Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Private Manning’s Humiliation

nybooks.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–18 of 18 posts

Re: Private Manning’s Humiliation

#11

Post by itistoday »

mkr-hn wrote: post #10
itistoday wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That this story is being silenced out in so many places... blows my mind. HN should be ashamed to participate in the censorship. The President of the United States is blatantly violating the Constitution (in one of the worst ways), and nobody cares.

The submission needs a less inflammatory title. I don't see any evidence in the article that Obama is specifically calling for this or that he has any say in Manning's treatment.

Your decision to turn a willful blind eye to this is part of the problem. If you know nothing about how the government works, perhaps you should listen to the law professors linked above.

In an indirect way, you are also helping contribute to Manning's continuing detainment and torture. Sleep with that.

Re: Private Manning’s Humiliation

#12

Post by mkr-hn »

itistoday wrote: post #11
mkr-hn wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The submission needs a less inflammatory title. I don't see any evidence in the article that Obama is specifically calling for this or that he has any say in Manning's treatment.

Your decision to turn a willful blind eye to this is part of the problem. If you know nothing about how the government works, perhaps you should listen to the law professors linked above. In an indirect way, you are also helping contribute to Manning's continuing detainment and torture. Sleep with that.

I'm asking for the lines in the constitution, a law, or some court ruling that gives the President the power to make the Pentagon to do something. That's not turning a blind eye, it's asking for more than bold words and demands for action.

The article doesn't provide that.

Re: Private Manning’s Humiliation

#13

Post by itistoday »

mkr-hn wrote: post #8
itistoday wrote: post #7

Why isn't this on the front page given the number of upvotes it's gotten (12 in 32 minutes?). Yet this is? Show HN: New Fwix Local API (from the team at Fwix) 4 points by goo 56 minutes ago | flag | 1 comment

Because mob rule would turn HN into a reddit without the option to remove mob strongholds from view.

BTW, HN has already turned into reddit, and the fact that this didn't make it to the front page is further evidence of that.

Re: Private Manning’s Humiliation

#14

Post by itistoday »

mkr-hn wrote: post #12
itistoday wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your decision to turn a willful blind eye to this is part of the problem. If you know nothing about how the government works, perhaps you should listen to the law professors linked above. In an indirect way, you are also helping contribute to Manning's continuing detainment and torture. Sleep with that.

I'm asking for the lines in the constitution, a law, or some court ruling that gives the President the power to make the Pentagon to do something. That's not turning a blind eye, it's asking for more than bold words and demands for action. The article doesn't provide that.

The President is sworn to uphold and protect the Constitution (by law, and upon accepting office). He can do this through whatever means are available to him, including executive orders, and rallying public support for legislation.

BTW, the title is "inflammatory" because the situation justifies it. It's an inflammatory situation, as it should be!

Find whatever excuse you want though for not approving this. Whatever helps you sleep.

Re: Private Manning’s Humiliation

#15

Post by mkr-hn »

itistoday wrote: post #14
mkr-hn wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm asking for the lines in the constitution, a law, or some court ruling that gives the President the power to make the Pentagon to do something. That's not turning a blind eye, it's asking for more than bold words and demands for action. The article doesn't provide that.

The President is sworn to uphold and protect the Constitution (by law, and upon accepting office). He can do this through whatever means are available to him, including executive orders, and rallying public support for legislation. BTW, the title is "inflammatory" because the situation justifies it. It's an inflammatory situation, as it should be! Find whatever excuse you want though for not approving this. Whatever…

I'm trying to find something that will let me take action. A letter to the President politely asking him to make the Pentagon be nice would be filed right next to all the letters asking him to ban Martians.

It's not actionable. I can't do anything with it. I've gone through the wiki on Presidential powers and don't see it.

Re: Private Manning’s Humiliation

#16

Post by rdouble »

mkr-hn wrote: post #12
itistoday wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your decision to turn a willful blind eye to this is part of the problem. If you know nothing about how the government works, perhaps you should listen to the law professors linked above. In an indirect way, you are also helping contribute to Manning's continuing detainment and torture. Sleep with that.

I'm asking for the lines in the constitution, a law, or some court ruling that gives the President the power to make the Pentagon to do something. That's not turning a blind eye, it's asking for more than bold words and demands for action. The article doesn't provide that.

Article 2 section 2. He's the commander in chief of the military and as such the military has to do what he says. It also offers specific provisions for pardons and reprieves.

Re: Private Manning’s Humiliation

#17

Post by [deleted] »

rdouble wrote: post #16
mkr-hn wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm asking for the lines in the constitution, a law, or some court ruling that gives the President the power to make the Pentagon to do something. That's not turning a blind eye, it's asking for more than bold words and demands for action. The article doesn't provide that.

Article 2 section 2. He's the commander in chief of the military and as such the military has to do what he says. It also offers specific provisions for pardons and reprieves.

[deleted]

Re: Private Manning’s Humiliation

#18

Post by mkr-hn »

rdouble wrote: post #16
mkr-hn wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm asking for the lines in the constitution, a law, or some court ruling that gives the President the power to make the Pentagon to do something. That's not turning a blind eye, it's asking for more than bold words and demands for action. The article doesn't provide that.

Article 2 section 2. He's the commander in chief of the military and as such the military has to do what he says. It also offers specific provisions for pardons and reprieves.

Just sent the President a letter and asked for a reply. Let's see what happens.
Post reply on HN