Comments on: Government tries to block Bradley Manning’s defense from interviewing classified witness

By: Wei-Ting Chen

Wei-Ting Chen — Wed, 06 Mar 2013 04:19:10 +0000

Man…you hit right on the spot. I never thought of that before. Your point just point out how ridiculous the trial is and will be.

By: Pat G

Pat G — Mon, 04 Mar 2013 15:58:03 +0000

Deborah is actually correct that Osama Bin Laden was never convicted of anything.

Furthermore, the FBI never listed Osama Bin Laden as “most-wanted” for anything related to 911. Why? Because they said there was not enough evidence to do so. Incredible, but true. Furthermore, the first Osama Bin Laden immediately following 911 disclaimed any connection to the 911 attacks.

Many point to a Benazir Bhutto interview taped in 2007 with David Frost about a month before she was assassinated, where she mentioned that Osama BinLaden was dead.

Are we to believe the “testimony” from an anonymous prosecution “witness” about a 2011 raid that killed Bin Laden? How credible is testimony from a disembodied voice? In a courtroom? Regarding easily fabricated digital media?

Can this tribunal be made even less credible as a court of justice?

I would say the proceedings are the very definition of a kangaroo court.

By: Deborah Macaoidh Selim

Deborah Macaoidh Selim — Sun, 03 Mar 2013 12:22:03 +0000

Has anyone he supposedly aided been convicted?

By: Deborah Macaoidh Selim

Deborah Macaoidh Selim — Sun, 03 Mar 2013 12:17:35 +0000

Will someone please explain how he could have aided Bin Laden when Bin Laden was not convicted of anything, but rather executed without trial?

By: Markin

Markin — Sat, 02 Mar 2013 21:11:54 +0000

Those who have followed the Manning case over the past year or so, maybe since about April 2012 when the pre-trial hearing began in earnest know that last November the defendant offered to plead guilty to a few lesser included charges in his indictment, basically taking legal and political responsibility for the leaks to WikiLeaks that had been the subject of some of the government’s allegations against him. Without getting into the arcane legal maneuvering on this issue the idea was to cut across the government’s pretty solid case against him being the leaker of information and to have the now scheduled for June trial be on the substantial question of whether his actions constituted “material aid to terrorism” which could subject Private Manning to life in prison. On February 28, 2013 in open court as part of the continuing pre-trial hearings down at Fort Meade in Maryland Private Manning pled guilty to those lesser charges (unauthorized use of Internet, disclosing secret information, etc.) before Judge Lind and has left himself open for up to twenty years of imprisonment. Right now the June trial issue will be on the major charges only. We need to stay with Bradley on this and make sure people know that what he admitted to was that he disclosed that information about American military atrocities in Iraq and Afghanistan and other diplomatic high crime and misdemeanors. He is in trouble, big trouble, and needs our support more than ever.

By: Marzi

Marzi — Sat, 02 Mar 2013 12:46:34 +0000

With this new clandestine government witness, all of a sudden the Bradley team is forced to cooperate with the prosecution to support an unproven event. If the so called witness was a Navy Seal who retrieved computer drives, which could have happened electronically anywhere, that still does not mean the event where he retrieved the drives happened according to the way the government said it did. Many are questioning whether Osama was alive at the time of the “raid” and the so called wives of “Osama” were never examined as to who they were – and their children. Osama’s wives had been well known.