User Tag List

First 3456 Last

Results 41 to 50 of 58

  1. #41
    Senior Member Little_Sticks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,370

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    Probably has been used to hurt innocent people? The government tried like crazy during the trial to show that Manning's actions had harmed someone, anyone. They couldn't find a single person, not one, who had been harmed by what he revealed. And believe me, if they could have found someone, they would have mentioned it. They wanted to him to get 100+ years in prison.

    Don't believe the government line about these leaks causing harm to the nation. They haven't. The reason people like Snowden and Manning have been pursued and prosecuted is because they embarrassed government officials. That is their only crime. Now the UK government has been harassing Glenn Greenwald and his partner. The US and the UK are out of control. The governments of both of these countries make me sick.

    Attachment 10073Attachment 10073
    It's not always easy to prove that a chain reaction of events precipitated from one event. But regardless, I don't think he got charged with aiding the enemy, so they didn't really charge him for potential hurt he might have caused.

    He did release a lot of information. It's a security breach. He could have gone through his command to fix any problems he found in the Army. If that didn't work, he could have focused the information to the media or other people that could have helped him stop abuses of power. He could have thought it through and been more anonymous and focused his information on getting clear messages across, without giving out confidential information not related to those messages. He could have even tried to start programs to stop a lot of the abuses.

    But I'm not saying he should get 35 years either. He was kind of stupid and rash. He pretty much has a mind like a juvenile. If it were me, I'd probably go with 10, parole in 5 or something. But I wouldn't do that anyway because I don't like the idea of prisons; they are pretty much used to throw people away and forget about them. And I don't know how they come up with their prison sentence numbers, but I'm sure there's a lengthy and overly thought-out justification for it to over-complicate life with.

    But seriously, are you saying you have no problem with how he approached fighting against the system? Is it his fault or the system or both? What should happen?

  2. #42
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    For people wondering if Manning's sentence was too harsh or too lenient, I suggest you watch this video. Keep in mind that Manning released this information to the American people. He was not spying for another nation, like Russia. He did not receive any money for what he did. It was done purely as a matter of conscience. The prosecution even admitted this during the trial.
    Yeah, with all of that context, it's just coming off as more and more bullshit, honestly.

    They basically are just making an example, as best as I can tell, to dissuade others from doing something similar. (Since their "security" sucked so bad, he could burn the data off on his music CDs and walk out the door with it.) Because realistically the punishment here is not commensurate with the punishments levied for worse crimes with more repercussions.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  3. #43
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Little_Sticks View Post
    It's not always easy to prove that a chain reaction of events precipitated from one event. But regardless, I don't think he got charged with aiding the enemy, so they didn't really charge him for potential hurt he might have caused.
    A chain reaction? There hasn't even been a reaction, much less a chain reaction. And he absolutely was charged with aiding the enemy (USMJ 104). He was found not guilty. You're woefully misinformed on this subject.

    He did release a lot of information. It's a security breach. He could have gone through his command to fix any problems he found in the Army. If that didn't work, he could have focused the information to the media or other people that could have helped him stop abuses of power. He could have thought it through and been more anonymous and focused his information on getting clear messages across, without giving out confidential information not related to those messages. He could have even tried to start programs to stop a lot of the abuses.
    He did exactly that. He first went through the chain of command. They laughed at him. He then went to the NY Times and Washington Post. They ignored him. It was only after "the establishment" didn't take him seriously that he went to wikileaks. And let's be clear here. Wikileaks functioned like a member of the media in this instance. You don't need to be an employee of corporate owned media to be a member. Anyone can function like a member of the media.

    But I'm not saying he should get 35 years either. He was kind of stupid and rash. He pretty much has a mind like a juvenile. If it were me, I'd probably go with 10, parole in 5 or something. But I wouldn't do that anyway because I don't like the idea of prisons; they are pretty much used to throw people away and forget about them. And I don't know how they come up with their prison sentence numbers, but I'm sure there's a lengthy and overly thought-out justification for it to over-complicate life with.

    But seriously, are you saying you have no problem with how he approached fighting against the system? Is it his fault or the system or both? What should happen?
    Right, I have absolutely no problem with how he approached "fighting against the system". He tried to use "proper channels". And when that didn't work, the government lost control of the information. The government should blame itself for its own embarrassment. Instead, it wants to put all of the blame on this one person.

    The system is corrupt. Our government is a self-serving entity with no independent oversight. It shouldn't not have the power, alone, to determine what the public should and should not be allowed to know. All of this secrecy is a breeding ground for corruption. All sorts of bad behavior goes unpunished, but exposing bad behavior is a terrible crime.
    "We grow up thinking that beliefs are something to be proud of, but they're really nothing but opinions one refuses to reconsider. Beliefs are easy. The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to growth and wisdom, because "strength of belief" is only the intensity with which you resist questioning yourself. As soon as you are proud of a belief, as soon as you think it adds something to who you are, then you've made it a part of your ego."

  4. #44
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Here is the text of Manning's letter to Obama requesting a pardon:

    The decisions that I made in 2010 were made out of a concern for my country and the world that we live in. Since the tragic events of 9/11, our country has been at war. We've been at war with an enemy that chooses not to meet us on any traditional battlefield, and due to this fact we've had to alter our methods of combating the risks posed to us and our way of life.

    I initially agreed with these methods and chose to volunteer to help defend my country. It was not until I was in Iraq and reading secret military reports on a daily basis that I started to question the morality of what we were doing. It was at this time I realized that (in) our efforts to meet the risk posed to us by the enemy, we have forgotten our humanity. We consciously elected to devalue human life both in Iraq and Afghanistan. When we engaged those that we perceived were the enemy, we sometimes killed innocent civilians. Whenever we killed innocent civilians, instead of accepting responsibility for our conduct, we elected to hide behind the veil of national security and classified information in order to avoid any public accountability.

    In our zeal to kill the enemy, we internally debated the definition of torture. We held individuals at Guantanamo for years without due process. We inexplicably turned a blind eye to torture and executions by the Iraqi government. And we stomached countless other acts in the name of our war on terror.

    Patriotism is often the cry extolled when morally questionable acts are advocated by those in power. When these cries of patriotism drown out any logically based dissension, it is usually the American soldier that is given the order to carry out some ill-conceived mission.
    Our nation has had similar dark moments for the virtues of democracy — the Trail of Tears, the Dred Scott decision, McCarthyism, and the Japanese-American internment camps — to mention a few. I am confident that many of the actions since 9/11 will one day be viewed in a similar light.

    As the late Howard Zinn once said, "There is not a flag large enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people."

    I understand that my actions violated the law; I regret if my actions hurt anyone or harmed the United States. It was never my intent to hurt anyone. I only wanted to help people. When I chose to disclose classified information, I did so out of a love for my country and a sense of duty to others.

    If you deny my request for a pardon, I will serve my time knowing that sometimes you have to pay a heavy price to live in a free society. I will gladly pay that price if it means we could have a country that is truly conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all women and men are created equal.
    Of course, we already know there's no chance Obama pardons Manning, even if he agrees with what Manning did. Obama is a coward.
    "We grow up thinking that beliefs are something to be proud of, but they're really nothing but opinions one refuses to reconsider. Beliefs are easy. The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to growth and wisdom, because "strength of belief" is only the intensity with which you resist questioning yourself. As soon as you are proud of a belief, as soon as you think it adds something to who you are, then you've made it a part of your ego."

  5. #45
    Senior Member Little_Sticks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,370

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    A chain reaction? There hasn't even been a reaction, much less a chain reaction. And he absolutely was charged with aiding the enemy (USMJ 104). He was found not guilty. You're woefully misinformed on this subject.
    Okay so I used the word "charged" in place of "convicted". And you seem personally invested in this.

    He did exactly that. He first went through the chain of command. They laughed at him. He then went to the NY Times and Washington Post. They ignored him. It was only after "the establishment" didn't take him seriously that he went to wikileaks. And let's be clear here. Wikileaks functioned like a member of the media in this instance. You don't need to be an employee of corporate owned media to be a member. Anyone can function like a member of the media.


    Right, I have absolutely no problem with how he approached "fighting against the system". He tried to use "proper channels". And when that didn't work, the government lost control of the information. The government should blame itself for its own embarrassment. Instead, it wants to put all of the blame on this one person.

    The system is corrupt. Our government is a self-serving entity with no independent oversight. It shouldn't not have the power, alone, to determine what the public should and should not be allowed to know. All of this secrecy is a breeding ground for corruption. All sorts of bad behavior goes unpunished, but exposing bad behavior is a terrible crime.
    There's always corruption; and often, you stop one corruption and create another. That doesn't mean you rebel against everything by yourself and all-out. Sometimes things aren't worth fighting for. In his case then that might have been true because all he ended up doing was throwing himself into a bunch of lions. That's not helped anyone, including himself. What you think he should have done has not really done any good.

    And I wonder again, in leiu of this, "What should have happened?" rather than "What should he have done?"

  6. #46
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    Here is the text of Manning's letter to Obama requesting a pardon:



    Of course, we already know there's no chance Obama pardons Manning, even if he agrees with what Manning did. Obama is a coward.
    To be honest, any pardon by Obama for Manning in the next three years would probably be a death sentence for Manning. Until it fades from public mind and Manning serves a "legitimate" term in people's views, I'm sure there are some guys out there who wouldn't be adverse to beating Manning up badly.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  7. #47
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Little_Sticks View Post
    Okay so I used the word "charged" in place of "convicted". And you seem personally invested in this.
    Right, charged...convicted...who cares what the difference is. It's not like the federal government had 3 years and millions of dollars at its disposal. Clearly Manning's high-priced lawyers outwitted the underfunded, overworked federal prosecutor.

    There's always corruption; and often, you stop one corruption and create another. That doesn't mean you rebel against everything by yourself and all-out. Sometimes things aren't worth fighting for. In his case then that might have been true because all he ended up doing was throwing himself into a bunch of lions. That's not helped anyone, including himself. What you think he should have done has not really done any good.

    And I wonder again, in leiu of this, "What should have happened?" rather than "What should he have done?"
    Right, there's always corruption and there are no varying degrees. It's all or nothing. So we should just give up and let corrupt officials do whatever they want. That's the safe course of action. Keep your head down and look out only for yourself.

    What should have happened is Manning should have been sentenced to time served and she did exactly what she should have done.
    "We grow up thinking that beliefs are something to be proud of, but they're really nothing but opinions one refuses to reconsider. Beliefs are easy. The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to growth and wisdom, because "strength of belief" is only the intensity with which you resist questioning yourself. As soon as you are proud of a belief, as soon as you think it adds something to who you are, then you've made it a part of your ego."

  8. #48
    Senior Member Little_Sticks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,370

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    Right, there's always corruption and there are no varying degrees. It's all or nothing. So we should just give up and let corrupt officials do whatever they want. That's the safe course of action. Keep your head down and look out only for yourself.
    Not what I said at all. Try some critical reading skills. Or maybe try understanding that people have other legitimate points of views, sometimes more legitimate than your own.

    What should have happened is Manning should have been sentenced to time served and she did exactly what she should have done.
    Interesting. Then why do you seem to have a problem with what transpired? Sounds like everything happened as you think it should have then.

  9. #49
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Little_Sticks View Post
    Not what I said at all. Try some critical reading skills. Or maybe try understanding that people have other legitimate points of views, sometimes more legitimate than your own.

    Interesting. Then why do you seem to have a problem with what transpired? Sounds like everything happened as you think it should have then.
    He said that she should have been sentenced to time served.

    Instead, she received the highest sentence that someone has ever received -- 35 years, parole maybe in 9. I think the next highest sentence was only 23 years, for the highest ranking agency official ever accused of espionage.

    So it's no wonder he's disappointed in the system.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  10. #50
    Senior Member Little_Sticks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,370

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    He said that she should have been sentenced to time served.

    Instead, she received the highest sentence that someone has ever received -- 35 years, parole maybe in 9. I think the next highest sentence was only 23 years, for the highest ranking agency official ever accused of espionage.

    So it's no wonder he's disappointed in the system.
    I'm still not sure where he's coming from though:

    I can understand if he has a problem with length of imprisonment, but it also then sounds like he's against any punishment (time served is almost like pretending he got all the charges dropped). And if he is, fine, but justifying it with saying the government is corrupt is kind of silly when anyone can accuse anything/anyone of being corrupt; and I'm sure there's different levels of corruption almost anywhere. He just happens to be focusing on this one because it's prominent.

    But if, on one hand, he believes in all kinds of information being free, then it makes a lot more sense to me why he'd be bothered and why he'd feel any prison time is unjust. And I can understand Manning being used as an example to discourage other people from doing something similar (long prison time) being a fucked up thing to do (I never liked the idea of punishing someone for what someone else would be LIKELY to do). Personally, in the case of a military though, leaking secrets about the operation and technology of the weaponry is a pretty serious thing to do; there's more of a reason to keep a lot of information private, even if it bothers people to do so; and I'm not sure @Lateralus has even bothered to address this other than to say there's no proof of any harm being done from the act, which may be true, but still shouldn't be encouraged (by not punishing the act); cause obviously, discouraging it has the potential to prevent harm, while encouraging it allows harm to happen because nobody really knows what harm might be caused until it happens, and even then it's not always going to be obvious; that doesn't seem very smart to me.

    Do you happen to understand his position at all by any chance?

Similar Threads

  1. Is Obama guilty of treason?
    By Lateralus in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 06-11-2013, 12:37 PM
  2. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 04-21-2008, 07:57 AM
  3. Draw yourself (but not your portrait)
    By alcea rosea in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 03-17-2008, 06:41 PM
  4. So I've got I and T... but not so sure about the rest...
    By zhandao in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 01-24-2008, 07:56 PM
  5. Hello! New to this site, but not...
    By NocturnalSun in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 08-18-2007, 10:50 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO