John Kerry reacts to Bradley Manning's prison conditions

[steve2470]

http://www.necn.com/03/06/11/John-Kerry-reacts-to-Bradley-Mannings-pr/landing_politics.html?blockID=434373&feedID=4212

Massachusetts Senator John Kerry was asked about the situation, and offered some defense for what's going on.

"There are concerns about what is happening, but a strong argument is being made that they're trying to preserve his safety, they don't want him harming himself, and using his own clothing to hang himself, or do something like that," said Kerry. "That's happened in prison before. I think it is possible to protect him, I think, and there are some legitimate reasons to believe that that may be true also. But I think that a lot of people are now reviewing this very, very closely, people have weighed in, myself included, I think that analyses are being made. There was a big article in the newspapers today examining it. And I'm convinced that there will be real scrutiny with respect to that issue."

There is a video of Senator Kerry making the statement at this site.

[FLAprogressive]

1. Wow, he managed to say absolutely nothing in 5 sentences.

[Luminous Animal]

5. He might as well had said, "Wah, wah, wah, wah, wah, wah, wah. Wah wah wah.

Wah, wah, wah, wah, wah.

[poverlay]

6. Charlie Brown style! n/t

[still_one]

10. and how is that different from when he ran for President? /nt

[Tunkamerica]

11. He said several things:

He said people have killed themselves with clothing items before in prison. That may be why his clothing was removed. But that may not be the case, and it is being watched closely. People have varying takes on the situation.

Did you not read the quote or you are not very good at comprehension? Or are you just being facetious?

[FLAprogressive]

12. A heck of a lot of "I think"s, "might be"s, "may be"s and whatnot....there's just no substance to it

"I think that analyses are being made." No shit, Sherlock.

[Warren DeMontague]

40. So why didn't he just say that?

It's not a lack of reading comprehension to acknowledge that there is a tremendous amount of authoritative-sounding gobbledygook in his statement.

[Tunkamerica]

46. Replying on camera/mic is different than critical reading later.

[progressoid]

16. Yep, perfect political babble.

[Angry Dragon]

24. Typical political speak ........ +1000

[Warren DeMontague]

39. My thoughts, exactly.

And astounding compendium of total gibberish.

[truebrit71]

55. But he said it clearly, concisely, and with conviction...

...:puke:

[fittosurvive]

60. I am puzzled--did you expect something different?

[Cleita]

2. Sorry, I'm not buying the doing it for his own good

story. It seems extreme and artificial to me.

[rug]

3. Why on earth would he want to kill himslf?

Isolate him for months, charge him with a capital crime, then strip him for hours so he won't harm himself with his underwear.

[Solly Mack]

4. Damn

[Webster Green]

7. I used to respect Kerry.

There aren't many democratic senators that I respect anymore. Even Barbara Boxer is a disappointment.

Dennis Kucinich and Bernie Sanders are both awesome. That's all I can think of. The rest seem to have given up.

Kerry's statement is one of the most useless, mealy-mouthed things I've ever heard. :wtf:

[yurbud]

8. he said he would look into GOP vote suppression in 2004 too.

[lob1]

9. Right, they're torturing him to protect him from committing suicide.

That's a real good W or Cheney explanation, and it disgusts me that Kerry sounds like he's condoning it.

[Rex]

13. Gee, could he be on suicide watch because he was striped of his

humanity John? Just go back to agreeing with whatever you are told and maybe an adult will come along and stop this nonsense. Thanks.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

25. or he could be on suicide watch after having joked about commiting suicide yes?

atleast i read a post on DU a few days ago that had that comment from his lawyer.

now if you are in charge of a prisoner would you take such words seriously or assume the prisoner is just joking? personally I'd likely have taken such claims seriously and taken steps to ensure the said prisoner can't do it

[EFerrari]

36. He didn't joke about suicide. n/t

[Rex]

45. Don't you hate it when 'our side' throws around GOP talking points?

Make me want to hurl.

[walldude]

53. No. He didn't "joke about suicide" he pointed out the flaws

in the logic of removing certain items that were deemed "possibly harmful" while leaving him with his clothes.

Taking his clothes is twofold: A. A way to humiliate him and his wise ass reminders of how foolish they look, and B. As a warning to anyone else who would like to expose war criminals or war crimes or reveal just plain embarrassing information.

[NOLALady]

14. I thought that he was being charged for a capital offense.

So, they are concerned that he might take his life before he's sentenced to death. Makes perfect sense. :eyes:

[Rex]

15. Hmmm...saying it like that, yeah I can see it.

Gotta keep him healthy until the state executes him.

[sarge43]

17. That's just pitiful.

Bull shit, too.

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bragi]

19. Is waterboarding also prisoner protection?

This rationale for abuse is like claiming that waterboarding is a humane technique because it keeps prisoners from killing themselves by not drinking enough water.

I don't believe it for a minute. There is no mystery here. The military is trying to break Manning so he will implicate Assange. What is pathetic about this is that any evidence from Manning will be derived from subjecting him to abuse and torture.

Are Americans prepared to see a whistleblower convicted based on obvious abuse and torture?

The military and the administration apparently thinks so. I hope they are wrong.

[karynnj]

31. No equivilence here

[Bragi]

32. Any actual argument you'd like to put forward? /nt

[karynnj]

33. I think it self evident that water boarding is far beyond what the administration

is accused of doing. I think there is an abuse here and that it is wrong - and said so. However, it diminished how despicable water boarding is to say that this is equivalent. (ie - though neither should be done, if you had to endure one, I suapect it would not be a difficult decision. )

I seriously thought saying they were not equivalent was self explanatory.

[Bragi]

34. Fair enough

I consider what is a=happening to Manning to be torture, but I don't disagree its of a lesser, more genteel nature.

I was just parodying in my initial comment the apologists I see here who favour abusing Manning.

I am constantly taken aback and distressed at the level of support I see among some here in support of abuse and torture.

[karynnj]

35. I was in no way condoning this (It is abuse,and humiliation, but I don't think it is "torture"

I actually see no one condoning it - not even Kerry,who asked the question, did not give it a clean bill of health. Much as I wish his response were stronger against it, it is significant that a close Obama ally includes himself in the group with questions and that it bears watching.

[Bragi]

37. It's more than just humiliation

The things being done to Manning are designed and intended to induce loss of mental ability, emotional collapse, and eventually madness and insanity. I consider this to be torture.

[EFerrari]

38. Precisely. digby had a very good post on the topic over the weekend.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x568343

It sank like a stone but it's a very well done piece, as usual.

[Bragi]

43. Recommended: a very good piece

I especially noted this:

I have often thought that one of the problems with our obsessive focus on waterboarding was that we may have inadvertently legitimized all the other torture techniques they used...

The case of Bradley Manning may be illustrative of that. He's been held, without charges, under punitive conditions that mirror in some respects the treatment of terrorist suspect detainees in the nation's foreign prison camps. However, he isn't being waterboarded, so there is resistance to the idea that this is torture. But it is:

“Removal of clothing was authorized by the Secretary of Defense for use at GTMO on December 2, 2002,” acknowledges the recently released U.S. Senate Armed Service Committee report on the use of harsh interrogation techniques. It also reports that the use of prolonged nudity proved so effective that, in January 2003, it was approved for use in Afghanistan and, in the fall of 2003, was adopted for use in Iraq.“Inquiry into the Treatment of Detainees in U.S. Custody”

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x568343

[karynnj]

20. Kerry was one of the few officials who questioned his treatment in the first place

- though Kucinich was far more outspoken. Here is an article which describes that - http://dailycollegian.com/2011/02/21/kerry-addresses-economy-foreign-policy-in-noho

In his comments here, it is clear that he did raise questions - and he is saying what the reason given by the administration is. He also says that this bears watching. (This WP article explains the administration's opinion - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/03/05/AR2011030503686.html

Now, I disagree with this - in that if suicide was the problem - then certainly he could be given something like the paper gowns that we all know from some doctor's offices. Certainly paper could not be used to hang himself.

But, Kerry has no ability to even have hearings on this - as none of his committees oversee this. Though he seems to question the reason given and says this should be followed, I really wish he would have said what he very likely thinks - as he did in North Hampton.

That said, I absolutely do not think that he sees Manning as a hero, especially if there is any real basis for the administrations charge of abetting the enemy, which some has said means that US sources or people were possibly killed because of information released. There is a problem here - just as here was in the Bush people outing Valerie Plame. Nothing however justifies torture - as Kerry has said very often. I don't know what he can do to watch (or more importantly impact) his treatment.

[dionysus]

22. sadly, this thread displays how many DUers can't stand any democrats, it seems...

:shrug:

[sarge43]

26. Oh please

We're not Republicans. We don't vigorously nod our heads and chant "Our leaders are always right."

If Manning is a potential suicide, put him in a paper uniform and establish a 24/7 guard on him.

Last I heard Manning hadn't been tried and convicted of any crime; therefore, he is innocent until proven otherwise.

Finally, as a former commissioned officer and a law maker, Senator Kerry should be aware of Article 93, UCMJ.

[Warren DeMontague]

41. I like and respect Senator Kerry

but I think he's just blowing smoke, here. He's issuing a "statement" that doesn't say anything, I suspect because on some level he understands just how fucked up this situation truly is.

[Mojeoux]

47. Just Free Bradley Manning!!!

I think your right about Kerry's instincts.

I wonder if he watched the helicopter video.

[politicasista]

51. Probably

But facts never get in the way of Kerry bashing.

[bemildred]

21. Ohhh, scrutiny, real scrutiny, not fake scrutiny, but real scrutiny.

:puke:

[olegramps]

23. He is only indicative of how little the rulers have in common with average citizen.

He lives in wealth that would be envied by many kings far removed from the mundane life of ordinary citizens struggling to make ends meet. This is the case of the majority of those elected to represent us. It brings to mind the incident of when Bush 41 happened to go to a supermarket and was amazed by the scanners which had been common place for a number of years. The rulers and the common folks have nothing in common, so how can you expect them to be concerned with our welfare? It is just a game to them on how to manipulate their respective bases to achieve reelection.

[karynnj]

28. Then why did he just submit legislation that provides tax relief to low income families?

http://www.heraldnews.com/news/x1174965957/Sen-John-Kerry-proposes-tax-relief-to-low-income-families

Your comments ignore a career of over 25 years in the Senate, where he was the person who has consistently fought to get funding for Youthbuild, who was the chief sponsor of what became the affordable housing fund passed in 2008 - that helps fund the building of more low income rental units in places where there is not enough, where he was a co-sponsor to SCHIP and the sponsor with Kennedy of the precursor bill - parts of which were used in SCHIP. You also ignore that even as a prosecutor, he was very involved with underpriviledged children and youths and set up the first rape victims program in a DA's office in MA.

Not to mention, he was not wealthy for much of his adult life - though he never faced the financial difficulties that many people do. He always was well connected and socially elite. Had wealth been his goal, he could have easily been extremely rich in his own right - either by having a long career as a trial lawyer (where he was every bit as talented as anyone) or using his connections to become a high ranking person in a large corporation.

As you know, the wealth that he currently lives with is mostly Teresa's. Are you saying that his values, understanding or positions changed when he married the love of his life? Not to mention, you might consider that it was Teresa, who concerned with how distressed Pittsburgh had become, called the other philanthropists and led an effort using their combined money to revitalize Pittsburgh. I would assume that without their intervention in the mid 1990s, Pittsburgh would not have placed anywhere on the list of the world's most livable cities - as it is it was the top US city. (This does not mean others don't deserve part of the credit - but the woman, who made the calls that initiated the coordinated action clearly is one who does.)

[olegramps]

49. Oh, he feels our pain.....

BOSTON (AP) -- Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry is docking his family's new $7 million yacht in neighboring Rhode Island, allowing him to avoid paying roughly $500,000 in taxes to the cash-strapped Bay State.

If the "Isabel" were kept at the 2004 Democratic presidential nominee's summer vacation home on Nantucket, or in Boston Harbor near his city residence, he would be liable for $437,500 in one-time sales tax. He would also have to pay $70,000 in annual excise taxes.

Huffington Post

[karynnj]

54. Even the Boston Herald has printed be paid the sales tax - as if it were bought in MA

just as he said he would.

"Now that Sen. John Kerry has cut a check for something in the neighborhood of $500,000 to cover use and excise taxes on his new $7 million high-seas plaything, Isabel, he gets to sail off into the sunset in peace. But not before we bring you one final postscript."
http://www.bostonherald.com/track/inside_track/view/20100801one_more_tax_to_grind_long_john_kerry/srvc=home&position=also
(They then argue that he should pay $70,000 to Nantucket - even though the annual tax is capped at $500 and hadn't been billed yet.)

The fact is the yacht is owned by a company set up by Teresa's people and it is chartered out when the Kerrys are not using it. They bought the yacht in RI and are maintaining there. The company incidentally is out of PA, Teresa's home state and docking it in RI was not in anyway illegal.

Nice that you are leaping to a right wing smear campaign - designed mainly to remind people just how wealthy Teresa Heinz is - and to try to silence Kerry on tax issues, because he is an effective advocate for taxing the wealthy. He also was among the 5 or so Democrats fighting in the caucus to have a vote on extending only the tax cuts for the first $250,000 in income.

[olegramps]

57. Why didn't you post the entire article?

"Now that Sen. John Kerry has cut a check for something in the neighborhood of $500,000 to cover use and excise taxes on his new $7 million high-seas plaything, Isabel, he gets to sail off into the sunset in peace. But not before we bring you one final postscript."

"As you know, the senior senator purchased his New Zealand-built, 76-foot floating palace back in March and ported her in Rhode Island, a state which repealed its boat sales and use tax back in 1993. By doing so, the senator could dodge some $437,500 in state sales taxes and an annual excise tax bill of $70,000."

It certainly appeared to many that they were taking advantage of the RI tax laws. But I suppose you know that unless you didn't read the entire two paragraph article. It didn't matter whether they were leasing it out when they weren't using it. It only demonstrates how far from the working class the ultra-wealthy life styles are. It just a fact, not something of conjecture. I have been involved in unions my entire working life and believe that they are the only proven way to get a fair share of the wealth that they generate. I believe that Kerry is an honorable man, but he didn't run a very effective campaign. I have never understood why he didn't hammer on the fact that the PNAC hawks that dominated Bush's cabinet were determined to take us to war in Iraq.

[karynnj]

58. Because the FULL article is no longer there - just what you quoted

and that part was incorrect. The annual excise cost is not $70,000, but $500 - and it is paid when the town bills it. The $437,500 state sales tax is what was paid with the check that they say was written. That paragraph was simply saying that putting the boat in RI could save that - the rest of the story, now behind the firewall, admits he did pay the excise tax (ie state sales tax). Look at the comments if you question that.

When that was pointed out, they had a later article that complained that it was wrong to cap it (and complained that Kerry took advantage of that) - but that is the law. The fact is that the Kerrys are paying the taxes as if they had the boat in Massachusetts.

It is a surprise to no one that Teresa Kerry is fabulously wealthy. She also spends her time working with her foundation on things like working with Mayor Booker in Newark on a prototype program to provide cheap prescription medicine to low income residents. The fact is that there are NO genuinely POOR US Senators. Biden was always mentioned as one of the poorest Senators, but he and Jill were still at least upper middle class - I have no idea what Dr Jill Biden's income was, but given that his was $170,000, they were very likely making over $250,000. (Nowhere near as wealthy as the Kerry's, but he was better off than Kerry until 1995 when Kerry married.)

The fact is that had Kerry spoken of PNAC and/or morphed into Michael Moore, he would have lost by a landslide. Do you seriously think that someone can simultaneously run for President and argue that the US was doing criminal things? As it was, my Catholic mom, who is a swing voter was appalled that Kerry repeatedly said it was not a war of last resort. Why? She knew her religion well enough to realize that he was saying the war was not a just war. Also consider his obvious outrage - the outrage of a man who lost many close friends in the Vietnam war - at the fact that the administration did not secure the ammo dumps and that ammo was used in the ieds "killing and maiming "our kids". That was essentially calling the administration negligent.

[olegramps]

59. Surely you are joking:

"The fact is that had Kerry spoken of PNAC and/or morphed into Michael Moore, he would have lost by a landslide. Do you seriously think that someone can simultaneously run for President and argue that the US was doing criminal things?"

Very simply, YES!!!!

How you could come to this conclusion is astounding. The problem was that the corporate owned media intentionally failed to inform the citizens. As a consequence the vast majority of citizens still don't appreciate the fact they were terribly mislead. When I have shown the evidence of the PNAC's own mandate calling for the invasion of Iraq they have been had to admit that it was clearly intentional.

Of course you know this.

[karynnj]

61. I come to my conclusion because the green candidate

got very very few votes. Kerry got nearly all the votes there were to get on the left - and he got many many votes from centrists, who would have NOT voted for Michael Moore. I do Know all about neo-cons and PNAC, but I also know many liberals who were really put off by the connect the dots part of Moore's F911.

I know this because a book club I belonged to decided to all (mostly independently) saw F911 and then discussed it. The group, liberal NY area Jewish women, were already near universally for Kerry. The problem is that none of those links are well known and Moore does not (and can not in the time) back them up. I explained a few - mostly those relating to BCCI, but - especially as they were voting for JK, I really did not think it could to push more of them - and a few didn't really connect as well as I would have wanted.

Now, this was a group that mostly didn't like Bush from December 2000 on. Yet, the overwhelming reaction was negative. Imagine what the reaction would be among independents. I also phone banked and canvassed. I met NO ONE saying they would not vote for JK because he was not antiwar enough - though I met some really sad that they couldn't vote for Dean. Here, one thing that did help was communicating what he said that the media hid -- and his 1971 actions. (I heard very few of them after the first debate - in my area, Democrats were extremely brought of Kerry's excellent debate.) I guess because we are next to PA, I met a few Republicans leaning to JK because they had always loved Teresa and figured he had to be a good guy or she would not have married him. These people were impressed when they were told of Kerry's small business work. Kerry needed more of those independents than he got.

So, Kerry said Bush "lied us into war" He said it was the "wrong war". He said when asked point blank in September that he would not have gone to war had he been President.

[olegramps]

62. You are absolutely wrong in regard to his stance on the war:

Kerry stands by 'yes' vote on Iraq war
JOHN KERRY

Share this on:Mixx Facebook Twitter Digg delicious reddit MySpace StumbleUpon LinkedIn August 10, 2004

Sen. John Kerry enjoys a view of the Grand Canyon in Arizona on Monday.Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry said Monday he would not have changed his vote to authorize the war against Iraq, but said he would have handled things "very differently" from President Bush.

Bush's campaign has challenged Kerry to give a yes-or-no answer about whether he stood by the October 2002 vote which gave Bush authority to use military force against Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.

The question of going to war in Iraq has become a major issue on the campaign trail, especially in light of the fact that no weapons of mass destruction have been found there

[karynnj]

63. That was a media/RW attack - it is very clear that Kerry did NOT get a

question with the condition "if you knew there were no WMD". This was clear because his answer was the same one he gave repeatedly to the question without the condition - and it included among things he would have done differently with the authorization "letting the inspectors complete their work".

In 2004, the Daily Howler compiled the evolution of the "common wisdom" that Kerry said that he would have voted that way even if he knew there were no WMD.

"Yes, Sanger just happened to choose an expert who thought Kerry looked "floppy" and Bush looked "shrewd." But over at Fox, in striking contrast, a Big Scribe was honest about Bush's latest clowning. On Tuesday, Bush was out playing the rubes, pretending that Kerry had said things he didn't on Monday. Indeed, Brit Hume just flat-out said so, chatting last night with the all-stars:

BUSH (shown on videotape): now agrees it was the right decision to go into Iraq. Knowing everything we know today, he would have voted to go into Iraq and remove Saddam Hussein from power. I want to thank Senator Kerry for clearing that up.

HUME (8/11/04): Well that line got a big cheer, as you saw yesterday when the president said it. But what Senator Kerry has said is not quite as the president has characterized it...Basically what Kerry has said, correct me if I'm wrong, is, Look, I would have wanted the authority if I'd been president. That's why I voted to grant this authority to go to war to the president...But he said he would have used it differently. He would have used it to as more of a lever for diplomacy. He would have used it to bring more allies aboard. He would have used it to as a threat behind inspections, to leave them going longer.

But the question is, the Bush camp knows what it's doing here. They know that they're stretching what the senator has said in trying to keep this the subject for the day. What about all this? "

http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh081204.shtml

What that shows, is that there were powers that be - IN BOTH PARTIES - who did not want a Kerry victory.

In addition to the obvious, this worked to conflate two things that Kerry had tried hard to separate - a vote to give leverage for diplomacy AND being in favor of invading. For the first half of 2003, Kerry was always referred to as an "anti-war" voice. He spoke - before Dean even - against rushing to war. Do you remember the millionms of times that he said "wrong war, wrong time, wrong place" ?

[olegramps]

66. His attempt to justify his vote to give Bush authority by obfuscation of the facts is typical.

He voted to provide Bush with the authority to go to war. That is the sole fact of the matter and no amount of bull crap with alleviate that fact. Remember that the vast majority of Democrats in the House didn't have any problem with voting NO as did nearly 50% of the Democratic Senators! He, along with Clinton, were playing protect your ass and failed to take a stand against what they knew was the clear stated intention of the Bush administration that was dominated by the PNAC neo-cons. It is purely delusional to not believe that he wasn't aware of their intentions. O'Neil told them that it was the subject of their first cabinet meeting. 911 was their "Pearl Harbor" excuse to invade Iraq. Enough with the nonsense.

[olegramps]

67. By the way, the Forbes made most of their fortune smuggling opium into China during the Opium Wars.

[Bluenorthwest]

65. You speak of Moore as if he had been a candidate and he

has never run for any office, he is a filmmaker. The film you claim was received poorly by the target audience was in fact the highest grossing documentary film of all time, more popular than any other film in that form ever. It was an international hit, making tens of millions of dollars, and changing the documentary world in deep and valuable ways.
The film was an unmitigated success, the topper most of the popper most. Number one of the year, of the era, of history.
And again, Moore has never been a candidate for office. In 2004 he spent a ton of his own newly created wealth to cross the nation urging young people to vote Democratic, which meant John Kerry. Dozens of cities, urging votes for Kerry and other Democrats.
So your point escapes me. Moore, not a candidate, used some of the profits from the highest grossing documentary of all time to promote John Kerry for President. And this is a problem, how? In what way?

[olegramps]

50. You stated that he was not wealthy for the most part of his lfe....

Well that is news to his mother who was a member of the ultra-wealthy Forbes family:

Kerry is the child of Richard Jerry Kerry (1915–2000), a Foreign Service Officer and an attorney for the Bureau of United Nations Affairs, and Rosemary Forbes Kerry (1913–2002), a World War II nurse and member of the wealthy Scottish-American Forbes family. He has three siblings: two sisters, Diana (born in 1947) and Margerie (aka Peggy; born in 1941) and a brother, Cameron (born in 1950), Cameron Kerry was picked to be Barack Obama's general counsel of the Commerce Department.<3>

[karynnj]

52. Kerry's mother was one of the Forbes, but she was one of 13 children

She and her siblings got money only after her parents passed. (Now JK and his siblings split her share)

The family that JK grew up in was was upper middle class. I was referring to roughly 1966 - 1995, years he was in the military, a prosecutor, lt Governor and the Senate. I did say that he was always well connected - and he was.

[Tatiana]

27. I think we have to read between the lines here.

Important parts of the statement:

"There are concerns about what is happening" - Kerry clearly is one who has those concerns.

"A lot of people are now reviewing this very, very closely" - Kerry clearly includes himself in those who are keeping an eye on the situation.

"I'm convinced that there will be real scrutiny with respect to that issue" - Reiterating that Kerry (and others) are keeping an eye on the situation.

This does sound mealy-mouthed, though. I suspect this is such a cautiously-worded statement because Kerry does not want to directly come out in opposition to the President. But I think he does disagree with the treatment Mr. Manning has received.

[karynnj]

29. well stated - and that was my opinion seeing it as well

[BlueIris]

30. Do your duty, Senator.

The longer you wait, the harder it's going to get for everyone.

[RSillsbee]

42. I get trying to protect him

but can't they at least give him some paper clothing to protect his dignity ?

[Bragi]

44. The "suicide" line is a throw-away talking point

The rationale for what is being done to Manning is well addressed here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x568343

[upi402]

48. 124 words and nothing but air

I got zip out of all that yammering -like kissin' my sister.

Boldly staking his flag directly in the center of that yellow line in the middle of the road.

[karynnj]

56. Other than Kucinich, find me anyone in the House or Senate saying more

I tried google - and I didn't find anyone - and I did find FDL saying only Kucinich and Kerry have shown any concern at all. Read between the lines. Here, he confirmed that this is true - where before it was the word of Manning's lawyer - is important. In addition, he does not argue for the actions taken - but indicates there are concerns and it should be watched.

[Bluenorthwest]

64. It is that kind of verbal fireworks that got Kerry elected in 04!

A barrage of hot air from a man who once protested against an immoral war. John has some nice things these days, servants, cars, homes, endless money, he has not had the need to count for decades now. I think he has the crusts of his sandwiches cut off to please him.
Really pitiful abuse of the language. If you can not say anything nice, say nothing, and if you are just going to say nothing with a ton of words, be nice and actually say nothing. Say 'yadda yadda' if you must vocalize.

[KG]

68. !

[defendandprotect]

69. No indication that Manning is "suicidal" except from his torturers ... !!!

[defendandprotect]

70. What a huge pile of crap -- We need Humanists in government, --