231–240 of 307 posts
This person is male. Could we please avoid the biologically nonsensical charade of referring to him as"she"?
This comment breaks the guidelines: > Please avoid introducing classic flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say about them. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
I cannot help but notice, though, that apparently all subthreads critical of Manning and/or commenting on the gender thing have been not only heavily downvoted but marked as 'flagged', while some fairly vitriolic ones in Manning's favor have not.
Not trying to be polemical, and not out to kindle further unproductive discussion, but I would be interested to see the unofficial political guidelines of HN moderation spelled out a bit more explicitly.
Sort of. She's on unpaid active duty with the Army still while her appeals wind through the legal system, and thus subject to the UCMJ. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/05/14/chel...
This is what I was going to remark on and maybe someone can clarify, but I don't believe the Army has any such thing as "unpaid active duty". The military doesn't just make up stuff like that. If you're on active duty, you're getting a check and accrueing time in service. Seems like sloppy reporting. Also considering: > After the 2013 sentencing, the ex-intelligence agent changed her name to Chelsea Manning and ident…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Because people who would be targets of political murders don't die at a statistically unusual rate. They don't have to be well known people that you would identify as targets. In fact those would be the worst to target. They could be potential whistleblowers you never learned of, for example. That said, sticking to well known people that could be targets, there's a large variety of those to e.g. MLK Jr, Malcom X, J…
These are political assassinations but they are assassinations by crazies. If you think these are government plots or that the man is secretly sending ninjas to rub out potential whistleblowers, you have to come up with some evidence otherwise it's just conspiracy theorizing. We might as well talk of alien abductions.
Some of them, we don't know who did them at all (e.g. MLK).
But even if that was the case, it's not difficult to manipulate a "crazy" to do something, especially if you have both crazies and guns in abundance in a country.
It would be a nice way to avoid blame for the whole thing, and you can even have some mafia figure/ex-cop collaborator kill them afterwards, before said crazies ever get to go to trial for the first murder.
>you have to come up with some evidence otherwise it's just conspiracy theorizing
You think there's much evidence in e.g. banana republic political murders too, even those where still everybody knows the government or some mogul with special interests ordered them?
> She was released from United States Disciplinary Barracks at Fort Leavenworth in Kansas around 3 a.m. 3am?! A parting kick to the head, or a ploy to avoid publicity?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately, many of the people that need convincing with regards to net neutrality and online rights also view her as a traitor with mental problems and thus "normal, patriotic Americans" should not worry about these things, except to prevent "liberals" from creating more "regulations" for companies and putting up barriers to keep our law enforcement from finding the "terrorists'" plans.
This comment is so loaded with strawmen and vitriol I don't think it meets our communities comment guidelines.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> unlawfully killed trans people As a Dutch person I was very confused for a minute, but then I remembered there are indeed lawfully killed people in other countries. (And while writing this, I remembered euthanesia is legal here, but that's not killing in my mind because the person chose it for themselves and the given reason cannot be an external, solvable condition.)
There are also accidental deaths, in which a person is killed, but it is not ruled unlawful.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately, many of the people that need convincing with regards to net neutrality and online rights also view her as a traitor with mental problems and thus "normal, patriotic Americans" should not worry about these things, except to prevent "liberals" from creating more "regulations" for companies and putting up barriers to keep our law enforcement from finding the "terrorists'" plans.
I don't know why other posters are disputing your assertions. Lets cut through all the noise and look at the President's uncut opinion on net neutrality. >Donald J. Trump Verified account >@realDonaldTrump >Obama’s attack on the internet is another top down power grab. Net neutrality is the Fairness Doctrine. Will target conservative media https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/53260835850816716... So there, tha…
But if anything net neutrality protects the voices of smaller media which, other than fox, many conservative media e.g. breitbart fall into that category. CNN wouldn't like it but they could pay for a network fast lane, Alex Jones or TheBlaze wouldn't nearly be able to compete!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When we refer to things, we use words that convey our perception of them. People identify themselves a certain way, and I can identify them a certain way too. The notion of someone's gender has relevance to others. It doesn't make sense to go purely based on their own self perception. For me, I tend to assign gender by sex. I don't want to disrespect myself by saying something I don't believe. On the other hand I don…
> When we refer to things, we use words that convey our perception of them. We are not talking about cross-dressers. We are talking about transgender individuals. You wouldn't even be able to notice them standing in front of you once their transition is complete.
I hope she's alright after this; there might be people literally gunning for her, even if she wasn't trans.
I think the "having been a whistleblower in the most powerful government on the planet" part of Chelsea's story is considerably more risky than the "is transgendered" part. There aren't many people running around "gunning for" trans people in the same sense that there are people "gunning for" informants. Primarily in the sense that in the latter case they use actual guns.
https://www.facebook.com/sophievlabelle/posts/18847957251286...