• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Assange Speaks to UN

Somebody else coined the phrase that 'war is hell', but it is certainly true. Yessir, it IS shocking, no doubt about it. The smell of human blood splattered inside a helicopter is a pretty SHOCKING experience. Disgusting too.

Humans might be divided into 2 categories--those who love war, and those who love peace.

If the shoe fits, wear it.

That's not true at all. I can't think of anyone who came back from deployment saying they just had a dandy ole time. People who love war need to be placed in an asylum for the good of the people around them.
 
What lives were saved?

I said that the truth "can" save lives. Key word being "can". I never said that it did. I have as much proof that it did as you have proof that it killed. None.

Doesn't matter. He has more assets than the average jack off, which means he's hardly broke.

Now, how much of that money is made by means other than donations? Is any of it from donations? Or do you just assume that it is?

I was actually returning to my original argument. You changed the goalposts by stating that the information didn't aid the enemy in any way because the information was old. Classified is classified.

I've never said that the information didn't aid the enemy in any way. I have only questioned whether people were killed because of it.

Manning stole over 750,000 classified military documents for the sole purpose of dissemination. His actions aided the enemy during a time of war, Assange was an accomplice to that. Manning should be executed as a spy, and Assange should be dealt with accordingly by the European courts, specifically, members of the coalition forces.

I agree that Manning betrayed his country and should be dealt with accordingly. However I do not agree that Assaunge should be punished because of publishing those cables. The ultimate job of journalists is to expose the truth, good or bad. If we start punishing journalists because of doing that then you are limiting freedom of the press. When you start doing that then you start controlling the press. At which point we are no better than those countries that do control the press. (like Iran) We open up a can of worms that should NEVER be opened. It starts allowing the government to dictate what can and cannot be published and told to the very people that they are suppose to be serving, not ruling.
 
And how do you know that Kal?

Read it in the news media. Can't remember which one but a quick search for it came up with Wikipedia stating this...

Manning told Lamo he passed the Baghdad helicopter attack ("Collateral murder") video to WikiLeaks shortly after this incident, in February 2010. In April, just as WikiLeaks published the video, Manning sent an e-mail to his master sergeant, Paul Adkins, saying he was suffering from gender identity disorder and attaching a photograph of himself dressed as a woman. Captain Steven Lim, Manning's commander, said he first saw the e-mail after Manning's arrest – when information about hormone replacement therapy was found in his room in Baghdad – and learned that Manning had been calling himself Breanna.[26] Manning told Lamo that his commander had found out about the gender issue before his arrest, after looking at his medical files at the beginning of May. He said he had set up Twitter and YouTube accounts in Breanna's name to give her a digital presence, writing in the Lamo chat: "i wouldn't mind going to prison for the rest of my life, or being executed so much, if it wasn't for the possibility of having pictures of me ... plastered all over the world press ... as [a] boy ... the CPU is not made for this motherboard ..."[27]

On April 30 he posted on Facebook that he was utterly lost, and over the next few days that "Bradley Manning is not a piece of equipment," that he was "beyond frustrated," and "livid" after being "lectured by ex-boyfriend despite months of relationship ambiguity ..." On May 7 he seemed to spiral out of control. According to army witnesses, he was found curled into a fetal position in a storage cupboard, with a knife at his feet, and had cut the words "I want" into a vinyl chair. A few hours later he had an altercation with a female intelligence analyst, Specialist Jihrleah Showman, during which he punched her in the face. The brigade psychiatrist recommended a discharge, referring to an "occupational problem and adjustment disorder." His master sergeant removed the bolt from his weapon, and he was sent to work in the supply office, though at this point his security clearance remained in place. He was demoted from Specialist to Private First Class just two days before his arrest on May 26.[28]

Ellen Nakashima writes that, on May 9, Manning contacted Jonathan Odell, a gay American novelist in Minneapolis, via Facebook, leaving a message that he wanted to speak to him in confidence; he said he had been involved in some "very high-profile events, albeit as a nameless individual thus far." On May 19, according to army investigators, he e-mailed Eric Schmiedl, a mathematician he had met in Boston, and told him he had been the source of the "Collateral Murder" video. Two days later, he began the series of chats with Adrian Lamo that led to his arrest.[29]

Wiki Link

Time to go back to work, lunch break is over.
 
Ah! Wikipedia. Well that certainly settles it.

I have read in the media that there were other reasons for his turning over the documents. After he 'lost his virginity' seeing US cowboys in action, and hearing their brutal and callous statements and laughter "That will teach them to bring their kids to a gunfight" he was immensely ashamed of the cause he was involved in.

I know that as a former US Army member and US citizen, I too was ashamed of the actions and laughter of those soldiers.

Because of that shame, and because he wanted to somehow possibly end such criminal behavior, he did what he did, same as Daniel Ellsberg decades before him.

It is true that he is gay, it seems, but that was not his motivation for his actions. Unless, of course, one happens to place alot of faith in Wikipedia.
 
Somebody else coined the phrase that 'war is hell', but it is certainly true. Yessir, it IS shocking, no doubt about it. The smell of human blood splattered inside a helicopter is a pretty SHOCKING experience. Disgusting too.

Humans might be divided into 2 categories--those who love war, and those who love peace.

If the shoe fits, wear it.
The only way im ok with that is if the tax system has an avenue for peace and war. As it stands all of America, Christian (or whatever else they are) and loving and caring aside, give their worth to war. Well except for the bums running around with signs preaching stop the war. But even then they have to beg and then get taxed at your local 7-11.

Give a viable avenue for peace through taxes (as in ZERO of the tax money under this option goes to anything war related) and then we can have a 2 way street instead.

I think there should be an checkable option on your taxes that states "None of my taxes are allowed for offensive, non 50 state land defense war, military, kinetic strikes, espionage, anything hostile in any manner including proxy gifts"
 
I absolutely agree Chris, but the way our politicians work, they would use taxes for the war machine and tell us that they were using it for Easter Egg Hunts, or something else. And many americans would believe them.

My earlier post was a bit of an oversimplification, no doubt. Many, including myself, can conceive of a just war, but all the wars in my lifetime have been undeclared and not connected with justice in any way, shape or form.
 
I said that the truth "can" save lives. Key word being "can". I never said that it did. I have as much proof that it did as you have proof that it killed. None.
It exposed Afghan nationals who were working as informants. It gave names and locations within Afghanistan, which is controlled by the Taliban and Mujahadeen. But I'm sure these people, who are notorious for mass murder, extortion, and coercion through torture and violence just let it slide this time.

Now, how much of that money is made by means other than donations? Is any of it from donations? Or do you just assume that it is?
He made 1.3 million from an autobiography after he became the peoples champion of not knowing when to shut the **** up, as well as an $800,000 dollar deal with another publisher in the works. Speaking of, in his book, he says this little gem:
Julian Assange said:
'Well, they're informants so, if they get killed, they've got it coming to them. They deserve it.'
What a swell guy.


I've never said that the information didn't aid the enemy in any way. I have only questioned whether people were killed because of it.
Of course there were, it just isn't in the papers. We already ****ed up by letting this happen, why go further by confirming kills for the Taliban?

I agree that Manning betrayed his country and should be dealt with accordingly. However I do not agree that Assaunge should be punished because of publishing those cables. The ultimate job of journalists is to expose the truth, good or bad.
Assange is an activist, not a journalist.

If we start punishing journalists because of doing that then you are limiting freedom of the press. When you start doing that then you start controlling the press. At which point we are no better than those countries that do control the press. (like Iran) We open up a can of worms that should NEVER be opened. It starts allowing the government to dictate what can and cannot be published and told to the very people that they are suppose to be serving, not ruling.
Yeah, that happened in 1798 with the Alien and Sedition Acts. Illegally publishing classified military information is not, and should never be protected by the First Amendment, just as libel, slander, incitement of violent acts, and terrorist threats aren't protected. There has always been limits to the First Amendment, and for good reason.
 
It exposed Afghan nationals who were working as informants. It gave names and locations within Afghanistan, which is controlled by the Taliban and Mujahadeen. But I'm sure these people, who are notorious for mass murder, extortion, and coercion through torture and violence just let it slide this time.

Unless you have proof that they have done something then the only thing that you can logically conclude is that nothing has happened. Saying anything else is nothing more than fear mongering.

He made 1.3 million from an autobiography after he became the peoples champion of not knowing when to shut the **** up, as well as an $800,000 dollar deal with another publisher in the works.

Ok, I concede the fact that he made some money with this. Now, whats the difference between what he has done vs any other media that makes money?

Speaking of, in his book, he says this little gem:

What a swell guy.

No one that I know of has ever claimed that he is a saint.

Of course there were, it just isn't in the papers. We already ****ed up by letting this happen, why go further by confirming kills for the Taliban?

Umm...because then you, all the anti-Assuange folks, the government etc etc would be able to use it to limit the press even more...including trying to convict Assuange.


Assange is an activist, not a journalist.

Yes he is an activist. But he is also a journalist. The two are NOT mutually exclusive. Indeed you could argue that many media outlets now adays are activists also. Either for a war, against a war, for a president, for an incumbant etc etc etc.


Yeah, that happened in 1798 with the Alien and Sedition Acts. Illegally publishing classified military information is not, and should never be protected by the First Amendment, just as libel, slander, incitement of violent acts, and terrorist threats aren't protected. There has always been limits to the First Amendment, and for good reason.

Yes and many agree that the Alien and Sedition Act would be considered unconstitutional today. And should have been then also. The reason that it wasn't ever declared unconstitutional was because the Supreme Courts right to judicial review was not established until Marbury v. Madison in 1803. (The sedition act expired in 1801) After Marbury v. Madison subsequent rulings indicated that it would have been considered unconstitutional.

And there is just as much good reason to not limit the 1st amendment. Such as not allowing a government to achieve tyranny by keeping the masses uninformed.
 
Somebody else coined the phrase that 'war is hell', but it is certainly true. Yessir, it IS shocking, no doubt about it. The smell of human blood splattered inside a helicopter is a pretty SHOCKING experience. Disgusting too.

Humans might be divided into 2 categories--those who love war, and those who love peace.

If the shoe fits, wear it.

Or people who understand it and people that don't.
 
And there is just as much good reason to not limit the 1st amendment. Such as not allowing a government to achieve tyranny by keeping the masses uninformed.

The masses are already uninformed. Knowing the things Assange publishes isn't going to make them knowledgeable about international relations, military operations, or intelligence procedures, so what does it matter?

They were uninformed before and they're uninformed after. People that aren't experts in things should really just shut the **** up about them; they're useless.
 
The masses are already uninformed. Knowing the things Assange publishes isn't going to make them knowledgeable about international relations, military operations, or intelligence procedures, so what does it matter?

They were uninformed before and they're uninformed after. People that aren't experts in things should really just shut the **** up about them; they're useless.

Now isn't this funny. Here you all are complaining about people finding these things out and now you're just saying that it doesn't matter because they will still be uninformed. Hypocritical much?
 
No sir, he betrayed his GOVERNMENT'S secrets.

This country and its government are two separate entities. Indeed, the country existed first, if you will, and by way of the founding document CREATED the government so that Justice might be established, a more perfect union formed, and the common defence might be improved.

And as Ike predicted in 1961, the government is way out of control.

He exposed the crimes--murder--of his government, just as Daniel Ellsberg revealed the crimes of the government.

Manning was motivated by conscience--the ability to know right from wrong--and for that he should be commended.

But instead the vengeful government kept him in torturous conditions in violation of still more laws, including the UCMJ.

Thanks for sharing. Also, thanks for not being in charge of national security.
 
You're quite welcome Wiggen, and thank YOU for not understanding what national security IS.
 
I know enough about it not to leave it in the hands of Bradley Manning or Assange. Or folks like you.
 
It exposed Afghan nationals who were working as informants. It gave names and locations within Afghanistan, which is controlled by the Taliban and Mujahadeen. But I'm sure these people, who are notorious for mass murder, extortion, and coercion through torture and violence just let it slide this time.


He made 1.3 million from an autobiography after he became the peoples champion of not knowing when to shut the **** up, as well as an $800,000 dollar deal with another publisher in the works. Speaking of, in his book, he says this little gem:

What a swell guy.



Of course there were, it just isn't in the papers. We already ****ed up by letting this happen, why go further by confirming kills for the Taliban?


Assange is an activist, not a journalist.


Yeah, that happened in 1798 with the Alien and Sedition Acts. Illegally publishing classified military information is not, and should never be protected by the First Amendment, just as libel, slander, incitement of violent acts, and terrorist threats aren't protected. There has always been limits to the First Amendment, and for good reason.

Robert Gates was on TV when I saw him say that what Wikileaks had released caused harm to NOBODY. He was the Sec Def. So all that wicked stuff people like to attribute to Assange is a bit of a hoax.

He's a hero in the sense that Paul Revere was, and heros are few and far between. :2razz:

It's true he is no angel, for he is a man. Nobody is perfect, and perfection is not an option.

But he's one of the few people in the world telling the truth about certain matters.
 
Except raping women. He apparently isn't willing to tell the truth about that in a court of law.
 
If you knew the whole story, you would not post like that because the whole truth is a fairly long story and reveals that it was not rape at all. The Swedes have weird laws, and the first prosecutor dismissed the case.

If you had full knowledge of the case, you would understand.
 
Robert Gates was on TV when I saw him say that what Wikileaks had released caused harm to NOBODY. He was the Sec Def. So all that wicked stuff people like to attribute to Assange is a bit of a hoax.
You need to cite this claim.

He's a hero in the sense that Paul Revere was, and heros are few and far between. :2razz:

It's true he is no angel, for he is a man. Nobody is perfect, and perfection is not an option.

But he's one of the few people in the world telling the truth about certain matters.

Revere was a warhawk that perpetuated tensions between the colonies and Britain, resulting in a war of attrition that lasted 8 years and cost an estimated 50,000 dead and wounded. Assange is a lousy activist that likes the smell of his own bowel movements, and contributes nothing of value to anybody.
 
I have no problem with what Assange is doing.

There's something murky and dubious about the powerful government that's ruling you holding "classified" data.
 
You need to cite this claim.



Revere was a warhawk that perpetuated tensions between the colonies and Britain, resulting in a war of attrition that lasted 8 years and cost an estimated 50,000 dead and wounded. Assange is a lousy activist that likes the smell of his own bowel movements, and contributes nothing of value to anybody.

Gates comments were on one of the MSM news programs, maybe more. When he was in office. There were stories about it in the print media too. It was way more than a year ago, maybe 2. Sorry I can't link to it.

Paul Revere was responsible for the American Revolution?
 
Why the hell should they free Manning? Dude is a traitor.

For the US government to call Manning a traitor is like Hitler calling a pesticide man a mass murderer.
 
Except raping women. He apparently isn't willing to tell the truth about that in a court of law.

He can't face those charges if the government that's charging him has ulterior motives. Until Sweden can get its act together and stop being uncle sammy's bitch, it doesn't make sense for him to stand trial there.
 
Assange is done. He's pissed on so many shoes in high places that prison is probably his safest bet.

Except the dudes he pissed on are higly-placed individuals in government and corporations--individuals who would do anything to save their own asses.

That's why Assange is living it up in Ecuador, giving speeches at this convenience, while David Cameron and Obama are shaking in their boots.
 
Back
Top Bottom