Contribute to the Chelsea Manning Welcome Home Fund


#1

Originally published at: http://boingboing.net/2017/02/10/contribute-to-the-chelsea-mann.html


#2

Thanks for the pointer. Done.


#3

Doubt Chelsea will ever even know that BBers here are rooting for her recovery, but welcome back. I can’t imagine what she’s had to endure, and will continue to deal with considering the political climate in the US, but she’s not alone.


#4

I think it’s called dealing with the consequences of your decisions. Of course, if you can get others to help pay for your mistakes, all the more power to ya.


#5

Her sentence commutation (not pardon) is a fine turn of events and evidence that even the federal government is capable of mercy. I’m torn, though-- I feel like anything on top of that seems like cashing in, especially from third parties seeking good PR. I wish Chelsea well, and I’m sure she is quite brave/tough, but not in any way that’s at all admirable or heroic (and maybe only as a result of her having to bear some of the consequences of her very real, very stupid choices for awhile).


#6

Curious how her decisions vs others that have been whistle blowers stack up. There have been others that have leaked far more sensitive material that weren’t tortured and locked in solitary for long periods of time. In fact Petraeus seems to be doing more than just fine.


#7

Petraeus is a gross little turd but you have to admit that his case is very, very different from Chelsea’s in huge ways. The closest equivalent to Manning is a special little guy named Eddie who fled to Russia under threat of even worse penalties, and now just gives smug TV interviews a couple times a year to feed his ego.


#8

Well this is a subject we won’t see eye to eye on given your characterizations.


#9

I’m open to reason about anything else, but Snowden is objectively smug. You can tell he practiced his humblebrag in the mirror 300 times before the interview, and yet he still has to drop in his umpteenth remark about how much money he made/makes now after climbing the ladder of success: (46:29, if the timecode doesn’t link right):


He sounds like Patrick Bateman auditioning for the role of a functioning human.


#10

And, while you may have had a point worth listening to, you have lost that opportunity with me, as you have convinced me that you are not worth listening to.


#12

Welcome to BoingBoing. Looks like you’re pretty new here. Feel free to stick around and learn how to shed that sense of smug superiority. Or, you know, just do the occasional trolling drive-by when you feel like you’ve got something to offer. Either way, we’re here. And we’re generally nice. And we respect your right to be a tool.


#13

And after all, that is the real issue here. How objectively smug Edward Snowden is.

FTR I watched the video you linked to and did not find him ‘smug’ in the least.


#14

Um… I’m a regular loiterer in the Boing Boing… I come here for my smug sense of superiority. Am I doing it wrong?


#16

I guess that smugness is in the eye of the beholder… or more likely the brain.


#17

A ticket out of America to a safe non-fascist country seems like the first priority,


#18

No problem with regular loiterers (I do that at the place where I ‘work’ and they pay me, so it’s a workable strategy apparently). It’s the drive-by loiterers that arouse my suspicions.


#19

So The Tone Argument is the hill you’ve picked to die on? “Okay, maybe he’s a hero after all, but I don’t like his voice, so fuck 'im?”


#20

I’m open-minded but unconvinced that he’s a “hero”, but it’s difficult because I find his whole vibe to be insincere/off-putting. That’s the extent of what I said. Typing a sentence isn’t some grandiose stand, and disagreeing with you (and maybe even most folks here) isn’t an attack. There is no death atop an abstract morality hill. There is no tone argument. ‘Finding him insincere/evasive and hard to trust as a result’ is a position someone, somewhere holds. Cope. (Derail over, sorry.)


#21

Fair enough, I’ll try to be less snarky. A lot of people ascribe insincere, self-serving motives to Ed Snowden, which doesn’t really make sense to me. Nobody abandons their home, family, friends, career, and future and goes on the run just to get attention. Snowden made real and permanent sacrifices for what he believes is a good cause. He’s also a classic computer nerd, and he’s not always great at public speaking or emoting effectively. I can understand doubting his judgement on the rightness of his choices, but the facts don’t really support him being genuinely insincere.


#22

Regardless of opinion, I’d posit that ‘respectful disagreement’ is a hill that actually is worth dying on/for. Cheers, buddy. :slight_smile: