Guest Posted August 23, 2013 Report Share Posted August 23, 2013 Oh this bull about going through the proper channels again? Oh, I'm sorry. Has it been discussed? I'd no idea. I guess it was okay that he gave 700000 secret US documents to Wikileaks then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 23, 2013 Report Share Posted August 23, 2013 An accountant in a public company uncovers fraud and bring it to light. In doing so she also compromised the privacy of some of the employess. She would still be awarded. Again, I fail to see the connection. If said public employee went on to give out all the HR details of the other employees, she probably wouldn't be. How come people find it so easy to differentiate between things that means nothing, like terrorist colour, and can't differentiate between things that mean a great deal, like war crimes and random secret government documents? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted August 23, 2013 Report Share Posted August 23, 2013 Oh, I'm sorry. Has it been discussed? I'd no idea. I guess it was okay that he gave 700000 secret US documents to Wikileaks then. We had discussed it in the Snowden threat that going through proper channels is more of a detriment to the whisleblower than leaking the docs and dealing with the aftermath. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 23, 2013 Report Share Posted August 23, 2013 We had discussed it in the Snowden threat that going through proper channels is more of a detriment to the whisleblower than leaking the docs and dealing with the aftermath. Fair enough. I did say that in a previous post. Rubbish! If he'd found evidence of war crimes, taken it upstairs, then decided to blow the whistle on it because nothing was being done, I would agree with you. But why give away documents about which you know nothing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted August 23, 2013 Report Share Posted August 23, 2013 Of course. We know that all of those poor people in Iraq and Afghanistan are all terrorists or wannabe terrorists. Why should we wait for them to actually try something before we kill them? They're not just terrorists they're brown terrorists and they speak funny. Anyone who can't grasp the difference between exposing domestic crimes and crimes against brown terrorists who speak funny, probably thinks this little gender dysphoria is natural too. As far as I've seen, the only ones here claiming "all of those poor people in Iraq and Afghanistan are all terrorists or wannabe terrorists" or condescendingly and ignorantly referring to them as "brown terrorists who speak funny" are the two of you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted August 23, 2013 Report Share Posted August 23, 2013 (edited) But why give away documents about which you know nothing? Mm, yes; that was my thought, too. A whistleblower says or exposes what's necessary to show others what's going on in private. The Manning thing is analagous to the aforementioned accountant dumping every one of the company's documents on a street corner and saying "Look! They're committing faud!" [ed.: correct] Edited August 23, 2013 by g_bambino Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted August 23, 2013 Report Share Posted August 23, 2013 (edited) Mm, yes; that was my thought, too. A whistleblower says or exposes what's necessary to show others what's going on in private. The Snowden thing is analagous to the aforementioned accountant dumping every one of the company's documents on a street corner and saying "Look! They're committing faud!" Actually Snowden has been very selective so far... As for the manning documents wikileaks offered the US a chance to redact any information that jeapardized active operations and personnel, or posed a real threat to national security. They declined, so clearly they didnt think any of it mattered too much. Edited August 23, 2013 by dre Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted August 23, 2013 Report Share Posted August 23, 2013 Actually Snowden has been very selective so far... Er, I meant Manning. Sorry. (I've fixed my post to correct the error.) It doesn't matter what Wikileaks did. If Manning released tens of thousands of documents and files, he couldn't have been trying to reveal anything in particular, just hoping something would be found by others in amongst all the data. He's therefore not really a whistleblower and thus no real hero. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted August 23, 2013 Report Share Posted August 23, 2013 It doesn't matter what Wikileaks did. If Manning released tens of thousands of documents and files, he couldn't have been trying to reveal anything in particular, just hoping something would be found by others in amongst all the data. He's therefore not really a whistleblower and thus no real hero. Well said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BC_chick Posted August 23, 2013 Report Share Posted August 23, 2013 Again, I fail to see the connection. If said public employee went on to give out all the HR details of the other employees, she probably wouldn't be. How come people find it so easy to differentiate between things that means nothing, like terrorist colour, and can't differentiate between things that mean a great deal, like war crimes and random secret government documents? I addressed your point in my post which you quoted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BC_chick Posted August 23, 2013 Report Share Posted August 23, 2013 As far as I've seen, the only ones here claiming "all of those poor people in Iraq and Afghanistan are all terrorists or wannabe terrorists" or condescendingly and ignorantly referring to them as "brown terrorists who speak funny" are the two of you. Oh, I forgot, you never pick up nuances, you're strictly literal. In any case, you totally missed the point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted August 23, 2013 Report Share Posted August 23, 2013 Oh, I forgot, you never pick up nuances, you're strictly literal. In any case, you totally missed the point. No, it's you who missed the point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkman Posted August 23, 2013 Author Report Share Posted August 23, 2013 Er, I meant Manning. Sorry. (I've fixed my post to correct the error.) It doesn't matter what Wikileaks did. If Manning released tens of thousands of documents and files, he couldn't have been trying to reveal anything in particular, just hoping something would be found by others in amongst all the data. He's therefore not really a whistleblower and thus no real hero. Good post. The thing that gets me is why he volunteered and applied to join the army in the first place. Now that he realizes they don't put up with that kind of stupidity in the army, he wants a sex change and a pardon from the president. Good luck Charlie! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 23, 2013 Report Share Posted August 23, 2013 Good post. The thing that gets me is why he volunteered and applied to join the army in the first place. Now that he realizes they don't put up with that kind of stupidity in the army, he wants a sex change and a pardon from the president. Good luck Charlie! Charlene Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReeferMadness Posted August 24, 2013 Report Share Posted August 24, 2013 No, he's in prison because she deserves to be. There is a duty to expose war crimes, and if he had just done that she would not be in prison. Why do you suppose he gave away thousands of documents as well? Gee, that's a tough one. Maybe because the people in the "proper channels" don't want to know about war crimes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 24, 2013 Report Share Posted August 24, 2013 Gee, that's a tough one. Maybe because the people in the "proper channels" don't want to know about war crimes? That's why he gave away thousands of documents as well? Seems an odd reaction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted August 24, 2013 Report Share Posted August 24, 2013 Rubbish! If he'd found evidence of war crimes, taken it upstairs, then decided to blow the whistle on it because nothing was being done, I would agree with you. But he also gave thousands of unread secret documents to some weasel half way around the planet without a clue what was on them. He's a pratt, and he deserves to go to jail. 35 years might be a bit excessive, but the consensus seems be he'll be out in less than ten. Should consider herself lucky. Exactly. Most of what she released was unread. Anyways it's a sad and pathetic false choice of the pro-Chelsea group to think you either have to 100% agree with Manning or your some kind of authoritarian state lover. It's especially rich coming from their ilk who believe in strong centralized government, intruding on everyone's lives, on what kind if cars people can build or own, what kind of toilets, light bulbs, sugar in your food, smoking, drinking, how much of your own money your "allowed" to keep each year, carbon dioxide and water vapour in the air, etc, etc, etc. The list is literally endless of their pro-government intrusion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted August 24, 2013 Report Share Posted August 24, 2013 I have to commend you, Shady, for using the proper pronoun and referring to her as Chelsea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted August 25, 2013 Report Share Posted August 25, 2013 Thanks! Anyways, indiscriminate leaking of classified information isn't whistle blowing. It's irresponsible. That's why she deserves to be in prison, and that's why her situation is different than Snowden's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted August 25, 2013 Report Share Posted August 25, 2013 Thanks!So do you think Manning belongs in a women's prison? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted August 25, 2013 Report Share Posted August 25, 2013 So do you think Manning belongs in a women's prison? Nope. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted August 25, 2013 Report Share Posted August 25, 2013 Nope.So you don't really think he's suddenly a "she?" I know I don't. I certainly respect his right to go that route if so desired, but I don't think one should be able to go from serving as a male in the military to serving as a female in prison - when absolutely nothing has changed; and until things have changed, he's still a "he" regardless of what he feels like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted August 25, 2013 Report Share Posted August 25, 2013 So you don't really think he's suddenly a "she?" I know I don't. I certainly respect his right to go that route if so desired, but I don't think one should be able to go from serving as a male in the military to serving as a female in prison - when absolutely nothing has changed; and until things have changed, he's still a "he" regardless of what he feels like. True, but it really annoys the pro-Manning types. However, I'll start referring to him as he again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted August 25, 2013 Report Share Posted August 25, 2013 True, but it really annoys the pro-Manning types. However, I'll start referring to him as he again.I was just curious about your thoughts. His name hasn't even been legally changed yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted August 25, 2013 Report Share Posted August 25, 2013 I was just curious about your thoughts. His name hasn't even been legally changed yet. True. A name change wouldn't be all that difficult. He/she sounds like a bit confused and troubled though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.