WikiLeaks

[Undertoad]

I'm sure I don't understand your objection.

[Lamplighter]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

I'm sure I don't understand your objection.

My objection is to attempts made directly, by inference, or dim-witted humor,
to submit a causal relationship between gender-ID and Manning's actions.

As far as I know now, only three potential reasons for Manning's actions
were discussed in Steve Fishman's 2011 NY Magazine (11 pages)... here.

No one has (yet) said or implied that $ had anything to do with his motivations.
By the FIshman chronologically, the GLBT-bullying by his army room mates
was a serious issue that started in the U.S. early in Manning's enlistment
... long before DADT was repealed. [pg 1]

It was later (2009) in Iraq, as I read it, and completely independent of his gender-ID issues,
Manning became aware of secret and illegal actions in the war, leading to him take such videos
to his superior officer, but then being rebuked. [pg 4]

It was even later that Manning got in touch with Wikileaks, and described his motivations as honorable:

Manning thought of himself as honorable, even heroic
—“I guess I’m too idealistic,” he said. “i want people to see the truth
… regardless of who they are … because without information,
you cannot make informed decisions as a public.”

Lastly, Manning was arrested just 4 days after a colleague informed the FBI.
So unless the argument is that his military superiors already recognized that
Manning was sending documents to Wikileaks, it does not fly to say
"they apparently didn't care".