Latest Breaking News

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)

35. Of course it is. Protecting our war criminals is of primary importance in this society

Thu Nov 8, 2012, 02:42 PM

Nov 2012

and the only way that will stop is when the American people support those who have the courage to expose them. So whether it is inadvertant or not, when you condemn the whistle blowers, you support the War Criminals. At least face the facts.

I have zero doubt that if the timing of these leaked documents exposing Bush War crimes had been different, had it occurred in 2007, the entire 'Left' would have made a hero out of Manning and would have been reading them and publishing them all over the place.

What all of this has revealed other than Bush War Crimes, is how hypocritical some on the Left in the US really are. And how little many of them ever cared about Bush War Crimes, but used them only for political purposes.

I guess we were all naive enough to believe otherwise. And I am encouraged by those who continue to stick with the facts, to oppose War Crimes as they always did, and to support Whistle Blowers. But it sure has been an awakening to find oneself having the same arguments with some on the Left re Bush war crimes, that we used to think we would only have to engage in with the Right.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

190 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Pfc. Bradley Manning offers guilty plea in Wikileaks case [View all] Freddie Stubbs Nov 2012 OP

I wonder if this is all about trying to set up Manning to avebury Nov 2012 #1

No, it's about Manning. Period. IMO. randome Nov 2012 #3

Man. That sounds like a prepared statement. loudsue Nov 2012 #4

The sheer volume of material means he didn't look too closely at them. randome Nov 2012 #5

What a coincidence, the sheer volume of redacting also means the cprise Nov 2012 #12

Who the hell is Bradley Manning to be making these decisions? randome Nov 2012 #17

I think your post should note that it is Manning's defense attorney that is pushing the gender msanthrope Nov 2012 #21

Conduct unbecoming is a pretty serious charge. glacierbay Nov 2012 #25

I am of the opinion that you had an unstable young man, who had many msanthrope Nov 2012 #28

You may very well be right. glacierbay Nov 2012 #29

I doubt, however, that he is a condescending hypocrite who selectively ignores his own tagline cprise Nov 2012 #84

Manning had the choice to tell Kucinich, Sanders, or Franken, and he would have been msanthrope Nov 2012 #88

Thats your opinion. He took it to the Fourth Estate instead cprise Nov 2012 #100

Whistleblowing in general is a precarious undertaking. Smarmie Doofus Nov 2012 #102

Shit. Even I would have taken the Kook over the 4th Estate. nt msanthrope Nov 2012 #103

That's a great response cprise Nov 2012 #57

+1. n/t Smarmie Doofus Nov 2012 #60

As has been pointed out, he could have used the Military Whistleblowers Protection Act. randome Nov 2012 #61

"Not that there's anything wrong with that" demwing Nov 2012 #173

You don't know what you are talking about. MrMickeysMom Nov 2012 #183

Well, the sheer volume, and his written statements to Lamo indicate that he could not msanthrope Nov 2012 #16

I have recalibrated my concept of 'sheer volume' to the warrantless wiretapping cprise Nov 2012 #68

Okay..but that has nothing to do with the fact that Manning could not have possibly read msanthrope Nov 2012 #77

He didn't just dump it out on the Internet, either cprise Nov 2012 #93

All of which he can argue at his sentencing--that he took special care while breaking the law. nt msanthrope Nov 2012 #107

Also should mention only Wikileaks had a safe tech infrastructure for whistleblowing cprise Nov 2012 #172

I really should use the sarcasm smilie more often. nt msanthrope Nov 2012 #175

You know what would be fantastic. If you chose to learn what Manning actually did sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #9

What you say may be true glacierbay Nov 2012 #18

He had the option of turning stuff over under the Military Whistleblowers Protection Act of 1988-- msanthrope Nov 2012 #20

You are correct glacierbay Nov 2012 #23

Well, sadly, if he had just googled more, he could have used the Military Whistelblowers Protection msanthrope Nov 2012 #26

I agree glacierbay Nov 2012 #27

No, he did not. He had already reported war crimes and had been told to shut up about sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #39

Care to document that assertion? hack89 Nov 2012 #44

I see you know nothing about this case as I suspected. If you have to ask me what sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #49

So you can't document them? Why not simply say so? hack89 Nov 2012 #52

Then enlighten us please. What did Manning do before he decided that reporting war sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #54

Nothing as far as I can see - that is why you need to substantiate your assertion hack89 Nov 2012 #70

He did nothing?? sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #72

Yet you seem completely incapable of providing that "public" information. hack89 Nov 2012 #74

She needs to send it on to Manning's attorneys---they seem to have missed it. nt msanthrope Nov 2012 #78

Your tactics are transparent and very, very old and jaded. You clearly have sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #79

So you lied about Manning reporting war crimes to his chain of command? hack89 Nov 2012 #86

Now you're getting desperate. Lol! sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #89

So you expect me to prove a negative? hack89 Nov 2012 #90

What I expect is simple. When someone sets themselves up as qualified to sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #94

You make up shit and then claim that as an "expert" you can't be challenged. hack89 Nov 2012 #95

Please post what 'shit' I made up. And try to calm down. You don't know anything about sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #98

You said that he informed his chain of command about war crimes hack89 Nov 2012 #99

So his claim that his chain of command ignored him is at the center of his defense .. oh wait. hack89 Nov 2012 #97

Then educate by linking to something treestar Nov 2012 #115

Have you asked your friends to produce something to show that any investigation sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #140

You're unable to link to anything treestar Nov 2012 #145

Kindly show us where Manning used the Military Whistleblowers Protection Act of 1988, as you claim? msanthrope Nov 2012 #48

Kindly read my comment again and show me where I said he did. sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #51

So you cannot document the legal steps Manning took? Why not just admit that? nt msanthrope Nov 2012 #53

Strange, did you just copy and paste Hack's comment which I just responded to? sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #55

No, I think great minds think alike. Still waiting for you to document your claim, though. nt msanthrope Nov 2012 #64

Exactly what is it that you do not know about this sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #71

Again, you aren't documenting your claim, but are expecting others to do it for you. msanthrope Nov 2012 #75

Here is information on it treestar Nov 2012 #177

This is getting ridiculous. Please read the thread as you clearly have not, nor have you sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #186

Right and wrong mean nothing in today's DU Ash_F Nov 2012 #81

Please link to the revelations of child sex trafficking treestar Nov 2012 #178

There's no way he read 491,000 War Logs. That's not even the hundreds of thousands of cables. msanthrope Nov 2012 #19

Horse shit. Condemning Manning is not supporting Bush hack89 Nov 2012 #30

Of course it is. Protecting our war criminals is of primary importance in this society sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #35

Manning should have followed US whistleblower laws hack89 Nov 2012 #37

Sabrina has an excellent point about war criminals that YOU ignore cprise Nov 2012 #63

I have no problem with him whistleblowing war crimes hack89 Nov 2012 #73

What a ridiculous suggestion. Name ONE just ONE Whistle Blower who was protected by sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #188

If he choose the path he is on then he understood the consequences. hack89 Nov 2012 #190

Indeed... MrMickeysMom Nov 2012 #184

Said the poster who can demonstrate no knowledge of this... MrMickeysMom Nov 2012 #180

Partly that but it's mostly to protect the Bush war criminals who were exposed in the sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #15

Catch 22 FiveGoodMen Nov 2012 #32

Many of the world's worst criminals are here in the US cpwm17 Nov 2012 #33

kick navarth Nov 2012 #2

Hopefully his willingness to admit to lesser charges will get dismissals on the others. freshwest Nov 2012 #6

+1 wtmusic Nov 2012 #8

Any accepted plea will. nt msanthrope Nov 2012 #14

He exposed Bush war crimes. Too bad just about everyone has covered up for Cheney, sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #10

The only way to bring Bush and Cheney to trial would be to have certain conditions on the ground. freshwest Nov 2012 #38

Good post. I have only relatively recently discovered the lack of justice for many sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #47

He could have exposed them legally treestar Nov 2012 #116

He did expose them legally. He was ignored. Then became a Whistle Blower which he sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #139

If he exposed them under the Whistle Blower Act treestar Nov 2012 #146

Okay, I'll play, again. sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #151

You just claimed flat out that Manning used the WB act treestar Nov 2012 #158

Um, no, I did no such thing, I said he used what was legally available to him, he sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #161

Did he use the Military Whistle Blower Protection Act? treestar Nov 2012 #179

What, no apology for being so wrong? And the question as to why has been sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #182

Well, his defense was correct to delay trial, time after time--- msanthrope Nov 2012 #11

The oath he took convicted him. No way to get that job without promising to NOT do what he did. freshwest Nov 2012 #41

He could have used the Military Whistleblwoers Protection Act of 1988--but that would not have msanthrope Nov 2012 #45

Please post a link to information on just ONE whistle blower who 'received the sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #56

Ellsburg. I think Manning thought he was going to be the next Ellsburg. msanthrope Nov 2012 #66

Lol, thanks, I had a feeling you have to go way back in history to find one. sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #69

(Facepalm) Sabrina, that you don't know that Ellsburg couldn't have used the msanthrope Nov 2012 #76

I'm having a hard time distinguishing you and Hack from each other frankly. Sorry sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #80

Manning could have gone to Kucinich, Sanders, Franken...he went to Assange. That msanthrope Nov 2012 #91

Yawn! sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #96

Again, kindly cite when and where Manning reported crimes to his superior officers. nt msanthrope Nov 2012 #106

You know the answer to that perfectly well. sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #143

You made the assertion Sabrina; it's up to you to prove it. It's not up to the rest of us msanthrope Nov 2012 #156

Made what assertion? sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #160

You make me laugh Sabrina....truly. nt msanthrope Nov 2012 #164

So once again you make an assertion and when you can't back it up, you sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #169

Again, no documentation of your claim. nt msanthrope Nov 2012 #171

What claim? What are you talking about? I stated the facts of this case as they are known sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #174

"Manning reported war crimes to his superiors." Document that. msanthrope Nov 2012 #176

No, your debating skills are poor treestar Nov 2012 #117

You mean 'that's why two of the usual posters are playing the same old games'. I am having sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #138

You've gone to ad hominem treestar Nov 2012 #147

Irony is not dead. Lol! Maybe you can give a direct response to the question they, and you sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #148

How do you know that the allegations aren't being investigated? glacierbay Nov 2012 #150

You are asking the wrong person. sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #153

Fair enough glacierbay Nov 2012 #155

Thank you, you have a great weekend also! sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #162

I met Ellsberg at Rice University where he met with students, inspired us to go to D.C. freshwest Nov 2012 #109

I hope he didn't crave adulation; I feel he was caught up. I remember when all of these great freshwest Nov 2012 #58

I think your post is just fine--I wouldn't edit it. msanthrope Nov 2012 #67

You sure that was why he didn't use the act? Ash_F Nov 2012 #83

He had the option of going to Kucinich, Sanders, Franken..... msanthrope Nov 2012 #92

Wait a minute treestar Nov 2012 #118

I'm sorry, the adults in this story were too busy protecting pedophiles Ash_F Nov 2012 #124

I don't know how pedophiles come into this treestar Nov 2012 #127

You are right that he should have talked to a lawyer Ash_F Nov 2012 #130

I can't watch a video at work and I can't find much information on this. randome Nov 2012 #131

US citizens were doing this Ash_F Nov 2012 #136

I always *wondered* who "the enemy" was in Iraq. Smarmie Doofus Nov 2012 #7

Al-Qaeda, which the prosecution presented evidence of at the Article 32. msanthrope Nov 2012 #13

So..... Manning was an al-Qaeda agent? Smarmie Doofus Nov 2012 #22

Well, an active, recruited agent? No.... msanthrope Nov 2012 #24

Indeed. In exactly the same way that Ellsberg's treachery aided the NVA and NLF. n/t Smarmie Doofus Nov 2012 #31

And Ellsburg would have been convicted--had the FBI refrained from wiretapping him. nt msanthrope Nov 2012 #36

Only if the gov't chose to prosecute him. Smarmie Doofus Nov 2012 #82

Um...smarmie. They did prosecute him. like in a courtroom. nt msanthrope Nov 2012 #85

You're getting peevish. I'll let you go. n/t Smarmie Doofus Nov 2012 #101

I apologize. I am peevish this evening. Please forgive me. nt msanthrope Nov 2012 #104

Done. You've been at a while. Thanks. N/t Smarmie Doofus Nov 2012 #108

He was, as Joesph Stalin liked to say glacierbay Nov 2012 #34

Excellent timeline of the entire affair from Firedoglake hack89 Nov 2012 #40

Indeed--a very good one. nt msanthrope Nov 2012 #46

Poor guy demhottie Nov 2012 #42

He's not admitting he was wrong...and he WASN'T wrong. Ken Burch Nov 2012 #43

Um--that's what a guilty plea is. Admitting you were wrong. Think there won't be allocution? msanthrope Nov 2012 #50

No, it's admitting that you did something...not that you were wrong TO do it. Ken Burch Nov 2012 #62

I have clients who think that way, and they have the rap sheets to prove it. msanthrope Nov 2012 #65

What Manning did has nothing in common with assault or ANY violent crime Ken Burch Nov 2012 #110

Mr. Manning chose the UCMJ, and what he did was a crime under that code. msanthrope Nov 2012 #113

The UCMJ cannot be privileged above conscience. Ken Burch Nov 2012 #168

Of course you have the right to put conscience before law. What you don't have is right to avoid msanthrope Nov 2012 #170

Very funny how the law worked here... MrMickeysMom Nov 2012 #185

The sad part is that what he did had no impact hack89 Nov 2012 #87

In the eyes of the law glacierbay Nov 2012 #105

The US military works for the United States of America Ash_F Nov 2012 #111

What makes you think that the UCMJ can't find real justice? glacierbay Nov 2012 #120

Manning has done 2 years for outing child sex-traffickers Ash_F Nov 2012 #122

Those were civilian contractors if I remember right. glacierbay Nov 2012 #123

Why do you even visit a political forum? Ash_F Nov 2012 #125

Show one post where I said that the people shouldn't discuss what the Govt. does? glacierbay Nov 2012 #126

What do you think we are doing here? Ash_F Nov 2012 #128

I'll ask again glacierbay Nov 2012 #129

Fair enough. But he still wasn't wrong. Ash_F Nov 2012 #132

I think he should receive leniency just for his unstable frame of mind. randome Nov 2012 #133

Maybe glacierbay Nov 2012 #135

I agree with you--he's got lots of mitigating factors to be considered in his sentencing. nt msanthrope Nov 2012 #159

I have a difference of opinion on this glacierbay Nov 2012 #134

An opinion you won't(or can't) defend? Ash_F Nov 2012 #137

Fair enough glacierbay Nov 2012 #141

Thanks for your post, glacierbay. It's a clear explanation Cha Nov 2012 #187

I doubt a plea bargain will be accepted. AtomicKitten Nov 2012 #59

If you really WANT Manning to be punished, that's depressing. Ken Burch Nov 2012 #112

It's more depressing to want the law to apply treestar Nov 2012 #119

Oh you're so right about that. 'It's more depressing to want the law to apply sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #142

Can one oppose the war without having to resort to this? treestar Nov 2012 #144

You actually doubt that war crimes were committed? AntiFascist Nov 2012 #189

The 'law' already favors those in power. ronnie624 Nov 2012 #149

'Every element of state power'? randome Nov 2012 #152

I don't know. Do they? n/t ronnie624 Nov 2012 #154

State power may refer to: ronnie624 Nov 2012 #157

I get you. randome Nov 2012 #163

The will of the people, should be the basis for all state power. n/t ronnie624 Nov 2012 #167

So you'd have obeyed the Fugitive Slave Act? Ken Burch Nov 2012 #166

You are conflating war in general with what Manning did. randome Nov 2012 #121

As I see it, Manning saw the truth AFTER he joined. Ken Burch Nov 2012 #165

Manning revealed war crimes duhneece Nov 2012 #114

"anyone who reveals war crimes is a hero in my book." MrMickeysMom Nov 2012 #181