Somewhere along the line, in stories about Manning, I thought this would happen. I must have read articles that I have since forgotten.
I could psychologize and suggest the role as oppressed outsider, had an influence of Manning's actions. Allen Johnson's 2001 book, Privilege, Power, and Difference might provide context, insofar as the effects of oppression and marginalization on actions. In the end, only Manning knows the full story.
Cue the haters lumping together "gender confusion", sin, and treason in 3... 2... 1...
GC, the labeling as "treason" is worth some thought. Technically, Manning's actions could be considered that.
But what do we do about a govt that is working counter to its citizens, in what is probably an unconstitutional way. Is the action of the govt, in its leadership and minions, loyalty to the US, or better labeled as "treason?" Spying on citizens, collecting data on, it seems, all of us, at the very least seems un-American. And is probably illegal. And the individuals doing it - they should be investigated and tried. Following laws and constitutional requirements.
I am no lawyer. So maybe I'm wrong. It just seems to me that Manning may be a patriot, rather than a traitor. How do we know? Sometimes, we are told to do something, by the govt, and that something is wrong. Is it treason, or patriotism, to counter that?
I don't have answers to those questions. I just wonder about them.
I remember decades of slurs about "homosexuals" being security risks. That was a reason to keep us out of the military. You are right about the haters.
Then that's the developing story about Glen Greenwald's involvement in the Snowden affair. Someone else who is holding the govt's feet to the fire.
Spying on citizens, collecting data on, it seems, all of us, at the very least seems un-American. And is probably illegal.
Unfortunately, I don't think it is illegal. You can thank the PATRIOT Act for that.
Susan, you are probably right. I wonder if the "Patriot Act" is constitutional. It seems like 1984 to me.
I don't think it is constitutional.
I don't mean to make light of this situation, and this may be considered anti-American to some (because it's government issued), but I think the good part of Bradley becoming Chelsea is that she'll probably stop wearing that stupid-looking beret. I never liked it on Pat Tillman either.