Posted on Sep 16, 2017
A Reminder to Harvard That Henry Kissinger Leaked Secrets That May Have Gotten 21,000 Americans...
Suspended Profile
5.27K
8
64
It is interesting Harvard University withdrew Chelsea Manning's appointment - while they never withdrew Henry Kissinger's appointment. According to multi-agency damage assessment task force - Manning's leaks were superficial and never got any of our military or civilian personnel killed - where Kissinger's leaks scuttling Lyndon Johnson's 1968 peace talks prolonged the Vietnam War - getting 21,000 additional American citizens killed - with the specific objective of furthering Richard Nixon's petty personal political ambitions in the 1968 presidential election. Warmest Regards, Sandy
A Reminder to Harvard That Henry Kissinger Leaked Secrets That May Have Gotten 21,000 Americans...
Posted from slate.com
Vietnam War
Office of the President (POTUS)
Education
Elections
Diplomacy
Edited 7 y ago
Posted 7 y ago
Responses: 14
There you go again. Henry Kissinger leaked secrets. Did he? Well, it's "assumed" that he did, or maybe just permitted someone else to leak them. Well, there's proof positive. Assumptions. Remember what they say about "assuming" anything? But hey, it fits your narrative (or the narrative of the Left), so let's just accuse the bastard and that's good enough, isn't it? Totally equivalent to Chelsea's crimes, right? I often wish I could hate like that so that I could be absolutely certain of things without regard for proof or consequences. Is it as comforting as it appears?
So because Kissinger "might have" leaked secrets that makes it okay for Manning who DID leak secrets? I guess in Bizarro world that makes sense.
There are 2 very important and key differences between Kissinger and Manning. 1) Manning was tried and CONVICTED of espionage. Kissinger was not. 2) In the digital age, the uproar of Manning about to be named a fellow was immediate. Kissinger's supposed crime of espionage during Vietnam were relatively unknown until about 30 years ago.
And one more thing to point out. Kissinger was offered a prestigious position at Columbia U in 1977, which was retracted after public opinions were heard.
There are 2 very important and key differences between Kissinger and Manning. 1) Manning was tried and CONVICTED of espionage. Kissinger was not. 2) In the digital age, the uproar of Manning about to be named a fellow was immediate. Kissinger's supposed crime of espionage during Vietnam were relatively unknown until about 30 years ago.
And one more thing to point out. Kissinger was offered a prestigious position at Columbia U in 1977, which was retracted after public opinions were heard.
Suspended Profile
1stSgt Glen Saunders - I know the regulations - actually federal statutes - but they are merely specifications under charges of mishandling information and failing to obey general orders. The convictions were under UCMJ not the United States Code. Warmest Regards, Sandy :)
SPC Casey Ashfield
So being tried and convicted under the UCMJ doesn't count now? That is wonderful news. Wish I had known that when I was still enlisted, I would have had more adventures on weekends.
Kissinger didn't get anyone killed either. There is no way to tell whether or not the peace talks would have happened if he didn't leak information. There is no way to tell the peace talks would have stopped the Vietnam war. I mean we see how long Israel has been having talks with Palestine, they haven't decided peace yet. In short there is no possible way to predict the effects of Kissinger's ALLEGED espionage had on Vietnam. Comparison between Kissinger and Manning is a flat out bad comparison with bad pseudo-science.
Kissinger didn't get anyone killed either. There is no way to tell whether or not the peace talks would have happened if he didn't leak information. There is no way to tell the peace talks would have stopped the Vietnam war. I mean we see how long Israel has been having talks with Palestine, they haven't decided peace yet. In short there is no possible way to predict the effects of Kissinger's ALLEGED espionage had on Vietnam. Comparison between Kissinger and Manning is a flat out bad comparison with bad pseudo-science.
Suspended Profile
SPC Casey Ashfield - We could have walked away in 1968 - same outcome - minus seven more years of death, destruction, and separation. Warmest Regards, Sandy :)
SPC Casey Ashfield
1LT Sandy Annala - You have absolutely no way of knowing the war would have ended. It is impossible to predict outcomes based on facts not in evidence. Would 9/11 of still happened if we had grabbed 1 or 2 of the hijackers? Or even all of them? Or would it still have happened with a different crew or different targets? Would North Korea be as much of a mess politically if we had put diplomatic pressure on China during the cease fire agreement in 1953 ending the Korean War? No idea.
The point is there is no possible way to predict a future that didn't happen based on erroneous circumstances.
The point is there is no possible way to predict a future that didn't happen based on erroneous circumstances.
1LT Sandy Annala
So what conclusions do you draw?
_Should Manning be given the fellowship? 0r should Harvard stop honoring Kissinger?
_Are Chelsea Manning's bona fides and academic value are as consequential as Dr. Kissinger's, or at least academically significant? If so, on what subject and in what way?
Or is there some other perspective I'm missing?
Because from my point of view
_Chelsea Manning's input on international affairs are less significant than a common thief's commentary on economics
_Chelsea Manning's gravitas as an iconic figure to the transgender community is neither representative of the transgender community, or helpful to the transgender community. I wouldn't be any happier for Sgt. Clayton Lonetree to get a fellowship on masculinity.
So what conclusions do you draw?
_Should Manning be given the fellowship? 0r should Harvard stop honoring Kissinger?
_Are Chelsea Manning's bona fides and academic value are as consequential as Dr. Kissinger's, or at least academically significant? If so, on what subject and in what way?
Or is there some other perspective I'm missing?
Because from my point of view
_Chelsea Manning's input on international affairs are less significant than a common thief's commentary on economics
_Chelsea Manning's gravitas as an iconic figure to the transgender community is neither representative of the transgender community, or helpful to the transgender community. I wouldn't be any happier for Sgt. Clayton Lonetree to get a fellowship on masculinity.
Suspended Profile
Maj John Bell - The actual convictions here were charges boiled down to failing to follow general orders and mishandling of information - not working in the employ of some other foreign intelligence agency and procuring critical national security information (frequency hopping algorithms, crypto algorithms, keying material, strategic nuclear, chemical, and biological agent design, production, manufacturing, and/or weapons effects information, deployment, strength, and capabilities of strategic and/or tactical forces) - not some idle chit chat about the peccadillos of some foreign government officials, after action reports, and/or videos of incidents that our government would prefer to withhold from disclosure for legal liability reasons and/or to maintain domestic political support for middle-eastern operations that would potentially be undermined by images of uninvolved bystanders killed on a screen with parallel commentary by weapons operator words making it sound like a video game. The key charge of aiding the enemy - was dismissed - she did absolutely nothing to aid the enemy - where every one of the people you named intended to aid foreign powers - she was never characterized as a foreign intelligence operator under foreign influence. More to the point - according to the multiple agency damage assessment report - the Chelsea Manning disclosures had absolutely no impact on our either national security posture - nor collateral damage to our people or national security assets. Warmest Regards, Sandy :)
p.s. Why weren't Aldrich Ames and the Walker Family Spies included in your list of spies?
p.s. Why weren't Aldrich Ames and the Walker Family Spies included in your list of spies?
CMDCM Gene Treants
1LT Sandy Annala - As far as janitorial personnel having access to classified areas, HECK YES. One command I worked at had civilian cleaners on contract to clean our spaces. At the end of the working day, some of us were appointed to make sure that spaces were actually secured, classified material was locked up, and safes closed. There were often recalls of the senior personnel responsible for the security of many spaces to return and secure their spaces, prior to the time lapse between the end of work and entrance of cleaners 5 hours later.
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3868778-Wikileaks-Manning-Defense-Department-Damage.html
Wikileaks Manning Defense Department Damage Assessment
Source document contributed to DocumentCloud by Jason Leopold (Jason Leopold Investigations).
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/chelsea-manning-leaks-national-security-us-no-damage-report-us-a7801101.html
Chelsea Manning's leaks did not damage US national security, says government report
In 2010 Wikileaks published classified documents provided by US solider Chelsea Manning that were said to be damaging to national security, but a newly-public report claims otherwise despite assessments about danger to civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq.
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20170620/ [login to see] /secret-defense-dept-report-shows-manning-leaks-did-no-serious-damage.shtml
Secret Defense Dept. Report Shows Manning Leaks Did No Serious Damage
Prosecutors seeking to justify a lengthy sentence (and the abuses that had already occurred) in the Chelsea Manning case insisted the documents she leaked had caused serious damage to those exposed by them. They said this even as multiple government...