Accused soldier offered plea bargain if he names WikiLeaks founder

[Robb]

Source: Independent

US authorities have stepped up their efforts to prosecute Julian Assange by offering Bradley Manning, the American soldier allegedly responsible for leaking hundreds of thousands of government documents, the possibility of a plea bargain if he names the Wiki-Leaks founder as a fellow conspirator.

(snip)

American officials view persuading Pte Manning to give evidence that Mr Assange encouraged him to disseminate classified Pentagon and State Department files as crucial to any prospect of extraditing him for a successful prosecution. To facilitate that, Pte Manning may be moved from military to civilian custody, they say. Since being charged in July with disseminating a US military video showing a 2007 attack by Apache helicopters that killed 17 people in Iraq including two Reuters employees, the soldier has been held at the Quantico Marine Base in Virginia. But members of his support network insist that he has not co-operated with the authorities since his arrest in May.

The Justice Department views the chances of a prosecution as far slimmer if Mr Assange was merely the passive recipient of information. But Adrian Lamo, a former hacker who had been in contact with Pte Manning and eventually turned him in to the government, is said to have told the FBI that Mr Assange had given the young soldier an encrypted internet conferencing service as he was downloading government files and a dedicated server for uploading them to WikiLeaks. The US Attorney General, Eric Holder, said this week that he had "authorised significant steps" in the investigation into the leaks without going into details. However, US diplomats say that while the Espionage Act of 1917 and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986 can be used against Pte Manning, extending it to Mr Assange would come up against the formidable defence of free speech and media freedom enshrined in the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

(snip)

WikiLeaks appears to be aware of the danger if it is proved to be involved in a conspiracy to leak material. It has deleted from its website the claim that "Submitting confidential material to Wiki-Leaks is safe, easy and protected by law". The site now says: "Submitting documents to our journalists is protected by law in better democracies." It also now says: "WikiLeaks accepts a range of material, but we do not solicit it." Furthermore, it no longer says it welcomes "classified" material.

Read more: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/freed-on-bail-ndash-but-us-steps-up-efforts-to-charge-assange-with-conspiracy-2162639.html

[fasttense]

1. I guess we can NOT look backward only when we are looking at

rich, well connected politicians who torture and murder.

How convenient for Obama that he doesn't have to prosecute thousands of torturers. Now, he only has one rather poor guy to prosecute for releasing information about Obama and bushes administrations.

[no_hypocrisy]

2. This is so Joe McCarthy and Roy Cohn redux.

[Downwinder]

3. I can see possible justification for US prosecution of Assange,

a foreign national, if the US were to give up Kissinger, Bush, Cheney, CIA agents in Italy and Germany, and troops in Iraq Afghanistan and Colombia to foreign prosecution.

[AlphaCentauri]

35. or the Japanese

Several men allegedly raped a Japanese woman on Okinawa island today, and a witness said the attack appeared to have been committed by U.S. military personnel, police said.

Police were questioning the victim, who is in her 20s, and searching the central Okinawan town of Chatan, which is located near several American military bases.

The unidentified passersby who said he witnessed the attack before dawn in Chatan called police to report it, saying the foreign men involved appeared to be American servicemen.

Police rushed to the scene and were questioning the woman and searching the area, said Shoichi Shinzato, a spokesman for the Okinawa prefectural (state) police.



http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=80846&page=1

[sabrina 1]

118. I agree with the second part of your comment. But since Assange

has committed no crime, stated clearly yesterday at the Judiciary Hearing, by John Conyers, I can't agree with the first part. You don't prosecute editors and publishers of news organizations for publishing material they receive from sources.

Funny, that the U.S. did not raise this issue when Assange published material he received by the exact same means on other governments. Like Kenya or Russia or China, eg. I guess that was just news. They are acting like babies.

Neither Assange NOR Manning are primarily responsible for the leaks, as was pointed out at the Judiciary Committee hearing yesterday by both Dems and Repubs and their witnesses, the primary responsibility for these leaks lies with those in charge of our keeping classified material from being leaked. I presume the U.S. military is responsible for the leaks and that was stated yesterday over an over again at that excellent hearing.

[MattSh]

4. What's the bargain this time?

torture now, plus 100 years, bargained down to life?

[Roy Rolling]

5. first....

the govenment has to tell Bradley what they want him to say. They do not want to hear the truth, they want a (now) psychologically-maimed prisoner in 23 hour a day solitary confinement to say exactly what they want to hear. Why even ask? Just haul out the "truth serum"---the waterboard---and he'll say whatever they want to entrap Assange. :mad:

[westerebus]

6. DA Holder.

Dear Sir,

Wall street investigations and prosecutions are your first priority.


Signed,
A concerned citizen.

[BOG PERSON]

32. what are you talking about?

those are clearly not anywhere near his top priorities.

[westerebus]

52. Did I need the sarcasm thingy?

[No Elephants]

7. "Surprise, surprise, surprise."

[EFerrari]

8. Holder is criminalizing journalism.

And now we know why they are holding Manning in solitary.

[Downwinder]

11. You haven't been listening to the trolls espousing these same plans.

We either have the Government listening to the trolls or, the trolls are disclosing confidential Government information.

[hack89]

15. Journalists cannot conspire to commit crimes

under the cover of the first amendment. If Assange encouraged Manning to steal those files he committed a crime

[EFerrari]

19. That's a circular argument. Journalists encourage their sources

to give them information for a living.

[Pavulon]

21. if he is running him like a source he owns the crime. he can publish

but not participate. he is calling for the potus to stand down so he is not press he is an intelligence service with no state.

[boppers]

152. Editorializing isn't press?

Interesting theory.

I'm pretty sure that's already been tested, and FAILED, at the Supreme Court level.

[Pavulon]

165. Covers Publishing, not conspiracy and participation.(nt)

[Pavulon]

16. No if assange ran him like a source he is not

protected. His right to PUBLISH is covered. His right to participate in the criminal act is NOT protected.

[Schema Thing]

117. isn't that what journalist and publishers do, "run sources"?

[Pavulon]

168. Cant participate in a crime and expect "journalist" to fix that

if he pimped manning he is a co-conspirator.

[bemildred]

9. Suborning perjury is OK if you are a prosecutor in the US "justice" system. nt

[glinda]

10. Torture and soliciting a statement that they want to hear. Uggggggh!

[Pavulon]

18. Solitary is not torture, making sure he takes his depression meds is not torture

and I spent many nights in the army with no sheets and no pillow. Also not torture.

[bitchkitty]

24. Solitary is torture.

Don't be so obtuse. And stop whining about your sheets and your pillow - you didn't join at gunpoint.

[Pavulon]

29. Neither did manning. he volunteered twice.. once to join, and again to get access

to classified access. that requires a set of signaturs.

there is nothing about solitary that is torture. not sensory dep, solitary.

[bitchkitty]

31. He's not whining, you are.

And whether or not solitary is torture depends on the person confined, and the person confining them.

[Pavulon]

33. torture is a legal term. like murder or burglary

you cant just make it up. waterboarding, electric shock, and beating are torture as the law sees it.

Not having a pillow and sheets and keeping a person who stole more classified information than anyone in history in solitary is not torture, just common sense.

edit: added "solitary"..

[bitchkitty]

34. It must not have been so classified

if millions of people had access to it.

[Pavulon]

36. nope lots of it was marked classified nofrn. he just choose to steal.

just because there are lots of employees where you work does not mean they should all have the right to steal.. bad security practices do not excuse his crime.

That argument will not hold up in a trial.

[bitchkitty]

114. Poor Manning.

I feel deeply sorry for him; he sacrificed his youth for truth.

[sabrina 1]

72. You need to read the Geneva Conventions.

All inhumane treatment of detainees is torture. By torturing Manning to try to force a false confession out of him, they have already lost. European nations will not extradite a person to a country that tortures. I hope they try, this debate needs to be had Globally as here in this country there is no rule of law, and some people are actually apologists for torture, attempting to change the meaning of it, as Bush's torture lawyers did.

That won't be accepted in an International court, and that is where Assange will take his case if they try to prosecute and extradite him.

Maybe in the end some good will come of the lies and smears and treatment of Manning. The world will get to judge, and it's way past time to restore the rule of law to this country.

[Pavulon]

73. AU just sent us a nice man who murdered his wife

he will die in prison, of old age. If he misbehaves he could spend time in solitary, maybe his whole life. The only strings were we dont put him to sleep.

There is nothing in GC about treatment of espionage you would want applied to your hero. Summary execution is an option there, though not used.

[sabrina 1]

74. Espionage? Again, you need to read, or just the Judiciary hearings

from yesterday. There is no hope in hell that Assange will be charged with espionage, nor Manning for that matter. They are desperately trying, but that idea was pretty much shot down yesterday. So, they are attempting to write new legislation to fit what Wikileaks does, the only problem with that is that what Wikileaks does is journalism. So those ideas were also shot down.

The GV are clear. If a detainee is being treated inhumanely by a country, that country is in violation of the law.

Sad the lengths you go to defend torture and the violations of the treaties this country is signed on to.

Assange is now a very high profile, Global hero. The rabid reaction of this government to what Wikileaks does, and has been doing for four years to other countries, MADE him a hero. The U.S. is now universally reviled as a rogue state for its use of torture and inhumane treatment of detainees and its refusal to apply the rule of law to torturers and murderers. World opinion matters. Many of the governments now friendly to the U.S. are more than likely to fall in their next elections, with Iceland leading the way.

It's time for this country to reverse the course it was put on by the Bush gang or become a pariah as it already is in South America and now spreading across the rest of the globe.

Anyone who cares one bit about this country will do all in their power to stop the freefall we are now in. Prosecuting Assange is a lost cause. They need to prosecute the criminals exposed in the leaks in order to regain some respect around the world.

[Pavulon]

80. Che was a hero, I believe he is dead.

the reality is simple. If the evidence supports a charge assange gets it. Because he has more groupies now has no bearing on that.

And the GC allows for execution of those connected to espionage. That does not enter in to a civilian case.

While you opinion is interesting it will not be reflected in reality. So should obama resign like hero assange requests?

http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/4e473c7bc8854f2ec12563f60039c738/0950951523e3dcadc12563cd0051bf3e!OpenDocument

[sabrina 1]

96. I feel sorry for you. Fortunately it is a very tiny minority

supportive of the effort to destroy constitutional rights and the violation of all of our laws, laws that make this a civil society.

Sadly for you, the entire world is now involved and there will be most likely no prosecution of Assange under any espionage act, a completely stupid idea which even Republicans appear to be now aware of.

You'll have to look elsewhere for excitement ~ maybe the prosecution of real criminals. I see yet another country is being asked to try U.S. torturers. Those crimes just won't go away no matter how the criminals here try to bury them. The real reason of course that they are after Wikileaks. But the world knows, we do not abide by the law here, so sooner or later someone else will have to go after them for us. And before long, now that, thanks to Wikileaks we know the pressure being put on international courts by this government, their pleas to these international courts will fall on deaf ears. It happens to every crooked government that engages in war crimes, sooner or later. In S.A right now, even though it took 30 years, the war criminals are finally being brought to justice.

And Julian Assange and Manning will go down in history as heroes.

[Violet_Crumble]

158. The conditions of that extradition had zero to do with the Geneva Conventions

While repressive countries with little respect for human rights continue to execute people, countries like Australia are signatories to human rights conventions which obligates us to not extradite anyone if there's a likelihood that if convicted they'll be executed. That's got nothing at all to do with solitary confinement. Also, Gabe Watson hasn't been convicted in the US yet, so it's very premature to be stating what will happen to him as though it's fact....

Have you read this article about the effects of solitary confinement on people? I think you should read it, as I'm sure yr compassionate enough to know after reading it that such treatment of someone who hasn't been tried or convicted yet is something that most good and caring people would view as cruel, if not torture...


http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/03/30/090330fa_fact_gawande

[Creative]

101. The Geneva Conventions only apply if you are captured by the Genevans.

Seriously, I am searching for the link to evidence that proves Manning has been tortured.

Do you have one?

[robinlynne]

110. try international law, geneva conventions or amnesty international.

[Creative]

115. Okay...specifically, which international law or Geneva article has been violated?

The nature of Pvt Manning's confinement is governed by the UCMJ, which is different than the federal judicial system. Correspondingly, the interrogation process is handled differently than it would be under the civilian process. The objective is to debrief him and try to learn as much as possible about the what, the why and the who of this matter.

I don't think you realize how serious this is from the military's point of view. After all, one of their own members has admitted that he betrayed them and as a result, quite possibly endangered some of their lives.

[sabrina 1]

130. I have read the UCMJ in its entirety and nowhere does it

allow for inhumane treatment of a suspect or even of someone who has been convicted. Naturally it would not, since the oath taken by our military personnel, involves defending and protecting the Constitution. Our domestic laws, our constitution forbid torture. And all the International treaties we signed, all forbid torture and/or the 'inhumane treatment' of human beings, soldiers and civilians alike. I know Bush tried to make distinctions among human beings when it came to torture, HIS claim was that if they weren't wearing a uniform they weren't 'human'. Are you now suggesting that under a Demcoratic administration, U.S. soldiers do not fall under the 'human' category mentioned in all of our laws?

NO HUMAN BEING is to be treated inhumanely. There are no categories of human beings in any laws that forbid cruel and unusual punishment. NONE. Is that so hard to grasp? If this was happening under Bush, this board would be on fire with threads denouncing it. I am sick to see how desensitized even democrats have become to the inhumane treatment of other human beings. I am a democrat because I thought we had higher standards.

He is in custody, he should be treated humanely. Including after conviction if that should happen. And any country that does not abide by those standards is NOT a country I want to be a part of, nor would I ever even try to defend it, no matter which party is in power.

[Ellipsis]

131. Nicely put... you just nutshelled the context of the last few days.

There me be hope for us humans yet.


You get little Joni Mitchel for that California.



I want to paint a picture
Botticelli style
Instead of Venus on a clam
I'd paint this flower child

[Pavulon]

132. No he will be treated like Robert Hanssen , humanely serving out his life in florence

with no telco, no sunlight and 23 hours a day in a cell. Laws are there for a reason, those who break them pay the price.

I dont give a shit who warms the chair in the executive branch manning earned a death penalty and will trade that down to flip on his conspirators.

For that effort he will live the rest of his life in solitary confinement in a unhappy place. reality needs to be represented here. thats it.

[Ellipsis]

136. Well bully for you... we humbly bow to your presence

You didn't even know who was in Florence till I posted it.


Now where's the Kitty GIFF?


Is it red or white tonight, are you Pale Ale or a hearty Stout guy?

Dish.

[Pavulon]

137. I knew about florence when Teddy K. got sent there, the idea was interesting (kitty gif incl)

a prison where silence was pervasive. no yelling, no hooting and hollering, just reflected sunlight.

firefly and lemonade, nomz..

mother of all kitty gifs..

[Ellipsis]

140. Thanks... when I read about it I remembered the gent who visited saying the words "Eerily" so quiet

...and how after about 10 minutes he felt the walls closing in on him like he was back in high school and had to leave.

Lots of prison in Wisconsin... Even a SuperMax... some fucked up people end up coming out of there. There are better ways. for them and the real world after they get out ... if they get out that is.

Time will tell, and it won't get solved here, or tonight.

Just coffee for me.

Have fun... doing what you do.

Very cool Kitty GIFF.

[Pavulon]

141. On review what kind of person

lets their cat duke it out with a gator? I would love this history of this one, florida and redneck are bound to be in this story..

cheers.

[sabrina 1]

142. You have just stated the reality that the Bush adminstration

created. Thank you! But it's sad to know that someone posting here would support it.

Manning has not been tried. He is innocent as of now. He will be defended under the whistle-blower laws. He saw wrongdoing, he tried to talk to his superiors about it. They, apparently involved in the wrongdoing, ignored him. He is a very brave person risking all to try to expose crimes against humanity. I am very happy to see how much support he is getting around the world.

It is illegal to hold someone in solitary confinement. You show a severe lack of understanding of the laws that govern this nation. Especially the underlying reasons for them. As I said before, I feel sorry for you. I hope I never reach a point where I would condone cruel and unusual punishment even for someone who may deserve it, like Dick Cheney. Because to succumb to such a state of mind, would make me as bad as they are. And to any decent human being, that is unthinkable.

[Pavulon]

143. none of that is more than pipe dream. whistleblower laws do not cover

classified data, it is not illegal to hold a person in solitary for their own safety. he is a material witness, is someone kills him in prison who will testify against assange?

lets get one thing clear, manning confessed in chat logs, bradass will die in prison. This has nothing to do with bush, cheney, or darth fucking vader.

watch and learn, this will take place right in front of you.

all of what you posted is very emotional but has no application in the reality being lived by manning in a marine brig.

[sabrina 1]

144. I'm sure many people thought that about Daniel Ellsberg too.

But in the end, our judicial system worked in his case.

Manning is a material witness, but not what you are hoping for. He witnessed crimes in Iraq. I hope one day he will be able to testify about those crimes when the perpetrators are finally brought to justice.

All of what you say is emotional. He never met Assange. They are getting desperate, now that they cannot use the Espionage act, a stupid attempt which has been pretty much shot down.

So, of course they will try to conjure up something, but any testimony extracted by drugs and torture or inhumane treatment, will be useless. This won't be just the U.S. where they can hide their trials behind closed doors. The world is watching and they will have to do more than produce testimony from a tortured 'witness'.

[Pavulon]

145. (1:51:25 PM) bradass87: i'd have to ask assange ** the lie that binds them**

them. he will get a public trial, you can go and watch it.

The case will be pretty compelling.

1) communications, maybe on tape, chat conversations for sure. bradass confessed and probably fucked assange too with his loose lips.

2) siprnet activity, if assange was in on the theft he (and any pals) are fucked. See his interview today on cbs, that stumble when she asked him if he conspired with manning along with the left eye movement is a tell.

3) bradass will testify against assange because he does not want a federal death penalty.

watch and learn, this will be coming to a tv set near you soon.

[sabrina 1]

147. Except for one thing, An editor and publisher of an award winning

news organization is perfectly within his rights to speak to his sources. That too was covered in those hearings yesterday. Assuming he did. But your 'evidence' is a little lacking. Moving his left when asked a question is not evidence of anything. As I said before, you are funny.

As for the trial, the U.S. will never get their hands on Assange. The international community will not permit it. We don't have much moral authority or credibility anymore, and we torture people. No one can be handed over to a country with the horrific record of torture and abuse this country has. Assange will go on doing his job and in the not to distant future will be invited on to talk shows all over the world to discuss his ground-breaking idea on how to fill the void left by the oppression of the free press around the globe.

Coming to a TV set near you! The man is a genius and will most likely receive many more awards for his innovative ideas and for the beginning of what is not just a New Media news organization, but thanks to the U.S. witch hunting of him, a worldwide movement.

[Pavulon]

148. looking up left

is a time honored tell.

The Australians handed over some asshole who murdered his wife here a while back. Only stipulation, we cant kill him. SO he will do a life sentence.

Assange (lil baby jeesus to some here) has protection to PUBLISH material but not to commit a crime, or 250,000 of them. he can win awards like h rap brown..

There are plenty of geniuses in florence adx, he will be in good company.

And for the drama some kitty fail!

[Ellipsis]

149. OR the location of his attorney off camera.

[Pavulon]

151. Maybe , if he really just "found" that data and never spoke to manning

he is fine. If not he is in a world of suck.

[sabrina 1]

153. You should send your cat gif to the rabid rightwingers calling

for Assanges extradition and murder. I think Assange just taught them a civics lesson. The liklihood of this country ever succeeding in getting their hands on Assange, considering our atrocious human rights record, and the calls for his assassination by former elected officials, not to mention the call for an investigation of the NYT in an effort to justify prosecuting a journalist like Assange, by Joe Lieberman, a chilling suggestion to free-thinking people everywhere, makes it all but certain, he will never be handed over to the U.S.

The Australians have a puppet government, the current and former PMs being completely in the pocket of the U.S. Assange is not in Australia, he is in Europe which has treaties laying out the conditions necessary for extradition. The U.S. fails on several fronts the test of which country a person can be handed over to.

[Pavulon]

161. We have standing treaties with both the UK and Sweden. Gary McKinnon

is getting ready to come here and spend a very long time behind bars. lets get the fact down here. If he is indicted here in a federal court, which is where people are tried for serious charges in the US, he will be detained in europe and he will then be extradited.

This is not a polanski rape case in a local prosecutors office, it would be the DOJ.

The only lesson he taught is that manning had to much access for his MOS.

[Ghost Dog]

157. "3) bradass will testify against assange because he does not want a federal death penalty".

Exactly, since that is or would be the deal being offered him by an apparently corrupt judicial system, military or civilian or bought-and-paid-for or whatever you want to call it.

The inference taken by any serious court of law would be that such testimony would be open to reasonable doubt as regards its veracity.

Such testimony would therefore not be accepted. It would be thrown out.

And the world would continue watching...

[Pavulon]

160. People take this deal all the time. It is part of

most judicial systems. Do the full ride or we knock off 5 years if you testify against you employer. Drug cases, murder for hire, this is established policy, not some manning special.

[Creative]

155. I think you need to consult an attorney who is familiar with the UCMJ.

For clearly, you are unable to grasp the fact that Manning does not have the same rights that he would be afforded in a civilian court.

http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/ucmj.htm#SUBCHAPTER

809. ART. 9. IMPOSITION OF RESTRAINT
b) An enlisted member may be ordered into arrest or confinement by any commissioned officer by an order, oral or written, delivered in person or through other persons subject to this chapter. A commanding officer may authorize warrant officers, petty officers, or noncommissioned officers to order enlisted members of his command or subject to his authority into arrest or confinement.

[sabrina 1]

163. Where does that say someone can be tortured or treated inhumanely?

As I said, I have the UCMJ and nowhere does it allow for someone to be tortured or subjected to cruel treatment. 'Restraint' doesn't mean torture you know. It clearly means in that context, 'arrested and taken into custody'.

[robinlynne]

164. I dont ahve the time to look it up. but solitary confinement for 6 months is definitley torture.

i think two weeks is already dangerous to the brain. don't know the exact times. If they were just trying to debrief him, they would put him in condiitons where he could actually think. After 6months in solitary people are hallucinating. I think they are just trying to get him to sign over Julian Assange. That has been published in several articles.

[sabrina 1]

111. Sure ~

The inhumane conditions of Bradley Manning's detention

In sum, Manning has been subjected for many months without pause to inhumane, personality-erasing, soul-destroying, insanity-inducing conditions of isolation similar to those perfected at America's Supermax prison in Florence, Colorado: all without so much as having been convicted of anything. And as is true of many prisoners subjected to warped treatment of this sort, the brig's medical personnel now administer regular doses of anti-depressants to Manning to prevent his brain from snapping from the effects of this isolation.

Just by itself, the type of prolonged solitary confinement to which Manning has been subjected for many months is widely viewed around the world as highly injurious, inhumane, punitive, and arguably even a form of torture. In his widely praised March, 2009 New Yorker article -- entitled "Is Long-Term Solitary Confinement Torture?" -- the surgeon and journalist Atul Gawande assembled expert opinion and personal anecdotes to demonstrate that, as he put it, "all human beings experience isolation as torture." By itself, prolonged solitary confinement routinely destroys a person’s mind and drives them into insanity. A March, 2010 article in The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law explains that "solitary confinement is recognized as difficult to withstand; indeed, psychological stressors such as isolation can be as clinically distressing as physical torture."

If they can remove his ability to think for himself, they can get him to sign anything, I guess that is the thinking. But while here in this great democracy of ours, where torture and inhumane treatment are as acceptable as they were in other repressive regimes, confessions extracted this way are acceptable, in most other civilized nations, they are not.

Julian Assange has stated that the never met Manning. We know that the government realizes they cannot get Assange under the Espionage Act. And we also know that this is their latest fantasy, to get Manning to claim that he 'colluded' with Assange. And if they have to drive him insande to get such a confession, they are prepared to do so.

Even that wouldn't work anyhow. They need lawyers it seems. There would be nothing wrong on Assange's part if he were to communicate with a source, even if he paid him, (unless we want to criminalize tabloids) as discussed in yesterday's judiciary hearings. News editors and publishers regularly meet with sources.

This country has sunk to such a low level that I am not sure it can ever be restored to some kind of democracy. To see people on democratic boards cheering this kind of treatment of any human being, is simply sickening. And makes me think that democrats who do, are hypocrites, slamming the Bush administration for the same crimes, it is apparently okay if they do it.

[Creative]

113. You provided I link to an opinion piece, I am seeking facts.

[sabrina 1]

116. No, it is not just an opinion piece. If you bothered to read it you

would know that the accusations about this are backed up by a named person from the military. But don't bother educating yourself if you wish, that's your choice.

I have no doubt, and in fact sadly, expected to hear that he was being tortured. We do have a history of torturing people, as you know. No one in the world, knowing our history, knowing how we have decided to 'move on' and to protect torturers, can doubt that he and if they can get their hands on him, Julian Assange, are and will be tortured by this barbaric government.

[Creative]

119. Okay, I re-read it and there is nothing there other than opinions of some who think it is inhumane

to be alone. And the "named person from the military" is not quoted. Please...

First, the nature of his alleged offense requires that he be separated from other prisoners. Secondly, Pvt Manning is being interrogated in an effort to learn the details of the offenses he is suspected of committing. This is not supposed to be fun.

Finally, Pvt Manning is responsible for this present state of being, and although may not be enjoying himself, he is not being tortured. And there is no credible evidence to suggest otherwise.

[Ellipsis]

120. Opinions... LOL

the nature of his alleged offense requires that he be separated from other prisoners.... that would be an opinion yes?


"Finally, Pvt Manning is responsible for this present state of being, and although may not be enjoying himself, he is not being tortured. And there is no credible evidence to suggest otherwise".... uh huh opinion



Got any facts... or do you just ask for them?

Speak in terms of generalities like "many people"? Who are these many people?


People who are accredited, who ARE experts, their opinions are what wins or loses court cases.


You don't even have kitty GIFFS do you?

[Creative]

121. It's not my opinion, it's a fact that those who are suspected of Manning's offense

are separated from other prisoners. It may surprise you, but the military implemented this policy quite some time ago in an effort to limit the dissemination of classified information.

Torture...? Again, all I want are the facts (credible evidence), and I have seen none.

[Ellipsis]

122. How about one signal link to support your assertion?

Credible evidence that's an opinion again right? There are several references in this very post, from this thread, from experts who are credible. Court cases have been won on their opinions... and you don't even have to use the Google...


Did you read the posts?

You have a set position. That's OK

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4662896&mesg_id=4663687

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4662896&mesg_id=4663757


Just quit log jamming the discussion.




.

[Creative]

123. I have read quite a few posts. But the important question is: did you read the law?

cruel and unusual punishment n. governmental penalties against convicted criminal defendants which are barbaric, involve torture and/or shock the public morality. They are specifically prohibited under the Eighth Amendment to the U. S. Constitution. However, nowhere are they specifically defined. Tortures like the rack (stretching the body inch by inch) or the thumbscrew, dismemberment, breaking bones, maiming, actions involving deep or long-lasting pain are all banned. But solitary confinement, enforced silence, necessary force to prevent injury to fellow prisoners or guards, psychological humiliation, and bad food are generally allowed. In short, there is a large gray area, in which "cruel and unusual" is definitely subjective based on individual sensitivities and moral outlook.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Cruel+and+Unusual+Punishment

[Ellipsis]

125. I reject the premise, doesn't apply. I take then you haven't read the posts in this thread.

Still no link, not one... just your opinion.



http://www.constitution.org/mil/ucmj19970615.htm


813. ART. 13 PUNISHMENT PROHIBITED BEFORE TRIAL

No person, while being held for trial, may be subjected to punishment or penalty other than arrest or confinement upon the charges pending against him, nor shall the arrest or confinement imposed upon him be any more rigorous than the circumstances required to insure his presence, but he may be subjected to minor punishment during that period for infractions of discipline.


Oh and just for grins Here's a Supreme court decision form 1890 on solitary confinement.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?friend=%3C%20riend%3E&navby=case&court=us&vol=134&invol=160&pageno=171

1890 - In an opinion concerning the effects of solitary confinement on inmates housed in Philadelphia (Re: Medley, 134 U.S. 160), U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Freeman Miller finds, "A considerable number of the prisoners fell, after even a short confinement, into a semi-fatuous condition, from which it was next to impossible to arouse them, and others became violently insane; others still, committed suicide; while those who stood the ordeal better were not generally reformed, and in most cases did not recover sufficient mental activity to be of any subsequent service to the community."

[Creative]

127. Your premise would matter more if you were a Supreme Court justice.

Being alone is not torture.

[Ellipsis]

129. Still no link? ...to support your assertion 'Tis a gray area indeed.

ttp://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?friend=%3C%20riend%3E&navby=case&court=us&vol=134&invol=160&pageno=171

1890 - In an opinion concerning the effects of solitary confinement on inmates housed in Philadelphia (Re: Medley, 134 U.S. 160), U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Freeman Miller finds, "A considerable number of the prisoners fell, after even a short confinement, into a semi-fatuous condition, from which it was next to impossible to arouse them, and others became violently insane; others still, committed suicide; while those who stood the ordeal better were not generally reformed, and in most cases did not recover sufficient mental activity to be of any subsequent service to the community."

[Creative]

154. The UCMJ not prevent this type of confinement; furthermore,

in interests of national security, wide latitude is afforded with respect to the interrogation process. The gray area occurs with the merging of the of military procedures with civilian ones.

http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/ucmj.htm#SUBCHAPTER

[sabrina 1]

124. Actually the people most responsible for these and other leaks

are the military. This was agreed upon yesterday by a bi-partisan committee on the leaks. As for Manning, I guess we have disposed with due process now also? There are laws protecting whistle-blowers which will no doubt be invoked in his defense. He has been accused, not convicted, but don't let that stop you. This country I know, no longer observes the rule of law so I guess considering that, your statement that he is guilty, should not be a surprise. Daniel Elsberg was also accused of heinous acts, but today is considered a hero.

He is being treated inhumanely and there are witnesses. It is sad to see anyone try to defend this, but even more sad to see it on a democratic board.

Hopefully now, with these reports, the International Red Cross and other humane societies will demand access to him. Drugging someone against their will, causing them to deteriate both physically and mentally, is a crime. Well, in a civilized society it is. But you may be right considering we do not live in a civilized society and have not since the Bush gang tossed out all our laws, and this administration decided to cover for them.

[Creative]

126. I did not say that he was guilty--I said "alleged offenses."

Nevertheless, he is cooperating with the Justice Department; thus, a simple application of logic leads one to the conclusion that he in some way, connected to this crime.

[robinlynne]

109. right on.

[robinlynne]

108. Solitary for a certain amount of time is torture. All human beings go crazy if kept in

solitary for long enough. International law would define how long is too log, but you can bet that 6 months is too long.

[Pavulon]

138. There are people in marion who have been in solitary since 86'(nt)

[IScreamSundays]

38. WRONG again Pavulov

I did you the favor of entering the search criteria. All you have to do now is click.

http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=solitary+confinement+as+torture&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

[Pavulon]

40. Advocacy crap and the real data is behind paywall. when you source you owe primary

the people touting a cancer rate in falluja 4x chernobyl learned that the hard way. need access to samples, not oped.

http://cad.sagepub.com/content/49/1/124.abstract

[GliderGuider]

41. Solitary is not torture?

HELLHOLE

“It’s an awful thing, solitary,” John McCain wrote of his five and a half years as a prisoner of war in Vietnam—more than two years of it spent in isolation in a fifteen-by-fifteen-foot cell, unable to communicate with other P.O.W.s except by tap code, secreted notes, or by speaking into an enamel cup pressed against the wall. “It crushes your spirit and weakens your resistance more effectively than any other form of mistreatment.” And this comes from a man who was beaten regularly; denied adequate medical treatment for two broken arms, a broken leg, and chronic dysentery; and tortured to the point of having an arm broken again. A U.S. military study of almost a hundred and fifty naval aviators returned from imprisonment in Vietnam, many of whom were treated even worse than McCain, reported that they found social isolation to be as torturous and agonizing as any physical abuse they suffered.

And what happened to them was physical. EEG studies going back to the nineteen-sixties have shown diffuse slowing of brain waves in prisoners after a week or more of solitary confinement. In 1992, fifty-seven prisoners of war, released after an average of six months in detention camps in the former Yugoslavia, were examined using EEG-like tests. The recordings revealed brain abnormalities months afterward; the most severe were found in prisoners who had endured either head trauma sufficient to render them unconscious or, yes, solitary confinement. Without sustained social interaction, the human brain may become as impaired as one that has incurred a traumatic injury.

It is unclear how many prisoners in solitary confinement become psychotic. Stuart Grassian, a Boston psychiatrist, has interviewed more than two hundred prisoners in solitary confinement. In one in-depth study, prepared for a legal challenge of prisoner-isolation practices, he concluded that about a third developed acute psychosis with hallucinations. The markers of vulnerability that he observed in his interviews were signs of cognitive dysfunction—a history of seizures, serious mental illness, mental retardation, illiteracy, or, as in Felton’s case, a diagnosis such as attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, signalling difficulty with impulse control. In the prisoners Grassian saw, about a third had these vulnerabilities, and these were the prisoners whom solitary confinement had made psychotic. They were simply not cognitively equipped to endure it without mental breakdowns.

Not torture, eh? He has't even had a fucking trial yet, and they have been doing this to him for almost 5 months.

[Pavulon]

45. not torture. you can post advocacy or you can post data.

advocacy is like sourcing the kkk for info on black history. Sourced material with sampled data is the standard..

he is a pfc which means he is still in the army and still subject to that set of rules.

put him in genpop and he will be dahlmered right quick. decause being dead is worse than solitary.

http://cad.sagepub.com/content/49/1/124.abstract

[GliderGuider]

66. I posted data below

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4662896&mesg_id=4663687

Knock yourself out, tough guy.

[Pavulon]

71. No N no data. cant see the contol data

where people in genpop show the same "symptoms"

[Ellipsis]

75. N data.

But, there was one piece of data recorded in the DOC files. DOC files record incidents of emergency psychiatric contact (e.g. suicidal or self-destructive behavior) and emergence of psychotic symptoms. Among the MI in Ad Seg (N=59) there were 37 such episodes (an average of .62 episodes per inmate – almost 2 for every 3 inmates). Among the MI in GP (N=33), on the other hand, there were only 3 (.09 per inmate – less than 1 for every 10 inmates). Could this have been random – i.e. not a reflection of some significant difference in the result? Statistically, the chance of that is entirely minute, approximately p=.0002; i.e. a chance of 1 in 5,000, a mighty small number. (In research, statistical significance requires only a probability of randomness of .05, i.e. as much as 1 in 20!) Thus, this objective data squarely contradicts the authors’ conclusion that Ad Seg does not produce significantly more psychiatric difficulties than does GP housing. The authors simply declined to perform this straightforward statistical analysis, even after the oversight was explicitly pointed out.

http://solitarywatch.com/2010/11/15/fatal-flaws-in-the-colorado-solitary-confinement-study/

[Pavulon]

78. So there are two competing studies. two results, take your pick. I say eggs are good for you

next study says they are not. Read your link it hosts data that counters your position.

I think i'll go with this study..

http://solitarywatch.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/adseg-report-final1.pdf

[Ellipsis]

83. Read the whole thing did you? I 'll take the expert who has 33 years behind him.

...with no dog in the hunt. Not a report motivated by economics of the DOC.

Nice dodge though.

[Pavulon]

84. Data is data, they either cheated or it counters

the study you have. Either way, solitary is not torture as defined by US or International law.

[Ellipsis]

88. Aiggghhhhh.... Busted. See you later... asked and answered. Have a good day.

Actually the N data is from the Colorado DOC ... just omitted from the report.

"Thus the saying among computer people and statisticians: “G.I. – G.O. — garbage in, garbage out.”"

[Pavulon]

90. Asked what. You sourced from what you provided I have a counter position.

thats how it works. If you really want to continue to try to argue the position we could get into sample data (700 people in my doc) and conclusions.

That may become unfun..

[robinlynne]

107. solitary for 6 months is definitely torture.

[Roland99]

12. Would have been shocking enough under the previous admin. Under this one???

:banghead:

[Jefferson23]

13. Getting to Assange through Manning

Glenn Greenwald

(updated below)

In The New York Times this morning, Charlie Savage describes the latest thinking from the DOJ about how to criminally prosecute WikiLeaks and Julian Assange. Federal investigators are "are looking for evidence of any collusion" between WikiLeaks and Bradley Manning -- "trying to find out whether Mr. Assange encouraged or even helped" the Army Private leak the documents -- and then "charge him as a conspirator in the leak, not just as a passive recipient of the documents who then published them." To achieve this, it is particularly important to "persuade Private Manning to testify against Mr. Assange." I want to make two points about this.

First, the Obama administration faces what it perceives to be a serious dilemma: it is -- as Savage writes -- "under intense pressure to make an example of as a deterrent to further mass leaking," but nothing Assange or WikiLeaks has done actually violates the law. Moreover, as these Columbia Journalism School professors explain in opposing prosecutions, it is impossible to invent theories to indict them without simultaneously criminalizing much of investigative journalism. Thus, claiming that WikiLeaks does not merely receive and publish classified information, but rather actively seeks it and helps the leakers, is the DOJ's attempt to distinguish it from "traditional" journalism. As Savage writes, this theory would mean "the government would not have to confront awkward questions about why it is not also prosecuting traditional news organizations or investigative journalists who also disclose information the government says should be kept secret — including The New York Times."

But this distinction is totally illusory. Very rarely do investigative journalists merely act as passive recipients of classified information; secret government programs aren't typically reported because leaks just suddenly show up one day in the email box of a passive reporter. Journalists virtually always take affirmative steps to encourage its dissemination. They try to cajole leakers to turn over documents to verify their claims and consent to their publication. They call other sources to obtain confirmation and elaboration in the form of further leaks and documents. Jim Risen and Eric Lichtblau described how they granted anonymity to "nearly a dozen current and former officials" to induce them to reveal information about Bush's NSA eavesdropping program. Dana Priest contacted numerous "U.S. and foreign officials" to reveal the details of the CIA's "black site" program. Both stories won Pulitzer Prizes and entailed numerous, active steps to cajole sources to reveal classified information for publication.

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/12/16/wikileaks/index.html

[SidDithers]

20. "but nothing Assange or WikiLeaks has done actually violates the law"...

And this shows why I have absolutely no respect for Greenwald as an analyst. He's making a statement about something he can't have full knowledge of. Does Greenwald know everything that went on between Assange and Manning? Has he read all of their communications?

If Assange encouraged or facilitated Manning's theft of documents, then he and / or Wikileaks have absolutely violated the law. That's why the prosecution is trying to get Manning to roll on Assange.

Sid

[Jefferson23]

23. I believe you may be applying your opinion objections exclusive

to Greenwald. You may disagree with him, but as the OP points out here, he is not alone.

"Moreover, as these Columbia Journalism School professors explain in opposing prosecutions, it is impossible to invent theories to indict them without simultaneously criminalizing much of investigative journalism."

As well, if there was something between Manning and Assange, we don't know about it. If the government needs to offer
a deal to get it, I'm not sure why anyone would trust it. I mean you could, but that would be some leap of faith I do
not share.

[SidDithers]

27. Fair enough. But my main point still stands...

Greenwald is assuring us that "nothing Assange or WikiLeaks has done actually violates the law" without knowing everything that Wikileaks or Assange has done.

Sid

[EFerrari]

64. No, Journalists professionally encourage their sources to give them

information. That's not a crime. Facilitating the delivery of information is not in all cases a crime, either. Journalists do this every day. Glenn is right about that. If you're really interested in this, watch Conyers' hearing from yesterday. Some good panelists talk about this issue in a very granular way.

Even if Holder gets Manning to turn, he's still going to have to deal with 1) Manning being in solitary confinement and the effect on him, who refused to speak voluntarily before his solitary confinement and 2) the evidence against Manning provided by a Lamo, who is not a great witness and 3) journalistic privilege.

This is a disaster in the making for the Obama administration and they shouldn't go there. Aside from the ethics or morality of it, they only stand to lose politically.

[Pavulon]

70. So lets just break those up and squish them now.

1) solitary. lots of people are in solitary. People who would be killed in genpop and other people who committed espionage in the past. I'm sure his defense will enter all these concens into evidence at his trial. And they will be addressed then. Solitary is not torture, no matter how much some people want it to be.

Lots of people have refused to speak until they are told they will face a federal death penalty case with a high probability of conviction. Based on the odds of being dead in about 3 years bradass may have changed his mind. May not have, he will at minimum serve life in solitary. Or he may catch the needle in indiana on the same spot as mcveigh.

2) lamo is not the evidence, the evidence are mannings own words, you can read bradass87's confession online. That alone is enough to bury him.. His own logged chats will be evidence. His user id on siprnet will be evidence. Every cable he stole will be traced back to hid id and potentially video of the room, while he is stealing. See post one on the Death Penalty case. Manning is done.

3) Privilege gives you the right to publish. If a story is about hookers you have a right to interview then, a right to witness potential criminal acts, you DO NOT have a right to be a pimp or to peddle you ass as part of a story. That remains a crime. If assange pimped him for data, he is fucked too.

So IF assange did ANYTHING other than accept data he WILL be charged with conspiracy at a minimum and he will be extradited.

[Kip Humphrey]

14. I think its time we change our name to DEMOCRACY UNDER

[Pavulon]

17. called this one..

manning will flip and conspiracy will be the charge. extradition treaty in place with UK to drop him in northern virginia.

[kgnu_fan]

26. Pavlon, what do you think this one?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x26930

[Pavulon]

28. Oh I am worried about the collapse. Have 20,000 rounds of 556, mre;s, water

a badass madmax leather suit and a farm... (KIDDING about the y2k approach) seriously the us is not collapsing.

[kgnu_fan]

37. You tend to be frantic and violent about militay issues but you are certain about dollar's value?

[Pavulon]

39. dont care about the dollars value. i provide a service

i get paid for my time. euros, rupees, whatever. my time is compensated.

[kgnu_fan]

48. So you are not loyal to USA, you obey any masters who pay you

You don't care if the USA is destroyed? You are selling off USA?

[Pavulon]

49. The USA is not a currency. It is an idea and set of laws

which i support. however if those laws and ideals cease to exist it does not prevent me from existing.

[kgnu_fan]

50. USA's idea is depending on democracy and you are supporting the force that is destroying it

just so you can get your money. You have been contradicting yourself. I hope you wake up.

[Pavulon]

53. Not supporting a person blackmailing the POTUS and SECSTATE

to resign is a position I am quite comfortable with. I will get money regardless.. listened to mom and paid attention in school.

[kgnu_fan]

57. If you can not uphold American ideal of democracy and Constituion, you failed

And I hope you grow up to be a man instead of staying a momma's boy. You need to see the world.

[Pavulon]

58. seen a good many parts of it.. treason may be mentioned in there

somewhere.. assange blackmailing the government is not democracy. stealing classified information is not democracy.

Just simple criminals.

[kgnu_fan]

59. Information is the currency of Democracy, have you heard about this?

[kgnu_fan]

60. And if you have seen the world only from comfortably protected military bases,

you have seen NOTHING of the world. Get out of an opaque cocoon of fear, get out and meet the true world.

[Pavulon]

62. I spent 3 years traveleing to LA and APAC and have seen plenty.

KFOR was an eye opener as well.

[kgnu_fan]

69. I hope you will someday grow up, you still have potential

[ProudDad]

105. He's much easier to take

when his posts come up as "ignored"...

I gave up on that POS years ago...

[PavePusher]

169. Excuse me... "comfortably protected military bases"?

Which ones would those be?

And what do you mean by "comfortably protected"?

I think your view of military life may not be completely accurate.

[U4ikLefty]

102. Hear, hear!!!

but I think the purposefully ignorant will continue to profit from their willful ignorance.

Our stinky little troll here is but one example.

[Pavulon]

139. And the hatey earn a kitty gif too..

lazy kitty brings no intellectual position to the table.

[U4ikLefty]

166. Speaking of "hatey kitty", I would call you something equivalent...

perhaps "angry pussy"??? Yep, that's what I would call you...no need for the gif.

Speaking of the intellectual BS...I actually AM an engineer & resent you brining our profession down to the level of the Rushbot.

You & your "opinion" of justice stink like "hatey kitty's" litterbox.

Now go home to your mom's basement.

[westerebus]

56. If he goes any where it will be to Sweden.

That's the country that has criminal charges pending against him. The charges are yet to be proven in a Swedish Court.

If the Brit's try to hand him over to the US the EU and International Court will have a field day with the case.

[Ruperto31]

150. Sweden has already agreed to defer to any US charges .

That's what Assange's British lawyer says.

http://www.skynews.com.au/world/article.aspx?id=551808&vId=

[Ellipsis]

61. yes you did.

[joshcryer]

67. Came to post this. Nice call. But I expected it.

Don't agree with everything you say but you were adamant about this one. Manning will fry Assange. Might even get a shortened sentence for it.

[Pharaoh]

22. A confession under torture

is worthless, and that is effectively done to Manning. Psychological brutal torture.

[Pavulon]

30. How so? By putting him on suicide watch?

and putting him in solitary. Every prisoner in florence adx is in solitary. It sucks, but is not torture.

[GliderGuider]

42. Ever been in solitary, tough guy?

From what I've read, I suspect your tune might change after a few years of it...

[Pavulon]

44. nope, never stole when I had access to classified info.

or otherwise pulled a criminal act that gets a person locked up in supermax.

[GliderGuider]

46. So you have no experience to say whether solitary is torture or not.

Tough guy with a keyboard.

[Pavulon]

47. so reverse that, you served solitary time in florence or similar

and have personal experience that it is torture.

[GliderGuider]

65. No, but I believe academics like Craig Haney who have spent a few decades studying it.

As someone who has not dived to the bottom of the ocean, I trust oceanographers who have.
As someone who has not flown to Jupiter, I believe astronomers who describe the planet.
For those things where I don't have personal experience, I trust experts who have.

Even if I have had personal experience I tend to trust experts for general opinions, since my experiences are be unique and not general.

So here's an example of academic studies that I trust. It's a peer-reviewed article written by an expert (Dr. Craig Haney is a professor in the Psych department at UCSC). I've included the the reference list at the end. You can read the entire article for yourself at the link, and look up as many of the references as you can bear. You want data, not advocacy? Here you go.

Mental Health Issues in Long-term Solitary and “Supermax” Confinement (PDF)

Abstract

This article discusses the recent increase in the use of solitary-like
confinement, especially the rise of so-called “supermax” prisons
and the special mental health issues and challenges they pose. After
briefly discussing the nature of these specialized and increasingly
widespread units and the forces that have given rise to them, the
article reviews some of the unique mental health related issues they
present, including the large literature that exists on the negative
psychological effects of isolation, and the unusually high
percentage of mentally ill prisoners who are confined there. It ends
with a brief discussion of some of the ways these mental health
issues can and should be addressed in supermax prisons.

Excerpt:

In assessing the mental health concerns raised by supermax prisons, it is
important to acknowledge an extensive empirical literature that clearly establishes their
potential to inflict psychological pain and emotional damage. Empirical research on
solitary and supermax-like confinement has consistently and unequivocally
documented the harmful consequences of living in these kinds of environments.
Despite some methodological limitations that apply to some of the individual studies,
the findings are robust. Evidence of these negative psychological effects comes from
personal accounts, descriptive studies, and systematic research on solitary and
supermax-type confinement, conducted over a period of four decades, by researchers
from several different continents who had diverse backgrounds and a wide range of
professional expertise. Even if one sets aside the corroborating data that come from
studies of psychologically analogous settings—research on the harmful effects of acute
sensory deprivation (e.g., Hocking, 1970; Leiderman, 1962), the psychological distress
and other problems that are created by the loss of social contact such as studies of the
pains of isolated, restricted living in the freeworld (e.g., Chappell & Badger, 1989;
Cooke & Goldstein,1989; Harrison, Clearwater & McKay, 1989; Rathbone-McCuan & 11
Hashimi, 1982), or the well-documented psychiatric risks of seclusion for mental
patients (e.g., Fisher, 1994; Mason, 1993)—the harmful psychological consequences of
solitary and supermax-type confinement are extremely well documented.

Specifically, in case studies and personal accounts provided by mental health
and correctional staff who worked in supermax units, a range of similar adverse
symptoms have been observed to occur in prisoners, including appetite and sleep
disturbances, anxiety, panic, rage, loss of control, paranoia, hallucinations, and self
mutilations (e.g., Jackson, 1983; Porporino, 1986; Rundle, 1973; Scott, 1969; Slater, 1986).
Moreover, direct studies of prison isolation have documented an extremely broad range
of harmful psychological reactions. These effects include increases in the following
potentially damaging symptoms and problematic behaviors: negative attitudes and
affect (e.g., Bauer, Priebe, Haring, & Adamczak, 1993; Hilliard, 1976; Korn, 1988a, b;
Koch, 1986; Miller & Young, 1997; Suedfeld, Ramirez, Deaton, & Baker-Brown, 1982),
insomnia (e.g., Bauer et al., 1993; Brodsky & Scogin, 1988; Haney, 1993; Koch, 1986;
Korn, 1988a, b), anxiety (e.g., Andersen, et al., 2000; Brodsky & Scogin, 1988; Grassian,
1983; Haney, 1993; Hilliard, 1976; Koch, 1986; Korn, 1988a, b; Toch, 1975; Volkart,
Dittrich, Rothenfluh & Werner, 1983; Walters, Callagan & Newman, 1963), panic (e.g.,
Toch, 1975), withdrawal (e.g., Cormier & Williams, 1966; Haney, 1993; Miller & Young,
1997; Scott & Gendreau, 1969; Toch, 1975; Waligora, 1974), hypersensitivity (e.g.,
Grassian, 1983; Haney, 1993; Volkart, Dittrich, Rothenfluh & Werner, 1983), ruminations
(e.g., Brodsky & Scogin, 1988; Haney, 1993; Korn, 1988a, b; Miller & Young, 1997),
cognitive dysfunction (e.g., Brodsky & Scogin, 1988; Grassian,1983; Haney, 1993; Koch,
1986; Korn, 1988a, b; Miller & Young, 1997; Suedfeld & Roy, 1975; Volkart, Dittrich,
Rothenfluh & Werner, 1983), hallucinations (e.g., Brodsky & Scogin, 1988; Grassian,
1983; Haney, 1993; Koch, 1986; Korn, 1988a, b; Suedfeld & Roy, 1975; ), loss of control
(e.g., Grassian, 1983; Haney, 1993; Suedfeld & Roy, 1975; Toch, 1975), irritability,
aggression, and rage (e.g., Bauer et al., 1993; Brodsky & Scogin, 1988; Cormier & 12
Williams, 1966; Grassian, 1983; Haney, 1993; Hilliard, 1976; Koch, 1986; Miller & Young,
1997; Suedfeld, Ramirez, Deaton, & Baker-Brown, 1982; Toch, 1975), paranoia (e.g.,
Cormier & Williams, 1969; Grassian, 1983; Volkart, Dittrich, Rothenfluh & Werner,
1983), hopelessness (e.g., Haney, 1993; Hilliard, 1976), lethargy (e.g., Brodsky & Scogin,
1988; Haney, 1993; Koch, 1986; Scott & Gendreau, 1969; Suedfeld and Roy, 1975),
depression (e.g., Andersen, et al., 2000; Brodsky & Scogin, 1988; Haney, 1993; Hilliard,
1976; Korn, 1988a, b), a sense of impending emotional breakdown (e.g., Brodsky &
Scogin, 1988; Grassian, 1983; Haney, 1993; Koch, 1986; Korn, 1988a, b; Toch, 1975), self
mutilation (e.g., Benjamin & Lux, 1975; Grassian, 1983; Toch, 1975), and suicidal
ideation and behavior (e.g., Benjamin & Lux, 1975; Cormier & Williams, 1966; Grassian,
1983; Haney, 1993).

In addition, among the correlational studies of the relationship between housing
type and various incident reports, again, self-mutilation and suicide are more prevalent
in isolated housing (e.g., Hayes, 1989; Johnson, 1973; Jones, 1986; Porporino, 1986), as
are deteriorating mental and physical health (beyond self-injury), other-directed
violence, such as stabbings, attacks on staff, and property destruction, and collective
violence (e.g., Bidna, 1975; Edwards, 1988; Kratcoski, 1988; Porporino, 1986; Setstoft,
Andersen, Lilleback & Gabrielsen, 1998; Steinke, 1991; Volkart, Rothenfluh, Kobelt,
Dittrich, & Ernst, 1983b). The use of extreme forms of solitary confinement in so-called
“brainwashing” and methods of torture also underscores its painful, damaging
potential (e.g., Deaton, Burge, Richlin, & Latrownik, 1977; Foster, 1987; Hinkle & Wolff,
1956; Riekert, 1985; Shallice, 1974; Vrca, Bozikov, Brzovic, Fuchs, & Malinar, 1996; West,
1985). In fact, many of the negative effects of solitary confinement are analogous to the
acute reactions suffered by torture and trauma victims, including post-traumatic stress
disorder or “PTSD” (e.g., Herman, 1992, 1995; Horowitz, 1990; Hougen, 1988; Siegel,
1984) and the kind of psychiatric sequelae that plague victims of what are called
“deprivation and constraint” torture techniques (e.g., Somnier & Genefke, 1986). 13

To summarize, there is not a single published study of solitary or supermax-like
confinement in which non-voluntary confinement lasting for longer than 10 days where
participants were unable to terminate their isolation at will that failed to result in
negative psychological effects. The damaging effects ranged in severity and included
such clinically significant symptoms as hypertension, uncontrollable anger,
hallucinations, emotional breakdowns, chronic depression, and suicidal thoughts and
behavior. Of course, it is important to emphasize that not all supermax prisons are
created equal, and not all of them have the same capacity to produce the same number
and degree of negative psychological effects. Research on the effects of social contexts
and situations in general and institutional settings in particular underscores the way in
which specific conditions of confinement do matter. Thus, there is every reason to
expect that better-run and relatively more benign supermax prisons will produce
comparatively fewer of the preceding negative psychological effects, and the worse run
facilities will produce comparatively more.

References
Andersen, H., Sestoft, D., Lillebaek, T., Gabrielsen, G., Hemmingsen, R., &
Kramp, P. (2000). A longitudinal study of prisoners on remand: Psychiatric
prevalence, incidence and psychopathology in solitary vs. non-solitary
confinement. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 102, 19-25.
References
Andersen, H., Sestoft, D., Lillebaek, T., Gabrielsen, G., Hemmingsen, R., &
Kramp, P. (2000). A longitudinal study of prisoners on remand: Psychiatric
prevalence, incidence and psychopathology in solitary vs. non-solitary
confinement. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 102, 19-25.
Austin v. Wilkinson, 189 F. Sup. 2d 719 (2002).
Bauer, M., Priebe, S., Haring, B., & Adamczak, K. (1993). Long-term mental
sequelae of political imprisonment in East Germany. Journal of Nervous &
Mental Disease, 181, 257-262.
Benjamin, T., & Lux, K. (1975). Constitutional and psychological implications of
the use of solitary confinement: Experience at the Maine prison. Clearinghouse
Review, 9, 83-90.
Bidna, H. (1975). Effects of increased security on prison violence. Journal of Criminal
Justice, 3, 33-46 (1975).
Brodsky, S., & Scogin, F. (1988). Inmates in protective custody: First data on
emotional effects. Forensic Reports, 1, 267-280 .
Chappell, N. & Mark Badger, M. (1989). Social isolation and well-being. Journal
of Gerontology, 44, 169-176.
Cooke, M., & Goldstein, J. (1989). Social isolation and violent behavior. Forensic
Reports, 2, 287-294.
Cooper v. Casey, 97 F.3d 914 (1996).
Cormier, B., & Williams, P. (1966). Excessive Deprivation of Liberty. Canadian
Psychiatric Association Journal, 11, 470-484.
Deaton, J., Burge, S., Richlin, M., & Latrownik, A. (1977). Coping activities in solitary
confinement of U.S. Navy POWs in Vietnam. Journal of Applied Social
Psychology, 7, 239-257.
DeMaio, J. (2001). If you build it, they will come: The threat of overclassification in
Wisconsin’s supermax prison. Wisconsin Law Review, 2001, 207-248.
Dupuy, H., Engel, A., Devine, B., Scanlon, J., & Querec, L. (1970). Selected symptoms of
psychological distress. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Edwards, K. (1988). Some characteristics of inmates transferred from prison to a
state mental hospital. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 6, 131-137. 35
Fisher, W. (1994). Restraint and seclusion: A review of the literature. American
Journal of Psychiatry, 151, 1584-1591.
Foster, D. (1987). Detention & torture in South Africa: Psychological, legal &
historical studies. Cape Town: David Philip,
Grassian, S. (1983). Psychopathological effects of solitary confinement. American
Journal of Psychiatry, 140, 1450-1454.
Haney, C. (1993). Infamous punishment: The psychological effects of isolation.
National Prison Project Journal, 8, 3-21.
Haney, C. (1997). Psychology and the limits to prison pain: Confronting the
coming crisis in Eighth Amendment law. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 3,
499-588.
Haney, C. (2002). The psychological impact of incarceration: Implications for
post-prison adjustment.. In Travis, J. (Ed.), From prison to home, Urban Institute
Press, in press.
Haney, C., & Lynch, M. (1997). Regulating prisons of the future: The
psychological consequences of solitary and supermax confinement. New York
University Review of Law and Social Change, 23, 477-570.
Haney, C., & Zimbardo, P. (1998). The past and future of U.S. prison policy:
Twenty-five years after the Stanford Prison Experiment. American
Psychologist, 53, 709-727.
Harrison, A., Clearwater, Y., & McKay, C. (1989). The human experience in
Antarctica: Applications to life in space. Behavioral Science, 34, 253-271.
Hayes, L. (1989). National study of jail suicides: Seven years later. Special Issue:
Jail suicide: A comprehensive approach to a continuing national problem.
Psychiatric Quarterly, 60, 7-XX (1989).
Herman, J. (1992). A new diagnosis. In J. Herman (Ed.), Trauma and recovery.
New York: Basic Books. 36
Herman, J.. (1995). Complex PTSD: A syndrome in survivors of prolonged and
repeated trauma. In G. Everly & J. Lating, (Eds.), Psychotraumatology: Key
papers and core concepts in post-traumatic stress (pp. 87-100). New York:
Plenum.
Hershberger, G. (1998). To the max: Supermax facilities provide prison
administrators with more security options. Corrections Today, 60(1), 54-57.
Hilliard, T. (1976).The Black psychologist in action: A psychological evaluation of
the Adjustment Center environment at San Quentin Prison. Journal of Black
Psychology, 2, 75-82.
Hinkle, L. & Wolff, H. (1956). Communist interrogation and indoctrination of
“enemies of the states.” Archives of Neurology and Psychiatry, 76, 115-174.
Hocking, F. (1970). Extreme environmental stress and its significance for
psychopathology. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 24, 4-26.
Hodgins, S., & Cote, G. (1991). The mental health of penitentiary inmates in
isolation. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 33, 177-182.
Horowitz, M. (1990). Post-traumatic stress disorders: Psychosocial aspects of the
diagnosis. International Journal of Mental Health, 19, 21-36.
Hougen, H. (1988). Physical and psychological sequelae to torture: A controlled
clinical study of exiled asylum applicants. Forensic Sciences International, 39, 5-
11.
Human Rights Watch (1991, November). Prison Conditions in the United States:
A Human Rights Watch Report. New York: Human Rights Watch.
Human Rights Watch (2000, February). Out of sight: Super-maximum security
confinement in the United States. Human Rights Watch, 12(1), 1-9.
In re Medley, 134 U.S. 160 (1890).
Jackson, M. (1983). Prisoners of isolation: Solitary confinement in Canada.
Toronto: University of Toronto Press. 37
Jamelka, R., Trupin, E. & Chiles, J. (1989). The mentally ill in prison. Hospital and
Community Psychiatry, 40, 481-491.
Johnson, E. (1973). Felon self-mutilation: Correlate of stress in prison. In B. Dant
(Ed.) Jail House Blues. Michigan: Epic Publications (1973).
Jones, A. (1986). Self-mutilation in prison: A comparison of mutilators and
nonmutilators. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 13, 286-296.
Jones, D. (1976). The health risks of imprisonment. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.
Jones ‘El v. Berge, 164 F. Supp. 1096 (2001).
King, R. (2000). The rise and rise of supermax: An American solution in search of
problem? Punishment and Society, 1, 163-186.
Koch, I. (1986). Mental and social sequelae of isolation: The evidence of
deprivation experiments and of pretrial detention in Denmark, in B. Rolston &
M. Tomlinson (Eds.), The expansion of European prison systems, Working
Papers in European Criminology No. 7 119-XXX .
Korn, R. (1988a). The effects of confinement in the High Security Unit at
Lexington. Social Justice, 15, 8-19.
Korn, R. (1988b). Follow-up report on the effects of confinement in the High
Security Unit at Lexington. Social Justice, 15, 20-29.
Kratcoski, P. (1988). The implications of research explaining prison violence
and disruption. Federal Probation, 52, 27-32.
Kurki, L., & Morris, N. (2001). The purposes, practices, and problems of
supermax prisons. Crime and Justice, 28, 385-424.
Leiderman, H. (1962). Man alone: Sensory deprivation and behavioral change.
Corrective Psychiatry and Journal of Social Therapy, 8, 64-74.
Lovell, D., Cloyes, K., Allen, D., & Rhodes, L. (2000). Who lives in super-
maximum custody? A Washington State study. Federal Probation, 64(2), 33-38.
Madrid v. Gomez, 889 F. Supp. 1146 (1995). 38
Mason, T. (1993). Seclusion theory reviewed—A benevolent or malevolent
intervention? Medical Science Law, 33, 95-102.
Miller, H., & Young, G. (1997). Prison segregation: Administrative detention
remedy or mental health problem? Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 7, 85-
94.
O’Brien, T., & Jones, D. (1999). A balanced approach for corrections policy needed.
American Psychologist, 54, 784—785.
Porporino, F. (1986). Managing violent individuals in correctional settings,
Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 1, 213-237.
Rathbone-McCuan, E. & Hashimi, J. (1982). Isolated elders: Health and social
intervention. Rockville, MD: Aspen Systems (1982).
Riekert, J. (1985). The DDD syndrome: Solitary confinement and a South African
Security Law trial. In A. Bell & R. Mackie (Eds.) Detention and security
legislation in South Africa (pp. 121-147). Durban: University of Natal.
Riveland, C.. (1999). Supermax prisons: Overview and general considerations.
Washington, DC: United States Department of Justice.
Robins, L., & D. Regier, D. (Eds.) (1991). Psychiatric disorders in America: The
epidemologic catchment area study. New York: The Free Press.
Ruiz v. Estelle, 503 F. Supp. 1265 (1980).
Ruiz v. Johnson, 37 F. Supp. 855 (1999).
Rundle, F. (1973). The roots of violence at Soledad. In Erik Olin Wright, (Ed.), The
politics of punishment: A critical analysis of prisons in America. (pp. 163-172)
New York: Harper.
Scott, G. (1969). The prisoner of society: Psychiatric syndromes in captive society.
Correctional Psychologist, 3(7), 3-5.
Scott, G., & Gendreau, P. (1969). Psychiatric implications of sensory deprivation in a 39
maximum security prison. Canadian Psychiatric Association Journal, 12, 337-341.
Sestoft, D., Andersen, H., Lilleback, T., & Gabrielsen, G. (1998). Impact of solitary
confinement on hospitalization among Danish prisoners in custody. International
Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 21, 99-108.
Shallice, T. (1974). The Ulster interrogation techniques and their relation to sensory
deprivation research. Cognition, 1, 385-405.
Siegel, R. (1984). Hostage hallucinations: Visual imagery induced by isolation
and life-threatening stress. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 172, 264-272.
Slater, R. (1986). Psychiatric intervention in an atmosphere of terror. American
Journal of Forensic Psychiatry, 7(1), 5-12.
Somnier, F. & Genefke, I. (1986). Psychotherapy for victims of torture. British
Journal of Psychiatry, 149, 323-329,
Steinke, P. (1991). Using situational factors to predict types of prison violence.
Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 17, 119-132 (1991).
Suedfeld, P., Ramirez, C., Deaton, J., & Baker-Brown, G. (1982). Reactions and
attributions of prisoners in solitary confinement. Criminal Justice and Behavior,
9, 303-340.
Suedfeld, P. & Roy, C. (1975). Using social isolation to change the behavior of
disruptive inmates. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative
Criminology, 19, 90-99.
Tachiki, S. (1995). Indeterminate sentences in supermax prisons based upon
alleged gang affiliations: A reexamination of procedural protection and a
proposal for greater procedural requirements. California Law Review, 83, 1117-
1149.
Toch, H. (1975). Men in crisis: Human breakdowns in prisons. Aldine Publishing
Co.: Chicago.
Toch, H., & Adams, K. (2002). Acting out: Maladaptive behavior in confinement. 40
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Trop v. Dulles, 356 U.S. 86 (1958).
Veneziano, L., & Veneziano, C. (1996). Disabled inmates. In M. McShane & F.
Williams (Eds.), Encyclopedia of American Prisons (pp. 157-161). New York:
Garland.
Volkart,R., Dittrich, A., Rothenfluh, T., & Werner, P. (1983). Eine kontrollierte
untersuchung uber psychopathologische effekte der einzelhaft (A controlled
investigation on psychopathological effects of solitary confinement). Psychologie
- Schweizerische Zeitschrift fur Psychologie und ihre Anwendungen, 42, 25-46.
Volkart, R., Dittrich, A., Thomas Rothenfluh, T., & Werner, P. (1983a). Eine
Kontrollierte Untersuchung uber Psychopathologische Effekte der Einzelhaft (A
controlled investigation on psychopathological effects of solitary confinement).
Psychologie - Schweizerische Zeitschrift fur Psychologie und ihre
Anwendungen, 42, 25-46.
Volkart, R., Rothenfluh, T., Kobelt, W., Dittrich, A, & Ernst, K. (1983b). Einselhaft
als Risikofactor fur psychiatrische Hospitalisierung (Solitary confinement as a
risk factor for psychiatric hospitalization.) Psychiatria Clinica, 16, 365-377.
Vrca, A., Bozikov, V., Brzovic, Z., Fuchs, R., & Malinar, M. (1996). Visual evoked
potentials in relation to factors of imprisonment in detention camps.
International Journal of Legal Medicine, 109, 114-117.
Waligora, B. (1974) Funkcjonowanie Czlowieka W Warunkach Izolacji
Wieziennej (“How men function in conditions of penitentiary isolation”), Seria
Psychologia I Pedagogika NR 34, Poland.
Walters, R., Callagan, J., & Newman, A. (1963). Effect of solitary confinement on
prisoners. 119 American Journal of Psychiatry, 119, 771-773.
West, L. (1985). Effects of isolation on the evidence of detainees. In A. 41
Bell & R. Mackie (Eds.) Detention and security legislation in South Africa (pp. 69-
80). Durban: University of Natal.

Enough data?

[Pavulon]

68. Nope I want the N.

http://cad.sagepub.com/content/49/1/124.abstract

I read the abstract. The N show how many people in Genpop control gave the same answers...

[GliderGuider]

76. The full paper is here (for free!)

http://www.supermaxed.com/NewSupermaxMaterials/Haney-MentalHealthIssues.pdf

Pages numbered 132 to 137 have the data you're probably looking for.

[Pavulon]

86. Thank you. I appreciate you sourcing.

that.

[Ellipsis]

77. Here's some N Data

But, there was one piece of data recorded in the DOC files. DOC files record incidents of emergency psychiatric contact (e.g. suicidal or self-destructive behavior) and emergence of psychotic symptoms. Among the MI in Ad Seg (N=59) there were 37 such episodes (an average of .62 episodes per inmate – almost 2 for every 3 inmates). Among the MI in GP (N=33), on the other hand, there were only 3 (.09 per inmate – less than 1 for every 10 inmates). Could this have been random – i.e. not a reflection of some significant difference in the result? Statistically, the chance of that is entirely minute, approximately p=.0002; i.e. a chance of 1 in 5,000, a mighty small number. (In research, statistical significance requires only a probability of randomness of .05, i.e. as much as 1 in 20!) Thus, this objective data squarely contradicts the authors’ conclusion that Ad Seg does not produce significantly more psychiatric difficulties than does GP housing. The authors simply declined to perform this straightforward statistical analysis, even after the oversight was explicitly pointed out.


http://solitarywatch.com/2010/11/15/fatal-flaws-in-the-colorado-solitary-confinement-study/

[Pavulon]

79. And here is the coutner data. Sorry. seems to be some debate on this topic..

http://solitarywatch.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/adseg-report-final1.pdf

[Ellipsis]

87. Actually the N data is from the Colorado DOC ... just omitted from the report.

[Pavulon]

91. Its a subset of data from a larger sample?

that can get tricky.. before we go down that road it would probably be easier to say there are competing studies and more research is needed..

[Pharaoh]

112. So then Pavulon

Are you just for being cruel to other human beings if they do not agree with your definition of truth and Justice?

[Pavulon]

133. You poster whose name it is against the rules to call out..voted for people to uphold the law

those laws have been around before you were a tinkle in someones eye. Robert Hanssen did what manning did and his sorry ass is in prison.

A jury put him there and a jury will deal with manning. the sun has set on his life, he will die in a cage for his choices.

[Creative]

156. So, let me get this right. An academic who is trying to prove that being alone is torture,

cites several articles written by others who believe that being alone is torture, concludes that being alone is torture.

:rofl:

[bongbong]

25. Stick a fork in it

Stick a fork in the idea of American Democracy as the Founding Fathers imagined it.

The new Gold Standard for "American Democracy" will now be one of the better Banana Republics, where the round ups were done only at night. It might take us a decade or so to get to where the army commits mass murder in broad daylight.

[EFerrari]

51. It's easier to turn Manning's brain into pudding than to change the law.

It looks like that's the calculation.

[Pavulon]

54. you assume bradass87's brain was not already pudding

and that assange did not already pimp him for access to siprnet. I'm waiting to see if that is what is recorded in evidence.

[davidthegnome]

63. Hmm

You speak of your loyalty to a set of ideals and laws - but ideals are generally based on what the individual holds to be true, not a particular set as defined by A Nation. There is also the fact that ideals very often clash with law requiring the individual to make what may be a difficult decision.

I assume you have seen some of the information leaked by wikileaks - or at the very least you've heard a great deal about it. Is there nothing within that concerns you or stands in opposition to the ideals you serve?

I suspect that Manning would not have done as he did if he did not have his own ideals. Had he sold this information for wealth or fame - now that would be something despicable, but it strikes me as far more likely that he released this information in order to reveal disturbing truths he felt people should know. The information may have been classified, yet he was willing to put his life and safety on the line to reveal it. Why would he do so if not for his own principles? I imagine his ideals differ from yours - but he is nonetheless serving what he believes in, just as you do. Do you have no respect for that?

[Pavulon]

81. I would have had respect for leaked info on criminal activity, NOT the other 249,995

random documents he dumped. I am familiar with that ethos and do not support the all info must be free meme.



i still fucking hate google for fucking up google images..

[davidthegnome]

104. I do not believe that all info must be free

I understand the need for secrecy in some things. I don't understand your rage against this man though. We don't know the circumstances of what exactly occurred. His confession reveals some things about him as a person - how he felt about the duties he was given. For all that, he is still a very young man, barely more than a child. Perhaps he trusted Assange to review and filter the leaks as necessary to protect lives while exposing criminal activity.

I know what it's like to despise what you're doing while having no options. As many young men do (particularly those with ideals) he rebelled against authority. He did so in a unique manner, he broke laws... but as yet I do not see how he has endangered lives. Had he leaked material to Assange intending to do harm to our armed forces or our citizens, I would understand your anger and have quite a bit of my own. But I do not believe that to be the case.

Surely a man of ideals also sees the value of compassion. I am not saying this young man should be released or made into a hero, I am only asking that you consider his situation and keep in mind that we still do not know the whole story. This is a young man who got in way over his head - and he is already facing the consequences of his actions, why demand more? Why hate him?

[Blue_Tires]

43. at least now I'm starting to see the dots connect...

I thought the U.S. would have to make up some 'double-secret probation' law to try and prosecute Assange...

[bemildred]

55. Expediency rules the day, and so it has been for quite a long time now.

The new normal. "Rule of Law" is so retro. The law is just a handy tool to use against opponents and trouble makers. One of the reasons our foreign policy is such a disastrous mess is precisely because it's all stall, stall, stall and patch, patch, patch; there is no actual overall policy intended to reach some future goal, it's all about trying to hang on to what once was.

[DeSwiss]

82. Without any charges being leveled, they first place him in solitary confinement....

...since the day they picked him up. Which is nothing but a form of torture. But Obama is a Torture President, so no surprise there, right? But now he's supposed to believe that they want to play nice now and give him a pass?

- We're surrounded by http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mi7D9DAcKOg&NR=1">assholes.

K&R

[EFerrari]

85. Today is Brad Manning's birthday.

He's 23.

[harvey007]

89. He is being tortured until he talks

And President Obama does nothing to stop this.

Manning should not be in solitary confinement.

Learn about his case....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Manning

http://www.bradleymanning.org/

[Pavulon]

92. He will be given a choice. He can

take a plea for life or he will be tried as a death penalty case. Espionage trials generally avoid discovery, but in this case, the data is loose. Nothing to loose going for the needle.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

128. What if WikiLeaks received the data passively, which is the way they ALWAYS operated?

[Pavulon]

146. Then they are fine. but that may not be the case

did you see mr assange on tv, he balked on that question, followed with a long eyeroll left, nice big tell. if bredass87 (one mr bradley manning) testifies against assange it gets interesting.

[EFerrari]

95. Agreed. Until he says what the Pentagon wants to hear.

I'm encouraging people to contact the ICRC and Amnesty International about his case. This is a human rights violation right in front of our faces.

[Ghost Dog]

97. It is clear that no evidence obtained by these methods should be

acceptable to any court of any civilised country considering an Assange extradiction reguest from the USA.

[EFerrari]

100. I don't understand how any country in the EU could send him here

because in addition to the specifics, we have the death penalty.

But, lately it looks like EU countries are more accommodating to my misbehaving government than they are observant of their own law. :(

[Pavulon]

135. Real simple. we have standing treaties with them to deal with this trash

we agree not to euthanize them and they are sent here to get a jury trial. BTW there is no stipulation that they can not serve there sentence in a place like florence or marion on 24 7 lockdown.

[goforit]

93. Sounds like Mr Lamo needs to be behind bars.

[Pavulon]

94. Since he contacted the FBI he does not get a conspiracy

charge. Like the guy from Geek Squad who finds kiddy porn on someones PC, if he copies it and keeps it, guilty. Calls the police, good guy.

simple.

[pleah]

98. Blackmail.

[Creative]

99. This is not news, Manning is cooperating...

[Rex]

103. I expected this would happen and the only surprise to me is when

I see posters 'shocked' by the actions of the military er govt authorities. He will be lucky to see the 'light of freedom' again in his lifetime imo.

[Pavulon]

134. He will be lucky not to get the needle in USP terre haute

he will trade that for life somewhere shitty and bite his masters hand.

[robinlynne]

106. This poor guy has been in solitary confinement for months. months without

any exercise.

[Creative]

159. No excuse...? Do you have evidence that someone other than Manning

released this information?

[sabrina 1]

167. Do you have evidence that they didn't?

[NikRik]

162. What dirty bisness this becomes !

When they start making deals with those being held.Alot if not most of the time they really just want the prisoner to say what they want to hear, by dangling freedom in their face.Our fairness for the acussed is thrown out the Window and no-one knows who to believe.