Chaos Computer Club Supports Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden
1–10 of 53 posts
Re: Chaos Computer Club Supports Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden
#2From the ccc website[1]:
> Donations
> We gladly accept any donation, even considerable sums.
Bank account of the CCC e. V.:
Chaos Computer Club e. V.
IBAN DE41 2001 0020 0599 0902 01
BIC PBNKDEFF
Re: Chaos Computer Club Supports Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden
#3Presumably, this now means anyone providing significant material support to the CCC can find themselves on the US's shitlist, no?
Re: Chaos Computer Club Supports Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden
#4Presumably, this now means anyone providing significant material support to the CCC can find themselves on the US's shitlist, no?
I think this has always been the case.
Re: Chaos Computer Club Supports Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden
#5From the ccc website[1]: > Donations > We gladly accept any donation, even considerable sums. Bank account of the CCC e. V.: Chaos Computer Club e. V. IBAN DE41 2001 0020 0599 0902 01 BIC PBNKDEFF [1] http://www.ccc.de/en/membership
A worthy cause. Also see this page for places to donate to Snowdens defense.
https://wikileaks.org/freesnowden (scroll down to Other options)
Location for Chelsea Mannings defense/appeal fund:
http://couragetoresist.org/2010/09/chelsea-manning-defense-f...
Re: Chaos Computer Club Supports Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden
#6Presumably, this now means anyone providing significant material support to the CCC can find themselves on the US's shitlist, no?
CCC has loose ties to the Wau Holland Foundation(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wau_Holland_Foundation), which collected considerable sums for Wikileaks and often collaborates with the CCC. I think they've already given enough reasons to be on the shitlist.
(Wau Holland co-founded the CCC)
edit: made it clear that by "collaborate with", I mean the CC and not Wikileaks.
Re: Chaos Computer Club Supports Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden
#7I had to look up Chelsea Manning. I was aware from the news that Bradley Manning had issues with gender, but wasn't aware he had changed his gender association. What's considered the current best way to describe this, that Bradley Manning released the documents (past tense) and now Chelsea Manning needs support (present tense), or that Chelsea Manning released documents and now needs support? The first way feels like it's more useful for expressing the situation to those that lived through it, but may be ignoring the identity of the person in question. Referring to the person through the later moniker in all instances may be confusing to those that miss the change as it happens, but may be less confusing to future generations.
I guess this isn't new though, we have Cassius Clay / Muhammad Ali.
Re: Chaos Computer Club Supports Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden
#8I had to look up Chelsea Manning. I was aware from the news that Bradley Manning had issues with gender, but wasn't aware he had changed his gender association. What's considered the current best way to describe this, that Bradley Manning released the documents (past tense) and now Chelsea Manning needs support (present tense), or that Chelsea Manning released documents and now needs support? The first way feels like…
This is also a solved problem (largely) around trans issues specifically.
I suggest reading http://www.glaad.org/reference/transgender for more context.
In particular, you should refer to Chelsea as she would want -- with her current name and her expressed gender pronoun preference (e.g., use 'her' where you use 'his' above). Also, "gender association" is not a common formulation.
In terms of capturing the nuance of acts prior to public transitioning, the above link has some suggestions:
Avoid pronoun confusion when examining the stories and backgrounds of transgender people prior to their transition.
Ideally a story will not use pronouns associated with a person's birth sex when referring to the person's life prior to transition. Try to write transgender people's stories from the present day, instead of narrating them from some point in the past, thus avoiding confusion and potentially disrespectful use of incorrect pronouns.Re: Chaos Computer Club Supports Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden
#9I had to look up Chelsea Manning. I was aware from the news that Bradley Manning had issues with gender, but wasn't aware he had changed his gender association. What's considered the current best way to describe this, that Bradley Manning released the documents (past tense) and now Chelsea Manning needs support (present tense), or that Chelsea Manning released documents and now needs support? The first way feels like…
I think the generally correct way to do it is to send all previous documents to the memory hole for correction, so we will know that the woman Chelsea Manning released information regarding our war with Eastasia.
Edit: spoken tongue-in-cheek of course, but I've run into this before where names were updated some places but not others... for a while I thought the Synthesis OS kernel must have been written by a pair of people because I kept seeing references to Henry and Alexia based on which paper I was reading
Re: Chaos Computer Club Supports Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden
#10I don't really understand supporting Chelsea Manning, or equating her plight with Snowden's.
Snowden had a purpose and a plan, and executed it while attempting to keep people from getting hurt. Chelsea Manning lashed out at an army that didn't support her and put her in the wrong position. The military may have mistreated her, but they're still not the same thing.