

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

No wonder Manning was subjected to what the UN special rapporteur on torture, Juan Mendez, described as cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment: left languishing in solitary confinement for months, regularly stripped naked, forced to sleep without darkness, deprived of any right to privacy. An example had to be made of a soldier who helped strip away the humanitarian pretences of US power, and revealed a far uglier reality.
Although it is Julian Assange - hiding from sex allegations in London's Ecuadorian Embassy - who has dominated the WikiLeaks story, Manning is the real martyr of the story. One of the videos released gave an insight into the horror of the US-led war in Iraq: an Apache helicopter shooting dead 11 Iraqis in a Baghdad suburb, none of whom returned fire. Among the dead was a 22-year-old Reuters' photojournalist Namir Noor-Eldeen; two children were brutally wounded. The crew laughed as they massacred: the video was one striking example of how occupations corrupt the occupier.
The US military may well succeed in locking away Manning, possibly for good. But whatever the verdict, for millions, he has already been vindicated.
"For me this seemed similar to a child torturing ants with a magnifying glass," was how Manning put it. According to WikiLeaks, this exposure had a key role in forcing US withdrawal after the Iraqi government stripped US forces of legal immunity.
Manning had a noble and courageous purpose: in his own words, to "spark a domestic debate on the role of our military and foreign policy in general".
It is a debate often suppressed with the cynical manipulation of patriotism. But it was the Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower who warned: "In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist."
It is exactly this power that Manning has challenged, and at great cost to himself.
Although Manning has pleaded guilty on 10 counts - such as unauthorised possession of sensitive material - he has proclaimed his innocence on "aiding the enemy", or specifically al-Qaida. In truth, it is a charge that successive US governments are guilty of: by funding and arming Islamist radicals in the 1980s, and pursuing a foreign policy that has helped radicalise millions since.
Manning faces spending the rest of his life in jail. It is not a sacrifice that should be made in vain. The fight for open, accountable international diplomacy must be stepped up in response. The US military may well succeed in locking away Manning, possibly for good. But whatever the verdict, for millions, he has already been vindicated.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |

No wonder Manning was subjected to what the UN special rapporteur on torture, Juan Mendez, described as cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment: left languishing in solitary confinement for months, regularly stripped naked, forced to sleep without darkness, deprived of any right to privacy. An example had to be made of a soldier who helped strip away the humanitarian pretences of US power, and revealed a far uglier reality.
Although it is Julian Assange - hiding from sex allegations in London's Ecuadorian Embassy - who has dominated the WikiLeaks story, Manning is the real martyr of the story. One of the videos released gave an insight into the horror of the US-led war in Iraq: an Apache helicopter shooting dead 11 Iraqis in a Baghdad suburb, none of whom returned fire. Among the dead was a 22-year-old Reuters' photojournalist Namir Noor-Eldeen; two children were brutally wounded. The crew laughed as they massacred: the video was one striking example of how occupations corrupt the occupier.
The US military may well succeed in locking away Manning, possibly for good. But whatever the verdict, for millions, he has already been vindicated.
"For me this seemed similar to a child torturing ants with a magnifying glass," was how Manning put it. According to WikiLeaks, this exposure had a key role in forcing US withdrawal after the Iraqi government stripped US forces of legal immunity.
Manning had a noble and courageous purpose: in his own words, to "spark a domestic debate on the role of our military and foreign policy in general".
It is a debate often suppressed with the cynical manipulation of patriotism. But it was the Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower who warned: "In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist."
It is exactly this power that Manning has challenged, and at great cost to himself.
Although Manning has pleaded guilty on 10 counts - such as unauthorised possession of sensitive material - he has proclaimed his innocence on "aiding the enemy", or specifically al-Qaida. In truth, it is a charge that successive US governments are guilty of: by funding and arming Islamist radicals in the 1980s, and pursuing a foreign policy that has helped radicalise millions since.
Manning faces spending the rest of his life in jail. It is not a sacrifice that should be made in vain. The fight for open, accountable international diplomacy must be stepped up in response. The US military may well succeed in locking away Manning, possibly for good. But whatever the verdict, for millions, he has already been vindicated.

No wonder Manning was subjected to what the UN special rapporteur on torture, Juan Mendez, described as cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment: left languishing in solitary confinement for months, regularly stripped naked, forced to sleep without darkness, deprived of any right to privacy. An example had to be made of a soldier who helped strip away the humanitarian pretences of US power, and revealed a far uglier reality.
Although it is Julian Assange - hiding from sex allegations in London's Ecuadorian Embassy - who has dominated the WikiLeaks story, Manning is the real martyr of the story. One of the videos released gave an insight into the horror of the US-led war in Iraq: an Apache helicopter shooting dead 11 Iraqis in a Baghdad suburb, none of whom returned fire. Among the dead was a 22-year-old Reuters' photojournalist Namir Noor-Eldeen; two children were brutally wounded. The crew laughed as they massacred: the video was one striking example of how occupations corrupt the occupier.
The US military may well succeed in locking away Manning, possibly for good. But whatever the verdict, for millions, he has already been vindicated.
"For me this seemed similar to a child torturing ants with a magnifying glass," was how Manning put it. According to WikiLeaks, this exposure had a key role in forcing US withdrawal after the Iraqi government stripped US forces of legal immunity.
Manning had a noble and courageous purpose: in his own words, to "spark a domestic debate on the role of our military and foreign policy in general".
It is a debate often suppressed with the cynical manipulation of patriotism. But it was the Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower who warned: "In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist."
It is exactly this power that Manning has challenged, and at great cost to himself.
Although Manning has pleaded guilty on 10 counts - such as unauthorised possession of sensitive material - he has proclaimed his innocence on "aiding the enemy", or specifically al-Qaida. In truth, it is a charge that successive US governments are guilty of: by funding and arming Islamist radicals in the 1980s, and pursuing a foreign policy that has helped radicalise millions since.
Manning faces spending the rest of his life in jail. It is not a sacrifice that should be made in vain. The fight for open, accountable international diplomacy must be stepped up in response. The US military may well succeed in locking away Manning, possibly for good. But whatever the verdict, for millions, he has already been vindicated.