U.S. soldier Bradley Manning (25), who provided classified documents to WikiLeaks, was acquitted of the most serious crime he was charged with -- aiding the enemy. The acquittal on this one charge [along with a lesser charge] was the headliner in American news reports, not the other 20 crimes he was found guilty of committing. Manning breathed a sigh of relief. He even allowed himself to provide an expression of satisfaction to the camera before leaving the courtroom.
Manning, from his perspective, was not only acquitted of the most serious charge, which would have landed him a life sentence without parole if proven guilty, but the court believed him. In the eyes of the military court, Manning transferred "stolen" material to the whistle-blower site WikiLeaks, but not to the enemy -- al-Qaida.
The Internet was also the big winner in all of this. Its appetite can continue to be fed without aiding bin Laden's heirs. Edward Snowden, the National Security Agency whistle-blower, is now perhaps also thinking of coming home from Russia, with love.
We must remember, Manning was ultimately convicted after exposing 700,000 military and diplomatic documents to the world through WikiLeaks. However, the acquittal on the most grievous charge, which was added to the case against him only a year ago, was more important than the 20 convictions. How ironic that the prosecution added the "aiding the enemy" charge to deter the next Bradley Manning. In retrospect, it was a mistake. The acquittal on this charge may actually serve to embolden the next Manning to act -- even if the original Manning may still have to serve up to 154 years in prison for his other offenses.
To successfully convict Manning of aiding the enemy, the prosecution needed to prove that the young soldier transferred the documents knowing they would fall into the enemy's hands -- in this case the al-Qaida terrorist organization. The court was not convinced, and the Internet was the main benefactor. We can assume that more leaks will follow.
During the trial, the prosecutor presented Manning as an anarchist and traitor. His attorney, on the other hand, presented him as a naively innocent but mostly humane guy with good intentions, who wanted to change the world and make it a better place than eastern Iraq, where he served as a young intelligence analyst.
The differences between the prosecution and defense's description of Manning are precisely the differences between how Manning is seen in America today. There are those who see him as a traitor, who embarrassed the world's pre-eminent superpower, while others consider him a hero who risked his own freedom for the sake of righting wrongs. One thing is clear: Manning did not leave the world indifferent, and certainly provided news rooms with long nights of Sisyphean labor.
The military court now needs to sentence Manning. Since June 3 his trial was held at Fort Meade in Maryland, a one-hour drive from the White House. Coincidentally, it is one of the most classified bases in the country. It is where the NSA is headquartered, and from where the U.S. listens in on the rest of the world.
It is not surprising that throughout Manning's trial, many thoughts turned to Snowden, the man who exposed the scope of the NSA's wiretapping activities. As for Manning, he emerged victorious: It was America which received his information, not the enemy.
טעינו? נתקן! אם מצאתם טעות בכתבה, נשמח שתשתפו אותנו