Bradley Manning Sentenced To 35 Years:

[Vox]

Not at all.... I think Assange is an opportunistic whore... Manning on the other hand is just a moron.

What's your point? That a doctored video means the shit they released is of no relevance?

That's fucking absurd. Your thought processes are suspect, seriously suspect.

yes. it is NOT a "war crime" if it is doctored to make it look like it is.
Period.

Ok, so what is your fucking point, or, do you even have one?

did you read the thread, or are you really a cretin?

assange worshiper( takeastepback) claimed that doctored video is a proof for a "war crime".

I said it is NONSENSE - which it is - and provided links to prove it has been known for at least 2.5 years it is a fake proof.

you jumped in the middle of the exchange as if you do not know how to read - and comprehend - or are you too lazy?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

yes. it is NOT a "war crime" if it is doctored to make it look like it is.
Period.

Ok, so what is your fucking point, or, do you even have one?

did you read the thread, or are you really a cretin?

assange worshiper( takeastepback) claimed that doctored video is a proof for a "war crime".

I said it is NONSENSE - which it is - and provided links to prove it has been known for at least 2.5 years it is a fake proof.

you jumped in the middle of the exchange as if you do not know how to read - and comprehend - or are you too lazy?

You do realize that video has nothing at all to do with him being sentenced to 35 years.. right?

 

[Vox]

Ok, so what is your fucking point, or, do you even have one?

did you read the thread, or are you really a cretin?

assange worshiper( takeastepback) claimed that doctored video is a proof for a "war crime".

I said it is NONSENSE - which it is - and provided links to prove it has been known for at least 2.5 years it is a fake proof.

you jumped in the middle of the exchange as if you do not know how to read - and comprehend - or are you too lazy?

You do realize that video has nothing at all to do with him being sentenced to 35 years.. right?

where the heck did I said anything about that?

are you really stupid or too lazy to read back?
I simply said there were NO WAR CRIMES PROOFS by the released material - and there is NONE - and TASB posted this doctored video as a proof, that there are "war crimes"

the doctored video is not and can not be a proof of "war crimes" - which there are none.

The video was doctored by Assange himself.

Why the heck are you dragging manning into this, or it is too hard for you to understand?

so I explained it above

 

[saved]

Bradley Manning video
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UFFkcCh-pCc]I am Bradley Manning (full HD) - YouTube[/ame]

 

[BreezeWood]

Time served was enough if not excessive.

what Manning did took courage without much to gain for himself.

 

[deltex1]

It's Chelsea....man you peeps are insensitive .

 

[Kondor3]

Manning refused to plead guilty in exchange for lesser sentence

Published time: August 22, 2013 01:50

US Army Private First Class Bradley Manning arrives alongside military officials at a US military court facility to hear his sentence in his trial at Fort Meade, Maryland on August 21, 2013. A sentencing decision will be announced later Wednesday.(AFP Photo / Saul Loeb)

Bradley Manning was offered and refused a deal from US military prosecutors that would have seen him serve a shorter sentence than the 35 years he was given Wednesday in exchange for a guilty plea.

Manning’s lead defense attorney, David Coombs, announced during a press conference that an offer was previously on the table.

“Part of that would be to cooperate in testifying, so obviously we didn’t do that,” he said.

He refused to elaborate any further, citing a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) with government prosecutors.

But in December 2011, Coombs suggested that the government was attempting to force Manning into a plea bargain and use him as a witness against Julian Assange - the WikiLeaks founder who published the 700,000 diplomatic cables, battlefield reports, and combat video disclosed by Manning.

“If the Department of Justice got their way, they would get a plea deal in this case, and my client would be named as one of the witnesses to go after Julian Assange,” Coombs said in court.

...

“The idea that WikiLeaks or Julian Assange or anyone else forced my client to do anything, or asked him to do anything, is just pure fabrication,” Coombs said after Manning’s sentence.

Prosecutors equated Assange as a co-conspirator throughout the Manning trial. The whistleblower’s lawyer, Michael Ratner, told reporters that he believes there could be a sealed indictment against the Ecuadorian embassy’s seemingly permanent resident, who has also been charged with sexual assault in Sweden.

...

Coombs said that Manning, for his part, was stoic as the sentence was read aloud. The 25-year-old, who will serve his time at Fort Leavenworth penitentiary in Kansas, was actually comforting the defense team after his fate was announced.

“He looks to me and he says, ‘It’s OK. It’s alright. I know you did your best. I’m going to be OK. I’m going to get through this,’” Coombs said.

Coombs and his fellow attorneys plan to petition US President Obama to pardon Manning, or commute his sentence.

Manning refused to plead guilty in exchange for lesser sentence ? RT USA

==================================

Political activist?

Legitimate whistleblower?

Patriot?

Well-meaning, naive, dumb-assed, self-appointed idealist judge of right and wrong?

High-functioning mental defective?

Damager of the United States military the and diplomatic corps and the Nation at large?

Betrayer of his oath and his comrades?

Traitor?

I dunno.

 

[deltex1]

Chelsea Manning video
I am Bradley Manning (full HD) - YouTube

I am weeping at the video testimony of these experts on treason and treachery.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

did you read the thread, or are you really a cretin?

assange worshiper( takeastepback) claimed that doctored video is a proof for a "war crime".

I said it is NONSENSE - which it is - and provided links to prove it has been known for at least 2.5 years it is a fake proof.

you jumped in the middle of the exchange as if you do not know how to read - and comprehend - or are you too lazy?

You do realize that video has nothing at all to do with him being sentenced to 35 years.. right?

where the heck did I said anything about that?

are you really stupid or too lazy to read back?
I simply said there were NO WAR CRIMES PROOFS by the released material - and there is NONE - and TASB posted this doctored video as a proof, that there are "war crimes"

the doctored video is not and can not be a proof of "war crimes" - which there are none.

The video was doctored by Assange himself.

Why the heck are you dragging manning into this, or it is too hard for you to understand?

so I explained it above

Oh, so your posts have nothing to do with the title of the thread? Are you always this big a cementhead?

 

[Vox]

You do realize that video has nothing at all to do with him being sentenced to 35 years.. right?

where the heck did I said anything about that?

are you really stupid or too lazy to read back?
I simply said there were NO WAR CRIMES PROOFS by the released material - and there is NONE - and TASB posted this doctored video as a proof, that there are "war crimes"

the doctored video is not and can not be a proof of "war crimes" - which there are none.

The video was doctored by Assange himself.

Why the heck are you dragging manning into this, or it is too hard for you to understand?

so I explained it above

Oh, so your posts have nothing to do with the title of the thread? Are you always this big a cementhead?

fuck off, dumbass

 

[MikeK]

Not at all.... I think Assange is an opportunistic whore... Manning on the other hand is just a moron.

I might agree with that assessment. But it has nothing to do with the end result of their actions, which I believe will ultimately benefit the American People.

More specifically, something menacingly insidious has been going on at the higher levels of our government. An Orwellian transformation is taking place in which our government has assumed a position of unaccountability for its actions. This position is facilitated via a veil of arbitrary secrecy. So I really don't care that Assange is "an opportunistic whore" and Manning is "just a moron." I'm concerned with what they did. And until I am made aware of some specific harm their actions have caused I am grateful for their revelations.

Well, ok, that is at least a reasoned response. Personally however, I really don't want these kinds of people, including Snowden, taking it upon themselves to just release this kind of stuff. There are processes that can and should be gone through if one feels there is wrongdoing.

Just releasing classified info for all the world to see ain't the way to go.

And for the record... I'm neither of the "hero" or "traitor" mindset... yet.

This situation is indeed a quandary.

I have the choice of either praising or condemning what Manning and Snowden did. If I praise it I am approving of future revelations of valid military and political secrets. But if I condemn it I am approving of the unimpeded rise of Big Brother government -- which means the end of the America we know and love.

I do not admire the persons of Julian Assange or Bradley Manning. But I firmly acknowledge the importance of what they have done, which is to effectively call attention to the malignant use of our military for one thing. At the bottom line I really don't care that Manning's motivation was that of a pouting homosexual and that Assange is a sleazy opportunist. I am concerned with what they did -- not why they did it. And what they did is not something any stereotypical good guys would do.

Snowden is a different story. He is neither a pouting homosexual nor a sleazy opportunist. He is far too intelligent to not have understood the risk he was taking and I'm not aware of any self-serving motive he might have had to do what he did. So far his punishment has been the loss of a comfortable existence and acquiring the status of a man without a country. And while I cannot advocate handing over classified government files to the media the value of Snowden's revelations cannot be denied.

What I am saying here is those good people we see marching with the "Free Bradley Manning" and "Snowden Is A Hero" signs are actually not celebrating those individual persons but rather their respective actions in pulling the covers off an ascending Big Brother.

The question now is what are we going to do about it? Are we going to allow government to persecute Manning and Snowden while ignoring the crimes and malfeasances they have exposed at great cost to themselves?

 

[Vox]

This situation is indeed a quandary.

I have the choice of either praising or condemning what Manning and Snowden did. If I praise it I am approving of future revelations of valid military and political secrets. But if I condemn it I am approving of the unimpeded rise of Big Brother government -- which means the end of the America we know and love.

I do not admire the persons of Julian Assange or Bradley Manning. But I firmly acknowledge the importance of what they have done, which is to effectively call attention to the malignant use of our military for one thing. At the bottom line I really don't care that Manning's motivation was that of a pouting homosexual and that Assange is a sleazy opportunist. I am concerned with what they did -- not why they did it. And what they did is not something any stereotypical good guys would do.

Snowden is a different story. He is neither a pouting homosexual nor a sleazy opportunist. He is far too intelligent to not have understood the risk he was taking and I'm not aware of any self-serving motive he might have had to do what he did. So far his punishment has been the loss of a comfortable existence and acquiring the status of a man without a country. And while I cannot advocate handing over classified government files to the media the value of Snowden's revelations cannot be denied.

What I am saying here is those good people we see marching with the "Free Bradley Manning" and "Snowden Is A Hero" signs are actually not celebrating those individual persons but rather their respective actions in pulling the covers off an ascending Big Brother.

The question now is what are we going to do about it? Are we going to allow government to persecute Manning and Snowden while ignoring the crimes and malfeasances they have exposed at great cost to themselves?

can not agree more.
But I do not think Manniing and Assange are even close to Snowden - both have had petty motives and did not expose anything of the value to the public ( at least American). contrary to Snowden.

Assange simply lied for his own agenda.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

did you read the thread, or are you really a cretin?

assange worshiper( takeastepback) claimed that doctored video is a proof for a "war crime".

I said it is NONSENSE - which it is - and provided links to prove it has been known for at least 2.5 years it is a fake proof.

you jumped in the middle of the exchange as if you do not know how to read - and comprehend - or are you too lazy?

You do realize that video has nothing at all to do with him being sentenced to 35 years.. right?

where the heck did I said anything about that?

are you really stupid or too lazy to read back?
I simply said there were NO WAR CRIMES PROOFS by the released material - and there is NONE - and TASB posted this doctored video as a proof, that there are "war crimes"

the doctored video is not and can not be a proof of "war crimes" - which there are none.

The video was doctored by Assange himself.

Why the heck are you dragging manning into this, or it is too hard for you to understand?

so I explained it above

Go watch the full version and read the documents provided. I posted THAT version because it pulled up first. Had I known I posted the infomercial version, I would have dug deeper. Regardless, that is ONE example of war crimes. It doesn't really matter though, does it? As long as you're on the side that's "winning".

Blow them all the fuck up. Who cares...

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Note to confused individuals. If you are unsure of who or what you are, please don't join our military.Please don't force the military which is there to defend our country, to have to deal with your confusion and your personal issues.They are not there to provide you with your own bathroom, your own baracks and showers, your own special treatment. They are there to prepare for war when necessary, not there to help you find yourself, or pay for your sex change surgeries.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Or war when completely unnecessary. We do it for the interests.

 

[Kondor3]

Or war when completely unnecessary. We do it for the interests.

That is an interesting - and tempting - theory, but, personally, I disagree.

Frankly, I'm far more ready to believe that we undertake a mixture of good and bad wars, sensible and stupid wars, preemptive and remedial wars, and wars that break out due to our foolish choices in alliances and global trade routes and supply lines and strategic interests.

There is no escaping the fact that our own Military-Industrial complex oftentimes cashes-in at such times but we tolerate them because they keep the arms and ammunition flowing when we need them, so, in a very real sense, we feed that Beast rather than it steering us.

And there is no escaping the fact that Big Oil and Big Business (outside the M-I Complex framework) also oftentimes benefit from war, but, then again, so do their stockholders, and employees, and subcontractors, and communities, and all of that.

Rightly or Wrongly, I see the profiteering of both Big Business and the Military-Industrial Complex as merely a symptom of a broader problem, namely: We have long-since become both a legitimate World Policeman AND a warlike self-appointed Vigilante Posse that reaches for its guns at the drop of a hat and with varying degrees of provocation or justification.

I believe that we - the American People - are even more guilty than these Godless, soulless corporations, because it's all being done in our name, and we choose not to expend the effort to assert a better and effective control over what is being done in our name.

It's not the corporations' fault - or at least, not in the main.

They're just the rash that our World Policeman Disease has broken-out with.

The People are the only salve that is going to cure that rash.

And there is no sign in sight, that The People are ready to assert that better control.

Some of our wars have been downright necessary and unavoidable and as close to 'righteous' as warfare can come.

Some of our wars have been downright bullshit, or a mix of legitimacy and bullshit.

The trick seems to lie in cultivating an ability to realistically and objectively tell the difference, and not to throw the baby out with the bathwater (not to cripple our much-needed ability to make war effectively, by intimating that all our wars are of the bullshit variety).

Or so it seems to this observer.

 

[Vox]

You do realize that video has nothing at all to do with him being sentenced to 35 years.. right?

where the heck did I said anything about that?

are you really stupid or too lazy to read back?
I simply said there were NO WAR CRIMES PROOFS by the released material - and there is NONE - and TASB posted this doctored video as a proof, that there are "war crimes"

the doctored video is not and can not be a proof of "war crimes" - which there are none.

The video was doctored by Assange himself.

Why the heck are you dragging manning into this, or it is too hard for you to understand?

so I explained it above

Go watch the full version and read the documents provided. I posted THAT version because it pulled up first. Had I known I posted the infomercial version, I would have dug deeper. Regardless, that is ONE example of war crimes. It doesn't really matter though, does it? As long as you're on the side that's "winning".

Blow them all the fuck up. Who cares...

I watched BOTH in 2011 and I read commentaries on BOTH.

The undoctored video DOES NOT prove to be the proof of any "war crime" - there are too many gaps, lapses and indistinguishable details to claim that.

and that is the reason it was made up - to fit Assange's lying agenda.

There are no "war crimes" in released materials by Wikileaks.

 

[Pete7469]

Collateral Murder - Wikileaks - Iraq - YouTube

Uploaded on Apr 3, 2010

Wikileaks has obtained and decrypted this previously unreleased video footage from a US Apache helicopter in 2007. It shows Reuters journalist Namir Noor-Eldeen, driver Saeed Chmagh, and several others as the Apache shoots and kills them in a public square in Eastern Baghdad. They are apparently assumed to be insurgents. After the initial shooting, an unarmed group of adults and children in a minivan arrives on the scene and attempts to transport the wounded. They are fired upon as well. The official statement on this incident initially listed all adults as insurgents and claimed the US military did not know how the deaths ocurred. Wikileaks released this video with transcripts and a package of supporting documents on April 5th 2010 on Collateral Murder

here is one of many, Dullard.

That's not a "war crime". It's a fog of war incident. That Apache crew had a job to do, they didn't know who was who, they had a target to take out, and they made certain it was neutralized.

War Crimes are deliberate mass murder of civilian innocents. Our country goes through extraordinary lengths not to even damage property during combat operations.

I've "been there, done that", so please don't insult me by insisting these incidents that the little pillow biter "exposed" are the result of deliberate actions to maim and kill non-combatants without regard and malice aforethought.

Furthermore the information leaked by this little traitor were not limited to incidents such as this. There were reams of secret information, and embarrassing shit that served no purpose other than to malign our officials. As incompetent as some of them might be. He did not take any consideration of the content of the information he released. He was seeking revenge, plain and simple.

 

[Katzndogz]

No war crimes were exposed. No one was exposed and prosecuted for having committed a war crime. The war crimes were violations of whatever passes for moral judgment in manning's pea brain. Under the mandates of individual judgments of morality, manning could be killed for being gay.

 

[Vox]

Collateral Murder - Wikileaks - Iraq - YouTube

Uploaded on Apr 3, 2010

Wikileaks has obtained and decrypted this previously unreleased video footage from a US Apache helicopter in 2007. It shows Reuters journalist Namir Noor-Eldeen, driver Saeed Chmagh, and several others as the Apache shoots and kills them in a public square in Eastern Baghdad. They are apparently assumed to be insurgents. After the initial shooting, an unarmed group of adults and children in a minivan arrives on the scene and attempts to transport the wounded. They are fired upon as well. The official statement on this incident initially listed all adults as insurgents and claimed the US military did not know how the deaths ocurred. Wikileaks released this video with transcripts and a package of supporting documents on April 5th 2010 on Collateral Murder

here is one of many, Dullard.

That's not a "war crime". It's a fog of war incident. That Apache crew had a job to do, they didn't know who was who, they had a target to take out, and they made certain it was neutralized.

War Crimes are deliberate mass murder of civilian innocents. Our country goes through extraordinary lengths not to even damage property during combat operations.

I've "been there, done that", so please don't insult me by insisting these incidents that the little pillow biter "exposed" are the result of deliberate actions to maim and kill non-combatants without regard and malice aforethought.

Furthermore the information leaked by this little traitor were not limited to incidents such as this. There were reams of secret information, and embarrassing shit that served no purpose other than to malign our officials. As incompetent as some of them might be. He did not take any consideration of the content of the information he released. He was seeking revenge, plain and simple.

it is doctored video.

there were no "war crimes" proved by wikileaks release.