Pentagon OKs Manning transfer to civilian prison for gender treatmentYou know, in general I don't care what people do. If you decide that you are really a woman, and you want to go through surgery and whatnot on your own dime, it's a free country. Maybe you really are a woman, if "being a woman" means having a female soul rather than having physical chromosomes of the XX type, and somehow your female soul got trapped in a male body. That's a metaphysical question, and it could even be the truth for all I know. Certainly I'm inclined to believe in souls, and manifestly bodies are not always perfected for us, as we often encounter disabilities in the physical body.
...
Some officials have said privately that keeping the soldier in a military prison and unable to have treatment could amount to cruel and unusual punishment....
"No decision to transfer Pvt. Manning to a civilian detention facility has been made, and any such decision will, of course, properly balance the soldier's medical needs with our obligation to ensure she remains behind bars," Pentagon press secretary Rear Adm. John Kirby said.
So, if you catch me at my most sympathetic, I can be quite sympathetic to this idea. However, if you've already betrayed your country and stabbed your fellow soldiers in the back, it takes guts to then turn around and demand in the next breath that they start calling you "Chelsea" and pay your way to your new, feminine way of life.
As far as I'm concerned, Mister Manning had better get used to his cell at Leavenworth. I can't believe the military is going along with this, to the point that this Rear Admiral has already adopted the pronoun change for official military statements.
24 comments:
I'm reminded of the farcical story about the Naval Academy where some fool (can't remember if it was the Commandant of Midshipman or who it was) actually uttered the words, "Diversity is our #1 priority".
[thud]
Seriously? DIVERSITY is the big reason for everything you do? I think you need to read a history book.
It takes a twisted culture to start calling this kind of thing "medical" and then find itself unable to explain why it's withholding "medical" treatment from prisoners. How long before it's "medically" necessary to issue a pardon to anyone who can't realize his full potential within a penitentiary?
It reminds me of the cons in "Raising Arizona," after their jailbreak:
"We released ourselves on our own recognizance."
"We felt the institution no longer had anything to offer us."
I read this this morning and almost couldn't eat breakfast. I'm with Grim on this one. HE did the crime. HE should do the time as every other criminal in military uniform has done.
Although, quite frankly, I'm surprised that the inmates haven't dealt with him already...but then they may be enjoying a willing *bitch* as a change of pace.
A couple of things:
...it takes guts to then turn around and demand....
A small quibble: it takes hubris.
As far as I'm concerned, the AP is gender-confused. And the Stars and Stripes appears to have changed their quote of RAdm Kirby; they're now attributing this to him: No decision to transfer Pvt. Manning to a civilian detention facility has been made, and any such decision will, of course, properly balance the soldier's medical needs with our obligation to ensure Pvt. Manning remains behind bars.
Makes me wonder about the credibility of the whole story.
Finally, the diagnosis, gender dysphoria, or, if you prefer, gender identity disorder in no way implies that Manning is a woman, only that he's confused about it. He should stay put. Woman or man, he treached against his country; he hasn't got any rights from within our social compact, say I. He voluntarily placed himself outside of it.
But the Army is caught in a conflict of opposing laws.
Eric Hines
Sly,
For whatever it's worth, Joseph W. -- our friend the JAG lawyer who used to be around here quite often -- maintained that he thought there was very little assault at Leavenworth. He said that his clients would plead it to him if they had a plausible case, since it was only in their interest to claim it, but that none ever did.
So it could be that Leavenworth is a more disciplined and well-ordered prison than is, sadly, common across the country.
Mr. Hines,
Hubris, hmm. It's a tragic-heroic flaw, and I see nothing of heroism about this character. I can't quite bring myself to apply a word well-suited to Oedipus or Agamemnon to such a low form of life.
As for the credibility of the story, it certainly strains mine.
I have my doubts about the story, but given the strange behavior of other branches of the federal government over the past few years, such a transfer and "medical" treatment would not surprise me, should the story prove true. And Manning, he, she, it, or otherwise, remains a traitor.
LittleRed1
Grim,
You're using the ancient meaning of hubris; I'm using the modern evolution of it: overbearing pride or presumption; arrogance
Eric Hines
You're using the ancient meaning.
Allow me to introduce myself. I'm Grim.
Pretty clear that the Military doesn't really know what to do with insane prisoners.
Apparently they don't know how to keep them from getting access to classified information, either.
You're using the ancient meaning.
Allow me to introduce myself. I'm Grim.
Greetings, Grim. I'm Eric Hines.
Eric Hines
Apparently they don't know how to keep them from getting access to classified information, either.
That's not unique to the insane. I'm with Eric B on this one--their failure is in dealing with the insane. They're not helped by those conflicting laws.
For my money, it'd be too bad if he died trying to escape en route to his...gender treatment. I'd be so distraught over that unfortunate event.
Eric Hines
Now I really feel like the Remnant.
We few, we happy few, cling to a cracked spar of sanity in the maelstrom of insane chaos.
Well, it's nice to have the spar, anyway.
Guts... hubris...
I think the word y'all are looking for is gall.
Are we sparring over it now? And for the record, this may be one of my favorite exchanges ever:
E: "You're using the ancient meaning."
G: "Allow me to introduce myself. I'm Grim."
It's like traitors are running the US Regime now.
The core feeling as the country slides into the abyss is similar...one second on the peak of the wave, a long drop to the clutching sea, in every direction the view the same, dull steel waves with tops ripped off in a white spume, then down, slamming into the claustrophobic trough, walls of water on all sides and the spar hammering the hull like a battering ram, dark water surging through the scuppers and almost over the gunnel..
BUT- every once in a while victory comes from an unexpected quarter- anyone see this?
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2014/05/14/cat-saves-little-boy-from-vicious-dog-attack-in-bakersfield/
I wanted to add-about the link-
The cat fought like a samurai-notice the speed, the focus, and the utter commitment to attack-
There is a passage in the "Hagakure" about this - the need to commit instantly with no reservation, no consideration of consequence, simply act.
Your linked video has been disabled with a notice saying "this video is private," but it can still be found on YouTube by searching for "cat" and "Bakersfield." We watched the amazing footage last night on the evening news. The little boy had two pretty good-sized gashes on his legs requiring stitches. The dog was actually dragging him off! The cat was amazing. "Hey! If anyone's going to eat a little kid around here, it's gonna be me, bub."
I came home one late night years ago to find my small old gray cat with spiked fur and arched back facing down three large raccoons. Have no idea what got into her feline brain but running was definitely not in the plan! Cats are odd, and hard to understand.
I saw the speed and focus in the cat, but not the commitment: he struck with a body check, and not with teeth and claws ripping. I've seen house cats do the latter--no warning blow, no willingness to let the dog disengage, instead from the jump grab with foreclaws, bite and chew while simultaneously raking with wild abandon with his hind claws.
Still, a good move by the cat.
As to what gets into their heads, a healthy respect for the opposition isn't always there. My brother had a big old tom who knew no respect. His name was Stupid (formally, You Stupid Cat). Because he never learned any respect for skunks. Took on every one of them.
Eric Hines
Ha! Yeah, dogs too- once had a friend with a dog who liked to bite porcupines. Multiple times. Nothing like pulling out 50 or 60 quills with a pair of pliers and a stick between the jaws. That dog was dumber than a post. One of those Weimaraners. Two weeks later it would be at it again.
I saw the cat as an ideal example for civilian self defense- it stopped the attacker cold and drove it off, then stopped it's attack when the threat was over.
"I saw the speed and focus in the cat, but not the commitment: he struck with a body check, and not with teeth and claws ripping."
I dunno, Eric. I watched it again, and to me it looks like the cat hits first with the front paws, and as it's trying to fully engage, it's also started yawing as a result of the dog's movement and the momentum of the cat's hind quarters, ultimately bringing them about to hit the dog as well. Maybe the cat doesn't have the claws to hold on- we trim our cats claws, and my parents cats as well. That dog also seemed to have a fairly thick coat.
Either way, what a cat!
Post a Comment