What on earth are they on about???? 1030(a)(1) relates to para Y of Section 11 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, to whit…“ y. The term „restricted data“ means all data concerning (1) design, manufacture, or utilization of atomic weapons; (2) the production of special nuclear material; or (3) the use of special nuclear material in the production of energy, but shall not include data declassified or removed from the Restricted Data category pursuant to section 142″

Is there anyone out in the rest of the world who is not aware that the US elects to use DU in their weapon projectiles? Does the US DoD (JAG…) ever turn on CNN, or even read the glossy brochures of their own weapon systems?

How does film showing the unlawful (and covered up, defaming of the victims) killing of innocent people by an advanced weapon system that the US sells to various other nations constitute a breach of para Y?

@ Mindsurge: As a former (medical) officer in the german army I don´t think Bradley should have tried to go through proper channels in order to indicate these war crimes. His effort would have been futile. The only way, that he could be sure, was to expose it openly.

In my opinion Bradley is brave young man and he deserves our respect for what he has done.

Last I knew, these videos were made mandatory for the purpose of reviewing army soldiers actions, to prevent criminal activity and to aid in the prosecution of war crimes committed by US Army personnel? Surely that would mean anyone and everyone was entitled to receive this video would it not?

What on earth would be the point in having video evidence of conduct during a combat situation, if it were not for public scrutiny and for the courts to decide whether or not an offence was committed?

Bringing discredit on the US Army is pointless these days, with friendly fire, civilian casualties in most altercations, and claiming evidence of WMDs that must have been vaporised by Captain Kirk on one of his time-warping away missions, because they were never found, the US Army has discredited itself more than enough for the for-seeable future. If an Army cannot be held accountable for it’s actions, it is not an Army, it is simply a gathering of heathens with guns and helicopters.

IF they can PROVE Bradley did ANYTHING, then the charge sheet should contain nothing more than first time offences, relating directly to computer crime, which are punishable mostly by a slap on the wrist. I doubt they can even prove he actually committed a computer related crime (Such as hacking, circumventing encryption or other security measures) the log (IF real) suggests that the document(s) were sat on a virtually open server, that he had access to, therefore he committed no electronic crime at all, since he had full authorative access and clearance for the material he was dealing with, he has done nothing more than report a crime through unconventional methods, because it had already been made clear to him, that the conventional ones were closed and not open to such a report! He mentioned AES256 in the alleged logs, if indeed he cracked it, he does not belong in prison, he belongs in the CIA or the NSA!

I agree that pilots and soldiers have to make snap decisions, but my snap decision, whilst in an armoured, very heavily armed helicopter, would have been to simply follow the normal rules of engagement, thus, not requesting permission to engage someone who has not engaged you, but if engaged, returning fire. The assault on the van is nothing more than a disgusting want for target practice and utter destruction.

Someone about to fire an RPG, who is in clear view, is warrant enough to return fire, and the intention would be very clear, no such event occurred, hence the repeated requests for permission to engage, rather than just engaging, it was pure panic and paranoia that prompted this attack to begin, nothing more. Under no circumstances should the van have been fired upon, they were clearly doing nothing more than trying to rescue the man who was clearly badly injured, not holding a weapon, and no one, I repeat, NO ONE was firing on the helicopter or ground troops in that vicinity, at that time, who cares if he was in fact an insurgent getting away? He did not fire on the helicopter or ground troops at any time, and the only thing the ground troops would do when they arrived would be transport him to a hospital, the troops on the helicopter clearly just wanted to make sure their „kill“ was actually dead, like shooting a deer between the eyes when you have only wounded it on your first attempt.