Covered at Reason 24/7: Bradley Manning Finally Goes to Court in June

He's been behind bars for over 1,000 days, and subjected to such humiliating conditions, including being stripped naked during his confinement, that a State Department spokesman denounced his treatment (and then subsequently resigned). Yes, we're talking about Bradley Manning, the sometimes celebrated, sometimes reviled, whistleblower, who will finally get his day in court.

From CNet:

Out of sight, out of mind -- that's the way it might seem when considering the plight of Bradley Manning, who has been held for more than 1,000 days without a trial. But the jailed Army private is getting close to having his day in court. On Tuesday, a military judge refused to dismiss charges against Manning, a former intelligence analyst, who could face a maximum life sentence in connection with charges that he aided the enemy.

Suspected of being the source for WikiLeaks' massive document release of military and State Department files, Manning is being held at a military jail in Quantico, Va., outside of Washington, D.C. Manning's court-martial is slated to go ahead in June.

The prosecution maintains that Manning turned over to Wikileaks hundreds of thousands of battlefield reports related to U.S. operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as State Department diplomatic cables while working as an intelligence analyst in Baghdad in 2009 and 2010. His defense team sought to get the charges against the 25-year-old Manning dropped, but military judge Col. Denise Lind denied their motion.

Follow this story and more at Reason 24/7.

If you have a story that would be of interest to Reason's readers please let us know by emailing the 24/7 crew at [e-mail], or tweet us stories at @reason247.

Comments

[BlogimiDei]

Get ready to be bent over by the UCMJ Brad

[Paul.]

The Manning case has been thoroughly confusing to me.

It seems that his treatment is a case for some kind of charges or lawsuit or further scrutiny.

But his defense (as I've read it on and off over the years) seems schizophrenic, or inconsistent, plus his supporters are saying things in his defense which are entirely different than what he (or his lawyer) are saying in his own defense.

It seems pretty straightforward that when you work in a top-secret segment, and you email someone (whomever) a bunch of those documents, that you're going to... raise some eyebrows and probably get jammed by a military court.

But all of this treatment (described in the post) muddies the water and makes him a martyer, which I honestly can't decide if he deserves to be.

[Hugh Akston]

He obviously deserves whatever legal penalties the UCMJ are going to throw at him for violating his oaf of supersecrecy.

But the fact that he published secret government documents makes him a big damn hero.

His treatment at the hands of military jailers does make him a martyr and validates just about everything we peacenik libertarians say about the military-industrial complex and the War on Terriers.

[Episiarch]

And more succinctly: if they can do this to him, they can do it to us.

[Paul.]

But they won't, because the Right People Are In Charge.

[Paul.]

I guess I just wish (and yes, this could be the result of his handling by military handlers who handle people) that his defense more closely matched what his supporters say.

When you've got his stalwart supporters saying: He blew the lid off evil miltary sucrets which the pubic had a right to know! juxtaposed to his defense which is (or was the last time I looked through my rose-colored glasses) that he knew not what he was doing, and was stressed out by the rigors of the job...

It just kind of makes me feel, you know...

[Hugh Akston]

Trying to make the libertarian case that government shouldn't be keeping secrets at all isn't gonna hold up in court. His defense is just trying to get their client out of the hole by whatever means they can.

[Paul.]

Are you saying that the glibertarian case is a weak one, while I look around me and see freedom ringing loud and clear at every border patrol checkpoint from Alamogordo to Oilton?

*squints skeptically*

[Hugh Akston]

No, I'm saying that no matter how strong the pussytarian case is, it's not gonna convince people whose livelihoods depend on not being convinced.

[Dweebston]

God, tell me that's not catching on.

[Irish]

I for one am totally okay being referred to as a pussytarian.

[Dweebston]

I don't mind the epithet, really; I've been called worse by cleverer. What I mind is giving that shrill harpy any credit for anything. Someone here earlier this week said it best, she's an emotionally distraught and intellectually vapid media mogul.

[RightNut]

But the fact that he published secret government documents makes him a big damn hero.

Why? I could understand if he published a secret document that was malign, but he just document dumped. I really don't see any reason for them not to throw the book at him.

[Hugh Akston]

And they should and will because he violated his oath.

Anything that reduces the stock of government secrets is a good thing. Governments should not keep secrets.

[RightNut]

I'd agree that our government keeps far far to many secrets, but I don't see why everything, especially information that is military related, should be an open book.

[Hugh Akston]

Because they work for us. I can allow limited classification for up to maybe a year before and a year after military operations.

But anything else that needs to be kept secret, government shouldn't be doing it in the first place.

[RightNut]

So we should have let the soviets know the location and number of nuclear warheads we had?

[Hugh Akston]

Why not?

[RightNut]

Because then they could have pinpointed where exactly to strike, thus making the threat of nuclear retaliation nearly zero?

[Hugh Akston]

No, the US would have seen their missiles coming and launched everything they had in retaliation and the world would have been destroyed just as it should.

MAD was what kept Ivan at bay, not uncertainty.

[RightNut]

No, uncertainty was part of MAD, that was the whole reason for projects like the Trident missile system. So I guess by your logic we collate all our data on stealth systems and just give it over to whoever would like it?

[John C. Randolph]

Knowing exactly where to strike wouldn't give them the ability to prevent a retaliatory launch. The commie's missiles could take out every single empty silo and they'd still be wiped out, as the US missiles passed by their missiles in space.

-jcr

[Scarecrow Repair]

I doubt the missile silos were very secret. Or airplane speeds, range, payload, electronic defenses, none of that shit was secret for long.

[Paul.]

I can allow limited classification for up to maybe a year before and a year after military operations.

I was going to add my 2cents to this, but it's four schfifty here, and this is a long, drawn out philosophical discussion which warrants me waste more of my employers time than I have left.

I think that this is a very reasonable way to approach governmental secrecy.

What we have now is a permanent security state running on fear. We've swung too far.

[Dweebston]

Running on inertia, I say. Inertia and ostensibly limitless borrowing. At some point we'll be made to pay for all the government we can't afford, and I'm willing to bet that the high esteem among taxpayers enjoyed within military circles nosedives shortly thereafter.

[Unindicted Co-conspirator]

But the fact that he published secret government documents makes him a big damn hero.

I disagree with this.

I expect government to be as transparent as possible, and not classify documents for trivial and/or corrupt purposes (say, because a disclosure might prove embarrassing, or politically inconvenient).

But it doesn't follow that everybody who discloses government secrets is a "big damn hero."

Manning, as best I understand it, indiscriminately dumped whatever documents he had access to. That pretty fatally undermines any argument that he's a latter-day Daniel Ellsberg, nobly pulling back the curtain on gummint malfeasance. If Manning was mistreated while in custody, that's deplorable, and I hope he gets justice, but beyond that there's every indication he's just an unprincipled crapweasel, and certainly not a "hero" by any standard I recognize.

[John C. Randolph]

But the fact that he published secret government documents makes him a big damn hero.

What makes him a hero is the fact that those documents exposed crimes by the government that should be investigated and punished.

-jcr

[Concerned Citizen]

He's fucked himself. No sympathy.

[MJGreen]

Cruel and unusual punishment is deplorable.

Unless the guy fucked himself, in which case who gives a shit.

[RyanXXX]

Fuck off, slaver

[MJGreen]

Well, it is alleged whistleblower, hence the trial.

[Hugh Akston]

I'm sure he'll get a totes fair trial too.

But the fact that he has not been convicted doesn't seem to have much effect on his treatment in jail. Funny how that works.

[Paul.]

Or his speedy trial.

[Sevo]

"Or his speedy trial."
Give 'em another couple of years to work on that.

[John]

The speedy trial is on him. He is the one who asked for most of the delays.

[Sevo]

John, if I blew it, shame on me. Got cites?

[John]

I know the people who are trying this case. I also used to be an Army prosecutor and know how speedy trial works. If you are in pretrial confinement, they have 120 days to bring you to trial or they have to dismiss the case and file it again. There is also a second level of speedy trial which is constitutional. That doesn't have a 120 day limit but is fact driven. Lose that battle and the charges are dismissed forever.

Put simply, there is no way a court would ever allow the government to lock a guy up for a 1000 days and never bring him to trial. And also, I personally know people on both sides of this case and Bradley has asked for a lot of delay for a variety of reasons.

[Sevo]

John,
I'm not gonna call bullshit, but I'm also not convinced.
You say a "court" wouldn't allow it; well, I've seen entirely too many "courts" allow what is prima facie total bullshit to accept that as evidence.

[John]

Also speedy trial only means you have to arraign the guy within 120 days, which I believe they did. What is left is Constitutional speedy trial. The defense filed a motion on this. Not sure if the judge has ruled on it yet. But some of that thousand days was on them. And beyond that, speedy trial isn't all its cracked up to be. All it means is the government has to diligently try to bring you to trial. meaning they can't just dick around for the fun of it for very long. And it is pretty damned easy for the government in any case to show they doing something at all times.

[Sevo]

"And it is pretty damned easy for the government in any case to show they doing something at all times."

Which is one of the reasons I'm not convinced.

[John]

YOur beef Sevo is with speedy trial in general. And it is a legit beef. But that is not about Manning in particular.

[Sevo]

"But that is not about Manning in particular."
It is when Manning is the subject.

[General Butt Naked]

I am inclined to see John's argument here.

I've known a lot of degenerates with good lawyers and they always, without variance, delay trials as much as possible. It's a good strategy for the defense as any witnesses will have only the vaguest of memories of what has happened. Also, you hope that the people trying for the state have changed and you're dealing with new blood. This can be good for a number of reasons, one could be that evidence is lost or misplaced, another could be that the new guy doesn't have as much invested in the case, and finally with so much different shit going on a minor technicality may arise (a discovery issue, perhaps).

Hell, my gf's nephew beat a bunch of charges with a PD because after all the delays (defense, and state) the case was 3 years old and there wasn't much interest on the state's behalf (with meager evidence) to proceed. I'll add that he was basically caught red handed waved his rights to the investigating officer.

[The Late P Brooks]

Apparently Diane Feinstein's gun control hearing was quite the heartstring tugging circus. Surprise, the police want you disarmed.

The Senate Judiciary Committee today heard from law enforcement officials who spoke in support of restrictions on semi-automatic assault weapons. Also testifying was Neil Heslin, the father of a 6-year-old boy slain at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown on Dec. 14.

"I just can't believe that that could happen," Heslin told lawmakers while choking back tears. "Those weapons were used in the battlefields of Vietnam, in the Persian Gulf, in Afghanistan and Iraq. Their sole purpose is to put a lot of lead on the battlefield quickly."

It's "false logic" that a ban on assault weapons would strip Americans of their Second Amendment right to bear arms, said Edward Flynn, chief of the Milwaukee police department. "These weapons are designed for combat" and "to cause lethal wounds to human beings," not for sporting or self-defense, he said.

I thought causing lethal wounds was the whole point of self defense.

[Dunphy (the real one)]

"the police want you disarmed."

rubbish. sorry, the fact that a cop-o-crat (appointed politician) wants you disarmed =/= same sentiment being held by THE POLICE writ large.

[Paul.]

Surprise, the police want you disarmed.

Dunphy keeps insisting that police are by and large, big 2nd amendment supporters. I have seen precisely the opposite in both my reading of the news, and anecdotal personal experience.

Sure, there may be the odd cop who supports is. But as an institution? Cops hate it when you carry a gun.

[Hugh Akston]

Look Paul, who are gonna believe, the guy who claims to be a cop who claims to lurve the 2nd Amendment, or the uniformed thug shouting at you to stop resisting while he tases you to death for pulling a candybar wrapper on him?

[Paul.]

"Those weapons were used in the battlefields of Vietnam, in the Persian Gulf, in Afghanistan and Iraq, your streets and town by officers who call them "patrol rifles", Their sole purpose is to put a lot of lead on the battlefield or in your family members during a no-knock raid quickly."

[Paul.]

It's "false logic" that a ban on assault weapons would strip Americans of their Second Amendment right to bear arms, said Edward Flynn, chief of the Milwaukee police department. "These weapons are designed for combat" and "to cause lethal wounds to human beings," not for sporting or self-defense, he said.

"A lot of people make a lot of money selling firearms and ammunition," Flynn said. "It's time for Congress to pick a side. This time I hope it's law enforcement."

Mother FUCK!

Because Congress NEVER chooses Lore Enforcement! They're OUTGUNNED!

[RightNut]

"A lot of people make a lot of money selling firearms and ammunition," Flynn said.

A lot of people make a lot of money selling cars and fuel, whats this morons point exactly?

[Xenocles]

It sounded on the radio like she claimed that converting a semi-auto to an auto is legal. I don't have a clip, but did anyone else hear what I'm talking about?

[Paul.]

It sounded on the radio like she claimed that converting a semi-auto to an auto is legal. I don't have a clip

Magazine! MAGAZINE!

[BarryD]

Guess he finally got used to the waterboarding, so they figured they were through with him on that end.

[The Late P Brooks]

Why is that the "police at large" feel completely justified in executing anybody in proximity to them they believe to be armed?

For, you know, OFFICER SAFETY.

[The Late P Brooks]

Panic fire when somebody scratches his ass does not exactly indicate enthusiastic approval of civilian carry.

Go ahead; yell louder. Some dummy will come along and take you seriously.

[John]

It's "false logic" that a ban on assault weapons would strip Americans of their Second Amendment right to bear arms, said Edward Flynn, chief of the Milwaukee police department. "These weapons are designed for combat" and "to cause lethal wounds to human beings," not for sporting or self-defense, he said.

That takes the cake for stupidity. You know a rifle designed to take down a several hundred pound deer or elk at two hundred yards is "not designed to cause lethal wounds". What weapon isn't designed to cause lethal wounds?

Is that guy this stupid or does he think we are?

[Irish]

Notice how it's always cops in the most violent parts of the country who want Americans disarmed? Also, notice how all of those violent parts of the country already have some of the stronger gun control laws?

They're basically saying 'We're in terrible shape and our people cannot stop shooting each other. That's why everyone else should be more like us!'

[Virginian]

Well he's a cop, so he's probably not too bright.

Yeah, that's one of the things that pisses me off about guns. I own several. They are deadly weapons. They are designed to be deadly weapons. That is the entire point. Some people need killing. Most of us never encounter these people through our entire lives. Most of us never have a house fire. Most of us never trip and break our legs. Yet we have smoke detectors, we have first aid kits, and yes we have firearms.

I just don't get this mindset where choosing to be prepared is a sign of paranoia, because every single person takes precautions and prepares for bad things to happen. No one in the world leaves their doors and windows open, leaves money laying around their house, refuses to purchase insurance. It just seems like some people say "Anyone who is more prepared then me is paranoid, and anyone who is less prepared is naive."

[Irish]

Anyone who is more prepared than me is paranoid, and anyone who is less prepared is naive.

This is a common way of thinking among progressives. Basically, anyone who thinks differently than you is a threat. The goal of the progressive movement is to create a world where people of all colors, creeds, nationalities, genders and sexual orientations come together and act, think, and behave as much like rich, white progressives as is humanly possible.

[C. Anacreon]

The goal of the progressive movement is to create a world where people of all colors, creeds, nationalities, genders and sexual orientations come together and act, think, and behave as much like rich, white progressives as is humanly possible.

I am stealing that one, OK?

[John]

Guns are designed to kill people and things. The weapon of choice for the mafia for years was the .22 caliber revolver. They were cheap, easily obtained and disposed of and quite deadly when put to someone's head.

[Rich]

Well said.

[John]

http://www.realclearpolitics.c....._this.html

The White House is now threatening Bob Woodward. What vulgar thugs they are.

[Sevo]

Woodward (from the link):
"I mean, it makes me very uncomfortable to have the White House telling reporters, 'you're going to regret doing something that you believe in, and even though we don't look at it that way, you do look at it that way.'"

Uh, Bob, want to try that again?
You made your rep with a GOP W-H doing so, and you weren't uncomfortable then. It's only now that Obozo has lied enough to get your attention that you get "uncomfortable". And it took lying on a major scale to *finally* get your attention; you've ignored it for the last 5 years.
Hypocrisy, thy name is Wa Po.

[John]

Yeah. Since when is Bob Woodward intimidated by a President?

[Paul.]

Yeah. Since when is Bob Woodward intimidated by a President?

Since Woodward knows that not a single media outlet will have his back.

Woodward knows he's alone on this, and that's a scary place to be, even if your name is Woodward.

[Irish]

I'll give Woodward some credit. I'm sure the White House has done similar things to other reporters, and none of them have come forward. You don't start this sort of shit by doing it to Bob Woodward, you start this sort of shit with a random peon reporter no one has ever heard of and you work your way up to Bob Woodward.

At least Woodward is willing to admit that there's something wrong with the White House. Most of the rest of the media won't even go that far.

[Sevo]

Irish| 2.27.13 @ 9:53PM |#
"I'll give Woodward some credit"

I will, too, but he'd be due more credit if he'd have started calling bullshit when the bullshit started.
He's been peddling administration bullshit without a gripe; now it gets deep enough he has to buy a pair of boots and he starts griping?
Hey, pal, the rest of us have been *paying* for it while you've been getting *paid* for it.
Tough.

[Tulpa (LAOL-PA)]

You left out the best part.

I think if Barack Obama knew that was part of the communication's strategy, let's hope it's not a strategy, that it's a tactic that somebody's employed, he'd say, 'Look, we don't go around trying to say to reporters, if you, in an honest way, present something we don't like, that, you know, you're going to regret this.' It's Mickey Mouse.

He STILL doesn't blame Obama; he says "if Obama knew about this he'd put a stop to it." He's blaming the underlings! And he won't out who the "senior official" is who sent him the offending email.

[General Butt Naked]

It's funny, I was arguing politics with my mother the other day and I posited that the only difference between Obama and Bush is a complicit media. She's only recently become liberal, and shot back with a shrike-like, "you need to quit listening to Rush Limbaugh!".

Which is ironic considering that she is only one of two people that I've known personally that have listened to Rush Limbaugh.

[Irish]

That's hilarious. Since when would Rush Limbaugh compare Barack Obama to Bush? Limbaugh would claim Obama is far worse than George Bush, so you claiming that they're the same should have clued her in that you don't listen to Rush.

[General Butt Naked]

And it's not like she doesn't know what my political beliefs are and how those beliefs are in direct contradiction to mainstream republicanism. Some people can't believe that there are alternatives to the binary political system we have today.

It's beyond comprehension for them that a person who didn't vote for Obama didn't vote for Romney.

[John C. Randolph]

Your mother recently became liberal? Have you taken her to a neurologist?

Early onset of dementia is not to be taken lightly.

-jcr

[Jerryskids]

I was going to point out exactly this. Bob Woodward isn't asking "What did the President know and when did he know it?" - Bob Woodward already knows that that nice Obama guy couldn't possibly know about his underlings attempting to intimidate a reporter because that nice Obama guy would have put a quick stop to it if he did know.

[Sevo]

Tulpa (LAOL-PA)| 2.27.13 @ 10:53PM |#
"You left out the best part."

Yep. If Woodward would have claimed is was all Mitchel's fault, why Nixon would have been golden!
Fucking hypocritical lefty 'journalist'.

[Irish]

When I was initially giving Woodward credit, I hadn't read that part. Yeah, he can go fuck himself. I can't believe how blatant the hypocrisy is, or how easily they get away with this bullshit.

[Sevo]

Totally OT, but worthy of derision. PETA gets pissy about some gal's outfit:
"PETA bosses take aim at Beyonce's shoes"
Hey, at least the link gives you a SFW image of an attractive woman, and you can groan at PETA's continued stupidity.
http://blog.sfgate.com/dailydi.....at-beyonce

[General Butt Naked]

I have a theory that Beyonce is the new Billy Crystal. Nobody is actually a big fan of these two, or spends money on their work, but they're seen as safe performers to be included in any award show/event that hollywood puts on.

[Dunphy (the real one)]

i'm bathing in the adrenaline and satisfaction - foot pursuit and arrest of burglar... the 2nd burglar in 3 days!

yea, i'm braggin' a little, but it's stuff like this that makes it so worthwhile. the IED's the guy had on him in the previous one WERE real too, i just found out. major pucker factor when i found them. what kind of nincompoop walks around/commits burgs with a hatchet stuffed down their pants, IED's in their pockets, and a mobile meth lab in a backpack on their back?

and i haven't had a foot pursuit in ages. after losing 30 lbs, it feels clear i have nowhere near the strength/explosiveness a cop should have. which makes me a sad panda. 🙁

bathe bathe bathe bask bask bask

[Irish]

You are beyond parody.

[Dunphy (the real one)]

fair enuf. it's an awesome job and rewarding as fuck. gotta put out my pov to counter all this negative rubbish. it;s a job where you can make a huge positive difference, bring bad guys to justice, save people's lives, get victims their shit back, etc. etc.

it's easy to be cynical and jaded from your safe, lofty perch and snipe at the bad cases (mal/misfeasance) or the questionable ones as they come in and feel all superior and cops suck derp derp derp. but nothing can take away the feel good high right now. it's an awesome feeling. reminds me of getting a really good wave on the north shore of maui, with a few nice maneuvers and a bitchen tube, ya dig?

[Irish]

I'm not a cop hater. I hate bad cops, but admit that the knee jerk anti-cop hatred of Reason can certainly be excessive.

You, on the other hand, write poorly reasoned posts completely without capital letters about what a TOTAL fucking BADASS you are. Your throbbing erection over the fact that you were called on to do your job tells me all I need to know about you.

[Dunphy (the real one)]

btw, irish. quotes like this make you look ignorant

"Notice how it's always cops in the most violent parts of the country who want Americans disarmed? Also, notice how all of those violent parts of the country already have some of the stronger gun control laws?"

you are basing this belief based on a quote from a cop-o-crat. not from REAL cops. do you have any idea what percentage of STREET cops support RKBA? no, of course not. you read the report where they inevitably interview some police chief, who inevitably has the same POV as the mayor - iow his boss, the person who can fire him in a heartbeat.

why do you think AMONG cop-o-crats, it's more often the sherffs vs. the chiefs who come out pro-RKBA. think about who THEIR boss is (they are elected). it's not rocket science.

it's offensive to us real cops that noncops are ignorant enough to allow a cop-a-crat to speak for us, as if their opinion (as management) is the same as ours (labor). FREQUENTLY, it's different.

[Dunphy (the real one)]

i have little doubt cops in liberal antigun cities are more likely to be anti-RKBA than cops in places like arizona, because to an extent they mirror the general population, which is also obviously less pro gun. but even in places like boston, PLENTY of cops support RKBA and in places like where i work, it's easily 80% or so of street cops supporting RKBA based on who i talk to

so stop letting media think for you and recognize that a police chief's opinion is not proxy for THE POLICE nor are DOZENS of police chiefs. they are as different from us (labor) as the head of an auto company is from the guys working the assembly line.

[General Butt Naked]

Without goons to throw people in cages what the cop-o-crats (and other politicians) say would be meaningless.

You don't fool anyone. You'll do what you're goddamned told in the daytime, then come here to digitally masturbate with your fables of heroics at nighttime.

How does it feel to be a fucking joke?

[Dunphy (the real one)]

it feels great to be able to be in a career that the vast majority of americans respect (per polling data), admire, etc.

it feels great to be able to even occasionally be presented with the opportunity to do something truly heroic ... (today was just good police work, but occasionally)

i have dedicated my life to public service (lifeguard, firefighter, and cop) and yes, that feels great too. i love people, and i love serving.

nobody GODDAMNED TOLD ME derp derp derp to foot pursue and arrest this burglar today. i did it because it was the right thing to do, which is what cops do the vast majority of the time, and help people in the process.

your petty bitterness sounds about what i'd expect from a person with a life devoid of meaning, purpose, or frankly... soul.

it's a beautiful world out there. most "Merikuns" aren't stupid. most people are good people, and some of us enjoy serving them, protecting them from those that prey on them, and the concomitant rewards we get are very pleasurable.

go back and wallow in your petty know-nothing ivory tower cynicism and leave The Job(tm) to us.

[Irish]

The vast majority of Americans are idiots. Some abused wives are convinced their husbands really love them. Doesn't make it true.

[Dunphy (the real one)]

the vast majority of americans are NOT idiots

but see that's the difference. i serve people. i respect people. i LIKE people and i don't think they are idiots. your elitism and snobbery disgusts me.

you are the perfect example of the kind of snobbery i see here that mirrors exactly what i see from progressives.

[Irish]

I like people too. I just think they're really stupid. I like my dog, but she's not going to win any science awards.

[General Butt Naked]

Guys that live like you claim you do don't have to say it, especially to an empty, soulless crowd like us.

You don't know the first goddamn thing about honor, fidelity or honesty, so keep your lectures to yourself.

[Irish]

Also, apparently he's trademarked the words 'The Job.' That's an impressive understanding of the law you've got there, Dunphy.

By the way, how did you manage to capitalize your name when you apparently can't find the shift key during the rest of your post?

[Dunphy (the real one)]

i live honor, fidelity and honesty. first and foremost, that is something no anti-cop bigot could ever take from me. no ivory tower critic, who feels oh so superior to the average cop, or the average american (dumb merikuns being the reason meme that never gets a protest).

but yea, thanks for describing what makes my job so meaningful - hfh - honor fidelity and honesty

i may be adopting that acronym for future use.

[General Butt Naked]

I don't feel superior to average americans, and have never said as much.

I do think that you as an individual are a liar, though. The more you post and the more digital ink you spill only confirms my suspicions.

[Irish]

I unquestionably said that I feel superior to the average American. Most Americans are very stupid.

http://news.nationalgeographic.....raphy.html

Take Iraq, for example. Despite nearly constant news coverage since the war there began in 2003, 63 percent of Americans aged 18 to 24 failed to correctly locate the country on a map of the Middle East. Seventy percent could not find Iran or Israel...Nine in ten couldn't find Afghanistan on a map of Asia...And 54 percent were unaware that Sudan is a country in Africa.

That's just geography. Would you like me to find you a survey about how many Americans can't name a Supreme Court Justice or what percentage of Americans recognize a picture of Joe Biden? Quick googling tells me 9 of 10 Americans can't name all 9 Justices. 1/3 can't even NAME the vice president.

Having this collection of people think that your job is super duper important is not exactly making me see your point.

[Irish]

If he cared about looking like a fucking joke, he'd realize that the shift key exists. You know, in places other than the RANDOM capitalization.

[Dunphy (the real one)]

yawn.

[Coeus]

Are these also cop-o-crats?