I agree with Anonymous about this... Do you?

[Playinghardball]

[ecstatic]

1. Care to give examples?

If true, then that's horrible.

[jeff47]

5. Never heard of this "Manning" fellow?

First, Rape:

Prison sentences for rape are not uniform. A study made by the U.S. Department of Justice of prison releases in 1992, involving about 80 percent of the prison population, found that the average sentence for convicted rapists was 11.8 years, while the actual time served was 5.4 years. This follows the typical pattern for violent crimes in the US, where those convicted typically serve no more than half of their sentence.[11]
Between 2002 and 2003, more than one in ten convicted rapists in Victoria, Australia, served a wholly suspended sentence, and the average total effective sentence for rape was seven years.[12]

Aaron Swartz was facing up to 35 years. Despite the fact that the "victim" in his case declined to sue him - it was only the government going after him.

While I personally do not think of Manning as an activist, Anonymous does. And he's facing way more than 5.4 years.

[another_liberal]

16. It is hard to see Private Manning . . .

It is hard to see Private Manning as anything other than a hero who sacrificed a great deal for us. That is certainly what he is to everyone who loves truth and hates our Imperial wars. He is clearly not a traitor, as some have tried to characterize him. He may have violated the terms of his security clearance, but the information he let us see was already known by every foreign government with even a minimal spy service.

Perhaps he should be discharged, but he should never have been imprisoned, as he has been for years, without a trial.

[jeff47]

21. Unfortunately, his motivation was edited after the fact.

The assertion that Manning leaked the information because he wanted to reveal "bad" activities by the US was added after-the-fact. His statements at the time of the leak do not support this assertion.

It also suffers from Manning not actually leaking anything that reveals "bad" activity. Even the "collateral murder" video matched the official, and already public, investigation. We just now have video matching the same story. If his intent was to reveal "bad" activities, he would presumably have leaked some.

but the information he let us see was already known by every foreign government with even a minimal spy service

That's not something we can actually say.

For example, Manning leaked a lot of information about the optics systems in Apache helicopters by leaking the "collateral murder" video. I have no idea what, if anything, is classified about those optics, but it's an example that shows he leaked more than just the content on the pages.

Plus there's the whole thing of our sources getting executed and reluctance of any future sources, but hey, that's a small price for having no effect on our imperial wars.

Oh, what, the government officially said they couldn't show harm? Well, take a nanosecond to think about it - the harm would be classified! So of course they "can't show" any harm to the public.

As for the length of his imprisonment so far, that's the doing of his defense team. He waived his speedy trial right in order to give his team more time to prepare.

[another_liberal]

24. If you mean . . .

If you mean by by, " His statements at the time of the leak do not support this assertion . . .," the weasel-snitches who have come forward to testify against him, after entrapping him into supposedly saying self-incriminating things to them in confidence on line, I do not trust anything which comes from that kind of a source. And as to the "lots of information about the optics systems of Apache helicopters,": Do you realize how many foreign countries we have sold those things to? Get real.

Manning should be exonerated and released, at the minimum.

[jeff47]

27. Again, there are two parts of what I said

The first part is his statements at the time don't match. But even if you ignore those because you don't trust the witnesses, there's the second problem: He didn't leak anything showing any new 'bad' behavior.

If his goal was to show bad behavior, you'd think he'd have actually leaked something that showed bad behavior. Instead, we find out that we know Castro's favorite ice cream.

Do you realize how many foreign countries we have sold those things to? Get real.

We don't have to sell our optics with the rest of the helicopter. For example, we've sold lots of F-15s and F-16s. We have sold zero computers for F-15 and F-16s....or at least 0 of the version we use.

And again, I don't know if anything in Apache optics is classified. It's an example of the additional information that was leaked by Manning that most people won't immediately see. The fact that we hear "bang", some time passes, and then we see bullets hit means we know just how far that helicopter was looking, and just what they can resolve at that distance. It's not obvious to most viewers that the video leaks this information.

[another_liberal]

29. I saw twelve innocent human beings . . .

I saw twelve innocent human beings torn into bloody corpses by slugs from a 30 mm chain gun. And, thanks to Private Manning, the U.S. government has no recourse but to admit that is exactly the kind of thing they have done, time after criminal time, in our name. Any investigation of that incident now ongoing is because Manning's courage made it impossible for the Army not to investigate. Why do you think they haven't investigated other such butchery, or do you really believe nothing like this ever happened before?

Whatever harm Manning's sharing of those records with his fellow Americans may have caused, and I sincerely doubt it was much, that supposed harm was far, far outweighed by the enormous good his shining some sunlight on our filthy, merciless, indiscriminate way of carrying out war against defenseless people and nations.

As to your point about the triviality of much of what he is accused of releasing: Would you rather he had made public documents which really are "Top Secret" and need to be kept so for the good of our national defense? I think his discretion should be applauded.

[jeff47]

37. And that wasn't new.

Again, "collateral murder" showed exactly what the official report said happened.

And, thanks to Private Manning, the U.S. government has no recourse but to admit that is exactly the kind of thing they have done

Except the US government already said it happened before the video was leaked. And the video showed that the official report wasn't hiding anything.

Any investigation of that incident now ongoing is because Manning's courage made it impossible for the Army not to investigate.

Except the army had already investigated the incident and released a public report before Manning leaked anything.

Why do you think they haven't investigated other such butchery, or do you really believe nothing like this ever happened before?

Here's the thing: People die in wars. Those innocent people included someone who was armed, and someone who was holding a large TV camera which was mistaken for a shoulder-fired anti-tank weapon. That miss-identification happens a lot, because they look similar.

So yes, they got killed over one AK-47 and a TV camera. But that, in and of itself, isn't a scandal. The fact that incidents like this are what just happens in war is the fucking reason to oppose war!

Would you rather he had made public documents which really are "Top Secret" and need to be kept so for the good of our national defense?

Manning only had a SECRET clearance. He didn't have access to any TOP SECRET information to leak. There was no discretion on Manning's part. In fact, he leaked everything he could get a hold of.

[micraphone]

45. "Here's the thing: People die in wars."

You appear to be condoning extra-judicial execution.

What of the drones that kill innocents every day? Oh - and maybe the odd terra-ist. BO has said he is ending a decade of war which HE did not start.

If Manning only had clearance for "Secret" (your words), why this long drawn-out torture and embarrassing "trial" for stuff that was not even "TOP SECRET"?

On edit: Clarification

[jeff47]

50. War is extra-judicial.

That's one of the reasons why war is bad.

What of the drones that kill innocents every day?

It's our least-bad option among choices that only include bad options.

why this long drawn-out torture and embarrassing "trial" for stuff that was not even "TOP SECRET"?

Because SECRET information is still classified, and leaking it "would cause "serious damage" to national security".

People are dead because of Manning's leak. We're just not going to hear about them, because that would require publicly declaring them our sources.

[rhett o rick]

53. Who's side in this class war are you on? nm

[jeff47]

55. Oh crap. You ran out of talking points.

Sorry 'bout that.

You are, of course, welcome to actually respond to anything I wrote instead.

[rhett o rick]

58. Try to convince you that Manning's threat to the status-quo

might be for the benefit of the masses? I stand with Manning. Just curious who you stand with.

[jeff47]

60. So...you stand with the guy who released....nothing?

or at least nothing that revealed any wrongdoing. As mentioned above, the events of "collateral murder" were already public.

Why, exactly? What did he do that is worth supporting?

[ljm2002]

61. You say...

..."People are dead because of Manning's leak. We're just not going to hear about them, because that would require publicly declaring them our sources."

Please provide a link for this. It seems awfully convenient to assert that people are dead because of Manning's leak, and then in the next breath to say that we won't hear about them. Also the logic is a bit tortured -- if people are dead because of this, then presumably that has to do with information that was revealed publicly within the reams of information that Manning revealed. But if that is true, then what additional harm could occur? They're already dead, and the information is already public.

[jeff47]

63. Leaking isn't declassification

The fact that someone leaked the information doesn't make the information unclassified.

Also, the identity of our sources is TS/SCI, yet the information they provide may only be SECRET. The problem is the specifics of the SECRET information can point to the identity of the source. Which means people get shot over leaks of SECRET.

Can I prove it? Of course not. The proof would be classified. But it's reasonable to believe that some "bad guy" traced back the SECRET information to the leaker.

But if that is true, then what additional harm could occur? They're already dead, and the information is already public.

Because we'd like to have more sources. And protecting the identities is rather vital for future sources.

[ljm2002]

65. "Leaking isn't declassification"...

...condescending much? As if the rest of us simply don't understand that "fine point". Puhleeze.

Anyway. Clearly you assume that anyone taking the side of Bradley Manning in this mess just doesn't understand how these things work. WRONG.

Your initial statement was an unequivocal, unambiguous assertion that "people died". Now you have amended your position to "it's reasonable to believe" that is the case. And the fact that other people were murdered, that a war crime was documented right there on tape, that seems to hold little weight with you.

I know, I know, but you were talking about all the REST of the leaks. And why we must punish Bradley Manning for revealing them. Personally I am glad he revealed the information. The so-called security in that outfit was a joke to begin with, by the way. And we know for a fact that a lot of the classified material should never have been classified in the first place. Or at least it should have had the lowest classification of CONFIDENTIAL, not SECRET or TOP SECRET.

The boys and girls who play with this stuff really get into it. They love making jokes like "I'd tell you but then I'd have to kill you". They enjoy being in the "in group" who know about cover stories ("that airplane flying to Iraq is loaded up with tons of frozen hamburgers", yep, that's the ticket). Like any other human system, eventually it becomes corrupt. Who will watch the watchers? It is an age-old question and one that directly applies in this case.

What I never hear from the folks like you who want to see Manning punished to the hilt is: I never see calls for prosecuting the war crimes that have been revealed. I never see calls for at least administrative discipline for those who classify information only because it reveals embarrassing facts or even war crimes, rather than because it truly should be classified.

It is clear that his regimen when first incarcerated was an attempt by the government to get him to implicate Julian Assange as having solicited the information or assisting him with obtaining it.

What do you do when faced with a moral choice: break the rules or ignore your conscience?

[jeff47]

67. It's short and accurate

Would you prefer a thesis that says exactly the same thing? This is an Internet message board, not a doctoral program.

Your initial statement was an unequivocal, unambiguous assertion that "people died". Now you have amended your position to "it's reasonable to believe" that is the case.

Because this is a doctoral program, not an Internet message board where people are casual with language use.

Oh wait....

Can I prove people died? Nope. Did people die? Yep. Why? Because of the wide volume of information Manning leaked. There is bound to be one piece of information that was traced back to its source.

And the fact that other people were murdered, that a war crime was documented right there on tape, that seems to hold little weight with you.

Actually, if you'd bothered to read the rest of my post instead of flying off the handle over the first few sentences, you'd have noticed where I point out the Army had already investigated the incident had published a public report on it. And the contents of that report matched the video.

The video did not show a war crime. There was a man with an AK-47, and a large television camera was mistaken for a shoulder-fired weapon. Since it was a war zone, that means it's perfectly legal to open fire.

The reason you should oppose war is because incidents like this are perfectly legal in war.

The so-called security in that outfit was a joke to begin with, by the way.

That's because 9/11 happend due to lack of intelligence sharing. So they altered the security, relying more on people's clearances than technological limitations so that people would share.

Btw, Manning destroyed that. So we're back to before 9/11, where intelligence isn't being shared. Go team!

And we know for a fact that a lot of the classified material should never have been classified in the first place. Or at least it should have had the lowest classification of CONFIDENTIAL, not SECRET or TOP SECRET.

Unfortunately you and Manning's other supporters keep making this claim without providing any evidence of over-classification.

There's also the problem that what appears innocuous can reveal more critical things - we know Castro's favorite ice cream. In and of itself, not something worth being SECRET. But the fact that we know it means we got it from someone who was in a position to know what Castro's favorite ice cream is. Revealing that is far more damaging than the actual content of the message.

They love making jokes like "I'd tell you but then I'd have to kill you"

Actually, such people don't really know. Because making such a statement demonstrates that you have classified information on that subject. That, in and of itself, is a reportable offense that can cause someone to lose their clearance. But people who don't have any classified information think that's what people with access say.

I never see calls for prosecuting the war crimes that have been revealed.

That's because he didn't reveal any.

Sorry, but as bad as the "collateral murder" video is, it isn't a crime. There was one person in the crowd with an AK-47, and another with what was mis-identified as a shoulder-fired weapon. That means they were legal targets. Don't like it? Well, that's why we oppose war to begin with - because incidents like this are legal.

I never see calls for at least administrative discipline for those who classify information only because it reveals embarrassing facts or even war crimes, rather than because it truly should be classified.

Well, since Manning's supporters continue to fail to point to any such information, it's rather hard to punish people for it.

What do you do when faced with a moral choice: break the rules or ignore your conscience?

Except that wasn't the choice at hand. And if the problem was just the collateral murder video, why leak Castro's favorite ice cream? Why not only leak what you felt was the illegal act?

If Manning's motives were what his supporters claim, then it makes no sense for him to have leaked all sorts of other information. If Manning's motives were what witnesses claim he said, then it makes perfect sense for him to have leaked all sorts of other information.

[LiberalLovinLug]

71. Just a few counterpoints to some of yours

"Can I prove people died? Nope. Did people die? Yep. Why? Because of the wide volume of information Manning leaked."

Brilliant deduction Watson! Sounds like. Do people die smoking Marijuana? Yep. Why? Because of the sheer volume of marijuana smoked. Here's a quote for you to chew on:

“Is this embarrassing? Yes. Is this awkward? Yes. Consequences for U.S. foreign policy? I think fairly modest.”
—Robert Gates, Unites States Secretary of Defense

"Except the army had already investigated the incident and released a public report before Manning leaked anything."

Yes a report on the killing of the Reuters journalists and the wounding of the two children. That report, with no video because the army refused to hand it over to Reuters, was a whitewash. None of the Apache soldiers were ever charged. It also ignored all the other casualties, only brought to light from this release.

"That's because 9/11 happend due to lack of intelligence sharing."

I see you are not immune to whacky conspiracy theories.
So it had nothing to do with the Bush administrations lack of interest in pursuing warnings from Richard Clarke, the AGs admonishment of FBI director Pickard to stop talking about Bin Laden and some "supposed threat", the ignoring of the CIA in the August 6th report "Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US..." that Condi Rice at first denied ever seeing.

"Except that wasn't the choice at hand. And if the problem was just the collateral murder video, why leak Castro's favorite ice cream? Why not only leak what you felt was the illegal act?"

And when, per say, do you think Manning had the time to comb through the mounds of information to pick out, in his subjective view, the parts that were criminal, or even ethically or morally wrong? That was what Wikileaks was for. They had the wherewithall and time and staff to take it to the next stage. Besides which, does knowing Castro's favorite ice cream negate any other hard information or something? I don't get your argument.

"It also suffers from Manning not actually leaking anything that reveals "bad" activity."

Seriously? I guess it depends on your definition of "bad". Revelations of coverups from relations with Tunisia's dictator, ignoring torture by Iraq security - a violation of the UN Convention Against Torture , to revealing lies about keeping tabs on civilian deaths in Iraq. Even things like the State Department's work on behalf of multinational textile corporations pressuring Haiti to NOT go through with a minimum wage increase. I mean of all the people that need a raise.... I call that "bad". There are many other examples of bad behaviour unearthed. Here's some: http://www.bradleymanning.org/learn-more/what-did-wikileaks-reveal

If Authoritarians like yourself are scared to death of these low-level leaks, I wonder what would happen to your head if some actual top secret leaks revealing more severe anti-constitutional, and criminal behavior was leaked?

[jeff47]

73. You're having a lot of trouble wrapping your head around the fact that this incident was legal.

Yes a report on the killing of the Reuters journalists and the wounding of the two children. That report, with no video because the army refused to hand it over to Reuters, was a whitewash. None of the Apache soldiers were ever charged. It also ignored all the other casualties, only brought to light from this release.

Except that the report did cover that other people died. And again, it was legal.

The AK and the mis-identified camera make them valid targets. Since the vehicle was responding to an attack on valid targets, it became a valid target too.

The reason why war is awful is things like this are legal.

I see you are not immune to whacky conspiracy theories.
So it had nothing to do with the Bush administrations lack of interest in pursuing warnings from Richard Clarke, the AGs admonishment of FBI director Pickard to stop talking about Bin Laden and some "supposed threat", the ignoring of the CIA in the August 6th report "Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US..." that Condi Rice at first denied ever seeing.

No, just explaining why Manning had access. The official story was we needed more intelligence sharing. Which was true - it was the lack of sharing was a problem, and it gave W's administration plausible deniability.

And when, per say, do you think Manning had the time to comb through the mounds of information to pick out, in his subjective view, the parts that were criminal, or even ethically or morally wrong?

Why leak them if they weren't wrong? You were just saying he was a heroic person leaking crimes. Which is it? He was heroically leaking stuff that he knew was criminal, or there was such a mountain he could never go through it all?

Or is your argument that there must have been crimes in there somewhere? Isn't that exactly the argument you deride when I say his leaks must have killed someone?

Besides which, does knowing Castro's favorite ice cream negate any other hard information or something? I don't get your argument.

It's an example of 1) information that Manning actually leaked that 2) showed no wrongdoing, and 3) provides a convenient way to explain how something that appears over-classified on it's face still needs to be classified.

Revelations of coverups from relations with Tunisia's dictator

His crimes, not ours, and already revealed elsewhere.

ignoring torture by Iraq security - a violation of the UN Convention Against Torture

Already revealed elsewhere.

revealing lies about keeping tabs on civilian deaths in Iraq

Already revealed elsewhere, and not a crime.

Even things like the State Department's work on behalf of multinational textile corporations pressuring Haiti to NOT go through with a minimum wage increase.

Already revealed elsewhere, and not a crime.

I call that "bad".

Except the threshold you set was "war crimes". I used "bad" for brevity.

If Authoritarians like yourself are scared to death of these low-level leaks, I wonder what would happen to your head if some actual top secret leaks revealing more severe anti-constitutional, and criminal behavior was leaked?

What makes you think I'm scared? Or an authoritarian for that matter?

Manning has a lot of supporters believing whatever makes Manning look best. Reality doesn't color him in as wonderful a light. My bias in this situation is towards reality.

[BainsBane]

56. Manning hasn't been convicted or sentenced

nor is he an internet activist

[jeff47]

57. Depends who you ask.

There's lots of people who think he is an activist. I agree that they're wrong, but that doesn't change their opinion.

[Fire Walk With Me]

39. Jeremy Hammond and possibly Barrett Brown. Swartz and Manning already having been mentioned.

[marble falls]

52. Aaron Swartz

[alarimer]

2. Yes.

Persecuting people like Aaron Swartz serves no purpose I can see. And the treatment of Manning has been utterly appalling, unbecoming of us. Of course I think the way most prisoners are treated is unconscionable.

Edited to add that the prosecution effectively hounded Swartz to death; he was facing decades in prison, for downloading a bunch of research papers. Quite a lot actually, but, in my opinion, scientific research belongs to all of us, not behind a paywall. Still, though it was technically a crime, it is shocking that the sentence could have been decades longer than rapists face.

[Squinch]

3. Don't forget the guys who brought down the global economy not getting arrested, while

all those OWS kids did.

[another_liberal]

19. Hear! Hear!

Good for you!

[OldDem2012]

32. Not to mention all of the people who lost their homes to foreclosure based on the....

....actions of people who were never arrested and brought to justice.

[Skittles]

4. Anonymous has a very keen sense of justice

Anonymous is very much correct

[roguevalley]

11. + a zillion

dissent is patriotism

[ReRe]

6. Hell... they hound some of them to fucking death!

Let's not forget our recently deceased treasure of the world Aaron Swartz!

Go check out http://www.DemocracyNow.org

All of last week Amy featured him and a Memorial was held for him Saturday at Cooper Union in NYC. Check the archives for last week on DemocracyNow!

[Buzz Clik]

7. I agree fully that punishments should be reasonable and equitable.

However, I doubt that these "activists" were unaware that they were breaking laws with severe punishments.

[tblue]

8. I will never side against people speaking truth to power.

But that's me.

[mbperrin]

9. I'm with you.

That makes another one.

[Phillip McCleod]

15. me three

[roguevalley]

10. plus a gazillion. There is a story on the home page about church men hiding child rape

they aren't even in prison. Enough said. GO, ANONYMOUS!

[DogPawsBiscuitsNGrav]

12. The system is broken, really broken. Neither party seems to want to fix it.

[Jackpine Radical]

13. It's not broken. It works very well.

It only looks broken because it serves purposes that are not yours.

[DogPawsBiscuitsNGrav]

14. Look at the list below. Are these not issues for you too?

#1 The United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world and the largest total prison population on the entire globe.

#2 According to NationMaster.com, the United States has the highest percentage of obese people in the world.

#3 The United States has the highest divorce rate on the globe by a wide margin.

#4 The United States is tied with the U.K. for the most hours of television watched per person each week.

#5 The United States has the highest rate of illegal drug use on the entire planet.

#6 There are more car thefts in the United States each year than anywhere else in the world by far.

#7 There are more reported rapes in the United States each year than anywhere else in the world.

#8 There are more reported murders in the United States each year than anywhere else in the world.

#9 There are more total crimes in the United States each year than anywhere else in the world.

#10 The United States also has more police officers than anywhere else in the world.

#11 The United States spends much more on health care as a percentage of GDP than any other nation on the face of the earth.

#12 The United States has more people on pharmaceutical drugs than any other country on the planet.

#13 The percentage of women taking antidepressants in America is higher than in any other country in the world.

#14 Americans have more student loan debt than anyone else in the world.

#15 More pornography is created in the United States than anywhere else on the entire globe. 89 percent is made in the U.S.A. and only 11 percent is made in the rest of the world.

#16 The United States has the largest trade deficit in the world every single year. Between December 2000 and December 2010, the United States ran a total trade deficit of 6.1 trillion dollars with the rest of the world, and the U.S. has had a negative trade balance every single year since 1976.

#17 The United States spends 7 times more on the military than any other nation on the planet does. In fact, U.S. military spending is greater than the military spending of China, Russia, Japan, India, and the rest of NATO combined.

#18 The United States has far more foreign military bases than any other country does.

#19 The United States has the most complicated tax system in the entire world.

#20 The U.S. has accumulated the biggest national debt that the world has ever seen and it is rapidly getting worse. Right now, U.S. government debt is expanding at a rate of $40,000 per second.

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/number-one-20-not-so-good-categories-that-the-united-states-leads-the-world-in

[truth2power]

17. I think jackpine meant that the system serves only

the kleptocrats, psychopaths and the 1%. But I repeat myself.

[EX500rider]

26. Hmmm...some of that list is pure BS

Take #8 "There are more reported murders in the United States each year than anywhere else in the world."

Phhhttt...not even close to true

Brazil has about 40,000 murders per year, US about 14,000

see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

#3 "The United States has the highest divorce rate on the globe by a wide margin."

Russia #1 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/21/highest-divorce-rates-in-_n_798550.html#s211130&title=Russia

#6 "There are more car thefts in the United States each year than anywhere else in the world by far."

#1 is Switzerland http://www.mapsofworld.com/world-top-ten/countries-with-most-car-theft-rates.html

[smirkymonkey]

35. Wow. That is shocking.

Makes me wish I lived in Europe.

[Jackpine Radical]

48. I stand by what I said.

The incarceration rate serves the Prison-Industrial Complex very well.

The obesity is a byproduct of several things, such as TV watching which I address below, and the fact that our whole agricultural/food industry is devoted to maximizing profits, which means lots of HFCS, grease, etc. in our GM foods. Regulation would interfere with those profits.

Television is a wonderful device for misinforming the populace and keeping them misdirected from awareness of real problems such as global warming. The Republican Party couldn't exist without it.

Illegal drug use? The Prison-Industrial Complex again. Also, many people seek escape from the "lives of quiet desperation" that the Oligarchy has ordained for them. Same thing with the antidepressants

It is good to have our educated people saddled with large debts. They are much easier to control that way. After all, it is the educated people who are most likely to raise trouble in any fascist state if you don't have a good handle on them. And for that matter, it is well if your educational system for the masses teaches nothing beyond the basic math & literacy skills required to serve the Empire.

The amount we spend on health care? Most of that goes into the coffers of the wealthy.

I could go on, but these points will serve to make my case.

So how can you possibly say that our system doesn't work?

[DogPawsBiscuitsNGrav]

66. I'm pretty sure that I was agreeing with you.

[Jackpine Radical]

68. I just wanted to make the point that the apparent "failures"

are not accidental, as I thought you were implying in saying that the system doesn't work. It's far more sinister than that.

[DogPawsBiscuitsNGrav]

69. You're preaching to the choir, but pointing these things out or even speaking of them

around here gets everyone screaming troll. I just zip it and play dumb. It's really not worth the effort. At least not for me anyway.

[another_liberal]

18. Why link the two . . .

Why are you trying to link "internet activists" with "rapists" in the first place? This aspect of your top post really bothers me. It is kind of like the top post which appeared yesterday which tried to conflate gay rapists with people who make fun of gun-lovers for being poorly "hung."

What kind of a game are you really playing?

[Egalitarian Thug]

20. Whoosh!

That was the point flying right over your head.

[another_liberal]

22. "Sayin' it. . ."

"Sayin' it don't make it so."

I guess you've never ever heard of a 'hidden agenda,' eh?

[Egalitarian Thug]

23. Two for two. The link was not between internet activists and rapists. n/t

[Egalitarian Thug]

28. Batting 1.000. Both of my parents were psychologists and my girlfriend wrote on

Edward Bernays. Perhaps you are seeking conflict where none exists?

[another_liberal]

31. Yep . . .

Yep, I'm sure. You on the other hand . . . well, that speaks for itself.

[OldDem2012]

33. What game are YOU playing and how have you managed to survive this long? nt.

[another_liberal]

34. No games here . . .

I said the of linking "Internet Activists" with "Rapists" bothered me. It does bother me. No game about it.

As to how I have survived, "so long?"

"A little money and a great deal of luck."

[Egalitarian Thug]

40. The tweet didn't make that link. Everybody but you understands that. n/t

[King_Klonopin]

47. It's not a "link"; it's a "comparison"

made to illustrate the disproportion and injustices
inherent within our legal/criminal justice system.

A heinous crime like rape results in less harsh
prison sentences than the "crime" of disseminating
information over the internet. I myself find that to
be a perverse and horrible injustice -- even if it
is an exaggeration. Maybe, it is because some of
our leaders view the free flow of information which
is now being made accessible to the public through
the internet as more of a danger and a threat to our
society -- and status quo -- than rape.
Information incriminates the guilty.

Another example is:

If you embezzled $1,000 from your employer, you
would be arrested, tried in court, and possibly even
serve time in prison for your crime.
On the other hand, NO ONE who was responsible for
the theft of about 1 trillion dollars of taxpayer money
via the "big bank bailout" has been sentenced or even
arrested. Seems disproportionate, but it's true.
This comparison in no way "links" you to those slimy
bankers.

I have noticed there are others here at DU who
seek to find conflict and indignation in a vacuum,
who strain out the gnat while swallowing the camel.
Why be one of them? Relax, Mr. McIntosh.

[Marrah_G]

51. You need to brush up on your reading comprehension.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

30. Yes.

[RoccoR5955]

36. Not only that

but if someone robs a convenient store s/he gets a larger sentence than a banker who robs the whole country of billions.

Drug companies can kill people with drugs and get away with a small civil suit, in relation to their profits. If a regular person kills someone they could get the death penalty.

There certainly is something wrong in this country, and in the world.

[Vattel]

38. State kidnapping, like state murder, is popular in the US.

[judesedit]

41. A very dirty GOP world if we don't stop them asap. Thank you for everything you do for us, Anon

[truedelphi]

44. Uh the DOJ is under the President's purview. If he wanted things to

be different, believe me, he could stir up Eric Holder's a bit more. So sad to see a young activist suicide himself, due to harshness of Federal prosecution attempts. Sad to know that just last week, a man who had spent so much time and energy providing for medical marijuana for Central Valley of California patients got ten years.

Meanwhile the DOJ has failed to prosecute 95% of the illegal activities undertaken by Wall street. Help destroy an economy, leaving twelve million foreclosed, countless numbers of people out of work, and you, Jaimie Diman, are A okay, and wearing the Oval Office cuff links.

Try and make journal writings available to all, you are screwed. Try to provide med marijuana, you get ten years.

[truedelphi]

42. Answer to question about "what kind of world are we leaving for our kids?"

A world in which the people at the top have their re-inaugurations celebrated, even though they could alter the fabric of the Justice Department to see that this wasn't what was happening, if they had the will to do that.

[VPStoltz]

43. When a dope smoker is getting a longer sentence than a drunk driver who kills - that's cray-cray!

[meegbear]

46. Why yes. Yes I do.

[mtasselin]

49. Love them

I think Anonymous is doing all of America a Great Favor that we will never be able to repay, please keep up the Great Work but, be careful very careful because they will come for you. I applaud you.

[rhett o rick]

54. When people dispensing state legalized medical marijuana get sentenced

and corrupt bankers dont.

[99Forever]

62. Justice is dead in America.

We are a nation without a conscience or compassion.

[mntleo2]

64. A million "moon" march is needed!

I have only been to DC once and it was a couple years ago. I went as an activist with another group. It was before the last appointment and I am pretty mad at the SCOTUS due to idiotic rulings like Citizens United and others. So while we were there and walking past the courthouse I told my friends I may never get a chance to come back and well, I decided I just did not come over 3000 miles without mooning these despicable people, if anything to register my disgust with them. It was cold, right after that terrible snow sorm they had and nobody was around. So I asked them to take a picture of me mooning them and then I did. I will never forget it, it was the highlights of my trip. Not a few people have laughed their asses off when I told them I had actually done this ...

I do not blame the last 2 appointees, don't get me wrong but just to ensure they do not fall into the trap of the consevatives they have to work with but ... Now I wish a "Million Moon March" could be organized so that thousands of people show up on the Mall and at some sort of signal do what I did to show they have zero respect unless these people actually rule with true wisdom and justice; they should turn around, and wave their naked bums, maybe with a few "fart sounds" (like Stephaie Miller does) broadcast throughout the Mall.

I believe this is one way to get a message in a humorous yet serious way we are tired of a bunch of idiots who have the power to change law at their whim often based on silly things llike some damn comma or phrase is not the way they see it.

Just sayin' ...

Cat in Seattle

[judesedit]

70. Absolutely. Thank God for Anonymous and friends. We'd really be screwed without them.

[judesedit]

72. Be careful Anonymous. They are trying to find you big-time I am sure. Thanks for all of us.