<html>
  <head>

    <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1">
  </head>
  <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    <h1>How State Secrecy Leads to War</h1>
    <p class="deck">Why Bradley Manning has done more for American
      security than Seal Team Six (Via <a
href="http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/how-state-secrecy-leads-to-war/www.tomdispatch.com">TomDispatch</a>.)</p>
    <div class="byline"> By <span class="author vcard"><a class="url fn
          n"
          href="http://www.theamericanconservative.com/author/chase-madar"
          title="View all posts by Chase Madar">Chase Madar</a></span> •
      <a
href="http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/how-state-secrecy-leads-to-war/"
        title="4:05 pm" rel="bookmark"><span class="entry-date">June 11,
          2013</span></a> </div>
    <br>
    <ul class="article-tools clearfix">
      <li style="float: right;"> <a
href="http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/how-state-secrecy-leads-to-war/?print=1"><img
            src="cid:part4.08090803.01020407@gmail.com"></a> </li>
      <li style="float: right;"> <a
href="http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/how-state-secrecy-leads-to-war/?email=1"><img
            src="cid:part6.05080404.02040207@gmail.com"></a> </li>
      <li style="float: right;"> <a
href="http://www.instapaper.com/hello2?url=http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/how-state-secrecy-leads-to-war/&title=How+State+Secrecy+Leads+to+War&description=And+why+Bradley+Manning+has+done+more+for+American+security+than+Seal+Team+Six.">
          <img src="cid:part8.03050701.07070708@gmail.com"> </a> </li>
    </ul>
    <div class="main-image"> <img
        src="cid:part10.02050102.09010108@gmail.com"
        class="attachment-full-post-width wp-post-image" alt="Source"
        width="554" height="380">
      <div class="caption"> <a
          href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bradley_Manning_US_Army.jpg">Source</a>
      </div>
    </div>
    <p>The prosecution of Bradley Manning, WikiLeaks’ source inside the
      U.S. Army, will be pulling out all the stops when it <a
href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/features/2013/06/bradley-manning-on-trial.html"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://www.thedailybeast.com']);"
        target="_blank">calls to the stand</a> a member of Navy SEAL
      Team 6, the unit that assassinated Osama bin Laden. The SEAL (in
      partial disguise, as his identity is secret) is expected to tell
      the military judge that classified documents leaked by Manning to
      WikiLeaks were found on bin Laden’s laptop. That will, in turn, be
      offered as proof not that bin Laden had internet access like two
      billion other earthlings, but that Manning has “aided the enemy,”
      a capital offense.</p>
    <p>Think of it as courtroom cartoon theater: the heroic slayer of
      the <em>jihadi</em> super-villain testifying against the ultimate
      bad soldier, a five-foot-two-inch gay man facing 22 charges in
      military court and accused of the biggest security breach in U.S.
      history.</p>
    <p>But let’s be clear on one thing: Manning, the young Army
      intelligence analyst who leaked thousands of public documents and
      passed them on to WikiLeaks, has done far more for U.S. national
      security than SEAL Team 6.</p>
    <p>The assassination of Osama bin Laden, the spiritual (but not
      operational) leader of al-Qaeda, was a fist-pumping moment of
      triumphalism for a lot of Americans, as the Saudi fanatic had come
      to incarnate not just al-Qaeda but all national security threats.
      This was true despite the fact that, since 9/11, al-Qaeda has been
      able to do remarkably little harm to the United States or to the
      West in general. (The deadliest attack in a Western nation since
      9/11, the 2004 <a
        href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Madrid_train_bombings"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://en.wikipedia.org']);"
        target="_blank">Atocha bombing</a> in Madrid, was not committed
      by bin Laden’s organization, though <a
href="http://shadow.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/11/29/spains_election_and_us_foreign_policy_after_2012"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://shadow.foreignpolicy.com']);"
        target="_blank">white-shoe</a> foreign policy magazines and <a
        href="http://www.manhattan-institute.org/pdf/scr_05.pdf"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','download','http://www.manhattan-institute.org/pdf/scr_05.pdf']);"
        target="_blank">think tanks</a> routinely get this wrong,
      “al-Qaeda” being such a handy/sloppy metonym for all terrorism.)</p>
    <p>Al-Qaeda remains a simmering menace, but as an organization
      hardly the greatest threat to the United States. In fact, if you
      measure national security in blood and money, as many of us still
      do, by far the greatest threat to the United States over the past
      dozen years has been our own clueless foreign policy.</p>
    <p><strong>The Wages of Cluelessness Is Death</strong></p>
    <p>Look at the numbers. The attacks of September 11, 2001, killed
      3,000 people, a large-scale atrocity by any definition. Still,
      roughly <a href="http://icasualties.org/"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://icasualties.org']);"
        target="_blank">double</a> that number of American military
      personnel have been killed in Washington’s invasion and occupation
      of Iraq and its no-end-in-sight war in Afghanistan. Add in private
      military contractors who have <a
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War#Contractors"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://en.wikipedia.org']);"
        target="_blank">died</a> in both war zones, along with recently
      discharged veterans who have <a
href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/03/19/veterans-outreach-increases/2001571/"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://www.usatoday.com']);"
        target="_blank">committed suicide</a>, and the figure triples.
      The number of seriously wounded in both wars is <a
href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/25/iraq-afghanistan-war-wounded_n_2017338.html"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://www.huffingtonpost.com']);"
        target="_blank">cautiously estimated</a> at 50,000. And if you
      dare to add in as well the number of <a
        href="http://web.mit.edu/cis/pdf/Human_Cost_of_War.pdf"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','download','http://web.mit.edu/cis/pdf/Human_Cost_of_War.pdf']);"
        target="_blank">Iraqis</a>, <a
href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2010/aug/10/afghanistan-civilian-casualties-statistics"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://www.guardian.co.uk']);"
        target="_blank">Afghans</a>, and <a
        href="http://icasualties.org/"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://icasualties.org']);"
        target="_blank">foreign coalition personnel</a> killed in both
      wars, the death toll reaches at least a hundred 9/11s and probably
      more.</p>
    <p><a
href="http://www.amazon.com/dp/1781680698/ref=nosim/?tag=theamericonse-20"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://www.amazon.com']);"
        target="_blank"><img alt=""
          src="cid:part23.04050905.06060705@gmail.com" vspace="6"
          hspace="6" align="left"></a>Did these people die to make
      America safer? Don’t insult our intelligence. Virtually no one
      thinks the Iraq War has made the U.S. more secure, though many
      believe the war created <a
href="http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-09-26-iraq-report_x.htm"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://usatoday30.usatoday.com']);"
        target="_blank">new threats</a>. After all, the Iraq we
      liberated is now in danger of <a
href="http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/06/why-iraq-is-on-the-precipice-of-civil-war/276562/"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://www.theatlantic.com']);"
        target="_blank">collapsing</a> into another bitter, bloody civil
      war, is a <a
href="http://www.boston.com/news/world/middleeast/articles/2011/07/07/as_iraq_iran_ties_expand_so_do_worries_of_arab_allies_united_states/"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://www.boston.com']);"
        target="_blank">close ally</a> of Iran, and <a
href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/03/world/middleeast/china-reaps-biggest-benefits-of-iraq-oil-boom.html"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://www.nytimes.com']);"
        target="_blank">sells</a> the preponderance of its oil to China.
      Over the years, the <a href="http://costsofwar.org/"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://costsofwar.org']);"
        target="_blank">drain</a> on the U.S. treasury for all of this
      will be at least several trillion dollars. As for Afghanistan,
      after the disruption of al-Qaeda camps, accomplished 10 years ago,
      it is difficult to see how the ongoing pacification campaign there
      and the CIA drone war across the border in Pakistan’s tribal areas
      have enhanced the security of the U.S. in any significant way.
      Both wars of occupation were ghastly strategic choices that have
      killed hundreds of thousands, wounded many more, sent <a
href="http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/174892/michael_schwartz_the_iraqi_brain_drain"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://www.tomdispatch.com']);"
        target="_blank">millions into exile</a>, and destabilized what
      Washington, in good times, used to call “the arc of instability.”</p>
    <p>Why have our strategic choices been so disastrous? In large part
      because they have been militantly clueless. Starved of important
      information, both the media and public opinion were <a
        href="http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/9301/jim_lobe_nuclear_drumbeat"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://www.tomdispatch.com']);"
        target="_blank">putty</a> in the hands the Bush administration
      and its neocon followers as they dreamt up and then put into
      action their geopolitical fantasies. It has since become fashion
      for politicians who supported the war to blame the Iraq debacle on
      “bad intelligence.” But as former CIA analyst Paul Pillar <a
href="http://nationalinterest.org/blog/paul-pillar/still-peddling-iraq-war-myths-ten-years-later-8227"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://nationalinterest.org']);"
        target="_blank">reminds us</a>, the carefully cherry-picked
      “Intel” about Saddam Hussein’s WMD program was really never the
      issue. After all, the CIA’s classified intelligence estimate on
      Iraq argued that, even if that country’s ruler Saddam Hussein did
      have weapons of mass destruction (which he didn’t), he would never
      use them and was therefore not a threat.</p>
    <p>Senator Bob Graham, chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee in
      2003, was one of the few people with access to that CIA report who
      bothered to take the time to read it. Initially keen on the idea
      of invading Iraq, he changed his mind and voted against the
      invasion.</p>
    <p>What if the entire nation had had access to that highly
      classified document? What if bloggers, veterans’ groups, clergy,
      journalists, educators, and other opinion leaders had been able to
      see the full intelligence estimate, not just the morsels
      cherry-picked by Cheney and his mates? Even then, of course, there
      was enough information around to convince <a
        href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2003/feb/15/politics.politicalnews"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://www.guardian.co.uk']);"
        target="_blank">millions of people</a> across the globe of the
      folly of such an invasion, but what if some insider had really
      laid out the whole truth, not just the cherry-picked pseudofacts
      in those months and the games being played by other insiders to
      fool Congress and the American people into a war of choice and
      design in the Middle East? As we now know, whatever potentially
      helpful information there was remained conveniently beyond our
      sight until a military and humanitarian disaster was unleashed.</p>
    <p>Any private-sector employee who screwed up this badly would be
      fired on the spot, or at the very least put under full-scale
      supervision. And this was the gift of Bradley Manning: thanks to
      his trove of declassified documents our incompetent foreign policy
      elites finally have the <a href="http://wikileaks.org/"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://wikileaks.org']);"
        target="_blank">supervision</a> they manifestly need.</p>
    <p>Not surprisingly, foreign policy elites don’t much enjoy being
      supervised. Like orthopedic surgeons, police departments, and
      every other professional group under the sun, the military brass
      and their junior partners in the diplomatic corps feel deeply that
      they should be exempt from public oversight. Every volley of
      revealed documents from WikiLeaks has stimulated the same <a
href="http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175282/engelhardt_whose_hands_whose_blood"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://www.tomdispatch.com']);"
        target="_blank">outraged response</a> from that crew: near-total
      secrecy is essential to the delicate arts of diplomacy and war.</p>
    <p>Let us humor our foreign policy elites (who have feelings too),
      despite their abysmal 10-year resumé of charred rubble and mangled
      limbs. There may be a time and a place for secrecy, even
      duplicity, in statecraft. But history shows that a heavy
      blood-price is often attached to diplomats saying one thing in
      public and meaning something else in private. In the late 1940s,
      for instance, the United States publicly declared that the Korean
      peninsula was not viewed by Washington as a vital interest,
      emboldening the North to invade the South and begin the Korean
      War. Our government infamously escalated the Vietnam War behind a
      smokescreen of official secrecy, distortion, and lies. Saddam
      Hussein rolled into Kuwait after U.S. Ambassador to Iraq April
      Glaspie <a
href="http://news.antiwar.com/2011/01/02/glaspie-memo-leaked-us-dealings-with-iraq-ahead-of-1990-invasion-of-kuwait-detailed/"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://news.antiwar.com']);"
        target="_blank">told</a> the Ba’athist strongman that he could
      do what he pleased on his southern border and still bask in the
      good graces of Washington. This is not a record of success.</p>
    <p>So what’s wrong with diplomats doing more of their business in
      the daylight—a very old idea not cooked up at Julian Assange’s
      kitchen table five years ago? Check out the mainstream political
      science literature on international relations and you’ll find
      rigorous, respectable, borderline-boring studies touting the
      virtues of relative transparency in statecraft—as, for example,
      in <a href="http://www3.nd.edu/%7Edlindley/handouts/COE.htm"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://www3.nd.edu']);"
        target="_blank">making</a> the post-Napoleonic Concert of Europe
      such a durable peace deal. On the other hand, when nation-states
      get coy about their commitments to other states or to their own
      citizenry, violent disaster is often in the offing.</p>
    <p><strong>Dystopian Secrecy<br>
      </strong></p>
    <p>Foreign policy elites regularly swear that the WikiLeaks example,
      if allowed to stand, puts us on a perilous path towards “total
      transparency.” Wrong again. In fact, without the help of WikiLeaks
      and others, there is no question that the U.S. national security
      state, as the most recent phone and Internet revelations indicate,
      is moving towards something remarkably like total state secrecy.
      The classification of documents has gone through the roof. 
      Washington classified a staggering <a
href="http://www.brennancenter.org/analysis/letter-president-obama-security-classification-reform-steering-committee"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://www.brennancenter.org']);"
        target="_blank">92 million public records</a> in 2011, up from
      77 million the year before and from 14 million in 2003. (By way of
      comparison, the various troves of documents Manning leaked add up
      to less than 1% of what Washington classifies annually—not exactly
      the definition of “total transparency”.)</p>
    <p>Meanwhile, the declassification of ancient secrets within the
      national security state moves at a near-geological tempo. The
      National Security Agency, for example, only finished <a
href="http://gawker.com/5810354/national-security-agency-declassifies-200+year+old-book"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://gawker.com']);"
        target="_blank">declassifying documents</a> from the Madison
      presidency (1809-1817) in 2011. No less indicative of Washington’s
      course, the prosecution of governmental whistleblowers in the
      Obama years has burned with a particularly vindictive fury, fueled
      by both political parties and Congress as well as the White House.</p>
    <p>Our government secrecy fetishists invest their security
      clearances (held by an elite coterie of <a
        href="http://blogs.fas.org/secrecy/2012/07/cleared_population/"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://blogs.fas.org']);"
        target="_blank">4.8 million</a> people) and the information
      security (InfoSec) regime they continue to elaborate with all
      sorts of protective powers over life and limb. But what gets
      people killed, no matter how much our pols and pundits strain to
      deny it, aren’t InfoSec breaches or media leaks, but foolish and
      clueless strategic choices. Putting the blame on leaks is a nice
      way to pass the buck, but at the risk of stating the obvious, what
      has killed <a href="http://icasualties.org/oef/"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://icasualties.org']);"
        target="_blank">1,605</a> U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan since
      2009 is the war in Afghanistan—not Bradley Manning or any of the
      other five leakers whom Obama has <a
href="http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/175500/peter_van_buren_silent_state"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://www.tomdispatch.com']);"
        target="_blank">prosecuted</a> under the Espionage Act of 1917.
      Leaks and whistleblowers should not be made scapegoats for bad
      strategic choices, which would have been a whole lot less bad had
      they been informed by all the relevant facts.</p>
    <p>Pardon my utopian extremism, but knowing what your government is
      doing really isn’t such a bad thing and it has to do with aiding
      the (American) public, not the enemy. Knowing what your government
      is doing is not some special privilege that the government
      generously bestows on us when we’re good and obedient citizens,
      it’s an obligation that goes to the heart of the matter in a free
      country. After all, it should be ordinary citizens like us who
      make the ultimate decision about whether war X is worth fighting
      or not, worth escalating or not, worth ending or not.</p>
    <p>When such momentous public decisions are made and the public
      doesn’t have—isn’t allowed to have—a clue, you end up in a fantasy
      land of aggressive actions that, over the past dozen years, have
      gotten hundreds of thousands killed and left us in a far more
      dangerous world. These are the wages of dystopian government
      secrecy.</p>
    <p>Despite endless panic and hysteria on the subject from both major
      parties, the White House, and Congress, leaks have been good for
      us. They’re how we came to learn much about the Vietnam War, much
      about the Watergate scandal, and most recently, <a
href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/06/nsa-phone-records-verizon-court-order"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://www.guardian.co.uk']);"
        target="_blank">far more</a> about state surveillance of our
      phone calls and email. Bradley Manning’s leaks in particular have
      already yielded real, tangible benefits, most vividly their <a
href="http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/01/18/tunisia.wikileaks/index.html"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://www.cnn.com']);"
        target="_blank">small but significant role</a> in sparking the
      rebellion that ejected a dictator in Tunisia and the way they <a
href="http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jan/25/world/la-fg-iraq-haditha-20120125"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://articles.latimes.com']);"
        target="_blank">indirectly expedited</a>our military exit from
      Iraq. Manning’s leaked reports of U.S. atrocities in Iraq,
      displayed in newspapers globally, made it politically impossible
      for the Iraqi authorities to perpetuate domestic legal immunity
      for America troops, Washington’s bedrock condition for a
      much-desired continuing presence there. If it weren’t for
      Manning’s leaks, the U.S. might still be in Iraq, killing and
      being killed for no legitimate reason, and that is the very
      opposite of national security.</p>
    <p><strong>Knowledge is Not Evil</strong></p>
    <p>Thanks to Bradley Manning, our disaster-prone elites have gotten
      a dose of the adult supervision they so clearly require. Instead
      of charging him with aiding the enemy, the Obama administration
      ought to send him a get-out-of-jail-free card and a basket of
      fruit. If we’re going to stop the self-inflicted wars that
      continue to hemorrhage blood and money, we need to get a clue,
      fast. Should we ever bother to learn from the uncensored truth of
      our foreign policy failures, which have destroyed so many more
      lives than the late bin Laden could ever have hoped, we at least
      stand a chance of not repeating them.</p>
    <p>I am not trying to soft-pedal or sanitize Manning’s magnificent
      act of civil disobedience. The young private humiliated the U.S.
      Army by displaying for all to see their complete lack of real
      information security. Manning has revealed the diplomatic corps to
      be hard at work <a
href="http://www.thenation.com/article/161057/wikileaks-haiti-let-them-live-3-day"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://www.thenation.com']);"
        target="_blank">shilling</a> for garment manufacturers in Haiti,
      for <a
href="http://www.theatlanticwire.com/global/2011/10/wikileaks-cables-show-how-big-pharma-shapes-foreign-policy/43264/"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://www.theatlanticwire.com']);"
        target="_blank">Big Pharma in Europe</a>, and under signed
      orders from then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to <a
href="http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/press_box/2010/11/wikileaks_hillary_clinton_and_the_smoking_gun.single.html"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://www.slate.com']);"
        target="_blank">collect</a> biometric data and credit card
      numbers from their foreign counterparts. Most important, Manning
      brought us face to face with two disastrous wars, forcing
      Americans to <a href="http://www.collateralmurder.com/"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://www.collateralmurder.com']);"
        target="_blank">share</a> a burden of knowledge previously
      shouldered only by our soldiers, whom we love to call heroes from
      a very safe distance.</p>
    <p>Did Manning violate provisions of the Uniform Code of Military
      Justice? He certainly did, and a crushing sentence of possibly
      decades in military prison is surely on its way. Military law is
      marvelously elastic when it comes to <a
href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/04/opinion/dont-trust-the-pentagon-to-end-rape.html"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://www.nytimes.com']);"
        target="_blank">rape and sexual assault</a> and perfectly
      easygoing about the <a
href="http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Military/2012/0124/Marine-demoted-to-private-to-end-Haditha-trial.-Did-military-justice-work"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://www.csmonitor.com']);"
        target="_blank">slaughter</a> of foreign civilians, but it puts
      on a stern face for the unspeakable act of declassifying
      documents. But the young private’s act of civil defiance was in
      fact a first step in reversing the pathologies that have made our
      foreign policy a string of self-inflicted homicidal disasters. By
      letting us in on more than a half million “secrets,” Bradley
      Manning has done far more for American national security than SEAL
      Team 6 ever did.</p>
    <p><em>Chase Madar is an attorney and the author of </em><a
href="http://www.amazon.com/dp/1781680698/ref=nosim/?tag=theamericonse-20"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://www.amazon.com']);"
        target="_blank">The Passion of Bradley Manning: The Story Behind
        the WikiLeaks Whistleblower</a><em>. A </em><a
href="http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/175654/chase_madar_the_school-security_america_doesn"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://www.tomdispatch.com']);"
        t_need"="" target="_blank"><em>TomDispatch regular</em></a><em>,
        he writes for the </em>London Review of Books<em>, </em>Le Monde
      Diplomatique<em>, the </em>American Conservative<em>, and
        CounterPunch</em>.  <em>He is covering the Manning trial daily
        for the </em><a
        href="http://www.thenation.com/blogs/chase-madar"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://www.thenation.com']);"
        target="_blank">Nation<em> magazine</em></a><em>. Follow
        TomDispatch on Twitter and join us on <a
          href="http://www.facebook.com/tomdispatch"
onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://www.facebook.com']);"
          target="_blank">Facebook</a>. Copyright 2013 Chase Madar<br>
      </em></p>
    <p><em><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/how-state-secrecy-leads-to-war/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=how-state-secrecy-leads-to-war">http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/how-state-secrecy-leads-to-war/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=how-state-secrecy-leads-to-war</a><br>
      </em></p>
  </body>
</html>