Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4
Kowalski

I Am Bradley Manning

171 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

Good video, and an excellent question:

[media=]

[/media]

So, how bout it guy's... If you saw a war crime, would you report it?

Edited by Kowalski
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Naturally I would, what I would not do is to also publish all dirty wash of the Department of State.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Naturally I would, what I would not do is to also publish all dirty wash of the Department of State.

Well, I was kinda hoping we could discuss, just the War crimes part. We already have several threads about Bradley Manning and whether publishing all the documents he did, was a risk to National Security....But, let's say a soldier was to make it public, about several war crimes that had happened, that the government didn't want known. Would this same soldier be persecuted like they did Manning? Shouldn't there be a law that protects people who expose war crimes?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a member of the Military you have a duty to report illegal activity and to disobey an unlawful command. However He leaked hundreds of thousands of files, not just war crimes files. Diplomatic Cables, Battlefield Reports, etc. Had he released just the video and other illegal activities my opinion of him would be different.

But my opinion stands that he deserve his punishment for betraying his position and his uniform.

The Western Military Defends Democracy, but we do not practice it. We are war fighters, our job is not pretty and we are willing to do terrible things to ensure that you can live the life you do. People assume that Military Justice is just like Civilian Justice, the problem is Military justice is very different and unless you know about it you will think it is harsh and unjust.

PFC Manning can not go unpunished for the hundreds of thousands of files which show no criminal activity. Just because a few, such as the Apache footage, showed criminal activity does not excuse the vast criminal negligence of PFC Manning.

7 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Naturally I would, what I would not do is to also publish all dirty wash of the Department of State.

Exact;y. Publicise the crime and those responsible for it, don't just give a great metaphorical truckload of stuff without knowing what might be in it to troublemakers, just in case there might be something in there relating to war crimes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think I would.

It's war, and history is written by the winner

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the Nuremberg trials established that there is no hiding place for those "just obeying orders" and by implication puts an onus on people to put their hand up if they see something wrong. Works two ways for them, by being moral, and by saving their skin if things go bad in the future for their side, whatever that may be.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I was kinda hoping we could discuss, just the War crimes part. We already have several threads about Bradley Manning and whether publishing all the documents he did, was a risk to National Security....But, let's say a soldier was to make it public, about several war crimes that had happened, that the government didn't want known. Would this same soldier be persecuted like they did Manning? Shouldn't there be a law that protects people who expose war crimes?

As long as it is ONLY the war crimes: Yes.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe there are thousands of war crimes that are still covered under a pile of crap. This man is a hero.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think most of us agree here: there's a difference between reporting wrong doing and what we identify as whistleblowing.

There is nothing wrong with reporting a war crime, especially seeing as the U.S. military likes to think itself a model for the world to follow. If that's the case then we need to weed out the morons who give the military a bad name.

However, what we now call whistleblowing, I find to be nothing more than stroking your own ego. Really, you couldn't find the actual relevant files? No, you didn't want to go through the effort, you just wanted the feeling that you outsmarted the system.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think I would.

It's war, and history is written by the winner

What if the war were brought under fraud? What if the war were not declared in accordance with law? What if the war were a scam?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In this day and age, most americans pretend there is no such thing as war crimes, or if there are, somebody other than americans do this. They refuse to acknowledge that their government is at the moment, the largest and most frequent perpetrator of war crimes in the world.

If one sees a crime on the street and does not report it, under Title 18 one has committed Misprison of a Felony, itself a felony.

The same obligation applies if one sees one's government commit felonies, and that's what Manning and others like Ellsberg and Snowden, have done.

One of the slogans of the War On Terror is "see something, say something". That should have an asterisk, indicating that if you see the government committing a crime, don't say a word, lest one will be prosecuted.

Perhaps the Nobel Peace Committee will give Manning the prize. He would be, I think, the first political prisoner in the US to receive the award.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What if the war were brought under fraud? What if the war were not declared in accordance with law? What if the war were a scam?

All very good questions. What would be the right thing for members of the armed forces to do? To all refuse to obey orders- to all mutiny? It would certainly completely melt down the court martial process, that's for sure.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All very good questions. What would be the right thing for members of the armed forces to do? To all refuse to obey orders- to all mutiny? It would certainly completely melt down the court martial process, that's for sure.

I don't know the correct answer, but you certainly raise the right question.

Remember Ehren Watada, 1LT US Army? Having already served in Afghanistan, under Bush he refused to go to Iraq and was court-martialed. Retained civilian attorneys, Court Martial judge screwed up badly, and the case ended up in civilian court, and Watada won.

I suspect once the military realized it had some sort of mutiny, or mass refusal, they might change things. Sadly, considering the brainwashing of the military (I went through it myself), I doubt such a protest would ever reach critical mass.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know the correct answer, but you certainly raise the right question.

Remember Ehren Watada, 1LT US Army? Having already served in Afghanistan, under Bush he refused to go to Iraq and was court-martialed. Retained civilian attorneys, Court Martial judge screwed up badly, and the case ended up in civilian court, and Watada won.

I suspect once the military realized it had some sort of mutiny, or mass refusal, they might change things. Sadly, considering the brainwashing of the military (I went through it myself), I doubt such a protest would ever reach critical mass.

They've been brainwashed into believing their fighting for democracy and freedom, which they aren't... I understand bad things happen in war, but shooting non-combatants from an Apache helicopter? WTF?! No wonder these guys are coming back so screwed up and killing themselves....

I think with every military action since Vietnam, they keep getting worse and worse...

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you may be snowden your not manning. There is a big difference between the two, the military. If you are in the military you have different rights and courts than the rest of us. The two worlds are so far apart it may only may make sense to ask the manning question to a person who has been in the military.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What if the war were brought under fraud? What if the war were not declared in accordance with law? What if the war were a scam?

we already have\had few such wars, wot, wod, iraq invasion.... so what can you do to stop exsisting ones and not to allow future wars like that to brake up??? i'll give you a hint, absolutely nothing. not a single wire\crime report\or wisleblower, did absolutely nothing to change reality, the war still go on as they were.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

we already have\had few such wars, wot, wod, iraq invasion.... so what can you do to stop exsisting ones and not to allow future wars like that to brake up??? i'll give you a hint, absolutely nothing. not a single wire\crime report\or wisleblower, did absolutely nothing to change reality, the war still go on as they were.

Well you are right that the bad guys have won control of the federal government, and are in the process of prosecuting and imprisoning, even killing (Hastings) the bad guys.

Before anything positive can happen, the american people must inform themselves. I hate to be the pessimist, but it appears most people I know don't really WANT to know the brutal truth. Ignorance is bliss, and it is demonstrated every day in many ways.

Until the mainstream media is overthrown, ain't nuthin' really gonna happen. :no:

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I was kinda hoping we could discuss, just the War crimes part. We already have several threads about Bradley Manning and whether publishing all the documents he did, was a risk to National Security....But, let's say a soldier was to make it public, about several war crimes that had happened, that the government didn't want known. Would this same soldier be persecuted like they did Manning? Shouldn't there be a law that protects people who expose war crimes?

Yes, they would. Dunno what they'd be charged with - violating Official Secrets Act or some such I'm sure.

At the very least, they'd get the very short end of the stick - look at what happened to the poor sod that stopped the Mai Lai massacre.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, they would. Dunno what they'd be charged with - violating Official Secrets Act or some such I'm sure.

At the very least, they'd get the very short end of the stick - look at what happened to the poor sod that stopped the Mai Lai massacre.

Just found that story here:

On March 16, 1968, Thompson and two other crewmembers landed their helicopter in front of U.S. troops firing on Vietnamese civilians in the village of My Lai. They pointed their guns at their fellow service members to prevent more killings, and helped evacuate the villagers. In a few minutes, we are going to be joined by one of Thompson’s crewmembers. First, we take a look at what happened on March 16th, 1968 by playing an edited excerpt from a documentary produced by Mike Boehm titled "The Sound of the Violin in My Lai."

Thompson and Lawrence Colburn later testified at the court martial hearings for the massacre of over 300 civilians at My Lai. Only one U.S. soldier, platoon commander Lieutenant William Calley, was convicted. He was court-martialed and sentenced to life in prison for his role in the massacre. Many around the country viewed Calley as a scapegoat. "Rallies for Calley" were held all over the country and Jimmy Carter, then governor of Georgia, urged citizens to leave car headlights on to show support for Calley. President Richard Nixon later commuted Calley’s sentence to three years of house arrest.

Thompson, on the other hand, was shunned for years by fellow soldiers. He received death threats and was once told by a congressman that he was the only American who should be punished over My Lai. Although the My Lai massacre became one of the most infamous atrocities of the Vietnam War, little was known about Hugh Thompson’s actions for decades.

In 1998, Thompson and his two crewmembers, Lawrence Colburn and Glenn Andreotta, were awarded the Soldier’s Medal, the highest US military award for bravery not involving conflict with an enemy. Andreotta’s award was posthumous. He was killed in Vietnam less than a month after My Lai.

Link: http://www.democracynow.org/2006/1/18/hugh_thompsons_crewmember_remembers_helping_to

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

History of United States War Crimes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_war_crimes

A good read here: http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=10555

JAY: So it seems rather clear. International law says, one, illegal war--in fact, I think it's in that charter, I believe, is the language which more or less says wars of aggression are the highest war crime, highest crime against humanity. The war in Iraq was illegal, according to most legal scholars I've heard, including Kofi Annan, who, unfortunately, didn't really come out and say it until after he left United Nations, but he said it. An illegal war, invading a country is a war crime. If Bradley Manning sees atrocities committed in the course of a war crime, it's not just some choice he made. It's not just a moral obligation. Under international law, he actually had a legal obligation, and certainly a defense, for doing what he did. So talk a bit about, you know, the significance of Nuremberg, a bit about Manning, and then we're going to get into, you know, where is international law anyway.

PRASHAD: Well, look, the first thing to say is that it is true that on August 8, 1945, this Nuremberg Charter appears. It is signed by the major powers. It has the weight of international authority. And it suggests that if you observe something that is a war crime, you are under a legal obligation to report it. That is, you know, unassailable. It is a fact.

JAY: Let me add just one quick thing of context, 'cause I have to keep reminding myself that we have a lot of younger viewers, and partly 'cause our school system stinks, they hardly know, I bet you, what we're talking about. So just quickly, after the end of World War II, the defeat of Germany, the three, four major Allied partners--Russia, England, and United States--got together and they started to prosecute the leaders of the Third Reich. Hitler was dead as far as we know, but other leaders of the German regime were put on trial. And the basis for having this trial was this Nuremberg Charter, because before that, there really wasn't anything in international law to say you could try these guys for committing war crimes. Other than that, previously they had just lost a war. And, in fact, often if you just lost a war, in European tradition the king and the leaders would do quite well after the war.

PRASHAD: Let's talk about that helicopter attack, because that took place in New Baghdad, where Apache helicopters saw something on the ground, people walking around, and they saw somebody, thinking he had a gun. They shot the crowd, killed, it turned out to be, a photojournalist with a international, you know, agency. He was killed in cold blood there. Nobody engaged the helicopters. A car came to help them, to rescue them. They said, give me the signal, I want to shoot, I want to engage, fired in. There were children in the car, etc.

Now, a ground platoon arrived at the scene, and American troops got out and saw what had happened. Many people saw that this was a great--let's just call it mistake that had taken place. When questions were asked at the time about that attack in New Baghdad, the United States government denied that anything was wrong, and the United States government also said there is no video. In other words, the government was lying and covering up what took people on the ground, even troops--there was one particular troop, a man named Ethan McCord, later would come out and speak about what he saw, but he was suppressed. Bradley Manning saw that video and felt obliged to release it because not only was this an illegal war, not only was this apparently a war crime, but also the government was covering up the war crime. So he released the video via WikiLeaks. When he released the video, Ethan McCord, who was on the ground and saw the little children inside that car, one of them blinded because glass went into her eyes, this shattered Ethan McCord's approach to what he was doing. But because Manning, this young, young man, took a courageous decision to release this video, it freed up other people in the military to come out and say, yes, we were party to a war crime.

JAY: And I think that's--the point is, yes, governments have a right to secrets, yes, in today's world, governments have a right to military secrets, yes, a soldier should be prosecuted if they simply are releasing secrets and they've agreed and signed a contract--I'm going to be a soldier and I won't release secrets and such and such--but not if the government's committing war crimes. And that should be the discussion about Manning. It's not just for transparency's sake; it's that it's a war crime, and war crime has--under international law, you have an obligation to do what you can against your government's wishes, because these wishes are illegal.

PRASHAD: And you--let's--this is exactly the issue. I mean, it's a war crime, it's a war crime that the government was covering up. It's a war crime that was giving nightmares to the troops themselves, not just people on the ground, not just those young children who now continue to suffer from, you know, the death of their father, the fact that they are disabled by that attack, etc. It's certainly that, but it's something other than that as well. This is a very young man who's put into action who has a understanding about the world, but it's not fully developed. A lot of dangerous things come before him, and he has to find a way to bring this up somewhere.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm proud to see you guys giving Hugh Thompson the credit he was due! His treatment by the Army was disgraceful.

:gun:

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well what a twist what a twist, he has apologized and says sorry to the US

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well what a twist what a twist, he has apologized and says sorry to the US

Bradley Manning has taken the stand during his sentencing hearing for leaking classified material to WikiLeaks and has apologized for hurting the United States and others.

Manning gave an unsworn statement Wednesday, which means he cannot be cross-examined by prosecutors. He began with an apology.

He says "I'm sorry that my actions hurt people. I'm sorry that it hurt the United States."

Manning says he understood what he was doing and the decisions he made. However, he says he did not believe at the time that leaking the information would cause harm.

Manning faces up to 90 years in prison for the leaks.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/08/14/bradley-manning-apologizes-for-hurting-us-at-sentencing-hearing/#ixzz2byy54rHh

I said it before and I'll say it again:

​ If their gonna prosecute Bradley Manning, they also need to prosecute the soldiers who committed the war crimes released on that video....For God's sakes, two children were hurt badly! You can't go around shooting at innocent unarmed civilians and children!

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well what a twist what a twist, he has apologized and says sorry to the US

After being tortured for how long.... This is why torture does not work it will make one say anything. Manning is a hero and may win the nobel peace prize. skip to 13:31 in the video

The more I see you post Nixon the more I think you might have a condition.

Edited by The Silver Thong
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.