European MP's suspect Manning is being tortured

Most of the information was regarding and embarassing to other nations, not the US.

 

I just think people believe the state should be more transparent, and more accountable.

It clearly is MILES from being that just now, indeed, it has grown FURTHER from the people, and there is less transparency, more secrecy, etc.

Not only is it logical that this would be fertile ground for whistleblowers to emerge, but their emergence is critical.

Unless, as I say, you believe that the state should be less accountable to daft people, and less transparent.

After all, what do we matter, right?

It's not our ear that the politicians seek, is it?

 

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-P3OXML00s"]I am Bradley Manning - YouTube[/ame]

 

No Jack, I see no sense in posting more than is necessary. Why use band width to repost your incoherent ramblings that you have admitted is based on ignorance? You make mistakes about S. Africa and then take up more space trying to back track and claim that we took you words wrong so it may be you that is looking to score points but all you do is go further into deficit.

I haven't talked to anyone that hates Manning. But it isn't his or your place to decide how benign the information may be.

Please tell us about the raping and killing that you are talking about. Is this something that happened or something that you dreamed.

Jack thought that President Bush was still in charge of torture.

 

Whistle blower, what exactly did he blow the whistle on? The Saudis desire that we take out the Iranian nuclear program?

 

Ha ha ha - I wondered how long it would take before my getting one detail, re S Africa, wrong, and acknowleding it, would be cynically brought up on other, unrelated, threads. Hey, guess what, I didn't know that Israel were offering to sell nukes to the Fascist Apartheid regime, okay, well done, move along, you've used up your credit on that one.

At least I am prepared to take on new information, when offered to me, if I feel it is valid. More than you can say for many on here, who would never budge, not matter what you said. I should know, I read them every day.

Some even boast that they do not care what the truth is, how about that?

Words on a screen take up band width, do they? Lol, yes, the last thing the forum wants is words on the screen.

Be honest - when someone takes a snip of a larger quote, then tries to make some smart remark underneath it, it is called quote mining, and the only people who engage in it are those that engage in debating the original topic of a thread.

Just as you are doing here.

You see.

 

Okay, well let's examine what he said, if you like? How about Collateral Murder - the footage always linked to BM? For starters.

You're making it sound like he barely did anything too 'wrong'. (Which I agree with you on)

In which case, where is the fervour to hang him high coming from?

I think two things are at work here.

One, the criminal elites have formed a sort of Stockholm Syndrome over many Americans, perhaps depending on geography, age, and education.

They have convinced them to attack (actually or verbally), anyone that dares demand more people power, less corporate and state power, more transparency, more accountability. Which is crazy, since we are all in this together, in the main, and should be pitching in, as one, imo.

That is partly the reason that you have those with their pitch forks out, for Manning.

They don't realise that in times of Great Deceit, we should welcome men like him, and JA. They should welcome the brave US troops who redeemed themselves by publicly admitting (and regretting), that they killed innocent people in Iraq, and it had no purpose, for these are true men of courage, going against the grain, being prepared to say what so many think, that they (soldiers) are being routinely exploited in a rich man's game.

Of course, it doesn't surprise me that these criminals should do a hatchet job on JA (absurd 'rape' charge!) and Manning (hmm, wait folks, he is a GAY, and wait, he has a mental health problem). He may well be gay, but the way that it is used by those conducting the hatchet job, as if to say that this is grounds to dismiss all that he stated or reported on, when, of course, it is entirely irrelevant to it. However, the elites are not stupid, they realise that homophobia is still rife in the US, and that revelation appeals to them.

Then we have this notion that he has some sort of mental health problem, yet I cannot seem to find specific information on this. It may be that this has been entirely made up or overstated by the PR dept of the US Military, that would be more than plausible. After all, if they can discredit him as being 'unreliable', so much the better...for them. However, even if he were/is suffering from depression of some kind, this in itself does not turn a man into a liar, able to construct fictional information, does it? Not unless you want to relegate a huge % of the American population as being 'unreliable' due to having had some sort of depressive illness. I think that Nazi's did this with those with mental health issues, bit of history there....

 

So that's it, that's THE issue huh?

 

Sure.

Happy to oblige.

I can see why they must downplay this in the US media.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Mh07l-Zrjk"]US Soldiers take turns Raping 14 year Old IRAQI Girl - YouTube[/ame]

Just FILTH, tbh.

A 'dream'..?

No.

A nightmare and an insult to humanity.

 

More quote minining, and on this occasion, not even from a post that was part of a discussion with you.

 

Good. As the Chinese saying goes, "Let each household sweep only the snow in front of its door." When every nation minds its own business, peace and goodwill will prevail in the world.

 

Problem is, the US elites will just NOT mind their own business.

They have been allowed to grow too large, and too powerful, the state and the intelligences services, I mean.

The CIA are more powerful now, than they were when they funded Nazi style experiments on unwitting Americans.

I say 'when they'...the oddds are that they still do.

 

Well - I told you, as asked.

What is your response?

 

So, when you see that you even have terrorists of a more regional variety living among you that sympathize with the terrorists of the Middle East, it should be clear why Manning is treated as he is, since he effectively is on the same side as both of them.

 

The 'terrorists' I despise most of all, are those that call terror 'war'.

As if by doing so, it somehow seems more noble.

It isn't. The only difference between state terrorism, and non state terrorism, is that the former version murders more innocent people, and leads directly to revenge attacks, and the growth of resistance movements, who may or may not then engage in violent actions.

Don't you agree?

 

We'll have to go into specifics on this.

Give me an example of the American government committing state terrorism, and I'll explain if I agree with the designation or not.

 

The bogus, false, and entirely made up claims of Iraq having WMD - then slaughtering some 100,000 or more, non combatant Iraqi civilians, as a result of it?

I think that is pretty terrifying, and 'terrorism' on a MUCH larger scale, than any non state terrorism you could ever cite. And would ever be possible. Imagine if I had the cops in your country, Fed and State, in my pocket. Then I made up a false claim that you had guns, and were coming at me. And on that basis, I slaughtered you, your family, and everyone you know. Then said 'whoops, no, he wasn't going to hurt me after all, but no matter, I liberate him'.

How about dropping an Atom bomb on a country that were already defeated, just to test it out, killing lord alone knows how many innocent people?

How about US involvement in Lebanon?

How about US and CIA operations in Latin America, routinely removing democratically elected Gov's, and replacing them with their own puppet regimes?

How about the state domestic terror of using Americans in unwitting experiments, with horrilble consequences? And this was when the CIA and the state had less power than now?

How about building what IS a concentration camp near Cuba, arbitarily kidnapping people, under a false pre text, and leaving them there, to be abused, and to rot?

How about the illegal use of white phospherous?

I am sure others can add to this, but just as a RC Church are the best organised and best funded paedophile ring in the World, bar none, the US state, and the CIA are the World's biggest terrorists.

In these hard times, it can be difficult to know what or who to believe.

Start by taking anything they claim, and dismissing it. For the real truth is likely the opposite.

Jack

 

I don't know what you'd call this, but... http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread59987/pg1

 

I even dedicated a thread to it.

http://www.politicalforum.com/political-opinions-beliefs/220581-too-see-present-look-past.html

Now.

Just use your brain, folks.

If that is the history of what they have been wicked enough to do, covertly, to your OWN people, why would they behave anything BUT barbaricaly toward any others?

 

I could consider a large portion of that to be state terrorism.

 

Sorry Jack-I missed yours.

 

Just to be clear Serfin', I'm not indulging in USA-bashing; our government have done similar stuff to British people. And people wonder why I never vote for these devious, self-serving bastards...

 

No worries.

I am only surprised that more Americans did not have more to say on the matter.

 

If you're saying that invading Iraq was state terrorism, then I guess the UN resolution supporting it must be related.

If the Iraq conflict was that simple, I would agree. It's not.

I was against the war, but it was for multiple reasons. The WMD claims were ironically partly in response to the fact that we sold Saddam WMDs back when he was on our side.

We knew that he at least had some WMDs at some point.

Honestly, I would call what we did to Japan karma. They reaped the whirlwind.

Sure, we can call these state terrorism.

For the ones wrongly accused, it's terror. For the ones who we have mountains of evidence against, it's vigilance.

How is it illegal?

I agree with you on the church.

I can't agree with you on the last part though.

Rational skepticism is one thing, but you're suggesting something equally as gullible as believing the government everytime.

 

See, this is the thing.

We NEED to seperate state action from the people.

One is not the other.

I find the British state disgusting, at times.

Not the worse, but we might be, if we had the powers that we once had, with the Empire again.

I would still find them morally wrong.

I find what the US state does, to others, and to their own, to be morally wrong, and often illegal. Rather than attack me for that, Americans should be standing shoulder to shoulder with me, in my attempts to expose these hucksters, and their ghoulish activities.

But the PR agencies have done a good job brainwashing into the people that an attack on the state, is an attack on the people.

It is no such thing.