About three weeks ago, Wikileaks, the online muckraking site, released 77,000 classified documents out of 90,000 obtained that discuss U.S. operations in Afghanistan, past missions, collateral damage, failures and successes of the U.S. in the Near East “cemetery of empires”.
The mainstream media and even many alternative outlets quickly downplayed the leak by at once saying, “these documents undermine our national security” while at the same time saying, “there is nothing in the documents we didn’t already know”. It’s this kind of double speak that helped kill the story and undermined the evidentiary power of the documents that proved our strategy in Afghanistan is NOT working.
Lost in the stories and short term news cycles was the fact that the anti-war crowd had found their smoking gun that proved their accusations of civilian deaths, a strong Taliban resistance and ineffective strategy of the U.S. (coalition?) forces. No longer were these accusations hearsay; they had hard evidence that the war was NOT going well.
The media ignored the evidence and discussed the leak and Wikileaks while debating whether leaking this information was okay. The discussion of freedom of the press became the headline not the failings of our war efforts and lack of clear goals or strategy.
The White House and the military are now going after the whistleblower in the case, Private Bradley Manning. He is in jail awaiting trial for leaking the documents.
The New York Times decided to do a hatchet job on Private Manning in an article called, “Early Struggles of Soldier Charged in Leak Case” (link)
Instead of focusing on the issues and reasons for his leaking of the documents, the fact that Manning disagreed with the U.S. tactics in the war, they have to paint him as a hurt gay man. “…classmates made fun of him for being a geek”, and “classmates made fun of him for being gay”. Yes, it’s those gay geeks that cause trouble.
Why mention those facts at all? It’s an attempt to discredit the information he leaked by discrediting the messenger. “his social life was defined by the need to conceal his sexuality under “don’t ask, don’t tell” and he wasted brainpower fetching coffee for officers.” He’s gay AND a coffee drinker. The NYT article infers that his mental derangement was the reason for his leaking of the documents and NOT a conscious objection to U.S. strategy and policy. Has anyone considered that the demoralizing effect of “don’t ask, don’t tell” would leave gay soldier to not give a damn what happens to them and make them less concerned what happens to them?
The NYT article continues to dissect his psychology and not the motive for releasing the documents, “At school, Bradley Manning was clearly different from most of his peers. He preferred hacking computer games rather than playing them, former neighbors said. And they said he seemed opinionated beyond his years about politics, religion, and even about keeping religion out of politics.” A gay communist computer geek is going to release this kind of information, for sure. “Private Manning refused to recite the parts of the Pledge of Allegiance that referred to God or do homework assignments that involved the Scriptures.” He’s a subversive for sure, and thus the war is okay because Manning is a gay commie computer geek that hates America.
” Private Manning’s parents divorced, he moved with his mother”, the article reads. He’s a mama’s boy from divorced parents, (that’s why he’s gay) gay computer geek communist atheist America hater. Thus, the information PFC Manning released in not credible.
“Former students at his school there, Tasker Milward, remembered Private Manning being teased for all sort of reasons. His American accent. His love of Dr Pepper. The amount of time he spent huddled before a computer.”
Release of those documents by this Doctor Pepper loving momma’s boy computer geek of divorce communist gay atheist America hater shows how desperate he was for attention. And he was friends with outcast Tasker Milward. Thus, any information in those documents on Wikileaks is NOT credible.
Instead of spending all that space attacking Pfc Manning, the NYT should spend it’s time following the leaks, discussing the implications of the leaks, analyzing the content and reporting on the war.
Write the Ombudsman (Public Editor) at the NYT and/or Cancel your subscription
- E-mail: email@example.com
- Phone: (212) 556-7652
- Address: Public Editor
The New York Times
620 Eighth Avenue
New York, NY 10018
Hears my letter to the NYT Public Editor
The article “Early Struggles of Soldier Charged in Leak Case” is unwarranted character assassination against Pfc Manning.
Instead of spending your time and space attacking Pfc Manning for being gay, or hurt, or “troubled” or gay, the NYT should spend it’s time following the leaks, discussing the implications of the leaks, analyzing the content and reporting on the war.
I can only assume that the Times wanted to discredit Private Manning as a way to discredit his tactics or leaking of the documents. Please stick to the news and leave the gossip to People Magazine.
ABCD aka Tex Shelters
Support the release of Private Manning
Bradley Manning Support Network
If you can, Donate to the Defense Fund: https://co.clickandpledge.com/sp/d1/default.aspx?wid=36678
Send Private Bradley a letter of support:
Inmate: Bradley Manning
3247 Elrod Avenue
Quantico, VA 22134
Brig phone: +1 (703)432-6154
Brig fax: +1 (703)784-4242
Visit Courage to Resist and take more actions for more resisters
“Blowing the whistle on war crimes is not a crime,” says former Marine Corporal Jeff Paterson of Courage to Resist, a group working with the Bradley Manning Support Network to raise funds for Pfc. Manning’s defense. (link)
Radical Representative wants to see Manning executed for leaking the facts.
Last week, Representative Mike Rogers called for the execution of military whistleblower, Private Bradley Manning. His crime? Sharing the “Collateral Murder” video and the classified Afghanistan “war logs” with Wikileaks, which exposed the truth behind the failing war in Afghanistan, Pakistan’s cooperation with the Taliban, and potential war crimes. The 22-year-old Army intelligence analyst said he felt it was “important that it gets out…I feel, for some bizarre reason…it might actually change something.” He is currently in jail at Quantico, on suicide watch, and is facing up to 50 years in prison for exposing information the American public has the right to know.