Some Ugly Implications of the Manning Prosecution

Glenn Greenwald writes of some
bad-for-press-freedom implications of the latest charges
against alleged WikiLeaker Bradley Manning:

the most serious new charge is for “aiding the enemy,” a capital
offense under Article
104 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Although military
prosecutors stated that they intend to seek life imprisonment
rather than the death penalty for this alleged crime, the military
tribunal is still empowered to sentence Manning to death if
convicted.

Article 104 — which, like all provisions of the UCMJ, applies
only to members of the military — is incredibly broad. Under
104(b) – almost
certainly the provision to be applied – a person is
guilty if he “gives intelligence to or communicates or corresponds
with or holds any intercourse with the enemy, either
directly or indirectly” (emphasis added), and, if
convicted, “shall suffer death or such other punishment as a
court-martial or military commission may direct.”…

In light of the implicit allegation that Manning transmitted
this material to WikiLeaks, it is quite possible that WikiLeaks is
the “enemy” referenced by Article 104, i.e., that the U.S.
military now openly decrees (as opposed to secretly
declaring) that the whistle-blowing group is an “enemy” of the
U.S. More likely, the Army will contend that by transmitting
classified documents to WikiLeaks for intended publication, Manning
“indirectly” furnished those documents to Al Qaeda and the Taliban
by enabling those groups to learn their contents. That would mean
that it is a capital offense not only to furnish intelligence
specifically and intentionally to actual enemies — the way that,
say, Aldrich Ames and Robert Hanssen were convicted of passing
intelligence to the Soviet Union — but also to act as a
whistle-blower by leaking classified information to a newspaper
with the intent that it be published to the world. Logically, if
one can “aid the enemy” even by leaking to WikiLeaks, then one can
also be guilty of this crime by leaking to The New York
Times…..

since the UCMJ applies only to members of the military,
newspapers (or WikiLeaks) couldn’t actually be charged under
Article 104; still, “there is still something profoundly disturbing
about the prospect of convicting Manning and sentencing him to life
imprisonment [GG: or the death penalty] for doing exactly what
media organizations did, as well.”

In other Manning commentary, to paraphrase Ali G,
“What do you think about the conspiracy theory involving Bradley
Manning?” “What, that he’s being cruelly repressed by a
transnational system of murder and mayhem out to crush the spread
of information?” “No, that he
don’t exist!“