4 ms·

>Only those with tremendous conscious, like Snowden or Manning, step up in the face of odds like that. It's unfair to group Snowden and Manning together. Snowd

>Only those with tremendous conscious, like Snowden or Manning, step up in the face of odds like that. It's unfair to group Snowden and Manning together. Snowden made a very serious, calculated ethical decision to release specific documentation that he felt needed to be in the public forum as reliable, confirmed information of governmental surveillance activity (not speculation or navel-gazing). Manning dumped as much confidential data as he could download because he didn't like the Army anymore. Snowden was motivated by "tremendous conscience" and Manning was motivated by petty revenge.

JupiterMoon 11y ago
> Snowden was motivated by "tremendous conscience" and Manning was motivated by petty revenge. I put it to you that Snowden remained a free(ish) man who was able to communicate his story with the world whilst Manning was locked in isolation and was unable to make public appearances or give interviews. Therefore the 'message' (as the PR people think of it) during the critical time period following leaks and naming of the whistle-blower was controlled by the US government. I put it to you that this may have influenced your and my and others opinions of them both.
- cookiecaper 11y ago
  That's definitely a valid point.
  - calgoo 11y ago
    From someone in Europe who don't follow mainline news, there was never any issues with what Manning did, at least not from me and the people i talked to. The amount of war crimes that were and are committed by individuals in the military and are covered up and almost encouraged are worse then a few undercover personnel in danger and some failed missions. I actually see that as a good outcome, if that actually happened. That this trade agreement is classified as secret, is just a huge joke. I understand why they are trying to do so... The idea that Corp. Lawyer A is in a lawsuit today against Corp. Lawyer B, and with Corp. Lawyer C acting as judge (who yesterday was in a suit against Corp. Lawyer A). Who even thinks of this?????? Was this a bet by a few drunk 0.1% guys to see if we are stupid enough to let it pass? Im amazed at the audacity of even trying to claim that this is even reasonable or needed. And that is just the process... With these rules, you could basically eliminate ANY worker rights, ANY nature protection law, and ANY laws that are created to keep corporations in check. Its scary thinking of what legal BS could be added to these laws that we are not even allowed to see until 2 years after it has been completed.
  - jklinger410 11y ago
    also *she
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
      - dragonwriter 11y ago
        > I'm not that familiar with the details, but at the time of the leaks, Manning identified as a "he", no? Manning was certainly publicly identified that way at the time; as I understand Manning's gender identity disorder was diagnosed by a military psychologist either prior to or during the same time the leaks were occurring, and Manning also declared to a supervisor the fact that she self-identified as female during the same period in which the leaks were occurring, so, I don't think one can say that Manning identified as male at the time without substantial qualification.
fineman 11y ago
Why are you a liar? Ignorance or malevolence? Or are you willingly a propaganda sock-puppet? Because if you aren't, you have a duty to educate yourself before you speak about things of this importance. [Re: Downvotes] - Is being called out upsetting? Imagine someone being put in jail by your lies. That's a lot more upsetting. [Re: Re: Downvotes] - Seriously. This isn't Uber vs Lyft, this is knowingly repeating false information to justify keeping someone in jail for treason. That's just steps under lying about someone to drum up support to get them killed. Does asking if a sock-puppet is a sock-puppet hurt HN more than allowing sock-puppets like that to use HN as a platform for hate? If it was Russia's propaganda machine, or a beloved hero like Nelson Mandela, we'd react strongly, but when it's our propaganda machine we give it a pass. > http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/feb/01/bradley-manning-wikileaks ... A dispute had arisen concerning 15 Iraqi detainees held by the national Iraqi police force on the grounds that they had been printing "anti-Iraqi literature". The police were refusing to work with the US forces over the matter, and Manning's job was to investigate and find out who the "bad guys" were. He got hold of the leaflet that the detained men were distributing and had it translated into English. He was astonished to find that it was in fact a scholarly critique against the Iraqi prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, that tracked the corruption rife within his cabinet. "I immediately took that information and ran to the officer to explain what was going on," Manning later explained. "He didn't want to hear any of it … he told me to shut up and explain how we could assist the [Iraqi] police in finding MORE detainees." ... The USA was cooperating in arresting innocent Iraqi civilians (and subjecting them to brutal torture when arrested). This is illegal. Under civilian and military law, illegal orders must be refused and reported. Manning had a legal duty to report the illegal orders. If Manning had not reported this, it would be a crime. Being told to ignore it doesn't change that. If you're pissed off about criminals ruining the reputation and effectiveness of the USA Armed Forces, and you should be, you need to be mad at the officers and soldiers and leaders who committed the crimes not the messenger who told you about it.
- cookiecaper 11y ago
  That doesn't seem to contradict anything I said. He was mad at the Army, so leaked a bunch of classified documents. To any extent which his leaks treat Iraqi police and/or U.S. forces detaining political prisoners, it is incidental -- the document dump was not discriminatory. Manning is not a whistleblower over events of illegal detention. We already know that this wasn't Manning's motive for leaking docs anyway; he was mad that the Army did not respect his desires to live as a transsexual and that it disciplined him for tardiness and other job failures. [0] http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/12/bradley-manning-court-martial-sentencing http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/12/bradley-manning...
digler999 11y ago
he leaked Collateral Murder because he didn't like the Army ?

JupiterMoon 11y ago

> Snowden was motivated by "tremendous conscience" and Manning was motivated by petty revenge. I put it to you that Snowden remained a free(ish) man who was able to communicate his story with the world whilst Manning was locked in isolation and was unable to make public appearances or give interviews. Therefore the 'message' (as the PR people think of it) during the critical time period following leaks and naming of the whistle-blower was controlled by the US government. I put it to you that this may have influenced your and my and others opinions of them both.

cookiecaper 11y ago
That's definitely a valid point.
- calgoo 11y ago
  From someone in Europe who don't follow mainline news, there was never any issues with what Manning did, at least not from me and the people i talked to. The amount of war crimes that were and are committed by individuals in the military and are covered up and almost encouraged are worse then a few undercover personnel in danger and some failed missions. I actually see that as a good outcome, if that actually happened. That this trade agreement is classified as secret, is just a huge joke. I understand why they are trying to do so... The idea that Corp. Lawyer A is in a lawsuit today against Corp. Lawyer B, and with Corp. Lawyer C acting as judge (who yesterday was in a suit against Corp. Lawyer A). Who even thinks of this?????? Was this a bet by a few drunk 0.1% guys to see if we are stupid enough to let it pass? Im amazed at the audacity of even trying to claim that this is even reasonable or needed. And that is just the process... With these rules, you could basically eliminate ANY worker rights, ANY nature protection law, and ANY laws that are created to keep corporations in check. Its scary thinking of what legal BS could be added to these laws that we are not even allowed to see until 2 years after it has been completed.
- jklinger410 11y ago
  also *she
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
    - dragonwriter 11y ago
      > I'm not that familiar with the details, but at the time of the leaks, Manning identified as a "he", no? Manning was certainly publicly identified that way at the time; as I understand Manning's gender identity disorder was diagnosed by a military psychologist either prior to or during the same time the leaks were occurring, and Manning also declared to a supervisor the fact that she self-identified as female during the same period in which the leaks were occurring, so, I don't think one can say that Manning identified as male at the time without substantial qualification.

fineman 11y ago

Why are you a liar? Ignorance or malevolence? Or are you willingly a propaganda sock-puppet? Because if you aren't, you have a duty to educate yourself before you speak about things of this importance. [Re: Downvotes] - Is being called out upsetting? Imagine someone being put in jail by your lies. That's a lot more upsetting. [Re: Re: Downvotes] - Seriously. This isn't Uber vs Lyft, this is knowingly repeating false information to justify keeping someone in jail for treason. That's just steps under lying about someone to drum up support to get them killed. Does asking if a sock-puppet is a sock-puppet hurt HN more than allowing sock-puppets like that to use HN as a platform for hate? If it was Russia's propaganda machine, or a beloved hero like Nelson Mandela, we'd react strongly, but when it's our propaganda machine we give it a pass. > http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/feb/01/bradley-manning-wikileaks ... A dispute had arisen concerning 15 Iraqi detainees held by the national Iraqi police force on the grounds that they had been printing "anti-Iraqi literature". The police were refusing to work with the US forces over the matter, and Manning's job was to investigate and find out who the "bad guys" were. He got hold of the leaflet that the detained men were distributing and had it translated into English. He was astonished to find that it was in fact a scholarly critique against the Iraqi prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, that tracked the corruption rife within his cabinet. "I immediately took that information and ran to the officer to explain what was going on," Manning later explained. "He didn't want to hear any of it … he told me to shut up and explain how we could assist the [Iraqi] police in finding MORE detainees." ... The USA was cooperating in arresting innocent Iraqi civilians (and subjecting them to brutal torture when arrested). This is illegal. Under civilian and military law, illegal orders must be refused and reported. Manning had a legal duty to report the illegal orders. If Manning had not reported this, it would be a crime. Being told to ignore it doesn't change that. If you're pissed off about criminals ruining the reputation and effectiveness of the USA Armed Forces, and you should be, you need to be mad at the officers and soldiers and leaders who committed the crimes not the messenger who told you about it.

cookiecaper 11y ago
That doesn't seem to contradict anything I said. He was mad at the Army, so leaked a bunch of classified documents. To any extent which his leaks treat Iraqi police and/or U.S. forces detaining political prisoners, it is incidental -- the document dump was not discriminatory. Manning is not a whistleblower over events of illegal detention. We already know that this wasn't Manning's motive for leaking docs anyway; he was mad that the Army did not respect his desires to live as a transsexual and that it disciplined him for tardiness and other job failures. [0] http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/12/bradley-manning-court-martial-sentencing http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/12/bradley-manning...

digler999 11y ago

he leaked Collateral Murder because he didn't like the Army ?