Skip to main content

During the health care/insurance reform fight, there were things that were commonly referred to as "zombie lies."  Those were the Republican lies about the bill that had both no connection to reality, and wouldn't go away (e.g.: ZOMG death panels).  After looking through yesterday's diary on the sarcastic comment that resulted in Manning being stripped naked every night and made to stand naked outside his cell every morning, I noticed that the handful of commenters that were most vigorous in their defense of his (mis)treatment seemed to have their own set of these zombie lies.

There were two main categories.  The first was based on the assumption that Manning was guilty of all the charges, which justified the treatment.

Link
Especially when you're in a military prison for stealing and leaking information that may have increased the threats already faced by our men in uniform.

A twofer, actually.  The first half is missing the "accused of", implicitly skipping ahead to "guilty of".  The second half is a worse lie, as back in October, even Gates had to admit that the leaks "compromised no sensitive intelligence sources or practices".  If the people making this claim have any evidence to support it, they need to provide it (and provide the DoD with that information).

Link
...accused of treason...

This one is also really common, even from before the latest set of charges (which still do not include treason) were announced.  The worst that he is accused of is the somewhat nebulous "aiding the enemy", which is a separate charge from "treason."

Let's look at the charge itself, though:

(1) aids, or attempts to aid, the enemy with arms, ammunition, supplies, money, or other things; or

(2) without proper authority, knowingly harbors or protects or gives intelligence to or communicates or corresponds with or holds any intercourse with the enemy, either directly or indirectly; shall suffer death or such other punishment as a court-martial or military commission may direct.”

Well, (1) obviously doesn't apply.  (2) only applies (at best/worst) in the "indirectly" case, but that seems to have its own problems.

The military’s argument thus appears to be this: (1) Manning stole intelligence from the U.S. and gave it to WikiLeaks; (2) WikiLeaks published that intelligence on the internet; (3) the “enemy” accessed or had access to that intelligence, completing the crime of aiding the enemy.

The problem for the military, it seems to me, is that this argument may not satisfy the definition of “indirectly” aiding the enemy.  The UCMJ subdivides 104(2) into two separate offences, “giving intelligence to the enemy” and “communicating with the enemy.”  Here is the first offence, according to the Manual for Courts Martial:

   Giving intelligence to the enemy is a particular case of corresponding with the enemy made more serious by the fact that the communication contains intelligence that may be useful to the enemy for any of the many reasons that make information valuable to belligerents.  This intelligence may be conveyed by direct or indirect means.

This offence can be committed indirectly, but it clearly contemplates a situation in which the enemy actually received the intelligence, either by directly receiving it from the defendant or by indirectly receiving it through the defendant’s intermediary.  Hence the following sample specification in the Manual for Courts Martial:

   In that __ (personal jurisdiction data), did, (at/on board — location), on or about __ 20 _ , without proper authority, knowingly give intelligence to the enemy, by (informing a patrol of the enemy’s forces of the whereabouts of a military patrol of the United States forces) (_).

It is possible that Manning is guilty of this offence, assuming that the military can prove an enemy of the United States did, in fact, access the information released on the internet; again, indirect conveyance is sufficient and the intent to aid is not required.  But that might be difficult to prove; does the U.S. government have access to WikiLeaks’ incoming IP addresses?

Link
despite your emotional appeal to use other unpunished wrongs to decry the treatment of another, it isn't relevant.
how many criminals should be set free by the same rational [sic]?

For context, this one is responding to a "Then why was Cheney never prosecuted" comment.  It's also technically true.  However, pointing out these sorts of contradictions proves the lie that Manning's treatment is really about the leaks.  If leaking were the "real" crime being addressed, then it would be consistently applied.

The second category of zombie lie was based around the idea that it was really because the kind, caring brig personnel were really concerned with him harming himself.  Since all of them said pretty much the same thing, I'll just leave a selection here:

Link
If they are concerned about him killing himself, this makes sense. Prisoners do whatever they have available to kill themselves, including using their underwear to hang themselves.
Link
The evidence we currently have is that, given Manning's behavior, this was a reasonable step to make. Mental health professionals will tell you to not disregard even sarcastic mentions of suicide. Not all people who mention suicide will actually attempt to commit suicide, but it's not something that one can reasonably disregard.
Link
since they should try to ensure that a potentially suicidal person can't kill themselves, it's easily explainable! But the lawyer LIED and said that it was "inexplicable". That's one thing we know. Another thing we know, other evidence we have, is that he suggested that if he wanted to kill himself, he had the means already at his fingertips. If you ask any mental health professional, they'll explain to you that ANY comment like that has to be taken as a potential threat that might be carried out.
Link
If you ask any mental health professional, any mention of suicide should be taken as a sign that a suicide attempt might be imminent.
Link
The commander isn't going to take any chances with his star prisoner committing suicide.

I'd just like to draw attention the the fact that they're all referring to Manning as "potentially suicidal."  Got it?  Good.

Quoting Mannng's lawyer's blog postfrom a few days ago...

On Wednesday March 2, 2011, PFC Manning was told that his Article 138 complaint requesting that he be removed from Maximum custody and Prevention of Injury (POI) Watch had been denied by the Quantico commander, Colonel Daniel J. Choike.  Understandably frustrated by this decision after enduring over seven months of unduly harsh confinement conditions, PFC Manning inquired of the Brig operations officer what he needed to do in order to be downgraded from Maximum custody and POI.  As even Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell has stated, PFC Manning has been nothing short of "exemplary" as a detainee.  Additionally, Brig forensic psychiatrists have consistently maintained that there is no mental health justification for the POI Watch imposed on PFC Manning.  In response to PFC Manning's question, he was told that there was nothing he could do to downgrade his detainee status and that the Brig simply considered him a risk of self-harm.  PFC Manning then remarked that the POI restrictions were "absurd" and sarcastically stated that if he wanted to harm himself, he could conceivably do so with the elastic waistband of his underwear or with his flip-flops.
Without consulting any Brig mental health provider, Chief Warrant Officer Denise Barnes used PFC's Manning's sarcastic quip as justification to increase the restrictions imposed upon him under the guise of being concerned that PFC Manning was a suicide risk.  PFC Manning was not, however, placed under the designation of Suicide Risk Watch.  This is because Suicide Risk Watch would have required a Brig mental health provider's recommendation, which the Brig commander did not have.  In response to this specific incident, the Brig psychiatrist assessed PFC Manning as "low risk and requiring only routine outpatient followup [with] no need for ... closer clinical observation."  In particular, he indicated that PFC Manning's statement about the waist band of his underwear was in no way prompted by "a psychiatric condition."

While the commander needed the Brig psychiatrist's recommendation to place PFC Manning on Suicide Risk Watch, no such recommendation was needed in order to increase his restrictions under POI Watch.  The conditions of POI Watch require only psychiatric input, but ultimately remain the decision of the commander.  

Let's look at that again.  The Pentagon admits that he's been an "exemplary" detainee.  The brig's psychiatrists have said that there is no justification for the POI watch, which the brig commander insists on keeping in place.  The additional restrictions were placed without consulting any of the psychiatrists.  Despite claiming that he is a suicide risk, he has not been evaluated for a suicide risk watch.  In response to this incident the brig's psychiatrist assessed him as low risk, and that the comment was not a risk.  Not to mention the additional absurdity, that at night, when they strip him naked due to supposed "safety concerns", they give him tear-resistant blankets.  I can't see any reason why anyone would doubt the motives of the brig personnel, can you?

Then there were a couple that seemed pervasive, but weren't part of the previous two, falling into the "claimant made no attempts to provide evidence when asked" category, and I include them in the off chance that they'll put their proverbial money where their mouths are.

Link
And he also knows that the 3 other times that Manning was under a suicide watch, rather than simply under a POI, he was also stripped naked at night, and so on those occasions, he also had to get up at 5 AM and stand at attention in his doorway naked. Yet he never complained about that in the past - it suddenly became an issue now.
Link
Under a suicide watch, a detainee only gets his boxers during the day - no other clothing - and at night, sleeps naked.

And finally, in the "how on Earth can you make this argument with a straight face?" category...

Link
But he hasn't been held in solitary confinement - how is it possible that you think you know enough about this case to comment upon it, yet you don't know that he's not being held in solitary confinement?

I'll be a little blunter than I usually am in the response to this one.  This is, maybe not THE stupidest, but definitely one of the stupidest things I've ever read here.  It's a claim that could only be made by someone who has no idea whatsoever of what solitary is, and has no problems at all clearly demonstrating that ignorance.  Solitary confinement is the term for holding conditions where a prisoner is not allowed to have physical interaction with individuals other than, perhaps, prison staff.  Manning spends 23 hours a day alone in a cell.  He is let out for 1 hour a day for exercise (he cannot do anything other than walk), with no non-staff interactions.  He's allowed one one-hour visit per week.  It's idiotic to pretend that that isn't solitary confinement.


Link
This is the same lawyer that in August demanded a mental health evaluation that should have taken 6 weeks after starting in October. Somehow that 6 weeks has come and gone, and now they're saying that it'll take another 2 weeks from now! That means that the review and evaluation will have taken almost 6 months instead of 6 weeks - that too should give you some pause, and tell you that Manning's mental health status is being looked at closely! (emphasis added)

Something that was supposed to take 6 weeks has been dragged out to 6 months, and it's a sign that it's being looked at seriously?  Are you f*king kidding me?

I'm sure there are others.  Anyone have anything they want to add to the list?

Originally posted to Hayate Yagami on Mon Mar 07, 2011 at 11:57 AM PST.

Also republished by Wikileaks Informationthread.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  No thinking person considers Manning ... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lonemorriscodem, skeyewalker

    to simply be an accused person who may be innocent.  The man BRAGGED about his acts.  Now it's time he pay for them.

    "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, and I am not sure about the universe." -- Albert Einstein

    by Neuroptimalian on Mon Mar 07, 2011 at 12:24:05 PM PST

  •  Interesting diary ty (12+ / 0-)

    I'm astounded at the stupidity of treating someone like this in front of the whole world. Its making the leaks look banal in comparison

    "Another world is not only possible, she is on her way. On a quiet day, I can hear her breathing." Arundhati Roy

    by LaFeminista on Mon Mar 07, 2011 at 12:29:54 PM PST

    •  The Wikileaks Informationthreads (4+ / 0-)

      were scary for these lying liars because they knew that if they came to my diary they were shouted down with FACTS.

      I am getting sick of this site becuase of what this diary is showing: Lying scumbags have no fear.

      If everyone treated a liar the same way I did, you would not have them showing up here.

      "Sad songs are nature's onions."-Mr. Show

      by cedar park on Mon Mar 07, 2011 at 01:11:28 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  And does anyone here really think that (0+ / 0-)

    the USMC would completely throw out the code for dealing with Marines in the brig as completely as we are being led to believe?

    "Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." --M. L. King "You can't fix stupid" --Ron White

    by zenbassoon on Mon Mar 07, 2011 at 12:30:49 PM PST

    •  Throw out the code? Probably not. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      SJerseyIndy, pgm 01, cedar park

      Exploit every possible method to make conditions as horrible as possible while remaining just in compliance?  Now that's a different question.

      Reality has a liberal bias.

      by Hayate Yagami on Mon Mar 07, 2011 at 12:37:43 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Things I do not believe (5+ / 0-)

      I do not believe that we would waterboard a guy, dump him naked in a cell afterwards, pour cold buckets of water on him all night, get him to say whatever we wanted, which was that Saddam Hussein had connections to Al-Qaeda, and then go to war on that shit, resulting in the death of more than one million people.

      I do not believe that we would take Habeas Corpus, a fundamental right going back to the year 1215, and simply toss it.

      I do not believe we would take interrogation methods best suited to witch hunting, and adopt them today. I mean, that shit is medieval.

      I do not believe that we would simply toss the modern Geneva Conventions either.

      I do not believe that a guy could have his penis regularly sliced with a scapel, and that U.S. courts would proclaim, in the bluntest and most straightforward way, that justice is simply not possible in America, about this.  

      I do not believe that we would take false tortured confessions to the Taliban, and use those tortured confessions ourselves, and simply lock a guy up forever without charge, based on that.

      I do not believe that we would stick insects on the legs of children locked in boxes, in order to extract confessions from their fathers.

      I do not believe that hyoid bones, which show death by strangulation, ever go missing in autopsies conducted by the United States military. Certainly not as a repeated occurrence.

      I do not believe that massive purple damage in a lung, showing slow tissue death, resulting from a hanging in chains or shackles, ever happens in U.S. military custody. Certainly not as a repeated occurrence.

      I do not believe that hanging in chains of any sort

      ever happens in U.S. military or intelligence custody. Certainly not as a repeated occurrence.

      I do not simply do not believe that a Captain in the United States army, heavily involved in some of the most scandalous events in all of U.S. history, could move on from that scandal and crime, not to prison, but to legislative aide in Congress.

      I do believe that a prime political matter in the United States now, is catching up our health care system to what many other nations have had for 50 and more years. That we are merely half a century or a century behind other nations, in what we need to do.

      I do not believe that our actual primary political issue now, is instead getting ourselves caught up with the standards and fundamental rights of the year 1215. I mean, how could such a thing possibly be true?  

  •  This feels like it should be cross-posted to group (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Shaviv, Hayate Yagami, cedar park

    but not sure which.

    More and Better Democrats

    by SJerseyIndy on Mon Mar 07, 2011 at 12:44:38 PM PST

  •  Treason is the new buzzword. (4+ / 0-)

    Just like the word deficit.  Ask the next 100 people on the street what the definition of treason (or deficit) is and they won't be able to tell you.  Or it will be Faux New's definition.  

  •  Something about the military (0+ / 0-)

    You learn, very early on, not to make any sort of "remarks", and especially not a sarcastic one to someone who has power over you, because it will end up badly.  They'll find any sort of loop hole.

    One of my first experiences in boot camp was making a smart ass remark that I would end up pissing myself.  This was after an especially stupid incident where we were stuck waiting outside.  We were promptly made to drink water and march around in circles till we all pissed ourselves and then stood outside like idiots in a Chicago February.

    Similar complaints about being worked to hard to the point where you might get hurt, usually resulted in force work outs (make it rain was ever popular) which always resulted in people getting physically ill or hauled off by the base EMS.

    There is no way someone who has been in the military, as Manning currently is, would not have known that making sarcastic comments like that did not have a problem, if not near certain, chance of him ending up in his birthday suit looking like a fool.

    You can agree or disagree with this sort of action, but it's hardly unique to Manning.

    "Foolproof systems don't take into account the ingenuity of fools."

    by overclocking on Mon Mar 07, 2011 at 01:09:05 PM PST

    •  so what evidence do you have that he bragged? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Hayate Yagami

      Lamo?! Grow up.

      "Sad songs are nature's onions."-Mr. Show

      by cedar park on Mon Mar 07, 2011 at 01:16:48 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  The article up there (0+ / 0-)

        PFC Manning then remarked that the POI restrictions were "absurd" and sarcastically stated that if he wanted to harm himself, he could conceivably do so with the elastic waistband of his underwear or with his flip-flops.

        He made a stupid remark about his underpants and flip flops.  So... they took them from him and made a fool out him.

        This is how everything in the military works.  You make smart ass remarks to people who can screw with you, and shocker, they do everything legally in their power to do it.

        If I made smart ass remarks about how I could harm myself with my underpants and my flip-flops while I was still in the military I wouldn't be shocked at all if they took them from me.

        Just as how when I made a smart ass remark about pissing myself, they made damn sure that me and everybody else in fact pissed themselves.

        "Foolproof systems don't take into account the ingenuity of fools."

        by overclocking on Mon Mar 07, 2011 at 01:22:22 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  NICE! So in the United States you should (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          neroden, Hayate Yagami

          never make a sarcastic statement?! What we are doing to Manning(standing naked) we could NEVER DO TO A PRISONER OF WAR!

          I hate this site

          "Sad songs are nature's onions."-Mr. Show

          by cedar park on Mon Mar 07, 2011 at 01:26:05 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  In the US military (0+ / 0-)

            No you should not make a sarcastic comment.  Doing so will only land you in a situation burning shitters, humiliated, or stuck pulling extra duty with no sleep.  How badly you get screwed depends on the situation you are in (obviously it's going to land you into more hot water in jail), the sense of humor of the person you snapped off to (MP's are obviously an idiotic choice to mouth off to), and what they can legally do if you mouth of (anything that could be construed as a threat to yourself or someone else is going to land you in even more trouble).

            So Manning, by the articles own admission, popped off to the MPs that he could kill himself with his underpants and flip flops if he wanted to.  The MPs, now with justifiable cause, then confiscated his under pants and his flip flops and put him through the ringer they'd put someone through who actually might want to kill themselves.

            Anybody who's been in the military can tell you that Manning is obviously either a) a blithering idiot for pulling a stunt like that because the first response that comes to mind is "well, there goes his skivvies and shower flops", or b) was trying to create a fiasco, which is also not uncommon behavior, in which case he got his fiasco.

            And we can do all sorts of things to our own soldiers, especially ones accused of crimes, that we can not do to prisoners of war.  What we can and can't do to a prisoner of war isn't really relevant to what we can do to our own troops.

            If you want to argue about idiotic military behaviors and bizarre actions that don't make any sense in the civilian world, we can have that debate.  Provided you understand that the rules are completely different on all levels for a civilian and a soldier.  But the fact that a private, and one already in the brig for prior issues, popped off and got the typical "ok smartass, we are going to go through the procedures now" response that happens any time you mouth off in the military, is hardly anything more than "same shit, different private".

            "Foolproof systems don't take into account the ingenuity of fools."

            by overclocking on Mon Mar 07, 2011 at 01:39:25 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  overclocking is an idiot cp (0+ / 0-)

            sheesh... you know continual pushback is necessary.

            They want you to give up. They want Manning to give up.


            Our... constitutional heritage rebels at the thought of giving government the power to control men's minds. --Thurgood Marshall

            by bronte17 on Wed Mar 09, 2011 at 07:52:55 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  And I guess you just fucking shut up (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          neroden, Hayate Yagami

          and took it when the military did that to you? I bet you would just sit there and take it when they put a bible on your cot? How about the religious sayings on your rifle scope? I bet you just bent over and said nothing when something was slapping against your ass.

          This site and this country are done because of that "thinking."

          "Sad songs are nature's onions."-Mr. Show

          by cedar park on Mon Mar 07, 2011 at 01:29:05 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I laughed (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            skeyewalker

            I laughed at the humor of pissing in my pants.  I laughed even harder when one of the dumbasses in my unit got the "bright" idea of pissing into his canteen, only to end up having to pour it out over his head after.

            Lesson learned, don't pop off to the petty officer about not being able to PT because you'll piss yourself, and don't be a wise ass and piss in your canteen when you think nobody is looking.

            It's the damn military.  It's not a corporate job, and the rules are not the same.  You do what you're told, which is key in any functioning military, and if you act smart you'll get made a fool out of.

            Nobody ever put a bible on my rack (it's not a cot), and I could really give two shits about who believes in what imaginary man in the sky, that's their business.  Everybody knew I didn't go to church and the only time the topic of a Chaplin, or religion, was even brought up around me was when a family member was ill at which point it was made crystal clear that this was only a talk because the guy was also a psychologist and I might want to talk to someone outside of the command he was an option, and that religion would not be broached at all.

            And I don't why this sort of stuff would equate to me being rapped, that's just a silly personal attack.  Which hints to me, you've realized you don't really have much of an argument left to make on this other than "lol get raped", nice!

            "Foolproof systems don't take into account the ingenuity of fools."

            by overclocking on Mon Mar 07, 2011 at 01:53:29 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  So you only saw up to the end of your own (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              neroden

              fucking nose. Good on you. I guess you are the complete Mrrican.

              talk to a Jew. Talk to a Muslim. Talk to an Atheist. Talk to anyone who is not white, southern and babptist.

              You do what you're told, which is key in any functioning military

              I'm glad to know that a pussy is on Kos.

              "Sad songs are nature's onions."-Mr. Show

              by cedar park on Mon Mar 07, 2011 at 02:20:10 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  I am an Atheist (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                skeyewalker

                And half my family is Jewish...

                I'm not seeing your point here.

                "Foolproof systems don't take into account the ingenuity of fools."

                by overclocking on Mon Mar 07, 2011 at 02:24:59 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  dignity of human beings (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  bronte17, cedar park

                  is pretty simple to understand Overclocking.

                  you can use all the sophistry you want, but we all know when someone's rights/personal dignity are being stepped on, and good officers- gentlemen as they used to be called- would never stand for this bullshit.

                  Bush pissed the honor of our military away, and Obama is doing nothing to recover it.  Manning is being made a martyr- he should be treated well for no other reason- but reptiles such as yourself don't get the simple truth of it......

                     

                  Out of my cold dead hands

                  by bluelaser2 on Mon Mar 07, 2011 at 02:42:28 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  You don't have a right to dignity in the military (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    skeyewalker

                    That much is made obvious the first moment you land at boot camp and are up for 48 hours or more getting shoved through medical like cattle and standing buck naked in group showers being yelled at with only 3 mins to shit shower and shave.

                    You lose many rights when you join the military.

                    Many is being treated like anybody else in his situation would.  He does not get a free walk and preferential treatment because some people think he's a saint.

                    "Foolproof systems don't take into account the ingenuity of fools."

                    by overclocking on Mon Mar 07, 2011 at 03:22:27 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                •  I know because you don't care. (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  neroden, Hayate Yagami

                  Look at the facts. Stop acting as if your fucking experience is the only fucking thing that ever fucking mattered.

                  "Sad songs are nature's onions."-Mr. Show

                  by cedar park on Mon Mar 07, 2011 at 02:43:01 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

              •  You should quit while you are behind cedar park... (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                skeyewalker

                ... because overclocking is stating a simple fact about military life, which happens to be true whether you like it or not.

                For the record, I agree that the mistreatment of Pfc. Manning has gone way beyond what any decent person could call reasonable incarceration while he awaits his court martial. All the same, I notice that the folks who are the fastest to rush to Manning's defense also seem to be the quickest to resort to name-calling about anyone who disagrees with their point of view. You and bluelaser2 are not exactly showing much class by calling overclocking a "pussy" and a "reptile."

                Please grow up. Or at least stop asking clueless questions like, "So what evidence do you have that he bragged?" when the very first paragraph of this diary notes that Manning's "sarcastic comment" is what precipitated the military's overreaction.

                Fire away. I'm sure you will have some personal insult to make. But with allies such as yourself, Manning doesn't need enemies. Knock yourself out. I've got to head home from work now anyway.

                •  I am tired of people such as yourself (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Hayate Yagami

                  complaining about calling an asshole an asshole. Get over language. All language is ok when used correctly. I have made my points about the military and how "that's how it is" is fucking wrong.

                  Grow up and stop trying to appease people who justify torture. It really looks bad.

                  "Sad songs are nature's onions."-Mr. Show

                  by cedar park on Mon Mar 07, 2011 at 03:25:15 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                •  AND I did a screen grab of your comment (0+ / 0-)

                  to show people that it was not from redstate or from some crazy relative from Facebook. I need to prove to people daily that shit like that is on dailykos.

                  You just made my point. This site is full of crap.

                  "Sad songs are nature's onions."-Mr. Show

                  by cedar park on Mon Mar 07, 2011 at 03:30:22 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  there are nuts everywhere. (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Hayate Yagami

                    half the point of the new site (if you ask lil old me) is allowing you to narrow but deepen your experience here. less time in useless cheerleading diaries, less browsing lists simply indicating which group is winning the mojo game today.

                    i haven't found much use for reading too far beyond my stream. i've been working to add more sources to it, but sticking to a well-curated stream seems the key to avoiding the dittoheads.

                    doesn't mean you won't run into them, but these folks aren't getting many recs and they seem akin to the small number of people on both the 'left' and 'right' who make a past-time of wandering into 'enemy territory' and pissing people off (instead of engaging in a cross-ideological debate).

                •  they're torturing him. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Hayate Yagami

                  there is no gray area. you support torture or you oppose it.

                  calling people names for supporting it doesn't strike me as the sign of an especially troubled mind.

              •  Correction: an obedient sheep (0+ / 0-)

                Pussycats never do what they're told, and I'm sure you didn't mean the other sort of pussy, did you?

                Avoid sexist language.

                Read pp. 1-7 of Krugman's _The Great Unraveling_ (available from Google Books). NOW.

                by neroden on Mon Mar 07, 2011 at 06:29:21 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

            •  I call bullshit (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              bronte17, neroden, Hayate Yagami

              I really was in the military, and it's not like the movies.  You are obviously just making stuff up about the military because you can't stand to lose an arguement.  The treatment of Manning is not normal military stuff.  I've done a suicide watch and it was not punitive.  You, sir, are a liar.

    •  this (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      neroden, Hayate Yagami

      is a red herring. The prison staff's behavior is what's in question here.

    •  "looking like a fool". (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bronte17, Hayate Yagami

      ladies and gentlemen, the rush limbaugh defense.

      this is just a bunch of fratboy silliness. nothing more than the army usually does. so what if it technically destroys human beings. it looks just like it did in basic training.

      i just hope you had equally kind words for mr bush's use of this torture technique. the only thing worse than justifying torture is justifying it only when politically expedient.

    •  Are you admitting that the US Military (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      nathguy

      uses forced nudity as punishment throughout our bases?

      That this forced nudity is standard operating procedure?


      Our... constitutional heritage rebels at the thought of giving government the power to control men's minds. --Thurgood Marshall

      by bronte17 on Wed Mar 09, 2011 at 07:51:36 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  excellent diary (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Hayate Yagami, skeyewalker

    tipped & rec'd. Nice to have all these lies gathered in one place.

  •  Wish I could rec (0+ / 0-)

    Got here too late!

    Thanks for the informative round-up.

    Government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth - Abraham Lincoln

    by Gustogirl on Wed Mar 16, 2011 at 11:33:55 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site