Free Bradley Manning! Free Wikileaks! Sen Klobuchar's office in Minneapolis, MN

[annm4peace]

Free Bradley Manning! Free Wikileaks!

Start: 12/13/2010 16:30
End: 12/13/2010 17:30
Come out for this weeks delivery of all the newly released Wikileaks documents to Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar, who has publicly denounced Wikileaks and Bradley Manning.

During the past week, a lot has happened in the Wikileaks saga and we plan to be out there again to continue to raise awareness about these issues and show support to all of those who are behind bars.

Date: Monday, December 13th
Time: 4:30-5:30 pm
Where: Senator Klobuchar's Office
1200 Washington Ave. S. Minneapolis

What to bring: Dress for the weather. We'll supply DVDs, Bradley Manning Information postcards, and some signs.

So please stop on by to hand out free DVDs with wikileaks documents including the released US embassy cables, Afghan War Diary, Insurance File and the classic Collateral Murder Video (full and short versions).

Look for signs reading "Free Classified Information" & "Free Bradley Manning"

We also have a limited supply of Free Bradley Manning Buttons and stickers. If you ask nice, you may get one.


Background:
On 11/29 Minnesota Senator Klobuchar told WCCO radio that she wanted to see Wikileaks "take the information off the site" and a prison term for life would be appropriate for Bradley Manning.
Link to interview: http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2010/11/29/klobuchar-calls-for-tough-punishment-over-wikileaks/

So we're taking the Wikileaks information "off the site" and bringing it to her Minnesota office!

[BrklynLiberal]

1. Good luck to everyone and "DRESS FOR THE WEATHER" is vital...

[Creative]

2. Free Wikileaks...? Pehaps...

Free Private Manning? Are you kidding me?

[Arctic Dave]

6. Manning is a patriot and you should treat him accordingly.

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Arctic Dave]

16. He will do neither.

That will be the beauty of it all.

[Pavulon]

17. You can bet your life he will die behind bars.

the only question is which facility. He confessed and the charges for what he did are clear felonies. 250,000 counts 10 years per count.

[sabrina 1]

22. Only if this country continues on the path it is on. If we ever

restore the rule of law and the real criminals, the ones who lied this country into war and tortured people against our laws, are never held accountable. Then, yes, he will die behind bars.

But looking at other nations who were on this path, times change, and in many of those countries, decades later later in some instances, the real criminals are now being prosecuted for torture and murder. People who once thought they too were above the law.

[Pavulon]

24. I hate string theory.

the topic is not connected. If you rob my home after promising not to, you are going to prison. If you steal information you promised not to you are going to prison.

[sabrina 1]

28. If I did not know you were torturing and killing people when I

promised not to, and I need to prove it and you have the evidence in your house, then sorry, it would be my duty to go get it.

[Pavulon]

32. Right, that game ends poorly.

bradley was playing in a space where the law is quite clear. He signed the documents, he did not break in , he was let in and then stole.

So he will die in prison.

[sabrina 1]

47. That doesn't alter my point.

If he didn't know what was going on when he joined the military, then discovered criminal activity, his oath to defend the Constitution makes it necessary for him to do just that. Just because they let him doesn't change anything. Whistle blowers usually are let in.

[Pavulon]

52. The forms signed do not distinguish being butthurt and disliking the army

and his feelings on the material he saw. He had a chain of command, which he broke. He broke the laws surrounding disclosure of secret information. He will go to prison.
whistleblowers disclose that a bank does not lend to blacks, they do not disclose the FUCKING NAMES of people in myanmar giving the US uranium samples, they do not disclose Iranian IBCM capability, or us efforts to secure HEU in pakistan.

Thats espionage and lets stop bullshitting and calling that whistleblowing.

That person named in the cable is dead if their name gets leaked.

[sabrina 1]

117. You need to read the decision in the Pentagon Papers.

Any names not redacted is the fault of the Pentagon. Both Wikileaks AND the NYT requested that the material be reviewed and any information that might threaten lives, be removed by the Pentagon. They refused.

The documents being released daily are being analyzed by five major news organizations and any material that would threaten lives is being removed. However the Pentagon appears to not care as much Wikileaks and other news organizations, about protecting lives.

[Arctic Dave]

26. Your math doesn't add up.

What he has been charged with has a maximum of 56 years. When you rob a bank do they charge you a count for every bill you stole or for the act itself? Manning will probably retire in Florida.

[Pavulon]

29. Mark my words. They will amend the charges

and he will die surrounded by people who view him as filth. Just like pollard will. EACH disclosure is an independent crime.

I signed the same form he did, it is clear what the consequences are for breaking the law when you sign the documents.

[Arctic Dave]

37. Or he will retire in Florida with a federal pension surrounded by people who

know he is a patriot.

[Pavulon]

40. Right, now how is that going to work?

please elaborate on how the person responsible for the single largest act of espionage publicly disclosed will not die in Florence Colorado supermax.

[Arctic Dave]

41. Presidential pardon.

[Pavulon]

44. Right. No president will pardon manning

the nation will dissolve before a president ever pardons that man.

he will die here.

[Arctic Dave]

49. Strange things happen.

Who would have thought a Pvt. in the army would get his hands on 250,00 classified docs and download them to a LGG CD.

Truth is sometimes stranger then fiction.

[Pavulon]

53. Right after manson gets a pardon, manning will be next on the list.

there is no situation in which he is freed.

[Arctic Dave]

56. Why would Manson get pardoned, he is mentally disturbed mass murderer.

Manning on the other hand, is a broom of the system.

[Pavulon]

60. Pollard, Ames, they need you help too. Dont leave them out of your movement

to pardon people convicted of espionage.

[Hawkeye-X]

76. Ahem. Jonathan Pollard did nothing wrong also.

I know he was a spy for Israel, but from my understanding - Pollard is a political prisoner, just like Manning is.

They both need to be released and embraced for their heroic action.

Hawkeye-X

[Pavulon]

78. Maybe, and maybe they should both get put to sleep

for their actions. They are both scum. You should improve your understanding.

[Hawkeye-X]

80. Ok, but you are extremely insensitive.

I just hope you realize that.

Both are true heroes, and you want to execute them because they released classified secrets that should be revealed to the public.

The United States of America is for the people, by the people, and supports the people.

Bradley Manning and Jonathan Pollard have defended the Constitution correctly. They reported wrongdoings that broke the Constitution - the remedy is to let the public know that the Constitution was broken.

If you don't like that, then I suggest you find somewhere else to post.

[Pavulon]

81. No I think I will post here. And Pollard disclosed classified information for money

to a foreign nation. How the FUCK does that defend the constitution? You have no idea what you are talking about.

[Hawkeye-X]

75. How about *YOU* going to ADX Florence?

I'll be sure to visit you, since it's a 90 min drive from here.

*spit*

Bradley Manning is a true American hero. These information are NEEDED to see what kind of government we're running.

It appears we're running a fascist government.

Hawkeye-X

[Pavulon]

77. No visitors. He will be there or kansas. maybe manning and pollard

can become pals. Now how EXACTLY do we need a mans name in myanmar helping the US to determine what they are doing with North Korean nuclear materials?

How does that benefit from being in the clear?

[Creative]

46. So, are you suggesting that a member of the Armed Services, entrusted with classified information,

should not face repercussions for releasing that information to a 3rd party?

If so, you should be in the Arctic, Dave.

[Arctic Dave]

50. I say he gets a 30 30 and a discharge.

Other then that, he should get a monument or a bronze statue.

[Creative]

62. In order to receive a discharge, he will have to be released.

And that will never happen. He will be given a reduction in rank (PFC to PVT) and spend the rest of his life in a cage.

[EFerrari]

51. So you're suggesting that witnesses to massive war crimes

should just stfu to avoid getting in trouble?

Some of you really need to sit down with these leaks and figure out what their classification was protecting because it sure as hell wasn't you.

[Pavulon]

55. Now how are those ICBM's in Iran related? How is XXX's name disclosing

information about Myanmar's nuclear program a war crime? What is the purpose of disclosing this information?

This will have consequences you people will not like and cause things to happen that will you will not have anticipated.

[Creative]

59. Where is the war crimes in Hillary's concern over the president of Argentina's

drug use? Or many of the other benign affairs of state that were released?

Private Manning was duty bound to take this matter up the chain of command, if he discovered something that he perceived as an undisclosed "war crime."

[EFerrari]

61. Brad Manning uncovered that the army was turning over prisoners

to torturers in Iraq. He did try to take it up the chain of command and they told him to sit down and shut up.

And as far as I can tell, WW3 has not broken out as a result of the Wikileaks. But we have found many cases of illegal behavior on the part of the government. With more to come, presumably.

[Creative]

67. How did he know that an investigation was not underway?

It's not up to a PFC to make these kinds of decisions. This young man has made a terrible mistake and he will pay for it by living out the rest of his years in a cage.

[EFerrari]

73. There was no investigation underway and it was continuing right

in front of his face. He was processing arrestees into the hands of the Iraqis who were torturing. So, not only did he have the information, he was being made a part of the crime.

[Creative]

82. We are supposed to turn arrestees over to the Iraqis, for they are in charge

are in charge of prosecuting criminals now.

[EFerrari]

84. This happened before the fake turnover. Although, our government

told us that the Iraqis no longer torture. That was a lie, too.

[Creative]

89. Of course they torture, for that is the way they do things in that part of the world.

The point is, we turned that part of the the government over to the Iraqis. Therefore, not only this not Manning's decision, it is not the US's.

Are you suggesting that we reverse this policy and reconsider getting out?

[EFerrari]

91. Wrong. This occured before the hand off AND your government assured you

those prisoners would not be tortured. Turning over those prisoners to torture is a crime.

Even if it had happened AFTER the hand off, turning over those prisoners to torture would STILL be a crime.

Does the law mean nothing to you? :)

[Creative]

95. Of course "our" laws mean something to me. But these are not our laws.

They are Iraqi laws being enforced by Iraqi personnel.

[EFerrari]

96. Nope. It became American law when we signed the UN Convention

against torture.

http://www.hrweb.org/legal/cat.html

[Creative]

98. Did the Iraqi's sign that treaty? I didn't think so.

So, unless you are advocating that we reverse course and re-assume total control of the Iraqi government, you will have to accept that this sort of thing is going to happen.

Do I approve of it? No. All I want to do, is get the hell out of there and let these people sort this out for themselves.

[EFerrari]

100. It is against American law to turn prisoners over to torturers. Period.

That has nothing to do with Iraq.

[Creative]

102. "That has nothing to do with Iraq." Are you serious?

The only way it can have nothing to do with Iraq is if we do not turn over the prisoners.

What do you suggest that we do, send them to Guantanamo?

You have written yourself into a corner. Checkmate.

[EFerrari]

104. Baloney. It is a violation of American law to turn prisoners over to torture

ANYWHERE for any reason.

But way to go, defending complicity in torture.

[EFerrari]

58. No wonder this country is so screwed up.

These people calling Manning a traitor probably don't even know what happened. They leap to defend government secrecy without even questioning for a minute what the situation was. And this AFTER the eight years of the Bush Pentagon "losing" billions of dollars, hiring raping, murdering, larcenous mercs, having a worldwide torture program and denying it, lying about everything including all the dead people, treating our troops like trash right up to and including Pat Tillman. After all of that.

After all of that and Obama keeping the same Pentagon leadership, too.

Unbelievable. When I was little, that lady was murdered in NYC in full view of her neighbors. It was a big deal because nobody helped her. I bet that same story wouldn't even make the front page today.

[Pavulon]

66. He confessed online. So yeah, anyone who wants to can read what he said.

he stole data, turned it over to an intelligence agency (wikileaks) and admitted he did it. So he is done.

[xocet]

103. Wikileaks is an Intelligence Agency? Yes, they must be doing intelligence for the NYT and Anonymous

It is remarkable that you seem to support war crimes with such conviction. Manning just might have done the right thing under the circumstances which neither you nor I exactly know.

You seem to be a staunch authoritarian follower. Were you involved in war crimes by chance? Is that why you so frequently proclaim that Manning should be punished harshly? Is it that you are afraid that something might eventually come back to you? Otherwise, I don't get the reactionary authoritarianism.

Why are you afraid of Wikileaks? Were you equally afraid of Lewis Libby and Dick Cheney? How about the New York Times? Just point the way to your vociferous musings regarding the Plame case.

[Pavulon]

107. Yes I am a war criminal. I once got drunk in Bosnia, where booze was forbidden

so that means I committed a crime during a war.. I have yet to have one of you people tell me why non "war crime" posts like the one that names a person giving information on Myanmar and North Korean nuclear programs is relevant to this. Why does their name need to be at risk?

I signed the same paperwork Manning did. It was quite clear what the punishment would be for disclosing classified information.

Don't mistake disgust with fear. They are all getting click through revenue. You will be paying to fix this mess with cash.

Wikileaks in brokering information stolen in a criminal act. It is going to cause unintended consequences.

[laughingliberal]

70. +1000 nt

[Ikonoklast]

97. Then so is Dick Cheney.

Using your own logic.

[Arctic Dave]

99. Was the dickster trying to uncover malfeasance or trying to cover it?

Come back to me when you find the answer.

[Ikonoklast]

110. Did every document Manning stole have to do with 'whistleblowing'?

You know the answer, the guy is a traitor.

[Arctic Dave]

112. When you cast a wide net.

However, we have only seen the tip of the iceberg so far.

[EFerrari]

115. Manning's broad leak hasn't cost a life and will save some.

However the broad rules of engagement in both theaters have killed hundreds of thousands of innocent people.

Obviously, we should punish Manning for revealing that.

[Pavulon]

116. XXXX's information on Myanmar and North Korean nuclear activities...

XXXX is dead if assange dimes him out. Now how tha FUCK is this information relevant to anything you have posted about?

Why is this in the clear?

[EFerrari]

101. Nope. Dick Cheney was committing a crime. Manning was exposing crime. nt

[Ikonoklast]

109. Yeah. His own.

He did no such thing, and you know it.


Manning is a traitor, and he violated his oath.

[EFerrari]

113. You seem to have some reading to do. I'll leave you to it. n/t

[Ikonoklast]

119. You seem to have no problem defending traitors.

I'll leave you with that.

[Imajika]

3. Bradley Manning should spend the rest of his life in prison...

Assuming he is found guilty of leaking all this stuff to wikileaks, Manning is essentially a traitor to his country and should rot in a cell for the rest of his life.

[Arctic Dave]

7. See post #6.

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Pavulon]

23. Fuck that noise. Disclosing classified information is not a Democratic value.

its a felony. Manning knew it was a crime and confessed, you can read his confession online. None of it has to so with altruism.

[Odin2005]

31. How do you know he was not tortured into confessing?

[Pavulon]

33. Because his stupid ass confessed online

in an IRC conversation before he was arrested. The logs are out there if you care to read them.

[cherokeeprogressive]

36. It takes some nerve for you to invite the poster to free republic, seeing as how the poster's been

four years longer than you.

Not cool at all.

[Odin2005]

38. Argument by Seniority Fallacy.

[PeaceNikki]

43. Everyone who doesn't agree with you is a poopyhead.

Got it!

[EFerrari]

48. Brad Manning tried to take the abuses he was witnessing up his chain of command

and they brushed him off.

He didn't betray the country in any way. He betrayed a bunch of war criminals. Get your facts straight.

[Pavulon]

64. Document that. It is not in his confession on boinboing

where he discussed his motives. This conversation will convict him.

aussie who can't seem to stay in one country very long =L
(12:27:13 PM) bradass87: im here
(12:27:24 PM) Adrian: Depends. What are the particulars?
(12:31:43 PM) bradass87: crazy white haired dude = Julian Assange
(12:33:05 PM) bradass87: in other words... ive made a huge mess :'(
(12:35:17 PM) bradass87: im sorry... im just emotionally fractured
(12:39:12 PM) bradass87: im a total mess
(12:41:54 PM) bradass87: i think im in more potential heat than you ever were
(12:41:54 PM) Adrian : I have more messages than resources
allocatable to action them. Please be very patient.
(12:45:59 PM) Adrian: not mandatorily
(12:46:08 PM) Adrian: there are always outs

[Catherina]

4. Excellent. I wish I could be there. Free Manning and put the real criminals in jail

starting with the traitors in the US Senate who led, and still lead, this country down a path of abomination.

Wars based on lies are still going on and ever expanding with a secret war in Yemen while the Senate steals food from the mouths of the poor the corporations they serve are increasingly creating.

Free Manning. Free Assange. Free Wikileaks.


Please post pictures when you have them. :thumbsup:

[whistler162]

5. and free Aldrich Ames and the Walkers while you are at it!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

8. K&R

[RZM]

9. I don't get this

Why free Manning? He broke the law -- you're not supposed to share classified information. If you want Manning freed, shouldn't you be advocating for changing the law first? And Assange is being held in Britain over condom-less sex in Sweden. What does that have to do with Senator Klobuchar?

[EFerrari]

11. There's every reason to believe that Sweden reopened the case

under pressure from the State Department. And the government is never going to make a law that says it's okay to expose its corruption.

[RZM]

21. So Manning should just get a Papal dispensation then?

He broke the law so he should face the consequences, just like you and I would if we broke the law. I agree the government will never change the law, but I still think that's what the 'Free Manning' crowd should be advocating for. Or else the next Manning will end up where the first is. Simply setting Manning free wouldn't change a thing.

As for the Sweden thing, people have gone round and round for a while on that. I don't know if the State Dept. asked them to reopen the case or not. I wouldn't be surprised at all if they did, given their beef with Assange, but I don't know that. I don't know that Sweden would comply either. Perhaps they reopened the case for their own reasons? Who the hell knows? I guess we'll have to wait for a future round of cable leaks to learn that :)

[EFerrari]

25. The Pope doesn't have jurisdiction. But I say let's give him the same justice Cheney got

for outing Valerie Plame. :)

[Pavulon]

27. Bottom line is he confessed to tens of thousands of felonies

that amount to espionage. He will die behind bars unless a death can be linked to his act. Then he will be executed.

[RZM]

30. If Manning were the Cheney in this, he wouldn't have even been charged

I think you mean Libby. The Scoot-ster got the commutation because he had sympathetic friends in high places and Manning ain't got that. No doubt Obama has no problem with Manning sitting in prison for a very long time. I for one think the government should be allowed to have secrets. I'm not sure where it should start and end -- probably my standards would be laxer than what we have now, but they would certainly be more stringent than Manning's or Assange's.

[EFerrari]

35. That's right. Cheney wasn't even charged.

I think it's obscene that Manning exposed murder and torture and he's in jail. But that's me. :)

[RZM]

42. Manning was allowed to look at the materials

He wasn't allowed to give them to whomever he wants. He was dreaming if he thought he could get away with it. A cook at a restaurant isn't allowed to share recipes with competitors without consequences. Why should a private be allowed to give classified information to anybody and everybody? Had he leaked a selected few cables that showed wrongdoing he would have come off better - but instead he chose to unload the whole kit and caboodle. Even then he would have been breaking the law and violating whatever pledges he had to sign before he got clearance.

[EFerrari]

45. The wanton murder of cilivilians is a war crime. Turning prisoners

over to certain torture is a war crime. Manning tried to take it up the chain of command and he was told to get lost.

This is what Amnesty International says about prosecuting human rights whistle blowers:

According to Amnesty International, criminal proceedings aimed at punishing a private person for communicating evidence about human rights violations can never be justified. The same is true with respect to information on a wide range of other matters of public interest.

http://www.amnesty.org.au/news/comments/24339/

To quibble about how Manning should have gone about this is to trivialize the big pile of dead people that our military has killed in secret and the other big pile of tortured bodies that they facilitated. The law here was being broken by our government and with impunity. That's the large crime in this scenario.

[RZM]

63. So you want to give him a pass on exposing those documents

I guess I wouldn't quibble with that. But what about the hundreds of thousands of others he handed over without permission? Should that be overlooked because of what was in a small number of them or because his is not the 'large crime?'

[EFerrari]

71. Why are you more interested in punishing Brad Manning

than in sorting through the information you have at your disposal now? The murder of civilians and torture are only two of the crimes the material has uncovered. There is more and there will be more.

But, it's more realistic to expect him to be punished than to expect the more destructive criminals in this situation to ever see the inside of a court room. That should appall anyone who has any truck with democratic (small d) values. Just like those kids from West Virginia going to jail over Abu Graib. They were thrown to the dogs and the worldwide torture program rolled on because those who were really responsible were too powerful to touch.

Manning will get a trial. But to call him a traitor is ridiculous unless you think that government corruption should be a state secret or that national security depends upon protecting criminals.

[Pavulon]

74. So dumping a cable with a mans name in Myanmar assisting the US

assess their nuclear program is related to a war crime how? How is a program to secure enriched uranium in pakistan related?

He stole all kinds of shit and dumped it with no regard for its impact.

He is a traitor and should be shot. However since that option is not available, he will die in federal prison.

Bottom line nothing you want will come out of this, only you tax dollars to fix the mess. Count on it.

[RZM]

79. Isn't that what the OP was about?

Urging us to contact Senator Klobuchar and tell her to 'free' Manning and Assange? I never called him a traitor, btw, I just said he broke the law. Maybe the prosecutor will call him that, but I didn't.

Should corruption be a secret? Well I guess not -- it shouldn't happen in the first place, but it does. Private communication with other nations regarding sensitive international situations should be secret, however. And that's where I differ with Manning and Assange.

[EFerrari]

83. I'm not a huge fan of law breaking.

But there are times when breaking the law is the ethical if not legal thing to do and imo, this was one of them. It's difficult to think of any other way to get this information out in the open. Brad Manning did us a service, one that it's hard to imagine could be accomplished through legal channels.

And part of that service was to show us how our government is using secrecy to hide everything from misdeeds ---- > war crimes. An MO the government took so for granted that they had all of this information sitting around on a network with something like 600,000 users. That really says something about how above the law they think they are and what kind of blind obedience they expect no matter what they do.

[Pavulon]

85. Again, why disclose the non "war crime" communications?

the information on things that actually should have remained secret. Negotiations to secure enriched uranium from pakistan and negotiations with china to reunite korea without starting ww3.

I think he stole it and dumped to do damage. He gave it to the people who would do the most damage with it.

He had plenty of options but choose the one with maximum negative impact on the US and its diplomatic channels.

[NoPasaran]

10. Manning should get the same warm reward the Rosenbergs did

[tammywammy]

12. Manning should spend the rest of his life in prison. n/t

[jwirr]

13. One of my favorite poems from the 70s was by James Russell Lowell

"Truth forever on the scaffold, wrong forever on the throne....". The first two lines of that poem fit the fight for justice today like no other time. Leave Wikileaks alone and have mercy on Brad Manning. For Manning, Thoreau's article on conscientious objection is the bottom line. In the Thoreau it is plainly stated that the objector must be ready to pay the consequences. I hope Manning read that before he acted because I do not think they will let him off. Punishing him is their only way of warning other whistle blowers. To be a whistle blower you have to have the courage to lay your life on the line.

[Pavulon]

15. you are misusing the word whistleblower.

that is applied to people who leak corporate or unclassified information showing illegal behavior. Stealing diplomatic cables randomly and releasing them for lulz is espionage and he is no different than pollard.

He will die in prison. He should die at the end of a rope, but that is not really an option.

[EFerrari]

88. I'll have to look that up. Perfect summation. nt

[jwirr]

105. The rest of the poem refers to God and religion. But those first two

lines have always struck me as very significant to both the 60-80s and today.

[Odin2005]

19. Manning is a fucking hero and a TRUE PATRIOT.

[Pavulon]

20. For someone, just not me. Pollard is a hero to some..

to me they are the same. Both treasonous scum, both will die in prison.

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Pavulon]

39. Hey check out calls on RTN. Manning disclosed 19 iranian ICBM's

so Raytheon (and others) will be getting a multibillion dollar boost phase interceptor contract next year. Had he not disclosed this information this project would have probably not been funded.

Funny how that works.

[Luminous Animal]

54. You keep trotting out that spin.

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=4206
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=4209

[Pavulon]

57. And the Myanmar cable, the HEU in Pakistan, the North Korea/China

cables. All diplomatic processes that do not benefit from disclosure. Those ICBM's change policy now that they are known.

All information does not want to be free.

[laughingliberal]

68. 2nd best part of Wikileaks-watching authoritarian, police state fans' heads explode. nt

[Pavulon]

72. The first best part is you get to pay to fix it all.

you think we are taking our football and going home. Everyone that is pissed on in these cables manning stole and assange fenced to places getting click revenue from them will be corrected with your tax dollars.

[laughingliberal]

86. Thanks for playing! nt

[Pavulon]

87. Np, thats the line item on your check that says FED TAX(nt)

[laughingliberal]

90. Thank you, again, for playing.

I find this ever so entertaining but you're really not going to change my mind.

I guess it's valuable for you in the sense of giving you a place to vent anger?

[Pavulon]

92. Still waiting for one of you guys to tell me why a person in myanmar

should have his name disclosed as part of this? Why should an operation to secure uranium be public?

What justifies the non "war crime" related cables, just curiosity. Your god given right to know.

Have yet to see an answer on that from anyone.

[laughingliberal]

93. This has been ever so much fun but I'm not inclined to provide you with more opportunities...

to rage.

Bye for now!

[Pavulon]

94. ta ta for now. Feel free to post a reason that man's life should be forfeit

and what that has to do with the war or anything else.

[jotsy]

106. Speaking of answers...I believe I'm still waiting for one from you.

I asked where all your outrage is for the previous administration officials who aren't dying in prison for exposing Valerie Plame. You never got back to me on that. War is sold as necessary to defend the public, if it's truly about making money, we should applaud that entity which brings that truth to light, shouldn't we? Irrespective of how many Rumpelstiltskin like figures stomp and scream no fair.

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQoBAc95tnw>
Watch before you tell me there's no reason to believe it, please.

[Pavulon]

108. This question has nothing to do with a war, nothing to do with a previous criminal act.

it could be answered if you choose to. Why disclose unrelated cables? Why place secret operations in the public venue? Why threaten release of unredacted files?

What benefit is gained from this unrelated data?

[jotsy]

111. Which means then you won't be answering my question?

You constantly refer to Manning and Assange with contempt and contend quite pragmatically what their futures hold for what they have done. I contend that others have committed comparable acts and aren't under legally condoned siege. Some are in fact out promoting books and raising corporate capital to buy elections. Justice is said to be dispensed without fear or favor. I'm not sure I've found your approach to the topic in keeping with the sentiment which I don't find to be a credible position.

[Pavulon]

114. You first. why disclose non relevant classified information?

what agenda is served by that act? How is that benefiting anyone?

My approach is the same that the Executive and Administrative branches are taking.

It looks like a criminal conspiracy to me.

[jotsy]

118. First point.

Executive and Administrative are in fact one branch. The other two are the judicial and the legislative. When I want to see the world through your eyes...let's not, I don't think you'll take too kindly to where we go if we go there.

It's the PTB that measures by agendas and benefits. Try to understand how it looks that you will disregard all other comparable incidents and demand a defense of every detail regarding only this particular matter. If you can't observe from a position of equal standard or express an opinion on a peripheral event, you've less than legitimate ground on which to stand.

<http://sunlightfoundation.com/>

Why do I have to provide answers first when I asked the first question?

[laughingliberal]

69. Yep. nt

[laughingliberal]

65. Kudos! K&R. nt