Chelsea Manning To Run For U.S. Senate In Maryland

Agreed. But the government created by the founders sought to do just that. So it wasn't a worse government than the monarchy, it was just the opposite, at least in concept. True the Constitution that was created had/has some holes that have always been exploited by the US government. I'm not sure what kind of government would ever actually work to secure the individual rights of The People (as stated in the Declaration). I personally have some suggestions in terms of plugging some of those holes but even so, there's no guarantee that will work either.

http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/proposed-constitutional-amendments.507699/

I can't disagree with that but again, that wasn't the intent of the founders, at least on paper.

 

That's correct but you originally claimed he's a criminal and anyone involved in WikiLeaks is also a criminal. I don't know if you're an American or not but in this country, there's something called due process of law. No one is a criminal on the basis of accusation alone. At least that's the way it's supposed to work. In practice though, it is often a different story but I personally tend to strictly follow constitutional principles. So I will always argue that everyone is innocent unless and until found guilty by a valid constitutional court of common law, something that's extremely rare to find in this country.

 

It is my opinion that he is a criminal. He is not as yet a convicted criminal.

 

Ok, you certainly have a right to your opinion. It is also my opinion that the last 3 Presidents are war criminals. The difference is their agenda cost the lives of hundreds of thousands of innocent people. What Assange allegedly did or didn't do harmed no one.

 

It is unknown if anyone was killed as a result of this massive release of classified info. It was none the less a crime, and a serious one IMO.

 

The difference is that it is very well known that hundreds of thousands of innocent people were massacred as a result of the war crimes and other human rights atrocities committed by the last 3 Presidents. A minute fraction of that was exposed by WikiLeaks. Talk about serious crimes, your opinion is strictly based on conjecture, mine is based on the facts. There is no crime in exposing war crimes, especially when those war crimes are "classified" under pretext of national security.

 

You are very generous in your assessment that "only" the last 3 presidents were war criminals. Almost all of the US presidents of the 20th century are accused by some people of being war criminals.
Unfortunately circumstances arise that require military action. Also unfortunately, nobody has yet invented a way to combat an enemy without anyone else being hurt.

 

Except I never used the word "only". I targeted the last 3 Presidents because they have either invented a fallacious permanent/endless war on terror under pretext of 9/11 or pursued that deadly fallacy.

Correct on both, however, that has nothing to do with committing war crimes based on a hegemonic agenda. The Nuremburg Principles, a doctrine authored by the International Law Commission that included Americans and that the US government is a signatory to is very clear on the description of war crimes.

And again, there is no comparison to the alleged crimes that Assange may have committed. IMO, what he did was a great service to the planet, far from any crime.

 

I don't see any great benefit to the planet resulting from the actions of Assange.

 

Probably not. No one raised any complaint when declaring Obama the first black president - when he is not the prodigy of slaves but rather of slave traders, is as much white as black and was raised among white people, not black people - even related to Republican Dick Chaney.

 

Education.





But I understand, you can only see him as a criminal.

 

What do people expect our guys to do in a combat zone like that, interview people before shooting them?
War is hellish and ugly. A lot of unintended stuff happens, especially in that kind of warfare. Nobody should have needed Assange to show them that.

 

"collateral" damage is a military term used to excuse death by:
1. Friendly artillery fire
2. Friendly aircraft bombing
3. Friendly drone attack
4. Friendly fire from sniper or other friendly ground unit
5. Napalm attack
6. Agent orange area spray
7. Radiation sickness caused by ordering troops to be in the blast zone of a nuclear test
8. Fatal illness caused by experimentation of drugs and biochemical agents on soldiers
9. Accidental death from foreign allies military
10. Death from deliberate attack by an enemy terrorist on a civilian target, where the enemy was funded by Saudi Arabia, and a Saudi Arabian prince apologized and sent a gift of several billions or forgave US debt, ascompensation. And where an owner of the 2 buildings that got destroyed, made 14 Billion dollars off a 100 million dollar insurance policy he took out just 4 months prior to the attack.

 

Yep. War is a war crime, agreed. It's also a racket.

Why? Does it bother you that he did? And/or do you believe those who are ignorant should remain ignorant?

So which is really criminal then, committing war crimes or reporting war crimes?

 

THe helicopter gunship incident was not considered a war crime. It was a mistake. The journalists were in the wrong place at the wrong time and their equipment was mistaken for weapons.

 

Sure, I understand, it was a "mistake". Assange should not be showing anyone "mistakes", they are classified. They/you can call it whatever they/you want, mistake, collateral damage, fun, whatever, for me it was a war crime. War crimes are well defined in numerous international treaties, they're also written in English. But for me, I don't need to read anything to know what murder is. For you, you were told it was a mistake.

You failed to answer any of my questions, I understand that too. It's ok though, I didn't expect you to.

 

You don't know what education is.

 

Sorry your gal lost.

 

War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength? What do you know about what I know (or don't) besides zero?

Who's my "gal" who "lost"? Why are you trolling my posts with irrelevant and irrational BS?

 

He's a coward. He's very afraid- the very reason he's seeking protection! lol

 

I'm sure given that the US government wanted to prosecute you for a crime that's not a crime, you would be a big hero and turn yourself in eagerly. Especially knowing how the US government treated Chelsea Manning. (lol)