Skip to main content

When Manning blew the whistle

Manning, who turns 24 on Saturday, has been charged with 22 accounts that can lead to life imprisonment. By using ‘unauthorized’ software on government computers he managed to pull out ‘classified’...


Manning, who turns 24 on Saturday, has been charged with 22 accounts that can lead to life imprisonment. By using ‘unauthorized’ software on government computers he managed to pull out ‘classified’ information which was downloaded ‘illegally’ and sent for public release Manning backstabbed his entire nation. He broke the oath. Basically, for the US Army and State Manning has already been declared a traitor. Already assumed guilty by his Commander in Chief, President Barrack Obama, one can only assume how just the trial can possibly be. He has been held for 18 months in confinement and his pretrial hearing on Friday will be his first public appearance.
However without information public cannot possibly make informed decisions. How can censorship of this level be promoted in the World’s supposedly most democratic country? How can the United States justify war crimes, stealing resources, committing atrocities and genocides on local populations and basically setting up false flag operations? There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. And whistleblower Sara Bachmann might have stirred a debate on the Iranian nuclear program, but as Western media fails to portray, Iran is not the biggest problem on the globe. It is in fact the US.
But speaking of media and selective reporting, the Manning issue has been left ignored, lying around to rot, as have the Occupy protests in the United States and on the contrary anti-Putin activists in Russia have made headlines for weeks at stretch. So the media ceases to play the role of watchdog and becomes a puppet controlled by the ‘National Interest’ and it is this American/ Western ideological interest that makes its narrative the ‘truth’ and all others become conspiracy theories.
In the hustle and bustle of what’s happening where and amidst headlines that focus on enough to create an issue out of a mere discrepancy, people are fed enough bits and pieces to recognize a state of chaos, and obviously who in their right mind would question the right of the American Army to send troops abroad: waging wars for peace, freedom, liberty, welfare, gender equality has been the theme of US foreign policy. However when the philanthropic intentions of the US are questioned, media conveniently labels the sources of such criticisms as conspiracy theorists. And then before we know it, a few unpleasant squabbles are exchanged and a new issue props into the horizon.
How is this article about Manning? Well he’s the reason why the US pulled out of Iraq. Why all of a sudden? Well turns out the US didn’t even have an option. After Manning gave in to his ‘moral culpability’ leaked 250,000 diplomatic cables, the US war crimes came out in the open and Iraqi government refused to let the US troops stay. The reason was simple; US wanted immunity of American soldiers from local prosecution and the Iraqi PM refused. But that is not what the mainstream media highlights. For most news sources Obama has ended one decade long war, for the critics he’s only desperate for re-election. But who highlighted the role of Manning in ending the war waged in the pursuit of weapons of mass destruction?
But even if we don’t care about US troops leaving Iraq and even if we are skeptical about the reasons behind rejecting immunity, certain facts that glare in our faces lie on the table like objects one can pick up and scrutinize. And here I bring in the issue of ‘National Security’. What was so outrageous about the cables that US national interest has collapsed after news of American ‘peace’ soldiers peeing on Afghan dead bodies, the gun-sight video of a dozen civilians shot down by a US Apache helicopter in Baghdad, the usual gunning down of civilians at checkpoints, the collateral damage of thousands of civilians in these war torn countries whose blood was initially denied but thanks to the cables Manning leaked into the hands of the world’s most ‘dangerous’ news source the truth was out.
But why should Manning have disrespected his oath? An oath he owed to his government, the land that spreads democracy, happiness where people donate yoga mats and last year’s wardrobe to the Earthquake victims in Haiti. The country where the homosexuals will soon be able to tie the knot (51% of which will live happily ever after). Where freedom of speech and love for all the good things in life like liberty, feminism, Happy Meals and rock’n’roll breathe freely.
The state that has tormented millions of lives, created stories about weapons of mass destruction, and destabilized the only stable Afghan government (in 1970) hence creating the source of all our problems today. A country that has tamed the watchdog to make gullible people like you, me and that couch-potato in the suburbs of Boston (munching tutsi rolls and supersize-combo-meals while funding the wars destroying innocent lives) believe that wars can make peace.
That is the oath and trust that Manning broke. According to Hilary Clinton Manning’s leaks were “an attack on the international community” that “put people’s lives in danger, threatens our national security, and undermines our efforts to work with other countries to solve shared problems”. What were the secrets apart from the war crimes exposed? That Congo is rich in minerals and the Straits of Gibraltar is a vital shipping lane. And why exactly are these geographical facts US state secrets? It doesn’t take a genius to figure that one out. Such ambiguous statements on the part of US officials are not uncommon. No-one bothers to define these heavy and for no reason persuasive words like ‘national interest’ and ‘security’ that are thrown into every official statement. They are just there to make an impact. And why does nobody ask: Dear Hilary what international interests and national security have been compromised when the war crimes of your ‘Holy’ soldiers are exposed?
An oath to a state that has violated all rules of humanity and no regard for life cannot make such bold demands. But what is appalling is that despite standing up to the Establishment that is on a mission to establish itself all over the globe, Manning has been forgotten. Despite the fact that Manning and Wikileaks together exposed crimes, brutalities and human rights violations on the part of  the American Establishment and US Army, the former has spent 18 months in jail (23 hours daily in solitary confinement) and the latter faces sexual harassment charges in Sweden (how convenient). This is how we treat heroes in the 21st century.
By Zoon Ahmad Khan
Courtesy: Tacstrat Analysis
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the SPY EYES Analysis and or its affiliates. The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). SPY EYES Analysis and or its affiliates will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements and or information contained in this article

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

What about Israel’s nuclear weapons?

By   Patrick B. Pexton Readers periodically ask me some variation on this question: “Why does the press follow every jot and tittle of Iran’s nuclear program, but we never see any stories about Israel’s nuclear weapons capability?” It’s a fair question. Going back 10 years into Post archives, I could not find any in-depth reporting on Israeli nuclear capabilities, although national security writer  Walter Pincus  has touched on it  many times in his articles and  columns . I spoke with several experts in the nuclear and nonproliferation fields , and they say that the lack of reporting on Israel’s nuclear weapons is real — and frustrating. There are some obvious reasons for this, and others that are not so obvious. First, Israel refuses to acknowledge publicly that it has nuclear weapons. The U.S. government also officially does not acknowledge the existence of such a program. Israel’s official position, as reiterated by Aaron Sagui, spokesman fo...

Pakistan can never be Madina E Saani

By Nadeem Sajjad. Pakistan is a land loved by many and lived in by millions. It has been witnessed in the past --and somewhat in the present age – that the origin of the name (word) “Pakistan” has had many different accounts of its creators/inventors. Known to be the most accurate of all accounts, is the one of the much respected Chaudhry Rehmat Ali. Others have the concept that the word “Pakistan” was given to the Muslims of India, after the success of Lahore resolution in 1940, by the Hindus of the subcontinent and was then used by Quaid e Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah in his presidential address to the All India Muslim League annual session at Delhi on 24 April 1943. Whatever may be the origin, the Muslims got their own land to practice their religion Islam, and to maintain their traditions. The thing that should be emphasized upon is that the country was created in the name of Islam.  Knowing the origin is one thing, but naming the country or the name itself to something els...

Pakistani Pilots in Arab Israel War

45 years after the 1967 war: How the Arabs lost Jerusalem War is normally measured by its final outcome, but many individual heroes gave up their lives for the Arab side during the 1967 Six-Day War. (Image courtesy AP)   By  ALI YOUNES   SPECIAL TO AL ARABIYA This past June marked the 45th anniversary of the Arab defeat of the 1967 war. War is normally measured by its final outcome, but many individual heroes faithfully gave up their lives for the Arab side, defending the honor of their nations. The actions of those men deserve to be highlighted and explained, especially the contributions of the Pakistani pilot Saiful Azam and the brave Jordanian soldiers of the battle of Ammunition Hill in Jerusalem. At 12:48 p.m. on June 5, four Israeli jets were descending on Jordan’s Mafraq air base to smash the country’s tiny air force, shortly after the entire Egyptian air force had been reduced to rubble.  To intercept the incoming attack, ...