Whistleblowers

It's about time we freed Chelsea (Bradley) Manning.


There's a major reason why we should not only free Chelsea (Bradley) Manning, but actively commend him in the press, as well as Edward Snowden and Julian Assange. The reason being, the less persecution they received and the more praise they receive, the more likely someone else is to be brave and Blow the Whistle.

I feel like there is a final power grab happening and everyone is trying to place their bets down before the roulette wheel starts to spin..

We could definitely be doing more!

Whistle blower laws are a joke. They claim to protect those who speak up when they see something wrong, but always seem to find a way to persecute them. If people were truly protected under those laws, I believe we would see more coming forward with some pretty damning evidence. I don't think they should be allowed to expose information that would put lives in danger, but when it comes to corruption, political/corporate manipulation and just plain wrong doings, turn'em loose.

a reply to: TechUnique

Don't you mean Chelsea Manning?

originally posted by: TDawgRex
a reply to: TechUnique

Don't you mean Chelsea Manning?

Yes, Chelsea Manning.

AP Stylebook, which is (arguably) the standard for serious reporting and journalism states that when reporting on a person of interest, it is always appropriate to use their name of choice, only adding a legal name if their chosen name is a pseudonym.

a reply to: TechUnique

This is a tough cookie to crack--on one hand, I am glad we know what we know because of what these guys leaked, but on the other hand, I despise the way in which it was done and the harm that it put some people in.

I'm for whistleblowing, but I'm not for putting average people in harms way by doing just a Walmart-sized info dump to the media. If someone needs to blow a whistle on something, I'm all for it, but it needs to be done in an appropriate way as to do the least amount of harm to individuals not complicit in making the secretive or illegal decisions (the acts that need revealed).

The problem with at least Manning and Assange (who I think is a jackass) is that they divulge information with reckless disregard for who may get hurt in the process. Sure, get the major players and out them, but have some respect for the little guy who becomes collateral damage.

So, yes, blow whistles, people, just do it in the most thoughtful way possible, especially during times of war.

a reply to: AgentShillington

Actually, his legal name is Chelsea Elizabeth Manning--from what I've read, he legally changed it.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

I agree pal, depending on how people blow the whistle is a fine line between War & Peace...


I wouldn't be surprised if the whole Russia/U.S saga is truly due to Edward Snowden's revelations.


Gotta be done in the right manner imo...


Not just thrown into the public...

But then these people probably want unorganised Revolution.

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: TechUnique

This is a tough cookie to crack--on one hand, I am glad we know what we know because of what these guys leaked, but on the other hand, I despise the way in which it was done and the harm that it put some people in.

I'm for whistleblowing, but I'm not for putting average people in harms way by doing just a Walmart-sized info dump to the media. If someone needs to blow a whistle on something, I'm all for it, but it needs to be done in an appropriate way as to do the least amount of harm to individuals not complicit in making the secretive or illegal decisions (the acts that need revealed).

The problem with at least Manning and Assange (who I think is a jackass) is that they divulge information with reckless disregard for who may get hurt in the process. Sure, get the major players and out them, but have some respect for the little guy who becomes collateral damage.

So, yes, blow whistles, people, just do it in the most thoughtful way possible, especially during times of war.

To counter, I present Death Star Politics. (Warning: Language)

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: AgentShillington

Actually, his legal name is Chelsea Elizabeth Manning--from what I've read, he legally changed it.

Yes, Chelsea is her legal name.

You cant make a omelet without cracking a few eggs .You can do surgical drone attacks without killing wedding parties .It seems like there is a lot of negative things you might cause inadvertently by telling the truth . Truth sometimes hurts but is it important to know ? It seems more important to hide the lies then to let the truth leek out . So many choices and so little time to decide .

Sorry guys I forgot to add the Chelsea part.

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: AgentShillington

Actually, his legal name is Chelsea Elizabeth Manning--from what I've read, he legally changed it.

Don't you mean...she?

a reply to: AgentShillington

Death Star Politics isn't a counter to my point, it supports it. The "empire" in my point is actually the whistleblower who does a massive dump of information without consideration for the roofers who will get shot up. The Service Members can't possibly, consciously be expected to consider the possbility of people like Manning being in their ranks when then join the military, so to imply via Death Star Politics that they should have been able to consider the risk and back out is inaccurate.

originally posted by: TDawgRex

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: AgentShillington

Actually, his legal name is Chelsea Elizabeth Manning--from what I've read, he legally changed it.

Don't you mean...she?

Nope. I'll call him Chelsea because that's his legal name. He didn't legally change his birth sex/gender, so I will the proper scientific pronoun until he has a vagina, female reproductive organs, and has the ability to produce milk from his nipples. Contrary to popular belief, one can't truly milk anything with nipples.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

Chelsea has sought legal gender reassignment. It isn't her fault that the government hasn't honored that request.

From your signature..

Liberties are not granted by government but are protected from government.

Contrary to popular belief, not every woman has a vagina, reproductive organs, and the ability to produce milk from their nipples.

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: AgentShillington

Death Star Politics isn't a counter to my point, it supports it. The "empire" in my point is actually the whistleblower who does a massive dump of information without consideration for the roofers who will get shot up. The Service Members can't possibly, consciously be expected to consider the possbility of people like Manning being in their ranks when then join the military, so to imply via Death Star Politics that they should have been able to consider the risk and back out is inaccurate.

You can't possibly believe what ti is you are typing.

Really, the whistleblower is the Empire? Really? How about, The Empire is the Government. The Contractors are The Contractors, and the Rebels are the Whistleblowers.

Anyone working as a government contractor is under assumed risk, and anyone working under an government that is less than transparent is also at risk when said secrets are divulged.

Dude...

Many Gungans died to bring you this information.

HELLO?!

originally posted by: SlapMonkey

originally posted by: TDawgRex

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: AgentShillington

Actually, his legal name is Chelsea Elizabeth Manning--from what I've read, he legally changed it.

Don't you mean...she?

Nope. I'll call him Chelsea because that's his legal name. He didn't legally change his birth sex/gender, so I will the proper scientific pronoun until he has a vagina, female reproductive organs, and has the ability to produce milk from his nipples. Contrary to popular belief, one can't truly milk anything with nipples.

Just FYI pronouns and language in general are not based on science and facts. But feel free to use superficial non scientific understanding of biology to justify your prejudice. Facts are only facts when you believe they are and it's clear what your beliefs are on this topic

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: AgentShillington

Actually, his legal name is Chelsea Elizabeth Manning--from what I've read, he legally changed it.

The kid has literally been brainwashed by the CIA to believe he is and act like a transgender person. This was done in part by the CIA mind controllers to humiliate and punish the real Bradley Manning and as a warning to all potential whistleblowers

Extreme Solitary Confinement: What Did Bradley Manning Experience?

www.thedailybeast.com...

a reply to: DAVID64

yes, I agree but the first step in protecting whistleblowers is pubic sentiment. The reasons the mass media shills crucify whilteblowers is because they are trying to drive public sentiment about whistleblowers in the direction their master want it to go.

This is where you need to start contacting your politicians and making your sentiment known to them. Politicians react to the greatest amount of pressure applied to them. Doing this is how the public pushes back against the media shills.

I always get a shudder when I see the name "Snowden" listed as a whistleblower. Assange to some degree as well. Snowden is a known prior CIA operative and there is no reason to believe - at all - that he ever changed allegiances. Assange managed to skirt a massive hacking prosecution back in the day - which is reason to suspect that he made a deal at that time.

However I'll put Assange aside, as I have mixed feelings about him and focus on Snowden. What did Snowden really tell us? In actuality it was very, very little. His leaks did substantiate what many, many people already suspected and were discussing - but his "revelations" did not add much to the discussion other than verifying what was already in the wild.

Let me put it this way - no member of the US Government could come forward and happily announce that the NSA can watch us - and then go on to suggest that this surveillance is to such a degree that even our texts are analyzed. Everything digital is filtered and stored to be held and potentially used against us later.

THAT would upset the apple cart in a huge way. BUT, from a political standpoint - Intelligence agencies would LOVE for us all to know / believe in that level of control...

What better way to tell us than to get an agent to "leak" it? Not only do people not freak out, but they herald the messenger as a hero.

IMO this is the true story of Snowden.

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter
The kid has literally been brainwashed by the CIA to believe he is and act like a transgender person. This was done in part by the CIA mind controllers to humiliate and punish the real Bradley Manning and as a warning to all potential whistleblowers

The implication here is insulting. You are suggesting that being transgendered is to be seen as humiliation and a punishment. This isn't how "brainwashing" works, nor is it how genderdysmorphia works. Read a book before spreading your hateful garbage.