Re: "Judge, isn't a soldier required to report a war crime?"

Hater, much? Obama is probably one of the most decent people to ever be elected President (Jimmy Carter probably is the most moral modern President).

Obama knows that if he comes off as soft in any way the Repugs will jump all over him - and he is pragmatic enough to know that closing Guantanamo isn't that easy in all truth, and there really are some bad people out there that are trying to kill us. So taking out an "American citizen" that is a sworn enemy of his own country - and a radical terrorist - is the pragmatic thing to do. The fact that he hasn't actually lived in the US for a long time, and is unavailable to arrest, kind of seals the deal.

Beyond that - trampling on people's rights? Like ensuring that religious nutters must actually provide for all aspects of employed women's healthcare, even if they have a 2000 year old book they say might prohibit it? Like ensuring that all American's must have healthcare coverage rather than sponging? Dang...hate it when Obama does THAT...clear violations of people's rights.... pfffffft.

Re: In war

Not even Mum and Dad.

Re: Re: In war

Who first told you about Santa Claus?

Re: Re: Re: In war

Had I intended my statement to to ask whether Mum and Dad were exempt from not being trusted or believed, I would have used a question mark.

Apparently I should have used big bold letters for 'not even', to let readers know that Mums and Dads get no special consideration here if they dare to criticize the American Way. :-)

Re: Re: Re: Re: In war

Chill, LG. I was simply giving a typical example of how M&D tell children a "happy" untruth to make their World seem a little brighter. Whilst I expect the whole idea of people feeding you untruths to lead you to believe an alternate version of reality has occurred plenty in your life, in this case I was simply jokingly supplying a reason why everything M&D utter should not be taken for gospel. You may now resume your passive-aggressive stance, tinfoil hat on tight.

For all those shrieking that Manning is a "whistleblower", it is very obvious that he simply wanted to strike back at the Corp in the most petulant manner he could, and it seems to me that A$$nut took advantage of that childish petulance to get what A$$nut wanted - more media exposure and money.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: In war

How can I  chill, Matt, when you say "happy untruths to make children's World seem a little brighter?" Of course, M&D tell their children about Santa Claus, to make them happier.

But aren't you like a child when it comes to PO?  Don't you believe the statistics of our government spokesmen, oil industry executives and foreign producers of oil, who tell us the 'happy untruths' about the 'alternate version of reality concerning Peak Oil, i.e., there's more oil in the ground, under the oceans, and loitering in sand and shale than we know what to do with?

You're like a little six year old who wrote a letter to Santa asking him for a dozen more Ghawar oil fields. Then you read articles and news stories that say Peak Oil hasn't happened yet and probably never will. You don't see that Peak Oil is breaking over us like a violent thunderstorm. As far as PO is concerned, you are just a six year old who expects Santa Claus to leave 500 billion barrels of oil underneath your tree. :-)

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: In war

"....But aren't you like a child when it comes to PO?...." LG's needle is stuck again! Run out of soundbites to repeat? Go on, just for fun, explain how AGW holds up if we are supposedly running out of oil. Surely that means we either don't have to worry about AGW, or PO actually hasn't happened? You can't have it both ways!

/Cue LG ranting in ever-decreasing, frothing circles, until the horse tranqulisers kick in.

The real fun begins AFTER Manning's trial has finished. I suspect we will find out what the US authorities fished out of the Wikileakers' phone amd email coms, at which point people like Appelbaum, Gonggrijp and Jonsdottir will really start to sweat! BTW, is it me or does Birgitta Jonsdottir look like a pale and pasty Warcraft female Troll?

Re: In war

"we either don't have to worry about AGW, or PO actually hasn't happened?"

How about this, Matt? Perhaps - as you are fond of pointing out - AGW is not that real. That it is a surreptitious construct by the government to accomplish an objective. The government's objectives are two. First, it takes its citizen's mind off of running out of oil; as AGW becomes a more eminent threat than peak oil. Second, beating the drum about AGW, delivers a small dividend to keeping PO secret. By constantly reminding everyone of AGW, true believers will conserve gasoline, heating oil, etc. and that will slightly reduce demand and consumption of crude oil and delay the evil day.

Remember PO occurs when daily crude oil demand out strips daily crude oil production.

I want to give you an opportunity to disabuse me of my belief in PO. Stay tuned. :-)

Re: Re: In war

Yeah, just carry on frothing, LG, it's giving the rest of us a good laugh. Still nothing to offer on tha Manning case, I see? Honest, this is my surprised face.

Matt Hominem has a good laugh with his make-believe friends.

"Still nothing to offer on the Manning case, I see?" @MB

Your life in the pubs sucking down pints has addled your brain, MB. Shirley you remember the forum "Manning's Lawyer Calls For Pre Trial Officer To Quit Case." in mid December, 2011. Remember the name Alfred Dreyfus? You ought to heed Manning's lawyer and quit The Reg and devote the rest of your time to becoming a Pint Master.

In that first of the Manning forums, I had to endure 14 of your pompous posts, brimming with ad hominem arguments and your sui generis self-adoration. What on earth would make you think I'd want to come back for more? Are you trying to increase your understanding of Sado-Masochistic behavior if the Manning case veers in that direction?

Poking through the dross of your comment with a 10 foot pole, I see you have a point. You'd like my posts to be more germane.

I'd be happy to oblige as soon as you Cut Your Ad Hominem Crap. :-)

Re: Matt Hominem has a good laugh with his make-believe friends.

<Yawn> And still waiting for an on-topic post from LG! Best make myself comfortable, this could take a very long time.

"....Remember the name Alfred Dreyfus?....." After your dismal showing in that thread, I'm surprised you bothered posting again! Not that I don't enjoy the unintentioned humour you provide with your amusingly silly rants. As I recall, the whining from you and your associated numpties then was that Manning was gay, that this was some form of excuse for his actions, and that the Corp were only prosecuting him out of malicious homophobia, hence your desperately weak attempts to compare him to Dreyfus.

That argument seems to have been thoroughly debunked, so now I've noted the pro-Manning crowd have switched to implying he was some sort of quivering mental wreck before his posting, that this made him unsuitable for deployment, and it was therefore no suprise and not his fault that he broke his oath, upteen military laws, and deliberately gave his country's secrets to someone known to have an axe to grind. Somehow, this line of "reasoning" is supposed to shift the blame from Manning onto the Corp.

Strangely enough, despite being a "mental wreck", he still seemed quite capable of planning his little theft and hiding his actions from his fellow soldiers and superiors. Almost like he knew what he was doing was wrong.....

Re: Matt Hominem has a good laugh with his make-believe friends.

Are you totally and completely bereft of the ability to read what other people write?

I said I would get "on topic" when your pathetic ad hominem arguments ended.

If you can not comprehend what that means, ask the bar tender when he returns with your pint and bag of nuts.

I am no more interested in discussing Manning with you, than I am in watching you try to open a can of beans in one of your drunken stupors.

I care no more about what you have to say about me than you care what I say about you.

Why don't you spend the time you waste posting here with your wife and children, if such unfortunate creatures exist?

Re: Matt Hominem has a good laugh with his make-believe friends.

Aaaannnd STILL waiting for LG to post ontopic......

Re: Why is his Nobel Peace Prize nomination never mentioned?

Maybe because Jonsdottir is another Wikileaker under investigation by her own government (of which she is, hilariously, an MP). It's a bit like Goebells nominating Himmler.

Re: Re: Why does The Inkwell Censor Legit Comments?

Why is anal rape like a Justin Bieber concert?

Because it isn't easy to get in.

Does anybody know anyone who saved a condom used for anal sex to prove in court that one was used? Those guys get flushed faster than radioactive toilet paper.