Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Bradley Manning gets 35 years

Options
1…34689…16

Comments

  • Options
    #152
    P_1
    Registered Users Posts: 14,681 ✭✭✭✭P_1


    So if the appeal fails does that mean that Manning will have to serve her sentence in Leavenworth while she transitions? I can't imagine that being particularly pleasent for her after everything else she has gone through.


  • Options
    #153
    Andy-Pandy
    Registered Users Posts: 1,848 ✭✭✭Andy-Pandy


    If i have known about Manning gender issue for months i'm pretty sure that the US authorities have known about it for much longer. During the trial her army shrink pointed to the massive mental pressure that she was under and her gender issues, which she had tried to bring to the attention of her superior officers, would have played a massive part of this. Being transgender in the US army must be a serious head****.

    I believe Manning will be seen by future generations as the hero/heroine that she is. It is heartbreaking to think that she could have to serve the full 35 year sentence, i hope that a presidential pardon is given.


  • Options
    #154
    Links234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,944 ✭✭✭✭Links234


    My name is URL wrote: »
    Why? People risk their very lives trying to escape from prisons. How come it's such a stretch to believe that someone might have some surgery done in order to escape what could very well be a very difficult and dangerous 35 years for them?

    I'm not sure you appreciate just how grave Mannings situation is. He's going to be in prison alongside the kind of men that he brought great shame and public hatred upon.. men he has shown to the world as murderers of innocent civilians.

    As I said though, I don't think he's lying about his gender issues given that they've been known about since before he was even first apprehended. I just wouldn't rule out that he's attempting to make his time in prison a little bit easier by talking about it and acting upon it now.

    As mentioned, it's nigh-on impossible for a transgender inmate in the US to get transferred to a different prison, and it's also discounting the extremely harsh treatment of trans people in prisons, of which there are many examples of rape, sexual assault and physical assault from other inmates and staff. Someone thinking they'd get an easier time by pretending to be trans would be in for a shock, because it would be a guarantee that things would get far worse for them. It's also discounting that it's sometimes nearly impossible to even get medical treatment for trans inmates in the US, depending on the state. This is pretty much conspiracy theory level conjecture

    In Manning's case, you're really barking up the wrong trea because of the statements her lawyer has made: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/22/us-usa-wikileaks-manning-idUSBRE97J0JI20130822
    Asked if Manning wanted to be sent to a women's prison, Coombs said no.
    Coombs said he was not worried about Manning's safety in a military prison since inmates there were first-time offenders who wanted to complete their sentences and get out.

    Experts generally view military prisons as safer than civilian prisons since the inmates are accustomed to hierarchy and discipline.


  • Options
    #155
    Son Of A Vidic
    Registered Users Posts: 32,370 ✭✭✭✭Son Of A Vidic


    Tombo2001 wrote: »
    Manning is apparently a candidate for the Nobel Peace Prize, which Obama won a few years back.....

    Ah yes, Obama, the man who won the Nobel Peace Prize for doing nothing.


  • Options
    #156
    efb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    That peace prize award that year was bs


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #157
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Corvus Maximus wrote: »
    Ah yes, Obama, the man who won the Nobel Peace Prize for doing nothing.


    He was successfully not George Bush. How many of us can say that?


  • Options
    #158
    karma_
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,798 ✭✭✭karma_


    Corvus Maximus wrote: »
    Ah yes, Obama, the man who won the Nobel Peace Prize for doing nothing.

    That's not completely fair. He got it for the solitary reason he was not Bush.

    I do agree it was totally undeserved and has undermined the Prize itself. I wonder can it be revoked?


    /edit

    Nodin beat me to the punch!


  • Options
    #159
    efb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    Forgot we (EU) won it last year... Lol


  • Options
    #160
    karma_
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,798 ✭✭✭karma_


    efb wrote: »
    Forgot we (EU) won it last year... Lol

    A little known fact, but I won the Time person of the year in 2006!!


  • Options
    #161
    Wacker The Attacker
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,473 ✭✭✭Wacker The Attacker


    humanji wrote: »
    I wouldn't really classify Manning as a whistleblower. He released a shed load of information without fully knowing what it contained. Any whistles that were blown were purely coincidental.

    All in all he just comes across as a guy who isn't the sharpest, and who is being used as a scapegoat by Assange and the US government.


    What does Assange have to gain by hanging Bradley Manning out to dry?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #162
    efb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    karma_ wrote: »
    A little known fact, but I won the Time person of the year in 2006!!

    I think you'll find, I won!


  • Options
    #163
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    I'm Time's 'Person of the Year 2006' and so is my wife.


  • Options
    #164
    humanji
    Registered Users Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    Wacker The Attacker wrote: »
    What does Assange have to gain by hanging Bradley Manning out to dry?
    He's used Manning from the start. From getting the original info from him to using him as a publicity stunt to boost his own agenda.


  • Options
    #165
    Terry1985
    Registered Users Posts: 251 ✭✭Terry1985


    Shakti wrote: »
    How can they kick her out of the army and reduce her rank?
    Poor kid 35 years,

    Are you for real?
    They were a trained soldier put in a highly privileged position of trust, who operated in a strict environment and must've been bound by any number of official secrets acts in law and military laws too.

    While Snowden was a true whistleblower exposing unconstitutional acts by the govt, what the Mannings do? Apart from cause an enormous diplomatic sh1tstorm and publish tactical reports in Iraq?

    No 35 years sounds about right regardless of people trying to gain sympathy on the trans issue. Gender should not be a factor in any sentencing.


  • Options
    #166
    Shakti
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,153 ✭✭✭Shakti


    Terry1985 wrote: »
    Are you for real?
    They were a trained soldier put in a highly privileged position of trust, who operated in a strict environment and must've been bound by any number of official secrets acts in law and military laws too.

    While Snowden was a true whistleblower exposing unconstitutional acts by the govt, what the Mannings do? Apart from cause an enormous diplomatic sh1tstorm and publish tactical reports in Iraq?

    No 35 years sounds about right regardless of people trying to gain sympathy on the trans issue. Gender should not be a factor in any sentencing.

    Nerdy looking kid get's 35yrs for exposing among other things the slaughter of Reuters journalists and the family that tried to help them, Impossible position for anyone to be in, she is a hero and a prisoner of conscience,

    and by the way I lol'ed at "enormous diplomatic sh1tstorm " that's so 90's west wing,


  • Options
    #167
    Mardy Bum
    Registered Users Posts: 3,674 ✭✭✭Mardy Bum


    Terry1985 wrote: »
    Are you for real?
    They were a trained soldier put in a highly privileged position of trust, who operated in a strict environment and must've been bound by any number of official secrets acts in law and military laws too.

    While Snowden was a true whistleblower exposing unconstitutional acts by the govt, what the Mannings do? Apart from cause an enormous diplomatic sh1tstorm and publish tactical reports in Iraq?

    No 35 years sounds about right regardless of people trying to gain sympathy on the trans issue. Gender should not be a factor in any sentencing.

    Do you think the sentence is the equivalent of other people who leaked documents? Including those who leaked to other countries rather than to journalists?


  • Options
    #168
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Interesting point made on a show yesterday.

    If a Russian* military agent had released files containing details of crimes committed and covered up by the Russian military, then received a 35 year jail sentence, half of the West would be calling that an act of authoritarian savagery and gross violation of freedom, while the other half would be looking to the ICJ to investigate and prosecute those crimes.

    Yet when it happens in the US, suddenly people are torn on their opinions and not sure whether Chelsea Manning was right or wrong in what she did.

    Interesting perspective, goes to show how one's interpretation is clouded by your allegiances and prejudices.

    *Or insert any Islamic regime here


  • Options
    #169
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    Terry1985 wrote: »
    While Snowden was a true whistleblower exposing unconstitutional acts by the govt, what the Mannings do? Apart from cause an enormous diplomatic sh1tstorm and publish tactical reports in Iraq?

    Are you serious? They exposed political lies and doublespeak from politicians around the world, including our very own Eamonn Gilmore, thus allowing citizens to make more informed choices about who to vote for.
    Can't speak for anyone else but it had a direct effect on me. I voted for Gilmore last time and he will be the very bottom of any ballot list I fill out from now until the end of his political career.

    http://www.broadsheet.ie/2011/06/01/say-it-aint-so-eamo/
    “Gilmore, who has led calls against a second referendum has told the embassy separately that he fully expects, and would support holding a second referendum in 2009. He explained his public posture of opposition to a second reference as ‘politically necessary’ for the time being.”

    Ambassador Thomas Foley, in a cable sent on July 23, 2008

    The absolute worst kind of leader. People around the world have a right to know what their politicians are really saying in their name, someone who lies to the public for "political reasons" is a coward and deserves absolutely nothing from us. Similar stories of political doublespeak have been exposed in dozens of countries thanks to Manning's leaks - in Tunisia and Egypt they were a major catalyst for revolution.


  • Options
    #170
    Czarcasm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,076 ✭✭✭✭Czarcasm


    Shakti wrote: »
    Nerdy looking kid get's 35yrs for exposing among other things the slaughter of Reuters journalists and the family that tried to help them, Impossible position for anyone to be in, she is a hero and a prisoner of conscience,

    and by the way I lol'ed at "enormous diplomatic sh1tstorm " that's so 90's west wing,


    I'm not sure what her looks have to do with anything, nor does she look like a young goat. At 25 she is an adult, and having spent five years in the military she would have known what the words discipline and responsibility mean.

    She was no more a prisoner of conscience than anyone else - we all make tough decisions that we have to live with every day, and in the context of her position within the military she would have had to do the same.

    She put people's lives at risk, knowing the consequences of her actions would be severe (not severe enough IMO), and yet she chose the course of action she has taken. It is now her responsibility as an adult to own her decisions and the consequences of whatever actions she takes.


  • Options
    #171
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    Czarcasm wrote: »
    She put people's lives at risk, knowing the consequences of her actions would be severe (not severe enough IMO), and yet she chose the course of action she has taken. It is now her responsibility as an adult to own her decisions and the consequences of whatever actions she takes.

    Whose lives did she put at risk? Even the US government has struggled to name one or two.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #172
    Shakti
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,153 ✭✭✭Shakti


    A kid with a gun is still a kid


  • Options
    #173
    Czarcasm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,076 ✭✭✭✭Czarcasm


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    Whose lives did she put at risk? Even the US government has struggled to name one or two.


    Well, that's not childish argument at all at all.

    Read it here for yourself how many people's lives she put at risk -

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chelsea_Manning#Disclosure_of_classified_material


  • Options
    #174
    Czarcasm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,076 ✭✭✭✭Czarcasm


    Shakti wrote: »
    A kid with a gun is still a kid


    Without opposable thumbs I wouldn't be too worried about a young goat in possession of a gun.

    I'm really not sure what you're trying to say Shakti tbh or how it relates to an adult being punished for crimes they knowingly committed. This wasn't a civillian either, who might not have understood the possible consequences of their actions; this was military personnel releasing confidential data to non-military personnel who would have no understanding of military training, procedures, or operations.


  • Options
    #175
    Shakti
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,153 ✭✭✭Shakti


    goats with guns? don't hear of that much TBH I'll have to take your word for it,


  • Options
    #176
    Czarcasm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,076 ✭✭✭✭Czarcasm


    Shakti wrote: »
    goats with guns? don't hear of that much TBH I'll have to take your word for it,


    No, please, don't just take my word for it. It's how they do things in Afghanistan-

    Guns, Goats and Justice in Afghanistan


    My favorite line has to be this -
    But it seems that an important part of local legal tradition had been overlooked in our attempt to see the triumph of the rule of law. In the doctors’ eyes, it wasn’t good enough because, quite simply, the process had failed to include any goats.


  • Options
    #177
    Shakti
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,153 ✭✭✭Shakti


    A typically nauseating article in the faux colonial style,


  • Options
    #178
    Czarcasm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,076 ✭✭✭✭Czarcasm


    Shakti wrote: »
    A typically nauseating article in the faux colonial style,


    Still a better love story than this nonsense -

    Shakti wrote: »
    Nerdy looking kid get's 35yrs for exposing among other things the slaughter of Reuters journalists and the family that tried to help them, Impossible position for anyone to be in, she is a hero and a prisoner of conscience,

    and by the way I lol'ed at "enormous diplomatic sh1tstorm " that's so 90's west wing,


    Typical nauseating post in the faux romanticised style.

    And you can lol at it all you want, but what you're doing is downplaying the consequences of a breach of trust. Do we really want to start downplaying the consequences of breaches of trust now?

    I certainly don't.


  • Options
    #179
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    Czarcasm wrote: »
    Well, that's not childish argument at all at all.

    Read it here for yourself how many people's lives she put at risk -

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chelsea_Manning#Disclosure_of_classified_material

    I'm childish for asking you to back up your argument? I provided a source for mine. The Wikipedia entry you've linked to above makes no references to anyone's lives being put at risk by the leaks.
    I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you have a better source?


  • Options
    #180
    Czarcasm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,076 ✭✭✭✭Czarcasm


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    I'm childish for asking you to back up your argument? I provided a source for mine. The Wikipedia entry you've linked to above makes no references to anyone's lives being put at risk by the leaks.
    I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you have a better source?


    I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you're not being an obtuse pedant looking for someone that was killed by a flying paperclip.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #181
    Shakti
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,153 ✭✭✭Shakti


    Czarcasm wrote: »
    Still a better love story than this nonsense -





    Typical nauseating post in the faux romanticised style.

    And you can lol at it all you want, but what you're doing is downplaying the consequences of a breach of trust. Do we really want to start downplaying the consequences of breaches of trust now?

    I certainly don't.

    The kid had a decision to make ...damn it all or be damned by it all,
    35years for doing the right thing,


Advertisement