Pic Of The Moment: Justice?

[EarlG]

BREAKING: Bradley Manning Sentenced to 35 Years for WikiLeaks Disclosures

Follow @demunderground

[MannyGoldstein]

1. Sorry Brad, you're group 2

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023494267

But thanks for playing!

[ProSense]

17. As awful, awful as Bush was, at least he *asked*

As awful, awful as Bush was, at least he *asked*
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023502570

[MannyGoldstein]

20. Which is appropriate to this post *how*? nt

[ProSense]

23. In the same way as the one you posted. You should thank me for helping to give it exposure. n/t

[MannyGoldstein]

49. The OP refers to two classes of people, as did my reference

The post you link to refers to prosecution of the press for doing their job.

[mindwalker_i]

50. This seems like another effort to deflect attention away from the point of the OP

The point of the OP is that justice under this administration is really fucked up. The whole system of government seems to be horribly corrupt, and Obama is not helping, if not actively making it worse.

Your failure to change your opinions given new information shows that you do not want to correct the situation.

You are noise.

[ProSense]

53. LOL!

"The point of the OP is that justice under this administration is really fucked up."

Justice in this country has always been "fucked up." I mean, aren't all U.S. Presidents "war criminals"?

When was the last time a U.S. President was tried for war crimes?

Bushco is the most deserving, and there was enough evidence to make a case more than eight years ago.

"Your failure to change your opinions given new information shows that you do not want to correct the situation. "

I don't have to "change" my opinions, they're based on facts, unlike the post I linked to.

[mindwalker_i]

57. Your opinions are based on carefully-selected facts, at best

Facts that are contrary to your position are ignored. Even you "argument" above boils down to, "well other presidents did bad things, so everything Obama does os okay." That's the argument of someone with only an agenda, and is definitely not valuable for the conversation. Hence, you are purely noise.

[ProSense]

64. No, that's your argument

"That's the argument of someone with only an agenda, and is definitely not valuable for the conversation. Hence, you are purely noise. "

So your "valuable" contribution to the conversation is claiming that people who disagree with you have an "agenda" and their opinions are "purely noise"?

I can see why you can't engage in a discussion. You're too busy attacking people for their opinions.

[mindwalker_i]

83. "Oh poor me, I'm being attacked"

I'm attacking you because you attack everybody who disagrees with what Obama does. The is, as yet, no evidence that you would ever disagree with anything he did, which strongly suggests that you aren't interested in what is right or even what will be good for the country, or world. Your only objective is to deflect blame from Obama.

Most people want to discuss the issues and move toward figuring out the best thing to do for the country/world, however haphazardly the path is. You, on the other hand, only support Obama regardless of some pretty bad things, Manning's torture and domestic spying being at the forefront. Your tactics are often to deflect the conversation away from things that Obama is doing that are wrong. That makes you noise.

It's a mistake for everyone else to engage in a discussion with you, since it diverts them from discussing the actual issues. I hope that by pointing this out enough, people will stop being sidetracked by your diversions.

[LiberalLovinLug]

92. Bravo mindwalker!

You speak for a lot of us

[NYC_SKP]

106. Not by a longshot, sport. eom

[sabrina 1]

107. Yes, and I think it's time to just ignore all these 'diversion' OPs and stay focused on the issues.

They whole purpose is to distract and when we get engaged, we are falling for the tactic.

[mr clean]

113. +1

[Enthusiast]

121. Yes, Mindwalker, you speak for a lot of us!

Right on!

[ProSense]

94. Nonsense, and spare me the strawman pity.

"I'm attacking you because you attack everybody who disagrees with what Obama does. "

LOL! At least you admit that my point was accurate, and I do not go around attacking other Duers for simply stating their opinions.

[mindwalker_i]

102. Sure you do, and you deflect people's attention from the issues

Of course I admit I'm attacking you, and I've very carefully explained why. To put it as bluntly as I can, I attack you because you support Obama no matter what he does, even when what he's doing is really bad. It's hard to believe that you support torture, or that you think spying on the entire country is ok, but since you defend Obama for doing these I have to either believe you do think it's ok, or that when you defend torture or spying, that's not your real opinion and hence, that you are not stating your real opinion.

I think it's the latter. If so, then arguing with you at all won't get anyone anywhere since it's not a real conversation. It's like when Republicans says things like, if we cut taxes, the economy will add jobs. They know it's not true but adding jobs isn't their goal - it's just to give more tax breaks to the rich, who then funnel some back as campaign contributions. Arguing with Republicans then is just a diversion away from the real issues, and it prevents us from solving the real problems.

When someone argues with you, they're being deflected from the real issues and are kept from actually fixing the problems we face.

[ProSense]

126. What a silly comment.

"It's hard to believe that you support torture"

You're creating people in your head and attacking your created personas.

It's hilarious.

[mindwalker_i]

130. Guessing at you motives is "creating a persona"?

All I have to go on are your posts, which defend Obama regardless of the issue, or attempt to deflect the conversations away from things that are unflattering, such as turture (Manning) or tapping the phone calls and internet traffic of all Americans. So I guess if guessing at your motives constitutes "creating a persona," I am guilty as charged. That still leaves the question as to why you unerringly support Obama no matter what he does.

My main point still stands, however: your goal is to defend Obama against any questions as to why he's breaking the law (or anything else unflattering). New information or issues don't affect your goal, and therefore all you bring to the conversation is noise.

Nobody should listen to you.

[hueymahl]

144. +1

[bobduca]

153. It's accurate.

[bobduca]

154. "I do not go around attacking other Duers for simply stating their opinions."

Um that's exactly what you do.

Employing dishonest rhetorical tactics is your stock and trade.

[tkmorris]

181. It's practically all you do

[ProSense]

182. Wrong. In fact, "practically all" I do is respond to baseless personal attacks.

In fact, some people think that such attacks make them cool.

[Matariki]

110. +1

[nashville_brook]

145. [phone]

[ProSense]

160. ^^^^^^ PDS ^^^^^^

[mindwalker_i]

175. So people who disagree with you deranged?

More proof that nobody should listen to you.

[ProSense]

178. "Nobody should listen to you."

"So people who disagree with you deranged?"

No.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023504843#post130

Constant personal attacks isn't disagreeing. I'd call it obsession.

"Of course I admit I'm attacking you, and I've very carefully explained why."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023504843#post102

[mindwalker_i]

179. Do you call this a personal attack

because you are a person, or are you implying that it's "personal" in the same way that telling someone they look funny is a personal attack? I'm attacking you because you mislead, divert, and try to make other people stop discussing issues that make Obama look bad.

So if attack you based on the things you do in your posts is personal, then I guess I'm goilty as charged again. More likely, not even you believe that but are trying to make the case (in the same way Republicans "make the case" for lowering taxes on the rich) that this is "personal" to divert people from the real issues that I am bringing up - that you divert all conversations that are not supportive of Obama.

[ProSense]

180. Your comments are becoming defensive. n/t

[mindwalker_i]

183. This is a pretty standard technique

And one that you've used a lot. Instead of talking about the issues, in this case that you attack anyone who says bad stuff about Obama, you talk about the person. I suppose what you are trying to imply is that I'm defensive and therefore, somehow, my arguments are wrong. Just like Snowden is a "theif," or Manning "broke the law."

Unfortunately this tactic often works, but it is fundamentally dishonest.

[ProSense]

184. You appear to be projecting.

"Of course I admit I'm attacking you, and I've very carefully explained why."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023504843#post102

And one that you've used a lot. Instead of talking about the issues, in this case that you attack anyone who says bad stuff about Obama, you talk about the person. I suppose what you are trying to imply is that I'm defensive and therefore, somehow, my arguments are wrong. Just like Snowden is a "theif," or Manning "broke the law."

You are the one who admits to "attacking" me intentionally. Now you're explaining that you're doing it because I criticize Snowden.

I mean, Snowden is in the news, the leak, the NSA, his flight from the country, his asylum are all being discussed.

Apparently you can't see why anyone would focus on him, which is your problem.

The fact that you think it's OK to "attack" me because I criticize Snowden is fairly bizarre.

I'm not a topic here anymore than you are. You should learn to stick to the issues. If you disagree with support of Obama or criticism of Snowden, rebut the point. Opinions posted here aren't an invitation to "attack" the poster.

[mindwalker_i]

187. I'm attacking you because your "arguments" are dishonest

They are designed to divert attention away from the issues people are discussing, often by attacking either Snowden or the people discussing him. Attacking your methods and shining light on them is what's needed to illustrate how destructive they are.

I'm defensive, creating personas, and projecting?

Please proceed.

[ProSense]

188. No, you're doing it because you have no rebuttal on the issues.

"I'm attacking you because your 'arguments' are dishonest

They are designed to divert attention away from the issues people are discussing, often by attacking either Snowden or the people discussing him. Attacking your methods and shining light on them is what's needed to illustrate how destructive they are."

You seem to think simply "attacking" someone is an argument. I mean, your excuses are completetly disingenuous. You don't like criticism of Snowden so you "attack" instead of rebut.

Here's the deal: Keep "attacking," and get use to criticism of Snowden. He's not above criticism, and your "attacks" aren't going change that.

[mindwalker_i]

189. "I mean, your excuses are completetly disingenuous"

Now that's projection. Every time anyone brings up anything that puts Obama in a bad light, you deflect the discussion away as much as possible, usually by attacking the person, not by refuting the information put forth. That is disingenuous. And when I point out that you are being disingenuous in your discussions, you claim it's a "personal" attack.

I will continue to argue against your, or anyone's, diversionary tactics as long as you or they continue to use them.

[ProSense]

190. What's hilarious

Now that's projection. Every time anyone brings up anything that puts Obama in a bad light, you deflect the discussion away as much as possible, usually by attacking the person, not by refuting the information put forth. That is disingenuous. And when I point out that you are being disingenuous in your discussions, you claim it's a "personal" attack.

...is that you think repeating this makes sense or makes you look good, especially after repeatedly admitting that you're intentionally "attacking" because Snowden is criticized. You:

And one that you've used a lot. Instead of talking about the issues, in this case that you attack anyone who says bad stuff about Obama, you talk about the person. I suppose what you are trying to imply is that I'm defensive and therefore, somehow, my arguments are wrong. Just like Snowden is a "theif," or Manning "broke the law."

Again, learn to deal with criticism of Snowden. You should also learn to deal with support of the President. In fact, learn to deal with being called out for the "attacking" you've admitted to.

[mindwalker_i]

191. This is agreat example of your disingenuousness

I criticize you for deflecting the arguments away from what Snowden, making it about Snowden and ignoring the content of what Snowden showed us. It's a classic case of shooting the messenger. You can criticize Snowden all you want and I will respectfully disagree, but when you use that purely to deflect from the real issue, that government is collecting all out phone calls and internet data - spying on us - when you ONLY deflect the argument, that's when I will "attack" you.

[JDPriestly]

74. Defending Bush?

Have you read the book written based on the personal experiences of Bush's first Secretary of the Treasury while on the Bush cabinet. It's called "The Price of Honor"?

There is no defending George W. Bush. Read that book and you will understand that the Iraq War was always on Bush's drawing table. He lied during his campaign for the presidency when he said he would not meddle in the affairs of other countries. He lied about the evidence supporting his war on Iraq. He was a liar the entire time he was in the White House.

I can't believe that anyone who claims to be a Democrat can defend Obama's failure to prosecute Bush. Bush lied to get us into war. Had he not lied, Congress would not have voted for the War Powers Act. And the rest of them supported or goaded Bush on with his lies. If we were a just country, the moral country we claim to be, they would all be in prison.

[HughBeaumont]

79. Rec'd.

HOURS after 9/11, Rummy, Cheney and the rest of the PNAC goons were looking for ANY excuse, no matter how minimal, to tie the attacks to Saddam. Short of that (well, and after they realized they couldn't go attacking their oil BFFs in Saudi Arabia), they invaded Afghanistan on flimsy reasoning and then drummed up a pre-emptive, tax-wasting turkey shoot in Iraq on brazenly forged "evidence".

Were this a sane country, the entire Bewsh Administration would be in the Hague.

When corporations own everything, laws and morals will be compromised and corrupted to make wealthy people wealthier and defense vigilant and ever-funded. Unless YOU OR I get out of line . . . then it's open season, of course.

[mindwalker_i]

86. I don't think ProSense is defending Bush

Only saying that all presidents do things that are bad. But then, that's used as an excuse to suggest that Obama shouldn't be held accountable for doing anything bad, like domestic spying. That is a huge mistake.

This country's failure to prosecute those in power, specifically Bush & gang for Iraq and torture, the banks for stealing houses from people, or of Bush and now Obama from spying on everybody is seriously undermining any sense that laws apply. The Republicans have often said that economic recovery is hampered by "uncertainty" as to, for example, what will happen with taxes (it's all BS), but what about the uncertainty of people that, if they buy a house, it won't be stolen from them? And not only that, but if it is stolen, that there is no recourse for them, how does that affect certainty in the system?

Add to that the FACT that pointing out the crimes of spying or torture will get YOU in serious trouble, and belief in even a remotely fair system is seriously being degraded.

[ProSense]

95. Maybe you

"There is no defending George W. Bush. "

...should tell that to someone actually "defending" Bush. It wasn't me.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023502570

[NealK]

150. I believe you. But then again what was wrong 7 years ago is still wrong today.

Bush is spying on Americans: opponents and activist groups. The law can't be changed to make that legal.

ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-15-06 08:53 AM
Original message
Edited on Wed Feb-15-06 08:53 AM by ProSense

Bush is spying on Americans: opponents and activist groups. The law can't
be changed to make that legal. The Republicans are trying to pull a fast one with this "law change" tactic by framing the illegal spying as warrantless spying on terrorists; therefore, the law is being changed to give Bush the authority to spy on terrorist. Spying on Americans was, is and will still be illegal. Bush committed crimeS by illegal spying on Americans and breaking existing FISA laws.

I'm sure all criminals would love to have a law passed that retroactively absolves them of their crimes.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2461323

Credit for finding this post:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3494587

[bobduca]

155. ITS OK IF A DEMOCRAT DOES IT n/t

[ProSense]

162. Wrong

Credit for finding this post:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3494587

That's a copycat poster. PDS

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3122617
http://sync.democraticunderground.com/10023185307#post11

I stand by the statement, Bush lied.



http://www.aclu.org/national-security/aclu-ad-president-lied-american-people-and-broke-law

Of course, Bush didn't get a "court order." He bypassed the FISA court and actually eavesdropped on Americans.

What's interesting about the most recent release is that the one incident that wasn't reported to Congress happened during the Bush administration, and it was reported to Congress by the Obama administration.

"There is no defending George W. Bush. "
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023502570

[NealK]

164. "I stand by the statement, Bush lied."

And when the current President was a kid he cut down his father's prize cherry tree with his new axe and said when questioned, confessed with the words, "I can not tell a lie."

[ProSense]

165. What the hell are you talking about? n/t

[NealK]

185. "What the hell are you talking about?"

Funny. That's exactly what I thought when I read your reply.

[MannyGoldstein]

157. Pol Pot slaughtered fewer innocents than Stalin did

I guess that's a defense of Pol Pot in your eyes?

Wow.

[ProSense]

163. In that analogy

"Pol Pot slaughtered fewer innocents than Stalin did"

...who is "Stalin" and who is "Pol Pot"?

Let's look at the facts in the context of history.

Iraqi Security Forces (post-Saddam) Killed: 16,623
Coalition Forces Killed: 4,805 (4,487 U.S.)
Contractors Killed: 1,554
Awakening Councils Killed: 1,002+
Iraqi combatant dead (invasion period): 7,600–11,000
Insurgents (post-Saddam) Killed: 21,221–26,405 (2003-2011)
Civilian casualties: up to about 1 million

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War

Leaked Pakistani Report Finds 147 Civilians Killed By Drone Strikes
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023314340

The number of Dresden deaths cited in that article is suspect

The most-respected estimates, including the estimate of the German government, are 18,000-25,000.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022347168#post93

[Enthusiast]

122. During the debate with Gore, Boosh said he was against "nation building".

He lied.

[JDPriestly]

128. Yes. I remember that very clearly.

[nashville_brook]

146. spun so tight they have to defend Bush to defend Obama.

[JDPriestly]

73. What he did was still a crime.

And if you read the war powers act, you will note that Bush was asked to give the justifications for his war in Iraq. He provided an insufficient answer in which he lied. Bush did commit crimes. So did the others up there. Recognizing that legally, the prosecutor has the discretion to let them go, but in my opinion, on a moral level, Obama's failure to try those characters for their war crimes was an obstruction of justice. Obama's failure to even try to prosecute the serious crimes of lying about the evidence for going to war makes him an accomplice.

Manning merely told the truth. Bush lied. He lied and he could not have failed to know that he was lying. Think about the Plame case and the research her husband did. The documents were obviously and poorly faked. Bush lied. And the cost in human lives and to the American treasury were devastating.

Bush's crimes will never be forgotten.

[1awake]

2. What a statement that makes... K&R n/t

[sabrina 1]

3. Great pic, I hope it goes viral.

[Delphinus]

4. Tells the truth.

Love it. Thank you.

[whatchamacallit]

5. Bless you EarlG!

[Egalitarian Thug]

6. Just us. n/t

[hootinholler]

19. ++ Exactly. n/t

[Zorra]

7. Rec nt

[Pretzel_Warrior]

8. Great job

[TBF]

169. Interesting.

After the many OPs and threads disparaging Manning you are here to commend EarlG on his comment? Really?

Because to me this is looking pretty disingenuous.

[nadinbrzezinski]

9. This is the truth

[Solly Mack]

10. K&R

[RoccoR5955]

11. K & R

And I STILL want to see the Bush Crime Syndicate, pounding rock salt into a rathole at the Crowbar Hotel!

[sabrina 1]

147. You and a few million other people.

[libodem]

12. .

[leftstreet]

13. DURec

[myrna minx]

14. K&R.

[young_at_heart]

15. The damage done by the eight 'zeros' is incalcuable!

I put Cheney at the top of the list. He probably learned about political dirty tricks when he worked in the Nixon White House. "All The President's Men" didn't mention Cheney, but he was there observing. Fortunately, they all eventually were exposed.

[iamthebandfanman]

27. plus HE leaked classified information to the press

Valerie Plame !

[young_at_heart]

29. What happened to him for this crime?

We all know the answer.....hard to fathom!

[Mr.Bill]

16. Left out Oliver North

Giving info to the enemy? He sold weapons to them. He was rewarded with a nomination to run for the Senate. It's a travesty this man was never tried for treason.

[dothemath]

58. Jesse Helms .........

gets the nod for saving North's ass. Ol' Jesse, the Rush Limbaugh of his time. He set the stage for Rush, Hannity, Beck and many other faux nooz wannabes. Funny (tragic) how a POS like Jesse can start out as a disc jockey and, will miracles never cease, become a 'statesman' of the republicon party and feed at the public trough for many years, all the while spreading homophobic racism.

[Mr.Bill]

59. And don't forget Ronald Reagan

declaring North an "American hero".

[RainDog]

117. Reagan said the Taliban were freedom fighters

He also said the fascist coup dictators in Central America were like the founders of this nation.

Which just indicates what a fucking fascist Reagan was.

[Enthusiast]

124. Exactly. Well said.

I love it.

Iran-Contra was treason.

[JHB]

60. Thank Congress for so "brilliantly" giving him immunity to testify...

...which murked up attempts by special prosecutor Lawrence Walsh to charge him (and/or cut a deal for testimony about higher-ups). Walsh was still able to convict him on several felony charges, but they were vacated by a three-judge panel on appeal to review the evidence for taint by the immunized testimony.

The vote on the 3-judge panel was 2-1 for vacating the charges. The two "for" judges were Laurence H. Silberman and David B. Sentelle, who were also on the 3-judge panel overseeing the Whitewater investigation (where they had a very different view of what could be allowed).

According to David Brock's book "Blinded by the Right", Silberman was something of a mentor to Brock during his days as a young conservative in Washington, as part of the crowd that included Ann Coulter, Dinesh D'Sousa, Laura Ingraham, and where he gained prominence by smearing Anita Hill, and engaging in the Arkansas Project to dig up and spin anything they could against Bill and Hillary Clinton. (Back then, Brock was pretty much a classier- and higher-rent version of Andrew Breitbart -- and Silberman helped nurture that).

Edited to add: Sentelle was a protege of Jesse Helms, and Reagan put both of them in the Federal appeals court that oversees Washington.

[Mr.Bill]

61. That's good information.

Thank you.

[Autumn]

18. Justice? American justice.

Something is very wrong in our Country. Thanks for posting this.

[Divine Discontent]

96. yeah... it helps to be in power and rich. sadly.

http://www.zazzle.com/elizabeth_warren_for_president_of_the_usa_bumper_sticker-128665143471542797?rf=238107662556833486

[Enthusiast]

125. "Something is very wrong in our Country."

You got that shit right!

[heaven05]

21. yep

excellent point.

[MotherPetrie]

22. Perfect.

[monmouth3]

30. I'd love to share this on my timeline, anyone have a connection or the name of the page? Tks...

[go west young man]

87. Just right click on the image

then pick save image as. Then hit the photo upload button on the Facebook timeline window. Upload and share.

[monmouth3]

115. Thanks so much..n/t

[iamthebandfanman]

24. Dicks turn!

for outing Valerie Plame !

[JEB]

25. I don't know what makes me more angry.

That those POS get off Scot free or that a truth teller gets punished for revealing crimes. Sickening.

[Rex]

28. YEP.

They would be in jail if we lived in a real country that respected the laws. Sadly, we don't live in any kind of country like that. Just one corrupt from the ground up.

[baldguy]

31. And to thnk that there are some on DU who would put Obama away for 35 yrs for his "crimes"...

[HangOnKids]

84. Maybe you need to let EarlG know that

So he can put it into his post.

[MissDeeds]

32. This says a lot about where we are

as a nation. It's appalling, and I am ashamed.

K&R

[FiveGoodMen]

33. Christians often say that the Devil is currently in charge of planet earth

This appears to support that.

[tofuandbeer]

34. Powerful!

[Catherina]

35. Thank you! n/t

[tallahasseedem]

36. Thank you for this picture...

very sobering indeed.

[cascadiance]

37. Need to add Karl Rove (ZERO!) and Don Siegelman (6.5 years)

To show how much our system of "justice" is becoming a pure parade of political prisoners at the "second tier" of our justice system. We in the "first tier" of our "justice" system just get put in prison at world record levels more for things like drug offenses.

[JDPriestly]

75. Yes.

And, on a different level, the homeowners out of their homes and the bankers still in their banks. That's a complete mystery to me. How could homeowners have lost out so much when the banks have made out so well?

[lark]

38. There is no justice in America.

And the fair comes once a year. Don't look for "fair" anytime other than then. Justice can't be found at all these days.

[Lenomsky]

39. Great Collage ..

Speaks volumes! War and Murder is A-ok but just keep quiet about it.

[DLevine]

40. Thank you. nt

[Dustlawyer]

41. In America today we have a class of people that are above the law. You could keep adding to this

list for awhile. What about Wall Street CEOs' like Jamie Diamond?

[brett_jv]

65. Just so you know ...

It's Jaime Dimon ...

And I agree ... he's pretty much the head of an international criminal conspiracy, he and the whole board deserve jail.

On-Topic: This whole thing just sickens me. 35 years? SMH, WTF ...

[Dustlawyer]

132. It can't be more clear that he and all of the other big banksters have stolen more than the mafia

ever dreamed of. They pay a fine much less than their profits from the crime and keep on keepin on! These crazy gun nuts that are attracted to shooting up schools and little kids need to set their sights on Wall Street instead (pun intended)!

[FailureToCommunicate]

42. 'So many criminals, so little time.'

[WillyT]

43. HUGE K & R !!! - THANK YOU !!!

[blackspade]

44. Thanks EarlG.

Excellent graphic.
I would also like to see one of the various soldiers that have committed torture, rape, and murders.
Most of them did almost no time or walked.

[forestpath]

45. It's Obama's idea of justice.

[FlyByNight]

46. Depressing

The Bush 8 pictured above will never be held accountable (at least here in the US).

When it comes to DC: position is inversely proportional to one's level of accountability. The high(er) position means less accountability. The picture speaks volumes.

[JDPriestly]

77. I'm hoping that someone, somewhere will figure out a way to try them even if in absentia.

We need the record of the Bush War Crimes trials.

The record of the Nuremburg trials is a constant measure reminding us that the armies and leaders of nations are bound to a moral and legal code and that they pay consequences when they veer too far from that code.

Mankind and all the nations of the world, need one consolidated record -- a trial transcript and fair judges and juries to announce their opinions and a verdict.

[OnyxCollie]

47. Don't worry, Bush et al.,

Obama's got your back!

[xchrom]

48. 105th rec. nt

[Auggie]

51. An oligarchy protecting their own

[Lars39]

52. And Gonzales and Yoo...

[theHandpuppet]

54. This should be a poster

And plastered all over America.

[Coyotl]

56. ^^^^^^ THIS ^^^^^^

[ctsnowman]

55. Perfect.

[Initech]

62. Fuckin' a!

The real criminals walk while we only prove the whistleblowers' point.

[idwiyo]

63. K&R

[benld74]

66. Twas waiting until I saw a post like this! Good job!

[Faygo Kid]

67. 10 years ago today, many of us here on DU predicted this

No, we didn't know then about Bradley Manning, of course, but we did know we had been lied into an unnecessary war by a group of criminals.

And we said so at the time, as did many others whose voices were ignored or ridiculed.

And while we were hopeful there might someday be accountability, we knew full well even then it was unlikely.

And so it was, and is. Congrats EarlG on one of your best ever.

[William769]

68. Kick & very highly recommended.

[JDPriestly]

69. Why didn't Manning enjoy the same immunity as the other government employees?

He fulfilled his duty to tell the truth and not to commit war crimes better than any of them did.

He did not commit any war crimes. There is no evidence that he caused any deaths.

The rest of those pictured committed war crimes and caused deaths.

This is justice???

[Jesus Malverde]

70. bump...nt

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

71. Well done. K&R

[RainDog]

72. Repulsive truth n/t

[lpbk2713]

76. Zero days.

Not even close.

[Divine Discontent]

78. I shall post! And I shall say - Spot on, chap!

[CENTER]



http://www.zazzle.com/free_bradley_manning-128150238172675668?rf=238107662556833486

[malaise]

80. What a sad day

Rec

[NM_Birder]

81. regardless what the other eight are guilty of,

Bradley Manning illegally removed classified documents, and illegally distributed them to unauthorized personnel. Paint that with whatever color whitewash you want, it's still a crime and rightfully so.

Pretending he is some sort of hero or that justice was not served, because he is punished for criminal activities he is found guilty of committing is ridiculous.

Want to know why the other eight aren't being prosecuted ? It's either #1 George Bush is so fantastically brilliant in his foresight of the events that would unfold, that he masterfully covered everything and every base to keep his administration clean, -or- #2 Democrats would burn in the investigation as well as Republicans and that would have a negative effect on future elections. Both make me sick to my stomach, but one I just simply can't believe.

The others may be guilty as well, but that doesn't make Manning innocent, nor a hero.

[Divine Discontent]

88. ok, I'll bite

the atrocities Manning exposed are certainly worthy of making him worthy of whistleblower status. It doesn't matter he was military, because 'they' were the ones committing the crimes that were far worse than Manning releasing evidence of them. He deserves the Peace Prize for what he exposed. As for B*sh, he was not brilliant but he was given enormous power by the SCOTUS to become pResident. A lot can be done from that seat of power...

[hack89]

108. Ignoring the Military Whistleblower Protection Act of 1988 is why he is not a whistleblower

there was a legal way to accomplish everything wanted to do. He choose to break the law. The senseless thing about all this is that he didn't have to go to prison.

[NM_Birder]

114. The reason the "eight" are not being prosecuted, ...what's your opnion ?

the road to hell is paved with good intentions, Manning can imagine for the next 35 years what ramifications his release of classified documents will have on ongoing operations. peace prize, what a joke.

Bush and company will never be tried because Democrats will suffer in the process,....THAT's American justice.

[Divine Discontent]

143. he won't serve more than another 7, hopefully. he was tortured and naked before being found guilty,

so frankly, I don't care - yeah, he could have done it differently, but I see you could care less about what he exposed (incredibly immoral filth), and the fact no evidence was shown what he did harmed anyone. And your last sentence really comes across as a Republican statement. And frankly, no matter how much Democrats would suffer in trying the war criminals, they'll never be the complete pieces of shit repukes are....

[NM_Birder]

172. he was not tortured, what torture did he endure ?

George Bush did not commit the atrocities he was able to commit, all by himself. And if the answer is "he lied" then my response would be, he lied to a bunch of gullible ignoramuses that had no business being in a position of authority regarding military deployment. -Or- do you believe George Bush, to coin a phrase....is able to play 8 dimensional chess, and run circles around Democrats ? Occam's razor does NOT tell me that George Bush outsmarted anybody, but I think he was able to bargain for what he wanted, in my mind that makes ALL involved as guilty.

The picture posted with the Bush administration and Manning is representative of the hypocrisy alive and well in politics. Everything Republican is bad, evil and immoral, and even though Democrats have got to be involved for ANY of it to occur........lets not acknowledge that, because it will affect the election of future Democrats. The most Progressive philosophy that anybody can promote to is to first acknowledge that political leadership has outgrown it's use of the American public. We are spoon fed hypocrisy, the American people gobble it up and point fingers at fellow Americans in a self righteous attempt to dominate an intangible argument that is as much fairy tale as it is fact. Meanwhile we are ALL circling the drain pointing our fingers at each other.... and the garbage disposal is on.

If the word "truth" means anything anymore, then EVERYBODY needs to be courageous enough to acknowledge the bloody footprints that lead to ALL doors, BOTH Republican and Democrat. In any case, Manning captured and then released classified military documentation to unauthorized personnel, the end does not justify the means, and I'm glad he was not rewarded with a light sentence.

[Iggo]

99. .

[LiberalLovinLug]

100. Regardless?.....Regardless?...

and its all because it was "illegal"?

Do you ever speed on a highway?
Ever not declared even a small amount on income tax?
Ever taken a hit off a joint?

And BushCo. ALSO was technically guilty of illegal activities...the wiretapping was only one (which was retroactively made legal).

What it boils down to is that One person told the truth...about crimes going on that would never have seen the light of day

And the others told lies and covered up the truth...about their own criminal activity (in which thousands if not millions were violently killed)

but....you know....that's all regardless..

[NM_Birder]

112. if you can equate a speeding ticket or smoking a joint....

to the illegal capture and release of classified military documents, in order to satisfy your views on justice, then I doubt we will ever be able to discuss this.

take care.

[NM_Birder]

129. I'll be twisting up a fatty later tonight, and watching "How the Universe Expanded"

That must make me akin to Steven Hawking, where do I pick up my Nobel Prize in Physics ?

[LiberalLovinLug]

173. Excuse me, it seemed like ilegailty was an issue with you

Okay so the illegality of it was NOT the issue with you..do I have that right?


Then what is left?
No one has been reported dead from the revelations...unless you count Kadaffi and his supporters.

All that is left is that the world knows about a lot of underhanded deceptive behaviour by your government.
Not to mention criminal activity in the military such as what is captured in the Collateral Murder video. Most everyone's "views on justice" would deem that behaviour unacceptable.

So what it boils down to is that you just don't want to know. Hands over ears....la la la la la la. The Authorities are right...we should not question.

[NM_Birder]

174. you're kidding right ?

Yes I exceed the speed limit, and when caught I pay the fine as dictated by law, it's happened before and it will happen again. I do smoke joints and if caught I will suffer the penalty of law.


If I were to disclose classified military documents to unauthorized personnel I would expect to feel the penalty of my actions. for the next 35 years Manning can contemplate this, while I pay my speeding tickets and smoke my doobies.

"no one has been reported dead from the revelations"...."Kadaffi".....you have absolutely become entertaining and have peaked my interest, .....please continue.

For the record, I also turn right on red lights, I've been known to use my phone while driving, I still use plastic bags at the grocery store because I can carry more at one time, I have an accountant do my taxes so I can't claim to be criminal there but I do buy my cigarettes on the reservation because they are tax free. Oh, and I water my lawn more than the city dictates I am allowed.

[Lenomsky]

176. I hope ...

you don't kill anyone when using your cell phone while driving, speeding, smoking a doobie, turn on red etc

So the above are lesser crimes which could lead however unlikely greater crimes.

Manning showed us the Truth he hurt nobody except the elite ... naive yes however roles reversed I'm not sure what each of us would do.

[NM_Birder]

177. no comment about my use of plastic bags ?

I know I must sound like this weeks "America's Most Wanted", but you'll have to take my word for it, I'm not hauling ass around town talking on my cell phone smoking dope trying not to run down citizens. But yeah, I have and will use my cell if I need to, I much prefer to smoke than drink but do neither while driving, and turning on red in NM isn't against the law, it's just for us "thrill seekers". I travel NM extensively for work, and if you know anything about NM, there is a LOT of NOTHING between cities, I have been known to exceed the speed limit, and even god forbid...... talk on my cell.

The point was, I understand the risks involved in my crimes, and if caught I'll suffer the consequences. Manning is enjoying the fruits of his crimes right now, and will be for 35 years, and I'm glad for that.

[LiberalLovinLug]

192. No

So if you were to happen to be in one of your lovely southern states and perhaps forgot about the local laws concerning mary jane, or inadvertently had a joint stashed somewhere and were pulled over by State troopers.....and were then sentenced in accordance with the state law, like in Louisiana or Arizona:

Under Arizona law, even minor marijuana possession offenses may be prosecuted as felony crimes, punishable by up to 18 months in jail and a $150,000 fine.

In Louisiana, multi-decade (or even life) sentences for repeat pot offenders are hardly a rare occurrence. Under Louisiana law, a second pot possession conviction is classified as a felony offense, punishable by up to five years in prison. Three-time offenders face up to 20 years in prison. According to a 2008 expose published in New Orleans City Business online, district attorneys are not hesitant to “target small-time marijuana users, sometimes caught with less than a gram of pot, and threaten them with lengthy prison sentences.”

I gather you would gladly accept the sentence. Even if friends and family urged you to fight it and thought it was far too harsh - say a 10 year sentence. No you'd say, I did the crime, I do the time.

............

The reason this relates to the Manning case is that he did a lot of good in releasing those cables, more than just enjoying a joint. He may have even sparked the Arab Spring, which started in Tunisia after the cables revealed corruption at the highest levels. (and American support).

and exposed other crimes and deceptions because of a moral compulsion. For this he gets 35 years. But you seem fine with that.

Do you even understand the concept of a whistleblower? Because it seems you do not. What about Civil Disobedience?...Is this also verboten? I don't understand someone like you.

[NM_Birder]

193. Ok, well what if I was in California instead of

one of my lovely Southern States. I'd get a ticket for a joint and be on my way. The comparison between the crimes of classified document release, and smoking a joint was silly, and irrelevant.

Verboten ? cute, but ineffective.

Sure I understand civil disobedience, are you telling me that stealing classified military documents,.....700,000 of them, and then releasing them to an unknown foreign source, qualifies as "civil disobedience" ?

Sparked the Arab Spring? You ARE smoking better weed than me, maybe too much.


I wished he had gotten life, but I'm satisfied with 35 years.

[LiberalLovinLug]

196. I guess you were too much in a pot cloud

when the Arab Spring started in Tunisia, because then you would have understood that the information about Tunisia's "The Family" and the confirmation of American acknowledgment of their corruption was a huge factor in the final push to take to the streets.

http://mondoweiss.net/2013/08/the-evidence-that-bradley-manning-helped-start-the-arab-spring.html

The point I was TRYING to make with you about the comparison between the two crimes is totally lost on you I can see. They are both "crimes", but especially in a few of the southern states, the punishment does not fit the "crime". I am assuming you would agree. In fact you most likely do not even consider smoking, or having pot, or even growing it (because how would you get it otherwise) is a CRIME.

I just wanted to be clear that you believe SOME deeds the State says are crimes, you don't agree are. Or maybe I'm wrong and you think you are a criminal and live in a perpetual state of guilt. If that's the case...you are a piece of work.

So I'll just assume otherwise. And if that's the case, you seem to be of a completely opposite mindset in regards to whistleblowers. Whether what they reveal is a benefit to democratic citizens right to know or not...you want the State to throw the book at them.

I can only gather that IF you were not a pot enthusiast, you would be completely backing some Louisiana court sentencing some kid for 20 years after having been caught with a joint for the third time....because pot, like information covered up and stamped "classified" in order to conceal it from the public, (and we are talking about diplomatic cables, not top level secret military cables), is just too dangerous to be set free.

[NM_Birder]

195. for what it's worth,...

Your words....

All that is left is that the world knows about a lot of underhanded deceptive behaviour by your government.
Not to mention criminal activity in the military such as what is captured in the Collateral Murder video. Most everyone's "views on justice" would deem that behaviour unacceptable.


My words......
All that is left is what the news decided to tell you, you filled in the gaps and decided that nobody got hurt or is being hurt, or will get hurt. Nobody reported dead except Kadaffi.....jesus christ.

[LanternWaste]

186. one may then easily rationalize that some laws are illegal to break, and others not so much...

I imagine that if you hold the opposition side to a higher standard than they hold themselves, you may then quite easily rationalize to yourself that some laws are illegal to break, and others... not so much.

So yeah, I can see why you wouldn't wish to discuss it with those who may hold both sides to the same standard.

Good luck!

[NM_Birder]

194. Articulate, sounded good and well said, but I doubt you mean it.

One might also say..........that

Neither political party hold themselves to any sort of "higher standard", because the cost in the next political election cycle is too great. That's why nobody ever sees one party held accountable for thier involvement in the crimes of the opposing party, even though there is absolutely no doubt that things like the Patriot Act, Homeland Security, The Iraq war, Drone surveillance and bombing all require involvement by BOTH parties. They both simply point fingers at each other, recount the horrors committed by "the other" side and wave around a self righteous flag of "higher standards" to disguise their own involvement. And it gets gobbled up, spun around and served up on a silver platter for the carp of society to feast on.

Manning stole classified materials,..... he removed the stolen classified materials from a secure facility, he then distributed the stolen classified materials to an un unknown and unauthorized foreign source. If your belief is that 700,000 pieces of classified materials being stolen and gifted to an unknown source without acknowledging the ramifications to ongoing operations,.... is some sort of obscure higher standard "for the greater good" or "the end justifies the means" then yeah you and I can't discuss this. I wish he was in for life, but 35 years is close enough, and I'd like to believe a treasonous traitor and fink like manning will be given the highest standard of treatment a piece of trash deserves,..... forgotten and thrown away.

Manning? Manning who?.........three weeks.... bet you.

[Stuckinthebush]

103. Agreed

But you won't get much traction here with that argument. The current incarnation of DU is a little myopic on this subject.

[NM_Birder]

119. ;)..........

if all I ever cared about was getting the correct answers.......I'd talk to a mirror.

I'm curious why people think Bush and company will never be put on trial, and how a "peace prize" is even mentioned in the trial of Bradley Manning.

[NRaleighLiberal]

82. Profound and devastating...Kick and Rec.

[Divine Discontent]

89. mmm... tomatoes...

[NRaleighLiberal]

90. so hard to get anyone to take me seriously - all they do is drool on my maters!

hey friend!

[Divine Discontent]

93. you don't know what a good mater does to a person...

nice maters!

[Spitfire of ATJ]

85. IOKIYAAR

[Divine Discontent]

91. YEP! or pretend to be one, or pretend to be a fundamentalist.

Republicans fall for those types all the time, and send them thousands in campaign donations...

[Hotler]

97. ..........

So true, well played Sir.

[Hotler]

98. Please refresh my memory.

Who is the person below Bush, above Cheney????

[MelungeonWoman]

151. Doug Feith n/t

[Hotler]

170. I thought so. Thank you. n/t

[SwampG8r]

101. what is most saddening is

that people will come in this thread and go "good job" or well done" or other short statements sounding like they are supportive of what you have posted
what they will really be "good job"ing and "well done"ing will be to congratulate the outcome for manning
and why not? its the outcome they have slavered after in op after op while they spin furiously to protect the real criminals your graphic addresses
what a sad day all around

[Hotler]

148. Not me!

Last edited Thu Aug 22, 2013, 08:54 AM - Edit history (1)

Everyone but Manning in the picture that Mr. G posted should be in prison, either here or in the Hague. I do not know who I hate ( hate is such a strong word) the most, these guys or those fuckers on Wall St.

[SwampG8r]

149. i think they are the same guys actually

at the end of the day wall street and these guys are the same guys

[gopiscrap]

104. No kidding!

[LondonReign2]

105. Just having to look at those faces again infuriates me

[MichiganVote]

109. What a complete and utter crock of shit this sentence is.

Embarrassing to say the US has justice.

[Hydra]

111. ...

I'm stunned...you've completely captured the insanity of the situation in 1 graphic.

All I can say is...very well done.

[Little Star]

116. k&r

[KG]

118. I recall powell being a right popular fellow around here when seemed to endorse obama for prez

[Enthusiast]

120. Those fuckers with zero years deserve Manning's sentence.

And Manning deserves zero.

This is what I'm talkin' about!

[PatrynXX]

123. the Ringleader here has gray hair and glasses

and used to Be Darth Vader. He committed Treason. Just like Snowden did. Maybe Manning. In order to sentence Manning to 35 years and be justified in doing so you must charge Dick Cheney with the same crime. End of story there are no Buts.

[Enthusiast]

127. Kicked and Recommended!

Nice post!

[yurbud]

131. WHITE HOUSE PETITION: fully pardon Bradley Manning

There probably are and will be more of these various places, but posting one on the White House website makes it harder for them to say haven't seen it, and for others who stumble across it on their site, it will be like a scarlet letter.

Who knows, it might even force Obama to act.

Sign at the link:

http://wh.gov/lg7Lo


https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/fully-pardon-bradley-manning/4kTTbwrt

[sulphurdunn]

133. He can be paroled in 6 years.

The best thing to do now is see that he is, but for the efforts of his supporters his sentence would have been much worse.

[chaplainM]

134. Add Rupert Murdoch

Unless bribery of foreign officials has been decriminalized.

[Scuba]

135. Proud to be Rec # 250. Kick.

[taught_me_patience]

136. K and R

[marble falls]

137. not equal justice.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

138. That lovely PNAC crew - they should all be behind bars

[Fire Walk With Me]

139. All my Recs are belong to you. n/t

[cantbeserious]

140. Injustice!

eom

[mimi85]

141. Hopefully his lawyer is right.

Oops - hit return too soon.
His lawyer says he's eligible for parole in 7 years. Fingers crossed. I don't think this fragile guy would last a day longer - if that long.

[rdharma]

142. 3 1/2 years house arrest..... for murder of 109 civilians

[Omnith]

158. The system needs reform

[Cleita]

156. You made me cry. n/t

[QuestForSense]

159. It's worse than you think

In court papers filed (Tuesday, 08/21/13), the United States Department of Justice requested that George W. Bush, Richard Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice and Paul Wolfowitz be granted procedural immunity in a case alleging that they planned and waged the Iraq War in violation of international law.

"The DOJ claims that in planning and waging the Iraq War, ex-President Bush and key members of his Administration were acting within the legitimate scope of their employment and are thus immune from suit,” chief counsel Inder Comar of Comar Law said.

http://warisacrime.org/content/obama-doj-asks-court-grant-immunity-george-w-bush-iraq-war

[blkmusclmachine]

161. The Too Big To Jail's,

versus

The Too Small To Matter's

Guess who LOSES, every single time?!?!

[woo me with science]

166. K&R

THANK YOU.

[Gus Lammas]

167. Cheney and Rumsfeld? The Needle

George the Easily-Led Doofus and Colin the Too-Loyal Soldier/Team Player? Let 'em go. Wolfowitz? Life without parole, with Rice getting ten years.

[Berlum]

168. k & r

nt

[Pterodactyl]

171. So, Obama's going to pardon Manning, right?