With the White House charging American citizens and servicemen alike for "aiding and abetting the enemy" it is abundantly clear that literally anyone could be helping the terrorists. That is why it is more important than ever to expose those who would sully the good name of Lady America. For this reason I have decided to provide an ongoing column dedicated to helping our government track down its enemies, however they may be defined. In our inaugural post we shall focus on our commander and chief, President Barrack Obama.
I can already hear the shocked responses of my readers (thank you, surveillance state!), "You can't be serious, you want to prosecute our president for aiding and abetting the enemy?" Damn right I do, and here's why.
Bradley Manning faces life in prison because Osama Bin Laden took interest in the information present in the cables Manning leaked. According to the DOJ that constitutes aiding the enemy, regardless of the fact that not a single cable leaked by Manning was considered "top secret". As Glenn Greenwald appropriately asks, If ending up on Osama's reading list is grounds for prosecution by the Department of Justice, if a terrorists interest in one's work constitutes aiding the enemy, then why not go after someone like Michael Bernstein, whose book "Obama's Wars" was at the top of Bin Laden's reading list. After all, his book was filled with classified and top secret info. I can do you one better Glenn.
Having first-hand experience with the criminal justice system, I can say
that rarely are they interested in the low-to-mid-level grunts. They want the big fish, the little guys are just chum. If the DOJ wants to get serious about cracking down on those that
leak classified information, there would be no bigger fish than the
While it is always "unnamed officials" that provide strategic leaks to people like Bernstein, and to newspapers like The New York Times and Washington Post, unlike Bradley Manning, I doubt they acted upon their conscience. Rather, it is likely that they were allowed, if not prompted to provide the sensitive information by someone higher up. Given the highly classified nature of the information provided in the leaks (e.g, insight into the use of the disposition matrix, championing drone strikes , even though the Obama administration will neither confirm nor deny their existence, etc.), it is doubtful that the president did not explicitly give the go-ahead to release the information.
The acknowledgment of U.S involvement wide ranging "anti-terror" measures, measures deeply unpopular in the regions in which they are deployed (surprise, surprise), provide great recruiting fodder for future Al-Qaida recruits. If that isn't "aiding and abetting the enemy", I'm not sure what is.
The DOJ must prove to future whistle-blowers that if you "aid the enemy", you will pay the price. Whether you are a Private First Class hoping to perform moral act, or a sitting president hoping to bolster his image, there should be no distinction when your actions put U.S security interests at risk.