TIME for Thanks

Before we stuff ourselves with stuffing and trim the tree this Thanksgiving, TIME asks some public figures—from Michelle Obama to Rick Warren to our astronauts orbiting Earth—to share what they're grateful for.

  • Share
  • Read Later
32 comments
PaxChristi
PaxChristi

Under the Geneva Convention and international law established at Nuremberg in 1945-46, PVT. Manning was obligated to expose the war crimes she witnessed as a U.S. Army intelligence analyst.  No oath of office, oath of secrecy or obedience relieves anyone of this obligation, as the convictions of the Nuremberg trials demonstrated.  Furthermore, a retrospective analysis of the U.S. government's intentional manufacture of evidence to falsely justify the invasion of Iraq for geopolitical-economic gain constitutes an illegal war of aggression by current international standards.  The exemption from accountability (impunity) the United States enjoys as a sole super power is the only thing preventing U.S. officials from being tried for crimes against humanity in the International Court of Justice.  How is it just to imprison a soldier for exposing the crimes of their government?  The conviction of PVT Manning was necessary to suppress any movement toward U.S. government accountability.  PVT Manning is a great American patriot who is consciously sacrificing her life to defend the constitution of the United States, and the soul of her country.

JessicaRobinDurling
JessicaRobinDurling

Chelsea Manning is a my hero, good health to her there is many of us that are thankful for her this holiday and wishing her good health and promising we won't forget 

sfgkimroman
sfgkimroman

And who the heck cares what Chelsea Manning thinks?  How much harm do you need to do to make Time magazine? 

LacyButterflyLiberationMacAuley
LacyButterflyLiberationMacAuley

And of course, we should give thanks for Chelsea Manning, whose act of selflessness and heroism has helped to save lives of so many. And whose continued bravery in all things public and "private" is truly inspiring.

I add YOU to the list of heroes, Chelsea, with Malcolm X, Dr Martin Luther King Jr, and Harvey Milk.

ManningTrial
ManningTrial

According to eQualityGiving.org, in Nov. 1977 Harvey Milk became not the first but the fifth openly LGBT person elected to public office in the U.S. He was preceded by Kathy Kozachenko (Ann Arbor City Council, Jan. 1974), Elaine Noble (Mass. House of Representatives, Nov. 1974), Allan Spear (Minn. State Senate, Nov. 1976), and Jim Yeadon (Madison, WI City Council, April 1977). Supervisor Milk was the first non-incumbent openly gay man elected in the U.S., but PVT Manning is remiss in overlooking these forerunners.

ManningTrial
ManningTrial

@PaxChristi It is significant that nowhere during the long pretrial, trial, and post-trial phases of Manning's court-martial did the soldier's legal team even once so much as mention Nuremberg, much less invoke it as a defense. Why do you suppose that is? Are Manning and his lawyers so stupid as to have overlooked such an obvious defense? I believe it's because your argument is specious in the extreme.

Manning's lawyers would've had to demonstrate that the sketchy authority of the Nuremberg Principles (derived under international law from the 20th century's foremost display of victor's justice) somehow trumps U.S. law. Since this court-martial was being conducted by the United States Army at Fort Meade, Maryland—rather than at the International Criminal Court in The Hague, Netherlands—Nuremberg did not and could not apply.

Moreover, writing about the helicopter attack depicted in the notorious video leaked by Manning, sympathetic biographer and attorney Chase Madar commented, "One might expect that such a graphic atrocity would be fodder for the condemnation of the major human rights organizations—Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Human Rights First—who monitor violations of the laws of war. Not one of these groups has issued a statement on the massacre. … Why haven't these human rights groups addressed the most vividly documented incident of the military slaughter of civilians since the My Lai massacre? … The reason for their silence is disquietingly simple: the gunship's actions were, under the Rule of Law as codified and accepted in international humanitarian law, perfectly legal."

Manning sacrificed her freedom but not her life; she left that to real warriors. And she acted not in defense of the U.S. Constitution but in abject betrayal of our nation's trust. This holiday, I give thanks Chelsea Manning is where she belongs.

ttheothereye
ttheothereye

@sfgkimroman publication in Time magazine doesn't lessen time spent in prison. Some things are deserved. Some folks are far too afraid to face themselves to find the will and understanding within themselves to support those who dare to throw their lives away for the betterment, no matter how small, of us all. It's a shame, really.

Roni
Roni

@LacyButterflyLiberationMacAuley Add to the list of people that has put your national security and the soldiers that help provide it at risk.  Do you honestly think the US is the only country watching it's allies?!?!  Please.  As a disabled vet I find what he did downright wrong.  There are somethings that need to remain private or forget any security in our nation.

PaxChristi
PaxChristi

@ManningTrial

  Manning's attorney David Coombs sought to apply a Nuremberg defense strategy, but it was prohibited by the presiding Army Judge Col. Denise Lind.  As you said, the trial was "conducted by the United States Army at Fort Meade, Maryland—rather than at the International Criminal Court in The Hague, Netherlands— Nuremberg did not and could not apply." (victor's justice) 



 

ManningTrial
ManningTrial

@chipin12 judging from the puny response here (scarcely a dozen comments in 4 days!), there's no evidence that "millions" care what Chelsea thinks. I wish it were true—I've written a book about Manning. But most Americans couldn't care less about the WikiLeaks soldier, and they're probably right.

g370u7455
g370u7455

@Roni   Neither our security nor any lives were put at risk by Manning's leaks. During the trial, a government witness testified that no lives were lost or endangered. So because others do wrong, that means it's okay for one to do the same? You don't see the irony in talking about how some things should remain private when you're defending the spying of, not just foreign governments, but every US citizen who uses the Internet or a cellphone?

As a disabled vet, you clearly don't see the bigger picture. Security at this time does not mean the same thing that it once did. The world is changing around you and you're blind to it.

Cynthia_Burkey
Cynthia_Burkey

@Roni @LacyButterflyLiberationMacAuley Thank you for your service.  What do you think about the people who were running this country putting our men and women into an unwinnable situation without proper body armor or armored vehicles? Because that's what they did.  What would you think if another country came into our country and did what we did in Iraq? Do you know what happened there?  Have you read the book by Thomas Ricks, who interviewed hundreds of military men who were there in Iraq?  It was an unmitigated disaster, according to them.  Lots of them.  Who put people at risk by sending them into that situation in the first place?  And try to remember this. Manning was, is, a KID.  He's so god damn young.  I do think what he did was brave.  

toadboy
toadboy

@g370u7455 and you're a troll. Get over it!

ManningTrial
ManningTrial

@PaxChristi that is simply untrue. I defy you to find even a single reference to Nuremberg among the exhaustive online archive of pretrial documents maintained by independent journalist Alexa O'Brien, or within the verbatim trial transcripts posted by Freedom of the Press Foundation. Whatever strategy you're referring to did not involve Nuremberg, since that word never appears anywhere in the Manning court-martial record. For Coombs to have been forbidden to invoke a Nuremberg defense, he would first have had to bring it up. Neither he, his fellow defense lawyers, nor Manning ever did so. It went entirely unmentioned, and for good reason. Manning was not being tried as a war criminal.

g370u7455
g370u7455

@ManningTrial I don't have to read your trash to know exactly where it goes and what it says because your obnoxious tweets and comments are so much like so many other close-minded "patriots" that it's obvious what kind of content you spew out. Re-hashing the same 'ol crap that's been successfully refuted by peoople you don't bother to listen to. I used to chalk all this "police" and "surveillance" state stuff up to paranoia up until I read the raw materials provided by Wikileaks and the revelations made by Snowden, so you can stuff your baseless insults of blindedness and closed mindedness.

I've provided plenty of argument and the evidence is apparent. Instead, it is you who fails to address much of anything. Wouldn't expect anything less from a government apologist and hack.

ManningTrial
ManningTrial

@g370u7455 thanks for your reviews of books you haven't read. And you call me a hack? You seem to be a freelance apologist for Manning, blinded by your own self-righteousness. You don't counter my points with evidence or argument. All you do is repeat your mantra that I "have nothing of value to offer." You no doubt take comfort in your closed mind, but others may judge for themselves who is better informed on this subject.

g370u7455
g370u7455

@ManningTrial Laughably obvious angles of attack in this and previous works of yours. It's obvious that you're a hack who writes with his gut and not his head and heart. Being "the first book" is not an accomplishment. On the contrary, it often means it is the least informed and most useless volume on its subject.

It appears you take a great interest in Manning's gender identity, believing it somehow has relevance in all this. Just further proof that you have nothing of value to offer on anything related to Manning.

ManningTrial
ManningTrial

@g370u7455 thanks for asking for the title, but all you had to do is click on my avatar for that info. My book is called "Manning: The Soldier Who Leaked on His/Her Country," and is available at Amazon. It's the first book to thoroughly examine Manning's 12-week trial, the first to retrace the step-by-step revelations of the soldier's conflicted gender identity, and the first to challenge Manning's mythical martyrdom.

g370u7455
g370u7455

@ManningTrial You haven't written a book on Manning. If you did, share the title. More Americans are showing concern every passing day about the revelations that Snowden and Manning and others have provided.

ManningTrial
ManningTrial

@Cynthia_Burkey thanks for reinforcing my point: 663 + 2,800 = 3,463, which is a whopping 996,537 short of the first among those phantom "millions" of supporters touted by @chipin12. This is consistent with the various online petitions requesting a pardon and/or clemency for PVT Manning, including two at the White House's "We The People" website. None of those attracted more than a few thousand adherents.

The idea behind "We The People" petitions is that if one meets a threshold of 100,000 signatures within 30 days, White House staff will review it, forward to appropriate policy experts, and issue an official response. However, when the deadline for each rolled around, neither Manning petition had garnered even 10,000 signatures, much less 100,000.

I don't dispute the energy and commitment of the few Americans who do support Manning, but in the grand scheme of things, their numbers are paltry.

Cynthia_Burkey
Cynthia_Burkey

@ManningTrial 663 people tweeted this article according to the latest count. That's far more tweets than any other article in this series.  2800 'likes' on Facebook, too.

g370u7455
g370u7455

@ManningTrial Responsible adults expose the wrongdoings of others. The trial was shamefully conducted, the conviction is morally wrong and Manning only offended imperialism.

ManningTrial
ManningTrial

@Cynthia_Burkey Manning is no kid. In 2½ weeks he'll be age 26. When he methodically disclosed three-quarters of a million U.S. government documents that he had sworn to protect, Manning was 22. Three years later, during his February 2013 confession in open court, the soldier declared, "The decisions that I made to send documents and information to WikiLeaks were my own decisions, and I take full responsibility for my actions."

Why not take Manning at his word? Whether you consider him a man or a woman, you ought to at least accept this person as a responsible adult who stands convicted of serious offenses against the country that trusted him.

g370u7455
g370u7455

@Roni @fish.face.freckle.fingers       It would be treason not to disclose the wrongdoings Manning was aware of. Roni, you have a Cold War mentality that only disservices everyone.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 280 other followers