Comments about ‘Manning sentenced to 35 years in WikiLeaks case’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, Aug. 21 2013 12:00 a.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Spanish Fork, UT

Manning's leaks have not been well reported. Because the majority of what he leaked was raw reports of the aftermath of various military exercises, it required a lot of work to read and analyze. Other than the easily sensationalized Apache helicopter video, much of our media simply did not take the time to look at, read, or consider the rest. There were chilling edicts by the government, as well, warning many in the military or other government employ that they would be summarily fired for looking at the leaks. Nevertheless, he did succeed in getting out many facts about the lack of wise strategies overseas that many of the needed debates did begin -- however quietly. Also he did, in fact, inspire many others like Edward Snowden.

Numerous US laws were broken in the long incarceration and treatment of Manning simply on suspicion of his alleged actions. Apparently there will be no accountability on the part of our government for any of that. Numerous departments have testified that Manning's careful leaks did not endanger any servicemen nor informants. His intentions -- and even actions -- were good.

Manning is textbook material for a pardon. I pray a future President grants it

lost in DC
West Jordan, UT

your comment that his actions endangered no informants is inconsistent with the story that said many informants had to be relocated to other countries.

BO and has actions remind me of the High Chancellor in the movie V for Vendetta.

Ogden, UT

He got off easy. He should have been sentenced to the whole possible 90 years, and forced to serve every minute of it. At the very least he should be forced to serve every second of the 35 years to which he was sentenced with no time off for anything.

In the 1960s my husband was a USAF security analyst with a very high security clearance (which he unequivocally honored and observed). I would guess that, more than just about everyone here, he knows and understands what Manning's actions mean and the harm they could cause if the information Manning divulged got in the hands of accomplished security analysts. He thought Manning should have fried.

Manning put a lot of US service people in deadly peril. He should be me to pay the price.

DN Subscriber 2

Manning committed Treason, providing aid and comfort to the enemy.

This used to be, and still should be, a capital offense. If you disagree, then make sure YOUR family members are the ones serving in our military to defend us from foreign enemies.

Allen, TX

"At his trial, Manning said he gave the material to the secrets-spilling website WikiLeaks to expose the U.S. military's "bloodlust" and generate debate over the wars and U.S. policy."

Here's the deal: There are no doubt many US Service Men and Women who are privy to information that they find repulsive, wrong or 'embarrassing'. However, in the interest of National Security, and to comply with their sworn oaths, they do NOT leak the information.

This is what distinguishes the hundreds and thousands of patriotic soldiers from this self-serving, immature, disturbed traitor. I hope he thinks about loyalty and honor while he sits in his cell.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments