Daily Mississippian Story on Freeing Bradley Manning

As I read through this article, I couldn't help but notice the tone of the piece, it was aggressive and seemed almost very personal. The writer makes good points about the treatment of Private first class Bradley Manning, but his valid points are set aside by his disdain for the topic. His anger and aggression can be clearly seen in his writing, and it takes away from what the story is supposed to be about, Bradley Manning, not the writer's anger on the situation. Sometimes I feel that feeling must be evoked in a story, but in this case it makes the story seem like an angry rant rather than an informative news piece. The writer should have left his personal feelings about the matter out and stuck with what the facts were, and emphasize Manning's mistreatment, but leave his personal feelings about the matter out and allow the readers to draw their own conclusions and feelings about what is happening to the Private. Personally I feel that the writer put a little too much of himself and his feelings into the piece and needed to be toned back a little. But the writer made very valid points about the mistreatment of Private Manning, things that should have a second look taken to them. Manning is a U.S. citizen who most likely did what he thought was right and moral, and he deserves the same rights enjoyed by the rest of his American brethren, it's as simple as that. If murders are allowed time with friends and family, then an American soldier should have the same luxuries no matter his crime, he is entitled to his rights.