SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
It's no pardon, but it will do:
President Obama has put Chelsea Manning, the former Army intelligence analyst serving a 35-year sentence for leaking classified material, on his short list for a possible commutation, a Justice Department source told NBC News. A decision could come [...] for Manning, who has tried to commit suicide twice this year and went on a hunger strike in a bid for gender reassignment surgery.
"I have more hope right now than I have the entire time since she was sentenced," Manning's aunt, Deborah Manning, told NBC News.
[...] Manning's supporters believe the harshness of the sentence can be traced to another leaker; the scandal around former NSA contractor Edward Snowden was erupting around the same time. "I really believe the judge felt she needed to send some sort of message," the aunt said. "I think in a way she was a scapegoat for Edward Snowden." Snowden, who has asked Obama for clemency, tweeted his support of Manning shortly after NBC News' report about the commutation decision aired on TODAY on Wednesday morning.
Four former and current Army intelligence officers told NBC News the documents leaked by Manning pale in significance to highly classified top secret material released by Snowden. The officers, who would not allow their names to be used, said the Manning sentence seems excessive.
Also at The Hill.
Time magazine adds:
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange will agree to be extradited to the U.S. if President Obama grants whistle-blower Chelsea Manning clemency before his term ends on Jan. 20, the organization has said.
In a tweet posted on the group's official account Thursday, WikiLeaks said Assange would not oppose extradition to the U.S. "despite [the] clear unconstitutionality" of any potential criminal complaints that the Justice Department may have against the whistle-blower website, if U.S. Army private Manning is released.
(Score: 2) by vux984 on Saturday January 14 2017, @09:37PM
I'm curious about your postscript.
because those were correct at the times I am referring to.
For example, when writing something about a married woman who took her husbands name did before she was married it seems you can go either way... for example, would you object to the sentence, "Barbara Bush was born in Flushing, New York." ? Probably not. Likewise if i were writing a longer biography I might first write that "Baraba Bush was born Barbara Pierce"... and then later write that "Barabara Pierce was born in Flushing, New York" and I doubt anyone would blink. Either seems perfectly acceptable. In any case I don't think using her current identity to refer to things that took place in the past is wrong, and is probably preferable unless you are doing a longer biography; for clarity.
So Chelsea Manning a 'she', was known as Bradley Manning, a 'he' at the time? So what? Unless you were writing a biographical text that followed their history, the convention is to refer to them by their current identity, for simplicity and clarify.
So, here you are, you could have called her Chelsea, but you decided to go with Bradley, and then evidently anticipating that it would piss people off, decided to pre-argue that you were right in doing so... it seems a bizarre approach to take, unless you were trying to bait an argument?
(Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Saturday January 14 2017, @10:14PM
Apparently you took the bait.
Also, those who work in certain environments occasionally see counterintelligence posters describing the exploits of known leakers and spies. All posters of Chelsea Manning depict Bradley Manning, because at the time of the leaks he was still Bradley Manning. There's a funny one of Snowden as well, with the byline "Spilled the beans and ran." The latter is particularly disturbing because it lists "enjoys working alone* " among the many warning signs of a potential spy.
* Um, maybe because they want to get actual work done without having to hold hands, engage in bullshit conversation about nothing from chatty co-workers, or being asked the same questions by 3 different managers 10 times a day?
(Score: 2) by vux984 on Monday January 16 2017, @09:15AM
Apparently you took the bait.
Not really; I just noticed it was there; there's a difference.
Also, those who work in certain environments occasionally see counterintelligence posters describing the exploits of known leakers and spies.
https://qz.com/780598/edward-snowden-and-julian-assange-feature-in-us-defense-security-services-infamous-spies-posters/ [qz.com]
Think i found one of the posters... but that one, at least, doesn't say 'enjoys working alone'. Not that I really doubt you that such a poster exists.
Found more here, but I haven't looked at all of them:
http://www.cdse.edu/resources/posters.html [cdse.edu]