Bradley Manning Supporters Erect Billboard in DC

Bradley Manning, the gay soldier accused of handing over thousands of classified documents to Wikileaks, is facing what could be the trial of the decade. But at least one group is on his side: The Bradley Manning Support Network has put up a billboard in downtown Washington, DC, asking for his release.

The sign, which reads, “Free Bradley Manning:  Blowing the whistle on war crimes is not a crime” is located at near 1240 New York Ave NE, on route to downtown Washington from Fort Meade, where the trial will take place. Similar bilboards have popped up in Kansas City, not far from Fort Leavenworth, where Manning was being held.

Image via Save Bradley

Get Queerty Daily

Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #bradleymanning #kansascity #washingtond.c. stories and more


  • JElder

    Love this billboard. :)

  • Ronbo

    Our President is prosecuting more whistleblowers than ALL former Presidents combined!
    Obama acts more Republican than Democrat. His words are sweet; but, his actins tell a different story – that of a trojan-hores Republican evicerating our Constitution.

  • Dick

    Free him? What he did was treason.

  • Kylew

    @Dick: Agreed. Complete treason. If he was only interested in the good of the nation, why did he indiscriminately hand over thousands of classified documents to a foreigner?? I could understand if he had passed a few selected documents that revealed war crimes to the US media, but this guy was a traitor whose actions decreased his nation’s international standing (as if that was even possible at the moment), and he should be treated like one.

    His sexuality is just a smokescreen, like Breivick’s alleged insanity. He was selfish child who lashed out at daddy because he wasn’t allowed to play. The big difference between Manning and a real child, is that Manning chose to put himself in a position where he could be persecuted in the first place.

    The whole sexuality in the army thing IS an issue, but not in this case.

  • Anon

    Bitch, please. He’s a traitor who committed treason. He should face a firing squad.

  • Ian

    His sexuality is irrelevant here. But his actions were arguably NOT treasonous.

  • Kylew

    @Ian: “But his actions were arguably NOT treasonous.”

    The public needed to know what he released, but he did not use a precision instrument, targeting specific cases. He wielded a scythe, indiscriminately giving away information that he cannot possibly have had the opportunity to personally review before revealing it. The fact that some of it turned out to be important for everyone to know was surely luck more than judgement. And who the hell is he to grant security clearance to the owner of wikileaks and the rest of the planet?

    I’d be very surprised if he doesn’t go down. His only possible hope is this bullshit mental anguish angle, and that doesn’t carry any weight with me, even though I’m extremely sympathetic of the plight of gay service personnel in general.

    Personally I’d put him in prison for ten years, then deport him to a desert island.

  • RVH

    It’s clear by reading the disgusting comments here that most gays have been duped into thinking that a police state is good for everybody. If it weren’t for people like Manning, who you creatons clearly hate for his courage, we’d all be slaves by now.

    “If you’re not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing.” – Malcolm X

  • Kylew

    @RVH: I’m sorry, but I think that YOU’RE the one who has been duped. Nobody here in the remotest bit thinks that a police state is a good thing, and I think everybody universally agrees that there is a need for whistleblowers, but it looks like Manning got lucky with the stuff he released because he wasn’t at all discriminating what he released, or whether it endangered the lives of his fellow soldiers.

    I equate him to someone who went out and drove his car drunk and was lucky enough to crash into an armed robber, and now he’s been hailed as a hero.

    Your piece of misdirection, by bringing the police state into it, is exactly the same as the statement, “If you love liberty, you must hate Muslims”. You’re tying two elements together that do not have an implicit conection. Yes Manning released documents – some of which showed civil rights abuses by the army, but did he do so out of altruism, or as the actions of a petulant child?

    You have no way of knowing for sure (and the indiscriminate nature of his releases is pretty damning), so before you get on your high horse and start lecturing US, just take a moment to imagine what would happen if every disgruntled military employee started leaking private documents…

    That’s the trouble with you extreme libertarians – you see everything as a conspiracy against you, and you simply can’t conceive of the need for the machine of order. There are PLENTY of genuine battles for us all to be fighting, without idealising this traitor as some kind of hero of the people.

  • RVH

    @Kylew: I’m no kind of libertarian. There’s plenty of need for order, but there is absolutely no need whatsoever for the kind of mass-murdering order (i.e. Iraqi reporters being gunned down by a US helicopter for no reason whatsoever, which was the first item released by Bradley Manning) that you’re justifying and that Bradley Manning has probably given his life up to expose in hopes that future generations do not have to be subjugated by it. I also must add that that whole little whimpering rant you just went on sounds much more like the ravings of a know-it-all snob on a high horse than what I wrote.

  • Kurt

    This guy should stay in prison for treason.

  • Kylew

    @RVH: So you don’t believe in liberianism at all? Odd, most people do, including myself. I argued against “extremist libertarians”. If you’re not even going to bother reading what I write, there’s barely any point speaking to you.

    But in case you ARE capable of intelligent thought, rather than simply leaping on the “poor Bradley” bandwagon, you are confusing motive with results. The fact that some good came from Bradley’s actions is a lucky happenstance – a by-product of his treason. He gave secret communiques to enemy powers (by proxy). Can you not see that? Are you unable to separate in your mind the fact that yes, good came as a result of his revelations, but that was not his intent. He was not driven by altrusim, and he did not consider the risk that releasing that information posed. There WERE channels that he could have used to release that information, but he ignored them.

    The critical issue as far as his future is concerned, is his motivation. You have no greater inside knowledge on that than anyone else here, but his indiscriminate actions suggest that his actions were not taken out of desire to help humanity, but simply to embarrass or hurt those who had mistreated him. They are not the actions of a hero; they are the actions of a traitor.

    And for the record, people who accuse others of being a know-it-all snob often tend to be insecure about their own position or status. It’s a shame if coherent, rational argument with relevant examples threatens you. Get over it. I have offered reasonable supporting evidence why I believe my position is correct. All you’ve done is squealed “Bradley’s innocent. Bradley’s a hero. yada yada yada.” Perhaps if you offered any reasons why your position deserved consideration, beyond insulting everyone and acting like a petulant child, you might pursuade others to evaluate your case.

  • Esculapio Mitiríades Torquemada de la Cueva


    1) Kind of a big leap from “prosecuting man who commits treason” to “police state.”

    2) If you’re going to call people “cretins,” for the love of God, please, PLEASE do not spell it “creatons.” People *can* die from too much irony.

  • ADufresne

    @Kylew: You realize you come across as incredibly mean-spirited, right? Just because an argument makes sense to you doesn’t mean you have some divine knowledge or reasoning skills that are superior to everyone else. But then again I don’t expect much more from typical Queerty readers.

    @Esculapio Mitiríades Torquemada de la Cueva: If you’re going to criticize someone for a spelling mistake, it’d behoove onself to know what irony actually is before you try to be a big boy and use it in a sentence.

  • Esculapio Mitiríades Torquemada de la Cueva

    @ADufresne: Kinda hard to make sense of that sentence; you might want to try to work on your grammar next time. *And* on your spelling. *And* on your vocabulary, since I did use “irony” correctly. Not that, judging from that garbled mess you wrote, you’d eve enough how to check a dictionary. Retard.

  • Kylew

    @ADufresne: I get sick and tired of the fact that because something has the word “gay” in it, that all the good little readers here dispense with all reason, and flock blindly to support whichever poor little oppressed homosexual is the subject of today’s news. Based upon that, yeah, I do have some greater power of reason than *many* (not all) of the people here. That’s not arrogant – it’s simple fact.

    You can paint it any way you like; letter of the law – Manning is unquestionably a traitor. The only unknown is his motivation. I think the facts are pretty damning, and to a rational mind, his actions generated serious security issues that no true patriot would have ignored. If pointing that out, instead of getting all warm and fuzzy about the irrelevance of his sexuality issues, and his youth, and his private torment makes me mean spirited then sue me. We can talk about how troubling those things are, and commiserate with him on those in a different thread, and I’m only too happy to concede his suffering. Irrelevant here though. Personally, I think blindly supporting someone, in spite of the facts, simply because they share your sexuality is ridiculous.

    The absolute BEST that you can argue in his favour, is that even if his motivation was noble, and not at all influenced by the way he was treated, he was lucky his actions didn’t cost lives. Again, I say that it’s important to separate the consequences from the motivation, and his sexuality from his actions.

  • Fawkes

    @Kylew: If you have the time to respond to everyone who dares question your infallible logic, you seriously need to get a life.

  • Kylew

    @Fawkes: Ha ha, and of course the irony inherrent in that weak insult is doubtless lost to you…

  • Pitt60

    If Manning is convicted, that will pretty much mark the end of the relevance of whistleblower protection laws. Just like the Constitution, they won’t mean anything to our corrupt government.

  • Esculapio Mitiríades Torquemada de la Cueva

    @ADufresne: I guess that by the laws of the internet, we are now sworn enemies, but … that made me smile.

  • Kylew

    @Pitt60: Yes, that is the great problem for democracy with this situation. Of course, in spite of what they might publicly say, the military and government would be delighted if nobody else was prepared to be a whistle blower.

  • Angelo

    @Esculapio Mitiríades Torquemada de la Cueva: Woah, if grammar/spelling Nazis existed, you’d be the commanding officer. Even worse, by your use of ‘retard’ as an insult, it’s clear you’re a bigot as well. Hopefully your nastiness is just a product of internet cowardice; otherwise, you’d be unbearable in person.

  • Pitt60

    @Kylew: So then you’re apparently on the anti-democracy side.

  • trevor bartlet

    If found guilty, he should be executed. Traitors are traditionally hung.

  • Kylew

    @Pitt60: “So then you’re apparently on the anti-democracy side.”

    I’m broadly in favour of democracy, but I have a prosaic view about how it should operate. As someone once said, “The trouble with democracy is that every asshole gets to vote”. I couldn’t agree more. That my future happiness is determined by some inbred chromosome-deficient, who handles snakes because “the good book” tells him he can, is a great irriation to me. The only trouble is, much as democracy doen’t work well at all, all the alternatives are so much worse, even including a Kyleocracy. ;-)

    But here’s the problem with any case of whistleblowing government secrets: the whistleblower may not be best placed to make the determination of what is in the public interest. For instance, supposing as a result of Manning’s revelations, 10,000 American citizens are killed in reprisals. Did he REALLY serve the public good? Couldn’t he have found other means to raise these issues without making them public? You might WANT to know what is going on in your name, but you don’t NEED to know.

    However, weighed against that, perhaps, is the need for secrets like these to come out so that America can start winning some hearts and minds. You went to so much trouble to give Osama a respectful burial (allegedly), so as not to inflame the Muslim world, then some low level grunt releases these documemts showing poor behaviour by other equally low level grunts, and any good will is lost.

    Personally, I think it’s incredibly naive to think that things like the ones he revealed, are not happening on a daily basis. You only have to consider the intellect of soldiers who are filming the video evidence for their own court martials… Also, if you demonize the enemy, put your soldiers in fear for their lives daily, and then deliver the enemy into their hands, of course the soldiers are going to behave passionately. It’s fine for some politician sitting in a safe office to make up battlefield rules of conduct, but unless he has ever been on the battlefield, he is simply talking crap.

    To be honest, even Guantanamo bay, much as I loathe it, has a place. A Queensbury rules view of combat against a force who’s primary weapon is terrorism, and who’s mindset is extremism, is both ridiculous, and costs lives. As always, the problem is knowing where to draw the line; if at all.

    Sometimes democracy needs to take distasteful actions to protect the greater good.

  • MikeyD

    @Kylew: I think Fawkes was right about you. You’re a lunatic.

Comments are closed.