Why do people think Chelsea Manning is a hero?

[psychedelicsoul]

http://www.quora.com/Is-PFC-Bradley-Manning-a-hero-or-a-villain-Why
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/ju...bradley-manning-sentencing-testimony-20130731

The truth is all these people supporting Chelsea Manning are being led very astray. This man has committed treason against this country and potentially endangered the lives of US soldiers. Worst of all he has the nerve to ask for a sex change from the same government he committed treason against. I don't care about your opinions on the war... Treason isn't acceptable. Leaking military information isn't acceptable.
Do you realize terrorists use the internet too? So when we leak out secrets like that, they get in the hands of the enemy. The military doesn't release everything they do because it would be impractical and stupid. In the 1880s, this dude would be strung up and hung for this.

He's not a hero and so many liberals/libertarians think he is. This is a result of people who know nothing about the military and don't care.

And I generally agree with libertarians on most issues, but not on the issue of national security and with this guy. I even heard some real stupid shit saying that Caitlyn Jenner should come out and support him because he's her "Trans-sister".... um...
Caitlyn Jenner has not committed treason against the US. (Except working with the Kardashians) Stop equating people based on arbitrary shit. Being trans doesn't make Caitlyn Jenner anything like him. I don't think he's in jail for being trans.

 

[Obyron]

The fact that you equated liberals with libertarians just blew my mind.

Display some historical perspective for me. Was Daniel Ellsberg committing treason when he leaked the Pentagon Papers? Was Senator Mike Gravel committing treason when he read them into the Congressional record?

Let's de-contextualize this discussion and take it entirely back to first principles and ignore that your post is more than 50% frothing about transgendered people.

1) Do you believe that there is any situation in which violating the laws of the country would be the right thing to do?
2) If not, can you explain why the government has codified laws that grant whistleblower protection to people who come forward with damning information, and that those laws protect both the public and private sectors? And not only that, but why those laws (specifically Sarbanes-Oxley) create situations where potential whistleblowers are legally required to come forward with information, and that their failure to do so can itself be a crime? It would seem the government has a compelling interest in protecting whistleblowers.
3) Do you think it is possible for a situation to exist where the government itself is breaking the law at high levels, and yet is willing to use other laws as a muzzle to silence would-be critics?
4) If yes, can you allow that there might come a time where the law itself has become your enemy, and so the only rational course of action is to pursue extra-legal means to shift the discussion by moving it into the court of public perception? If your answer to this is no, then can you explain what better avenues would be available in that situation?

If you can work your way through those things, you can easily see why there are people who would think someone like Chelsea Manning is a hero, and you simply disagree with them on this specific case. In that case it's incumbent on you to make a counter-argument, preferably on the merits of the discussion itself and not on LGBT issues.

 

[psychedelicsoul]

The fact that you equated liberals with libertarians just blew my mind.

I didn't. This is just one point where both agree. I know they're nothing alike. I generally destest liberals, and mostly support libertarians. But there are times where I don't like either

Display some historical perspective for me. Was Daniel Ellsberg committing treason when he leaked the Pentagon Papers? Was Senator Mike Gravel committing treason when he read them into the Congressional record?

Did they endanger American Soldiers when they did it?

Let's de-contextualize this discussion and take it entirely back to first principles and ignore that your post is more than 50% frothing about transgendered people.

How?

1) Do you believe that there is any situation in which violating the laws of the country would be the right thing to do?
2) If not, can you explain why the government has codified laws that grant whistleblower protection to people who come forward with damning information, and that those laws protect both the public and private sectors? And not only that, but why those laws (specifically Sarbanes-Oxley) create situations where potential whistleblowers are legally required to come forward with information, and that their failure to do so can itself be a crime? It would seem the government has a compelling interest in protecting whistleblowers.

You didn't read the article I posted. I'm all for whistleblowing. However, what he did endangered soldiers.

3

) Do you think it is possible for a situation to exist where the government itself is breaking the law at high levels, and yet is willing to use other laws as a muzzle to silence would-be critics?

Of course

4) If yes, can you allow that there might come a time where the law itself has become your enemy, and so the only rational course of action is to pursue extra-legal means to shift the discussion by moving it into the court of public perception? If your answer to this is no, then can you explain what better avenues would be available in that situation?

If you can work your way through those things, you can easily see why there are people who would think someone like Chelsea Manning is a hero, and you simply disagree with them on this specific case. In that case it's incumbent on you to make a counter-argument, preferably on the merits of the discussion itself and not on LGBT issues.

I think Edward Snowden did something like that. However, I don't think he endangered American soldiers

As for the LGBT stuff, I was reacting to a pic I saw posted on the facebook page of the Libertarian Party that suggested Caitlyn Jenner needs to support Chelsea Manning. I thought that was stupid so I referenced it. That's it...
Also I didn't argue because what I wanted to say was said better by the articles I posted from a soldier and from a former general of the army. I think their word is more important than mine

 

[spacejunk]

Manning hasnt threatened my country, or any country.
Whistleblowers deserve respect and protection, especially when it comes to revealing war crimes and atrocities.

 

[Phil.McKeer]

Manning & Snowden = Heroes of the Republic.

One day in the distant future I predict they will receive a Congressional or Presidential pardon.

 

[WhiteRabbitIsland]

Obyron! Sorry new to this forum but read your explaination about Tramadol being an opioid not and opiate. Can you explain this in laymen's terms? Specifically I would like to know if Tramadol would show up on an opiate drug test. Or any drug test. Thank you!

 

[Cosmic Trigger]

Obyron! Sorry new to this forum but read your explaination about Tramadol being an opioid not and opiate. Can you explain this in laymen's terms? Specifically I would like to know if Tramadol would show up on an opiate drug test. Or any drug test. Thank you!

Wrong thread dude. I know things can be confusing for a newb.

 

[David Wooderson]

http://www.quora.com/Is-PFC-Bradley-Manning-a-hero-or-a-villain-Why
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/ju...bradley-manning-sentencing-testimony-20130731

The truth is all these people supporting Chelsea Manning are being led very astray. This man has committed treason against this country and potentially endangered the lives of US soldiers. Worst of all he has the nerve to ask for a sex change from the same government he committed treason against. I don't care about your opinions on the war... Treason isn't acceptable. Leaking military information isn't acceptable.
Do you realize terrorists use the internet too? So when we leak out secrets like that, they get in the hands of the enemy. The military doesn't release everything they do because it would be impractical and stupid. In the 1880s, this dude would be strung up and hung for this.

He's not a hero and so many liberals/libertarians think he is. This is a result of people who know nothing about the military and don't care.

And I generally agree with libertarians on most issues, but not on the issue of national security and with this guy. I even heard some real stupid shit saying that Caitlyn Jenner should come out and support him because he's her "Trans-sister".... um...
Caitlyn Jenner has not committed treason against the US. (Except working with the Kardashians) Stop equating people based on arbitrary shit. Being trans doesn't make Caitlyn Jenner anything like him. I don't think he's in jail for being trans.

The fact that you can steal from the most powerful military on the planet, and then be comfortable and trust your jailers so as much that you would let them preform a sex change operation...and expect it to work out to your satisfaction!!!

AMAZING!!!

This is miles beyond "the line" in my book, tolerance is breeding some pretty nasty situations that will have lots of collateral damage.

In this one case I think that his crime did more for society than it harmed, but if everyone just decided what they were doing wasn't cool and resorted to espionage than the world would be a very messed up place.

 

[JessFR]

People love to throw around the word treason. The founding fathers were careful in their definition of treason because of it's misuse as to mean anything the state doesn't like.

So treason is the only crime defined in the constitution, as I recall it's defined as knowingly and with intent giving aid or comfort to an active enemy of the United States. If that's the case, I don't think you can legitimately claim manning as a traitor.

 

[amzam]

Chelsea Manning was a very troubled, mentally unstable person with a very low rank and a ton of access to very sensitive information.

The answer to the situation that she released a lot of information is to prosecute the hell out of her, vilify her, and call for more punishment?

I don't think so. I think her having unrestricted access to so much info at such a low rank demonstrates systemic pronlems. I think as she roved through info not relevant to her job alarms should have sounded. The great big trove of data she made off with was a criminal matter for her, but was more a demonstration of utter, systemic incompetence in the way classified information was accessed and readily shared.

Chelsea took an oath and knew or should have known her actions were criminal and subject to severe punishment. However, the bigger problem was several paygrades above her. Focusing on her is ignoring the fact that there was severe defects in screening personnel and monitoring systems. Chelsea's willful acts should have been shut down near immediately, and some high ranking unnamed others should have some accountability in what happened.

 

[JessFR]

I somewhat agree with you. It weems very troubling to me that such junior personnel have access to so much classified information, seemingly unneeded for the performance of their duties. I wonder how much of this is a deliberate distraction to distract from that issue. Focusing on some nobody, vilifying them thus distracting from noticing that it seems surprising it took this long for this to happen.