Treated like "A caged animal" Bradley Manning Wikileaks Hearing.

page: 3
22
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 08:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by seeker1963
 


I don't need it quoted for me nor do I require lectures. I serve in the Army now. I also know what to do if a crime is committed and I find out about it. What Manning did is NOT the right way.


What is the right way to hold our government accountable for atrocious acts they otherwise cover up and sweep under the rug?

Where's the official form you fill out to request that the acting general release information and videos of our troops murdering civilians?

I'm not trying to be a jerk but I just don't any way to do what he did other than how he did it.




posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 08:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Bedlam
 



Pfft. I think it's less that he was following a noble cause to expose wrongdoing than that he was a whack job that was becoming more and more mentally unstable as time went by.

Pffttt. I think it's less that you really have a brain and more that you believe anything the Government says. Honestly...



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 09:08 PM
link   
reply to post by ChaoticOrder
 


Yes, yes, I suppose that all that counseling and the waffling of his superiors as to not deploy him due to mental instability was really because they perceived he was a Noble Warrior, proud and free, who was going to use his position as a PFC to right wrongs.

Or, he was nuts and should never have had that access. And shouldn't have had the opportunity to do what he did.

edit to add - given the volume of the material he stole, do you really REALLY think he was reading all of it and picking out all the evil crime laden ones, or did he just get on JWICS and start copying everything in sight that he had access to?

And given that he was already seeing the base counselor in 2009 before his deployment for emotional issues, they should have immediately pulled his clearance. So add the psych guy to the next cell down, too, IMHO. You ought not be able to be in therapy and have access except in the "gimme" areas - PTSD, marital counseling and civilian reintegration. But for having an emotional breakdown? Nope.
edit on 30-11-2012 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 09:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Bedlam
 


Regardless of whether or not he was mentally unstable, his actions still resulted in the exposure of horrendous war crimes, which otherwise would have remained hidden from the public. Who knows if he actually read everything he leaked, I highly doubt he did. He most likely was looking through the files and noticed those disturbing parts, and decided to take everything he could get in case there was more crucial information within the files. Regardless of his methodology or why he chose to do it, the end result is still the same; he exposed high level military corruption and caused a whole lot of murderers and criminals to get their panties in a twist, and for that he should be congratulated, not locked up in a small cage like an animal.



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 09:20 PM
link   
I have been a very long time lurker at ATS and have finally decided to register in order to join this discussion.

First off, I am torn on this issue- Truly I am. But I must say this...

Upon joining the Military and entering boot camp I was amazed at the shady (and probably Illegal ) activity I saw on a nearly daily basis. I saw Drill Sergeants pass recruits on the firing range who could not shoot (they actually jumped in the hole and shot the targets for them)- I saw Drill Sergeants "fix" certain peoples run times and puish up counts- I saw alot of #.

I was scared to death- The number crunchers who would be determining troop size and configuration assumed that

a) The Soldiers had been tested and could hit a min number of targets at a specific range

b) The Soldiers can run at a certain distance and speed

c) They have enough upper body Strength to actually pull themselves over a wall

-The FACT was, this was not the case. It was impossible NOT to pass- Well, anything... They talked about "Integrity" and other bull#, as they were passing people who could barely shoot and would be the very ones supposedly watching my rear.

-I assumed this MIGHT change upon entering AIT...It did not.

I could write Books (Full Novels) about the amount of lies, fraud, deception and general insanity which I saw just in boot...And this came from our "leaders".
Now, this was all shortly after 911 and I know they were trying to ramp up for War but their lies cost potentially (and probably did) cost lives. I am not sure if this is standard practice but it happened throughout my entire Military experience.

-And it got worse.

There are things I will never, ever commit to writing or even utter in words- BUT, the amount of Shadyness which came from the Top was unreal. Lies were encouraged and accepted in many circumstances- The Truth was usually frowned upon. If you reported something that wasnt "liked" - "they" would say "are you certain?"- "Yes Sir."- "Are you sure?"- "Yes, Sir?"- "You SAW this?"- "Yes Sir."- "are you sure you didnt see it happen THIS way...." and so on.

Very , very disheartening and disgusting. But I experienced this-

What manning did was clearly Illegal- but so is a good portion of accepted practices which are "unspoken", so are all the cover ups and the War crimes.



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
reply to post by Bedlam
 


Who knows if he actually read everything he leaked, I highly doubt he did. He most likely was looking through the files and noticed those disturbing parts, and decided to take everything he could get in case there was more crucial information within the files.


Or, he deems himself a "hacker" (which he does) and decided during a fit of pique at his boyfriend that he'd just show everyone by stealing a bunch of data and posting it in public.

And the other issue is the "war crimes" thing - a term that many people throw around with as little understanding as "fascist". Who says any of it IS a war crime? Have you seen any war crimes trials start over this? Or is it more that you are of the type that says "War is a crime, therefore anything I don't care for associated with the military is a war crime"? The term has been reduced to near meaninglessness by that sort of thing.

Also, admitting that he likely didn't even read it isn't really helping the "noble warrior for peace" argument. And I doubt he did.
edit on 30-11-2012 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 09:26 PM
link   
Anyone who still thinks there own military(usa) wouldn't firing on there own citizens when the time comes, should really read the post by military members. It seems like the oath and doing things in the proper military order come before doing the right thing.
Do people see how disconnected and differently aligned military members are to regular citizens. They already disagree with us and the # hasn't even hit the fan yet.



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 09:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Cuervo
 


You go to your chain of command until you get to the commanding general. If that doesn't work you go to CID. They WILL do something about it. After you go to CID, go across the road to the IG. They'll wanna know why things aren't being handled at company or battalion levels.

People will go to jail. They WILL be fired.
And they will do so in a manner that doesn't destroy mission essential information.

You have to be in the military to understand. There is a way to handle stuff like this. War Crimes are covered up only when no one decides to do anything about it.

If I were PFC Manning I would be making official statements and filing official charges. Not betraying my country and everyone who wears my uniform to look like a hero to ignorant people on the internet.



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 09:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Bixxi3
 


That would be an illegal order.

You have no idea what you're talking about. You assume so much because you know so little.



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 09:33 PM
link   
Bradley Manning chose to be treated like "A caged animal".

He did that when he broke the rules every Military Member swears by.

I don't understand how people can see it.
edit on 30-11-2012 by sonnny1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 09:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by DarKPenguiN

I saw Drill Sergeants pass recruits on the firing range who could not shoot (they actually jumped in the hole and shot the targets for them)- I saw Drill Sergeants "fix" certain peoples run times and puish up counts- I saw alot of #.


(sheepishly holds up hand)

I have modified PT scores for people myself. Generally for older NCOs about to retire, or with injuries I knew they'd get over. Some of what you're talking about there is applying judgement to the situation - the Army doesn't play if the numbers are noticed. It's a judgement call at times whether you allow something to be noticed.

Same with one of the other examples you stated - if you had gotten into a small bit of a physical conflict with, say, the E5 over you, as an acting platoon sergeant I might, after evaluating all the info, decide that I don't want the E5 to press the issue because he was being a dick and sort of got what he had coming. In that case, I would make clear to the E5 that I didn't want a solid statement that you had shoved him, for example, by questioning his interpretation a few times. He would, unless he was a fool, get the idea and back down from his statement. I would then make sure that YOU thought you had screwed up beyond belief by doing that instead of resolving it with me, and try to avoid NJP or god forbid getting a formal complaint going.

It's a way to filter out the small crap. Generally when it's minor, and you can deal with it by teaching instead of pulling out the Hammer of Justice and swinging it around. What's not noticed officially can be dealt with personally.

When that breaks down is when patterns of problems aren't dealt with, or the one trying to handle it internally is less interested in unit cohesion and fair dealings with his men and more interested in making sure his stats look good by not having ANY issues.



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 09:38 PM
link   
reply to post by projectvxn
 

Hey there is alot i don't know about, i'll admit that. But you seem to live in this perfect military world were everyone does what they say and are true to there word.
But I'm guessing when your in the middle of know where in the middle east. And taking humiliating photos of POWs seems to be encouraged or just ignored by your commanding officer. You'd might look for help else where. When theres a "you either with us or against us" attitude. And im not trying to pull this stuff out of my ass. I know something like this happened in the army i believe and to some soldiers they didn't feel like they could get it resolved without fearing for the lives.
I agree he isn't a hero though. The last real heroes died in WW2, they fought for freedom.
edit on 30-11-2012 by Bixxi3 because: (no reason given)
edit on 30-11-2012 by Bixxi3 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 09:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by Bixxi3
 


That would be an illegal order.

You have no idea what you're talking about. You assume so much because you know so little.


I would have to disagree (assuming you are talking about firing upon Citizens if ordered)- I think many would without question.

I didnt see a plethora of people of Integrity in my experience. I saw a "gang" (similar to the "boys in blue")- Right from the recruiting office my Recruiter actually got me the stuff to pass my drug test (and told me how to answer all the questions)- At MEPS you could tell many. many peoples recruiters got them exact same "cleaner" since our pee looked like Gatorade (Florescent green).

It was lie after lie after lie so long as that it made things better than the "truth"- And the quality of people (with exceptions) was very, very low. Hell, Theft was a HUGE issue through my entire experience. If they will steal from their Brothers in Arms...

No. I think most WOULD fire on citizens if it was ordered. I hope it never comes to that but the Military isnt filled with "white hats"... Hell, they are just people (generally low income) doing a job. Some for Pay, some for excitement and some for college Money. They are kids for the most part, playing "call of Duty" with little regard for what is Constitutional or not.

-That is my opinion.



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 09:53 PM
link   
Yes Bradley Manning is a traitor .. confirmed !
i cant deny that ..

i have a little fictional role story for you guys :

once upon a time .. there was 2 brothers living in a very rich and big familly
that have a good reputation in the whole town
the familly is reputed to been always helpfull with the mayor
making hospital donations and food to the poor famillies etc
but they have a big secret and the 2 brothers obviously know about their familly secret
the parent are canibals and murderers and steal money from the town in secret
the younger brother is against those atrocities but cant do much at the moment
and the older brother support and help in the killings

which one you are ... The younger or older brother ?
if you choose to be the older brother .. then the story will continu on and on and on

but if you choose to be the younger brother .. it give you 2 path .. 2 choices

A) Say nothing to remain loyal and patriot to his familly
and eventualy be part of the conspiracy himself yrs after

B) Denounce his entire familly
to stop the killings and be at the same time a traitor to his familly forever
but a patriot to huminaty

Time to decide now !

Bradler manning decided to be a traitor to his familly yes
and be that little brother that choose option B

of course if the familly find the little brother they will put him in cage like an animal
and they will make him pay each day by humiliating him with several beatings a day
for endangering the familly reputation and plans
edit on 11/30/2012 by Ben81 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 10:00 PM
link   
This fool was supposed to keep his suckhole shut for a reason. When you blab you can cost people their lives, as in DEAD.

He's a snivelling little parasitic snitch who endangered men and women in the line of fire.

No sympathy here.

TRAITOR.



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 10:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Bixxi3
 


At what point did I give the indication of a "perfect military world "?

Do you not supposed that I have been in the military long enough to know there are some crappy people wearing my uniform?

I assure you there are. But you don't deal with them by doing something wrong. You MUST keep your promises even if others do not.

edit on 30-11-2012 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 10:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Ben81
 


Life ain't simple yes or no decisions.

Obviously you are trying to use a rather lame logic trap. Who wouldn't want to stop the cannibalism and murder?

That's why we have the resources we do. To make it possible for the criminals to be weeded out. The army I belong to puts the welfare of soldiers first. Sometimes that means putting a few out or in jail.



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 10:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
reply to post by Bedlam
 


Regardless of whether or not he was mentally unstable, his actions still resulted in the exposure of horrendous war crimes, which otherwise would have remained hidden from the public. Who knows if he actually read everything he leaked, I highly doubt he did. He most likely was looking through the files and noticed those disturbing parts, and decided to take everything he could get in case there was more crucial information within the files. Regardless of his methodology or why he chose to do it, the end result is still the same; he exposed high level military corruption and caused a whole lot of murderers and criminals to get their panties in a twist, and for that he should be congratulated, not locked up in a small cage like an animal.


The argument of 'Ends justifies the Means' is precisely what created the situations Manning found himself seemingly needing to break his Oath and his Honor to shovel out the back door. The Military, far too often, uses that very logic itself. So, he should be justified in committing crimes to report them? I'm totally lost on the logic of becoming what you're supposedly against, as this clearly is to use that rationalization.

There is still a point missed and it's a big one. Any number of creative justifications can be used in the betrayal of the Iraq and Afghanistan action reports. Antiwar people have had a ball doing that since he was first busted. None of that covers his release of the State Department stuff. Who was he avenging by destroying the diplomatic option between nations? Who was he harming? I'd say he harmed peace and it's chances to work very directly on that second half of what he dumped.

However someone justifies the first half, the second one doesn't wash on any level. He replaced law and his oath with his own warped sense of right and wrong and he did immeasurable damage by what he couldn't have even known to take into consideration, given how much he dumped.
No dice on seeing him as anything good.

edit on 30-11-2012 by Wrabbit2000 because: minor correction.



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 10:15 PM
link   
reply to post by DarKPenguiN
 


I saw DSs do similar stuff. Basic is a joke these days and since the beginning of the Iraq war the army has let lot of dbags become ncos. I don't like it either. Because it produces murders who kill civilians and self aggrandizing traitors like Manning.
edit on 30-11-2012 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 10:21 PM
link   
"The degree of civilization in a society can be judged by entering its prisons."
--Dostoyevsky





new topics
top topics
 
22
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join