To the Manning defenders...

[Cid_B]

... how do you get up the nerve to hold up a guy who beats women as this paragon of virtue? Among all his other amazing qualities of course...

[Luminous Animal]

1. I also heard that he fucks goats.

[Matariki]

7. And makes babies cry in order to drink their tears.

[Luminous Animal]

14. While fucking goats. And looking at himself in the mirror. The horror.

[PatrynXX]

83. gee your

starting to sound like a Braveheart myth. yep blows fireballs from his arse...

I'm not a Manning defender in one sense, however the state lost control of these case when 1. Obama declared him Guilty before innocent... and 2. they tortured him. just like did do with OWS.

[saras]

107. Yep. It was the fireballs that convinced me. Crime in government - naah, but anal fireballs?!

I'll defend him, I'll attack him, I'll ignore him, I don't really give a damn, he's just one more soldier, for better or worse.

I'll defend WHAT HE DID WITH THE DOCUMENTED CRIMES HE DISCOVERED as long as I have a sentient cell in my body.

He could be raping babies by the tens of thousands, at three seconds each, and I'd STILL say "try him for raping the babies, but admit that publicizing those documents was the only right thing to do under the circumstances."

[Cherchez la Femme]

108. Before or after he throws them out of their incubators?

Subtle, yet important

[FedUp_Queer]

174. He's gay, right? He, therefore, makes baby Jesus cry.

On a serious note, has anyone held him up as a paragon of virtue? (What do you want to bet if Bush were president doing the same thing, a lot of these Obama apologists would be saying the opposite?)

[seabeyond]

2. ? i hadn't heard.

but then, i dont defend manning and never thought much of his character.

but, i hadnt heard this either.

[msanthrope]

111. I've posted it more than a few times--he hit a female superior officer

in the face, and then bragged about it to Lamo.

I'm glad Cid posted this so forthrightly....

[seabeyond]

112. i read it thru out the thread. listening to the man

looking at his behavior, his history.... i am pretty comfortable with my accessment at not being impressed with his character. this is no surprise to me.

thanks.

[Lisa D]

119. Deserved it?

Are you actually suggesting that a woman deserves to be hit if she says the wrong thing to a man? And why does a slap or a punch make a difference. They're both a physical assault.

Please clarify.

[NavyDem]

120. He was reduced in rank for it. That's how he went from PVT to PFC

Military has a rank structure, so obviously she was higher in rank.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

124. Whoa....whoa....whoa.....

Did I land in Free Republic?

You've gotta be fucking kidding me......A woman "deserved" to get hit?

Looks like you just showed your ass, buddy.

[AtomicKitten]

125. The higher the monkey climbs the more he shows his ass.

She deserved it? Good gawd almighty.

[redqueen]

203. And the decision to hide it

was only 4-2.

[krucial]

161. Free Repbublic?

It looks that way bro.Some dont want to talk about the seriousness of the war crimes that was exposed by manning they are only interested in trying to blunt the evil of these criminal activites by our military in Iraq,by pointing out the dark side of Manning,and the truth is even if it was Satan that exposed this evil,it would still be war crimess,ordered by war criminals.
As disabled Infantry Viet Nam veteran and a draftee,we always have people who will defend the miiltary no matter what they do,because a lot of Americans on the right,worship wars and the military,our military could commit crimes as Heinous as Hitler,and many of these Americans would make excuses for them and stand behind them.
I remember too that when Lt. Calley ordered the massacre of those innocent Viet Namese,

They were some Americans claiming he was a hero, and that it was unamerican not to stand behind your country and your military in time of war.We saw the same thing in Iraq and Afghanistan,people calling soldiers who executed murdered innocent prisoners with hands tied behind their backs,and cutting off peices of dead in Afghanistan as Heroes.
Thats a very Immoral,sick and disgusting stand for anyone to take.
Thats the same stand the Germans took when Hitler was doing his thing during world war two,standing firm behind their country

[tblue]

167. Thank you, krucial, for putting it better than I ever could.

And I defer to your comments about what our military has done because I never served.

But I so appreciate what you wrote. for all you've seen and the truth you speak because of it.

[pinboy3niner]

170. +1000, brother!

[NavyDem]

173. The post that you're agreeing with supports Manning, but

does not support the statement that him hitting a woman was deserved.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

179. Your points on Manning are not wrong....

....but if your stance on Manning's "dark side" is "Maybe she deserved it", I have no use for you either.

Sorry if I'm supposed to ignore that while you fry the bigger fish, but I'm not.

[Shoe Horn]

190. Judging the message and judging the messenger can be separated...

...it's not either / or.

Personally, I try not to idolize or demonize any individual.

*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***

~ I support Wikileaks and the light they've shed on US war crimes.

~ I support applying the brakes (if possible) on World Militarization by Israel and US.

~ I do not support the leaking thousands of (presumably) unread, classified documents
and/or punching women in the face.

Not sure how holding all these view can be construed as hypocritical.
Please correct me if I am wrong.

[tammywammy]

128. "deserved it"

You should feel ashamed for even typing that out.

This isn't a "broadside attack on Manning". He hit a female, was demoted in rank because of it and he was already being ushered to discharge - before he was ever arrested.

[LooseWilly]

149. Technically he said "Perhaps she insulted him and deserved it." ... no need to take out of context

And the "perhaps" suggests a possibility of context being an issue in Manning's case too...

Just saying ... details please.

[Shoe Horn]

191. You're not saying that insulting someone deserves a physical response, are you?

???

[tblue]

164. I can distinguish between the two.

But this is the first I've heard of him hurting anybody. Obviously the kid has problems.

[ooglymoogly]

176. Being glad for another's straw man

does not speak well of yours and similar posts.

[NavyDem]

3. To what do you refer?

Is someone associated with Manning beating women?

[Cid_B]

13. As per court activities yesterday...

Fulton provided details of a confrontation that finally got Manning banned from the workplace. She said Spc. Jirhleah Showman grew angry after she was summoned from her bed to work, and saw Manning there, apparently playing a video game.

Fulton said she heard Manning tell Showman to calm down. Fulton testified that she heard terse words exchanged, followed by shuffling sounds, and then saw Manning pinning Showman to the floor.

"She said he had struck her and she had a welt on her face," Fulton said.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45715508/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/t/army-pressed-why-it-kept-trusting-manning/#.Tu69P9S3ed4

_____________________________

I just find it strange that someone who would normally get nuked for abusing women gets a ethical pass because he provided information that was beneficial to their cause.

[Luminous Animal]

16. As every single other accusation that has been presented in any case that has been presented on this

board, I demand evidence.

This is hearsay.

[joshcryer]

22. He allegedly bragged about it in this chat log:

http://www.queerty.com/new-chat-logs-reveal-bradley-manning-is-an-abused-depressed-trans-curious-queerty-reader-20110714/

Search for a derogatory term for a lesbian that starts with the letter D to find the bit of the chat.

[Luminous Animal]

37. Every dyke that I know calls themselves a dyke. (Thus, dyke march) Every gay

man that I know calls women that are dykes, dyke.

Every dyke calls a gay man a fag.

And we all call each other queer.

If he punched a woman in the face (or a man) then that should be adjudicated and should have no bearing at the case at hand.

[joshcryer]

38. You asked for proof of the allegation.

I merely provided it. I have made no statements about it in this thread.

[Aerows]

63. I'm a lesbian

I don't call myself a dyke, because I'm not a "dyke". I also don't call gay men "fags." I don't like those terms, so I don't use them.

It's up to you to determine what words you wish to use, but don't make a blanket statement that all of us that are homosexual use those particular terms.

[FreeState]

129. I agree - however Dyke is far from offensive to the community as a whole

As is evident from the Dyke March at our local parade (San Diego).

http://www.myspace.com/dykemarchsd
https://twitter.com/#!/dykemarchsd
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyke_March

[unapatriciated]

185. Thank You .

I"m straight and find both words offensive. I know some in the gay community use them but not all. I find this word and fags to be on the same level of the c word. Don't like them and don't use them.

[PatrynXX]

85. he would have to make a habit of it

there's a few times I've considered punching my dad out.

this would be like Assange and the rape crap which looks more like crap have sex cry rape. really ruins it for real rape victims...

pull this and Indiana Jones is a rapist

[MADem]

91. He also told the guy he was talking to precisely what he was doing...!

Not the brightest bulb, for someone who prided himself on his intelligence--from your link:

(12:46:17 PM) [e-mail]: how long have you helped WIkileaks?
(12:49:09 PM) bradass87:since they released the 9/11 “pager messages”
(12:49:38 PM) bradass87:i immediately recognized that they were from an NSA database, and i felt comfortable enough to come forward
(12:50:20 PM) bradass87:so… right after thanksgiving timeframe of 2009
(12:52:33 PM) bradass87:Hilary Clinton, and several thousand diplomats around the world are going to have a heart attack when they wake up one morning, and finds an entire repository of classified foreign policy is available, in searchable format to the public… =L

[ooglymoogly]

206. Thufferen Thapho....

Using the felon ratsnake, adrian lamo as the rock on which any argument is made, is like using a sieve for a water bucket.

He has proven his lack of veracity too many times to count.

Slithering his way fast, out of the hearts of decent and honest folk.

How do you know when a.l. is lying?...when his lips move.

[pnwmom]

75. Testimony by an eye-witness isn't hearsay; it's evidence.

The witness reported hearing the scuffle, seeing Manning pinning the woman to the floor, and seeing the welt on the woman's face. This is not hearsay; it's an eye-witness statement, the reliability of which will be determined by the judge and/or jury.

[NavyDem]

21. I see.

The article says that the defense is claiming that that Manning should have been removed from his clearance due to other disciplinary reasons.

Speaking strictly from the standpoint of a Sailor that led other sailors, I would have brought him up on charges if it were clear that he violated a regulation (such as assaulting a peer). As far as the clearance goes, I could only make the recommendation for revocation. It would have to be adjudicated by the proper authority (which would not be me). I know this because over the course of 20 years active, and holding a TS clearance that the adjudicating authority could opt not to revoke a clearance for stranger reasons.

That being said, I've not held Manning in a good light, and since he is not being tried for assault, it has no bearing to me. The pressing questions I have are simply did he commit the charges against him, regardless of his reason. If yes, he should be convicted. If no, then he should be aquitted.

[tammywammy]

26. The attack on his superior officer led to his demotion in rank

and were preparing to discharge him.

"On 5 May he wrote of being "beyond frustrated with people and society at large", and a day later, on 6 May, he wrote: "Bradley Manning is not a piece of equipment." On 7 May Manning was found in a foetal position in a storeroom after stabbing a chair with a knife as he tried to carve the words "I want" into the seat. He had punched his commanding officer, a woman, in the face.

He was disciplined and demoted and told he was to be finally discharged from the army on grounds of "adjustment disorder"."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/27/bradley-manning-us-military-outsider

[NavyDem]

29. I think that is a separate incident

A specialist, is only an E-4, not the commanding or superior officer.

[MADem]

99. I think the civilians writing up this stuff don't understand that a leading petty officer or other

supervisory military authority is not always a "commanding/superior officer."

They tend to give out the title to anyone who can give an order to someone else.

It's the same incident, I'm pretty sure. The woman that he hit was his first line supervisor, I believe.

[FedUp_Queer]

78. I'm reading this post and wondering.

I agree with you a million percent. Maybe the guy is a dirtbag. What, exactly, does this have to do with the case at issue?

[Mojorabbit]

81. It sounds to me that he is ill mentally. I hope he is getting some treatment while in custody. nt

[NavyDem]

143. Bringing up previous offenses

Is to establish a pattern of misconduct. It's fairly common in this day and age (in the Navy at least) to document misconduct (even smaller offenses) that lead up to a charge that can be persued.

For example: a person can be late to work which is technically failure to be at their appointed place of duty. Once in a great while, this will be overlooked. But when they make a habit of it, it starts to get documented through verbal, and then written counseling, followed by being brought up on charges.

In Manning's case, his pattern of conduct may be used to establish that he was carrying a vendetta due to being bullied, or not able to adjust to military life, etc. Granted, I don't know who that works out better for, the prosecution or the defense.

[FedUp_Queer]

172. I'm not sure.

Under Title 10, Chapter 47 of the UCMJ, I do notice this prescient section:

10 USC 809(c): No person may be ordered into arrest or confinement except for probable cause

10 USC 810: Any person subject to this chapter charged with an offense under this chapter shall be ordered into arrest or confinement, as circumstances may require; but when charged only with an offense normally tried by a summary court-martial, he shall not ordinarily be placed in confinement. When any person subject to this chapter is placed in arrest or confinement prior to trial, immediate steps shall be taken to inform him of the specific wrong of which he is accused and to try him or to dismiss the charges and release him.

In doing a search, I could not find a rules of evidence for courts-martial. However, under the Federal Rules of Evidence, prior acts are admissible only if the character trait in issue is an element of the crime charged. Prior acts MAY be admissible to impeach the credibility of a witness. In other words, it MAY go to his credibility as a witness, but such actions are not relevant to the elements of the crime he is charged with, I don't think. Either way, I don't think any court found him guilty of these things, let alone even charged him. The exceptions to this no prior acts rule come in sexual assault or rape cases.

[NavyDem]

177. The Manual for Courts Martial gives the rules of evidence I believe

As far as a charge of assault, it may or may not be severe enough to warrant courts martial. Normally something like that his handled by Non-Judicial Punishment. In most cases of NJP (with some exceptions), the accused can refuse NJP and ask to be taken to courts martial. Manning was reduced in rank via NJP for the assault.


As to the bolded section, there were delays by both the prosecution and the defense in bringing Manning to trial. He was arrested May 26th, 2010 and the charges levied against him 29 May, 2010 (PDF: http://anthropoliteia.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/manning-charge.pdf ) Charges were amended March 2nd, 2011 ( http://news.cnet.com/2300-31921_3-10006905.html ).

[FedUp_Queer]

182. Whether or not it's "court-martiable" is not really the issue as I see it.

It's whether the assaults are convictions and whether they are admissible in this trial. I don't see that they are given the charges against him. Further, because they are not convictions (I don't think), they are not admissible to impeach.

[NavyDem]

184. If they're not admissible

I haven't seen it in 22 years of service.

In the traditional sense NJP is not a "conviction" as in it doesn't follow you out of the service as a federal conviction, but make no mistake it is treated as if it were a misdemeanor offense while you are on active duty. Get enough NJP, you get booted out of the service. It's almost as if it were like points on the drivers license. Probably a bad analogy I know.

Edit to add: Having a tendency to not follow regulations can certainly be admissible to determine the character of the defendant.

[ooglymoogly]

196. Am I addressing cap'n Queeg here?

Without the ability to see the overall picture...which your posts clearly indicate....dwelling on minutia...in this case a big fat straw man, does not acquit the mind of these posts.

The military committed cold blooded and heinous war crimes (mass murder of innocents, including a journalist and a baby among the many...

Shot like helpless rabbits, to the glee of sadistic helicopter pilots, following the still alive...mortally wounded... trying desperately to crawl to safety and cutting them down in their last breath) these grisly and heinous acts...the sick horror... clearly documented and graphically illustrated in these files and they are but one.

Exposing them is the duty of any decent human being.

There just is no defense of these clear cut war crimes....hence the meaningless straw men to give the supporters of these war crimes a duplicitous way to support them...without exposing their malevolent intent.

No matter what happens to BM in these kangaroo trials...history will know him as one of the greatest heroes of an evil and disastrous period in the history of the world....

The catalyst to Tunisia, Tahreer square, the Arab spring and OWS...

And that is the reason the "establishment" so hates this man..now forever associated with Julian A., their real target....and so fears the repercussions of the heroic and dangerous actions they took...

Striking down the first domino of an evil world empire.

For those repercussions...of what they did, are in the process of taking down said "establishment"...

Now in the process of knocking the 1% off their, oh so comfortable, golden tower... with fascism their only tool to fight off the constitution and "We the People".

[NavyDem]

198. TL;DR

[Cid_B]

199. Those poor souls...

... what is the world coming to when a man can't walk down the street with his own RPG?

[Cid_B]

210. Hey smart guy...

Last edited Thu Dec 22, 2011, 07:00 AM - Edit history (1)

... that animated .gif is taken directly from the poorly named "Collateral Murder" video...

Sorry to bother you with facts.

[ooglymoogly]

211. You are correct....my apologies.

[ChadwickHenryWard]

110. It's really starting to sound like the government/military dropped the ball on this thing.

Refraining for a moment from defending or condemning Pvt. Manning and his actions, it really seems as though this leak was only a matter or time. A huge number of personnel had access to a massive volume of documents that had nothing to do with their positions. Now it comes out that Pvt. Manning had charges against him that should have prohibited him from having access to this information. It really seems as though this leak incident was just waiting to happen.

[MH1]

139. That's a statement we ALL should be able to agree on.

IF these other accusations against Manning are true, no way should he have had access to the kind of material he did. Some of the top brass should have been reassigned just for that incredible lapse of security.

[NavyDem]

142. There seemed to be very little in terms of physical or adminstrative control...

over the classified information in that facility. As I recall, at least one of his direct superiors was reduced in rank for dereliction of duty due to these security concerns.

Another flub on the part of the government, is that they cannot produce the paperwork he signed indicating that he understood his responsibilities for safeguarding the classified information. Most likely that would have been in the form of a Systems Security Access Authorization form, or more basically a user form for access to DoD computers (required for all DoD computers, classified or not). The other form would be his SF-312 when he was granted his clearance.

That being said, the whole "You didn't stop me, so I didn't do anything wrong" defense will not hold with any person that holds a security clearance (most likely the majority of his jurors when/if this goes to court martial).

[ChadwickHenryWard]

183. I don't understand that defense.

I know that military courts work a lot differently than civilian courts, but how could any competent lawyer put forward the "you didn't stop me" line of reasoning? Is that a valid defense for breaking the rules in the military? Even if his superiors were totally negligent, how could that possibly absolve him?

[boppers]

187. I believe it's possibly angling towards an argument of entrapment.

The government provided the means, and (arguably) the motive, so the question is whether or not (with that kind of defense) Manning would have committed the offenses otherwise... which would be a really rough defense, but it seems to be Chewbacca time, trying anything possible.

[Scurrilous]

25. And from wikipedia:

"In March 2006, he reportedly threatened his father's wife with a butcher's knife during an argument. She called the police, and he was escorted from the house."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Manning

[vaberella]

212. If this is true then he most definitely is not mentally stable. n/t

[xocet]

27. ...to "their" cause...? To which cause do you refer? n/t

[Cid_B]

62. The cause that supports Manning and claims he is this shining light...

When he had real issues and wanted to strike at the service at which he seems to have failed so miserably at...

[truedelphi]

88. I don't doubt that charges like these will crop up against Manning

Similar charges came up against Assange.

What most of us doubt is the validity of the charges.

This is reminiscent of the Hoover FBI trying to castigate Martin Luther King for his "Communism."

[tammywammy]

93. He was demoted in rank for hitting a female soldier and on his way to being discharged.

This was before he was arrested.

[truedelphi]

133. Good to know. n/t

[eridani]

115. He doesn't get an ethical pass for that

Scott Ritter shouldn't have fucked teenagers either, but that doesn't mean he was wrong about Iraq WMD.

[redqueen]

204. +1

[Better Believe It]

118. Do you have any evidence to back up her "she said" claim? And Julian Assange is a rapist ... right?

Please don't circulate that kind of garbage attacking whistleblowers defenders of our Constitution and Bill of Rights

[tammywammy]

121. Here's him saying it in the chat logs

(02:04:59 PM) bradass87: i punched a colleague in the face during an argument… (something I NEVER DO…!?) its whats sparked this whole saga

and

(01:45:18 PM) bradass87: i punched a dyke in the phace…

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/07/manning-lamo-logs

That was why Manning was demoted and they were preparing him for discharge before he was arrested.

[Bjorn Against]

132. Is there any proof he actually said that?

It is not exactly difficult to produce fake chat logs and in this case there is certainly motive for doing so.

[tammywammy]

134. I have not seen anything denying they're real

[Bjorn Against]

137. Has he publicly admitted they were real? The fact that you have not heard a denial is not evidence.

[tammywammy]

140. If they're not authentic then I'm sure Coombs will quickly bring that up in the hearing.

But if they're not, I'm surprised that he hasn't already. Or they're authentic.

[NavyDem]

144. I've really got to start bookmarking the articles I read...

But one of the articles from the last couple of days of testimony indicated that a civilian computer forensics guy found trace of the chat logs. Since I cannot remember where I read that, I will call this post speculation on my part.

[tammywammy]

146. Here's one:

"FT. MEADE, Maryland – Forensic investigators searching Bradley Manning’s computers and removable media found a full log of the online chats Manning conducted with former hacker Adrian Lamo in which Manning described his alleged leaking of classified information, a government witness revealed during testimony on Saturday.

Investigators also discovered classified information on an SD memory card they found at the Maryland home of Manning’s aunt, Debra Van Alstyne, where he had been living before enlisting in the Army."

------

"Special Agent Mark Mander, with the Army’s Computer Crime Investigative Unit, didn’t go into detail about the chat logs found on Manning’s computer, other than to say that the Army got a copy from Lamo, and “corresponding versions were found on the property collected from Pfc. Manning.”"

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/12/chat-log-on-manning-computer/


edited to add: My previous point stays. If the chat logs aren't authentic, I expect Coombs to bring that up shortly.

[NavyDem]

157. I don't disagree with your point at all.

The defense will have to discredit the forensic examiner (AKA Expert Witness) on the authenticity of the logs, or it may be the most damning evidence presented.

[Bjorn Against]

148. Why would he bring it up if it has nothing to do with the case?

Bradley Manning is not on trial for woman beating, it would make no sense for the defense to try to defend him on a charge that has nothing to do with the case at hand.

[tammywammy]

151. Why wouldn't he bring up the chat logs?

You do realize they contain more than an admission of assaulting a woman, right?

[Bjorn Against]

152. So stick to the parts that are relevant to the case.

[tammywammy]

158. I think this is relevant to what the defense is trying to say

They're presenting evidence that he should have had his clearance revoked due to a number of issues, including assaulting a female soldier, before he ever had the chance to steal the files.

[boppers]

188. It is much harder to forge two chat logs, on two different computers...

...half a world away from each other, with one log being on Manning's computer, exactly matching a log on Lamo's computer.

[MrMickeysMom]

168. Sounds more like you migrated to the hearsay of a witness...

...reminding me of the "rape" associated with Assange...

Wow.... in fact... WTF wow....

[LooseWilly]

171. Wow, this whole OP is a pile of out-of-context tripe spinning... spectacular!

You call a tussle between two active duty soldiers over video games and work duty in the middle of the night "abusing women"?

"Abusing women" is a loaded keyword that triggers a Pavlovian-esque response... and conjures images of physical laborer men "abusing" gentle and nurturing women-folk... but what you have here is a gay man with gender identity issues—

Other testimony revealed that Manning, serving in Iraq in 2009 and 2010, was sometimes angry and distant with others from his unit. The defense has said that Manning, who is gay, was bullied by fellow soldiers. Manning's defense team says he told Adkins he suffered from gender-identity disorder — the belief that he was born the wrong sex.

... who got into some sort of "confrontation" after "terse words" were "exchanged"... and keep in mind that this "confrontation" occurred between two individuals equally trained for combat.

That's the instance of "abuse" that you would have everyone override all other details of the case over, in outrage?

That's actually a rather demeaning judgement of women in the services if you ask me... and I think they'd find it insulting... though maybe I'm wrong.

Maybe women in the military want opinion-spewers such as yourself demeaning their capacity to handle themselves in order to assassinate the character of someone who shared military secrets with the world. In fact, maybe they are all confident that the response, should your spin be swallowed by the public at-large, will NOT be to just keep women out of the military because they are obviously conducive to secrets being shared... as was the case in this case.

I'm guessing they mostly think the words that you are typing are something they'd expect to be uttered by a windbag asshat... though I'd be interested to hear any women service members correct me in my guess...

[stevenleser]

186. he struck a superior. in the military, that is not.a small issue. also "trained for combat"

Are you kidding? They were computer techs, not infantry. Just because you are in the military doesn't mean you are trained to fight. There are plenty of specialties that have zero.possibility of combat and thus you get basically no combat training.

[NutmegYankee]

4. All that matters to them is the war.

That people were attacked or that vital defense secrets (unrelated to the Iraq war) were released to our enemies doesn't matter to them. If convicted, he deserves to stand before a firing squad.

[truedelphi]

90. None of that happened.

What did happen is various officials got egg on their faces. For using government property inappropriately. You know, usual lame bullshit behavior that happens when powerful people think no one is looking.

The team releasing the information had said information checked, and nothing new was slipped out the door. Operations of military activity were related to concluded military activity; and everything released was at least six months old.

[kenny blankenship]

5. He was a good QB, and his extracurriculars, say what you like, didn't affect the point spread

[madinmaryland]

64. He was, but he played for a crappy team his entire career.

The Aints.

[spanone]

6. ???

[bertman]

8. My understanding is that he is being held and tried for exposing military 'secrets'--

not for beating women.

As a former Infantry officer and combat veteran I support any service member who is willing to expose illegal activities within the military.

The use of classification of information, actions, documents to hide wrongdoing is rampant in the military just as it is in civilian government. We need more brave individuals to expose the perpetrators who are violating their oaths and the laws of this nation.

P.S. I've never heard anyone refer to Manning as a 'paragon of virtue'. Other than you, that is.


Edit for typo.

[MichaelMcGuire]

60. +1

[duhneece]

87. Yes, yes yes nt

[bread_and_roses]

95. Thank you. Better answer than I could give (n/t)

[polly7]

100. +1

[Matariki]

9. Hello, Mr. Flamebait.

[DJ13]

10. Slime as sport, what fun

[MindMover]

11. me thinks you have manning and that other guy assange mixed up.......

the american who spilt the beans on the world has been holed up in a marine brig somewhere in the states for almost 2 years with no charges other than he gave a lady gaga cd filled with a bunch of state secrets to this guy assange.......now if someone were to prove that those secrets got someone hurt or killed then I guess you could say all of his time spent behind bars was worth it.....or maybe not.....

[nadinbrzezinski]

12. Let me turn the question around

You understand undue command influence right? The comment of the CiC a few months ago as to the nature of his guilt, IS UNDUE COMMAND INFLUENCE.

Now in the real world where I live... that is called contaminating a case.

I will be charitable... here... but they have fucked up this case seven ways to Sunday.

Now that is not defending Manning... it's just a fact.

[kenny blankenship]

17. But he doesn't comment on non-existent bank prosecutions.

You have to acknowledge his impartiality on that score.

[NavyDem]

24. Let the court decide on that.

It is the position of every prosecutor that the defendent is guilty. They still have to prove it. By your logic, the person in his chain of command that brought the charges, because they say he's guilty.

[nadinbrzezinski]

32. Oh that is but one example

the presiding judge works in the civilian word for DOJ... guess what he works in? Wiki Leaks... yes defense asked the presiding judge to disqualify himself

The torture...

As I said, they have fucked this seven days to sunday.

At this point it is no longer about guilt or innocence, but court misconduct.

[NavyDem]

35. I am aware of the credentials of the investigating officer, and the request that he recuse himself.

"FORT MEADE, Md. — The military court case against the young soldier blamed for the largest leak of classified material in American history resumed Saturday after an Army appeals court rejected a defense effort to remove the presiding officer."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/prosecution-to-present-its-case-against-young-soldier-accused-of-leaking-nations-secrets/2011/12/17/gIQAtG8vzO_story.html

My opinion is that the defense attorney is throwing shit at a wall, and seeing if he can get anything to stick. Thus far, he hasn't been terribly successful.

[nadinbrzezinski]

36. So you think somebody who is working on wiki leaks as a civillian is a-ok?

At this point, we part company.

[tammywammy]

39. He doesn't work on Wikileaks for the DoJ

"Friday’s tangling, however, centered primarily on Almanza’s Justice Department job. “I don’t believe I’m biased,” Almanza said, explaining that his government work concerns child exploitation and obscenity. He said he hasn’t talked about WikiLeaks or Manning with anyone in the department or FBI."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/prosecution-to-present-its-case-against-young-soldier-accused-of-leaking-nations-secrets/2011/12/17/gIQAtG8vzO_story.html

[NavyDem]

40. What I think doesn't matter in the legal sense,

And the court of appeals has spoken. And as TammyWammy mentions below, he didn't work on Wikileaks.

Edit: Correction: TammyWammy's post is above mine.

[nadinbrzezinski]

45. We part company... court misconduct

matters in my book.

[Azathoth]

41. Where was it reported that the investigating officer worked on the Wikileaks case?

Demanding that he recuse himself simply becuse he works at DOJ is fatuous, so I have to assume you have evidence he is directly involved in the Wikileaks investigation.

[nadinbrzezinski]

44. Among other places, Countdown

And yes, from a conduct of the court, there are many instances of misconduct and contaminating this case seven ways to Sunday. This is but one more example.

[Azathoth]

47. This isn't an example at all -- you're simply asserting something without any documentary evidence

Keith never does original investigative journalism, so I have to assume whatever he reported came from somewhere. So...where?

[nadinbrzezinski]

49. Ok, you asked and you did not like

answer.

Whatever, have a good night.

I have followed this case from the beginning... and I am sure you will also defend the treatment and the less than timely court martial.

This case has been all but textbook.

Have a good night.

[Azathoth]

51. No, I asked for an answer but you apparently didn't have one

So you just declared victory anyway and left. Good strategy

Good night.

[nadinbrzezinski]

65. Au cntrainere I gave you an answer

one you did NOT LIKE.

[MADem]

102. Countdown misspoke, if they did say such a thing. There is no conflict of interest.

The guy worked at Justice on HATE CRIMES legislation, specifically, the Shepherd - Byrd bill. He also worked on child exploitation issues. He has never, ever worked a national security case. He didn't have a single thing to do with this one in his duties at DOJ.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/hearing-officer-in-manning-case-is-a-justice-department-employee-in-civilian-life/2011/12/16/gIQAMZN1yO_story.html

FORT MEADE, Md. — Paul R. Almanza, the presiding officer at Friday’s pretrial hearing for accused leaker Bradley Manning, won a Justice Department award last year for his work in developing and advocating the department’s position on hate crimes legislation.

The legislation, called the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009, strengthened and expanded federal laws prohibiting hate crimes by allowing prosecution of violence motivated by a victim’s sexual orientation, gender or disability.

...As of September, Almanza was the deputy chief of the Justice Department unit that handles child exploitation cases.

He previously served as chief of staff in the department’s Office of Legal Policy, which helps develop and implement Justice Department policies. According to federal court records, he has only appeared in three criminal cases, the most recent in 2004. All three cases are related to pornography or obscenity. He has not appeared in court in a national security matter.

That's just an inaccurate and unfair characterization of this individual, who is not the judge, in any event, he's simply the guy presiding over the pretrial hearing to determine if the case goes forward. Anyone who thinks there's a prayer of a dismissal at this stage, based on the information already provided in the hearing and regardless of who is sitting in Almanza's chair, would probably be persuaded to buy a bridge you might have for sale.

[tammywammy]

46. He doesn't work on Wikileaks for the DoJ

"As of September, Almanza was the deputy chief of the Justice Department unit that handles child exploitation cases.

He previously served as chief of staff in the department’s Office of Legal Policy, which helps develop and implement Justice Department policies. According to federal court records, he has only appeared in three criminal cases, the most recent in 2004. All three cases are related to pornography or obscenity. He has not appeared in court in a national security matter."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/hearing-officer-in-manning-case-is-a-justice-department-employee-in-civilian-life/2011/12/16/gIQAMZN1yO_story.html

[Azathoth]

48. Ah, the plot thickens

Now I'm *really* keen to see what her evidence is. Whatever it is, it must be downright explosive, as it would prove not only that Almanza has a conflict of interest, but that he is lying bluntly about it.

[EFerrari]

55. It doesn't matter. Obama already pronounced Manning guilty

and Holder announce he would find something to charge Assange with, which is in itself illegal. This guy should be nowhere near this railroading, I mean, trial.

[Shining Jack]

192. +1000!

[EFerrari]

54. It is transparently ridiculous for this individual to be assigned this case given

Holders' fatwa on Wikiieaks. No, he doesn't have to have worked it directly himself, that's absurd. He works for the Attorney General who announced publicly that he would look for a crime to charge Assange with.

[Azathoth]

59. lol, so we're playing six degrees of Eric Holder now?

That's like saying Almanza should be barred from presiding over civil rights cases because he works for DOJ and the boss of his boss of his boss is a civil rights advocate. It's absurd.

This kind of situation is dealt with all the time in the courts. Unless you can show that Almanza is involved somehow in the Wikileaks case, or that he is being unduly influenced by Holder, it's a non-issue.

Once this moves to a full court martial, I assume we will start hearing how the judge should recuse himself because he's a member of the military.

[EFerrari]

79. Nope. He works for Eric Holder. That's no degrees. nt

[JDPriestly]

50. Are you sure, nadin?

I am drawing a conclusion that is not completely supported by your statement, but . . . if, the judge is also an attorney in the justice department, and in that capacity he has worked on the Wikileaks case, he would presumably have knowledge of confidential details about Wikileaks. That could but does not necessarily mean that he worked on the Wikileaks matter concerning Manning. Wikileaks could include cases other than Manning/Assange.

But if the judge worked on anything having to do with Manning's case while at the DOJ, that is very troubling. You can't be the prosecutor and the judge in the same case, not in the America I grew up in.

[nadinbrzezinski]

66. That is why defense asked him to recuse himself

[tammywammy]

71. No, it's not.

They request it because he works for the DoJ and the DoJ is investigating Wikileaks. The defense didn't say it was because Almanza works on Wikileaks because he doesn't.

[Gregorian]

15. I still respect the weapons inspection work of Scott Ritter.

[tammywammy]

18. Yes, punching a female soldier is why he was demoted in rank. n/t

[TheKentuckian]

19. Bring charges on this matter and we will examine the merits of them.

[CreekDog]

20. you're first post expressing a concern about someone being beat up

i guess this is progress.

[Cid_B]

52. Must resist my grammar nazi urges....

You make it tough though...

[CreekDog]

53. yes, by all means, correct the mangled word

sadly, the same is not needed for the content.

[Angry Dragon]

23. ..........

[msongs]

28. how many people has he murdered by way of drone attacks? nt

[RZM]

101. What does that have to do with anything?

Most people on earth have not ordered or directed a drone strike.

[MrMickeysMom]

166. ...

[Fire Walk With Me]

30. I am unaware of anything negative he's done.

[William769]

31. I salute bradley Manning

One of the true Heros to come out of that cesspool of a so called war.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

33. How many Iraqi civilians did he kill?

[backscatter712]

34. Oskar Schindler cheated on his wife and clusterfucked every business he ever ran...

But that doesn't diminish the fact that he saved thousands of Jews who would otherwise have gone to the ovens.

How do the allegations in this thread diminish Manning's heroic act of whistleblowing that showed the corruption and depravity of our leaders?

[duhneece]

89. I know of other civil rights leaders who cheated on their wife

I don't defend that, but I don't allow that to diminish the good they did. And Manning did a good thing by exposing murder.

[Ter]

42. I know Eli had a bad game but this is a little harsh

[Hissyspit]

43. The Straw Men are strong in this one.

[Behind the Aegis]

56. Hey now! If it weren't for "strawmen", we would have missed out on this splendeforous thread!

[pscot]

106. If it weren't for straw men

half the threads on the board would dry up and blow away.

[bread_and_roses]

97. LOL, that's perfect (n/t)

[Betty Karlson]

57. Sorry, that's not the issue

The issue is whether Manning's superiors have shred of decency left.

We all know that women (and GLBT people) are mistreated in the army - and nothing much happens about it. This discrimination goes hand in hand with committing war crimes (waterboarding), so the issue is bigger than a fight between a girl and a boy, OK?

[Cid_B]

58. It shows his character...

... and it shows his motivations.

Any man (not a boy) who would hit a woman (not a girl) because of his own issues is a shitbag.

Pretty easy to try to excuse assault when you agree with what else he is up to hmm?

[Betty Karlson]

61. You're twisting my words

The issue is not the assault. The issue is the reprehensible behaviour of the US army (in general terms, not attacking specific individuals) because of what the legislature has sanctioned.

attacking the (good or bad) character of a whistleblower does not diminish or change the issue. The assault is a separate issue, and should be dealt with separately.

That the prosecuting authority would try to mix the issues up, only confirms to me that the real dirt is not being discussed.

[eridani]

135. Character and motivations are irrelevant

The only relevant point is whether the documentation of war crimes is true or not.

If he committed crimes not related to that, try him for those crimes. Scott Ritter shouldn't have fucked underage girls either, but that does not make him wrong about the Iraq WMDs.

[Shining Jack]

193. "Any man who would hit a woman because of his own issues is a shitbag. "

You should stay consistent. Last month it was a pregnant woman's fault if she miscarried after being pepper-sprayed and kicked in the stomach by a cop at Seattle Occupy.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x2359626#2359646

[Cid_B]

194. *yawn*

Really?

Also, I seem to remember that woman turned out to be a liar as I correctly predicated.

[Shining Jack]

197. Yawn?

Doesn't change the fact that in that thread it's evident how you really feel about women being beaten. Unless you're pretending to be a psychic you couldn't possibly know if she was telling the truth or not yet you immediately concluded that she was lying. It shows your character.

[dionysus]

67. i saw what you did there...

[xchrom]

68. few people on planet earth are with out character defects and moral holes in them.

what about robert novak -- who outed valerie plame and has never done time for that?

the only point that makes manning a hero is releasing those files.

he didn't drone any body to death -- he didn't kill untold numbers of innocent civilians, lie us into war or justify them -- all done in our country's name and paid for with our tax dollars.

[Cid_B]

69. Correct...

Assault is not the only crime he has committed. It just stands out to me because I find it personally offensive and the sign of a true weakling.

Good point...

[xchrom]

72. i'm sure you have a few character defects that stand out for me as well. nt

[Cid_B]

73. To be sure...

... but beating women and violating my oath aren't among them.

[Laughing Mirror]

77. Kick the true weakling when he's down

Yeah, that's the spirit. So much fun to do that, isn't it?

[SidDithers]

70. Bradley Manning is like Robert Novak?...

Interesting comparison.

Sid

[msanthrope]

113. Indeed. Weren't we pissed about what Novak did? nt

[SidDithers]

114. Apparently, Novak was just a whistleblower...nt

Sid

[RZM]

103. I don't get this 'but he never killed anybody' business

What does that have to do with anything? Do we give out passes now based on how Iraqis one hasn't killed or how many drone strikes they didn't carry out?

[Vinnie From Indy]

74. It takes less nerve to hold up Manning than to make a post like this without

even a shred of proof offered. That, my friend, takes nerve!

[Cid_B]

92. You don't like witness statements ?

Yet again...

For anyone else an eyewitness statement about the abuse of women would be treated like the gospel itself.

All of a sudden there must be extenuating circumstances that made him assault that woman. He is just misunderfuckinstood.

Free ethics passes as long as you agree with his politics and his extracurricular activities.

[surfdog]

76. The guy is guilty and should be jailed

It's clear he committed a crime he stole that information and turned it over to somebody he didn't really know any didn't really know what was in the information he was turning over

[Charlemagne]

80. Peyton or Eli?

[AtomicKitten]

82. The testimony so far has been jaw-dropping.

Manning was apparently on his way out anyway because of issues unrelated to the "leak."

[chrisa]

86. Bradley Manning was / continues to only care about himself.

That's what it was about all along. He's an egotistical megalomaniac who got caught because he had to brag to others about what he had done. He's not some superhero like many of his defenders want to believe - he's a self-absorbed idiot who stole intelligence in order to inflate his own overly-inflated sense of self-importance.

[EFerrari]

117. And where did you get your degree in psychology?

[chrisa]

126. Can't prove me wrong, eh?

[EFerrari]

131. Maybe use your Google and search "proving a negative". nt

[eridani]

136. So?

The intelligence documents war crimes. The truth of the message matters. The personal defects of the messenger do not.

[chrisa]

145. There is no question that a lot of good has come from

what Manning did. I just don't think he had any intentions that weren't self-serving.

In the long run, the messenger does not matter. However, I'm just making my opinion of Bradley Manning known. Think what you will of it.

[eridani]

155. I could care less who he is as a person

I care about the war crimes revealed. I care about our president pronouncing him guilty without a trial. I care about him being tortured. If we are going to start torturing people for misogyny, I can think of a lot of people I'd rather start out with.

[AuntPatsy]

207. Excellent post in a sea of questional motivations

[MrMickeysMom]

163. Says who?

[chrisa]

178. It's my opinion. Like I said above, think what you want of it.

[MrMickeysMom]

181. I will think what I want of it...

And being read, it and 35 cents can buy a phone call.

[boppers]

189. Pay phones, that only take 35 cents, still exist?

Where is this at? Finding a payphone is hard enough, let alone one that's less than 50 cents.

[MrMickeysMom]

208. Well, I remember one in TX costing 10cents outside and HEB store!

But, you get what I mean...

[fascisthunter]

94. The REAL Question is....

...will this BS stick to the wall, and when did you stop beating your wife? FAIL...

[Eliminator]

96. This thread on the homepage is why unrec needs to come back

Other than the K&R threads, this kind of thing needs to be regulated too.

What in the world does anything else Manning has done have to do with his being illegally detained for almost two years without trial? What does it have to do with his exposing the lies and corruption of the U.S. government, which caused the deaths of over 4000 soldiers and hundreds of thousands more innocent civilians, while the perpetrators of this crime remain sitting in their easy chairs, sipping fine wine at their ranches and beach houses, and playing golf?

[krucial]

98. Can not erase the fact

Looking up reasons and excuses to atttack Mannings credibility,is the normal MO for the Govt.
Anyone that exposes this Government and show the truth of the evil underbelly and immoral in humane actions of our war machine is deemed as and enemy and,the one who is evil and should not be trusted.In fact is this govt knew anyone as going to expose them,they would make sure to rub that person out by putting a hit on them the first chance they get.
Truth is one of the biggest enemy to most repressive governments.

Even if manning was the devil,the truth is the truth,and there is no way whatever manning is,that can never erase these gross action of our millitary and the lies and cover up by our governmet,telling the world they are killing terrorist,when they are really killing and executing innocent men women and children.

That is sick,and all they are trying to do is to make sure that they never get exposed like this again.
I dont ever never take anything our government tells us as facts or truth,until I check out most foreign sources first.

Thanks to the nacestors that there was a Wiki leaks and a manning to uncover and espose the nastiness of this illegal war on the innocent people of Iraq.
This is deffinetly War crimes if you ask me,but unfortunatle,y the only victims and people who will be prosectuted and pay a price are the ones who exposed the lies and showed the truth to the world.
So as one can see,there is no Justice in this world truth sometimes is a bad thing,and it shows for sure that"Extreme Power corrupts,and EVIL RULES!!

[Shipwack]

105. I find it sad that...

the people who lied us into an unnecessary war in Iraq (Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al) got Congressional Medals of Freedom and/or Honor , but Manning, who apparently exposed a war crime, is in prison.

[Shipwack]

104. I'm surprised there is this much controversy... no reason to complicate this.

There are several issues involved with the Manning case, and various people seem to think they rely on each other. These are separate issues, and the status of each is independent of the others.

1) Did Manning give classified information to Wiki-leaks? The answer to this has nothing to do with what kind of performance marks he got, or if he tussled with another sailor.

2) If he did, was this the morally correct thing to do? Just because an act is illegal doesn't mean it was immoral. If he had evidence that a crime was being covered up, what could he do if no one was willing to investigate it?

3) Was Manning a "good sailor"? He could be a dirtbag, and still not be guilty of leaking classified information. Or he could be a dirtbag, but do the right thing for the wrong reasons. What is a "good Sailor", anyway? Was he considered a dirtbag because he stood a poor watch and was negligent in his duties? Or was he not liked because he didn't let others steal government property, or he reported the command golden child for being drunk on duty?

4) Is Manning being ill treated in his confinement? Even if he is guilty, that is not an excuse to physically or mentally abuse him.

For those playing the home game, my opinion is yes, yes, no, yes; not that it matters.... But just because he had poor evals, didn't work and play well with others, or had sexual identification issues doesn't mean he did the wrong (or right) thing. People are complicated creatures, and no person is completely good or completely bad.

[NavyDem]

130. You do know that the Army doesn't have sailors right? nt

[msanthrope]

109. Dear Cid--thank you for exposing this. When I posted it yesterday, 'crickets.'

Manning and Assange make quite the pair.

[Hissyspit]

122. Exposing what?

Last edited Mon Dec 19, 2011, 10:42 PM - Edit history (1)

First off, are you a big fan of guilty until proven innocent? Second, as has been posted multiple times, the one issue really has nothing to do with the other, in both the Manning and Asssange cases. If Daniel Ellsberg had been wife-beater, would what was revealed in The Pentagon Papers been any less true? Should he have been punished for revealing The Pentagon Papers, due to the fact that he was a wife-beater? If the White House accused him of being a wife-beater, would you automatically believe it true? If he was a wife-beater, would it have been any less risky of him to expose the corruption that was exposed in the release of The Pentagon Papers?

[nashville_brook]

127. classic GOP-style smear campaign -- it's a shame some in our party are so threatened by Manning

[krucial]

156. You are right

This is the norm for the GOP,just look at Herman Cain? He lies,dney,and demonize his accusers,thats the way they do it.Never accepting the fact that they did any wrong,but see themself as the victim of their accuser,no matter how gross and vile their actions were.
They try to turn around the charges and make their accuser Manning into the criminal and the aggresor,and ignoring tha facts of their war crimes in Iraq.
Americas leaders at the time should be the ones being brought up on war crimes for being the war criminals they are.
I am ahsamed at Baral Obama for the postitio he took on this,I was very, very, dissapointed in him,because he has been slowly turning and morphing into the other side

[Deep13]

123. News to me, but it's not his personal life that draws accolades.

It's his willingness to expose the truth at the expense of his career and freedom. A person can do anoble thing even if he is not an especially virtuous person in private.

[FreeState]

138. You do realize Manning is more than likely Transgender?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10144957

[MH1]

147. Um, I hope I'm not being insensitive in some way, but why would it be relevant?

If he's beating up women he's beating up women. (not speaking to the accuracy of the charge - but if it is true, then why would transgender status matter?)

[FreeState]

150. There is no he if Manning identifies as female.

It would be a female hitting a female. Transgender females are not male, HE is inappropriate.

According to Reuters News Service, Manning’s attorney, David Coombs, and Manning’s brigade chief, Captain Steven Lim, told the Dec. 17 Article 32 hearing that Manning informed an Army intelligence supervisor by email in April 2010 that he was suffering from gender identity disorder.

Lim testified at the hearing that Manning disclosed in his email that the disorder was “affecting his life, work and ability to think,” Reuters reported. Lim also testified that Manning’s email included a photo of Manning dressed as a woman.

Coombs stated at the hearing that Manning’s self disclosure that he was struggling over his gender identity was a sign that he was emotionally unstable and may not have been in a position to handle highly classified documents, Reuters reported.

http://www.washingtonblade.com/2011/12/19/lawyers-say-bradley-manning-struggled-with-gender-identity-disorder/

[MH1]

153. Yeah, but didn't he report to duty as a male?

this is the first I've heard that he identified as female, and anyway, all that means is the pronoun 'he' would be inappropriate. It isn't exactly cool for women to be beating up on other women, whether or not they are transgender. (generally it's not cool for people to beat on other people, actually.)

[FreeState]

154. Mannings supervisors knew of Mannings gender identity

Does not matter what gender Manning identified as when Manning enrolled.

I agree it does not matter if both are women or men - however to the OP it does. ("... how do you get up the nerve to hold up a guy who beats women as this paragon of virtue? Among all his other amazing qualities of course... " ).

[Puregonzo1188]

141. Because it has nothing to do with his status as a whitsleblower or the way he's been treated?

Honestly, it seems like it should be simple enough to understand...

[DirkGently]

159. I thought Manning was being defended against the false charges of being a traitor?

A poor attempt to turn one discussion, in which those defending Manning are correct, into another discussion, to avoid admitting that fact.

[TomClash]

160. I'd rather defend a bad guy who did right

Than defend the merchants of 500,000+ deaths for nothing but plunder, profit and power.

Exactly how do you defend that?

[MrMickeysMom]

165. You appear to have an agenda...

... and I don't have to ask what it is, do I, Cid?

Of course, now that hearing are underway, and not before them, when this guy was deemed guilty by Barack Obama (way to go, Constitutional Scholar) I noted no interest in making this claim, which I really think is a low blow.

[ooglymoogly]

175. Plus 10,000 and then 10,000 more

and yet there are 14 recs.....on DU!

[ooglymoogly]

169. Wow! the shallow sanctimony here is strange and profound.

Have those defending the torture of BM, so quickly forgotten the horror that he exposed.

Can any of them not try to understand, that a fragile BM was at his breaking point.

The road to hell is trodden with sanctimonious goody two shoes, unable or unwilling to look at anything with any depth; who have a profound lack of perception beyond skin deep;

especially to anything and anyone not in line with a preordained notion of righteousness.

A self righteousness that belongs in a fundamentalist revival meeting of fire and brimstone for anyone straying from their narrow path that is leading them right off the edge of the earth.

[MrMickeysMom]

180. Well, let's at least rec each other...

Since the recs to this OP seem to count for NOTHING.

I don't think anyone remembers anything on the exposure by this whistle blower of drone gamers... We will have to wait... wait until they're knee deep in post traumatic stress to validate what this patriot exposed.

[ooglymoogly]

195. Adrian....is that you. nt nr

[Bucky]

202. He beat a woman, therefor he lost his 4th and 6th Amendment rights.

Have I appropriately encapsulated the OP's argument here?

It's possible to stand up for the rights of the accused without condoning their crimes. It is for grown ups, anyway.

[redqueen]

205. +1

[MNBrewer]

209. +1 again

[LanternWaste]

213. I separate the art from the artist, the cause from the individual, etc...

All things being equal, I separate the art from the artist, the cause from the individual, etc.

Of course, I realize that is a rather difficult thing for many people to do, and hence, simply ignore or deny the critical and relevant differences between two wholly different things.

Additionally, I would hazard the phrase (in re: to Manning) 'paragon of virtue' has been uttered so melodramatically by no one other than yourself, and may be little more than a self-defined clever attempt at conflating two different concepts.

[ooglymoogly]

214. +1 nt