So you’d consider the United States an enemy if you lived in any other country. You are a traitor at heart.
From Ellsberg to Manning to Snowden, the government has shown that it will never compartmentalize secret data so that one person can’t unleash a huge trove of information they had no discernible reason to be allowed access to. Ellsberg was at least somewhat high on the org chart, but the US doesn’t really have any controls to entry level personnel having huge amounts of sensitive data. Why aren’t their immediate supervisors being fired? Why does this happen decade after decade? These guys didn’t even get turned by foreign enemies. Imagine what is going out that we will never know about because they didn’t go public? We are paying huge amounts for war preparation and secrecy when in fact the American public are really the only people being effectively kept from these secrets.
I took it as an argument that you were once again talking out of your ass when you said
…but that’s just me.
That’s my question. Why is data security not apparently on anyone’s radar over at HQ?
When you think of the long and gloomy history of man, you will find more hideous crimes have been committed in the name of obedience than have ever been committed in the name of rebellion. –C.P. Snow
When you get 3-1/2 years in an apartment for being obedient versus 35 years in a cell for being rebellious, duh!
Possibly. As an American, I have a vested interest in America not getting nuked to smithereens.
There seem to be several people in this and other threads who are of the opinion that since Bradley Manning has now decided he wants to be a girl, the Army is obligated to give him hormones and surgery while he’s in prison.
I didn’t miss anything. You clipped my post to exclude the part where I already answered that question. Here:
Since we’re not in those other threads, wherever they might be, please quote those in this one that say that the Army is obligated to give him hormones and surgery.
Where does that article say anything about surgery?
[QUOTE=Second Stone]
From Ellsberg to Manning to Snowden, the government has shown that it will never compartmentalize secret data so that one person can’t unleash a huge trove of information they had no discernible reason to be allowed access to.
[/QUOTE]
After 9/11, everybody and their grandma freaked out that various agencies were not sharing intelligence with each other to “connect the dots.” There were all these catchphrases, like “need to know should now be need to share.” The 9/11 Commission wrote a whole chapter on the irresponsibility of compartmentalizing interesting documents. (Well, they didn’t use those words, but that’s still accurate.)
So you were talking out of your ass yet again concerning your latest claim? Just as I thought.
I remember that vaguely and I gotta tell you, even as a 7th-grader, I was not expecting them to share all their data with every low-level flunky and coffee gopher.
We could go with this post in which I was cursed at for suggesting that the Army shouldn’t give Bradley Manning surgery.
OR we can just admit that when we made the claim that others in this thread said that he should be given hormones and surgery we didn’t know what the fuck we were talking about.
Also inaccurate. My issue with you is your attitude towards transexuality in general, not the treatment of Manning in particular.
Fair enough. You’re dodging my point, then.
While I don’t hold that changing/correcting one’s gender is akin to a nose job, would you say that it is elective? Also, do you think that Manning (or anyone in a similar circumstance) should expect the government to pick up the tab? If so, doesn’t that reward bad behavior. Why should doing something that gets you thrown in jail result in you receiving a nice pricey gift? Why shouldn’t he have to wait till he gets out and then get the surgery on his own?
Transexuality is a legitimate and serious medical condition, and I consider treating it to be a medical necessity. However, the process of changing one’s gender isn’t just a matter of a single procedure, but a whole host of different potential treatments, not all of which are applicable to (or desired by) every patient. Many of those treatments I would consider to be elective. Most of them I would consider deferable. I’m generally okay with surgery not being made available to Manning while she’s in prison, although I’d want any decision to withhold surgery to be made by a doctor, and not done as a matter of administrative policy.
I do think hormones should be made available to her while she’s in prison, though. The earlier you start hormone treatment, the more effective it is. By refusing them, they’re making future medical treatment after Manning is released less effective, which I think goes beyond the scope of her punishment. Surgery, by and large, could be performed at any point after she gets out without a dramatic reduction in effectiveness.