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

741–750 of 797 posts

Re: Obama Commutes Bulk of Chelsea Manning’s Sentence

#741

Post by TheCoelacanth »

rudolf0 wrote: post #714
l33tbro wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Russia was one of his last choices as a refuge; they were just one of the only countries to accept him. I doubt he's fond of Russia, either, and he's made some passive-aggressive jabs at them on his Twitter. That said, it can't be ruled out that he divulged even more secret information to Russia's intelligence services as a condition for asylum, but I don't think there's any evidence it was one of his motives when le…

He wasn't even trying to stay in Russia. He was just traveling through on his way to Ecuador but he got stuck there because the US revoked his passport.

Re: Obama Commutes Bulk of Chelsea Manning’s Sentence

#742

Post by EdHominem »

golergka wrote: post #682
EdHominem wrote: post #669

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd call the cops on bank robbers even knowing they may get "damaged" during capture because I think the benefits to society outweighs the harm. Besides, we saw ~10 people blown away in that one video. That's a fair number of eggs you'd get to break by leaking before even being at parity with that one instance, let alone all the others.

Repeating a discussion that is being mad in a neoghbour thread, I don't see any criminal or even incorrecr decisions by US military in that video. Making decisions based on incomplete information, with certain risk of bad outcomes abd collateral damage is a part of war.

Let's even pretend that the pilots are totally blameless. The military covered this up. They don't get to cover things up, because that's how we get war crimes.

Had this been reviewed properly, yes. A "Mistakes Happen" stamp could probably be used. But by hiding it and lying about it, they turned it into something we can't ignore.

Also, I don't think the pilots are blameless. If they ever hit civilian court that transcript would hang them.

Re: Obama Commutes Bulk of Chelsea Manning’s Sentence

#743

Post by hendersoon »

dtparr wrote: post #717
hendersoon wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The top NSA official who would have received Snowden's whistleblowing report was just fired for retaliating against a whistleblower. Also, Snowden was a contractor not a NSA employee so he wasn't covered by such programs. Your argument does not hold together. http://www.pogo.org/blog/2016/12/intelligence-community-land...

I'm not sure what argument you think I was making other than 'yes, whistleblower programs exist' in response to the parent's question of > Has there been any sort of "ethical" system designed to show a person how they are supposed to whistle blow? As you helpfully exemplified, many people dismiss the IG's programs due to the potential for (or reality of) retaliation (which I mentioned), but I specifically wanted to a…

I read your post as saying they should have followed the chain of command rather than leaking data. I apologize for not catching the nuance in your response.

The WaPo covered Snowden's claims in great detail. Reading it, I certainly would not have felt protected against retaliation myself.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2014/03/...

Re: Obama Commutes Bulk of Chelsea Manning’s Sentence

#744

Post by vkou »

hendersoon wrote: post #715
vkou wrote: post #416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What part of it can be attributed to Manning..? And what part of it can be contributed to food insecurity, economic downturns, the despots running those countries tightening the screws, the CIA's involvement, a civil war in Iraq, the Department of State jumping on the opportunity to stick it to Putin by destabilizing Assad? Are any other architects of these disasters serving 35 years?

That's impossible to measure quantitatively. It's very clear that the leaks contributed to some degree, much like the email leaks and FBI notes to congress contributed to the election results, but how much? Nobody will ever know.

My point is that if you want to crucify Manning for starting the Arab Spring, there's a long, long line of people, who were actually responsible for the problems she exposed.

Re: Obama Commutes Bulk of Chelsea Manning’s Sentence

#745

Post by notpc »

burkaman wrote: post #737
notpc wrote: post #585

Earlier quoted context omitted.

35 years with the possibility of parole in 10 years seemed pretty reasonable to me.

Why? Do you think 35 years is a greater deterrent than 15 years? Or are you concerned about rehabilitation? What is the logic?

Indiscriminately leaking thousands of diplomatic cables is the kind of thing that can change the world forever. It can cause major treaties to fall through, wars to start, etc.

Just as an example, Manning's leaks have been cited as a major contributor to the Arab Spring that has left thousands of people dead, thrown Europe into turmoil, and is in the process of potentially ending the EU due to backlash against migration.

In honesty, the punishment should be death, but given that Manning was a deeply troubled young man, 35 years with the possibility of parole in 10 years is fine with me.

Re: Obama Commutes Bulk of Chelsea Manning’s Sentence

#746

Post by burkaman »

notpc wrote: post #745
burkaman wrote: post #737

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? Do you think 35 years is a greater deterrent than 15 years? Or are you concerned about rehabilitation? What is the logic?

Indiscriminately leaking thousands of diplomatic cables is the kind of thing that can change the world forever. It can cause major treaties to fall through, wars to start, etc. Just as an example, Manning's leaks have been cited as a major contributor to the Arab Spring that has left thousands of people dead, thrown Europe into turmoil, and is in the process of potentially ending the EU due to backlash against migrat…

So what is the logic of 35 years? The way you describe it, it should be a life sentence. What is the purpose of prison in this case? And why not 15 years, or 50?

Re: Obama Commutes Bulk of Chelsea Manning’s Sentence

#747

Post by etjossem »

hnbro wrote: post #648
etjossem wrote: post #533

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Feeling female and actually being one are two very different things. Feeling female can be an early indication that you are a woman. > I do not deny that gender dysphoria is a clinical diagnosis, but that does not mean we should enable an unhealthy behavior. On the off chance you actually care about Chelsea Manning's health, please stop referring to her as "he."

what does "feeling female" mean?

In this case, it's simply a quote from a counselor Manning spoke with, describing the moment when Manning first identified herself as female. [1]

This situation is typically referred to as gender dysphoria - the mismatch of sex assigned at birth with gender identity. For some trans people (Manning included) the most effective ways to resolve gender dysphoria may include hormone replacement therapy or surgery. There are lots of good articles on this if you want to read more about it, including a very good piece by a clinical psychiatrist for the NYT. [2]

[1] http://nymag.com/news/features/bradley-manning-2011-7/index4...

[2] https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/23/opinion/sunday/richard-a-...

Re: Obama Commutes Bulk of Chelsea Manning’s Sentence

#748

Post by MicroBerto »

KirinDave wrote: post #738
MicroBerto wrote: post #733

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At this point, I'd only like to know why you're making personal attacks on someone you've never met in order to support and defend a politician who's committed federal crimes -- one who you've likely also never met. Might be time to step back and take a deep breath, my friend. Have you actually read the emails in question? I've referenced them elsewhere in this thread.

I've read most of the Wikileaks materials. I've taken them with a grain of salt because there is strong evidence that Assange does not have control of Wikileaks, and therefore it's very difficult to trust the entirely of the corpus. Even if I take all of them as 100% verified, I am certainly not "chilled" the way you are. Nor do I think having IT fuckups should be a federal crime. Given how shit both R and D party se…

> Given how shit both R and D party security is...

Ummm, since we're now talking about the private email server (still absolutely illegal, regardless of justification), we're not talking about DNC leaks here, so this has nothing to do with "D" and "R".

That ClintonEmail.com server should have been in the STATE DEPARTMENT behind government firewalls, heavily monitored by our government's cybersecurity division.

> I suspect the private email servers are actually afforded a bit of security by being obscure.

WOW!!! Are you listening to yourself?! That's demonstrably been proven to be completely false (ClintonEmail.com is not exactly a "obscure" domain, BTW) -- and by her team's own admission, as there was hack attempt after hack attempt:

* http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/JW-v...

* http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/JW-v...

* http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/JW-v...

Then, of course, there was this quote:

> Finally, we learned there is a confidence from these sources that her server had been hacked. And that it was a 99% accuracy that it had been hacked by at least five foreign intelligence agencies, and that things had been taken from that.

But, "you suspect".

How about this: I suspect that they setup a private email server to keep out of the reach of FOIA attempts, because of Lord knows what scandals would have been unearthed. Those emails are out there, many of them possibly on the Weiner laptop or elsewhere, and time will tell if there will ever be any justice served for these Federal crimes.

Re: Obama Commutes Bulk of Chelsea Manning’s Sentence

#749

Post by notpc »

burkaman wrote: post #746
notpc wrote: post #745

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indiscriminately leaking thousands of diplomatic cables is the kind of thing that can change the world forever. It can cause major treaties to fall through, wars to start, etc. Just as an example, Manning's leaks have been cited as a major contributor to the Arab Spring that has left thousands of people dead, thrown Europe into turmoil, and is in the process of potentially ending the EU due to backlash against migrat…

So what is the logic of 35 years? The way you describe it, it should be a life sentence. What is the purpose of prison in this case? And why not 15 years, or 50?

The purpose of prison is to strike fear deep into the hearts of those who would follow in Private Manning's footsteps. And actually, the sentence was 35 years with eligibility for parole in 8 years. There is always a certain arbitrariness to choosing sentences.

Re: Obama Commutes Bulk of Chelsea Manning’s Sentence

#750

Post by dragonwriter »

randcraw wrote: post #662
ceejayoz wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but politically, "we dropped her sentence to seven years in jail" is more tenable than "we pardoned someone who never stood trial nor served a day in jail".

So don't pardon Snowden. Commute the charges against him. Like 97% of the cases that go to prosecution in this country, let him plea to a lesser crime and serve a 10 year sentence, minus time served in Russia.

> So don't pardon Snowden. Commute the charges against him.

Commutation is reduction of sentence, it can only happen after conviction.

> Like 97% of the cases that go to prosecution in this country, let him plea to a lesser crime

Is there any indication that Snowden has any interest in pleading guilty to anything?

Post reply on HN