Susan's Place Transgender Resources

(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.salon.com%2Fcontent%2Fthemes%2Fsalon%2Fimages%2Fui%2FID_salon.gif&hash=077b64dec2c27e2b60b2e4b11e51d44d1e65d4fb)


How Bradley Manning's fate will be decided


The soldier accused of giving files to WikiLeaks will likely face a court-martial -- we explain how it works

By Justin Elliott | Saturday, Jan 21, 2012 2:00 PM UTC

http://www.salon.com/2012/01/21/how_bradley_mannings_fate_will_be_decided/singleton/ (http://www.salon.com/2012/01/21/how_bradley_mannings_fate_will_be_decided/singleton/)

(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.salon.com%2F2012%2F01%2FBradley-Manning-460x307.jpg&hash=870d21ee371645afd6d884bf766aca8b56350637)
Army Pfc. Bradley Manning is escorted by military police from the courthouse after the sixth day of his Article 32 hearing at Fort Meade, Maryland, December 21, 2011.  (Credit: Benjamin Myers / Reuters)


This week, Bradley Manning came one step closer to being tried for allegedly leaking a trove of secret American cables to WikiLeaks when a military officer made the formal recommendation that Manning should face a court-martial on 22 criminal charges.

One of the counts, aiding the enemy, carries the possibility of the death penalty, but prosecutors have already said they will not seek it in Manning's case.

Manning will spend many, many years in prison.

I realise he has been a traitor to his country. But I feel sorry for him. He doesn't seem to be the ingrained long term spy who quietly moled into top secrets and sold them to their 'masters'. He seems much more of a fool who didn't realise letting internet emails out to other people was being traitorous. That he was allowed to by his superiors is unconscionable. He should not be the only one on trial.

The world has changed. But the rules have remained the same. A radio message saying that the Bismark was leaving her harbour was fantastic intelligence in WII. Telling someone what underwear someone is wearing and that they like fetish activity doesn't mean anything to anyone anymore, you cannot blackmail someone into treason for that. Hell you have grunts peeing on bodies, and that is considered classified. Not sure why.

Damn sure enemy peeing on USA soldiers would be classified. Damn sure it wouldn't.

I did not and do not mean this post to offend; particularly to anyone who have lost people in this conflict. I just think a fool is being hanged out to dry. And those who live under rocks will be safe.

Y'all.

Of all places to misgender someone.  Really?

Manning (http://feministing.com/2011/12/22/why-does-the-media-and-her-supposed-supporters-continue-to-misgender-breanna-manning/) is a (http://openchannel.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/12/21/9590399-manning-defenses-focus-on-gender-identity-disorder-alarms-some) trans (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/12/bradley-manning-defense-reveals-alter-ego-named-brianna-manning/#.TvKVXFwjLa4.tumblr) woman (http://tigerbeatdown.com/2011/07/15/in-or-out-b-manning/#quotefmReady).  Her name is Breanna and she's identified as such for a pretty good long time.  Enough for everyone to get used to it, and especially for a trans forum to get used to it.  Christ, people.  This has been around for a while. 

Oh really? Not in Australian media

I'm using what is in the electronic and printed media and I now see your media report. Considering the USA judicial system I'm not sure what to think of it.

If I'm wrong I'll stand corrected, I mean no offence but the clouds have been created

Cindy James

I'm really conflicted here. I want to kind of respect Manning for yanking the government's pants down, especially after the Indefinite detention bill was signed in last year. But at the same time, what he did was wrong. But then again, Americans committed treason against the King of England all those years ago. So I'll let history decide whether Manning did good or not.
I wish Manning had been anything but [possibly] transgender, because this is going to really hurt us at some point.

They didn't do anything wrong they just showed how vicious the US action aboard is with the wholesale slaughter of innocent bystanders... Whitch everybody else in the entire world already knows Except for those inside the US for some idiotic reason.

The label traitor is simply an excuse to hurt the one who showed you the mirror and made you look at yourself. Retreating back behind false and willfully ignorent notions of National pride against the "Others"

Wake up and ACCEPT what you are, Tell me yourself are you a nation of murderers, supported by complicit accomplices. Or a league of murderers supported by a nation of idiots who just don't know any better.

If your won't look yourself then perhaps the only way the pepole of the US will ever learn of the atrocities they commit daily are if they themselves brutally subjugated and tortured so they can see the horrors they endorse and commit first hand.

In whitch case the Theocratic bigoted state your gradually decaying into is a well earned end.

Grow up.

Quote from: pebbles on January 23, 2012, 06:58:58 AM
They didn't do anything wrong they just showed how vicious the US action aboard is with the wholesale slaughter of innocent bystanders... Whitch everybody else in the entire world already knows Except for those inside the US for some idiotic reason.

The label traitor is simply an excuse to hurt the one who showed you the mirror and made you look at yourself. Retreating back behind false and willfully ignorent notions of National pride against the "Others"

Wake up and ACCEPT what you are, Tell me yourself are you a nation of murderers, supported by complicit accomplices. Or a league of murderers supported by a nation of idiots who just don't know any better.

If your won't look yourself then perhaps the only way the pepole of the US will ever learn of the atrocities they commit daily are if they themselves brutally subjugated and tortured so they can see the horrors they endorse and commit first hand.

In whitch case the Theocratic bigoted state your gradually decaying into is a well earned end.

++


Do you realize how contrived and pedantic this sounds?    Not to bash your opinion which I'm not too far off from agreeing with in some ways,  but this literally sounds lifted right off of some website that hates America.  Sounds like you have memorized little sound bites that you think sound good.  But really it just comes across as "Hey wonder where she copied that from."    Especially when you have typical spelling errors that speak to lack of good writing skills.  Ex:  It's "you're gradually decaying into"  not "your."

Just a heads up as a teacher and a writer.  If you want people to take you seriously don't do that.  LOL   :police:


[/old lady/teacher]


IMO  everyone in a war is at risk.   No soldier should ever ever ever do anything that puts other soldiers at risk.  Like the ones that peed on the dead bodies.   Way to guarantee that the next group of American soldiers that are caught by some zealots will be tortured and maimed.

Their actions are just as criminal as this.   If you don't want to keep the commitment then don't sign up.  So,  sorry no pity for this soldier.

The vast majority of information that was leaked was not military, but State Department stuff, mostly about how our 'allies' weren't.

I don't care if they leaked ONE piece of military information and that information was the password to get the toilet paper.   You don't compromise military security.  I'm not a patriot.  It is simply unfair to the men and women who are serving.  I tend to see certain things in black and white.  This is one of them.  You do not compromise military security in any shape or form.

Quote from: Wonderdyke on January 23, 2012, 04:01:40 AM
Y'all.

Of all places to misgender someone.  Really?

Manning (http://feministing.com/2011/12/22/why-does-the-media-and-her-supposed-supporters-continue-to-misgender-breanna-manning/) is a (http://openchannel.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/12/21/9590399-manning-defenses-focus-on-gender-identity-disorder-alarms-some) trans (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/12/bradley-manning-defense-reveals-alter-ego-named-brianna-manning/#.TvKVXFwjLa4.tumblr) woman (http://tigerbeatdown.com/2011/07/15/in-or-out-b-manning/#quotefmReady).  Her name is Breanna and she's identified as such for a pretty good long time.  Enough for everyone to get used to it, and especially for a trans forum to get used to it.  Christ, people.  This has been around for a while.

Interesting point, this was not a case of misgendering but of using the name in the article as written.

Quote from: mixie on January 23, 2012, 09:08:24 AM
I don't care if they leaked ONE piece of military information and that information was the password to get the toilet paper.   You don't compromise military security.  I'm not a patriot.  It is simply unfair to the men and women who are serving.  I tend to see certain things in black and white.  This is one of them.  You do not compromise military security in any shape or form.

As a Veteran...Thank You for that observation! Regardless if the information was Military or Civilian/Diplomatic, Classified is Classified, Restricted is Restricted and National Security is National Security Information. Albeit that the Army clearly screwed up and should have pull Manning's Security Clearance awhile back, Manning has to take responsibility for the actions commited.

Quote from: SandraJane on January 23, 2012, 12:19:37 PM
Interesting point, this was not a case of misgendering but of using the name in the article as written.


As a Veteran...Thank You for that observation! Regardless if the information was Military or Civilian/Diplomatic, Classified is Classified, Restricted is Restricted and National Security is National Security Information. Albeit that the Army clearly screwed up and should have pull Manning's Security Clearance awhile back, Manning has to take responsibility for the actions commited.

I don't see it quite as clear cut though. Look at how Manning's superiors knew she was becoming a problem. But yet their inaction's are going unpunished. She was acting out and erratically but hey, it's business as usual. Which is why I see this whole trial as a sham.  Don't get me wrong, I don't condone Manning's actions, but I don't see why she should be the only one on trial here. Especially since I was taught that there is no 'I' in a unit, you are a team.

Quote from: Keaira on January 23, 2012, 04:56:44 AM
I'm really conflicted here. I want to kind of respect Manning for yanking the government's pants down, especially after the Indefinite detention bill was signed in last year. But at the same time, what he did was wrong. But then again, Americans committed treason against the King of England all those years ago. So I'll let history decide whether Manning did good or not.
I wish Manning had been anything but [possibly] transgender, because this is going to really hurt us at some point.

The colonial Americans invoked the natural right to revolution in response to what they felt was oppression and tyranny.

I have not seen any evidence that Manning's gender dysphoria played a part in the alleged crimes.  Certainly, he was in an unhappy and stressful situation because of his sexual orientation.  His motivation to leak classified materials, however, seems political.

Everyone involved should go down as well. 

The colonial Americans invoked the natural right to revolution in response to what they felt was oppression and tyranny

1. The colonial Americans invented that 'natural right of revolution' out of whole cloth.  No such 'right' existed before they came up with it.
2. Natural right or not, what they did was treason, and unlike yourself, they completely understood that.  That we don't call it treason is proof that we won, had they lost, they would have hung - no doubt about it.

Quote from: tekla on January 23, 2012, 01:21:27 PM
The colonial Americans invoked the natural right to revolution in response to what they felt was oppression and tyranny

1. The colonial Americans invented that 'natural right of revolution' out of whole cloth.  No such 'right' existed before they came up with it.
2. Natural right or not, what they did was treason, and unlike yourself, they completely understood that.  That we don't call it treason is proof that we won, had they lost, they would have hung - no doubt about it.

1. I would credit John Locke's Treatises on Government (late 1600s) as the immediate inspiration.  However, Jefferson's phrasing in the Declaration of Independence amplifies the concept.

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

2. I am well aware that the Founders recognized their peril, thus:

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

The Treaty of 1783, recognizing independence, absolved the revolutionaries of any charge of treason.

Quote from: Jamie D on January 23, 2012, 01:42:40 PM
1. I would credit John Locke's Treatises on Government (late 1600s) as the immediate inspiration.  However, Jefferson's phrasing in the Declaration of Independence amplifies the concept.

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

2. I am well aware that the Founders recognized their peril, thus:

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

The Treaty of 1783, recognizing independence, absolved the revolutionaries of any charge of treason.

Quote from: tekla on January 23, 2012, 01:21:27 PM
The colonial Americans invoked the natural right to revolution in response to what they felt was oppression and tyranny

1. The colonial Americans invented that 'natural right of revolution' out of whole cloth.  No such 'right' existed before they came up with it.
2. Natural right or not, what they did was treason, and unlike yourself, they completely understood that.  That we don't call it treason is proof that we won, had they lost, they would have hung - no doubt about it.

Quote from: Jamie D on January 23, 2012, 12:51:24 PM
The colonial Americans invoked the natural right to revolution in response to what they felt was oppression and tyranny.

I have not seen any evidence that Manning's gender dysphoria played a part in the alleged crimes.  Certainly, he was in an unhappy and stressful situation because of his sexual orientation.  His motivation to leak classified materials, however, seems political.

Okay, I love history too, but this thread is about Bradley Manning's fate not the history of the American Revolution. Some good points made but let's stay on track please!  :police:

Thank You!

I tend to get off on tangents.  Sorry.

The tangent, of course, is "Were Manning's alleged actions treasonable?"

So I'll stick with my original statement - he's going to prison for a long time.  ;)

Quote from: Cindy James on January 23, 2012, 02:32:55 AM
I realise he has been a traitor to his country. But I feel sorry for him. He doesn't seem to be the ingrained long term spy who quietly moled into top secrets and sold them to their 'masters'.

That's exactly what a country searches for in a disposable spy. Someone with extremely low self esteem, no friends, a poor self image.

All it would take is another country "being buddies" with him.

I certainly hope he reflects on this....because he is going to be in prison for a VERY long time.

Quote from: pebbles on January 23, 2012, 06:58:58 AM
They didn't do anything wrong they just showed how vicious the US action aboard is with the wholesale slaughter of innocent bystanders... Whitch everybody else in the entire world already knows Except for those inside the US for some idiotic reason.

The label traitor is simply an excuse to hurt the one who showed you the mirror and made you look at yourself. Retreating back behind false and willfully ignorent notions of National pride against the "Others"

Wake up and ACCEPT what you are, Tell me yourself are you a nation of murderers, supported by complicit accomplices. Or a league of murderers supported by a nation of idiots who just don't know any better.

If your won't look yourself then perhaps the only way the pepole of the US will ever learn of the atrocities they commit daily are if they themselves brutally subjugated and tortured so they can see the horrors they endorse and commit first hand.

In whitch case the Theocratic bigoted state your gradually decaying into is a well earned end.

wow....

...slowly......backs.....away...........

Sorry I did not mean to misgender. In the media reports I saw (in Australia) TG wasn't mentioned. It was implied that he/she was a gay guy.

The problem with all these cases is that the internal investigation will find the lowest cracking point and not the highest person responsible. They have found a very easy nut to crack. Totally disposable, unredeemable, a perfect fall person.

I do feel sorry for her.

She will have a hell of a life in prison. And no one will care.

What is it with taking responsibility for people in your charge?

If someone in my work sends out the wrong results, I'm to blame for not checking. OK I live with that.

If someone falsifies results and sends them out, I'm to blame for not checking, not understanding the ramifications. OK I live with that.

If someone access data from one of my databases and sells/gives it to a journalist, I'm to blame for not making sure the proper procedures were not in place. OK I live with that. I will (probably) fire the individual and maybe take legal proceedings but I can assure you of one thing, no matter how high I am in the company; I will be held responsible for the action of my staff.

And guess what? when I signed the form for being a boss, I knew that, and I live with it.

It's a simple concept. You are responsible for people in your command.

Unless you can prove total disregard for orders, SOP, inability to be trained, then it is your fault. If you knew the person was incapable of doing their job, then you are responsible for placing an incompetent person in a position that you are responsible for. 

Is this why a country may recruit low level spies? because they know the command structure is crap? When the command structure is strong you have to carefully build a dedicated and intelligent person into a long term role in order for them to spy when they have passed all those checks.

I am in no way judging right from wrong.

In my discussion that is irrelevant.

Why have we/you ended up taking a a person who could be best described as very fragile physically,  emotionally and psychologically into a position where they could access such an enormous amount of data, release it, and not know about it.

As far as I can tell it became apparent that the data had been leaked only when wikileaks did so.

Is there any evidence that the information contributed to anything except total and complete embarrassment of the people who employed this soldier?

I'm not in any way condoning what was done by Manning, but I am astonished how a very junior person is being held responsible for the whole affair.

I would suggest that a professional interrogator could get this person to confess to being one of Santa's elves, while their coffee cooled. 

Before they had finished their coffee they would have  so broken her so that she would confess to anything.  Then according to what I read they kept her in solitary custody without access to defence lawyers for a period of time that I do not recall, but it wasn't 24 hours. I think it was weeks. Must have been character building.

Again, I do not condone in anyway what Manning did (or may have done), but I have great reservations that justice, in this case,  is to bury a living corpse.

JMO
Cindy James

Quote from: SandraJane on January 23, 2012, 12:19:37 PM
Interesting point, this was not a case of misgendering but of using the name in the article as written.

Heh, yeah.  It's actually mind-boggling how little press there's been about how the entire world is misgendering her.  I mean, I'm expecting dumbass media outlets to do that, because that's their modus operandi, but even Wikipedia has fallen prey to the trap of following all of the credible news outlets because even the credible, normally respectful sources have their heads stuck in the mud about it.

This, that, and a few minor technicalities.

I've never worried too much about it, knowing he's going to military court and the presumption in military court is that you are guilty, and since he is guilty they are going to have no problem finding him as such locking him up and tossing the key for a few decades.  And military prisons are not like regular prisons, they suck on a whole 'nother level.

Treason as defined in the Constitution: "levying War against [the United States], or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort."  The Constitution further gives Congress - and Congress alone - the power to declare war.  Currently, there is no such declaration, hence no war, hence no treason.  Nor is he being charged with treason.  So he's not really a traitor in any legal sense.

The side-bar about the Revolutionary War (aside from the fact that there are a lot of Brits in here who would consider it as such) is that actions at the time are not necessarily seen that way in historical perspective.  Also note, there was a war on, they actually caused the war, started the war, and pursued the war, which is exactly what treason is.

His case is fairly unique, (though Danial Elsberg's is similar), in that usually giving away classified documents is done as part of an espionage deal.  There is no espionage going on here (and if there was, unless it was huge - and it really wasn't - he would be traded back because that's how we did it back in the day with the USSR), there was no foreign country, or foreign power he was supplying.  He released this stuff to the citizens of the United States (and everyone else).  And, exactly like Elsberg, those documents paint a picture of widespread lying - deceit is the word your looking for - and cover-ups on the part of our government when it comes to dealing with military adventures (ours and others) beyond our borders. 

And, let me say a kind word about espionage.  Espionage keeps the peace.  Espionage is powerful tool in maintaining the peace.  Electronic and space-based surveillance by both the US and USSR, as well as more traditional means (pilfering documents), probably averted several wars that could have turned nuclear.  All of  the Poppa Reagan fan club out there who get all warm and runny at the mere mention of his sainted name should well remember that he said: Trust, but verify.  Espionage is how you verify.  The other side too.  Both sides know that, and despite attempting to keep everything a secret from the other side (and like the present case, most MOST of what is classified is non-information) you actually have to kind-of let them get the stuff they really need.  The information that makes them feel more secure.  If you want to really go down the rabbit-hole, the closest thing to Alice-In-Wonderland we have is the world of counterespionage during the Cold War, who was getting what and how, very trippy. One person who was heavily involved called it 'A Wilderness of Mirrors."  I mean we 'let stuff out' from time to time for various reasons, and such things are very obscure to source.

So, I reserve the right to look through this again and again and wonder if BM was set up.  Why this information?  Who did this release benefit?  Who did it hurt?  Is he just a likely fall guy, a patsy, a stooge being manipulated by people much more cunning and smarter (and cold blooded to say the least) than he is/was?  And that's often stuff you don't know till years down the road.  If ever.  And preferably, never.

But given some of the real master spies of the Cold War era, Bradley Manning does not seem to fit the profile.  Danial Elsberg was a doctor doing pentagon contract research at a top grade contractor, that's how he had access, how does a PFC get it?  So I'm still curious as to how some PFC has all that stuff with so little supervision - unless there is just so much, the sheer volume of it is now, at long last, totally unmanageable.  I'll accept that, but that opens a whole new, big, huge problem.

Quote from: tekla on January 24, 2012, 09:57:17 AM
This, that, and a few minor technicalities.

I've never worried too much about it, knowing he's going to military court and the presumption in military court is that you are guilty, and since he is guilty they are going to have no problem finding him as such locking him up and tossing the key for a few decades.  And military prisons are not like regular prisons, they suck on a whole 'nother level.

Treason as defined in the Constitution: "levying War against [the United States], or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort."  The Constitution further gives Congress - and Congress alone - the power to declare war.  Currently, there is no such declaration, hence no war, hence no treason.  Nor is he being charged with treason.  So he's not really a traitor in any legal sense.

Not even close.

The Uniform Code of Military Justice specifically states,

... the accused must be presumed to be innocent until his guilt is established by legal and competent evidence beyond reasonable doubt. 851. Art 51. (c). (1)

Furthermore, the US Supreme Court, going all the way back the The Prize Cases in 1862, has ruled a state a war can exist without a formal declaration of war.  This sort of sophistry will not help Manning's case one bit.

Manning's addition problems regarding espionage and spying are found in 906. Art 106 and 906a. .Art 106a

He's guilty of however many counts that it is of release of confidential documents, nothing more, he's not a spy in any national security sense, because he's not working for any foreign government.  Those charges will be enough to hold him forever and a day.  And I don't care what they say, the presumption in most military courts is for guilt or else it wouldn't have made it that far, it would have been dealt with on an administrative level, if not made to go away altogether.  They've got him dead to rights.

Quote from: tekla on January 24, 2012, 09:57:17 AM
This, that, and a few minor technicalities.

I've never worried too much about it, knowing he's going to military court and the presumption in military court is that you are guilty, and since he is guilty they are going to have no problem finding him as such locking him up and tossing the key for a few decades.  And military prisons are not like regular prisons, they suck on a whole 'nother level.

Treason as defined in the Constitution: "levying War against [the United States], or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort."  The Constitution further gives Congress - and Congress alone - the power to declare war.  Currently, there is no such declaration, hence no war, hence no treason.  Nor is he being charged with treason.  So he's not really a traitor in any legal sense.

The side-bar about the Revolutionary War (aside from the fact that there are a lot of Brits in here who would consider it as such) is that actions at the time are not necessarily seen that way in historical perspective.  Also note, there was a war on, they actually caused the war, started the war, and pursued the war, which is exactly what treason is.

His case is fairly unique, (though Danial Elsberg's is similar), in that usually giving away classified documents is done as part of an espionage deal.  There is no espionage going on here (and if there was, unless it was huge - and it really wasn't - he would be traded back because that's how we did it back in the day with the USSR), there was no foreign country, or foreign power he was supplying.  He released this stuff to the citizens of the United States (and everyone else).  And, exactly like Elsberg, those documents paint a picture of widespread lying - deceit is the word your looking for - and cover-ups on the part of our government when it comes to dealing with military adventures (ours and others) beyond our borders. 

And, let me say a kind word about espionage.  Espionage keeps the peace.  Espionage is powerful tool in maintaining the peace.  Electronic and space-based surveillance by both the US and USSR, as well as more traditional means (pilfering documents), probably averted several wars that could have turned nuclear.  All of  the Poppa Reagan fan club out there who get all warm and runny at the mere mention of his sainted name should well remember that he said: Trust, but verify.  Espionage is how you verify.  The other side too.  Both sides know that, and despite attempting to keep everything a secret from the other side (and like the present case, most MOST of what is classified is non-information) you actually have to kind-of let them get the stuff they really need.  The information that makes them feel more secure.  If you want to really go down the rabbit-hole, the closest thing to Alice-In-Wonderland we have is the world of counterespionage during the Cold War, who was getting what and how, very trippy. One person who was heavily involved called it 'A Wilderness of Mirrors."  I mean we 'let stuff out' from time to time for various reasons, and such things are very obscure to source.

So, I reserve the right to look through this again and again and wonder if BM was set up.  Why this information?  Who did this release benefit?  Who did it hurt?  Is he just a likely fall guy, a patsy, a stooge being manipulated by people much more cunning and smarter (and cold blooded to say the least) than he is/was?  And that's often stuff you don't know till years down the road.  If ever.  And preferably, never.

But given some of the real master spies of the Cold War era, Bradley Manning does not seem to fit the profile.  Danial Elsberg was a doctor doing pentagon contract research at a top grade contractor, that's how he had access, how does a PFC get it?  So I'm still curious as to how some PFC has all that stuff with so little supervision - unless there is just so much, the sheer volume of it is now, at long last, totally unmanageable.  I'll accept that, but that opens a whole new, big, huge problem.

Note- 715 words used.

brev·i·ty

noun
1.
shortness of time or duration; briefness: the brevity of human life.
2.
the quality of expressing much in few words; terseness: Brevity is the soul of wit.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/brevity (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/brevity)

...do you think you could have said it in 200 words or less?   ???

Quote from: tekla on January 24, 2012, 11:31:31 PM
He's guilty of however many counts that it is of release of confidential documents, nothing more, he's not a spy in any national security sense, because he's not working for any foreign government.  Those charges will be enough to hold him forever and a day.  And I don't care what they say, the presumption in most military courts is for guilt or else it wouldn't have made it that far, it would have been dealt with on an administrative level, if not made to go away altogether.  They've got him dead to rights.

106a. (a)

    (1) Any person subject to this chapter who, with intent or reason to believe that it is to be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of a foreign nation, communicates, delivers, or transmits, or attempts to communicate, deliver, or transmit, to any entity described in paragraph (2), either directly or indirectly, any thing described in paragraph (3) shall be punished as a court-martial may direct, except that if the accused is found guilty of an offense that directly concerns

        (A) nuclear weaponry, military spacecraft or satellites, early warning systems, or other means of defense or retaliation against large scale attack,

        (B) war plans,

        (C) communications intelligence or cryptographic information, or

        (D) any other major weapons system or major element of defense strategy, the accused shall be punished by death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct.

(Emphasis mine)

Did Manning have reason to believe the encrypted and classified materials he leaked would injure the United States?

How did this person, low in the chain, to say the least, know what information to release.

Quote from: Annah on January 24, 2012, 01:31:26 AM
wow.... ...slowly......backs.....away...........

Sure I'm crazy whatever any excuse to dismiss what I'm saying.

Guantanimo defense lawyers are begin physically and legally intimidated under the "Espionage act" for potentially revealing acts of torture commited against detainees.
http://spy.wareremoval.com/3087/guantanamo-defense-lawyers-being-investigated-over-cia-photos/ (http://spy.wareremoval.com/3087/guantanamo-defense-lawyers-being-investigated-over-cia-photos/)

John Kiriakou The man who orignally revealed to the world that the USA was waterboarding Detainees, now finds himself arrested accused of espionage against the United states.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/ex-spy-kiriakou-accused-in-cia-leaks-played-key-role-in-public-debate-over-waterboarding/2012/01/24/gIQA2mXROQ_story.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/ex-spy-kiriakou-accused-in-cia-leaks-played-key-role-in-public-debate-over-waterboarding/2012/01/24/gIQA2mXROQ_story.html)

Obama bends over backwards to protect and continue crimes and abuse from the bush era. Yet anyone who actually reveals these crimes is brutally punished.

Compair and contrast.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Wuterich (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Wuterich)

Marine staff seargent he tells his men to "shoot everyone and ask questions later" after a marine died under his command as they march into Haditha Iraq. 24 civilian men women and children are killed.

If found guilty of this psychopathic war crime he stands to be imprisoned for 3 months during his incarceration he will be subject to a 2/3rds pay cut and demoted back to the rank of private.

And your all complicit in this I doubt any of you knew because your unwilling to know.
Bradley Manning would have been better off commiting war crimes and wholesale murdering civilians rather than reporting them. Perhaps you would be calling him/her a heroic patriot then.

OK, if you're an American, the line forms here to have Pebbles tell each of us whether we fall in the "murderer" or "idiot" camp.

do you think you could have said it in 200 words or less

Brevity is the soul of the idiocy that is exacerbating a lot of our current problems with a sound-bite political culture and bumper sticker politics. 

An intentionally ignorant democracy doesn't work.  Plenty of proof of that these days.

Quote from: tekla on January 25, 2012, 09:59:50 AM
do you think you could have said it in 200 words or less

Brevity is the soul of the idiocy that is exacerbating a lot of our current problems with a sound-bite political culture and bumper sticker politics. 

An intentionally ignorant democracy doesn't work.  Plenty of proof of that these days.

I guess that means no! :laugh:

Quote from: tekla on January 25, 2012, 09:59:50 AM
do you think you could have said it in 200 words or less

Brevity is the soul of the idiocy that is exacerbating a lot of our current problems with a sound-bite political culture and bumper sticker politics. 

An intentionally ignorant democracy doesn't work.  Plenty of proof of that these days.

Those raised on television, like Sesame Street and network news, have a 30 second attention span.

Quote from: pebbles on January 25, 2012, 04:16:32 AM
Sure I'm crazy whatever any excuse to dismiss what I'm saying....

John Kiriakou The man who originally revealed to the world that the USA was waterboarding Detainees, now finds himself arrested accused of espionage against the United states....

Waterboarding saves lives.  Leaking jeopardizes them.

Literal lol @ consistent misgendering.

So much for respect for identity, huh?  I guess it's only ok if the person isn't around to complain.

Quote from: pebbles on January 25, 2012, 04:16:32 AM
Perhaps you would be calling him/her a heroic patriot then.

Actually, during this point in time, I prefer to call Bradley Manning a psychopath and a deeply troubled person.

He threatened his step mother with a butcher's knife, lived in a truck because all of his family members were afraid of him, numerous accounts of insubordination (had no idea how to follow orders and screamed at his commanding officers, had numerous encounters with various military mental health counselors, and punched a female soldier in the face.

He did brief internet sessions with a gender counselor and the gender counselor doubted he is transgender. The Therapist stated that he has many other mental health issues going on right now that makes it impossible to tell if he is transgender or if this is another one of his phases or a reaction to his inability to cope with people around him or an attempt of getting attention (his previous boyfriends all left him because of his inability to cope with people and his strong desire for unhealthy attention)....this is probably why I am still referring him to the male gender. I think he is at the mental state where he doesn't know what he wants.

Quote from: pebbles on January 25, 2012, 04:16:32 AM

And your all complicit in this I doubt any of you knew because your unwilling to know.
Bradley Manning would have been better off commiting war crimes and wholesale murdering civilians rather than reporting them. Perhaps you would be calling him/her a heroic patriot then.

"you're all complicit"  "you're unwilling to know"   If you don't know how to use a contraction, it's best to spell out "you are."

Note- Whether it is about brevity in expression, or grammar, let us be tolerant of each other...please! :)

Thank You,

SJ

Kia Ora,

::) All I can say about Bradley, is I pity the poor sod, life for her now in the land of the 'patriot' [America] is going to be sheer hell whether in prison or out of it...Even if the charges are trumped up, mud sticks...

Metta Zenda :)

Quote from: Annah on January 25, 2012, 03:13:31 PM
Actually, during this point in time, I prefer to call Bradley Manning a psychopath and a deeply troubled person.

He threatened his step mother with a butcher's knife, lived in a truck because all of his family members were afraid of him, numerous accounts of insubordination (had no idea how to follow orders and screamed at his commanding officers, had numerous encounters with various military mental health counselors, and punched a female soldier in the face.

He did brief internet sessions with a gender counselor and the gender counselor doubted he is transgender. The Therapist stated that he has many other mental health issues going on right now that makes it impossible to tell if he is transgender or if this is another one of his phases or a reaction to his inability to cope with people around him or an attempt of getting attention (his previous boyfriends all left him because of his inability to cope with people and his strong desire for unhealthy attention)....this is probably why I am still referring him to the male gender. I think he is at the mental state where he doesn't know what he wants.

Yeah, I don't really care what you think about her mental state, because I think she's made it clear that her identity is such.  Trans people are constantly having their mental state questioned by others for their identity, and it's really unsavory.  She may have a hell of a lot of other mental health issues going on, and she clearly did several things that were indefensible.  I'm not defending her actions, but y'all, respecting people's self-identity is a cardinal rule.

Quote from: Wonderdyke on January 26, 2012, 01:12:53 AM
Yeah, I don't really care what you think about her mental state, because I think she's made it clear that her identity is such.  Trans people are constantly having their mental state questioned by others for their identity, and it's really unsavory.  She may have a hell of a lot of other mental health issues going on, and she clearly did several things that were indefensible.  I'm not defending her actions, but y'all, respecting people's self-identity is a cardinal rule.

You missed my point. The top section of my post was in response to Bradley and why he was a perfect candidate of being taken advantaged of by wikileaks. He desired attention so much he was willing to do something illegal to get it.

My second point (which has bearing to how he sees his self) is the fact that he doesn't know what he believes. He even stated that. If he is unsure as to what he is, I will use the default pronoun until he is clear he is transgender.

I've been following his story. One week he is a gay man, the other week he wants to be a woman. It then cycles depending on his mood and his therapists are saying he has a personality crises and it's one of the defense team's arguments in his favor.

So, essentially, you saying "her" all the time can be offensive to Bradley as he keeps on switching what his identity is. Who knows, maybe Bradley is Bi Gender...but at this time no one has been saying anything.

I think you should know by now by my posts I am a big advocate of the gender being between the ears and not between the legs and I am an advocate for non ops and pre op's right to be a woman. I've been attacked here quite a few times for defending my views that post op women are not the only ones who has the right to be called female. Bradley doesn't know what he is. He even told his therapist that. He goes by a female name on twitter and he crossdressed a couple times to take pics but according to Bradley and his therapist, that's as far as they gotten and he is so confused with a myriad of other issues that he is not sure of his gender...this is coming from him...not the Army.

So the proper pronoun will probably be he/she or a pronoun that reflects when Bradley feels of the proper gender at the time.

Quote from: Annah on January 26, 2012, 01:24:11 AM
You missed my point. The top section of my post was in response to Bradley and why he was a perfect candidate of being taken advantaged of.

My second point (which has bearing to how he sees his self) is the fact that he doesn't know what he believes. He even stated that. If he is unsure as to what he is, I will use the default pronoun until he is clear he is transgender.

I've been following his story. One week he is a gay man, the other week he wants to be a woman. It then cycles depending on his mood and his therapists are saying he has a personality crises and it's one of the defense team's arguments in his favor.

So, essentially, you saying "her" all the time can be offensive to Bradley as he keeps on switching what his identity is. Who knows, maybe Bradley is Bi Gender...but at this time no one has been saying anything.

So the proper pronoun will probably be he/she or a pronoun that reflects when Bradley feels of the proper gender at the time.

This isn't exactly an uncommon method of progression; the only thing that's uncommon is that there's a treason scandal surrounding the whole affair.  Plenty of people "try on" a gay identity before they really understand their gender identity.  I haven't exactly heard of any switching back and forth like you seem to be insinuating.  All I know is that

Quote
I wouldn't mind going to prison for the rest of my life, or being executed so much, if it wasn't for the possibility of having pictures of me... plastered all over the world press... as boy.

doesn't sound like the kind of thing that a gay male would say.

I think the defense's idea of using this as a defense is inane, but I also think they wouldn't be using "gender identity disorder" to get her out of trouble if it were blatantly false and if Breanna were just a gay guy. 

Is this discussion going anywhere?

If not lets leave it and go back to the main thread

Quote from: Wonderdyke on January 26, 2012, 01:29:23 AM
"I wouldn't mind going to prison for the rest of my life, or being executed so much, if it wasn't for the possibility of having pictures of me... plastered all over the world press... as boy."

doesn't sound like the kind of thing that a gay male would say.

I think the defense's idea of using this as a defense is inane, but I also think they wouldn't be using "gender identity disorder" to get her out of trouble if it were blatantly false and if Breanna were just a gay guy.

Actually, I think it's a lot deeper than that.

Bradley has had a very troubled past. I wouldn't pin it all on Gender Identity Dysphoria. GID doesn't typically cause people to threaten their step-mothers with a butcher knife or punch a girl in the face or end up living in their truck because all of their family members are scared to death to take him into their homes.

My biggest question is not whether Bradley is a boy or a girl but how in the hell did the Army allow this person to be enlisted?

I am not just saying this to say it. Even his gender therapist said the same thing.

Quote from: Annah on January 26, 2012, 01:36:09 AM
Actually, I think it's a lot deeper than that.

Bradley has had a very troubled past. I wouldn't pin it all on Gender Identity Dysphoria. GID doesn't typically cause people to threaten their step-mothers with a butcher knife or punch a girl in the face or end up living in their truck because all of their family members are scared to death to take him into their homes.

I am not just saying this to say it. Even his gender therapist said the same thing.

I'm more baffled at how you think they cannot coexist.  Clearly Manning has issues with her mental health, but I don't see why she isn't allowed to identify as female, those issues notwithstanding.

Quote from: Cindy James on January 26, 2012, 01:32:43 AM
Is this discussion going anywhere?

If not lets leave it and go back to the main thread

Actually, I think it has a lot to do with the thread. One of the biggest parts of Bradley's legal matters involves the state of his gender and if the defense can use this to their side.

Also, it's a big deal for transgenders as Bradley sometimes identifies as transgender and right now he doesn't represent transgender in it's better light....considering the nature of Bradley's crime.

Quote from: Wonderdyke on January 26, 2012, 01:40:50 AM
I'm more baffled at how you think they cannot coexist.  Clearly Manning has issues with her mental health, but I don't see why she isn't allowed to identify as female, those issues notwithstanding.

Im not saying they cannot co exist. What I am saying (as well as his OWN therapist) is that his outlook on being a girl can be the result of other mental instabilities in his life and him feeling like a girl could be a result from his other mental illnesses.

Quote from: Annah on January 26, 2012, 01:36:09 AM
Actually, I think it's a lot deeper than that.

Bradley has had a very troubled past.  I wouldn't pin it all on Gender Identity Dysphoria. GID doesn't typically cause people to threaten their step-mothers with a butcher knife or punch a girl in the face or end up living in their truck because all of their family members are scared to death to take him into their homes.

My biggest question is not whether Bradley is a boy or a girl but how in the hell did the Army allow this person to be enlisted?

I am not just saying this to say it. Even his gender therapist said the same thing.

Kia Ora Annah,

::) And all this info comes from none other than "the sources who are out to crucify him!"

Metta Zenda :)

Quote from: Annah on January 26, 2012, 01:46:22 AM
Im not saying they cannot co exist. What I am saying (as well as his OWN therapist) is that his outlook on being a girl can be the result of other mental instabilities in his life and him feeling like a girl could be a result from his other mental illnesses.

Like.......I guess that's possible??  I just don't really think that the therapist does or can know better than the patient.  Maybe that's just my own skepticism of mental health professionals that's come from my experiences with them, though.

Quote from: Wonderdyke on January 25, 2012, 12:44:59 PM
Literal lol @ consistent misgendering.

So much for respect for identity, huh?  I guess it's only ok if the person isn't around to complain.

The reason for the misgendering is because Bradley/Brianna hasn't specified themselves how they'd like to be referred to. The evidence that they have GID was taken from chat logs and private conversations.

Quote from: Zenda on January 26, 2012, 01:47:42 AM
Kia Ora Annah,

::) And all this info comes from none other than "the sources who are out to crucify him!"

Metta Zenda :)

not quite.

Most of this came from his defense team.....not the prosecutor.

Quote from: Annah on January 26, 2012, 01:36:09 AM
My biggest question is not whether Bradley is a boy or a girl but how in the hell did the Army allow this person to be enlisted?

Having spent 10 yrs in the Military, I found myself asking that question a lot... how did "that" person...and even about myself. :laugh:

I am glad to see that this topic has generated this much interest, and Wonderdyke  raising the question of why are we "misgendering" Manning? I see no reason not to accept Manning's being Transgendered, it is not "debunked" by his/her actions, but regardless they broke the law and gave away Classified information that was not their's to give. And the Army shares blame here also for not taking action against Manning prior to this incident. Was Manning a victim of "Catch-22"?

Kia Ora

"how in the hell did the Army allow this person to be enlisted?"

::) It does make one wonder....

http://rt.com/news/afghanistan-us-marines-urinate-621/ (http://rt.com/news/afghanistan-us-marines-urinate-621/)

Metta Zenda :)

Quote from: Annah on January 26, 2012, 01:36:09 AM
My biggest question is not whether Bradley is a boy or a girl but how in the hell did the Army allow this person to be enlisted?

Reminds me of this dialogue from the 1970 film MASH:

Hotlips O'Houlihan: I wonder how such a degenerated person ever reached a position of authority in the Army Medical Corps.
Father Mulcahy: He was drafted.

Quote from: SandraJane on January 26, 2012, 10:20:03 PM
Having spent 10 yrs in the Military, I found myself asking that question a lot... how did "that" person...and even about myself. :laugh:

I am glad to see that this topic has generated this much interest, and Wonderdyke  raising the question of why are we "misgendering" Manning? I see no reason not to accept Manning's being Transgendered, it is not "debunked" by his/her actions, but regardless they broke the law and gave away Classified information that was not their's to give. And the Army shares blame here also for not taking action against Manning prior to this incident. Was Manning a victim of "Catch-22"?

"Victim"?

A "Catch 22" is a no-win situation.  From the novel:

There was only one catch and that was Catch-22, which specified that a concern for one's safety in the face of dangers that were real and immediate was the process of a rational mind. Orr was crazy and could be grounded. All he had to do was ask; and as soon as he did, he would no longer be crazy and would have to fly more missions. Orr would be crazy to fly more missions and sane if he didn't, but if he were sane he had to fly them. If he flew them he was crazy and didn't have to; but if he didn't want to he was sane and had to. Yossarian was moved very deeply by the absolute simplicity of this clause of Catch-22 and let out a respectful whistle.

The character "Orr" had an option - he could have not reported for duty at all and accepted the consequences of his actions.  Manning had the choice of not leaking classified materials.  One always has options.

Quote from: Jamie D on January 27, 2012, 03:00:36 AM
Reminds me of this dialogue from the 1970 film MASH:

Hotlips O'Houlihan: I wonder how such a degenerated person ever reached a position of authority in the Army Medical Corps.
Father Mulcahy: He was drafted.

I enlisted in the Navy during the Vietnam war.  I didn't have to due to my birthday draft was #300 out of 366 plus they had stopped the draft for my year (1952).  Others I knew were drafted in the Army, they had no choice.  As with the Marines urinating on the corpses, worst things has happened in all wars we have been involved on both sides .  Listening to my nephews, the worst things are done is what the insurgents do to the locals, their own kind in Iraq and Afghanistan. 
  A lot of things that happened during WWII and Korea was not said until decades later.  Vietnam was the first televised war, the reporting still restricted.  Iraq-Afghanistan, too transparent for all sides (there are more than two here in both arenas).  Everybody has a digital camera and can send anything shot with it anywhere at the speed of light.  War is hell and anybody who goes into war sane and proper end up doing this stuff because they are constantly exposed to what the enemy has done to their comrades and with this war, what '->-bleeped-<-' the enemy do to to their own kind! 
  Joelene

Quote from: Jamie D on January 27, 2012, 03:13:48 AM
"Victim"?

A "Catch 22" is a no-win situation.  From the novel:


The character "Orr" had an option - he could have not reported for duty at all and accepted the consequences of his actions.  Manning had the choice of not leaking classified materials.  One always has options.

And remember that Orr escaped to Sweden, having defeated the Catch 22 clause! But notice how regardless of what Manning did, he was always put back in the game by his superiors...a common military flaw, not enough qualified or competent personnel.

Yes it was his choice, but the military believes in "ownership"...you belong to US! :laugh: