solitary treatment look positively generous and humane (completely restrained, blindfolded, locked in a metal container in near-freezing conditions, subjected to sleep deprivation).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Atkray (profile), 22 Aug 2013 @ 8:19am

Embarrassed
When you sell secrets to another government the secrets stay secret from the public, so no one is caught with their pants around their ankles.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Aug 2013 @ 8:20am

has anyone had a longer sentence than him? did anyone make as good a job of pissing on the government bonfire as him?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Aug 2013 @ 8:24am

Should have sold them
If he sold the secrets, slap on wrist, capitalism is the American way!

Instead he simply made America look bad, he will rot in jail for that.

This prosecution has never been about the crimes, its because he embarrassed the Administration/Army and they want to make an example of him.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
jupiterkansas (profile), 22 Aug 2013 @ 8:34am

Re: Re: Re: What the hell...
He still has the power to pardon Manning.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Anonymous Coward, 22 Aug 2013 @ 8:34am

Need for Secrecy
We keep hearing about how important these 'secrets' are. With all of the things revealed, with the possible exception of outing individuals, the only 'harm' has been embarrassment. That embarrassment is directly related to the fact that the information 'was' secret. If the information had 'not' been secret, there would have been no embarrassment. Thus no need for any of these shenanigans.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
jupiterkansas (profile), 22 Aug 2013 @ 8:35am

Re:
The government NEEDS you to fear them and the rest of the world to justify their bloated budgets.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
jupiterkansas (profile), 22 Aug 2013 @ 8:41am

Re:
Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were executed for giving atomic bomb secrets to the Soviets. Those who confessed to helping them were given 15 and 30 year sentences.

Things have not yet gotten as bad as the Commie witch hunts of the 50s, but we're getting there.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Aug 2013 @ 8:43am

Re: Re: Re: What the hell...
"The US President is Commander and Chief of the Armed Forces"

That point was made, but thanks for your confirmation.

"If we want to go to war, Congress must approve to do so"

Oh Wally - you're so cute

"the buck stops at President Obama"

So the prez should, as part of everyday duties, approve or disapprove of all military court martial sentencing? I find this to be a stretch, by what rational is this reasonable?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Aug 2013 @ 8:43am

Re: Re: Re: Re: What the hell...
Yes, but we all know that will not happen.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Aug 2013 @ 8:49am

Re: Lindh
So torture does work :/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Hephaestus (profile), 22 Aug 2013 @ 8:49am

In the US sentences are increased, by a factor of five, when a crime is committed with a computer ... didn't you get the memo?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Aug 2013 @ 8:52am

Re: Re: What the hell...
Obama is the commander in chief; every single person in the military ultimately reports to him. If prosecutors were overaggressive, they are HIS prosecutors.

The President also has ultimate pardoning authority. Somehow I doubt Obama is going to use it to release him after he's served another 3 years.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Tony T, 22 Aug 2013 @ 8:53am

2 words
William Weidband. Was a Russian mole who caused what the NSA refers to as "Black Friday". Never prosecuted.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Pat Labine, 22 Aug 2013 @ 8:59am

You forget my very favourite example!
People selling/giving/leaking information getting lesser sentences than Branning?

Dick Cheney gives away sensitive classified information about an American spy abroad (Valery Plame) and he gets... re-elected!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Aug 2013 @ 8:59am

Re: Re: Re: Re: What the hell...
"So the prez should, as part of everyday duties, approve or disapprove of all military court martial sentencing?"

Maybe — can you provide a justification for your proposal?

"I find this to be a stretch, by what rational is this reasonable?"

If you find your own strawman to be "a stretch," perhaps you should not have constructed it so shoddily.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
wec, 22 Aug 2013 @ 9:10am

This prosecution has never been about the crimes, its because he embarrassed the Administration/Army and they want to make an example of him.

This persecution has never been about the crimes, its because he embarrassed the Administration/Army and they want to make an example of him.

Fixed it for you...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Idobek (profile), 22 Aug 2013 @ 9:13am

The UK and Great Britain?
The former includes the latter.

Great Britain on the other hand could have differing laws to other parts of the UK i.e. Northern Ireland.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Aug 2013 @ 9:21am

Re: Re:
The 1984 rule book!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Aug 2013 @ 9:22am

Re:
Citation?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DCX2, 22 Aug 2013 @ 9:25am

Re: Re: What the hell...
The President proclaimed Bradley Manning guilty long before his trial even started. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IfmtUpd4id0

It was so embarrassing that the Obama administration had to back track on their statement. It's apparently a big deal when the President of the United States does not believe in "innocent until proven guilty". http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0411/53601_Page2.html#ixzz1KMlT6PFZ
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Aug 2013 @ 9:25am

Re: Re: Lindh
So torture does work :/
So long as there is zero regard for the truthfulness/accuracy of the information the victim provides in order to stop the pain/war-crime being done to them — sure, it "works."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DCX2, 22 Aug 2013 @ 9:26am

Re:
She's blind folded, it's not her fault that she can't see the government is pushing down on the scale with a finger
[ link to this | view in thread ]
martyburns (profile), 22 Aug 2013 @ 9:31am

Re: Should have sold them
US Government: "How dare you publish secret documents without even trying to get any money for them! You are an embarrassment to capitalism the world over, to jail with you!"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
HappyBlogFriend (profile), 22 Aug 2013 @ 9:33am

Punishments for TREASON will be harsher now that everyone knows what it is.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Aug 2013 @ 9:48am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What the hell...
- "Obama, seriously?" -

In response to the above allegation that the prez is responsible for the disparity in sentencing of those who divulge state secrets, it was pointed out that the prez does not usually get involved in these matters.

According to you, this is a strawman. Nice try.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Aug 2013 @ 9:52am

Re: Re: Re: Lindh
We are still waiting for Sean Hannity to be water boarded for charity.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Luna (profile), 22 Aug 2013 @ 10:00am

Re: Wally
Well, to be fair, Gender Dysphoria is the primary thing the T in LGBT deals with on a daily basis, and gender is a social construct so that's not entirely true.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Aug 2013 @ 10:22am

It's too bad Manning didn't use the "for the children" defense. He would be free and probably received a medal.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Aug 2013 @ 10:28am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Lindh
Torture, if you know the person doing it against you will never deal you lasting damage, is not really torture as such. If someone like a certain right wing radio host want torture, he should probably accept it in a foreign country and under a "do your worst" contract, if it should carry any meaning.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Aug 2013 @ 11:01am

It is also worth noting that when the Obama administration caught an actual Russian spy ring working in the U.S.--one that was equally high profile--they downplayed the significance and returned the spies to Russian as part of a fairly generous spy-swap agreement. The administration was criticized for failing to show foreign powers or potential spies that there were negative consequences for this type of action.

The message to foreign powers seems to be: we understand that spying is all part of the game and we won't make you or your agents pay for getting caught. Meanwhile, the message to potential whistle blowers is: don't you dare give any information to the American public or we'll label you an enemy of the state and do everything in our power to ruin your life.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
sorrykb (profile), 22 Aug 2013 @ 11:08am

AC #38 wrote:
Torture, if you know the person doing it against you will never deal you lasting damage, is not really torture as such.

Wrong.

"Torture" means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind...
- UN Convention Against Torture (ratified by the United States in 1994)

Despite all contorted pseudo-legal arguments about "waterboarding/stress positions/whatever-we-feel-like-doing-because-'terrorism', it's torture, it's illegal, and it's wrong.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Brandt Hardin, 22 Aug 2013 @ 11:30am

dystopia
We will all �do time� in the Dystopian Police State we are allowing by remaining silent. I am Bradley Manning and YOU are Bradley Manning whether you know it or not. http://dregstudiosart.blogspot.com/2013/06/we-people-are-bradley-manning.html
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Simple Mind (profile), 22 Aug 2013 @ 11:31am

Re:
Ironically, Manning probably did do it in a large part "for the children". Whereas others just give lip service to the children to push their own agendas. Interesting how the idiom "give lip service to the children" sounds a lot like child abuse.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Aug 2013 @ 11:42am

Surely from the treatment that Bradley Manning received from the time of his internment up to date was a clue to you that his 'justice' would be a kangaroo court in the fullest sense of the meaning.

Even the UN has ruled his treatment was inhumane and unjustified. This was never about justice. This was about embarrassment and setting up an example.

This has been the M.O. for every whistle blower that has had the gall to barrenness this administration and is not a sole glaring example.

More and more it appears we need a new president and impeachment would not be out of the question.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Aug 2013 @ 11:45am

Re:
Yea

Unfortunate reality that people tend to forget is that rules don't work in war.

I'm not trying to justify it by any means. And i'm especially not convinced that this was a necessary war as such. And i believe that officially the US isn't even at war with any of these people/states/countries/groups etc.

But when the blood starts pumping, and you're in a position of power over life and death... written laws mean about zilch.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Aug 2013 @ 11:46am

Re:
Edit autocorrect... not barrenness but embarrassment.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Aug 2013 @ 12:06pm

Everyone knows they got lighter sentences because they didn't do it "on the internet." Duh!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Martin, 22 Aug 2013 @ 12:14pm

Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) does NOT equal civilian law.
All of your examples lack something in common with Manning's case. None of the people you mentioned were tried in a military tribunal under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. I totally don't agree with the ruling, but let's not spin the issue using irrelevant examples, shall we? Its intellectually dishonest.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
mudlock (profile), 22 Aug 2013 @ 12:42pm

Re: Re:
LMFGTFY

https://www.google.com/search?q=gender+dysphoria
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That One Guy (profile), 22 Aug 2013 @ 3:40pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Lindh
Torture, if you know the person doing it against you will never deal you lasting damage, is not really torture as such.

Yeah, no.

Mythbusters tested out 'chinese water torture', that involved nothing more than drops of water, and even though the one being tested knew without a shadow of a doubt that they could get out of it at any time they wanted, it still had a profound affect on them.

Conflicted on the second half though. On one hand, no-one should be subject to torture, as the mere practice is an affront to human decency and makes you no better than the worse sociopaths out there, but on the other hand if someone is advocating for it to be done to other people, it would only be fair for them to get a little taste of what they are saying is 'acceptable' and 'no big deal' so they are knowledgeable on the subject next time it comes up.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That One Guy (profile), 22 Aug 2013 @ 3:45pm

To clarify:
While I am wholeheartedly against the practice, and feel it should never be done, I do see where the AC above is coming from when they say that those advocating it should have no problem volunteering themselves to go through it if they are really going to advocate torture as not being a big deal or 'worth the price'.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DCX2, 22 Aug 2013 @ 4:12pm

Re: Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) does NOT equal civilian law.
There was a CIA guy, who presumably signed the same "I will not share classified secrets" document that Mr. Manning had to sign.

Also, there is no espionage article in UCMJ.

Last but not least, while on the topic if not being disingenuous, being in the military doesn't mean you are stripped of the Constitutional protections that every other citizen has. In fact, in some cases the UCMJ provides extra protections; the Supreme Court has found that the UCMJ's right to a speedy trial creates a more exacting standard than the 6th Amendment.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Aug 2013 @ 5:19pm

David Hicks doesn't belong on that list
The Hicks prosecution was bogus -- he eventually entered an Alford plea just to get out of prison (5 years in Gitmo, among other issues). Note that his "plea deal" included the somewhat suggestive stipulation that he promise not to sue the US government for his mistreatment.

It's a mistake and unfair for Mike to include the Hicks example above, and I think a correction is merited.

Overview: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Hicks
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Aug 2013 @ 5:20pm

Re: David Hicks doesn't belong on that list
I acknowledge that Mike is merely parroting the MSNBC error.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Niall (profile), 23 Aug 2013 @ 6:01am

Re: David Hicks doesn't belong on that list
So someone who entered a possibly false plea after being illegally held for five years shouldn't be counted with someone who is being falsely over-charged, as evidenced by trials of people who did 'actual' harm? Right.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DJ, 24 Aug 2013 @ 10:18pm

Guess what?!
I dislike our president so much its making me hate this place! Hahaha
[ link to this | view in thread ]
jeff, 26 Aug 2013 @ 4:01pm

Re: Re: David Hicks doesn't belong on that list
I feel he can stay on the list BUT it needs massive clarification. I believe Hicks is currently trying to get the guilty ruling overturned.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
robert, 26 Aug 2013 @ 10:45pm

Lt. Monti stole a P38R & defected to Nazi Germany because he wanted to fight Soviet Communism. When the war ended he was prosecuted by the USA for desertion & may have done 6 months (memory?). Public outrage forced the Feds to bring additional charges & he was jailed until the early 60s.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Robyn, 19 Jun 2015 @ 7:29am

Re: yes
Jonathan Pollard, whom may I remind you, gave away secrets to an ally, got life in prison, and a plea bargain promifed that he wouldn't get that sentence, he honored it but the government violated it!
[ link to this | view in thread ]