I’m really sorry that this has happened, because she would’ve been great. She’s wonderful. She doesn’t deserve, as a human being, she doesn’t deserve the attacks that were made upon her that were false. It was really outrageous.
Madeleine Albright, on Ambassador Susan Rice withdrawing herself from consideration for Secretary of State.
The government’s priorities are upside down. The US government has refused to investigate credible allegations of torture and other crimes under international law despite overwhelming evidence.
Yet they decided to prosecute Manning who it seems was trying to do the right thing - reveal credible evidence of unlawful behaviour by the government. You investigate and prosecute those who destroy the credibility of the government by engaging in acts such as torture which are prohibited under the US Constitution and in international law.
The government’s pursuit of the ‘aiding the enemy’ charge was a serious overreach of the law, not least because there was no credible evidence of Manning’s intent to harm the USA by releasing classified information to WikiLeaks.
Since the attacks of September 11, we have seen the US government use the issue of national security to defend a whole range of actions that are unlawful under international and domestic law.
It’s hard not to draw the conclusion that Manning’s trial was about sending a message: the US government will come after you, no holds barred, if you’re thinking of revealing evidence of its unlawful behaviour.
Amnesty International’s Senior Director of International Law and Policy Widney Brown, on the prosecution of whistleblower Bradley Manning.