Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Obama Commutes Bulk of Chelsea Manning’s Sentence

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

611–620 of 797 posts

Re: Obama Commutes Bulk of Chelsea Manning’s Sentence

#611

Post by grzm »

adrienne wrote: post #610
grzm wrote: post #566

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I skimmed the comments in this thread, searching for references to "he" or "they" (and the instance of "guy" I found) in reference to Manning. I found 3 "he", 1 "guy", and one "they". All were downvoted, two of them flagged dead. Admittedly this isn't comprehensive: there are currently over 500 comments. This doesn't include discussion of the use of "they" in general, or reflection on the use of "they" when the gende…

User 'wtbob has posted three comments in this thread full of really appalling transphobia and they don't seem to be getting downvoted. Meanwhile i'm down 30+ points.

All of 'wtbob's comments have been posted within the past hour, well after I skimmed the comments two hours ago, and while HN is not nearly as active as it was earlier in the day. I've sincerely tried to engage you fairly and charitably, and in the case of looking at behavior, as objectively as I can, 'adrienne. I wish you the best.

Edit to add: Within the time it took me to compose this comment, at least two of their comments have been downvoted.

Re: Obama Commutes Bulk of Chelsea Manning’s Sentence

#612

Post by boomboomsubban »

nerfhammer wrote: post #547
boomboomsubban wrote: post #539

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much time do you think someone on active duty in Iraq has to sort through data?

Manning was on leave at the time FWIW

A two week leave, that's asking her to check well over 10,000 documents a day.

Re: Obama Commutes Bulk of Chelsea Manning’s Sentence

#613

Post by sintaxi »

l33tbro wrote: post #370
rudolf0 wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Little unethical behavior was actually leaked, though. The killing of the Reuters journalists probably should've been leaked since there was a sort of cover-up (government refused to give Reuters the video or concrete details), so I'll give her that. But the rest was basically just normal communications. I think she's served more than enough jail time, but this didn't really seem like a conscience-driven whistleblowi…

Could you please elaborate on this? I recently had dinner with a friend in intelligence, who was trying to convince me that Snowden was in bed with Russia from the get-go, and that the 90% of the leak had nothing to do with privacy concerns. I took his opinions with a grain of salt given his background, but also couldn't refute due to being relatively unfamiliar with the Snowden saga.

Good grief, Your friend actually said that with a straight face?

Re: Obama Commutes Bulk of Chelsea Manning’s Sentence

#614

Post by nickpsecurity »

rbanffy wrote: post #269
colechristensen wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Snowden released a large volume of information to well qualified journalists who very carefully combed through the data to find the things most relevant and important for the American public to know. Information that was legitimately classified and had no whistleblowing value simply wasn't released. Manning released a large volume of information to the public en masse with no regard to it's whistleblowing value. Some…

> Manning released a large volume of information to the public en masse No. She leaked the documents to Wikileaks, who decided to publish them uncensored. She had no control over what Wikileaks would do. Other media outlets opted not to release information they considered dangerous. And, as @mhurron pointed out, there is no record of someone who was harmed by that information being released.

"She leaked the documents to Wikileaks, who decided to publish them uncensored. She had no control over what Wikileaks would do."

The first part of your sentence shows why the second part is nonsense. Manning dumped a bunch of classified information on a third party. Manning left the ethical decisions to that third party. That is certainly preventable as many others have prevented it. I've done so many times with confidential information that I make public in a selective way in my writing that protects sources or just details that must be private.

Truth is Manning's mind was messed up due to internal struggles, she also saw messed up stuff in military, and simultaneously was blindly trusting third parties to make the right decisions. The combination led to a damaging, criminal decision to turn all of that over to Wikileaks rather than pure whistleblowing of combing for corruption to selectively leak and/or redact. This is what she was rightly punished for although how the punishment was delivered was cruel and should've been illegal.

Glad Manning is to be released soon but she set it in motion with foolish decisions that had alternatives. It certainly wasn't an inevitable set of cause and effect.

Re: Obama Commutes Bulk of Chelsea Manning’s Sentence

#615

Post by nfoz »

macspoofing wrote: post #601
colechristensen wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Snowden released a large volume of information to well qualified journalists who very carefully combed through the data to find the things most relevant and important for the American public to know. Information that was legitimately classified and had no whistleblowing value simply wasn't released. Manning released a large volume of information to the public en masse with no regard to it's whistleblowing value. Some…

>Snowden released a large volume of information to well qualified journalists who very carefully combed through the data Snowden stole a huge amount of highly classified information and gave a tiny amount to journalists to comb through. Now we only have his word that none of it went to Russian intelligence though all signs point to the contrary.

We have "only the word" of everyone with security clearance that they are not leaking secrets to foreign agents.

You don't have to be physically present in Russia to provide the Russians with intelligence.

I don't know why it makes any sense to assume that Snowden is leaking any more than what he gave to the journalists. His entire mission was out of loyalty to the American public, he did not intend to end up in Russia, and he wants to return to the US. America is keeping him out because they will not guarantee him a trial that meets his criteria of fairness/openness.

Re: Obama Commutes Bulk of Chelsea Manning’s Sentence

#616

Post by adrienne »

grzm wrote: post #611
adrienne wrote: post #610

Earlier quoted context omitted.

User 'wtbob has posted three comments in this thread full of really appalling transphobia and they don't seem to be getting downvoted. Meanwhile i'm down 30+ points.

All of 'wtbob's comments have been posted within the past hour, well after I skimmed the comments two hours ago, and while HN is not nearly as active as it was earlier in the day. I've sincerely tried to engage you fairly and charitably, and in the case of looking at behavior, as objectively as I can, 'adrienne. I wish you the best. Edit to add: Within the time it took me to compose this comment, at least two of thei…

I just sent an email to the mods about those comments. And yes, i acknowledge that they are newer than your last post to me. I see how my comment implied otherwise, and i apologize for that. I am really, really appalled at those comments and i was uncareful in writing about it.

Re: Obama Commutes Bulk of Chelsea Manning’s Sentence

#617

Post by nickpsecurity »

DonHopkins wrote: post #374
hendersoon wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no record of any individual being physically harmed, but the leaked diplomatic cables were highly embarrassing, hurt the interests of the US, and were completely unjustified. They weren't exposing malfeasance or war crimes. They should not have been released. Manning did it wrong, Snowden did it right.

The fact that the US murdered innocent civilians was highly embarrassing and hurt the interests of the US, not the fact that Manning leaked that information itself. Punish the murderers, not the messengers. The only people were actually harmed were the innocent children and journalists on the receiving end of US machine guns.

I see what you're saying here but it might not be so simple. These types of countries are all competing doing all kinds of evil stuff to do so. All or most would have to be hit with whistleblowing & often for what you say to matter. What we've seen is large scale whistleblowing in some countries but not others. A few of those crying "Foul!" are almost certainly doing equivalent or worse but benefit from being the moral, high ground.

The result: a whistleblower for one just gives a competitive advantage to the others. So, both the country's policy and the whistleblower shifting people or investments to other scheming countries or companies are each causing damage.

Re: Obama Commutes Bulk of Chelsea Manning’s Sentence

#618

Post by nickpsecurity »

cmdrfred wrote: post #527
DonHopkins wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that the US murdered innocent civilians was highly embarrassing and hurt the interests of the US, not the fact that Manning leaked that information itself. Punish the murderers, not the messengers. The only people were actually harmed were the innocent children and journalists on the receiving end of US machine guns.

In my opinion the solution to not being embarrassed is to not do embarrassing things. The person exposeing those things isn't in the wrong, you are. Keep in mind all of the recent leaks have been from individuals and organizations that have supported domestic spying under the rationale "if you've got nothing to hide". Yet they hide in shadows and evidently misbehave when the public isn't looking.

"In my opinion the solution to not being embarrassed is to not do embarrassing things. "

That was the government's position against Snowden, Wikileaks, etc. Also called the "Safe if Nothing to Hide" fallacy. What secrets can cause damage in what ways is pretty broad and arbitrary. Interestingly, it applies to the government's schemes much like people's, private lives. We have to keep them in check more but that should be done by citizens leaning on various branches of government. Including groups doing something about problems in GAO reports.

Really easy to say, though, to never piss off any important person in any foreign country or company with one's private decisions or actions. Really hard to do, too.

Re: Obama Commutes Bulk of Chelsea Manning’s Sentence

#619

Post by pbreit »

djsumdog wrote: post #32

Seven years is still a long time for whistle blowing. I'm glad to see she is still getting released though. It's important to note commuting the sentence is not a pardon. Chelsea will still have this conviction for the rest of her life. I know there is a lot of controversy with Manning compared to Wikileaks et. al. as far as not redacting documents or using a discriminating news source to filter them. Still, I oppose…

What was chilling about the Hillary emails? They seemed quite inoffensive to me.

Re: Obama Commutes Bulk of Chelsea Manning’s Sentence

#620

Post by nickpsecurity »

dragonwriter wrote: post #332
hendersoon wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no record of any individual being physically harmed, but the leaked diplomatic cables were highly embarrassing, hurt the interests of the US, and were completely unjustified. They weren't exposing malfeasance or war crimes. They should not have been released. Manning did it wrong, Snowden did it right.

> Manning did it wrong, Snowden did it right. AFAIK, both Manning and Snowden released large quantities of information without reviewing all of it in detail for public interest vs. potential harm, and released it not to the public but to third parties that managed public release. The difference is that Manning released it to Assange and Snowden released it to more responsible journalists.

"The difference is that Manning released it to Assange and Snowden released it to more responsible journalists."

Sort of. They're more responsible in the general sense but also foreign journalists receiving U.S.'s spying capabilities on foreign persons. The aiding and abetting concept is quite appropriate given they published all kinds of NSA attack strategies & subverted companies while the foreign attacks & companies... including in their own countries... didn't get the same treatment. Both attack and defense on the other side got a great boost while U.S. companies simultaneously lost market share.

Quite a bit of damage giving stuff foreigners shouldn't know to foreign journalists. I might be happier if there was a Snowden in all 20+ countries involved in economic and industrial espionage. Instead, it was just what mainly two (U.S. and U.K.) were doing outside the many eyes partnership that extends to Europe. Quite asymmetrical.

Post reply on HN