Bradley Manning | News | Wikileaks

Bradley Manning's Full Court Statement Released: AUDIO

Wikileaks soldier Bradley Manning's 1 hr and 7 minute speech to a military court was leaked by the Freedom of the Press Foundation today and posted as a Soundcloud file by Buzzfeed, along with an edited clip of Manning describing a 2007 video he gave to Wikileaks and the reasons he did so.

ManningSays Manning in the latter clip:

"At first I did not consider the video very special, as I have viewed countless other war porn type videos depicting combat. However, the recording of audio comments by the aerial weapons team crew and the second engagement in the video of an unarmed bongo truck troubled me ...

It was clear to me that the event happened because the aerial weapons team mistakenly identified Reuters employees as a potential threat and that the people in the bongo truck were merely attempting to assist the wounded. The people in the van were not a threat but merely "good samaritans." The most alarming aspect of the video to me, however, was the seemly delightful bloodlust they appeared to have."

Watch and listen to the above-referenced clips, AFTER THE JUMP...

Writes Glenn Greenwald:

The Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF), the group I recently helped found and on whose board I sit, has received a full, unedited audio recording of the one-hour statement Manning made in court two weeks ago, and this morning has published that recording in full. In that statement, Manning details at length what he did and, more important, the reasons he chose to do it. I'm personally unaware of who made the recording and am not aware of how it was made, but its authenticity has been verified. Last week, the superb independent journalist Alexa O'Brien, who has covered the proceedings from start to finish, created the best transcript she could of Manning's statement, which was published, among other places, in the Guardian. But this audio recording provides the first opportunity to hear Manning, in his own voice, explain his actions; that, presumably, is why whoever recorded Manning's statement risked violating the court-martial rules to do so.

The unofficial transcript is also posted here.

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. No one can deny Manning is a tough little dude. They haven't broken him.

    But, he made a really poor decision from at least a personal standpoint, and I'm afraid he won't get left off the hook or treated compassionately by the court. Where are all his 'radical' friends now? Why aren't radical 'progressives' publicly furious with the current federal administration for the way they're handling this case? Rhetorical questions, most know the answers. Another example of why I really look down on those with feet of clay who pontificate, no matter their ideology.

    Posted by: ratbastard | Mar 12, 2013 11:39:25 AM


  2. Where are Manning's supporters? Yeah.. he's won the Guardian newspaper's "Person of the Year" readers' poll two years in a row. He's also been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize two years in a row as well. He certainly deserves the award far more than Obama, who has continued and even expanded some of the War on Terror abuses that began under the Bush administration. Brad's actions have not been shown to have harmed anyone, but that doesn't mean they didn't have an impact. Among many revelations, he helped to expose a cover up of the execution style slaying of women and children in Iraq (which was subsequently obliterated by a US airstrike). Once this event became widely reported in the Iraqi press, Iraqis' outrage against US abuses reached a fever pitch. This occurred at the same time that Obama was trying to negotiate a Status of Forces Agreement to *keep* US soldiers in Iraq past the end of 2011. The Iraqi public forced their politicians to demand no continuation of legal immunity for US troops in Iraq past the deadline -- which became a red line for the Pentagon. The troops came home sooner arguably because of Manning's actions. People in Tunisia and many other countries around the world have been able to hold corrupt powerful people accountable because of these revelations.

    Furthermore, Brad is unilaterally offering to take responsibility for transferring the information to WikiLeaks. There is no plea offer. He's just saying "yeah this is what I did, and this is why I did it". He's only contesting the far more outrageous charges such as those that claim he sought to aid Al Qaeda, which is obviously ridiculous.

    It's not just progressives who support Brad. There are people from all across the spectrum - especially among conservatives and libertarians who are outraged at the Obama administration's unconstitutional mistreatment of Brad while in custody -- both during the 9 months of solitary confinement, forced nudity, confiscation of eyeglasses etc -- and violation of his due process rights (he's been in custody over 1000 days now without trial -- setting a new record each day the government drags this process out).

    I think the real story is the fact that so many people still care, and are still writing about and reporting on this story three years after it broke while most news stories can barely garner 30 seconds of the public's attention.


    Posted by: Mike | Mar 12, 2013 11:53:42 AM


  3. @Mike,

    Your right, it's not just 'Progressives', but I single them out because we both know if GW was still president, this story would be FAR BIGGER today than it is.

    Posted by: ratbastard | Mar 12, 2013 11:56:23 AM


  4. Agree with you on that point. But I wouldn't call those folks Progressives -- I just call them Democratic party loyalists. True progressives call out BS when they see it.

    Posted by: Mike | Mar 12, 2013 12:07:57 PM


  5. Let him be tried and if he is convicted let him stand before a firing squad.

    Posted by: David Hearne | Mar 12, 2013 12:11:37 PM


  6. Ratbastard, I see it as similar to the logic that allows for a debt slave. "One must pay one's own debts" is a cruel logic that can turn a man into a slave at the price of social morality.

    Manning leaked the stuff of his own will, so he is responsible for all things. Similar to the other logic it conveniently leaves out all reality. So I think the rad progressives think their hands are tied, because they are morons.

    Posted by: Fensox | Mar 12, 2013 12:14:59 PM


  7. I agree with you RATBASTARD. I don't understand the free pass given to so many hawkish practices (war, interrogations, drones, etc.) just because Obama is President now. It can no longer be argued that the current situation is merely a result of having to continue what happened under GWB. Whenever I try to organize anything anti-war on campus it's nearly impossible, whereas these happened all the time just five years ago.

    Posted by: Thomas | Mar 12, 2013 12:15:59 PM


  8. He was just telling the truth, ain't that what good Christians do?

    Posted by: Jesus | Mar 12, 2013 1:24:10 PM


  9. y'know, i've read a LOT about this...and yet i've yet to read anything at all that shows that what Manning leaked put Americans at "specific risk" .

    from all that i've read, the guy is a whistleblower. and i like me some whistleblowers.

    Posted by: Little Kiwi | Mar 12, 2013 1:33:50 PM


  10. You all do realize most of the classified information Manning released was pertaining to events DURING THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION. Not Obama. In particular the events described in this very post took place in 2007.

    I'm not saying Obama isn't certainly guilty of continuing many unsavory policies under the War on Terror umbrella, but most of what was leaked dealth with Bush-era events.

    Posted by: Wolfie | Mar 12, 2013 1:35:54 PM


  11. Obama didn't just continue "many unsavory policies". He expanded them.

    While I'm (finally) satisfied with what he's doing for LGB people, his other policies are as disturbing as Bush ever was, particularly since nobody's paying attention.

    Posted by: Randy | Mar 12, 2013 2:54:23 PM


  12. Only cowards hate Manning, and lie about what he's done and why.

    They are the ones that are treasonous.

    Posted by: epic | Mar 12, 2013 4:07:33 PM


  13. If he's convicted he should be publicly executed.

    Posted by: David Hearne | Mar 12, 2013 5:49:44 PM


  14. It isn't that I hate what he has done. I simply think it wasn't his place to decide what did or did not risk the lives of Americans serving overseas. I find it hard to believe that he read thoroughly or through thoroughly through all he released. For people who do have loved ones - siblings, nieces, nephews, children - serving overseas, it isn't up to him to make those decisions unilaterally. And honestly, even if you DO agree that what he did was remarkable, admirable, brave - he defied the law. And he should accept his punishment. I'm always just astounded that so many people think he should go free. Beyond that, I fail to see what exactly has come from this? As people note, nothing has changed. The sleeping populace did not rise up and demand a better government because of it. We re-elected Obama. Let's not kid ourselves into thinking this kid changed the world. He didn't.

    Posted by: Wolfie | Mar 12, 2013 6:45:28 PM


  15. "Where are Manning's supporters?...."

    What in the world are you talking about? We just had rallies over 70 cities around the world against his 1,000 days' incarceration without trial (and the tortures) and we have raised so far one million dollars for his legal defense fund!
    (I myself was holding a big banner* at the S.F. rally. *The left banner in the 3rd Flickr photo in the below link. And on the right column, you can see the milliards of events planned and held all the time! )
    Just because the vile corporate media don't cover it, it doesn't necessarily nothing is happening!

    https://www.bradleymanning.org/

    http://www.bradleymanning.org/news/international-protests-of-bradley-mannings-1000th-day-jailed-without-trial

    Posted by: iban4yesu | Mar 12, 2013 8:18:02 PM


  16. In the full clip, segments dealing with his sexuality are at 25-26 minutes, 46-47 minutes, and maybe 22-23 minutes if I heard it right.

    In any case, some violations of the law are justifiable, and I think his motives were good. If this were a real court, he may be sentenced to time served. Not going to happen, of course.

    To some degree, this case isn't about right and wrong, but about how do you even think you can keep secrets in the digital age. If you think 2010 was tough, just wait for 2020.

    Posted by: Randy | Mar 12, 2013 10:17:11 PM


  17. I mean, it doesn't necessarily mean nothing is happening!

    Posted by: iban4yesu | Mar 12, 2013 10:38:17 PM


  18. @RatBastard, Mike, and Thomas:

    What do you propose we do exactly that hasn't been done? When a Republican was in power, we had secrecy, torture, and civil rights violations. Now a Democrat is in power, and he have secrecy, torture, and civil rights violations. I'm taking suggestions from all quarters.

    Posted by: Dan B | Mar 13, 2013 8:30:23 AM


Post a comment







Trending


« «Hong Kong's New Equal Opportunites Commission Boss Promises End to Anti-Gay Discrimination« «