Posted on | December 12, 2013 | 71 Comments
— Robert Stacy McCain (@rsmccain) December 12, 2013
In that analogy, President Obama is P.W. Botha and laws to punish disobedient soldiers are apartheid. Remember that Bradley Manning was the emotionally disturbed Army private who illegally provided classified U.S. documents to Julian Assange’s Wikileaks.
Conservatives are often accused of “simplistic” thinking, and liberals claim they’re all about “nuance” and “critical thinking,” but there are layers of nuance that seem to pass right over the heads of these idiot anarchists who mindlessly admire Manning. When my own son took the oath at Fort Meade, security was on high alert because there was a hearing in the Manning case that day, and the Army didn’t know if the Anonymous protesters might try some real-life “civil disobedience.” My son swore an oath that day to obey the orders of his Commander-in-Chief, whose politics and policies I have frequently criticized, but who is nonetheless President of the United States.
This is what democracy and the rule of law require. Citizens of a democracy cannot selectively decide which laws to obey, imbue their crimes with political significance, and then claim that enforcement of the law is unjust. And the security of a free state is always dependent on the service of those like my son who are bound by oath to obey orders, without regard for mere political controversies. While there are many decisions of the Obama administration that I have criticized, the prosecution of Bradley Manning is to be applauded, because if our soldiers cannot be trusted to obey orders, none of us are safe.
My soldier son and his mother.
If Bradley Manning is a courageous hero, then is every soldier who obeys orders a cowardly villain? This is what the anarchists of Anonymous are saying by their support of Manning, whose crimes were heinous and whose punishment is thoroughly deserved.
Speaking of punishments thoroughly deserved, a friend sent me an article about the “PayPal 14″ hackers whom I mentioned yesterday. It may be necessary to remind you of the sequence of events: Manning illegally provided classified U.S. documents to Julian Assange’s WikiLeaks; PayPal suspended the WikiLeaks account; Anonymous then launched distributed denial of service (DDOS) attacks to shut down PayPal. In other words, a company’s business was attacked because of their refusal to support Manning’s criminal activity.
Alas, those digital terrorists weren’t so Anonymous after all, and it was only a few months until the feds busted them. This May article by Huffington Post writers Jerry Smith and Ryan J. Reilly oozed with sympathy for the “Pay Pal 14″ hackers:
Before he was charged in July 2011 with aiding the hacker group Anonymous, Josh Covelli lived what he considered the life of an ordinary 26-year-old. He spent countless hours on the Internet. He had a girlfriend. He was a student and employee at Devry University in Dayton, Ohio.
But after federal authorities accused him and 13 other people of helping launch a cyberattack against the online payment service PayPal, Covelli faced potentially 15 years in prison, and his life began to unravel.
His girlfriend broke up with him. He struggled to find an employer willing to hire an accused computer hacker. His friends “wanted nothing to do with me,” he said, and he suffered from bouts of paranoia — “looking out windows, not sure who to trust” — before checking into a behavioral health center for three days.
“It was as if I got kicked off a cliff,” Covelli, now 28, told The Huffington Post in an interview. . . .
Well, boo hoo hoo. Maybe if Josh Covelli had sought “behavioral health” treatment sooner, he would have realized how crazy he was to think that committing crime on behalf of WikiLeaks was a smart idea. But, hey, let’s all be sympathetic to stupid criminals:
Some knew each other before the indictment, but only by online nicknames such as “Anthrophobic” and “Reaper.” They had never met in person until Sept. 1, 2011, when they made their initial court appearance together.
One defendant, Tracy Ann Valenzuela, a single mother and massage therapist, told a local ABC station in 2011 that she got involved in the PayPal attack while reading the news online.
“I saw something about PayPal shutting down payments to Wikileaks, and I clicked on some other site and joined a protest,” she said. “And next thing I knew, my house was surrounded by guns.” . . .
“I clicked on some other site and joined a protest” — a protest on behalf of criminals, a protest that involved criminal acts intended to deprive PayPal of revenue, because the company refused to process donations intended to support the criminal Julian Assange.
Tracy Ann Valenzuela: Her defense? She’s stupid.
Tracy Ann Valenzuela’s defense is that she was too stupid to realize that DDOS attacks are a crime. Perhaps we need to put all the stupid people in prison, just to be on the safe side, because otherwise they might log onto the Internet and commit cybercrime.
Let me propose an alternative theory of Tracy Ann Valenzuela’s crime: (a) she knew damned well this DDOS “protest” was criminal, but (b) she had contempt for the law and (c) she thought she could get away with breaking the law, because … Anonymous! and (d) oops.
Reminds me of the 18-year-old who thought she could get away with having sex in a school toilet stall with a 14-year-old. Oops.
It’s weird how millions of Americans go through life without ever being arrested for sex offenses or cybercrimes, but whenever the liberal media want to portray some criminal as a victim of social injustice, they always manage to find a way to do it:
In interviews with The Huffington Post, defendants in the PayPal case said they have spent the past two years burdened by pre-trial conditions that restricted their Internet usage. Many also struggled to secure employment.
“When you’re applying for a job and someone Googles you, you have a lot of explaining to do when you want to point out that you were standing up for free speech and a worthy cause and the government says you’re a cyber terrorist,” said Graham E. Archer, an attorney who represents Ethan Miles, one of the defendants.
Archer said being on pre-trial release has been “extraordinarily stressful” for Miles. Court records note that he spent time at a mental health facility. . . .
What? Ethan Miles “spent time at a mental health facility”? It’s hard to get a job if “the government says you’re a cyber terrorist”?
Ethan Miles: A criminal who is crazy.
Strip away the HuffPo’s sympathetic spin — and the lawyer’s claim that the kook Ethan Miles thought DDOS attacks were a way of “standing up for free speech” — and what you get is this: Crazy people commit crimes and nobody wants to hire crazy criminals.
Where do these crazy and/or stupid criminals get the idea that any time there is a protest — because somebody said it’s about “peace,” or “free speech” or “social justice” — they can just join the protest and be exempted from potential negative consequences? Pardon me for thinking maybe they get that idea from the liberal media:
Most Americans have never heard of Chris Hani or Oliver Tambo, both of whom died in 1993, and there was no fanfare in the U.S. media when Arthur Goldreich died two years ago. Since Nelson Mandela’s death last Thursday, the names of his former comrades in the anti-apartheid struggle have been omitted from the media narrative. The MSNBC hostess who last week enthusiastically credited Mandela with having “singlehandedly” ended apartheid was merely reducing to its ridiculous essence a myth that has become ubiquitous. What has been carefully omitted from the media myth — along with the names of many of Mandela’s colleagues in the African National Congress — is that the ANC was a communist-dominated party closely allied with the Soviet Union during the Cold War.
The controversy that erupted Tuesday after President Obama shook hands with Cuban dictator Raul Castro at a Mandela memorial in South Africa should have provided an opportunity to explain the history that has been deleted from the media’s Mandela myth. After all, Fidel Castro’s communist regime sent tens of thousands of soldiers to Angola to fight in a civil war where South Africa’s apartheid government sent troops into combat against Soviet-backed Marxists. The fact that Moscow and Havana spent the final 15 years of the Cold War fighting to spread communism in sub-Saharan Africa, and that Pretoria was a key Western ally against that effort, got no mention in the obituary praise for Mandela, who remained imprisoned until 1990. . . .
Read the whole thing at The American Spectator. Maybe I’m “on the wrong side of history,” but at least I’m not a stupid criminal kook.
Also, it’s not a crime to hit my tip jar: PayPal is your friend!