Julian Assange’s health in ‘dangerous’ condition, say …

Two clinicians who examined Assange renew calls for him to be given safe passage to hospital

Julian Assanges long stay in the Ecuadorian embassy in London is having a dangerous impact on his physical and mental health, according to clinicians who carried out the most recent assessments of him.

The pair renewed calls for the WikiLeaks publisher to be granted safe passage to a London hospital.

Sondra Crosby, a doctor and associate professor at the Boston Universitys school of medicine and public health, and Brock Chisholm, a London-based consultant clinical psychologist, examined Assange for 20 hours over three days in October.

In an article for the Guardian, they wrote: While the results of the evaluation are protected by doctor-patient confidentiality, it is our professional opinion that his continued confinement is dangerous physically and mentally to him and a clear infringement of his human right to healthcare.

Although the two did not go into details, Assanges health appears to be deteriorating significantly after more than five years holed up in the embassy.

The doctors assessment offers the first clues about Assanges condition since WikiLeaks in 2016 published documents setting out the impact of life in the confines of the embassy on his mental and physical health.

Since he sought refuge in the embassy in June 2012, following an extradition request from Sweden over allegations of sexual assault, there have been various reports that he has a serious shoulder issue that requires an MRI scan, which would be near impossible to organise inside the embassy. He is also said to have a lung problem.

The UK government refused an earlier request to allow Assange safe passage for hospital treatment. A fall-back position would be to allow doctors with the necessary medical equipment into the embassy, but the size of the equipment needed appears to rule out this option.

Supporters of Assange have expressed fears that if he leaves the embassy, police will arrest him for jumping bail and, once in custody, he will face the prospect of extradition to the US, where he could face a lengthy jail sentence over the publication of classified material including the Iraq war logs and state department cables, both reported on by the Guardian.

The article was co-written by Crosby, Chisholm and Sean Love, a doctor in training at a Boston hospital. Love, on a trip to London last May, visited Assange. Afterwards, he proposed a medical evaluation be carried out.

Crosby, who has done extensive work on human rights and refugees, and Chisholm, who specialises in trauma cases, wrote in the article: It is unconscionable that Mr Assange is in the position of having to decide between avoiding arrest and potentially suffering the health consequences, including death, and the need to call an ambulance if a life-threatening crisis such as a heart attack were to occur.

Further, our assessment reveals that he has had no access to sunlight, appropriate ventilation or outside space for over five and a half years. This has taken a considerable physical as well as psychological toll.

They urged the British Medical Association and colleagues in the UK to demand safe access to medical care for Assange.

Medical conditions are a matter of privacy but a representative of Assange said he had approved Crosby, Chisholm and Love writing the article.

The Ecuadorian embassy, which has granted citizenship to Assange, is in negotiations with the UK government in an attempt to end the stand-off.

The US attorney general, Jeff Sessions, said last year that arresting Assange was a priority for the US. The FBI is investigating WikiLeaks.

Read more from the original source:
Julian Assange’s health in ‘dangerous’ condition, say …

Bitcoin Opacity Medium

It may fail but we now know how to doit

Foreword to the book by Saifedean Ammous

Let us follow the logic of things from the beginning. Or, rather, from the end: modern times. We are, as I am writing these lines, witnessing a complete riot against some class of experts, in domains that are too difficult for us to understand, such as macroeconomic reality, and in which not only the expert is not an expert, but he doesnt know it. That previous Federal Reserve bosses, Greenspan and Bernanke, had little grasp of empirical reality is something we only discovered a bit too late: one can macroBS longer than microBS, which is why we need to be careful on who to endow with centralized macro decisions.

What makes it worse is that all central banks operated under the same model, making it a perfect monoculture.

In the complex domain, expertise doesnt concentrate: under organic reality, things work in a distributed way, as Hayek has convincingly demonstrated. But Hayek used the notion of distributed knowledge. Well, it looks like we do not even need that thing called knowledge for things to work well. Nor do we need individual rationality. All we need is structure.

It doesnt mean all participants have a democratic sharing of decisions. One motivated participant can disproportionately move the needle (what I have studied as the asymmetry of the minority rule). But every participant has the option to be that player.

Somehow, under scale transformation, emerges a miraculous effect: rational markets do not require any individual trader to be rational. In fact they work well under zero-intelligence a zero intelligence crowd, under the right design, works better than a Soviet-style management composed to maximally intelligent humans.

Which is why Bitcoin is an excellent idea. It fulfills the needs of the complex system, not because it is a cryptocurrency, but precisely because it has no owner, no authority that can decide on its fate. It is owned by the crowd, its users. And it has now a track record of several years, enough for it to be an animal in its own right.

For other cryptocurrencies to compete, they need to have such a Hayekian property.

Bitcoin is a currency without a government. But, one may ask, didnt we have gold, silver and other metals, another class of currencies without a government? Not quite. When you trade gold, you trade loco Hong Kong and end up receiving a claim on a stock there, which you might need to move to New Jersey. Banks control the custodian game and governments control banks (or, rather, bankers and government officials are, to be polite, tight together). So Bitcoin has a huge advantage over gold in transactions: clearance does not require a specific custodian. No government can control what code you have in your head.

Finally, Bitcoin will go through hick-ups (hiccups). It may fail; but then it will be easily reinvented as we now know how it works. In its present state, it may not be convenient for transactions, not good enough to buy your decaffeinated expresso macchiato at your local virtue-signaling coffee chain. It may be too volatile to be a currency, for now. But it is the first organic currency.

But its mere existence is an insurance policy that will remind governments that the last object establishment could control, namely, the currency, is no longer their monopoly. This gives us, the crowd, an insurance policy against an Orwellian future.

Excerpt from:

Bitcoin Opacity Medium

Edward Snowden is campaigning against the worlds largest …

American whistleblower and former Central Intelligence Agency employee Edward Snowden has joined the campaign against Aadhaar, Indias 12-digit unique identification number programme that has been under fire for its security and privacy systems.

On Sunday, Jan. 21, Snowden backed KC Verma, former head of Indias external intelligence agency, the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), who had written about his experiences with Aadhaar. Snowden retweeted the article published in The Wire saying the act of organisations such as banks and telcos forcing individuals to produce their Aadhaar numbers should be criminalized.

Snowdens voice against the Aadhaar programme has been growing louder ever since he first made a reference to the scheme on Jan. 04 after tech journalist Zack Whittaker tweeted a Buzzfeed News piece on the alleged security breach of the Aadhaar database.

A couple of days later, he spoke up on Twitter against the state-run Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) filing a first information report (FIR) against a journalist with The Tribune newspaper who wrote about security breaches of the Aadhaar database. The journalist, Rachna Khaira, described in an article how she paid just Rs500 ($7.84) to buy Aadhaar data from an anonymous seller over WhatsApp.

Snowden, currently under temporary asylum in Russia, also retweeted a statement posted on Twitter by the editor-in-chief of The Tribune.

In addition to openly pointing out flaws in the Aadhaar system, Snowden has also spent time retweeting multiple complaints from Indians about their experiences with Aadhaar.

For months now, Aadhaar has been under attack due to privacy concerns and criticisms of the flawed implementation of the programme, forcing the UIDAI to step up its security processes by introducing new features such as a Virtual ID to authenticate and verify the Aadhaar numbers. Ever since 2015, there have been a number of purported data breaches, including duplication of cards and fraudulent bank transactions made using leaked biometric data.

Meanwhile, the implementation of the Aadhaar scheme is currently being evaluated by a five-member bench in the supreme court of India, led by chief justice Dipak Misra. The perusal follows multiple petitions filed in the courts over the security and privacy being maintained by the UIDAI. This includes a case filed by a womens rights activist claiming that linking Aadhaar data to mobile phone numbers violates privacy, and another filed by a group of bank employees stating they dont have the wherewithal to provide Aadhaar-related services.

The hearing comes four months after the supreme court ruled that privacy is a fundamental right of all Indians, which immediately put a cloud over the aggressive linking of Aadhaar with other schemes and programmes under the Narendra Modi government.

Read the original post:
Edward Snowden is campaigning against the worlds largest …

Linda Sarsour Backs Traitor Bradley Manning for Senate …

Pro-sharia extremist Linda Sarsour put her support behind U.S. traitor Bradley Manning for his Senate run and not a single person is shocked.They are two peas in a pod.

How strange, though, that a Muslim would support a transgender person knowing full well that her religion allows for throwing them off of buildings. Perhaps Sarsour is ignoring that particular inconvenience and latching on to what she shares with Manning: hisanti-Americanism.

Before he announced his Senate bid as Chelsea in a disturbing ad you cant unsee Manning was formulating his agenda on Twitterwith messages like f*** the police. This further proves hehas no loyalty to the U.S. military, enjoys committingespionage, and thinksthe police are domestic occupiers. That’s a lot of hate for people in uniform for someone who loves dressing up as a woman.

If this is the best the Democratic Party can muster, then, bring it on. We Republicans “got this.”

Read the rest here:
Linda Sarsour Backs Traitor Bradley Manning for Senate …

Bradley Mannings Strange World American Free Press

By Victor Thorn

Drag Queens, Transsexuals, Cross Dressing, Homosexual Computer Hackers, Gays in the White House and Rebellion Against the Militarys Dont Ask Dont Tell Policy

Did Bradley Manning leak classified military secrets because he was suffering a severe psychotic breakdown due to conflicts resulting from his desire to undergo a sex change operation? Mannings attorneys think so, describing him as a deeply troubled soldier struggling with issues of gender identity.

Indeed, Mannings sexual identity deteriorated to such an extent that he adopted an online alter-ego named Breanna, ordered female hormone treatments while in Baghdad, and became a transvestite during military leaves. He told one acquaintance, I cross-dressed, full onwig, breast-forms, dress, the works. Manning then photographed himself wearing womens clothing and gave the pictures to Master Sergeant Paul Watkins. In addition, he ordered a book from Amazon.com that instructed males on how they could use reconstructive surgery to look more feminine, while also considering the possibility of electrolysis.

This information, though troublesome, is crucial because Bradley Mannings entire identity revolved around his homosexuality and feelings of seething rage at the U.S. military for not facilitating his transgender lifestyle. Prior to hacking into government computers, Manning punched a female intelligence officer named Casey Fulton in the face, threw violent tantrums, overturned a table and broke computer monitors, hurled chairs in a fit of rage, and experienced three possible nervous breakdowns. He eventually received a demotion for his behavior, whereas other officers recommended that he forfeit his firearm.

Mannings extremely fragile condition was no doubt fueled by being bullied, mocked, verbally smeared and physically attacked by fellow soldiers. Unable to function, the diminutive soldier often curled into a fetal tuck at night and wet the bed as he screamed into his pillow.

Feeling increased animosity, Manning characterized his colleagues as homophobes and a bunch of hyper-masculine trigger happy ignorant rednecks. This hostile environment also led Manning to sneer at his cohorts by calling military intelligence an oxymoron. Filled with disdain at those surrounding him, Manning delivered these shocking words. I am not a piece of equipment. Take me for who I am, or face the consequences. Revenge soon followed.

Mannings worries about transitioning from male to female actually began prior to his deployment in Iraq, leading him into a sordid web of homosexual computer hackers. The young privates introduction to this shadowy realm came via his former lover, Tyler Watkins, a drag queen and computer hacker that operated out of the Boston area.

Later, after deciding to penetrate the Armys computer files, Manning revealed his secret to Adrian Lamo, a notorious bisexual hacker that was convicted in 2004 of breaking into computers at Microsoft and The New York Times. Lamo then went on to become a member of San Franciscos Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender (LGBT) and Queer Youth Task Force.

Alarmed by the gravity of his risky communications with Manning, Lamo contacted his former boyfriend, Timothy Douglas Webster, who had been employed in the past by Army counterintelligence. Lamo told Webster, What I saw in those chats [with Manning] was an admission of acts so egregious that it required a response.

In addition, Lamo started funneling copies of his correspondence with Manning to Wired magazines senior editor Kevin Poulsen, another convicted hacker who, in 1994, plead guilty to money laundering, obstruction of justice, mail fraud and other cyber-crimes. After the Wikileaks scandal broke, Lamo stated that many of the primary figures involved were gay, or a velvet espionage ring, as he put it.

To illustrate the depths of Mannings allegiance to his gay rights agenda, he boasted of smuggling downloaded data taken from military computers on CDs marked Lady Gaga. To those not familiar with pop music, Lady Gaga is an openly bisexual singer and gay rights proponent plagued for years by transgender rumors. Similarly, Manninggoing by the name Bradass87once described himself to transsexual blogger Xeni Jardin as such: [My] CPU is not made for this motherboard.

Mannings obsessive battle against the militarys Dont Ask Dont Tell (DADT) policies even extended into the White House, where he befriended President Obamas openly gay Director of Specialty Media Shin Inouye, who was tasked with outreach to the LGBT community. According to conversations with transgendered blogger Zinnia Jones, Manning said that Inouye was a source within the White House that kept him informed on Obamas progress in repealing DADT. Manning then revealed, He [Inouye] tried to sleep with me.

Furthermore, after bragging about being connected to influential members of Washington, D.C.s gay political scene, Manning also leaked military data to Chris Johnson, a reporter for D.C.s gay newspaper The Blade. To show how ingrained this lifestyle was to him, the disgruntled activist G.I. marched in gay parades and attended Democratic gay rights fundraising events.

Columnist Ginger Thompson summarized this situation in an Aug. 8, 2010 article for The New York Times. Mannings social life was defined by the need to conceal his sexuality under DADT. He became obsessed with the repeal of DADT. On the other hand, the website Gawker.coms Adrian Chen wrote on Dec. 16, 2011 that Manning saw himself as a cunning sexual strategist, screwing and seducing his way to influence among D.C.s quasi-closeted military and political scene.

On Nov. 27, 1978, San Francisco supervisor Dan White murdered Mayor George Moscone and a gay legislator named Harvey Milk. As his defense, Whites lawyers claimed that he consumed too many sugary snacks that led to his clinical depression. This failed strategy came to be known as the Twinkie Defense.

Interestingly, one of Bradley Mannings computer passwords was Twink1492 [slang for effeminate gay men]. In this updated and exploited version of the Twinkie Defense, Mannings attorneys assert that because the military didnt accommodate his desire to become a transgendered female, their client experienced a psychotic crack that led to his self-destructive acts. When coupled with a deluge of abuse from fellow soldiers in Baghdad, Mannings deterioration caused him to seek revenge against those he saw as tormenters.

In this sense, Mannings detractors insist that he didnt divulge classified secrets as an act of conscience, but instead lashed out at an institution that made him feel powerless and frail. Critics further explained that Manningdepressed, alienated and lonelywasnt motivated by love of country or patriotism, but rather an extreme homosexual agenda that allowed him to commiserate with the enemy.

Stated differently, akin to the Iraqi people or those in third world countries that were underfoot of the U.S. military, he too felt victimized as a closeted man trapped in a womans body that the U.S. military ran roughshod over via their DADT policies.

In this vein, the Twinkie Defense unequivocally contends that Manning cannot be held responsible for any actions he committed because of pressures he felt from his surroundings. But is such an approach fair to thousands of other gays serving in the military that didnt steal state secrets? In essence, Mannings lawyers are arguing that homosexuals cant be trusted with classified documents because the military is homophobic, therefore corrupting them into committing criminal acts.

Since Manning and many of his colleagues were computer hackers, did they feel any loyalty to their country? Mannings betrayer Adrian Lamo confessed quite tellingly: patriotism is something of a dirty word in the hacker community.

In this context, was Manning suckered in by an even larger scheme than the transgender agenda he so embraced? Sanjiv Bhattacharya of AOL News brought this issue full circle on July 21, 2010. As it happens, [Adrian] Lamo was uniquely qualified to lead Manning on. All hackers are adept at manipulation: they play roles when they penetrate security systemsits called social engineering, and it often involves pretending to be someone else entirely. Consequently, manipulation and betrayal are not uncommon among hackers.

Manning frequently referred to himself as a ghost, an actor in a body that actually wasnt his. In fact, Mannings counselor said that his patient felt he was female and that a host of gender identity struggles caused him to feel like a monster. But after being introduced to, and then exploited by, a subterranean netherworld of homosexual computer hackers, Mannings image is no longer transparent as he faces a lifetime in prison.

Following a seven-day trial in mid-December at a makeshift Fort George G. Meade courtroom, Lt. Col. Paul Almanza will soon make recommendations to his military commander as to whether private first class Bradley Manning should face a court martial in regard to the theft of over 250,000 government documents that were eventually released to Wikileaks. The 22 counts brought against Manning include aiding the enemy and illegally stealing government secrets. The embattled soldier could face life imprisonment if found guilty of pilfering the battlefield reports in question.

As a former Army analyst, Manning sent shockwaves through the military and mainstream media in Apr. 2010 when Wikileaks posted video footage that later became known as Collateral Murder. Filmed in 2007, U.S. helicopter pilots were captured strafing Iraqi civilians with gunfire as they joked about and called their victims dead bastards.

The exposure of these damning actionsrecorded from the cockpit of an Apache helicoptercaused the Army a great deal of embarrassment as they now had the blood of 11 innocent citizens on their hands. Antiwar critics unloaded on the Bush administration over these senseless casualties. In no time, a frantic manhunt was underway to find an individual that some called public enemy number one. Others referred to this whistleblower as the greatest hero of free speech since Daniel Ellsberg delivered his cache of Pentagon Papers to The New York Times and other publications.

In May 2010, federal officials arrested Manning on Iraqi soil for violating a top-secret security clearance that allowed him access to classified data. They were led to him after Adrian Lamo, the computer hacker that corresponded with Manning, snitched to a member of Army counterintelligence (see related story).

Shortly thereafter, Manning found himself imprisoned in Quantico, Va.s Marine Corps brig where he claimed to have experienced prolonged abuses and inhumanities. His supporters allege that Manning was forced to endure solitary confinement for 23 hours a dayoftentimes nakedwith no personal belongings in his cell. Then, at night, wardens allowed him to only wear a smock and sleep on a cot that had no sheets or covers.As news of this treatment leaked out, the Pentagon was faced with another public relations disaster that created unwanted headlines. With no other option, Army superiors transferred Manning to the U.S. penitentiary in Leavenworth, Kansas. Up until the date of his trial, Manning had spent a total of 19 months behind bars.

Ever since the Bradley Manning scandal erupted, Wikileaks founder Julian Assange has adamantly denied having any contact with the young Army private that stole hundreds of thousands of government documents. During an Oct. 25, 2010 interview at Londons Frontline Club, Assange dismissed any possibility that he had knowledge of Mannings involvement in the controversial hacking and high-tech thievery. Then, again on Dec. 17, 2010, Assange took it a step further by claiming that he had never even spoken with Manning.

However, at Mannings court martial trial at Fort George G. Meade, prosecutors provided a plethora of evidence that they contend proves an ongoing cyber-relationship between Manning and Assange. This information is crucial because if Assange did conspire with Manning to obtain classified data, he could be charged with violating the U.S. Espionage Act.

This direct collaboration on Assanges behalf undeniably complicates his stance that Wikileaks merely acted as a conduit to publish anonymously received material. But, if Assange failed to tell the truth and his role went beyond that of a mere journalistic endeavor, Wikileaks status as an innocent bystander in this affair is seriously jeopardized.

To prove the governments case, digital forensics contractor Mark Johnson of the Armys Computer Crime Investigative Unit provided 15 pages of correspondence between the two parties that was extracted from Mannings personal MacBook Pro. Of particular interest in these online chats is Mannings knowledge of Assanges Internet user name and his Icelandic phone number.

Even more damning is a Mar. 8, 2010, conversation where Manning seeks Assanges assistance in cracking the password of a government computer so that he can retain anonymity. Assange responded by providing a tool that was useful in deciphering the password in question. Later, after penetrating the militarys system, Manning informed Assange, Im throwing everything Ive got on Guatanamo at you now. The upload is about 36 percent. These documents would later appear on Wikileaks.

Taken one step further, Manning relayed to Adrain Lamothe computer hacker that eventually snitched on himhow he had been in contact with Assange. Lamo responded by chiding Manning about this interaction, adding thatat least in his opinionAssange was using Manning to do his dirty work for him.

If true, the conclusion to this scenario is clear. As Catherine Fitzpatrick wrote for the website Wired State on Dec. 19, Julian Assange has now been definitely caught in a lie, and the implications of the chat logs published by Wired are now validated: Manning has been found to be directly in touch with someone named Julian Assange in chat, and had his contact information on his computer. Julian Assange and his lawyers, of course, have continued to lie about this. Assange claims he never got directly in touch with Manning. Thats so he can appear to keep his distance from the crime of inciting hacking.

As a side note, its more than curious that Julian Assange has attacked 9-11 truth-seekers in the past, even going so far as to tell the Belfast Telegraph on July 19, 2010, Im constantly annoyed that people are distracted by false conspiracies like 9-11.

Read more:
Bradley Mannings Strange World American Free Press

Senator Chelsea Manning? Democrats Should Be Proud – Susan …

Democrats have outdone themselves this time. Chelsea Manning, (D-Fort Leavenworth), the former U.S. Army soldier-turned-traitor, who was a male named Bradley until he betrayed America and swiped on some lipstick, is running for the United States Senate in Maryland on the Democratic Party ticket.

Manning is the perfect Democratic Party candidate: Anti everything thats quintessentially America in stilettos and a skirt.

Mannings campaign video features a defiant Chelsea proclaiming, We dont need them anymore, with clips of police clashing with protesters. It is about as ludicrous as Democrat Dana Nessels campaign ad for Michigan attorney general where she says: When youre choosing Michigans next attorney general, ask yourself this: Who can you trust most not to show you their penis in a professional setting? Is it the candidate who doesnt have a penis?

Maybe Nessel should ask Chelsea.

Manning is a darling of the radical left, whose super-duper ginormous tent includes everyone except those who dont live in New York and California, love America, the Rule of Law, the U.S. Military, law enforcement, guns, freedom of speech, conservatism, Judeo-Christian values, the unborn, and God — to name a few.

Manning wants U.S. borders open, prisons closed, inmates freed and all hospital services free. In a tweet January 16, the defiant traitor said, the reign of terror must end, calling for the abolishment of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and U.S. Customs and Border Protection agencies. On Law Enforcement Appreciation Day, January 9, Manning tweeted: F**k the police. What a sweetie.

Responsible for what authorities describe as the largest leak of classified documents in American history, Manning would have been the perfect running mate for the illegal private email server pantsuit queen, Hillary Clinton. This traitor endangered U.S. soldiers lives, compromised military operations and put Iraqi and Afghani partners at risk.

Manning was ultimately charged with 22 offenses, including aiding the enemy. Rather than death by military firing squad, the coward received a 35-year prison sentence. Former President Obama showed us how much he loves America, our military and law enforcement when he commuted Mannings sentence during his last days in office.

Apparently, Manning wants to pay Obamas bigheartedness forward by challenging Maryland Democrat Sen. Ben Cardin, who happens to be the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Mannings espionage conviction will apparently mean nothing.

Its already questionable that Congress members are given access to classified government secrets without the normal requirement of a security clearance. And we all know how seriously Manning takes oaths of office.

The Democrats latest mantra is that President Trump is unfit for office, despite the presidents recent perfect score on a voluntary mental aptitude test. But were supposed to believe Manning is fit? As Ive written before, this goes against the sensibilities of those like former Johns Hopkins Hospital psychiatrist-in-chief Dr. Paul R. McHugh who wrote a piece in the Wall Street Journal explaining that transgenderism is a mental disorder which warrants medical treatment. He said, policy makers and the media are doing no favors either to the public or the transgendered by treating their confusions as a right in need of defending than a mental disorder that deserves understanding, treatment and prevention.

And dont forget, no one can question Manning, post-Chelsea conversion: Express mental state concerns, and you are transphobic.Mention lack of skills, and you are anti-feminist. Talk about treason, and you are a Dick Cheney war hawk.

Just when you think theyve hit rock-bottom, Democrats do something to remind us there is no pit so deep that they cannot sink deeper still.

Go here to see the original:
Senator Chelsea Manning? Democrats Should Be Proud – Susan …

Opinion | Why Im Ambivalent About Chelsea Manning

I tried, in my own meager way, to follow the example of Brooklyns 42. As I embarked on my own career as a public person, I too tried to be above reproach, smiling forgivingly as a student at a university in Ohio attempted to compliment me by saying, You know, Professor, before I heard your lecture, I used to think people like you should be, you know, exterminated.

I laughed along with a studio audience when Oprah Winfrey sang to me, Yes, she has a vagina, she has a vagina today!

Later, off camera, Id curl up into a ball and weep, thinking of the words of Clarence the Angel: There must be an easier way of winning my wings. What I did not do was fight back.

Ms. Manning is an angrier public figure than I am, but she has good reason to be angry. For violating the Espionage Act, she served seven grisly years in prison, much of it at Fort Leavenworth a military facility for male offenders, in spite of having publicly declared her female identity on the day after her conviction. During her incarceration, which ended after President Barack Obama commuted most of her sentence in January 2017, she endured a hunger strike and a suicide attempt. I cant imagine the horrors she has experienced, and my heart truly goes out to her. If Id been through all that, Id be angry too.

At the same time, Im not sure shes the senator Maryland needs right now. And its not just me some of the people most ambivalent about Chelsea Manning are other transgender people, and our veterans not least. Kristin Beck, a former Navy SEAL who took an unsuccessful run for Congress herself two years ago, said in 2013 that Ms. Manning was a traitor: What you wear, what color you are, your religion, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender identity has no basis on whether you are a criminal or not.

It is possible to have opposed George W. Bushs war in Iraq and to nonetheless condemn Ms. Manning for leaking classified documents in the effort to end that war. It is possible to enthusiastically advocate equality and justice for L.G.B.T. Americans and to nonetheless wonder whether Ms. Manning is the best messenger for that fight.

In spite of my suspicion that Ms. Manning is not the ideal candidate, I nonetheless admire her willingness to put herself out there in the rough world of national politics. And I also worry for her, in the same way I worry for anyone who places their transness at the center of a public identity. Since coming out as transgender, I have often wondered whether being trans was the thing that hindered my career as a writer, or the thing that made it possible.

In part, I wish for Chelsea Manning the thing I sometimes wish I had chosen for myself a life of privacy and quiet instead of a life in which you have to sit there smiling on television while a celebrity sings a song about your vagina. But maybe Ms. Manning will also find what Ive found that progress is its own reward, and that the loss of a private life is a small price to pay in exchange for justice.

Im not sure she has my vote. But whether she wins her wings, or not, she has my respect.

An earlier version of this article mischaracterized the crime that Chelsea Manning was convicted of. She was convicted for violating the Espionage Act, not treason.

Read the original post:
Opinion | Why Im Ambivalent About Chelsea Manning

Chelsea Manning Officially On The Ballot For U.S. Senate …

Chelsea Manning is officially on the ballot for the U.S. Senate race in Maryland.

Manning, a former Army private imprisoned for sharing classified government documents with WikiLeaks, tweeted a photo on Wednesday evening showing her displaying her filing paperwork.

The whistleblower, 30, announced her intention to run earlier this month and released her first campaign video on Sunday.Manning is one of five Democrats who have filed to run in the race, and will face off against incumbent Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.), the highest-ranking party member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

We dont need more, or better leaders, Manning says in the clip. We need someone willing to fight. We need to stop asking them to give us our rights. They wont support us, they wont compromise.

Manning was released from prison in May 2017 after serving seven years. Her sentence was commuted by former President Barack Obama last January.

Chelsea Manning Officially On The Ballot For U.S. Senate …

Senate bid could land Chelsea Manning back in prison – Hot …

Not too long ago we talked about the entry of convicted traitor Chelsea Manning in the Maryland Senate race this year. My sentiments about the idea of casting a vote for someone who was convicted on that many counts of betraying his nation (and was technically never even pardoned, only having had his sentence commuted) havent changed. But there was one other wrinkle in this story which hadnt even crossed my mind and could make it an even worse idea for Manning. Due to a rather obscure and rarely enforced rule, technically it would be illegal for Manning to run and it could even land him back in prison.

The Daily Caller dug up some information on this subject and reminds us that theres a rule barring active duty military personnel from engaging in any overt political activity. Running for office would certainly qualify.

Dru Brenner-Beck, retired Army judge advocate general and president of the National Institute of Military Justice, told The Daily Caller News Foundation that on the face of it, Manning is prohibited by Department of Defense regulations from running for office while serving in an active-duty capacity. The only exception is if Secretary of Defense James Mattis grants explicit permission, a power that cannot be delegated by a secretary to anyone else.

According to Brenner-Beck, the regulation in question is DOD Directive 1344.10 Directive 1344.10, Political Activities by Members of the Armed Forces, dated Feb. 9, 2008, para. 4.2.2.

That paragraph is punitive and violation of it subjects her to courts-martial for violation of a lawful order or regulation under Article 92, Brenner-Beck told TheDCNF. Her activities campaigning for herself and fundraising for herself may also violate other provisions of the DoD Directive, themselves separately punishable under the UCMJ, art. 92.

Brenner-Beck added that prosecution in this case is a discretionary decision by her chain of command.

Some readers might be shaking their heads at this point and noting that Manning is described pretty much everywhere as a former Army private. But thats not technically true. Manning remains an active duty soldier while his convictions are on appeal, though he is on excess leave and in a non-pay status. He still has a military ID card and remains eligible for many military benefits, including medical care.

Does that mean hell be prosecuted? Unknown but probably unlikely. Exceptions are made to this rule (or its simply ignored) on a regular basis. But we have to say probably here. Just because a rule is rarely enforced, that doesnt mean that it cant be. In order to be completely in the clear Manning would need to have an exemption granted by Mad Dog Mattis. How likely does that sound to you? And then, the decision to prosecute is, discretionary by the chain of command. I probably dont need to remind you who is actually at the very top of that chain of command currently. Does going after Manning in another Court Marshal really sound like something completely beyond the universe of options Trump would consider?

Sure, the press would make such a move out as being vindictive and petty. And to be honest, it probably would be. I may not like the fact that Manning had his sentence commuted but the fact is that he did and the rules are the rules. Sending him up on this obscure charge doesnt sound worth the bother, particularly when his chances of beating Ben Cardin are roughly the same as an egg surviving a fall off the Sears Tower. But this is 2018, folks. Ive already learned not to try to guess whats going to happen next.

Excerpt from:
Senate bid could land Chelsea Manning back in prison – Hot …

Report: Chelsea Manning Cannot Run for Office While on …

Chelsea Manning, the soldier who spent sevenyears in prison for leaking sensitive documents to WikiLeaks, could face prosecution over her run for Senate office in Maryland, The Daily Caller reported.

Manning remains on active-duty status while she is appealing a general court martial. She must remain on active duty until the appeal is complete, ABC News reported in May 2017, which could be an issue for her candidacy, former military lawyers told The Daily Caller.

Dru Brenner-Beck, retired Army judge advocate general and president of the National Institute of Military Justice, said Department of Defense regulations prohibit her from running while on active duty. The only exception, Brenner-Beck said, is if Secretary of Defense James Mattis grants her permission.

Prosecution of the issue, however, is a “discretionary decision by her chain of command,” Brenner-Beck said.

Victor M. Hansen, New England Law professor and former military lawyer, said that Manning was an exceptional case that would not likely inspire other active duty service members to run for office.

Manning’s chain of command could be pressured into prosecuting her, Hansen said, but he believes that the Army is likely to want the Manning issue to fade out of the spotlight, instead of having an investigation which would spotlight the case further.

Then-President Barack Obama commuted Manning’s sentence in January 2017.

In her run for the Senate, Manning would be challenging incumbent Sen. Ben Cardin, D-Maryland.

“Senator Cardin is looking forward to a vigorous debate of the issues and a robust conversation with Maryland voters,” Cardin’s spokeswoman Sue Walitsky said in The Washington Post.

2018 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Visit link:
Report: Chelsea Manning Cannot Run for Office While on …