Chelsea Manning sent to jail for refusing to testify in WikiLeaks case
Former Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning will be held in jail until she testifies before a grand jury or that grand jury is no longer operating, a federal judge in Alexandria ruled Friday.
Most of the hearing at which prosecutors argued for Manning to be held in contempt was sealed, but the court was open to the public for Judge Claude M. Hilton's ruling. "I've found you in contempt," Hilton said. He ordered her to custody immediately, "either until you purge yourself or the end of the life of the grand jury."
Manning was called to testify in an investigation into WikiLeaks, the anti-secrecy website she shared classified documents with back in 2010. Manning served seven years of a 35 year prison sentence for her leak before receiving a commutation from President Barack Obama.
Outside court before the hearing, Manning said she was prepared to go to jail. "These secret proceedings tend to favor the government," she said. "I'm always willing to explain things publicly."
Older article. Also at BBC, The Guardian, and Associated Press.
(Score: -1, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 09 2019, @02:35AM (20 children)
Just like Trump!
Read about his past!
(Score: 4, Informative) by RandomFactor on Saturday March 09 2019, @02:39AM (17 children)
I hate it when I mix people up too. Chelsea is a her.
В «Правде» нет известий, в «Известиях» нет правды
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Saturday March 09 2019, @02:49AM (7 children)
Your political correctness is noted.
(Score: 5, Funny) by Azuma Hazuki on Saturday March 09 2019, @03:57AM (3 children)
She's more of a man than you ever were or will be despite cutting the bits off and taking testosterone blockers. For that matter, *I* have more of the traditional manly virtues than you do and I'm an OEM, XX-chromosome-having model
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Saturday March 09 2019, @02:21PM (2 children)
I guess so. You and Bradley, and a whole bunch of others, including incels, are busy redefining what a man is. When you're done redefining all the bits and parts that make a man, I'm sure I will no longer WANT to be a man. Just remember, I have had assertiveness training, not sensitivity training. You and Bradley can sensitize all you like, but don't ever expect me to join you.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Saturday March 09 2019, @06:43PM
I admire Manning for what he did. I admire Manning for what she's doing here. It's Manning's actions and character that matter; what gender Manning wants to be yesterday or today or tomorrow is a sideshow distraction from the message about government corruption and crimes.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Saturday March 09 2019, @09:29PM
Wait, I thought your complaint with me was that I'm too *insensitive.* You know, a shrill, screeching, Nasty Woman (TM). Now I'm too attuned to peoples' emotions? Which is it, Runaway? And that's not a Bradley any longer. I can't pretend to understand trans* peoples' experiences, but I'm willing to take her at her word for what she is. If this triggers you, well, so much the better; I love the idea of not only respecting people but also making self-hating closet cases like you foam at the mouth while doing it.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 5, Informative) by aristarchus on Saturday March 09 2019, @06:33AM (1 child)
I just knew that ol' curmudgeon Runaway would not be able to stand for liverty on this one, but would revert to his old transphobic hog-loving ways.
(Score: 1, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Saturday March 09 2019, @02:22PM
So, you've got liver spots?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 10 2019, @12:43AM
Your virtue signaling has been noted.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 09 2019, @02:53AM (7 children)
Yeah, you are mixed up. He's a psychologically ill guy who has to take drugs, or he turns back into a pumpkin. He's a "her" only in his (and apparently yours too) head, not in the real world. This game you people play is not sustainable, requires too much conscious effort and infrastructure. Not worth it. It will only make us weak and sickly and crippled.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 09 2019, @02:56AM (3 children)
You're welcome to leave any time you want.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 09 2019, @04:35AM (2 children)
I hear ya, man! People who tell the bare naked ugly truth are real assholes, aren't they? Get them the hell away from us!
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 09 2019, @06:13AM (1 child)
Who needs science? This guy common senses!
/s cause this is SN
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 10 2019, @12:00AM
A politician that tells the truth will lose the election. Similarly, here a person posting the truth will be modded down and unjustly blocked from posting.
This guy Manning is a conman with very serious psychological issues. You can see it in those pics when he was in the army.
Self mutilation is not normal behavior.
(Score: 2) by RandomFactor on Saturday March 09 2019, @03:01AM (1 child)
What I found most humorous about the NPC meme is that some of them were so well done it was completely impossible to tell if it was an NPC or someone an NPC was mocking.
В «Правде» нет известий, в «Известиях» нет правды
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 09 2019, @07:05AM
Someone playing an NPC ? Say it ain't so, Joe! (The Joe here is "Shoeless" Joe Jackson, accused of throwing the World Series (of baseball, for non-USAians)) Here it not a matter just of betrayal and complicity and collusion, but plain logic?
(Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 09 2019, @03:02AM
Ever tried the shuffle? It is best performed on the edge of a mortal coil.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 09 2019, @03:44AM
It has been sent to jail.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 09 2019, @04:34AM (1 child)
manning for president!
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Saturday March 09 2019, @06:48PM
Manning for Senate, and then for chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee. Man, couldn't you just imagine the entire 3-letter agency community shitting its collective pants?
Yeah, put Manning there. Bring Snowden back in a similar capacity. Make Preet Bharara AG. That's some justice-y action right there.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Snotnose on Saturday March 09 2019, @02:40AM (28 children)
Can't really add anything, subject says it all. This is a very scary slippery slope we're sliding down.
When the dust settled America realized it was saved by a porn star.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Saturday March 09 2019, @02:50AM (25 children)
I will note that "contempt of court" has always been a thing. Please explain this "slippery slope".
(Score: 4, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 09 2019, @02:59AM (13 children)
Well, the right wing nut jobs see someone who is transgender and shit their pants. So things get slippery.
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 09 2019, @03:02AM (10 children)
while left wing nut jobs see someone confused, and start creaming in their panties - even more slippery
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 09 2019, @06:34AM (9 children)
You see, your reply needs to be grounded in reality for it to be poignant. Conservatives metaphorically shit their pants, start screaming "rape!" and whatnot when they encounter transgenders. Liberals see someone discovering their sexuality and they try to not be rude. It can be a little awkward at first, but just a little practice and it isn't that big a deal. The same genetic argument you make for strict gender typing doesn't always map perfectly to someone's mental configuration. Being gay is not a choice, identifying as male/female is not a choice.
That said, there is a spectrum of sexuality, most easily thought of in percentages. People can lie anywhere along the spectrum, from totally hetero to totally homo, and your uncomfortableness with this more recent popular acceptance is a YOU problem. It is now considered standard politeness to address someone as their obvious gender. If you have an issue it is ok to apologize and maybe even converse about it, but realize the "situation" is your problem. You are the antagonist.
So "PC" and "SJW" is really just people asking for standard politeness. No gender or racial slurs please, address people respectfully. That goes for all people, including whiteys (I can say that, its an in-group reference but as always mind the trolls) so we should spend a little more time worrying about the literal damage being done to our planet by our activities. Seek sustainability, use wind power stations to regulate extreme weather (HUGE fucking infrastructure needed NOW), tidal, potential massive flooding and damns to compartmentalize mass destruction.
Oh right, money. Umm, get over it and build some decent spreadsheets. No single human earns more than 100x any other. Seems fair, peak of your game and you're worth 100 other human beings. Then its resource management and we have plenty of people to help out with that. Money really shouldn't be the stumbling block of humanity. "Hey, those poor bastards got so hung up on their economic system that the population was decimated." They have some nice little villages now though, and they didn't completely forget how to use electricity.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 09 2019, @08:39AM (1 child)
Asking for politeness would be reasonable. You are not doing that. You are making demands, and then attacking people who disagree or who had a different notion of what is "obvious."
How did this thread start? Someone absolutely had to "correct" the pronoun used by AC, when pronouns have nothing at all to do with the story, and it's clear that AC doesn't give two hoots about which pronoun is preferred and deliberately used the opposite one. But SJWs have to score their virtue points somehow, don't they?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 09 2019, @08:11PM
Found the asshole
(Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 09 2019, @10:24AM (2 children)
You're on the left I see. You wouldn't be islamophobic, would you? Of course not! They have a beautiful culture, and can't be held to oppressive western standards...
This pronoun issue is going to die along with the people who care about asking people what their pronouns are. All such people will be killed.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 09 2019, @08:13PM
Found the psychopath
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Saturday March 09 2019, @09:41PM
You can be on the left and have a very rational fear--so not a "phobia" in the psychiatric sense--of Islam, and indeed all the Abrahamic religions. I sure as hell am and do. The key, though, is to fear the ideology, not the people, the disease, not the carriers. Or, put another more popular way, "hate the sin, not the sinner."
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by Runaway1956 on Saturday March 09 2019, @02:35PM (2 children)
So, uhhhm, you're appealing to me on the basis of some form of "politeness"? Hmmmmm . . .
Well, you know, I can actually do some of that, for some people who are very different from me. I can even do it for queers, of whatever variety. But - and this is a REALLY BIG BUT - we're talking about Bradley Manning here. If that little fuckwit happened to spontaneously combust in front of me, I wouldn't piss on him to put out the fire. The most polite thing that I could possibly do for him, is not to shoot him out of hand, if I should ever meet him.
While I have synonyms in mind, let me look up some more:
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 09 2019, @06:24PM
AC was going to try to appeal to you on the basis of pedantry but it seems someone beat him to it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 09 2019, @08:16PM
Found the.. oh it is Runaway. We find these truths to be self evident....
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 10 2019, @07:29AM
No it's not. Political correctness is the reason "colored person" is racist while "person of color" is not. "Black" used to be the correct term but now you have to say "African American".
wat
Is this word salad? Are you a bot?
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Saturday March 09 2019, @03:33AM (1 child)
Well usually they have the courtesy to wait until the weekend proper.
Some of us are still sober!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 09 2019, @07:19AM
zhmm, Slippery Runaway, with skidmarks! Kinky! Where are the Ruskie Poopie Tapes?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Snotnose on Saturday March 09 2019, @03:06AM (3 children)
2 words; "secret court". Or, if you prefer, "Secret proceedings'.
When the dust settled America realized it was saved by a porn star.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 09 2019, @03:10AM (2 children)
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Spamalope on Saturday March 09 2019, @03:18AM (1 child)
I guess you have to be at Hillary's level to use the 'I don't remember' defense.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by legont on Saturday March 09 2019, @04:40AM
Hillary Clinton is a liar, while Manning is not.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 3, Informative) by RandomFactor on Saturday March 09 2019, @03:20AM (3 children)
I'll take "What is a straw man?" for 100, Alex.
В «Правде» нет известий, в «Известиях» нет правды
(Score: 0, Offtopic) by Runaway1956 on Saturday March 09 2019, @03:43AM (2 children)
And, I'm sure you'll be very happy with your strawman, although no government in the United States will recognize your marriage to an inanimate object.
(Score: 2) by RandomFactor on Saturday March 09 2019, @05:03AM
Hmmm, i guess. I was referring to the battling AC strawmen below you.
В «Правде» нет известий, в «Известиях» нет правды
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 09 2019, @08:43AM
And yet you are considered "marriageable". Isn't that ironic.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by DrkShadow on Saturday March 09 2019, @04:20AM
There is an amendment, I believe it's the first one, that includes a right to freedom of speech (or not). I know, I know, it's worth nothing more than toilet paper now'adays, but anyway.
This toilet paper says explicitly that congress shall make no law infringing upon one's right to free speech. The judicial branch, being the judicial branch, cannot make law, and so isn't relevant here.
Consider that there _can_be_no_ law requiring speech of someone -- testimony. Congress isn't permitted to make such a law and the judicial branch can't make such law.
That slippery slope that was mentioned -- it's extralegal detainment, as evidenced here.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Saturday March 09 2019, @03:09PM (1 child)
I think the only notable thing here is
>Most of the hearing at which prosecutors argued for Manning to be held in contempt was sealed.
Trials about secret stuff are one thing. Secret trials are another and have no place in a democracy.
Manning can be a traitor or a hero[ine] or both, does not matter.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2, Flamebait) by Runaway1956 on Saturday March 09 2019, @03:51PM
Maybe we need a few more details. This is a Grand Jury, not a trial, right? I believe that it is common for grand juries to be closed, sealed, or otherwise secretive. The rules of a grand jury are quite different from the rules for juries in trials. The burden of proof is quite different, as well. While I agree that secret hearings, secret courts, and a myriad of other secrets are anti-democracy, grand juries, maybe not so much. All that happens in a grand jury is, the prosecutor convinces the jurists that something illegal may have happened, and that an investigation and a prosecution should take place.
I will also note that Manning is to be jailed for as long as the grand jury remains in existence, OR until he agrees to testify. That will *almost* certainly be for less than a year, and probably less than six months, possibly even less than a month. I don't think that grand juries are generally long lived.
And, finally, contempt of court is a more-or-less accepted tool that courts can use to compel a witness or defendant to do something. In this case, the court is attempting to compel Manning to testify.
I'm not sure where I stand on the secretiveness of this particular hearing, nor of the secretiveness of grand juries in general.
As a rule, I agree with you about secret hearings and secred courts. Maybe this grand jury is being abusive, maybe not. Maybe grand juries in general are abusive with their powers and authorities, maybe not. But, what I'm seeing is a common-place kind of thing here. It happens in every county in this nation, pretty routinely.
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Saturday March 09 2019, @04:49PM
Considering that she agreed to give evidence if the hearing was public, I have to agree.
OTOH, while I may think this judge abusive and unjust, I must acknowledge that there have been judges like that back to the Alien and Sedition acts...and you can't go much further back and still be in the same legal system. "Contempt of Court" is a decision that nearly begs to be abused.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 09 2019, @06:12PM
Are you serious?
Slippery slope was passed a long time ago...
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 09 2019, @03:50AM (29 children)
Good. I hope that Chelsea finishes the remainder of his original 35 year sentence there. Treason is still treason, no matter the motivation.
Perhaps while in prison, Chelsea will get the mental health care that he desperately needs.
(Score: 5, Informative) by mendax on Saturday March 09 2019, @04:42AM (22 children)
Not likely. She'll be held in a jail, not a prison. There is no mental health care in such places. And even in prisons mental health care is minimal. Most prisoners are crazy and need help.
BTW, Chelsea Manning is a she despite her chromosomes. Gender dysphoria is real.
It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 09 2019, @05:33AM (11 children)
It is. Unhappiness about one's condition is as old as humanity. Including Chelsea/Bradley's unhappiness about being a man. I don't mind if he wants to live like a woman. But he's still a man.
(Score: 0, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 09 2019, @08:47AM
You seem to be very focused on Manning's gender. Is there something you want to get off of your chest? Maybe lower?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Thexalon on Saturday March 09 2019, @01:30PM (9 children)
Why do you care so much about the gender identity of someone you'll probably never meet and almost definitely never have sex with? Seriously, what's it to you at all? It's a simple enough rule: Call someone by the name they want to use. What's the problem?
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2, Disagree) by Bot on Saturday March 09 2019, @03:18PM (5 children)
The problem is that you are dictating me which words to use. One thing is me having responsibility for what I utter. Another is censorship.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by Arik on Saturday March 09 2019, @05:29PM (1 child)
Just telling you you're being senselessly rude. Regardless of how you conceptualize it, there's no point in injecting that into every conversation.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 10 2019, @12:18PM
"How many lights do you see there?"
"I see four lights."
"No. There are five."
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Thexalon on Saturday March 09 2019, @06:26PM (2 children)
"Hi, I'm Bill."
"No, you're Jane."
"No, I'm Bill. You should call me Bill."
"Stop putting words in my mouth! I'll call you whatever I want!"
"OK, I'll call you whatever I want too, you total jerk! Goodbye."
"Waaaa, why was she so mean to me?"
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Sunday March 10 2019, @11:43AM (1 child)
- Hi this is an apple.
- No it's a pear.
- No, as you can see I removed all pear shaped parts and i want it to be an apple so you should call it apple.
- No it's a pear shaped like an apple and you offend me if you don't submit to the idea that being pear or apple is not intrinsic.
- Well, fuck you.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Monday March 11 2019, @12:57PM
The difference, which should be blindingly obvious, is that pears and apples aren't people.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 09 2019, @08:46PM (1 child)
Same reason I'll still say your hair color is black, even if you get it into your head to identify it as hot pink. Because things are as they are, not what you wish them to be.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 10 2019, @02:15AM
So my hair color is "black" even if I dye it "pink"?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 10 2019, @06:00AM
Agreed. I do not get all of the hatred directed at Rachel Dolezal either.
Why do they care so much about the race that someone identifies as they'll probably never meet and almost definitely never have sex with? Seriously, what's it to them at all?
(Score: 1, Informative) by loonycyborg on Saturday March 09 2019, @08:54AM (9 children)
Gender is purely social construct, only objective thing about it is which part you take during procreation(and currently it's impossible to change person's sex without disrupting fertility). Attaching any other meaning to it is prejudice. Consequently I wouldn't consider a person who wants to try out other societal template to be having a medical condition. But why limit yourself to boring old templates of "male" and "female"?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by fyngyrz on Saturday March 09 2019, @04:03PM (8 children)
No, it isn't. It is a biological state.
The only relevant question as to a person's actual gender is, are the individual's chromosomes XX, XY, or other? Other is very, very rare, but it happens.
Those things, and the various downstream biological development related issues, are what determine gender.
All else is various combinations of surgery, plumage, and behavior. Those things cannot accomplish actual gender change. They comprise various degrees of posing, no more than that.
Having gone there, and no doubt ruffled a few feathers, I will add this: It's absolutely no problem if someone wants to pose as a gender they are actually not in the general case. Also no problem if they want to go as far as to have surgery to meet whatever imitative standard they personally embrace. More power to them, and have fun, I hope. Doesn't matter what bathroom they use, doesn't matter what clothes they choose, or how they walk. Etc., for everything that is not actively sexual.
Everyone poses. When someone says something idiotic, and I respond politely, I am posing. What I am actually thinking is that they are an idiot. When we choose specific clothing, shoes, jewelry, makeup, etc., we are posing — even when the choice is "I don't care." We still have made a choice. We are establishing a set of apparent characteristics and signals for others to take in, and hopefully, perceive us as we would prefer. That's pretty much a basic human instinct as far as I can determine, something the vast majority all have in common. So pose away. Everyone. Again, by all means, have fun.
However... someone posing as the opposite gender should clearly and unequivocally let anyone know exactly what they are doing in this regard before they allow any sort of sexual component to arise in a relationship. Doesn't matter if it's straight or gay sex; most (almost all) people make very specific and consequential choices as to consent based on the gender they believe they are interacting with.
The root problem is one of informed consent. Like all such problems, if a person in the circumstance is led to it without being informed, it is an abject violation of their liberties, as informed consent cannot have taken place. That is always a bad thing.
Personally, upon being so informed at the proper time, I'd disengage as politely as I know how from any sexual aspect (which is quite polite.) If I weren't so informed, I'd end the relationship when I found out based on what I consider to be an absolutely unforgivable violation of trust and personal liberty. Perhaps not quite as politely, but I like to think I'd at least try to go there.
But my polite outlook is not typical. Many people would react far more strongly than I would, whether we as a society (or at least, the sane portion of society) would prefer that to be the case, or not. It can be outright dangerous to take these poses into a sexual relationship sub-rosa, as well as a violation of trust and personal liberty. So doing it is both wrong and may be unsafe.
--
Want about to a race conditions? hear joke
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Saturday March 09 2019, @06:39PM (4 children)
By "very rare", you mean quite possibly 1 in every 60 people or so who aren't quite one of the standard 2 physical sex packages. That's a bit unusual, but not so unusual as to be "very rare". Until recently, it was common for doctors to "fix" whatever the baby was born as by surgically converting them into one of the 2 standard models.
And yes, disclosure before sex is part of the etiquette to my understanding, and trans and intersex folks talk a lot amongst themselves about when to disclose what. However, they do have to be extremely careful about it, because disclosing not-totally-infrequently leads to them being murdered, especially if they're transwomen talking to cismen. You can understand why they're a bit nervous about doing so under those conditions.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by fyngyrz on Saturday March 09 2019, @07:07PM (3 children)
Here's some reasonably trustworthy data:
XXX syndrome: frequency is approximately 1 in 1,000 female infants; occurs more commonly with older mothers.
Turner syndrome (females with only one X chromosome): estimates of its frequency range from 1 in 2,000 to 1 in 5,000 female infants.
Klinefelter syndrome (XXY or more rarely XXXY or XY/XXY): frequency of Klinefelter syndrome has been reported to be between 1 in 500 and 1 in 1000 male births.
Jacob's syndrome (males inherit an extra Y chromosome, XYY): this may be as common as 1 in 900 male births to as rare as 1 in 1500 or even 1 in 2,000.
Reference [palomar.edu]
Mine as well. However, for the rabid and/or neurotic — on both sides of the issue — it's well worth laying it out explicitly. With particular emphasis on before any potentially sexually charged contact, from hand-holding, hugs, kisses, and up, because anything later is broken.
--
Perfect has seven letters. So does Foooood.
Coincidence? I think not.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 09 2019, @08:26PM (2 children)
Ah the fools who think gender is only tied to genitals. Doesn't explain homosexuality, a trait found in other species so it isn't just some mental disorder.
Get educated before you spout off like an expert.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 09 2019, @08:51PM
Why are you so foolish to think that your choice in sex partners depends on your gender?
(Score: 2) by fyngyrz on Sunday March 10 2019, @09:43PM
Ah, those fine individuals who can't comprehend what they read:
--
If cats could text back, they probably wouldn't.
(Score: 0, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 09 2019, @11:55PM (2 children)
You are confusing gender with sex. Gender is social; sex is biologic, and the biology is much less clean than you think. You should try reading about androgen insensitivity sometime.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 10 2019, @02:17AM
I'll just listen to an early Bowie album or two. He seemed to have figured things out.
(Score: 2) by fyngyrz on Sunday March 10 2019, @10:09PM
No, you are confusing gender with posing. Despite the politically correct attempt to arrogate gender as an amorphous term for posing, or not posing, as a gender one is not; gender is a fixed thing you are born with.
Gender is specifically your actual sexual identity, without regard to any posing you might be doing to make people (perhaps including yourself) imagine otherwise.
Short of genetic revision post-birth, gender is the cards you're dealt. That doesn't — can't, as yet — change no matter what cards you pretend to have, regardless of what combination your posing is based upon: plumage, drug regimens, surgery, and/or behavior.
No matter how enthusiastically you pose as a gender you are not, you're no more that other gender than a white man wearing blackface is a black man. It's a pose.
Let me be perfectly clear: If you're born a woman, you will always be a woman; if you're born a man, you will always be a man; and if you're born as other, you'll always be that, too... there's no fix for such mutations. Yet.
"Identifying" as the gender you aren't is a pose. No more, no less. Nothing at all wrong with it unless you try to deceive someone into an act in a non-informed, and hence non-consensual manner. But that doesn't somehow make a change in reality. For that, you're going to have to look to (considerable) future advancement in the genetic sciences.
AIS is a hormone-related deleterious mutation that affects males (XY). If the individual was female (XX), it wouldn't have that effect. See how that works? There are uncountable mutations that have deleterious (and beneficial) effects upon the body. That's a downstream issue from gender; and for AIS, that is patently obvious from the fact that it only affects males.
--
When I dunk my cookies, I think of you.
I hold them under until the bubbles stop.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 09 2019, @07:45AM (1 child)
Spoken like a true robobrain bootlicker.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Saturday March 09 2019, @03:24PM
if I say x is x, the worst thing you can do is an ad hominem. Best to argue whether topic is instance of x.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by pe1rxq on Saturday March 09 2019, @01:20PM (3 children)
The US is founded on treason... or do you still consider it a British colony?
(Score: 2) by Bot on Saturday March 09 2019, @03:21PM (2 children)
>The US is founded on treason
genocide*
but you are arguing that history is peppered with rape and murder so those are fine.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by pe1rxq on Saturday March 09 2019, @04:34PM (1 child)
No, I am arguing that laws should not be treated as absolutes. There is historic precedent to consider treason to be ok in some cases.
Same actually with e.g. murder: the whole idea behind the Geneva conventions is that it can be ok to kill.....
So there is no absolute law, only grey areas and a lot of opinions and dissagrement on the shade of grey....
(Score: 2) by Bot on Sunday March 10 2019, @01:13PM
Laws should be absolute. Sometimes not STRICT, if you get the difference. I don't like draconian laws either.
The problem is that if you start considering law flexible, then you give more power to someone else, namely who is in charge of applying law. The more flexible the law, the more absolute the power in the hand of the judge.
Same if the laws are too many or if precedent rulings trump laws.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 3, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 09 2019, @04:27AM (3 children)
And your ass end up in jail.
America, Fuck Yeah.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by realDonaldTrump on Saturday March 09 2019, @06:51AM (2 children)
The Mob takes the Fifth. If you're innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Saturday March 09 2019, @09:55AM (1 child)
If you are innocent, why are you protesting that much FBI's investigation?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 1, Informative) by realDonaldTrump on Saturday March 09 2019, @11:23AM
After I fired Lyin’ James Comey -- a total sleaze -- he flew back to Washington from California on the Taxpayers Dime. That wasn't right! I didn't approve of that! That was wrong. Why don't they investigate that one? It was approved by Andrew McCabe. I told him to look into that. To investigate the hell out of it. But, he didn't -- why? Instead the corrupt former leaders of the FBI, almost all fired or forced to leave the agency for some very bad reasons, opened up an investigation on me, for no reason & with NO PROOF!!
Funny thing about Sanctimonious James Comey. Everybody wanted him fired, Republican and Democrat alike. After the rigged & botched Crooked Hillary investigation, where she was interviewed on July 4th Weekend, not recorded or sworn in, and where she said she didn’t know anything (a lie), the FBI was in complete turmoil (see N.Y. Post) because of Comey’s poor leadership and the way he handled the Clinton mess (not to mention his usurpation of powers from the Justice Department). My firing of James Comey was a great day for America. He was a Crooked Cop who is being totally protected by his best friend, Bob Mueller, & the 13 Angry Democrats -- leaking machines who have NO interest in going after the Real Collusion (and much more) by Crooked Hillary Clinton, her Campaign, and the Democratic National Committee. Just Watch!
Will the FBI ever recover it's once stellar reputation, so badly damaged by Lyin’ James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Peter S and his lover, the lovely agent Lisa Page, & more, and other top officials now dismissed or fired? So many of the great men and women of the FBI have been hurt by these clowns and losers, all disgraced and/or fired and caught in the act.
They tried to do a number on your President. Part of the Witch Hunt. Disgraced Andrew McCabe pretended to be a "poor little Angel" when in fact he was a big part of the Crooked Hillary Scandal & the Russia Hoax -- a puppet for Leakin’ James Comey. I.G. report on McCabe was devastating. Part of "insurance policy" in case I won. Many of the top FBI brass were fired, forced to leave, or left. McCabe’s wife received BIG DOLLARS ($700,000) for his wife's political run from Hillary Clinton and her representatives -- he gave Hillary a pass. McCabe is a disgrace to the FBI and a disgrace to our Country. Why didn't A.G. Sessions replace him? Drain the Swamp!
By the way, I have been FAR tougher on Russia than Obama, Bush or Clinton. Maybe tougher than any other President. At the same time, & as I have often said, getting along with Russia is a good thing, not a bad thing. I fully expect that someday we will have good relations with Russia again! Working hard!
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 09 2019, @01:17PM (2 children)
Pretty simple formula. Your 'beliefs' are not relevant here. All you have to do is just state you dont recall. You satisfied your legal obligation and get to sleep in your own bed that night.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 09 2019, @10:44PM
No law was broken here, honey try to keep up.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 10 2019, @03:51AM
Contempt of court is based on the premise that if a judge told you to do something, there is nothing to debate. However in compelling testimony to be given in a secret hearing, clearly that premise is is being overreached. The reason we don't do this in this country, is to prevent somebody from standing in the doorway with a blowtorch saying: "Now you remember that it went like this.... right?". The other issue, is that a secret grand jury made up of hand picked cronies can invent whatever testimony it wants regardless of what she says. She didn't say she wouldn't testify, she said she wouldn't testify in secret. The judges response should tell you that the persons demanding the grand jury have something to hide, or are looking to execute some miscarriage of justice.
With contempt of court, judges regard your ability to remember as being at their discretion. As there is no checks or balances on the refusal of habeas corpus to in/validate any declarations or accusations he may make, they have gotten away with it so far. No right to jury, no jurisdiction. It is that simple, and it goes all the way back to the British law that the Constitution derives from. By refusing to testify she is acting directly in defense of the 5th amendment. Which is certainly as much of an act of defending this country as splitting some dipshits wig in some shithole desert somewhere. It is an honorable behavior.
Really what is needed is a law that says: if civil litigation is brought against a judge, and it is found by a jury that contempt of court was used in an unlawful way, the judge has to serve the same amount of days in the clink as the guy he locked up. That would put a stop to this shit PDQ.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 10 2019, @04:44AM
https://youtu.be/WkFsgU_WLko [youtu.be]