Posted on 07/31/2010 12:10:46 AM PDT by Zakeet
Edited on 07/31/2010 12:18:27 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
The US Army intelligence analyst, who is half British and went to school in Wales, appeared to sink into depression after a relationship break-up, saying he didn't "have anything left" and was "beyond frustrated".
In an apparent swipe at the army, he also wrote: "Bradley Manning is not a piece of equipment," and quoted a joke about "military intelligence" being an oxymoron.
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
Please keep your bigotry away from this forum.
Great many Italian, Irish and Hispanic Americans have courageously fought and died for this country.
Can you cite an instance in which you have posted this to any mocking muslims?
Just one.
Or be shown to be a hypocrite.
Post what you posted to me, here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2562424/posts
The nation was founded on freedom from foreign based religions.
Founders recognized the dangers of receiving Gods word through foreign based religions.
Manning, as with those who helped him to include those idiots at WikiLeaks, is a treasonous, nutless idiot who should become nutless in actuality.....before being shot by a firing squad. =.=
Certainly, more so for a CIC.
Unfortunately, the truth is much worse.
I agree with your two cents.
I normally first skip breaking down wars or deaths attributed to religion or christianity and just “give” those wars to them. Even with that cessesion, the numbers are no where close.
The other thing to keep in mind is that wars are fought for many reasons: security, acquisition of land, money, power, and political or religious philosophy. For example, our current war against Terrorism was started by Muslims attacking us for religious and political reasons, but our response has more to do with security then fulfilling a religious tenet. So to list all the casualties of this current conflict under a title like “deaths by Islam”, it wouldn’t be completely accurate.
Another thing about Christianity is that while it does support killing for punishment or defense it isn’t commanded as necessary for the Christian believer. That is very different from Islam, where killing the unbeliever is commanded.
On the Crusades, there were some decrees made by Popes and other Catholic leaders which were not supported by the Bible. Things such as freeing Jerusalem will grant you salvation, but even given that, you are correct that the Crusades were primarily are defensive position as a result of the expanding Muslim empire. To call the Crusades a war created by the Bible or Christians is to grossly misunderstand what was all going on.
I understand your position as I have probably had similar discussions with atheists and their claim that religion has killed more people then anything else.
Being that I am a Christian, I can look at what the Bible says about war and killing and go from there.
First, before trying to get into the numbers, it’s important to look at the doctrine of killing in Christianity. There is no demand for Christians to kill unbelievers like there is in Islam. In fact Jesus talked about “shaking the dust from your feet” or leaving those who don’t want to accept the message of Jesus (Matthew 10:14). However, there are verses in the New Testament which support defending yourself (Luke 11:21 & 22:36) or defending others (John 15:13) or that governments can punish evil and protect itself (Romans 13:4).
One other common misconception is the English translation of Exodus 20:13 “Thou shall not kill.” The Hebrew word that gets translated “kill” is ratsach. Ratsach actually means to murder or assassinate. In other words ratsach is unauthorized killing. It doesn’t mean all forms of killing because God directed Israel to kill at various times. The word used for this authorized killing is harag.
Now, just because a “Christian” leader authorized the use of force in a war, that doesn’t necessarily make that war a “Christian” war. I’m not an expert in history by any stretch of the imagination, but I’m pretty sure that wars like the Civil War, the Spanish-American, and WWI were not declared to “punish people for not accepting Jesus” or because the Bible demanded it. I know that the abolitionists cause (freeing the slaves) in the Civil War, weren’t brought out as a reason until late in the war when Lincoln needed a new boost/angle.
So while some reasons why some “Christian” leaders may start or get involved in armed conflict or war may be based in Biblical tenets (protecting the innocent or punishing the wicked), it would still be false to put all deaths in that war at the feet of Christianity or religion.
I know this gets into some degree of hair splitting, so that’s why I just simplified my response.
I had one discussion with a pacifist who claimed he would never use violence to solve a problem. I asked him if his inaction to use violence resulted in an innocent child or person to die, wouldn’t that make him an assesory to the death of the innocent, specifically if he had the ability to physically stop the primary agressor. That situation left him in a quandry and he ceased discussion on absolute pacifism.
He probably won’t get death but he damn well should. He should take up his case with Satan.
One gets the sense that our military has been infiltrated by socialist and communist sympathizers who are assigned the task of dismantling it from within before it can become an agent of change. Neutered before the coup...
Yeah, you sure do. Man, it is all unravelling at exponential speed.
Was Wikileaker Bradley Manning Betrayed By His Queer Identity?
Was Wikileaker Bradley Manning Betrayed By His Queer Identity?It’s been speculated that alleged Army leaker, PFC Bradley Manning, is transgendered. We’ve found evidence that strongly suggests Manning has some sort of LGBT identity, and that the man who snitched on him exploited this to win his trust.
Twenty-two year-old army intelligence specialist Bradley Manning was arrested May 26th for allegedly leaking the notorious Iraq Apache attack helicopter video and more than a quarter million classified State Department documents to secret-sharing website Wikileaks. He was turned in by his confidant, ex-hacker Adrian Lamo. Lamo then gave logs of his chats with Manning to Wired’s Kevin Poulsen, who broke the story of Manning’s arrest.
There are many unanswered questions about this story—the largest of which is: Why would Manning trust an ex-hacker he had never met enough to confess, almost immediately, via instant message, his terrible Wikileaks secret—something he knew could put him in prison for a long time? Lamo told Salon that Manning found him by doing a Twitter search for “Wikileaks,” and that he doesn’t know what motivated his confession. Yeah fucking right.
Wired suggested Manning sensed a “kindred-spirit in the ex-hacker” Lamo. But Manning and Lamo also apparently share something stronger than a fondness for breaking into computer systems: An LGBT identity. Lamo is an out bisexual, while an increasing number of clues suggest that Manning is, if not transgendered, deeply uncertain about his sexuality and/or gender. Interviews with Lamo’s acquaintances and a close reading of the chat logs suggest Lamo traded on this identity to exploit Manning at his most vulnerable, as questions about his sexuality were unbearably pressing on his personal and professional lives......
http://gawker.com/5571388/was-wikileaker-bradley-manning-betrayed-by-his-queer-identity
The communists are working on many prongs in parallel to neutralize the military and the armed population. They'll probably use the 90,000 released documents to throttle the communication between the American people, mainly the Internet, to prevent alerts of the start of arms' confiscation.
There is no way communists can disarm and subjugate the American population with the Internet, talk radio and FOX intact.
Without the military and disarming the population, communists can't take over and turn us into a fully controlled communist country.
I believe that the damage done to the country so far is reversible. If we take the house (the purse,) defunding is the way to go without voting for "repeal" bills that has to be approved by the Senate (impossible,) signed by 0b0z0 (never) and overriding his vetoes (not enough numbers.)
I've been on this site for almost a decade now. At all times I spoke against all sorts of bigotry --- against Roma (Gypsies), Catholics, Jews and, yes, Muslims (when it was indeed bigotry rather than political views.). You'll find plenty of such posts.
The foregoing is a clarification that you asked for but did not deserve whether on moral or logical grounds. Whether or not I am also bigoted is logically disconnected from the issue. This is a well-known logical fallacy --- questioning the attackers' characteristics rather than responding to criticism. In simple language it's "turning the tables" on someone. Thus you are incorrect not on one but both counts: (i) you have indeed exhibited bigotry in your post, and (ii) yes, I do stand on principle and oppose bigotry of all kinds.
You have shown also additional contempt to Judeo-Christian morality. From defaming an ethnic group, you turned to defaming me, intimating without shred of evidence that I am somehow Muslim-defender. You have not apparently even heard of Ten Commandments, one of which prescribes that we refrain from serving as false witness. There is nothing more American than the principle, according to which it is the accuser who must prove his accusations, not the accused. You instead accuse me of being a Muslim sympathizer and then request that I furnish the proof of the opposite.
Judging by these posts, there is not a conservative bone on your body. As I requested earlier, keep your bigotry out of this conservative forum.
Evidently, he said he is a homosexual on Internet sites and was openly homosexual. He told his friend that he was mad at the military for their Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy.
So Manning himself told others that was the reason he was leaking the classified documents.
Repeal “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” is also on his FaceBook page above.
Who provided him with the need to know ??How did an openly homosexual get a TS ?
Interesting response. I respect your opinion.
Gee, he was angry over a break up? Well, that explains everything. He just needs a shoulder to cry on. No harm, no foul, let’s move on... /s
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.