18 1 SEPTEMBER 2013Newspaper of Socialist Alternativewww.redflag.org.auREDFLAG
REDFLAG1 SEPTEMBER 2013Newspaper of Socialist Alternativewww.redflag.org.au19Manning and Snowden havechanged the discussionManning and Snowden have met their objectiveof initiating a serious discussion nationally andinternationally, whatever further crimes may beinflicted on them.When Edward Snowdengave his first public interviewin Hong Kong,he said his greatest fearwas the possibility that his revelationswould fall on deaf ears.Chelsea (formerly Bradley) Manningand Snowden have paid a steepprice for their revelations of the warcrimes and massive violations of theBill of Rights by the US governmentagainst its own citizens and its vastcollection of electronic communicationsworldwide.Manning was sentenced to 35years in a military stockade for tellingthe truth, and Snowden has beenforced into exile, hunted down by thecriminal administration in Washington.But their sacrifice has not beenin vain. In a real sense, Manning andSnowden have met their objective ofinitiating a serious discussion of thesematters nationally and internationally,whatever further crimes may beinflicted on them.Snowden’s revelations, comingafter those of Manning, changed thecontext of Manning’s court martial.The exposure of the secret NSA programscaused many to begin to callinto question Washington’s real intentionsin prosecuting the soldier.Julian Assange said Manning’ssentence was a partial victory, in thatit was much less than the administrationwanted. The prosecutors arguedstrongly for a life sentence withoutthe possibility of parole for “aiding theenemy” – in essence, treason. Havinglost that in the atmosphere created bySnowden’s revelations, their final demandwas a sentence of 60 years.Manning’s lawyers say she will beeligible for parole in about seven moreyears, having been given credit for theover three years she has already beenheld in prison, which included somemonths of torture.Her defence now moves into a newphase. After she was sentenced, Manningissued a strong open appeal toPresident Obama for a pardon. Thatwill be pursued legally.Then Manning came out publiclythat she would now live her life as awoman, and changed her name toChelsea. She said she would seek medicaltreatments to change her physicalbody accordingly. The army immediatelyresponded that it would allowno such treatments. Now Chelsea ischallenging that in the courts. This ispart of the fight for her to receive fairand good treatment in prison in general.These campaigns will help keepher case in the public eye, and prepare,if necessary, to fight for her earlyrelease at the first opportunity forparole.Ruling class worriesThe New York Times editorialisedthat Manning’s sentence was “excessive”,while saying she deserved somepunishment. The Times’ position reflectsa division in the ruling classconcerning the Manning-Snowdenrevelations.Another indication was the closevote in the House of Representatives,which almost defunded the NSA’s programof monitoring every phone callin the US.The Times also ran a lengthy articlein its Sunday magazine of 18 Augusthow Laura Poitras, a journalistand film-maker, who worked withSnowden and Glen Greenwald to gethis revelations out to the world.Her photo was on the magazine’scover, with the headline “How LauraPoitras helped expose what the Americangovernment does in the nameof security”. The article portrayedSnowden, Poitras and Greenwald asnot only quite intelligent in how theycircumvented the US repressive apparatus,but was sympathetic to theircause. Poitras deserves more credit,and I urge readers to look up this article.Another aspect is freedom of thepress, even the capitalist press. TheJustice Department is seeking to forceNew York Times reporter James Risento testify in its case against formerCIA officer Jeffry Sterling. It allegesthat Sterling leaked classified informationto Risen, who used it to writeabout the CIA. So far Risen has resistedtestifying, but he might face contemptof court charges.The administration would like tomove against the Times and other papersfor printing some of Manning’sand Snowden’s revelations. It fears tocreate a backlash, however.Now some officials and people inCongress are seeking to put organisationslike WikiLeaks in a new categoryof “non-legitimate” journalism, and sonot protected by constitutional guaranteesof freedom of the press.Such a move would raise its ownproblems for the ruling class, forexample for reporting by social media.Would a teenager who postedSnowden’s documents be fair gamefor the spooks?It is quite likely that Julian Assangeis already under secret indictment,probably citing the EspionageAct, for publishing Manning’s materialas well as aiding Snowden.A section of the ruling classdoesn’t want to go that far in tearingup the Bill of Rights.RepercussionsAnother cause for concern in rulingclass circles has been the wideinternational repercussions of Manning’srelease of State Department cables,and the wide international net ofthe NSA’s spying.A recent release of Snowden documentsby Greenwald, reported in DerSpiegel, of new information of US spyingon Germans has created consternationin that country.Adding to Greenwald’s release ofinformation of US spying on Brazil,where he is living, was the detentionat London’s Heathrow airport ofGreenwald’s companion David Mirandafor nine hours.Miranda was on his way back toBrazil from a meeting in Berlin withLaura Poitras, who is working withGreenwald on further Snowden releases.The British political police claimedthey were acting under a law to ferretout information about terrorism.“What’s amazing is this law, calledthe Terrorism Act, gives them a rightto detain and question you about youractivities with a terrorist organisationor your possible involvement in orknowledge of a terrorism plot”, Greenwaldsaid.But the spooks didn’t raise anythingabout terrorism when theygrilled Miranda. “The only thing theywere interested in was NSA documentsand what I was doing with LauraPoitras”, Greenwald noted.The British cops then confiscatedall Miranda’s electronic documentsand equipment. A court later ruledthat his computers and records wouldhave to be returned to Miranda, butgave the police seven days first tocopy them.The Brazilian government stronglyobjected. Obviously, London didn’tdo this on its own, but in collaborationwith Washington.The British political police alsothreatened to shut down the Guardiannewspaper, its editor, Alan Rusbridger,has revealed. This was inretaliation for the paper’s publishingmaterial from Wikileaks and Greenwald.The police said they would shutdown the Guardian unless it turnedover its hard drives containing theleaked material, or destroyed the harddrives. Rusbridger decided to do thelatter, and destroyed them under thewatchful eyes of three police thugs.This might seem ridiculous since thematerial on the hard drives existselsewhere. The intent was clearly tointimidate.The credibility of the US administrationhas been damaged, both bywhat Manning and Snowden haverevealed (and there is more to come),and by the violent way it has respondedto the leaks.That this has caused consternationat the top presents new opportunitiesto expose the truth about Washington’scrimes. When the thieves fallout, we should take advantage.