The Curious Case of Bradley Manning aka BradAss87

Bradley Manning is facing a court martial. Some say he is a hero. Others say he is a traitor. Who is right?

Imagine this scenario. A gangbanger has witnessed numerous crimes including murder, so he goes to the cops to rat out his fellow gangbangers. Whether you agree or disagree with this move, one thing is clear. The rat has betrayed his fellow gangbangers. He is a traitor to his gang. According to the ethics of the street, he must die.

Bradley Manning is in the same boat as that gangbanger. He broke the law for the sake of a higher law--the cause of human rights. But make no mistake. He is going to pay for this in much the same way that the Founding Fathers were going to hang if they lost the War for Independence. You can be both a hero and a traitor at the same time.

People expecting the US Army to excuse Manning's actions are asking for something that can't be done. If you are in the service, you never reveal secrets. You know this going in, and you know this while serving. Manning broke those rules, and he will pay for breaking those rules. But those rules cannot and must not change. Those serving in the military don't get to spill the beans whenever they deem it necessary or right.

I am glad Manning did what he did, but I would still find him guilty and sentence him. People may find this contradictory, but that is why it is called "sacrifice." Erwin Rommel made a similar sacrifice in trying to assassinate Hitler, and he failed and died as a consequence. This is the way it is.

On the other side of this debate is Julian Assange who obviously published the info Manning provided. He did the right thing since this is the job of a journalist. Journalists reveal secrets and expose the truth. They are protected by the First Amendment, and they do us a service by exposing this truth. So, how can I defend Assange and not Manning?

The ethics of a particular situation depend on the role you play. A doctor can cut you open where I cannot. If I cut you open, I'm killing you because I'm not a doctor. Similarly, Assange is a journalist while Manning is not. We don't allow soldiers to reveal secrets that may compromise the mission. These soldiers are welcome to oppose the war when they have completed their terms of service, but while in uniform, they do what our civilian leaders tell them to do.

Consider it this way. Imagine a whistleblower in a corporation that rats out his company causing material loss to the company. This whistleblower may have done the right thing and even exposed lawbreaking. But under no circumstances does anyone think the whistleblower should keep his or her job. Those who do are being foolish. Whistleblower protection laws are nonsensical. You cannot ask a person, an organization, or a company to continue to trust someone who has betrayed their trust.

Let us consider the case of Adrian Lamo, the man who ratted out Manning. Lamo is not a journalist. The moment he knew of Manning he had to go to the authorities or risk being a conspirator. Lamo betrayed Manning, but here's the difference. Lamo doesn't expect Manning to trust him again or to be loved by Manning's supporters.

The nature of ethics is problematic because we are put in contradictions and trade offs. There is a cost to doing the right thing. You may be imprisoned or even die. This is the way it is. The nature of life is such that these conflicts are unavoidable. This is why it behooves everyone to decide what their code is going to be because they are going to bear the costs of living according to that code.

We do have rats. These are people who work as spies, moles, or turn whistleblower or informant. In each of these situations, these rats play a dangerous game of trust and betrayal. Yet, they do us a service by being rats. But being a rat also involves a rat code of ethics which is very elemental. Don't get caught. This is why the FBI has the witness protection program.

Bradley Manning is a rat. He betrayed the trust of the US military, and he is going to suffer for it. He was undone by another rat. The only question Manning has to answer was whether it was worth the sacrifice. I can't answer that for him, but from what he has said, he considered it worth the risk. Now, he will have to suffer the consequences.

Posted in: