It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Congressman Calls for Execution of Wikileaks Whistleblower

page: 7
38
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 05:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aggie Man
IMO, it would be very inflammatory to execute someone that half of America thinks did the right thing.


Half? Really?



Originally posted by Aggie Man
I say we put the military and the government on trial for their war crimes...if found not guilty, then this whistle-blower did the wrong thing and should be prosecuted to the maximum extent of the law; however, if it is determined that war crimes were committed and this whistle-blower brought them to light...well, I say let him go free and honor him as a hero.


Well, that's ass-backwards. But, if any of you heroes care to put me on trial for war crimes, knock yourself out.




posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by ItIsMe
man what is your deal? I never said that, you are over emphasizing everything here and missing the point. Fist why would anyone have to hand over secret documents, documents that are seven months past what is occurring now to show what has really happened? Documents that private sectors already have access to as Paid Corporations.


So what if they're seven months old. There's probably information that's still classified from World War 2, Korea and Vietnam. Time doesn't mean dick.

And the private sectors that have access to this info isn't the ones leaking it out, it's Manning.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by jerico65


Half? Really?


Roughly, yes.


Well, that's ass-backwards. But, if any of you heroes care to put me on trial for war crimes, knock yourself out.


Yeah, at face value. However, say they execute this guy. Then in the future, it is determined that war crimes were committed....well, you can't give a dead man his life back....so, in this case I say it's not so "ass-backwards".



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 05:34 PM
link   
This thread is still going strong?


What is there to debate?

This guy is/was a soldier, they do not fall under civilian juristiction. He knew this, and still broke the law. He didn't release documents only pertaining to illegal activities, he released documents indiscriminately. That is treason by any definition, and the punishment for treason does include the death penalty.

As for the "the better good" arguement, the US military has procedures in place for just that sort of thing. And there is no chance in hell that EVERYBODY in the US armed forces is corrupt or government/corporate shill.

So, he had the chance to release illegal info through proper channels that would have removed all liability from him, but he CHOSE to do a blanket release of info to a non-american of all things.

This isn't whistleblowing, this is ridiculous. Has anybody looked into wether the private was paid for the documents?



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aggie Man
Yeah, at face value. However, say they execute this guy. Then in the future, it is determined that war crimes were committed....well, you can't give a dead man his life back....so, in this case I say it's not so "ass-backwards".


And if it's proven that his leak caused the death of US/Allied troops, then what?



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 06:57 PM
link   
reply to post by jerico65
 


Let's start by examining how many lives lost due to an illegal war, before we start arguing the ethics of whether his release of classified documents got people killed.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 07:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by jerico65

Originally posted by Aggie Man
Yeah, at face value. However, say they execute this guy. Then in the future, it is determined that war crimes were committed....well, you can't give a dead man his life back....so, in this case I say it's not so "ass-backwards".


And if it's proven that his leak caused the death of US/Allied troops, then what?


Not a good situation. However, at least the US/Allied troops signed up for the hell they are in. What did the innocent people slaughtered in Afghanistan sign up for?

Potential US/Allied troops deaths is simply an unsubstantiated ploy to divert from the important issue at hand...The US government & military murdered innocent people and then co-conspired to cover-up their disregard for human life.

So, rather than ask me how I feel about potential death of US/Allied troops, maybe that question should be posed to the families of those the US indiscriminately murdered.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 08:02 PM
link   
I'm in favor of the war in Afghanistan, proud of the soldiers over there with their lives on the line. Iraq was a costly mistake, but Afghanistan is a noble cause.

That being said, I think that whistleblowing should be encouraged within the military. The fella who said that the young man who leaked the info should be put to death is way out of line.

When the military #s up, they should be held accountable. And if it takes the leaking of sensitive information to hold them accountable, then give the men and women who do the leaking freaking medals.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 08:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aggie Man
Not a good situation. However, at least the US/Allied troops signed up for the hell they are in. What did the innocent people slaughtered in Afghanistan sign up for?

Potential US/Allied troops deaths is simply an unsubstantiated ploy to divert from the important issue at hand...The US government & military murdered innocent people and then co-conspired to cover-up their disregard for human life.


So, your opinion on US Troops being killed in Afghanistan is, "F**k 'em, they got what they deserved for enlisting."?

"Murdered innocent people". You feel that US planners and Soldiers are sitting around a table with a map of the AOR, discussing the ways and means of wiping out villages and killing civilians with complete abandon? Screw fighting the Taliban, just kill as many civilians as possible.

Because that would be murder. And I know that the US military isn't in the business of murdering civilians. The Taliban and their allies are.

Discuss the "disgard for human life" to the Taliban. McCrystal had orders not to engage anyone if there was a chance civilians would be killed. Taliban don't roll that way. Individuals can be shot if they are seen talking on radios. So what do the Taliban do? They make sure they have kids with them.


Originally posted by Aggie Man
So, rather than ask me how I feel about potential death of US/Allied troops, maybe that question should be posed to the families of those the US indiscriminately murdered.


How about the families of those indiscriminately murdered by the Taliban?



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 08:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by jerico65

Originally posted by Aggie Man
Not a good situation. However, at least the US/Allied troops signed up for the hell they are in. What did the innocent people slaughtered in Afghanistan sign up for?

Potential US/Allied troops deaths is simply an unsubstantiated ploy to divert from the important issue at hand...The US government & military murdered innocent people and then co-conspired to cover-up their disregard for human life.


So, your opinion on US Troops being killed in Afghanistan is, "F**k 'em, they got what they deserved for enlisting."?

"Murdered innocent people". You feel that US planners and Soldiers are sitting around a table with a map of the AOR, discussing the ways and means of wiping out villages and killing civilians with complete abandon? Screw fighting the Taliban, just kill as many civilians as possible.

Because that would be murder. And I know that the US military isn't in the business of murdering civilians. The Taliban and their allies are.

Discuss the "disgard for human life" to the Taliban. McCrystal had orders not to engage anyone if there was a chance civilians would be killed. Taliban don't roll that way. Individuals can be shot if they are seen talking on radios. So what do the Taliban do? They make sure they have kids with them.


Originally posted by Aggie Man
So, rather than ask me how I feel about potential death of US/Allied troops, maybe that question should be posed to the families of those the US indiscriminately murdered.


How about the families of those indiscriminately murdered by the Taliban?


This is filled with so many red herrings....Think I will go buy a fishing license.


I deplore the way the "players" in these wars are labeled.

If you are a US/Allied player, then you are a "trooper", a "hero" (i.e., you get a name and a face)....and we are suppose to "support the troops"

If you are anything else, then you are an "insurgent" or "collateral damage"....and they are merely causalities of war.

I absolutely support our troops...and their desire to come home. I do not, however, support the war nor any innocent death that results from it. If one is a troop in this fiasco and they desire to remain fighting, then I have no remorse for them in the event of their demise. I do not support the US government or military leadership in this endeavor. I don't have to pretend to approve of a war and support the killing of innocent civilians in order to support the troops.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 08:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aggie Man
This is filled with so many red herrings....Think I will go buy a fishing license.


Nah, just questions. Don't feel bad, I haven't gotten an answer for most of them anytime I've posted them on ATS. No worries.


Originally posted by Aggie Man
I deplore the way the "players" in these wars are labeled.

If you are a US/Allied player, then you are a "trooper", a "hero" (i.e., you get a name and a face)....and we are suppose to "support the troops"


Hero? Nah. "Troop" is the same as Soldier, Marine, Sailor or Airman. Take your pick, it's all the same.


Originally posted by Aggie Man
If you are anything else, then you are an "insurgent" or "collateral damage"....and they are merely causalities of war.


An insurgent is a smelly bearded guy that kills civilians because they are easier than going head to head with some pipehitters from the 173rd or 82nd.


Originally posted by Aggie Man
I absolutely support our troops...and their desire to come home. I do not, however, support the war nor any innocent death that results from it. If one is a troop in this fiasco and they desire to remain fighting, then I have no remorse for them in the event of their demise. I do not support the US government or military leadership in this endeavor. I don't have to pretend to approve of a war and support the killing of innocent civilians in order to support the troops.


Dude, the guys there fighting aren't intentionally killing civilians. Do you think they enjoy that, or enjoy the fact they can't engage the enemy because he's hiding in a crowded village or using human shields?



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 08:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by jerico65
Dude, the guys there fighting aren't intentionally killing civilians. Do you think they enjoy that, or enjoy the fact they can't engage the enemy because he's hiding in a crowded village or using human shields?


Yet civilians are being killed. How do we avoid that? Because we can't just go around killing folks for using a damn radio...pathetic!

If we can't kill the enemy w/o inflicting harm upon the innocent, it's a lost cause.

I find your care and concern for your fellow troops admirable! However, I find your lack of care and concern of civilian death nauseating.

Here's an idea...those folks are no threat to us in their current position. How about we rethink our strategy....maybe we bring our troops home and guard OUR borders...you know...the Atlantic, Pacific, Gulf, Canada & Mexico. The threat will cross those borders, not Afghanistan's.



posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 12:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aggie Man

I absolutely support our troops...and their desire to come home. I do not, however, support the war nor any innocent death that results from it. If one is a troop in this fiasco and they desire to remain fighting, then I have no remorse for them in the event of their demise. I do not support the US government or military leadership in this endeavor. I don't have to pretend to approve of a war and support the killing of innocent civilians in order to support the troops.


I wouldn't even go so far as to say I "support the troops." I'm generally indifferent to the troops. I support them about as much as I support police officers, trash men, and construction workers. I'm happy somebody took the job to do it so I don't have to, but I hardly support them just because they exist.



posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 02:15 AM
link   
What do you expect from Republicans, the Right Wingers want someone dead at all times, if it's not the wikileaks guy, it's the illegals, if not the illegals it's Muslims, if not the Muslims, it's someone else. Does this actually shock anyone?



posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 02:58 AM
link   
He also says he would've supported executing Daniel Ellsberg, the hero who released the Pentagon Papers helping end the Vietnam War. Though in his defense, he did hesitate when answering the question.

Disgusting.





[edit on 5-8-2010 by muftanan]



posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 04:30 AM
link   
this is quite disturbing to hear something like that being said.is this where
we are heading? my opinion is never surrender your freedom or liberties to the government.government is self serving and it does not create anything,but laws that restrict freedom.



posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Section31

Originally posted by ItIsMe
reply to post by Section31
 


Section31 I think all the leaks are justified.

I don't believe in the US at all and it's about time all the crap they have pulled and lied about comes to light.

Of course you do. Since your country gains from those leaks, you couldn't possible have an argument in support of the American people. Your philosophies would not align with those who are trying to protect their secrets.

You made my point. Thank you.


Were not talking about American People we are talking about the White House(like little mini Rome)

The White cares about Wall street which cares about Corporations, they do not care about the people. There laws which you will so obey are constantly getting rid of peoples freedom. I care about the people not Those who would oppress them.

If I say I don't believe in the US I am saying I don't believe in US politics or those who run it in the White House.

Wiki Leaks more power to you!



posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aggie Man
Yet civilians are being killed. How do we avoid that? Because we can't just go around killing folks for using a damn radio...pathetic!


This isn't some Afghan Homeboy with a boombox on his shoulder. Why else would someone be using a radio there? But, hey, we'll change the rules just for you. And when a Taliban Forward Observer calls in mortars and kills a bunch of GIs, you can tell their families.

I did notice that the Talibans use of human shields didn't raise an eyebrow on you.



Originally posted by Aggie Man
If we can't kill the enemy w/o inflicting harm upon the innocent, it's a lost cause.


We try. The Taliban doesn't.


Originally posted by Aggie Man
However, I find your lack of care and concern of civilian death nauseating.


I do have concerns over civilian deaths. You're just missing the point.


Originally posted by Aggie Man
Here's an idea...those folks are no threat to us in their current position. How about we rethink our strategy....maybe we bring our troops home and guard OUR borders...you know...the Atlantic, Pacific, Gulf, Canada & Mexico. The threat will cross those borders, not Afghanistan's.


How about using the Border Patrol like they should be used.



posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 02:54 PM
link   
reply to post by SUICIDEHK45
 


Ridiculous. Tyranny. People like that congressman should have their head on a post. For the people!

[edit on 5-8-2010 by darkbake]



posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 02:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by eNumbra
reply to post by IntastellaBurst
 


This is something too few people remember anymore.

We run the country; not them. We vote for whomever we believe will best represent us for the office's term. Ultimately, we are in charge. Congress needs to be reminded of this.

On the positive, being martyred for something like this is awfully suggestive of the kind of government we have. Perhaps people will take notice.

[edit on 8/3/2010 by eNumbra]


The time is coming to take notice. The government has gone too far. I just wonder if anyone can do anything. Other countries: THE US IS IN THE PROCESS OF BECOMING TOTALATARIAN. Take notice. From a citizen who does.

[edit on 5-8-2010 by darkbake]

[edit on 5-8-2010 by darkbake]




top topics



 
38
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join