Its authoritarian. To say otherwise is ridiculous.
Guy should have known better than to leak sensitive documents. Don't get me wrong, this is most definitely torture and I'm not supporting it at all, in fact, am against it, but he couldn't possible have expected not to be treated like this. You piss off the big guy and you're not getting off clean, even if it is against the law/everything they stood for.
Technically what he did is Treason. He's lucky he hasn't been executed, tbh.
[QUOTE=Gordy H.;26733248]Technically what he did is Treason. He's lucky he hasn't been executed, tbh.[/QUOTE]
He wasn't convicted.
[QUOTE=Gordy H.;26733248]Technically what he did is Treason. He's lucky he hasn't been executed, tbh.[/QUOTE]
"The Constitution of the United States, Art. III, defines treason against the United States to consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid or comfort. This offence is punished with death. By the same article of the Constitution, no person shall be convicted of treason, unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court."
he clearly didn't attack the US so which enemies did he adhere to?
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;26733280]"The Constitution of the United States, Art. III, defines treason against the United States to consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid or comfort. This offence is punished with death. By the same article of the Constitution, no person shall be convicted of treason, unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court."
he clearly didn't attack the US so which enemies did he adhere to?[/QUOTE]
He put classified documents into the public eye, so anyone could be looking at them right now.
It's almost silly to argue this point by now.
He should be charged with treason, but whatever.
[QUOTE=sloppy_joes;26733299]He put classified documents into the public eye, so anyone could be looking at them right now.
It's almost silly to argue this point by now.[/QUOTE]
-He- didn't put classified documents into the public eye, Wikileaks did.
Why the hell is this thread full of assholes.
This is fucking terrible, i feel so sorry for this man.
[QUOTE=Killuah;26732947]That's not true for every order.[/QUOTE]
This is true, you do have a obligation to follow a lawful order, and an obligation to not follow an unlawful order.
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;26733280]"The Constitution of the United States, Art. III, defines treason against the United States to consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid or comfort. This offence is punished with death. By the same article of the Constitution, no person shall be convicted of treason, unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court."
he clearly didn't attack the US so which enemies did he adhere to?[/QUOTE]
The documents he released were classified and he released them into the Public, which includes our enemies.
[QUOTE=sloppy_joes;26733269]He wasn't convicted.[/QUOTE]
He's been charged, but not tried yet. The UCMJ operates on different rules then the civilian justice system, and I'm pretty sure they can detain soldiers until their trial in whatever type of confinement they see fit.
Wow, USA. Just fucking wow.
Fuck this shit I'm going to rapture.
[editline]16th December 2010[/editline]
[QUOTE=Gordy H.;26733358]the Public, which includes our enemies.[/QUOTE]
... :v:
This is really fucking stupid. The USA's government tried to hide the fact that their army was fucking up, and when a soldier released the truth to try and make things better, they throw him in solitary confinement with no human contact 23 hours a day for 7 months, not even allowed to exercise. That is not moral in my book, and if you think it's "ok because he treasoned dur" then maybe it's time to learn that the ends no not justify the means if the means greatly outweigh the problem you originally started with. Exposing a corrupt/law breaking/shitty government does NOT justify a man to be stripped of his basic rights and thrown in a concrete cube with a mattress for seven months.
What's next? Jail sentences for cussing? Sure, nobody would cuss in public any more but that's not the fucking point. Jesus fucking christ.
What the fuck is wrong with people?
[QUOTE=XxPsychoxX;26733331]-He- didn't put classified documents into the public eye, Wikileaks did.[/QUOTE]
Wikileaks is just a tool.
[QUOTE=XxPsychoxX;26733331]-He- didn't put classified documents into the public eye, Wikileaks did.[/QUOTE]
PFC manning holds a secret clearance, which means he had to read and sign a wordy NDA between himself, and the US Government. He used his position to illegally disclose classified information. That is the issue here.
What the fuck people are actually defending this?
[QUOTE=Gordy H.;26733358]The documents he released were classified and he released them into the Public, which includes our enemies.
He's been charged, but not tried yet. The UCMJ operates on different rules then the civilian justice system, and I'm pretty sure they can detain soldiers until their trial in whatever type of confinement they see fit.[/QUOTE]
he released them to wikileaks. is wikileaks an enemy of the US?
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;26733412]he released them to wikileaks. is wikileaks an enemy of the US?[/QUOTE]
It doesn't matter if he releases it to his grandmother, it still illegal for him to do so.
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;26733412]he released them to wikileaks. is wikileaks an enemy of the US?[/QUOTE]
He gave them to Wikileaks knowing full well what they were gonna do with them.
yet another reason for me to hate America
[QUOTE=Ermac20;26733451]yet another reason for me to hate America[/QUOTE]
The USA*. Canada, or Brazil for example, are on the American(north/south) continent, but they are not part of the United States.
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;26733412]he released them to wikileaks. is wikileaks an enemy of the US?[/QUOTE]
yes.
[QUOTE=Kalibos;26732117]
[img_thumb]http://gyazo.com/300b3aaea5887a497b8abbe63d932934.png[/img_thumb][/QUOTE]
Why do people do this? I made a bad post, I snipped it, you're not going to argue over the post, so why bother even acknowledging it?
[QUOTE=Uber|nooB;26733503]yes.[/QUOTE]
Hardly. Wikileaks merely a site where people can expose corrupt organisations and attempt to bring a little justice to the world in doing so.
Is justice and freedom of information an enemy of the US?
[editline]16th December 2010[/editline]
[QUOTE=sloppy_joes;26733519]Why do people do this? I made a bad post, I snipped it, you're not going to argue over the post, so why bother even acknowledging it?[/QUOTE]
It lets people notice that you're an idiot, so we can choose to ignore your arguments.
[editline]16th December 2010[/editline]
Also because it's funny seeing how silly the post was.
I can understand wanting him in solitary confinement if he knows more information, but they need to press charges against him, to put someone in jail and just not press charges is completely illegal. If it's such a big deal, charge him with treason and have him out of there in a week one way or another. It's bullshit that you can be held forever in prison with no charges being pressed against you.
It's funny how people sit here and claim he was never charged, when he was.
[url]http://cryptome.org/manning-charge.pdf[/url]
I mean, what's happening to him sucks, but he's the one who fucked around with classified documents. Did he think the government was just gonna let him go?
[QUOTE=Bepo5;26733575]I can understand wanting him in solitary confinement if he knows more information, but they need to press charges against him, to put someone in jail and just not press charges is completely illegal. If it's such a big deal, charge him with treason and have him out of there in a week one way or another. It's bullshit that you can be held forever in prison with no charges being pressed against you.[/QUOTE]
They did charge him. He's in confinement awaiting his trial.
[QUOTE=Azur;26733536]
It lets people notice that you're an idiot, so we can choose to ignore your arguments.
[editline]16th December 2010[/editline]
Also because it's funny seeing how silly the post was.[/QUOTE]
Yeah but everyone on this site is an idiot, what's the difference?
[QUOTE=sloppy_joes;26733625]Yeah but everyone on this site is an idiot, what's the difference?[/QUOTE]
Haha, I suppose. :P
[QUOTE=Kinversulath;26733596]It's funny how people sit here and claim he was never charged, when he was.?[/QUOTE]
But he was not [b]convicted[/b], and is therefor [b]innocent until proven guilty[/b], which means it's illegal to incarcerate him.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.