5 ms·

Why are you a liar? Ignorance or malevolence? Or are you willingly a propaganda sock-puppet? Because if you aren't, you have a duty to educate yourself before

by fineman 11y ago

Why are you a liar? Ignorance or malevolence? Or are you willingly a propaganda sock-puppet? Because if you aren't, you have a duty to educate yourself before you speak about things of this importance. [Re: Downvotes] - Is being called out upsetting? Imagine someone being put in jail by your lies. That's a lot more upsetting. [Re: Re: Downvotes] - Seriously. This isn't Uber vs Lyft, this is knowingly repeating false information to justify keeping someone in jail for treason. That's just steps under lying about someone to drum up support to get them killed. Does asking if a sock-puppet is a sock-puppet hurt HN more than allowing sock-puppets like that to use HN as a platform for hate? If it was Russia's propaganda machine, or a beloved hero like Nelson Mandela, we'd react strongly, but when it's our propaganda machine we give it a pass. > http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/feb/01/bradley-manning-wikileaks ... A dispute had arisen concerning 15 Iraqi detainees held by the national Iraqi police force on the grounds that they had been printing "anti-Iraqi literature". The police were refusing to work with the US forces over the matter, and Manning's job was to investigate and find out who the "bad guys" were. He got hold of the leaflet that the detained men were distributing and had it translated into English. He was astonished to find that it was in fact a scholarly critique against the Iraqi prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, that tracked the corruption rife within his cabinet. "I immediately took that information and ran to the officer to explain what was going on," Manning later explained. "He didn't want to hear any of it … he told me to shut up and explain how we could assist the [Iraqi] police in finding MORE detainees." ... The USA was cooperating in arresting innocent Iraqi civilians (and subjecting them to brutal torture when arrested). This is illegal. Under civilian and military law, illegal orders must be refused and reported. Manning had a legal duty to report the illegal orders. If Manning had not reported this, it would be a crime. Being told to ignore it doesn't change that. If you're pissed off about criminals ruining the reputation and effectiveness of the USA Armed Forces, and you should be, you need to be mad at the officers and soldiers and leaders who committed the crimes not the messenger who told you about it.

cookiecaper 11y ago
That doesn't seem to contradict anything I said. He was mad at the Army, so leaked a bunch of classified documents. To any extent which his leaks treat Iraqi police and/or U.S. forces detaining political prisoners, it is incidental -- the document dump was not discriminatory. Manning is not a whistleblower over events of illegal detention. We already know that this wasn't Manning's motive for leaking docs anyway; he was mad that the Army did not respect his desires to live as a transsexual and that it disciplined him for tardiness and other job failures. [0] http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/12/bradley-manning-court-martial-sentencing http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/12/bradley-manning...
- fineman 11y ago
  > That doesn't seem to contradict anything I said. It literally contradicts everything you said. Manning would be a criminal, by our existing laws, for not reporting the abuses. The attempt to report war crimes was ignored before the leaks. He tried, and was rebuffed, but his responsibility didn't end there. > He was mad at the Army. Irrelevant. Manning had a legal duty to - more than just refuse the orders - make sure the illegal actions stopped. Besides, can you imagine a mobster using this defense? "Sure, I kill people, but Bugsy only told you because he was angry I cut him out of some of the payment. If Bugsy wasn't a little bitch you never would have caught me." We'd laugh because it's irrelevant; a crime is a crime and an illegal order is an illegal order. > [link] "... Manning flipped a table during counseling ..." Oh my god! Small emotional outburst cancels importance of illegal conspiracy. I'm so sorry for the counsellor who had to witness that. It must be almost as traumatic as having your parents taken away and tortured or killed because of politically motivated false arrest. /s You're only talking about the messenger to distract from the message. What are you afraid of? What are you covering up for?
  - pc86 11y ago
    Your tone is overly personal and counter-productive.
    - fineman 11y ago
      The other poster's words contribute to putting a hero in jail for treason. Mine might not be productive because they're accusatory. I'll take that chance considering the stakes. How counter-productive would you feel this was if it was your family unlawfully detained? And, if you'll note, their words are personal. They attack and denigrate Manning specifically and by name, despite evidence. I only refer to them in the abstract because I'm referring to anyone who feels or says what they do. This is important - their words follow Manning forever, mine are only here in this thread, only attached to their hate speech. If they walk away from the lies, they walk away from my judgements. We shouldn't pretend that willful ignorance is a justifiable opinion that deserves respect - lies are lies, and these ones specifically are calculated to put an innocent in prison.

by fineman 11y ago

cookiecaper 11y ago

That doesn't seem to contradict anything I said. He was mad at the Army, so leaked a bunch of classified documents. To any extent which his leaks treat Iraqi police and/or U.S. forces detaining political prisoners, it is incidental -- the document dump was not discriminatory. Manning is not a whistleblower over events of illegal detention. We already know that this wasn't Manning's motive for leaking docs anyway; he was mad that the Army did not respect his desires to live as a transsexual and that it disciplined him for tardiness and other job failures. [0] http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/12/bradley-manning-court-martial-sentencing http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/12/bradley-manning...

fineman 11y ago
> That doesn't seem to contradict anything I said. It literally contradicts everything you said. Manning would be a criminal, by our existing laws, for not reporting the abuses. The attempt to report war crimes was ignored before the leaks. He tried, and was rebuffed, but his responsibility didn't end there. > He was mad at the Army. Irrelevant. Manning had a legal duty to - more than just refuse the orders - make sure the illegal actions stopped. Besides, can you imagine a mobster using this defense? "Sure, I kill people, but Bugsy only told you because he was angry I cut him out of some of the payment. If Bugsy wasn't a little bitch you never would have caught me." We'd laugh because it's irrelevant; a crime is a crime and an illegal order is an illegal order. > [link] "... Manning flipped a table during counseling ..." Oh my god! Small emotional outburst cancels importance of illegal conspiracy. I'm so sorry for the counsellor who had to witness that. It must be almost as traumatic as having your parents taken away and tortured or killed because of politically motivated false arrest. /s You're only talking about the messenger to distract from the message. What are you afraid of? What are you covering up for?
- pc86 11y ago
  Your tone is overly personal and counter-productive.
  - fineman 11y ago
    The other poster's words contribute to putting a hero in jail for treason. Mine might not be productive because they're accusatory. I'll take that chance considering the stakes. How counter-productive would you feel this was if it was your family unlawfully detained? And, if you'll note, their words are personal. They attack and denigrate Manning specifically and by name, despite evidence. I only refer to them in the abstract because I'm referring to anyone who feels or says what they do. This is important - their words follow Manning forever, mine are only here in this thread, only attached to their hate speech. If they walk away from the lies, they walk away from my judgements. We shouldn't pretend that willful ignorance is a justifiable opinion that deserves respect - lies are lies, and these ones specifically are calculated to put an innocent in prison.