SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Chelsea Manning has been freed from the Fort Leavenworth military prison, according to a US Army spokesperson:
In January she tweeted that she wanted to move to Maryland after being released, a state where she previously lived. On Monday she tweeted: "Two more days until the freedom of civilian life ^_^ Now hunting for private #healthcare like millions of Americans =P".
Manning will remain on active army duty while her military court conviction remains under appeal. She will have healthcare benefits but will be unpaid, the army says. An online campaign set up by her attorney has raised $150,000 (£115,725) to pay for her living expenses for the first year after her release. If the appeal is denied, she could be dishonourably discharged from the army, US media say.
The mentioned Chelsea Manning Welcome Home Fund. Also at NPR, NYT, and CNN.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 17 2017, @10:57PM (21 children)
It's okay, don't worry. Obama has a (D) next to his name, so the media isn't the least bit interested in the military committing atrocities while he was in charge.
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by Ethanol-fueled on Wednesday May 17 2017, @11:04PM (7 children)
He only freed Chelsea because she's a tranny.
If Chelsea stayed Bradley he'd still be rotting in Leavenworth. So the moral of the story is, if you get caught leaking classified information with a Democratic president in charge, become a tranny immediately and wait for your pardon.
That was a battle that both Chelsea Manning and Baraq Hussein Soetoro chose to fight wisely, because the Democratic party's image would have suffered a significant hit in the voting booths come next election.
(Score: 1) by kurenai.tsubasa on Wednesday May 17 2017, @11:48PM (6 children)
Wait, what? Er… hold on. So, ok, everybody knows that Baraq Hussein Soetoro is the last president's True Name [wikipedia.org], and knowing somebody's True Name gives you power over him.
So are you saying that Chelsea Manning is the True Name of the person in TFS???
Can we get a confirmation from Runaway?
(Score: -1, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Thursday May 18 2017, @01:11AM (5 children)
WTF? You want the "true name" of a subhuman?
(Score: 1) by kurenai.tsubasa on Thursday May 18 2017, @01:43AM
Lol!
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday May 18 2017, @02:55AM (3 children)
Oh that's fucking rich coming from you. Manning may be messed up in the head but she's about a million times better of a person than you are.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 18 2017, @07:51AM
I swear, ever since I stuck up for Runaway as not a total conservative Trump voting douche he has done his damned best to prove me wrong. Reminds me of training a dog, can't show too much affection or it goes to their head and discipline goes out the window. They start shitting on the rug thinking they have a free pass on everything!
(Score: 2, Flamebait) by Runaway1956 on Thursday May 18 2017, @01:56PM (1 child)
Your biggest problem in regards to Manning, is that you actually believe he "leaked" stuff for altruistic reasons.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday May 18 2017, @06:30PM
So? You don't get to bitch about "petty" now with who we have in the Oval Office.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 5, Informative) by butthurt on Wednesday May 17 2017, @11:08PM (12 children)
He wasn't in charge in 2006, nor were the news media universally uncritical of him. E.g.,
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/05/obama-administration-drone-strikes-war-crimes [theguardian.com]
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dan-kovalik/obama-adminstration-guilt_b_8916380.html [huffingtonpost.com]
(Score: 4, Interesting) by hemocyanin on Wednesday May 17 2017, @11:58PM (11 children)
You might be astounded to learn this, but things people do have an effect into the future if they are important.
what Manning did was force a withdraw on Bush's deadline because Obama could not get the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) extended. SOFA forbade Iraqi courts from trying US military personnel for crimes committed in Iraq. Perhaps you can comprehend that the Iraqi government was sort of irked by the US Military having immunity to commit war crimes, and so decided not to extend SOFA.
Anyway, after failing to extend the war, Obama declared peace and has been a Democrat darling. Honest question, would he still be a Democrat darling had he managed to extend the war like he wanted to?
(Score: 2) by butthurt on Thursday May 18 2017, @01:36AM (9 children)
You might be astounded to learn this, but things people do have an effect into the future if they are important.
Thank you for sharing your observation. Does it have some relation to what I wrote?
What I meant was that Mr. Obama wasn't president in 2006. You had posted about a "2006 incident in the central Iraqi town of Ishaqi" and I was alluding to that.
Perhaps you can comprehend that the Iraqi government was sort of irked by the US Military having immunity to commit war crimes, and so decided not to extend SOFA.
I don't have a deep understanding of Iraqi politics. After a little reading I gather that the agreement was made during the George W. Bush administration, gave general immunity from Iraqi law for U.S. soldiers stationed in the country, and was disliked because the presence of thousands of foreign soldiers was seen as an infringement on the country's sovereignty.
Two major agreements-a Status of Forces Agreement stalled on the issue of legal immunity for U.S. troops and dates for a full withdrawal, and a broader strategic framework agreement-were approved by Iraq’s parliament in late November 2008.
-- https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/us-security-agreements-and-iraq [cfr.org]
At the end of the Bush administration, when the Status of Forces Agreement, or SOFA, was negotiated, setting 2011 as the end of the United States’ military role, officials had said the deadline was set for political reasons, to put a symbolic end to the occupation and establish Iraq’s sovereignty.
-- http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/22/world/middleeast/united-states-and-iraq-had-not-expected-troops-would-have-to-leave.html?_r=0 [nytimes.com]
Are you simply saying that the war as a whole is criminal because it was a war of aggression? If not, what leads you to say that immunity from war crimes was the main factor in non-renewal of the agreement?
> Anyway, after failing to extend the war, Obama declared peace [...]
Citation, please, for "Obama declared peace"?
> [...] and has been a Democrat darling.
As I understand it, he ran for the Senate and for president as a Democrat. By "Democrat darling" are you saying that fellow politicians in his party have been uncritical of him? That's not unexpected: I've noticed that politicians belonging to his predecessor's party have, largely, been uncritical of Mr. Bush. Or are you saying that the press is controlled by Democrats?
> Honest question, would he still be a Democrat darling had he managed to extend the war like he wanted to?
His party's platform in 2008 said:
Ending the war in Iraq will be the beginning, but not the end, of addressing our defense challenges. We will use this moment both to rebuild our military and to prepare it for the missions of the future. We must retain the capacity to swiftly defeat any conventional threat to our country and our vital interests. But we must also become better prepared to take on foes that fight asymmetrical and highly adaptive campaigns on a global scale.
We will not hesitate to use force to protect the American people or our vital interests whenever we are attacked or imminently threatened.
-- http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=78283 [ucsb.edu]
Not exactly a commitment to non-violence, was it?
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 18 2017, @02:20AM (1 child)
> Thank you for sharing your observation. Does it have some relation to what I wrote?
Seems like hemo's hate-on for hillary is now bending towards obama too.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by hemocyanin on Thursday May 18 2017, @06:16AM
Obama:
Yeah -- Obama is super awesome. If you are Republican.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by shortscreen on Thursday May 18 2017, @05:51AM (1 child)
The post wasn't about Obama's relationship to the 2006 incident/crime. It was about the effects of the leaked info which came out in 2011 (when Obama was president). Before that, essentially no one knew about the incident.
(Score: 3, Informative) by butthurt on Thursday May 18 2017, @08:27AM
The post wasn't about Obama's relationship to the 2006 incident/crime. It was about the effects of the leaked info which came out in 2011 (when Obama was president). Before that, essentially no one knew about the incident.
I didn't reply to that post. I replied to an AC who had written:
Obama has a (D) next to his name, so the media isn't the least bit interested in the military committing atrocities while he was in charge.
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Thursday May 18 2017, @06:10AM
The war was a travesty based on lies. However, one of the war crimes committed was quoted in my original post, it involved:
The publicity surrounding that event was important and w/o Chelsea Manning's help, more such atrocities would have been enabled under an Obama extension of hostilities. Considering that nobody involved in that incident was publicly punished, and Iraq was prohibited from doing anything about because of SOFA, it should be glaringly obvious the importance of publicizing the event.
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Thursday May 18 2017, @06:19AM (3 children)
One should also add, quoting Obama's 2008 platform is like quoting Sleeping Beauty. It might be interesting fantasy, but it bears little relationship with reality.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 18 2017, @07:16PM (1 child)
Does that mean that Trump's 2016 platform is something like Snow White with the evil queen played by Hillary?
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Thursday May 18 2017, @11:23PM
Yes. Except in reality, HRC is an evil queen. However, when it comes to what Trump promised, it will be as useful a reference tool as Obama's '08 platform.
(Score: 2) by butthurt on Friday May 19 2017, @06:16PM
You seem to be faulting me for quoting it. It seemed the most obvious standard by which the Democrats could be expected to judge his actions, and decide whether he ought to be their "darling." Or by "Democrat darling" did you mean the same thing as the AC: that the news media are uncritical of Democratic Party politicians?
(Score: 2) by butthurt on Friday May 19 2017, @06:53PM
> [...] Obama declared peace [...]
I asked where you learned this, but there was no answer. I found a transcript of his speech from 31 August 2010:
Of course, violence will not end with our combat mission. Extremists will continue to set off bombs, attack Iraqi civilians and try to spark sectarian strife.
--
https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2010/08/31/remarks-president-address-nation-end-combat-operations-iraq [archives.gov]
The moment of candour wasn't universally ignored by the news media. For example, one article was titled "President Obama Marks End of Combat in Iraq, Cites Challenges Ahead" and said:
Today the official name of the military mission in Iraq changes to "Operation New Dawn," but the president cautioned that does not mean the violence in Iraq is over, nor is the U.S. commitment to help fight it.
"Extremists will continue to set off bombs, attack Iraqi civilians and try to spark sectarian strife," Obama said.