Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 1 votes

Bradley Manning court testimony leaked


  • Please log in to reply
108 replies to this topic

#1    questionmark

questionmark

    Cinicus Magnus

  • Member
  • 36,348 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece and Des Moines, IA

  • In a flat world there is an explanation to everything.

Posted 13 March 2013 - 03:25 PM

The Telegraph said:



A leaked recording of Bradley Manning's testimony in a military court has given the public its first chance to hear the young soldier justifying his decision to leak hundreds of thousands of secret documents to WikiLeaks.



In the one-hour seven-minute recording from a court hearing in late February, Private First Class Manning describes how he wanted to expose the "bloodlust" of US forces fighting in the Middle East and how he had a "clear conscience" after helping to engineer the largest intelligence leak in American history.


The tape was released by the Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF), a transparency group that said it wanted to counter the "extreme government secrecy" surrounding Pfc Manning's court martial.

Read more


A skeptic is a well informed believer and a pessimist a well informed optimist
The most dangerous views of the world are from those who have never seen it. ~ Alexander v. Humboldt
If you want to bulls**t me please do it so that it takes me more than a minute to find out

about me

#2    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Closed
  • 8,732 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 13 March 2013 - 08:35 PM

Manning provided a great service to his country by revealing the crimes of its government.

By risking his life to expose such crimes, he joins the company of other brave men over the years.  His treatment is the best indicator of what an immoral and unprincipled hypocrite Obama is.


#3    AsteroidX

AsteroidX

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,570 posts
  • Joined:16 Dec 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

  • it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

Posted 13 March 2013 - 08:38 PM

Shorter exerp no DL required




#4    Resonance

Resonance

    Paranormal Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 807 posts
  • Joined:27 Oct 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:No.

Posted 13 March 2013 - 08:42 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 13 March 2013 - 08:35 PM, said:

Manning provided a great service to his country by revealing the crimes of its government.

By risking his life to expose such crimes, he joins the company of other brave men over the years.  His treatment is the best indicator of what an immoral and unprincipled hypocrite Obama is.
^^^ This, this this, one-thousand times THIS!

"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."  
- Socrates

#5    DieChecker

DieChecker

    I'm a Rogue Scholar

  • Member
  • 20,420 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon, USA

  • Hey, I'm not wrong. I'm just not completely right.

Posted 14 March 2013 - 12:57 AM

If his disclosure of documents and video had been limited to what could be verified as wrongful actions, I would agree. But he downloaded and handed over so many documents that it would have taken him well over a year of full time reading with 8 hour days to know what it was that he was sending out.

If he read one document a second for a week straight, doing nothing but reading one a second, (no sleep, on eating, no restroom, etc...) that would be 600,000 of the 750000 documents he sent out. If you figure 8 hour days and 5 day weeks, with one document per second, then it would be 144,000 documents per week he could read, and do nothing else during that time. If you figure a minute per document (not too unreasonable, as he is trying to determine if the document is Evil or not), then we can figure 2400 documents a week and 312 weeks to finish, or.... 6 years (at one document a minute full time during work hours)...

So you tell me that he knew what he was sending out??

The man is a traitor. I don't see it any other way. The facts are clear. He did not just go and find documents that showed guilt and wrongdoing by the government, he just copy and pasted everything. And then handed them all over to a Foreign National. If a man shoots 1000 people he is bound to shoot at least a few criminals, but that should not be an excuse for shooting the other 995 people. He's a criminal traitor to his Oath of Service and extremely stupid too. His actions were motivated by the emotions of anger and fear, overreaction, desperation and frustration. But those should not excuse even the smallest civilian crime, so I don't see why it would excuse a federal emplyee crime. It is only in desperation now that he trys to justify his idiot actions by trying to be a whistleblower.

The fact he sent the documents to a Foreign National of dubious security is even just more damning. If he'd sent them to a uber-liberal judge, or senator, or a state governor, or even just to a FBI, or CIA branch office or a US Consolate, he'd be covered by the Whisteblower Act and be a free man now. But he wanted to be a big shot and deal with WikiLeaks. And so now he will rot in prison till he is too old to do much beyond collect social security.

He's a Traitor.

I dare anyone to defend him by telling me how those 750000 documents were justified to download and hand over to WikiLeaks. How did Bradley know those all needed to be published online??

Edited by DieChecker, 14 March 2013 - 12:58 AM.

Here at Intel we make processors on 12 inch wafers. And, the individual processors on the wafers are called die. And, I am employed to check these die. That is why I am the DieChecker.

At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not cease to be insipid. - Friedrich Nietzsche

Qualifications? This is cryptozoology, dammit! All that is required is the spirit of adventure. - Night Walker

#6    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Closed
  • 8,732 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 14 March 2013 - 01:41 PM

In a perverse sense, worse than the killing was the conversation on the intercom between the front seat and the back seat, as they shot up those attempting rescue. :td:


#7    preacherman76

preacherman76

    Seeker

  • Member
  • 11,419 posts
  • Joined:16 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Dark side of the Moon

Posted 14 March 2013 - 01:44 PM

His defense is easy Die. The entire war was illegal to begin with. The only people who should be defending themselfs are those who decided to go to war killing at least hundreds of thousands of innocents. Every single thing done in this illegal military conflict should be exposed.

View PostBabe Ruth, on 14 March 2013 - 01:41 PM, said:

In a perverse sense, worse than the killing was the conversation on the intercom between the front seat and the back seat, as they shot up those attempting rescue. :td:

With a child in the van no less.

Some things are true, even if you dont believe them.

#8    Collateral Damage

Collateral Damage

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 258 posts
  • Joined:30 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:In midst with the Sands of Time.

  • "Anti-Americanism is a pure totalitarian concept. The very notion is idiotic."

Posted 14 March 2013 - 04:48 PM

View PostDieChecker, on 14 March 2013 - 12:57 AM, said:

He's a Traitor.

I dare anyone to defend him by telling me how those 750000 documents were justified to download and hand over to WikiLeaks. How did Bradley know those all needed to be published online??
Well said and he's just that, "...a Traitor."

Undated letter from J.F.K. said:

   "War will exist until that distant day when the conscientious objector enjoys the same reputation and prestige that the warrior does today."

      "The nation which forgets its defenders will be itself forgotten."

#9    Bama13

Bama13

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,085 posts
  • Joined:09 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Just Southeast of God's country

Posted 14 March 2013 - 05:24 PM

View Postpreacherman76, on 14 March 2013 - 01:44 PM, said:

His defense is easy Die. The entire war was illegal to begin with. The only people who should be defending themselfs are those who decided to go to war killing at least hundreds of thousands of innocents. Every single thing done in this illegal military conflict should be exposed.



With a child in the van no less.

The Constitution gives Congress the power to declare war. Congress authorized the use of force therefore the war was legal. You can claim it was immoral, ill thought out, or just plain wrong, but it was not illegal.

" Mighty little force is needed to control a man whose mind has been hoodwinked; contrariwise, no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything —you can't conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him" - Robert Heinlein

#10    and then

and then

    Abyssus Abyssum Invocat

  • Member
  • 15,200 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land's End

  • Because what came before never seems enough...

Posted 15 March 2013 - 03:23 AM

I'm glad he finally seems willing to take responsibility for his actions.  I will respect him a bit more if he pleads out and does his time without acting like he's a victim.  I think he's a traitor to his uniform, his country and his soldiers.  As to the "bloodlust" of the helo crew, maybe they were savages or maybe they'd seen one too many of their friends mangled or slaughtered by insurgents.  There was a firefight a few minutes earlier only a few blocks from where the gundown happened.  It is reasonable to assume that they genuinely felt these were bad guys.  People who volunteer for a combat arms MOS don't tend to be choir boys either.  It takes a certain mindset to do such a job and we need them just as much as we need medics or doctors or IT specialists.

  We've cast the world, we've set the stage,
  for what could be, the darkest age...
“This is like playing poker with a guy who cheated you twice before. You know who does that, a moron.

#11    ninjadude

ninjadude

    Seeker of truths

  • Member
  • 11,072 posts
  • Joined:11 Sep 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Illinois

  • "dirt collects at the interfaces"

Posted 15 March 2013 - 03:35 AM

View PostDieChecker, on 14 March 2013 - 12:57 AM, said:

He's a Traitor.

he's my hero. A true American.

"Whatever you can do or dream you can, begin it. Boldness has genius, power and magic in it. Begin it now!""
- Friedrich Nietzsche

#12    Sir Wearer of Hats

Sir Wearer of Hats

    SCIENCE!

  • Member
  • 12,284 posts
  • Joined:08 Nov 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Queensland, Australia.

Posted 15 March 2013 - 06:26 AM

View Postninjadude, on 15 March 2013 - 03:35 AM, said:

he's my hero. A true American.
He can be both.

I must not fear. Fear is the Mind-Killer. It is the little death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear.
I will permit it to pass over me and to move through me. And when it is gone I will turn the inner eye to see it's path.
When the fear is gone, there will be nothing.
Only I will remain.

#13    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 12,345 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 15 March 2013 - 07:11 AM

View PostBama13, on 14 March 2013 - 05:24 PM, said:

The Constitution gives Congress the power to declare war. Congress authorized the use of force therefore the war was legal. You can claim it was immoral, ill thought out, or just plain wrong, but it was not illegal.
The hell it wasn't.  "Authorizing the use of force" isn't declaring war.   The Congress wasn't given any power in the Constitution to "authorize the use of force" at the President's pleasure, it has the authority to declare war.  When war is declared, that is the start of the war.  Only the Congress has that power.  The President only has the power to wage it.   What the Congress did, whether you use that wording I put in quotes or not, is give the President the power to declare war by himself, if he wanted to, why he wanted to, and when he wanted to.  The Congress has no power to delegate its own authority to the President like that.  That was a gross violation of Constitutional authority.   That authorization to use force wasn't even remotely a declaration of war.  I would have voted for the dumb thing.   You might as well call any one of these acts against Iran stating that "all options are on the table" a declaration of war on Iran too so Obama can play King and do what Bush did.  Ridiculous.

"The power to declare war, including the power of judging the causes of war, is fully and exclusively vested in the Legislature.  The Executive has no right, in any case, to decide the question" ~ James Madison
"Peace cannot be achieved by force, only by understanding."  ~ Albert Einstein
"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela
"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians.  Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." ~ Mahatma Gandhi

#14    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Closed
  • 8,732 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 15 March 2013 - 01:50 PM

Die Checker

If Manning is a traitor, how do you describe a person or persons who take the country to war under fraud?

How do you describe persons who plunder the treasury under fraud, or who pass legislation that assaults the US Constitution?

Recall that the ONLY crime defined in the US Constitution is treason.  Article III Section 3


#15    Bama13

Bama13

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,085 posts
  • Joined:09 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Just Southeast of God's country

Posted 15 March 2013 - 02:10 PM

View PostYamato, on 15 March 2013 - 07:11 AM, said:

The hell it wasn't.  "Authorizing the use of force" isn't declaring war.   The Congress wasn't given any power in the Constitution to "authorize the use of force" at the President's pleasure, it has the authority to declare war.  When war is declared, that is the start of the war.  Only the Congress has that power.  The President only has the power to wage it.   What the Congress did, whether you use that wording I put in quotes or not, is give the President the power to declare war by himself, if he wanted to, why he wanted to, and when he wanted to.  The Congress has no power to delegate its own authority to the President like that.  That was a gross violation of Constitutional authority.   That authorization to use force wasn't even remotely a declaration of war.  I would have voted for the dumb thing.   You might as well call any one of these acts against Iran stating that "all options are on the table" a declaration of war on Iran too so Obama can play King and do what Bush did.  Ridiculous.

Authoritizing the use military force is, to me, the same thing as declaring war.
Not going to argue semantics with you.

" Mighty little force is needed to control a man whose mind has been hoodwinked; contrariwise, no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything —you can't conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him" - Robert Heinlein




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users