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

page: 5
22
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 02:18 PM
link   
Its funny we brand people throughout history as War Criminals...e.g Officers or Soldiers working in the SS following orders and yet if one of those officers or soldiers broke ranks and gave the Allies information about the evil acts they had performed he would have been called a Hero..... Yet one of your own blows the whistle on your own evil acts and yet you call him Traitor.
American pride outweighing Logical Justice... I'm glad you won the war of Independance, it saves me being ashamed.
edit on 1-12-2012 by DreamerOracle because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 03:06 PM
link   
Free Bradley Manning. Prosecute Bush and Cheney...



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by projectvxn
I'm in an aviation unit. I fly as a crew chief on an air assault Blackhawk every day. I know a lot of air cavalry guys in Kiowa helps and Apaches. If this happened in my unit they would come back in handcuffs.
edit on 30-11-2012 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)
edit on 30-11-2012 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)


So if this did happen in your unit and they didn't come back in handcuffs, what would you do?

Then say that you did report it to higher ups and still nothing happened, what would you do?



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 03:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Kram09
 


I think soldiers decide not to do anything because they are either complicit or are gutless.

If I knew of someone in my unit killing civilians wantonly I would turn his ass in before you could blink.

If my command didn't do anything about it I would bring in external sources like CID, and IG.

The fact is criminal acts like those being described HURT the efforts of the Army. They don't help. If we're trying to end an insurgency what good would it do to fuel it by letting crimes be committed?

I fully understand that too many times crimes have been allowed to go unpunished. But that doesn't mean all of us in uniform approve of or would allow such crimes to continue unchecked if we could do something to prevent the crime or punish the offender.

The hyperbolic notions people have, and the characterizations being made of those of us who serve are not a productive means to understand why I believe what I believe about Manning, his actions, and the actions of those he exposed. It would be really helpful to try to understand me rather than trying to paint me as a Nazi or as another user alluded, as a man without morals who would gladly kill a nursery full of kids.
edit on 1-12-2012 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 03:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by lucidclouds

Originally posted by projectvxn
I'm in an aviation unit. I fly as a crew chief on an air assault Blackhawk every day. I know a lot of air cavalry guys in Kiowa helps and Apaches. If this happened in my unit they would come back in handcuffs.
edit on 30-11-2012 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)
edit on 30-11-2012 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)


So if this did happen in your unit and they didn't come back in handcuffs, what would you do?

Then say that you did report it to higher ups and still nothing happened, what would you do?



I'd go straight to CID and IG with whatever evidence I had.



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 03:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by projectvxn

Originally posted by lucidclouds

Originally posted by projectvxn
I'm in an aviation unit. I fly as a crew chief on an air assault Blackhawk every day. I know a lot of air cavalry guys in Kiowa helps and Apaches. If this happened in my unit they would come back in handcuffs.
edit on 30-11-2012 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)
edit on 30-11-2012 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)


So if this did happen in your unit and they didn't come back in handcuffs, what would you do?

Then say that you did report it to higher ups and still nothing happened, what would you do?




I'd go straight to CID and IG with whatever evidence I had.


And if still nothing happened what would you do?
edit on 1-12-2012 by lucidclouds because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 03:33 PM
link   
reply to post by lucidclouds
 


You're assuming nothing would happen.

This isn't Hollywood, where you're going to have to break all the rules and play a damned spy game to get justice. The Army isn't homogeneous. There is independence in CID and IG. Their job is to police the Army. The only way that nothing would happen is if they were not involved. I guarantee that every crime that has been committed, that has gone unpunished, is a result of not letting CID, IG, and the MPs in on it.

edit on 1-12-2012 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 03:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by lucidclouds
 


You're assuming nothing would happen.

This isn't Hollywood. Where you're going to have to break all the rules and play a damned spy game to get justice. The Army isn't homogeneous. There is independence in CID and IG. Their job is to police the Army. The only way that nothing would happen is if they were not involved. I guarantee that every crime that has been committed, that has gone unpunished, is a result of not letting CID, IG, and the MPs in on it.



I get that, I'm just wondering how far you would go. Thats all.

And I understand that there is independence in CID and IG, but they are still under the U.S. government.

It makes a big difference on peoples opinion when they see actual video of how war looks. In this case it would be the collateral murder video. Vietnam footage got to people emotionally.

So my question, not sure if you have the answer, is would the video be brought to the public if handled by CID? Or would they deal with the problem as quietly as possible.

My opinion is that people have the right to see what their government is doing, and if their government is lying about the number of civilian casualties it should be brought to light. Who is going to do that? The CID and IG are under the U.S. government.



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 03:58 PM
link   
reply to post by lucidclouds
 


I get it.

Its the government so there are no honest and good people to deal with these issues.

It's a lose/lose situation with you people. life is hopeless and the whole world is evil. Got it. Im done here.



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by lucidclouds
 


I get it.

Its the government so there are no honest and good people to deal with these issues.

It's a lose/lose situation with you people. life is hopeless and the whole world is evil. Got it. Im done here.


Is that what you got from my post? Thats a sad cop out.

You can't act like they are always truthful, they lied about the civilian casualties in Iraq. They lied about weapons of mass destruction.

I know there are honest and good people, but the system is set up so they can do very little on the inside.

edit on 1-12-2012 by lucidclouds because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 04:04 PM
link   
Everyone is talking about how he broke an oath and contract...well what about the people he exposed and the oaths they took??!??!

So it's ok for them to break their oaths to commit crimes yet he does it to expose the crimes being committed by these people and you all want him hung basically. I fail to see the logic in that.

Should he have kept his mouth shut? Probably but maybe he really thought he was doing something good by exposing what he has seen or knew.

I know a few people who are disgusted with the branch of the military they are in because of the stuff they see going on and there is nothing they can do about it. Just because someone is military or some high official doesn't excuse them from committing crimes nor does it excuse them from being complete scum. Just cause you wear a badge or have a title doesn't make you special.

I don't really have an opinion on this but I think people need to look at the people he has exposed and remember they TOO took oaths!
edit on 12/1/2012 by mblahnikluver because: spelling



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 04:14 PM
link   
......................
edit on 1-12-2012 by ker2010 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 06:20 PM
link   
reply to post by The0nlytruth
 


That is why it is called "jail" Einstein... -_-



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 06:28 PM
link   
reply to post by mblahnikluver
 


Except he gave that info to WikiLeaks, which is probably funded by the CIA/FBI.

And he probably used TOR. Which is funded by the military and CIA.

It's just a mess. How do we know what information he actually 'leaked'? I can't tell, can you?



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 06:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by projectvxn
Yeah that's called jail moron. (not you op)

I hope they make an example of this traitor.

I know on ATS violating your oath of enlistment is a cool thing to do. You people only care about oaths when it benefits your cause and could care less about it when whatever wrong was committed is a means to your end.
edit on 30-11-2012 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



His oath was to protect and fight for the american people.
Not to co-operate in lying to them in a effort make their government look all pretty and holy while they commit war crimes behind the peoples backs.

Only a traitor of his own would do that.



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 06:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by SymbolicLogic
reply to post by The0nlytruth
 


That is why it is called "jail" Einstein... -_-


Except in the case of manning his condition has been described in court as "akin to torture" which of course looks like a gentle admittance that it was just that, torture,



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 06:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Bedlam
 


You actually believe that stuff about gender identity?

He wouldn't be able to maintain clearance due to an unhappy ex girlfriend, let alone serious mental issues.



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 07:27 PM
link   
reply to post by projectvxn
 


You speak of oathes... What about the oath to uphold the constitution.. IMHO the oath to uphold the United States constitution trumps all other oathes. What Manning did was expose the facts on how truly unjust and unconstitutional these wars are, not to mention the lies surrounding the reasons they invaded. REASONS THEY INVADED!!!! Let that settle in for a minute.

Do you believe their reasons for invadading? You don't think any of the intel was fabricated?
Did you know about certain evidence being destroyed when building 7 was demolished?

Lives in danger??? When you sign up to fight bad guys in other countries, you have just put your own life in danger. How about the lives of the people whos countries are being invaded??? How many civilians should have to die for every combatant killed??? Should war be indefinate? Is the war on terror being won or are more people being terrorised?

At the rate things are going it would seem our government is insuring our grandkids will have an enemy to fight!



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 07:38 PM
link   
reply to post by projectvxn
 


Yes Manning took an oath but I can't say I don't regret what he did, yes it was wrong but on the other hand it is our right to know what our soldiers are being used for and it's not Kosher, therefore it's not what he signed up. When our soldiers are doing immoral acts, where do we draw the line? By saying that, I believe Manning's real motives was the fact that he was bullied time and time again simply because he was gay and a little turd, his superiors did nothing and he wanted revenge.

Whatever his ulterior motive was, no superiors of any organisation be it public or private likes a whistleblower.



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 07:48 PM
link   
reply to post by chuckMFd
 


Anyone who takes the oath and is serious about it... wouldn't go to basic training.





new topics
top topics
 
22
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join