Replies

"1. a. To give aid or information to an enemy of; commit treason against: betray one's country. b. To deliver into the hands of an enemy in violation of a trust or allegiance 2. To be false or disloyal to: betrayed their cause; betray one's better nature. 3. To divulge in a breach of confidence: betray a secret.

Oh, looks like we have a DOUBLE winner"

Again you come with the illogical position. "1. a. To give aid or information to an enemy of; commit treason against: betray one's country.". So this would apply to ANYONE or ANY organization who reports ANYTHING that could possibly be used against us? What a ridiculous implied assertion.. And how exactly did Hackworth commit treason against or betray his country? Nothing in this definition even remotely describes what Hackworth did. You still fail to respond to my previous points and questions, how about responding to them instead of making illogical and unfounded one line assertions of guilt?

"2. To be false or disloyal to: betrayed their cause; betray one's better nature.". Again, where did Hackworth do any of this? If you actually believe that Hackworth is guilty of betraying his country for merely releasing photos showing illegal and inhumane abuse to try to bring attention to it, THEN WHY HAVEN'T YOU BOTHERED TO CALL THE ALLEGED ACTIONS OF THE GUARDS AND OTHERS INVOLVED WHO BEAT, RAPED, ABUSED, TORTURED AND MURDERED PRISONERS BETRAYALS??????? Why haven't you compared them to benedict arnold, why haven't you stated that they were "going to be responsible for the death and injury of thousands", WHY HAVEN'T YOU CALLED THEM TRAITORS?!?

As I said before and to which you had no response:

"Since when is our soldiers moral preferrable to doing what is LEGAL, and what is RIGHT??? And why exactly would this have a bad affect on moral? Maybe because this puts their lives, their sacrifice, their honor, and that of everyone who gave their lives over there in a bad light? Why should such shame be hidden or glossed over? Are you implying that they should feel shame for dishonorable actions they themselves had no hand in? If I were them I imagine I would, even though I should not. Sorry, rule of law, basic fundamental human rights and our very freedoms which they fight for DEMAND that this subject be displayed openly and honestly, and that it be dealt with in the same manner.

Your previous uncivil and fallacious comments still call for a decent response..."

If you sidestep or ignore my comments again I can only assume that it is due to intellectual cowardice or just plain laziness on your part.