No it doesn't speak of his character, it speaks of those that wish to color his character with irrelevant information. We don't know what the circumstances behind the assault charge are...for all we know, he could have been morally in the right and defending another person, or standing up against a bully. Or, he could be a violent asshole. The point is, we don't know anything other than the impression that they are trying to create of him, which is a character assassination of him in the court of public opinion.Busted for assault doesn't mean anything? Doesn't speak to the man's character? How many times a week do you assault someone? None, I'd guess. Any bias is due to Manning's own actions that are being brought to light.
The assault charge is as irrelevant as the two mentions of his interests in gay rights, and what a girl from his past said of him. What does ANY of that have to do with the act of treason? They are all things designed to do nothing but slur his character...like they've done to Assange with 2 rape charges....someone I was speaking to this morning said that they read a news report that one of the accusers has strong links to the CIA. Didn't read it myself, so no link, but I'm interested to see what pans-out. I'm not saying I believe it to be true yet, though I wouldn't be surprised. Let's see what happens.
The only relevant information is that which pertains directly to the case, not the character of the person. Anything to do with character, is nothing more than slur and an attempt to discredit the person above and beyond what they are accused of.
Put it this way, they're certainly not telling us that these guys are loving husbands, contributors to their respective communities, or are stamp collectors, are they? Yet these things too would have the same amount of relevence...NONE! See what I mean?
Yes, but you conceded that you made errors also at 22. This guy is 22! Let me know when you think he's allowed to make that error or two, will you? That's the point I'm making. Sure, it's a biggy! But it lacks more wisdom than contains criminal behavior, IMO. He could have managed the situation better.The hell I can't. Should I compare Manning's situation to yours at 22? I only know of my own. You recall I mentioned how wrong I was on things at the wise old age of 22? My comparison is to our self-righteousness and appetites for instant gratification of our desires. I empathize with Manning but I won't excuse him. I was not excused for my youthfulness and lack of experience, and certainly not for my vain idealism.
I was referring to Assange with the profit motive, not Manning. Sorry if that wasn't clear. Assange gave the material to 5 news outlets....they pay for information, and for this, they would pay big, for basically the ones he chose had exclusivity of a region. And as I think of it, he quite possibly could have even made more money, had he forced those 5 into a bidding war for global exclusivity.Profit? How does that work? Manning can say he broke the trust because God told him to do so. Doesn't alter the facts of what he did. You think intent makes a difference? If he intended his actions as an assault, as revenge he can swing, but if his cause was noble he should walk away a hero? I might think so if I was still that 22 year old idealist. I'd be wrong.
DEFENDING your country is worth fighting for. Not invading. And there are many other sorts of fights than military ones. Don't worry, I stand up and speak out, and often to my own detriment....I'm a trouble-maker. It's just that I've finally learnt the system where I work so well now, that I understand how to use the system against itself...it's a complex array of government bodies that oversee each other, and a matter of working out which is the most potent, and then employing them to do their job by giving them the correct information. So in effect, you set a pack of dogs upon the pack of dogs that are the problem. But that's patience and experience (and self preservation) in contrast to the rash exuberance of youth. But I learnt the hard way, and it's cost me a few jobs, don't worry. Like I've said, I'm a Schmuck idealist...what's worse is that I understand this, but find myself compelled. And thankfully, it's not the most powerful and pervasive military power in the world that I buck-up against....I would have been dead or in a dungeon somewhere decades ago!A true pacifist, eh? Turn the other cheek in all things? Nothing is worth fighting for?
So as I said, I sort of see where Manning is coming from. But in saying that, I also understand that many things that look bad to the observer, particularly the uninitiated and inexperienced one, are actually the correct things to be happening, so the observer is the one that is out of context. Thus also, many things that look perfectly normal, are the wrong things to be happening in context to the situation...or more clearly, a facade. So I'm sure that some of the material he uncovered that looks bad, is actually not, for we don't know the context. But again, some of it will be in context, and so worthy of our disgust.
But killing for the profit of others, particularly corrupt politicians and oil companies? I may as well contract myself out and be a hit-man, and actually make some money for risking my life....lousy pension plan, but great money while you're working.