RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Really ?
You have no idea who Karen Kwiatkowski is ?
.... wow ..... ya really might wanna Google that name and have a look ......
.... and BTW, "he" is very much a "she" ....
USAF Lt. Col: Bradley Manning has rights!
- Thread starter AMonger
- Start date
You have no idea who Karen Kwiatkowski is ?
.... wow ..... ya really might wanna Google that name and have a look ......
.... and BTW, "he" is very much a "she" ....
I understand the relationship between the citizen and government. I know who SHOULD be in control. What I don't understand is how one kind of oath is less binding or important than another? I took my oath as as soldier. I took a similar, and just as binding an oath, when I joined the Agency. They were equally binding and equally important and carried equal responsibility. To say that my civilian oath is somehow less important makes no sense to me. I am misunderstanding your meaning on this?
greg334
Veteran Expediter
Because they are part of a bureaucratic machine, not a military one. Much of the civilian employed population of the federal government doesn't put much above themselves, if at all. Oaths are meaningless to them and suspect to many who view their jobs as expendable.
It is like pensions, I don't think I should be paying for their pensions but they should be footing the bill 100%. BUT because there is a fallacy that there was a promise made, I am stuck with it.
It is like pensions, I don't think I should be paying for their pensions but they should be footing the bill 100%. BUT because there is a fallacy that there was a promise made, I am stuck with it.
greg334
Veteran Expediter
Really ?
You have no idea who Karen Kwiatkowski is ?
.... wow ..... ya really might wanna Google that name and have a look ......
.... and BTW, "he" is very much a "she" ....
I think it is a different case altogether, she started to write after she retired and she along with others are doing things within what can be considered - the law.
The only slight problem I have in reading some of her stuff is the tags she uses (neo-conservative, liberal agenda, etc..) instead of being political neutral, it seems she has an agenda to make it a clear division between political ideologies.
Her position reinforces mine - bureaucrats don't take oaths seriously.
"Because they are part of a bureaucratic machine, not a military one. Much of the civilian employed population of the federal government doesn't put much above themselves, if at all. Oaths are meaningless to them and suspect to many who view their jobs as expendable.
It is like pensions, I don't think I should be paying for their pensions but they should be footing the bill 100%. BUT because there is a fallacy that there was a promise made, I am stuck with it."
I cannot speak for the non-intell civilian employees but you are quite wrong on the attitude that you will find in the Agencies. At least during the time I was in I can assure you that the vast majority of people were as hard working and as dedicated as anyone I ever saw in the military. I have little doubt that it has changed all that much.
As the the "fallacy" you speak of on pensions. I used to have a legal copy of that "fallacy" pension. I no longer have those documents as they were destroyed in my basement flood.
My contract, legal and binding contract, stated that I would deposit 7% of my paycheck, every paycheck, and if and when I completed my required number of years of service AND reached a certain age, I would receive a pension equal to 40% of the average of my high five years. This was to include any cost of living pay increases that may come later. That WAS the contract that we all signed at the time. It is NOT a fallacy.
I did NOT take my pension, I took a buyout years ago. I took that buyout for MANY reasons, some financial and some moral. There were just some things that I refused to participate in after Clinton took office.
It is like pensions, I don't think I should be paying for their pensions but they should be footing the bill 100%. BUT because there is a fallacy that there was a promise made, I am stuck with it."
I cannot speak for the non-intell civilian employees but you are quite wrong on the attitude that you will find in the Agencies. At least during the time I was in I can assure you that the vast majority of people were as hard working and as dedicated as anyone I ever saw in the military. I have little doubt that it has changed all that much.
As the the "fallacy" you speak of on pensions. I used to have a legal copy of that "fallacy" pension. I no longer have those documents as they were destroyed in my basement flood.
My contract, legal and binding contract, stated that I would deposit 7% of my paycheck, every paycheck, and if and when I completed my required number of years of service AND reached a certain age, I would receive a pension equal to 40% of the average of my high five years. This was to include any cost of living pay increases that may come later. That WAS the contract that we all signed at the time. It is NOT a fallacy.
I did NOT take my pension, I took a buyout years ago. I took that buyout for MANY reasons, some financial and some moral. There were just some things that I refused to participate in after Clinton took office.
Yes, although the new, fashionable liberal term for it is "torture," the actual name for it is Prevention of Injury Watch (POI), or more commonly, suicide watch. They don't want him being injured, by himself or anyone else.
As for what gets published in many places, largely the same stuff over and over again, most of it the product of an agenda, is what people are seeing. For example, take this from The Law Office of David E. Coombs: A Typical Day for PFC Bradley Manning (Manning's attorney... edited quote, please see the link for the full article):
Which gets translated by liberal blogs, Lew Rockwell's in particular (which was then feverishly replicated ad nauseum on Web pages all over the place) to the following:
And from Salon.com:
Manning's attorney is unaware of the brig's medical personnel administering regular doses of anti-depressants to Manning. When he questioned Salon.com about it, they said their source was good and left it. At least Salon.com did correct one lie, that of Manning not being allowed books, magazine or access to news, as he has all of that, and is allowed to watch the news on TV. He is not allowed newspapers except during his correspondence time, but he is allowed weekly and monthly magazine periodicals in his cell, like Newsweek and Time (tho, only one book or magazine at a time).
Also, keep in mind, Manning told interrogators in his first interrogation about what he took and how he did it. He did that by admitting to being the one who was in the text chat with Lamo where he detailed all this stuff. Is that a confession? Not technically, but he did admit to what he did, how he did it. He also admitted to having developed a relationship with Assange.
Black Sheep
Expert Expediter
It's a bit of a stretch to think that Karen Kwiatkowski is a household name, and it's obvious she thinks that the military should be run like a civilian bureaucracy complete with the social experimentation and political correctness that's so fashionable today. The way he's being treated in prison sounds like speculation on the part of his advocates. He's actually got blankets and pillows, although they might not be soft enough for his tender white flesh. He doesn't have cotton sheets because they don't want him to hang himself. There's no reason to feel sympathy for this punk - hopefully, others like him in that are in the military will think twice before they ignore the oath they took when they volunteered.
The comparison between the victimized fictional movie character and Manning is just a load of BS. Manning released highly classified documents and in doing to provided aid to our enemies. Anyone who is remotely familiar with the Constitution knows that's treason, and anyone who's been in the military knows that orders must be followed without exception. The exact extent of the damage done will take a while to evaluate, and even then probably won't all be public knowledge. The fact that people are shocked because he's been tossed into a jail cell for what he's done says something about our society in general.
The comparison between the victimized fictional movie character and Manning is just a load of BS. Manning released highly classified documents and in doing to provided aid to our enemies. Anyone who is remotely familiar with the Constitution knows that's treason, and anyone who's been in the military knows that orders must be followed without exception. The exact extent of the damage done will take a while to evaluate, and even then probably won't all be public knowledge. The fact that people are shocked because he's been tossed into a jail cell for what he's done says something about our society in general.
Really ?
You have no idea who Karen Kwiatkowski is ?
.... wow ..... ya really might wanna Google that name and have a look ......
.... and BTW, "he" is very much a "she" ....
UH, why should I know? Why would you presume to think that I am aware of everyone, or would even want to be aware of, that you are? Just because you might know who she is, might agree with her spin, is of no value to me. Your eyes must hurt since you role them soooo much.
By he I meant the LTCOL.
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Lew Rockwell isn't a liberal .... he's a libertarian ....
Potentially a very big difference, depending on what one's understanding of the word "liberal" is ........
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Good point ..... of course, you are right .... I have absolutely no reason to think that you would want to pay attention to current events over the last 10 or so years to same degree as I.
Point taken.
Yeah .... the Lt. Col. is a she .... her name is Karen ....
witness23
Veteran Expediter
Good point ..... of course, you are right .... I have absolutely no reason to think that you would want to pay attention to current events over the last 10 or so years to same degree as I.
Point taken.
Yeah .... the Lt. Col. is a she .... her name is Karen ....
WOW! This is some entertaing stuff.
From my casual observance of the conversation at hand, and if I were keeping score, it would look something like this.
RLENT = 234
Soapbox = 2
Sorry that I inadvertently made a bad connection to Rockwell and liberal blogs. I know Rockwell isn't a liberal, but mentioned him by name since his blog is the singularity from which the twisted facts emanate, and have since then been restated on countless liberal blogs.
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Fair enough ... I accept your assertion that it was an inadvertent error.
Really ?
The singularity eh ?
That almost sounds scientific .... or somethin' ....
And kinda sounds kinda like some vast liberal/libertarian conspiracy .....
You ain't been talkin' to Hillary lately have you ?
If I had to guess, some of what's there probably gets restated elsewhere as well ..... possibly a libertarian blog or two ..... and maybe even a few conservative ones as well, depending on the mindset ...
Of course, some folks might even see things in a similar way, having come to those conclusions on their own ....
Last edited:
Good point ..... of course, you are right .... I have absolutely no reason to think that you would want to pay attention to current events over the last 10 or so years to same degree as I.
Point taken.
Yeah .... the Lt. Col. is a she .... her name is Karen ....
You are in NO position to know what I do to pay attention to current events. Believe it or not there are OTHER sources out there the YOU may not read. I doubt that you have the end all list of sources, as I don't, for anything. Just because you use a certain source by no means requires the rest of the world to do so.
Sorry about the Col. I often read things out of order, mix up words etc. Not intentional. Do the same thing with numbers. Kinda makes things difficult sometimes. Made school VERY difficult. They did NOT believe in oral testing back then.
greg334
Veteran Expediter
Layout,
The problem isn't with the specific person but the agencies and management themselves, be it the agriculture agency or the NSA. I have no doubt there are a lot of hard working people who take things seriously and they may be in the majority but it is the minority who are the cause of the issues that we need to concerned about. BUT don't forget, the entire system is built on the fact that every one is a civil servant and nothing more.
Regardless how you defend it, the intelligence community itself is full of the same bureaucrats that is in every agency within the government. For example the biggest issue that caused 9/11 in the first place still exists today which includes territorial positioning to protect jobs and the power some hold and the need to treat information as it is owned by one agency or another. The biggest cause of 9/11 was a lack of information sharing and instead of revamping the intel community across the board to eliminate duplicate information gathering and other duplicate things beside breaking down the barriers within the entire community, we ended up with the DHS and the amplification of the same issues - example is the London arrests and the lack of that knowledge by the Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.
For someone on the outside looking in, I see people taking oaths that later become meaningless once they reach a point of power and they want to retain that power at any cost. Wealth may not be a driving factor as it is in other worlds but the power they hold can open doors to more power and more rewards.
You can't convince me otherwise, because if it was the case as you seem to think in your defense, we would not see the books being written by former intel workers or hear about people like Plame and others who make it look like they are important.
As far as the pensions, anything outside the military is considered a civil servant and under the constitution I don't see any clause that says there is a promise by the citizens to provide retirement benefits to workers. You may have had a contract, which means little to me, but it is my tax money that I feel is not being well spent when I'm told that I need to be part of the "shared sacrifice" in my future that is needed to fix the problems that the bureaucrats caused in the first place. Let the hit start with the civil servant who should not be embedded but sacrificed when the government is in a downward spiral.
The problem isn't with the specific person but the agencies and management themselves, be it the agriculture agency or the NSA. I have no doubt there are a lot of hard working people who take things seriously and they may be in the majority but it is the minority who are the cause of the issues that we need to concerned about. BUT don't forget, the entire system is built on the fact that every one is a civil servant and nothing more.
Regardless how you defend it, the intelligence community itself is full of the same bureaucrats that is in every agency within the government. For example the biggest issue that caused 9/11 in the first place still exists today which includes territorial positioning to protect jobs and the power some hold and the need to treat information as it is owned by one agency or another. The biggest cause of 9/11 was a lack of information sharing and instead of revamping the intel community across the board to eliminate duplicate information gathering and other duplicate things beside breaking down the barriers within the entire community, we ended up with the DHS and the amplification of the same issues - example is the London arrests and the lack of that knowledge by the Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.
For someone on the outside looking in, I see people taking oaths that later become meaningless once they reach a point of power and they want to retain that power at any cost. Wealth may not be a driving factor as it is in other worlds but the power they hold can open doors to more power and more rewards.
You can't convince me otherwise, because if it was the case as you seem to think in your defense, we would not see the books being written by former intel workers or hear about people like Plame and others who make it look like they are important.
As far as the pensions, anything outside the military is considered a civil servant and under the constitution I don't see any clause that says there is a promise by the citizens to provide retirement benefits to workers. You may have had a contract, which means little to me, but it is my tax money that I feel is not being well spent when I'm told that I need to be part of the "shared sacrifice" in my future that is needed to fix the problems that the bureaucrats caused in the first place. Let the hit start with the civil servant who should not be embedded but sacrificed when the government is in a downward spiral.
Last edited:
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Never said I was .... it just that she was in so many places at one point there I was kinda thinking that it would have been pretty hard to miss if one was paying attention.
Nooo ..... seriously ?
Say it ain't so Joe .....
No apologies to me are necessary ..... to her might be another matter tho' ...
I actually think she's kinda hot ..... real patriot women put my heart all kerfuffle .....
I would imagine.
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
I would disagree ........ I would say the biggest cause of 9/11 was our utterly misguided foreign policy - something that crosses party lines .... and we have been told as much.
What is it called when you keep doing the same thing over and over and expect a different result ?
Oh .... yeah ..... stupid ...
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Errr ..... what do pensions have to do with the original post in this thread ?
Jus' sayin' .....