Is Manning truly worth this much of our capital and time?

[apples and oranges]

After seeing post after post on this topic, I can't help but wonder.

I seriously think we should choose our battles more wisely. The man clearly broke the law, whether you agree with his actions or not. And having to sleep in paper clothes due to being on suicide watch is NOT torture. Continuing to insist that Manning is being tortured (without evidence) only serves to further diminish the credibility of the "professional left." Focus on the things that matter, like what's going on in Japan or Wisconsin.

[ret5hd]

1. Describe this "professional left" you speak of.

[Travelman]

32. Ask

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/11/gibbs-stands-by-his-profe_n_678811.html">Robert Gibbs.

[ret5hd]

72. Thank you, but i asked the OP.

[Edweird]

2. Yes. Next question.

[EFerrari]

3. How much is due process worth to you?

Human rights?

Massive government corruption?

[apples and oranges]

18. A lot. I will stand against torture whenever it actually occurs

It has not occurred in this case. I get it- you support Manning's actions and think he should go unpunished for his acts. But that does not mean he is being tortured. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20042929-503544.html

[EFerrari]

24. The Pentagon said the same tactics were legal in Abu Graib, too. n/t

[jwirr]

84. Where is his speedy trial - they haven't even indicted him yet. That

is a right worth fighting for.

[movonne]

77. When bush and cheney are in convicted and in prison for life and then and

only then we can talk about Bradley being in the brig...if we can killing of millions of people in an illegal war...those are the real war criminals..

[treestar]

219. Then his lawyer can challenge it in the courts

And it may already be a settled legal question.

[Vincardog]

4. Are you the judge? How decides what man should be tortured? I say EVERY one is worth it.

NO ONE SHOULD BE HELD AND TORTURED WITHOUT TRIAL EVER.

[apples and oranges]

9. Produce one credible link to back up your claim

that he is being tortured.

[leftstreet]

12. Can you explain to us what he's been charged with? I can't remember n/t

[phleshdef]

54. Violations of UCMJ Articles 92 and 134 + 22 additional charges.

He was charged on July 5 under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) with violations of UCMJ Articles 92 and 134 for "transferring classified data onto his personal computer and adding unauthorized software to a classified computer system in connection with the leaking of a video of a helicopter attack in Iraq in 2007," and "communicating, transmitting and delivering national defense information to an unauthorized source and disclosing classified information concerning the national defense with reason to believe that the information could cause injury to the United States."

...

On March 2, 2011, an additional 22 charges were preferred, including wrongfully obtaining classified material for the purpose of posting it on the Internet, knowing that the information would be accessed by the enemy; the illegal transmission of defense information; fraud; and aiding the enemy. CBS reported that the new charges involved the leaking of the Afghan and Iraq war logs, and a quarter of a million State Department cables; according to ABC News, the charge sheets said Manning had transferred 380,000 records about Iraq, and 90,000 about Afghanistan. In all, CBS said, he is accused of having leaked over half a million documents and two videos.

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

[leftstreet]

55. How did this all come out at trial?

:shrug:

[phleshdef]

61. Charges come before a trial. Everyone knows that. Stop playing ignorant.

[leftstreet]

63. When's the trial?

[phleshdef]

67. Sometime between May and June.

[Ikonoklast]

70. As soon as Manning's lawyers get their shit together.

They are the ones that asked for more time in order to prepare a legal defense.


You know, there's this nifty new intraweb thing called "Teh Google" that can help keep you from asking answers to questions that you pretend not to know.

[EFerrari]

14. The Pentagon has not denied that his sleep is disrupted

that he is in isolation or that he lives with sensory deprivation or that he is subjected to forced nudity.

They instead have tried to rationalize it.

[Travelman]

21. Where are your tears for Jared Loughner?

He's getting the same treatment in the federal pen. Isn't he being tortured? Shouldn't we set him free?

[myrna minx]

26. 1) Jared Loughner has been *charged* with a crime.

2) Where are the allegations that he's being treated in the same way as Manning?
3) Should there be different standards of treatment for people we like vs people we don't?

[Travelman]

48. 1.) Bradley manning has been *charged* with over 24 crimes

2.) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jared_Lee_Loughner">It's not hard to find:

Loughner is being held without bail by the Federal Bureau of Prisons in the Federal Correctional Institution at Phoenix. He is kept isolated in his cell away from other inmates 23 hours a day for his own safety and allowed out for one hour to shower and exercise.

The only thing that is different is that Loughner does not get his clothing taken away because he has not threatened suicide on numerous occasions, unlike Bradley Manning, WHO HAS.
3.) That's precisely the question I'm asking. Why is it that if it's somehow "torture" to keep Bradley Manning in isolation, it's just just gumdrops and rainbow farts from unicorns when the exact same is happening to Loughner? Either they are both necessary measures to keep an inmate safe and in place until trial (which is the reality-based explanation), or they're just horrible, awful torture devices and practically every violent criminal ever in the history of this country should be let out of prison because of it.

[phleshdef]

58. 1) Bradley Manning has been charged with multiple crimes.

2) Loughner is not being held under UCMJ law as Manning is, so its irrelevant.
3) See number 2, it doesn't matter if we like him or not, there are and always have been a different set of standards for military justice issues versus civilian justice issues. If you don't like that the law works that way, thats fine. You are well within your rights to dislike the situation and advocate changing the law. But as it stands, Manning is being held and treated in complete accordance with the law, at least based on everything we currently know.

[EFerrari]

28. Punitive pre-trail detention is illegal in this country

no matter who is subjected to it. And Loughner's case is on the schedule, unlike Manning's, is it not?

[Travelman]

53. It is not punitive. It is pre-trial detention. Period. Thousands of cases just like it around.

Just declaring that it's "punitive" doesn't make it so. Sorry.

And Manning's case IS on the schedule. His Article 32 hearing should come up in May or June, about a year after his initial arrest, which is right on par with most Article 32 hearings of significant consequence.

[EFerrari]

91. Widespread use of these tactics do not make them less punitive. Wrong. n/t

[tallahasseedem]

188. Dear Travelman,

please post more often!

Thank you!

:)

[Travelman]

198. Thanks!

:hi:

[phleshdef]

65. Manning's trial schedule is completely in accordance with the law.

And if it wasn't, his lawyer would be asking for his release and complete dismissal of the charges.

[EFerrari]

92. Um, his lawyer has asked exactly for that. n/t

[Travelman]

95. Based upon the lack of a speedy trial? I think not.

All attorneys always ask that all of the charges be dismissed, no matter how unlikely that is to happen. That's standard procedure.

[EFerrari]

99. His filings are posted to his blog so you don't have to exert yourself.

http://www.armycourtmartialdefense.info/

[Travelman]

108. Yes, that's very handy indeed

I particularly like http://www.armycourtmartialdefense.info/2010/11/pfc-manning-case-update.html">this entry:

III. Article 32 Hearing: Unless a soldier waives this right, no charge may be referred to a general court-martial until a thorough and impartial investigation into the basis for the charge(s) has been made by an investigating officer. This pretrial proceeding is known as an Article 32 investigation and essentially serves the equivalent function of a grand jury indictment in a civilian jurisdiction.

At the Article 32 investigation, a soldier is able to call witnesses on his behalf and to cross examine the government’s witnesses. The Article 32 hearing is a means to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of a case as well as to determine the appropriate disposition of any specific offense. At the conclusion of the Article 32 hearing, the investigating officer will make a recommendation to the convening authority. This recommendation is not binding on the convening authority. The recommendation is simply for the purpose of giving advice to the convening authority.

** PFC Manning’s case is currently awaiting an Article 32 hearing. Based upon several defense motions in this case, the government has put the Article 32 hearing on hold until it can determine the classification level of the case. A preliminary classification review is currently being conducted to determine the highest classification level of any relevant information involved in the case.

The preliminary classification review is expected to last an additional three to six weeks. Once this review is complete, the government will need to take the necessary steps to ensure everyone associated with the case has the requisite security clearance. This process, depending upon the classification level, can be a lengthy one. Once every member of the government and defense has the requisite security clearance, the government will likely begin the Article 32 hearing.

So if anyone is preventing a speedy trial here, it's Manning's own lawyer!



Well, I'm glad that's been cleared up.

[EFerrari]

120. Well, no. Per your own post:

the government has put the Article 32 hearing on hold until it can determine the classification level of the case.

[phleshdef]

124. BASED UPON SEVERAL DEFENSE MOTIONS.

You conveniently left those 5 words out.

[EFerrari]

133. Words do mean things: the government placed a hold, not the defense

which filed its motions in a timely manner.

[phleshdef]

141. Wrong. The defense requested the government to do so, so that they could have him mentally evaluated

Private Manning has been held under highly restrictive conditions since July at the Marine Corps brig in Quantico, Va. One question has been why legal proceedings against him did not seem to be moving forward.

The Army said Wednesday that the delay was to evaluate Private Manning’s “mental capacity” at the defense’s request. That evaluation is pending, it said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/03/us/03manning.html

I can post many, many other sources detailing how the defense requested this.

If you weren't so determined to be right (even though you are wrong), you would realize that this delay could work out in Manning's favor if his defense people can make him look crazy.

[Travelman]

125. Words mean things

"Based upon several defense motions in this case,

the government has put the Article 32 hearing on hold until it can determine the classification level of the case."




The government didn't put the Article 32 hearing on hold for shits and giggles. They did so at the request of the defense.

[EFerrari]

134. Ergo, it's the government's move, not the defense's.

Words do mean things, definitely.

[Travelman]

140. Oh for Pete's sake

That's just asinine.

Defense: "Your Honor, we would like to delay this case for six weeks."
Judge: "Granted. We'll continue this case for six weeks and we will re-convene on the sixth Tuesday from today."
EFerrari: "See? The government delayed the case! Who cares if the defense actually asked for it? By gum, the government is the one who delayed the case!"



You have steered off into a level of absurdity I don't think anyone has plumbed before.

[phleshdef]

144. LOL, best summation of like 90% of the comments on this Manning thing.

[tallahasseedem]

178. +1

[phleshdef]

143. No, its the government's move in response to requests by the defense to make said move.

[EFerrari]

162. Correct. It's the government's move. n/t

[Travelman]

171. At the request of the defense

So, what would you have said if the defense had put in a motion for a continuance, and it had been denied?



Don't worry: I know already what it would have been. "Manning was denied due process!!!111oneoneoneteeneleven11!!"



This is just stupid. If you are just completely hell-bent upon being so incredibly intellectually dishonest as to claim that the government doing something that the defense asked them to do is somehow a violation of Manning's rights, then you clearly are utterly and completely incapable of any level of honesty whatsoever. Manning could bite the heads off of kittens on national television and you would claim that he was just doing it in the name of exposing what's inside.

[Lost-in-FL]

52. Travel much?

:eyes:

[Raster]

62. I think we both know the answer to that one.

:eyesroll:

[sabrina 1]

173. You don't get it do you? Our prison system is a disgrace

and those of us who care about Manning's treatment, have been fighting for human rights for even the worst offenders, for a long time.

I think you may be projectiong how YOU choose the issues that are worthwhile, onto other people. But those of us demanding humane treatment for Manning believe that our whole system of incarceration is shameful and needs to be completely reformed. Torturers need to be prosecuted no matter who the victims are.

Glad you asked.

[Travelman]

216. Name the prison system on this planet that does not use isolation to protect their prisoners.

I'll wait.


In the meantime, I'd like to know what "reforms" you think would change Manning's situation for the better. Should he instead be out in general population, where he's likely to get shanked in a heartbeat? Should he just be allowed to commit suicide?

[sabrina 1]

223. Post some proof that Manning is suicidal. I'll wait.

Just to help you out, his father, his friends, his attorneys and he himself along with the prison psychiatrist deny that he is suicidal.

As for prison systems elsewhere, try studying the prison systems of other civilized nations. It's sad how indoctrinated some Americans are into the belief that the only way to run a prison is to abuse human beings. We really have sunk to Soviet Union level in this country and there isn't much hope of changing it when both parties, except for a rare few, subscribe to this brutal policies.

I know someone who was in prison in this country who actually WAS suicidal and in no way was he treated the way Manning has been. The prison has special clothing for such people, but never was there any removal of clothes or degrading treatment of the person. And this was not exactly a model prison in terms of human rights.

So stop with the apologetics for what is going on with Manning, the world is watching and you are very much in the minority of those who actually believe this BS.

[ReggieVeggie]

203. LOUGHNER IS FUCKING MURDERER!

stop with tis false equivalency shit!

[Travelman]

215. Whoa, there! Hang on just a second!

There are people all over this thread and others saying that you can't go around declaring guilt until the trial is over. So, how can you go around calling Loughner a murderer?


It's not false equivalency at all. Loughner is in jail on a pre-trial detention, and Manning is in jail on a pre-trial detention. Loughner is held in isolation, 23 out of 24 hours per day locked in his cell, and Manning is held in isolation, 23 out of 24 hours per day locked in his cell. The only difference between the two, other than the fact that Loughner is at a federal prison in Arizona and Manning is in a military prison in Virginia, is the fact that Manning is on suicide watch. Manning is on suicide watch because he has threatened suicide on multiple occasions. There is no need for a doctor to say that Manning is suicidal; that canard is a red herring. The jailers have a specific obligation to ensure that their prisoners do not kill themselves, and that means that if one of them threatens suicide, then they must act as if that prisoner is going to attempt suicide. So no, the suicide watch is not some "extra punishment," as has been claimed.


Now, since your claim of "false equivalency" has been utterly and completely destroyed, where are your tears for Jared Loughner? He's getting the same treatment as Manning, and yet no one is out there pouring out the crocodile tears for him. Why not?

[sabrina 1]

225. And there are even more people in this thread who oppose the

abuse, if he is being abused, of Loughner or any other prisoner, no matter what crime they have been charged with or convicted of.

Torture, abuse and/or degradation of prisoners is against laws with no specifications for those who commit egregious crimes. And that goes for the already convicted also.

So your 'gotcha' attitude fails. Most of us have always opposed the inhumane treatment of any prisoner no matter whether they are convicted of a horrendous crime or not.

We do not need as a society to get down in the gutter with criminals. That is not necessary in order to maintain a system of justice and the safety of the public. And it only harms the society that engages in such abuses.

I hope that's clear enough for you.

[Vincardog]

49. Provide your rational why anyone should be sleep deprived and forced to stand naked and be humiliate

[Bragi]

81. The UN convention on torture

The UN definition of torture is below. It's rather clear that the treatment of Manning is torture under the UN Convention.

...any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him, or a third person, information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in, or incidental to, lawful sanctions. --UN Convention Against Torture

[Travelman]

83. That does not in even the slightest possible way show that Manning is being tortured.

The only thing tortured there is the "logic" that says that because he has repeatedly threatened to commit suicide, the jailers should just let him.

[Bragi]

93. Sorry pal, but you're saying more about you than about torture

The idea that long-term solitary confinement, no exercise, sleep deprivation and humiliating treatment don't constitute torture is just a sad reflection on your own humanity.

If you have no qualms about torture, then I suspect that the fact that international law and the UN convention defined what is happening to Manning probably means little to you.

As for him being suicidal, there is zero evidence of this. No medical doctor has indicated that this is his mental condition (at least yet, hopefully the torture he is suffering under won't made him suicidal.)

[Travelman]

105. Then you get the same question as everyone else has today:

Where are your cries that Jared Loughner be sprung from jail? He's getting the same treatment as Manning is, except for the suicide watch. Shouldn't we let Loughner out so that he can shoot up some more people?

I have plenty of qualms about torture. The problem is that you're trying to just declare this torture just becuse you want it to be an excuse to let a traitor off the hook. You have yet to produce any evidence of any sort of torture whatsoever.

And as for him being suicidal, the tired old canard about no doctor is absurd. There is absolutely no need for some sort of medical opinion on whether or not someone is suicidal in order to put them on suicide watch. Manning has repeatedly threatened suicide; even his attorney admits that he has threatened suicide. That's all that's needed for jailers anywhere to put someone on suicide watch. And if they didn't put him on suicide watch, and he managed to kill himself in jail, would you just sit silently by and say "well, at least he wasn't made to not wear his prison clothes at night?" Of course not. You'd raise holy hell about it, and you know it.

[Bragi]

113. Nonsense

If this Jared character he is being subjected to the same treatment as Manning with no medical evidence that he harbors suicidal tendencies, then yes, that is torture, and it should be stopped. Period. As for not needing any medical evidence to declare someone suicidal, that is also wrong and intolerable.

As for you trying to shift the focus away from the torture of Manning onto your apolagetics for what is being done to him, this response is as far as I'll play your game.

Bye.

[Travelman]

122. So, just let Loughner out of jail, then?

Can't have it both ways. Either Loughner needs to be sprung from federal custody, or else Manning needs to stay.

Which is it?

[Bragi]

127. Huh? Why do you think those are the only choices?

Why do you think there are only two options: incarcerate and torture accused people, or set them free?

What's wrong with the old-fashioned notion where authorities just follow the law in handling accused parties?

(By old-fashioned, I mean back in the days when legal rights and civil liberties mattered.)

[Travelman]

137. Well, either it's torture or it isn't

If it's torture when it's Bradley Manning who is in solitary, then it's torture when it's Jared Loughner who's in solitary.

And like it or not, the authorities are following the law in both cases.




There is no torture. Sorry.

[Bragi]

199. You posited that torture and unconditional release are the two options

In #113 above you indicated there were only two options for either person: torture or release.

Those aren't the only two options.

Just because someone is incarcerated does not mean the state has the right to commit acts of torture against them.

Sorry, but torture is happening to Manning, and may be happening to the other guy, I haven't looked closely into it.

I want the torture to stop wherever and whenever it occurs. You seem to be fine with it.

[tekisui]

195. If Loughner is being subjected to the same pre-trial, pre-conviction

punitive conditions, yes absolutely, they should cease. I would say the same about any detainee, pre or post conviction.

[Ghost in the Machine]

181. Please provide a link to back up your assertion that Bradley Manning

"has repeatedly threatened to commit suicide"...

Thanks in advance,

Ghost

[phleshdef]

85. Manning has not been subjected to severe pain or suffering. You have no idea what "severe" is do you

[leftstreet]

5. unRec for "professional left"

:eyes:

[Donnachaidh]

6. unrec n/t

[myrna minx]

7. Human rights are sooo 20th century.

Thank you for your concern.

[MadHound]

8. After all, it's just one man, it's just infringing a little bit on our rights.

:puke:

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

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

[daleanime]

11. ........

:wow:


















:scared:

[Solly Mack]

13. "..further diminish the credibility of the "professional left." "

Snort

[myrna minx]

20. It makes you wring your hands with worry!

:rofl:

[Solly Mack]

22. Teehee

lolol

[Heidi]

25. The OP's concern is commendable,

annit?

[Solly Mack]

27. Oh, yeah. Very.

Snicker

[Heidi]

30. I was darn near tempted to clutch my _own_ pearls.

But then I remembered that the OP had used a rightwing slur to describe me and most of the people I respect.

Pfffffft.

[Solly Mack]

34. I was going to make fart noises but opted for the snort instead.

[QC]

47. I clutched mine so hard the string broke!

Now I am on my hands and knees, sobbing and picking genuine faux pearls out of the carpet!

[grahamhgreen]

15. You have just convicted a man. Reversing the concept of innocent until proven guilty that is the USA

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

16. I'm of the opinion that knowing what our govermment does "matters".

I know it's just one of the silly and archaic ideas about the people in a democracy being able to keep an eye on their public servants but, what the hell, after decades of being lied to by the bosses, holding them accountable is worth a try. Even if it embarrasses the poor babies.

[PassingFair]

17. Yes.

What are the charges?

Aiding and abetting the "enemy" when
no "enemy" can be specified?

He didn't get the paper clothes until
an uproar occurred when it was discovered
that they were holding him NAKED.




I'll side with Veterans For Peace every time.

[bluecoat_fan]

19. depends on how much you value the truth

the "professional left" (commie, pinkos, or whatever you guys call us now a days)do care about the truth.

[Heidi]

23. I don't know any liberals who use the term "professional left."

Where's you come up with that? Hanging out with the wrong crowd?

Furthermore, none of us know exactly what Manning did or did not do. We're not even certain of what the government will claim in court he did (goodness knows prosecutors _never_ overcharge :sarcasm: ) so how can you imply he's not one of those "things that matter"?

I'll decide for myself which _people_ or "things" matter, thank you very much.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

33. "Professional left". Used to be called "Reds", "Troublemakers", "Outside agitators".

aka: "Bleeding hearts", "Commies", "Traitors", "Effete intellectuals", and (EEK!) non-conformists.

[Heidi]

41. I know.

I was raised in the south where all of those terms (except "effete" -- pronunciation obstacle) were used to describe us.

If "professional leftist" is the worst thing I'm ever truthfully called, I'll have lived a good and honest life.

[apples and oranges]

39. Uggh. It's in quotes for a reason

It was a tongue in cheek phrase, and I think we are all familiar with where that term originated. :eyes:

Turning over classified documents to someone in another country is illegal. End of story. And I take Obama's Pentagon at their word when they say he is not being tortured. If you think the President and his people are liars, then that's your prerogative. Now, who is hanging with the wrong crowd again?? The one who keeps calling Obama a liar, or the one who believes him?

[Heidi]

68. Why are you so quick to take the government's side?

I like Obama and I voted for him, but he wouldn't be the first president in my lifetime who just out and out lied to the American people. But maybe we who are cognizant of history and its tendency to repeat itself are a bad crowd.

[hfojvt]

87. well, we all make those decisions

but as a group for the last 8 or 9 months, it seems like GD has been wikileaks underground. It's wikileaks, Assange, Manning dominating this discussion board. It's the issue du jour that won't do away. And, as with most issues a good portion of the posts are about outrage. People are claiming to be angry about what is happening to Assange or Manning. There's a new outrage every other day.

My own concerns tend to be more about the hundreds of thousands of people who will suffer because of cuts to things like Liheap and Head Start and cuts to education and infrastructure which will have a large negative impact on thousands as the lost jobs negatively impact the economy.

But it is not new that working class issues and the economy take a back seat to every other issue, except for the periodic declarations that we are all poor, all slaves and all doomed because the world is going to hell because of captialism-peak oil-overpopulation-global warming-toxic food-loss of topsoil.

It seems like being on the left means being depressed, and pessimistic, and always angry at something the Government or the teabaggers are doing or not doing. The group seems to obsess about issues that do not resonate with me, and I doubt if my neighbors are giving Manning much thought either.

[RainDog]

29. wow

just wow.

[JoePhilly]

31. Each week gets a new outrage with endless OPs refering to the same

2 or three quotes.

Like each weekly outrage, the endless screaming about Manning will soon be replaced with a new one.

[EFerrari]

38. "The endless screaming about Manning"

I assume if this shit were being done to you, you'd want someone to scream about it.

[myrna minx]

51. No kidding - I love how caviler people are with due process and

habeas corpus when it's not their guilt or innocence on the line, because after all, all that matters is how the President appears politically. :puke:

[phleshdef]

90. Due process has not been violated. Neither has habeas corpus. All claims to such are lies.

[EFerrari]

100. Punitive pre-trial detention is a violation of due process. But you knew that.

[Travelman]

114. And yet there is no punitive pre-trial detention.

It's just pre-trial detention. Period. Happens all over the planet every day.

Just declaring that it's punitive doesn't actually make it so.

[phleshdef]

119. Yea and his own defense has actually been the reason for the pre-trial delay.

They wanted more time to craft a case of defense.

[EFerrari]

131. Magical thinking: If you deny it, it will go away.

Amnesty International
http://takeaction.amnestyusa.org/c.jhKPIXPCIoE/b.6519797/k.4456/End_the_punitive_detention_of_Bradley_Manning/siteapps/advocacy/ActionItem.aspx

UN Special Rapporteur for Torture via The Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/23/un-treatment-leaks-bradley-manning

Psychologists for Social Responsibility
http://www.bradleymanning.org/15952/psychologists-for-social-responsibility-open-letter-to-robert-gates-on-mannings-confinement/

Center for Constitutional Rights via The Public Record
http://pubrecord.org/nation/8703/about-bradley-manning/comment-page-1/

[phleshdef]

118. Its not punitive. His detention is 100% in accordance with UCMJ.

And there has been no violation of due process. He has representation. His pre-trial has only been delayed this long because HIS DEFENSE LAWYERS REQUESTED IT IN ORDER TO HAVE MORE TIME TO CRAFT HIS DEFENSE.

All of these claims are continually shot down into obliteration yet you continually insist on repeating them anyway. That reminds me of a certain person named Bachman... in the trance as always.

[EFerrari]

138. Wrong. Sleep disruption, constant interrogation, isolation

sensory deprivation and forced nudity, all ILLEGAL.

[phleshdef]

146. LOL, sleep disruption. He is allowed plenty of time to sleep.

Making prisoners sleep on a certain schedule is 100% legal.

There is no constant interrogation.

Isolation is not illegal, no matter how much you want it to be, neither is nudity.

[EFerrari]

163. Denial is not a counter argument. Requiring someone to respond

every five minutes is constant interrogation.

And yes, using those tactics on prisoners is illegal unless you are in North Korea or China.

Good grief, educate yourself. Read the Geneva Convention against torture, read the convention for the treatment of prisoners. Read the UN convention that we signed into US law. Read the UMCJ. Do something.

[EFerrari]

104. My mom would say, this is why 9/11 happened --

meaning that critical thinking seems to be at an all time low in this culture.

[phleshdef]

123. "Critical thought" does not include making baseless accusations with no factual foundation.

Which is exactly what you seem to continue to do, regardless of how many times you have been proven flat wrong at every single turn.

[EFerrari]

135. Denial is not a counter argument. Wrong.

[phleshdef]

148. Its not denial. We've proven everything we've asserted. You shown nothing.

Even your own links work against you, the few times you've even attempted to post something.

[EFerrari]

And there's more: This Shameful Abuse of Bradley Manning

The WikiLeaks suspect's mistreatment amounts to torture. Either President Obama knows this or he should make it his business.
by Daniel Ellsberg

President Obama tells us that he's asked the Pentagon whether the conditions of confinement of Bradley Manning, the soldier charged with leaking state secrets, "are appropriate and are meeting our basic standards. They assure me that they are."

If Obama believes that, he'll believe anything. I would hope he would know better than to ask the perpetrators whether they've been behaving appropriately. I can just hear President Nixon saying to a press conference the same thing: "I was assured by the the White House Plumbers that their burglary of the office of Daniel Ellsberg's doctor in Los Angeles was appropriate and met basic standards."

When that criminal behavior ordered from the Oval Office came out, Nixon faced impeachment and had to resign. Well, times have changed. But if President Obama really doesn't yet know the actual conditions of Manning's detention – if he really believes, as he's said, that "some of this has to do with Private Manning's wellbeing", despite the contrary judgments of the prison psychologist – then he's being lied to, and he needs to get a grip on his administration.

If he does know, and agrees that it's appropriate or even legal, that doesn't speak well for his memory of the courses he taught on constitutional law.

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/03/12

[phleshdef]

176. And Ellsberg, just like you, provides not one single fact. Just a bunch of guessing that ignores.

...tons of other available facts. He just boldly claims shit without backing it up with anything substantial. Just because you aren't getting away with doing that doesn't mean you can post someone else doing the same thing and expect to get away with it that way.

[EFerrari]

184. More: Bradley Manning's Abuse: Army's Dishonor, Obama's Shame

The treatment of Bradley Manning by the United States Army has stained the honor of the American military. Manning is the soldier who leaked over two hundred thousand documents to WikiLeaks -- documents printed by The New York Times and a host of other publications whose patriotism and support of our country are unimpeachable. None of these documents gave out troop positions or any other military secrets. Private Manning's intent has been clearly documented: he feared for the future of his country and he felt desperate to correct our course.

In return, the most powerful army in the world is subjecting him to brutal treatment that qualifies as borderline torture. One can argue the extent, if any, of his guilt, or whether the editorial board of The New York Times should be brought up on criminal charges for aiding and abetting the delivery of the material Manning leaked. But torture? Sanctioned and conducted by the U.S. Army? Sleep deprivation 'a la North Korea's brainwashing techniques? Stripped and forced to stand naked in a cold cell? Kept in total isolation 23 hours a day except when he must respond to guards who check on him -- every 5 minutes? This is the "new army"? Who gave the go-ahead to impose this kind of treatment on a man who may not even have committed a crime? Who decided to raise the stakes in Manning's trial and bring capital charges against him. That's right. He is accused of aiding and abetting the enemy and for a U.S. soldier, the punishment can be death, although the army announced, in a show of benevolence, they will likely only seek life imprisonment.

Whoever it is driving this madness, they have a commanding officer. And somewhere up the line, the buck stops at the top -- at least that's the single most important, bottom-line rule of leadership. In the United States Army, the top is known as the Commander in Chief, also known as the President of the United States, Barack Obama. Which leads me to wonder:

Why is the Commander in Chief of the U.S. Armed Forces silent about the torture and judicial railroading of an American soldier by his own army, an army of which President Obama is the highest ranking officer? As Ruth Marcus recently noted in The Washington Post, Obama's is becoming the "Where's Waldo" presidency. Marcus points out that there's always a rational explanation for why Obama is strangely inconspicuous during a given event but, as has been often observed, the apparent upshot is a man unwilling to articulate a moral stance, to stand for anything. Obama seems to operate under the mistaken impression that leadership is akin to facilitating a corporate retreat.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barton-kunstler-phd/bradley-mannings-abuse-ar_b_831179.html

[JoePhilly]

64. The guy has been charged with numerous crimes and is now

stuck in the military brig. And from everything I've read, his treatment is not very different than others in the same position.

My main point however, is that each week we get a new outrage. It flares up. We get OP after OP, each quoting the same source. And then it dies. It goes away.

DADT, DOMA, Obama's going to announce SS cuts in the SOTU, Obama's budget will cut SS, Obama is working to keep Mubarak in power, Obama hates the Unions, Obama is torturing Manning ... in about 3 days it will be something new.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

69. Maybe we should stick to talking about how cute Obama's kids are.

Or, what a swell speech he can give.

[displacedvermoter]

107. Looks great in a bathing suit!!!

[treestar]

218. Uncalled for.

The other poster points out how the PL is so obsessed with Obama, that every issue is about him.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

227. Has Obama resigned? Is he no longer Commander in Chief?

It is about him and his support for the way that Manning is being abused.

[treestar]

228. Just proves your obsession

Like there is no entire system, federal bureaucracy, different branches of government. People get obsessed with the POTUS because that office is the one that is held by one individual person, when you want a king/leader, you latch onto him.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

229. So, he's the powerless puppet of the bureaucracy?

And, the buck stops with some nameless flunky who actually runs things.

[EFerrari]

94. DADT, DOMA, SS cuts, human rights abuses --

these are all fights worth having. Maybe you should direct your ire at our government's support for dictators, its war on unions and its mistreatment of prisoners. I'll be happy to stop if they do!

[JoePhilly]

161. I really don't have much "ire" ... amusement, maybe, not so much "ire".

Here is a great Outrage OP ....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=638620&mesg_id=638620

This one doesn't even include a specific outrage.

[EFerrari]

168. It's nice that someone can find amusement in the continuing demolition

of civil rights in this country.

[JoePhilly]

183. What I find amusing ... is the endless knee jerking.

As for the "continuing demolition of civil rights" ... which civil rights, exactly? Manning is a member of the military charged with numerous crimes.

Can you tell me this ... why is the Manning story an outrage THIS WEEK, versus any other week in the past 3 months. Its not like his incarceration, or the associated conditions are a surprise.

And yet here on DU, the number of threads about his situation suddenly explodes. Why?

I contend that in a few days, the Outrage Machine will have moved on to a new topic. Because that's what it does. And THAT is what I find amusing.

[ReggieVeggie]

204. beats the hopeless daily bleat of Obmaphants

At least people who criticize are more interesting. You don't know exactly what they're going to say on ANY given subject.

[Vinnie From Indy]

35. "The man clearly broke the law"

This is clearly flame-bait.

If it is not, I weep for America becuase of the bone deep ignorance many have in regard to their own fundamental freedoms. Once again, the quickest way to convert a right-wing asshole into a progressive asshole is to put them on the receiving end of losing their civil rights.

[Raster]

59. Not only it is flamebait, but almost a direct recitation of the winger talking point.

Hmmm, where have we heard this one before?

[Cid_B]

117. He did clearly break the law...

If some want to claim that he is righteous or whatever else they like then that is fine. He was in clear violation of his clearance, UCMJ and his oath.

He made the choice and now he'll suffer the consequences. It couldn't happen to a more deserving fella either...

[Vinnie From Indy]

154. So he has been convicted?

When did that happen?

[Cid_B]

174. Right...

Because I as an average citizen cannot have an opinion prior to the trial (ya know.. just in case I get called for the panel.)

Jared Loughner hasn't been convicted yet but I think he did it and he is a POS. Same case here....

[Name removed]

190. Deleted message

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

[Raster]

212. Sorry, Red, white and blue and all that good shit.

And it is beyond dishonest to equate Loughner, who shot a Congresswoman and killed innocent bystanders with Manning, who shot no one, and only released evidence that the United States was involved in war crimes and MURDERED UNARMED JOURNALISTS AND CHILDREN. "Let's light 'em up!"

Yeah, I surely can draw a parallel between Loughner and Manning.:sarcasm:

[Cid_B]

226. Manning is likely responsible for more deaths actually...

... but they are just Afghans working with ISAF forces so it's ok for you not to count them right?

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503543_162-20011886-503543.html

Also, if "neutral" journalists decide to embed themselves with RPG toting folks wandering the streets they are taking their own stupid chance.

[Raster]

230. bullshit..."Manning is "likely" responsible

Again, BULLSHIT!

[Cid_B]

231. Great response to my point...

Way to delve into the issue...:eyes:

[Hell Hath No Fury]

36. Yes.

Next question?

[aquart]

37. Thank you for your concern.

I'm sure you know best.

[ArnoldLayne]

40. No not really

[Angry Dragon]

42. To: apples and oranges

#1: He has not been convicted of any crime so is innocent has such time he is convicted

#2: Forced to sleep in the nude and forced to stand at attention in front of male and female guards

#3: etc

[LiberalAndProud]

43. Honestly, I think it's very important to keep the light on our political prisoners.

The potential for abuse is high, therefore we must be vigilant.

[Cleita]

44. Well, I guess you won't give a shit until it happens to you.

Remember Rev. Neimoller in Nazi Germany who ended up in Daschau concentration camp, and who stated that he really didn't worry about the Nazis when they came for the communists, the trade unionist, the Jews, etc.. But when they finally came for him, there was no one left to speak up for him.

[Lost-in-FL]

45. Seriously? Who are you to tell us "who" is valuable and who is not? nt

[Teaser]

46. POST WHAT I WANT.

thanks.

[GodlessBiker]

50. To protest the excess time spent on this issue you spend more time on this issue?

[Raster]

56. Unrec by this member of the nonproffesional left.

Manning provided evidence that the United States was not only involved in war crimes activities, but was also conducting a systematic pogrom AGAINST JOURNALISTS that would document the US crimes.

Bradley Manning is a hero.

[lob1]

57. They don't treat Charles Manson as badly as they're

treating Manning. I guess humiliation and degredation is cool with you. But I think your tune might change if they were doing it to you.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

60. Well, be fair, Lt. Calley had to spend a whole weekend in the stockade.

But, he only murdered a bunch of women and children.

[Travelman]

74. They're treating Jared Loughner the same way.

He's in isolation. Held without bail. Awaiting trial that will be a year or more away.

Why aren't you bent out of shape about him?

[lob1]

78. I haven't heard that Loughner is being mistreated.

If he is, I feel the same as I do about Manning. He hasn't been convicted either, and it's not suitable treatment even if they ARE convicted.

[Travelman]

79. It's not hard to find...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jared_Lee_Loughner">Loughner is being held without bail by the Federal Bureau of Prisons in the Federal Correctional Institution at Phoenix. He is kept isolated in his cell away from other inmates 23 hours a day for his own safety and allowed out for one hour to shower and exercise.

It's not mistreatment, either. Sorry. It's called isolation, and it's been used for a long, long time to keep people from hurting themselves as well as to keep them from getting shanked in general population.


So, shall we just throw open the jailhouse doors and let Loughner go free? Let him go try to finish the job on Gabby Giffords?

Or is it just maybe possible that people are ludicrously hyper-sensitive about making sure that criminals are kept as comfortable as possible?

[phleshdef]

88. He isn't being "mistreated". This is what happens when you seriously break the law.

Its not torture. Its not a violation of rights. Every single argument where people have tried to make such claims, misguidedly bring the Geneva conventions into it, etc, have all been shot down. Speedy trial and torture do not apparently mean what a lot of people here think they mean.

[EFerrari]

97. Every major human rights organization disagrees with you. n/t

[Travelman]

111. Then they are out there busting every single inmate out of prison?

Lots and lots and lots of people, both here in the US, and in Canada, and in Europe and indeed all over the world are in solitary confinement.

Where are those human rights organizations? Why aren't they complaining about Loughner?

[EFerrari]

115. Go read and see what human rights organizations think of American prisons.

They have ALL been protesting them and for years.

[phleshdef]

126. Human rights organizations protesting something does not make that something illegal.

I ultimately agree that we should be less harsh on prisoners in general. That has nothing to do with what the law is. And his case has thus far been handled completely in accordance with the law.

[EFerrari]

139. Nope. And I won't repeat what has already been laid out for you at length

all over this thread.

[phleshdef]

149. You've laid nothing out. You can barely offer more than fragmented sentences at this point.

[EFerrari]

165. Nope, not getting sleepy here.

:)

[xphile]

224. I suspect that those who make excuses for Manning's treatment don't

really give a damn about human right. Unless it's their own of course.

[lob1]

110. He has't been convicted of anything!!!! Illegal!!!

Guilty until proven innocent. Remember that? It should be more than a slogan. And I repeat, even if he's convicted, it's not right to treat anyone that way. Period. Jesus.

[phleshdef]

128. There is ALWAYS a build up between charges and a trial.

He has been charged with over 24 charges. He is being legally detained in accordance with UCMJ law. His pre-trial hearing was postponed by his own defense and will take place sometime between May and June. Thats how the process ALWAYS works.

[lob1]

132. You've made my point. He hasn't been convicted.

And if he is convicted, the penalty won't be 10 yrs in prison without clothes. Not convicted, not convicted, not convicted!!!! It's ILLEGAL!

[phleshdef]

150. Um no, the military has every legal right to hold him between now and the time his trial comes.

And they have not exceeded the time limit for a speedy trial yet.

Not illegal, not illegal, not illegal, no matter how much you desperately want it to be.

[lob1]

152. They have a right to hold him. They don't have the right

to torture, degrade or humiliate him. To do that while they're holding him is illegal and immoral. I'd even say the same thing if they were doing it to you.

[Travelman]

156. He has not been tortured, denigrated, or humiliated

Sorry. He signed on the dotted line and volunteered for the Armed Services. I guarandamntee you that he's been made to be naked in more than one circumstance by the military. He VOLUNTEERED for it.

[lob1]

194. You can't honestly believe the shit you're saying.

He volunteered for it? What bullshit. Let me ask you a question. If your mom was arrested for something...anything, do you think it'd be cool to parade your mom around naked in prison? Your sister, your wife or husband, your brother?

[Travelman]

221. I can easily believe facts.

Fact: Manning voluntarily joined the Armed Services of the United Staes.
Fact: It is quite common for those in the Armed Services to be forced to be naked in front of others. Communal showers, for example. Have you just forgotten all the DADT arguments?
Fact: Manning is not "paraded around naked in prison." That's just a bald-faced lie.
Fact: If my mother, sister, wife, father, or any of my brothers were to be arrested, particularly for a capital crime such as treason, I guarandamntee you that they would indeed be subjected to strip searches on a regular basis, as well as cavity searches, and if they threatened suicide, they would be put on suicide watch.



You've never been arrested, have you? Hint: jail is not fun. It's not a happy place. It's not there for the enjoyment of the prisoners. People who are held in pre-trial confinement are kept there because they are a flight risk. That's just reality. I'm sorry if it makes you uncomfortable, but I have no interest whatsoever in just turning flight risks loose just because it offends your sensibilities that they are in jail. Bradley Manning is not being held just for someone's shits and giggles; he's there because he stole a bunch of classified documents and then gave them to a foreign entity. Now, you can go around calling that "truth to power" or "serving peace and justice" all day long, but that's not going to turn it into something legal to do. It's illegal, and he has bragged about doing it, and now he's being held in pre-trial confinement until his Article 32 hearing in a couple of months.

Sucks to be him, but he should have thought about what jail would be like before he decided to wilfully engage in committing a crime. Maybe he'll get acquitted. Maybe he'll find some sympathetic bunch in the jury who decide that it's somehow OK to violate the numerous oaths and promises regarding classified material that he took because he was service some greater good or whatever. And if he gets that acquittal, well, bully for him, but he's still not going to get any sympathy from me, and I'm damn sure not going to make up a bunch of fucking lies to try to claim that he's somehow being "tortured" when he's getting the same treatment as any other prisoner would in this set of circumstances.

[phleshdef]

160. You're right. They don't. And they haven't.

What you and others are doing here is you are making a mountain out of a molehill.

[elias49]

153. Wow! I thought this was about a guy named Manning

who's been kept in essentially a dark hole for 8 months.
Isn't that who this thread is about?
Was about?
Hmmm



edited spelling

[Ikonoklast]

75. Really? Manson has served his sentence. He should be released.

You should be outraged that he is being kept in prison for 22 YEARS after his sentence was over.

Manson was never even convicted of murder.


I see no crocodile tears for Charlie Manson on DU, a person that has paid his debt to society, yet is till incarcerated.

[lob1]

80. I don't know what the hell you're talking about.

[Travelman]

82. Erm....

Charles manson hasn't actually served his sentence. He was actually sentenced to death.

[Ikonoklast]

175. California v. Anderson.

Erm, yourself.

[Travelman]

185. Yes, I know.

That converted his sentence to life in prison.

Last I checked, he's still alive. He has yet to finish his life in prison.

[Autumn]

66. Yes. n/t

[Bunny]

71. Because there have been NO threads on Wisconsin or Japan.

None at all! Imagine that. How could we have ignored those two situations? :eyes:

This member of the "professional left' will decide how much of my 'capital and time' to spend on Bradley Manning, without input from you, thanks very much.

[Better Believe It]

73. So the attacks on our civil liberties and gov't whistle blowers are unimportant. OK No problem.

And rendition, imprisonment without charges or trials, the persecution of Julian Assange .... that sort of stuff needs to be taken off the table.

And besides, the "paper clothes" that Manning has allegedly been given are rather fashionable!

Can you post a link for those "paper clothes" provided to Manning?

[phleshdef]

89. Manning isn't a "whistle blower". He had no noble purpose behind doing what he did, whatsoever.

Manning released any and every classified document he could get his hands on. He was and is an unstable individual who all ready was having a LOT of adjustment trouble in the military. And what he did was nearly treacherous. He is no hero. He is an irresponsible criminal and deserves to spend many years either in a mental institution or behind bars, depending on whether or not they can determine how looney tunes he actually is.

This is not an attack on anyone's civil liberties. Everything thats happened so far with him has been done well within accordance of the constitution, UCMJ and does not violate the Geneva conventions in the slightest way. Everyone is just taking pieces of this law or that law, attempting to apply it to the situation to see if they can stumble upon some true violation and so far, when investigated, every single claim has been shot down.

[EFerrari]

96. Wrong. Every single claim has been validated, over and over.

And now the Obama administration is being investigated for torture by the UN Special Rapporteur.

[phleshdef]

130. No. It hasn't. You've yet to cite one single refutation that hasn't been cleanly shot down.

You've shown nothing. You just keep repeating the same dishonest bullshit over and over.

When the UN investigates the claim (as they would ANY claim) and pronounces that no wrong doing has occurred, what are you going to cry about after that?

[EFerrari]

142. Attacking me doesn't alter reality.

But you know that, too.

:)

[phleshdef]

151. You've been proven wrong about torture accusations.

You've been proven wrong about the defense requesting his trial delay in order to evaluate his mental capacity.

You've been proven wrong about the legality of having clothing removed for safety purposes and about the legality of periods of isolation.

You've been proven wrong about many things you claimed happened to Manning that didn't happen.

You've been proven wrong about how the Geneva conventions apply to Manning and how that all ties in with Article 6 and UCMJ law.

You've been proven wrong at every single turn.

Maybe at one time, you were use to being able to say whatever the hell you wanted, right or wrong, and never having to deal with facing a serious questioning of the facts. That time is over. You have been questioned and you have been proven wrong.

[EFerrari]

164. Well, no.

The defense has not requested any delay. That's false.

The prisoner has not been judged by any doctor to be at risk for self harm, that's also false.

The Geneva Convention against torure and it's iteration in the UN accords and UCMJ do apply, that's also false.

In fact, you have not proven anything. Try it on someone else.

[phleshdef]

172. Yes, the defense DID request it and I even linked you to an article describing it.

For the last time, they requested a delay so they can have a mental evaluation done on Manning.

They requested a delay so they can have a mental evaluation done Manning.
They requested a delay so they can have a mental evaluation done Manning.
They requested a delay so they can have a mental evaluation done Manning.
They requested a delay so they can have a mental evaluation done Manning.
They requested a delay so they can have a mental evaluation done Manning.
They requested a delay so they can have a mental evaluation done Manning.
They requested a delay so they can have a mental evaluation done Manning.
They requested a delay so they can have a mental evaluation done Manning.
They requested a delay so they can have a mental evaluation done Manning.
They requested a delay so they can have a mental evaluation done Manning.

You can't change that. ITS FACT.

A doctor is not required to declare a patient a suicide risk. The brass gets to make that call, whether you like it or not, they do.

There was no torture. Any claims of such just sound idiotic. Torture hurts a lot more than anything done to Manning. Thats just cry baby bullshit.

[Travelman]

189. "I reject this reality and wilfully replace it with my own..."

It's just insane.


"He hasn't gotten a speedy trial! VIOLATION OF RIGHTS!!1111!"
"Uhm, he asked for a delay. Here's where he requested it."
"I don't belive that! The government is responsible for it!"
"HE'S the one who asked for the delay!"
"Yeah, well ... the government granted the delay, therefore it's THEIR FAULT!!"




Oh well. Here in reality, where unicorns don't fart rainbows, we can look at the actual facts and recognize that this is what happens to people who engage in espionage.

[EFerrari]

210. Bradley Manning's Abuse: Army's Dishonor, Obama's Shame

Barton Kunstler, Ph.D.
Posted: March 4, 2011 01:20 PM

Bradley Manning's Abuse: Army's Dishonor, Obama's Shame

The treatment of Bradley Manning by the United States Army has stained the honor of the American military. Manning is the soldier who leaked over two hundred thousand documents to WikiLeaks -- documents printed by The New York Times and a host of other publications whose patriotism and support of our country are unimpeachable. None of these documents gave out troop positions or any other military secrets. Private Manning's intent has been clearly documented: he feared for the future of his country and he felt desperate to correct our course.

In return, the most powerful army in the world is subjecting him to brutal treatment that qualifies as borderline torture. One can argue the extent, if any, of his guilt, or whether the editorial board of The New York Times should be brought up on criminal charges for aiding and abetting the delivery of the material Manning leaked. But torture? Sanctioned and conducted by the U.S. Army? Sleep deprivation 'a la North Korea's brainwashing techniques? Stripped and forced to stand naked in a cold cell? Kept in total isolation 23 hours a day except when he must respond to guards who check on him -- every 5 minutes? This is the "new army"? Who gave the go-ahead to impose this kind of treatment on a man who may not even have committed a crime? Who decided to raise the stakes in Manning's trial and bring capital charges against him. That's right. He is accused of aiding and abetting the enemy and for a U.S. soldier, the punishment can be death, although the army announced, in a show of benevolence, they will likely only seek life imprisonment.

Whoever it is driving this madness, they have a commanding officer. And somewhere up the line, the buck stops at the top -- at least that's the single most important, bottom-line rule of leadership. In the United States Army, the top is known as the Commander in Chief, also known as the President of the United States, Barack Obama. Which leads me to wonder:

Why is the Commander in Chief of the U.S. Armed Forces silent about the torture and judicial railroading of an American soldier by his own army, an army of which President Obama is the highest ranking officer? As Ruth Marcus recently noted in The Washington Post, Obama's is becoming the "Where's Waldo" presidency. Marcus points out that there's always a rational explanation for why Obama is strangely inconspicuous during a given event but, as has been often observed, the apparent upshot is a man unwilling to articulate a moral stance, to stand for anything. Obama seems to operate under the mistaken impression that leadership is akin to facilitating a corporate retreat.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barton-kunstler-phd/bradley-mannings-abuse-ar_b_831179.html

[EFerrari]

207. The defense's motion was filed in a timely manner.

There is zero delay on their part.

And no one but a doctor can diagnose in this country, period. That's the law of the land.

[Better Believe It]

159. If anyone deserves the Medal of Freedom honor it is Private Manning. A real American hero!

[phleshdef]

180. A near treacherous, wreckless, ill adjusted individual with a history of assaulting other officers..

...and being otherwise unable to adjust to military life and a criminal to boot.

Your standards for who should get the medal of freedom is a complete disagrace to the existence of said medal.

[coalition_unwilling]

193. "near treacherous" - Ignore list for endorsing torture as an

instrument of U.S. policy and for general incoherence.

Jeebus

[Better Believe It]

201. He/she made my ignore list! If I wanted to read reactionary crap like that I wouldn't be on DU

[Raksha]

76. Yes, because we are ALL Bradley Manning.

[Call Me Wesley]

86. STOP!!11!!!

OPEN THE DOOR,
GET ON THE FLOOR.
EVERYBODY WALK THE DINOSAUR!

[joeybee12]

98. "clearly broke the law"...yes sir, do not question authroity, everything you read is true...

our overlords have only our best interest at heart.

Nice typing direct from the WH, buddy.

[Desertrose]

101. Wow. Guess "rights" don't mean much as long as it isn't you!

words fail.

[Matariki]

102. Posts like yours make me think it's a thousand times over worth "our capital and time"

[leftstreet]

112. And what is this 'capital' of which the OP speaks?

Surely doesn't mean the Democrats/Obama Administration

That capital is loooooooooong gone

[marmar]

103. 'professional left'?

Jesus, Maria y Josef :eyes:

[G_j]

121. yea, them and the feminazis I suppose...

yikes!!

:puke:

[truth2power]

106. Yes. Yes he is. eom

[G_j]

109. my first unrec of 2011

:-(

[Bragi]

116. Unrec'd for toxic display of inhumanity /nt

[lamp_shade]

129. Bravo. K&R

[EFerrari]

169. Gross.

Cheering human rights abuses now, are we.

[readmoreoften]

136. Ew gross!

[EFerrari]

145. Well, there are only so many responses to, the Obama administration is being investigated

for torture.

"Move along" is one of them.

[Lucky 13]

147. Unrec

One person being tortured is worth my time.

[Name removed]

155. Deleted message

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

[RainDog]

158. I don't think the founders of this nation fit that description

and it was they who created the bill of rights that you don't seem to give a shit about.

[EFerrari]

166. The word is "altar". n/t

[fittosurvive]

182. You are correct.

[sallysense]

157. (Our country needs people like Bradley Manning!) Letter to the President

(Another letter sent to the President and other Officials.)

Mr. President,

Please properly investigate the possible/probable inhumane treatment of PFC Bradley E. Manning, being detained in the United States Marine Corps Quantico Brig in Virginia.

Common sense tells the conscience that possible/probable inhumane treatment must be fully investigated.

Facts of the case, as reported by David Coombs, PFC Manning's defense lawyer, indicate that:

Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell has stated that PFC Manning has been a model detainee.

Brig forensic psychiatrists have continually stated that there's no mental health justifications for the extreme conditions of PFC Manning's detainment.

Quantico Commander Colonel Daniel Choike has denied a fair request by PFC Manning to be removed from the medically unnecessary extreme current conditions of his detainment.

Chief Warrant Officer Denise Barnes used a sarcastic remark made by PFC Manning, (referring to the waistband in his shorts), as an unfair convenient excuse to unjustifiably further increase the extreme conditions of PFC Manning's detainment, with no contact of, nor recommendations from, the mental health staff to do so.

The Brig (excluding mental health staff as they don't recommend the extreme current conditions) is using loopholes in policies to unfairly increase the extreme conditions of PFC Manning's detainment.

These extreme conditions, inconsistencies between policies, and possible/probable abuse of authority, must be investigated.

The communication and exercise and sleep of PFC Manning is being severely restricted to the viable concern of inhumaneness.

Hence, to now rely on the sole assurance of those allegedly behind this alleged mistreatment, does nothing to justly bring the truth to light.

Our country's principles of conscientiousness, deserve to have a serious matter such as this be fully investigated by unbiased independent third parties.

Again, please properly investigate the possible/probable inhumane treatment of PFC Bradley Manning.

Anything less falls short of truth and justness, and hence the American way, as your words so often convey.

Sincerely,

Sally Kline

[Rex]

167. Don't be squemish, your country tortures its own people now

there has been so much information regarding Mannings torture, I can only conclude your post is to get people from talking about it as if it is not important. To you torture is okay, fine that is your opinion. Mine is torture is wrong and we should not do it. Manning is being tortured by the MIC, deal with it or don't. People will focus on what is important and then some just don't care.

[texastoast]

170. The slippery slope enslippens some more

As it has been said a zillion times, if you give up your rights, there are shits standing in line to take them.

If we let Bradley be treated like this, we're next.

Lots of battles. No rest.

[coalition_unwilling]

177. Whenever a DUer says "The man clearly broke the law" I reach

for my ibuprofen. The alternative is, what, that he 'unclearly broke the law'? Jeebus, the misuse of adverbs on this site discredits the posts themselves.

FWIW, it is not yet clear that Manning broke the law, this poster's grammatical malapropism to the contrary. Last time I checked, the 'presumption of innocence' was still a valid principle of U.S. jurisprudence. But the OP clearly knows something the rest of us don't :)

[Ramulux]

179. I have an idea

Figure out what the fuck you are talking about before you start talking shit. You are misrepresenting the torture that this man is going through and essentially saying that its cool to torture people if you think they have committed a crime.

Sorry, but that's not how a reasonable society should operate. There is this thing called the rule of law, and it says that someone is innocent until proven guilty, and Bradley Manning has not only not been proven guilty he hasn't even been formally charged with a crime.

[Travelman]

186. He has been formally charged with a lot of crimes

And he's not being tortrued.

[coalition_unwilling]

192. If you're going to endorse torture as an instrument of U.S. policy, the

least you could do is spell it correctly.

Welcome to my Ignore list.

[Travelman]

196. I humbly apologize for my typo

Your turn: where's your concern for Jared Loughner? He's getting the same treatment as Manning. Should we turn Loughner loose? After all, by your own standard, he's being tortured. Shouldn't we set him free? Give him another opportunity to shoot up a bunch of people in a mall parking lot?

[Call Me Wesley]

200. Why are you so insisting of equating apples with oranges?

Your argument about the whole issue that 'Jared Loughner should be turned loose if we liberals get our way by our own standards' is pretty much invalid and ignorant to booth. I don't think that you're really open to discussion, so I just resort to your own tactics: After all, by your own standards, torture does not exist. Or, to be more precise: I'm happy if they all got what they deserve, no matter what. So much for your ability on the current issue to distinct different cases.

Perhaps you work in this field, then I understand the travels you come from. Regarding the issue, I mean.

Happy travels!

[Mimosa]

208. And you know this how?

*rolling eyes at troll*

[Travelman]

222. I know this because I can read

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Manning#Arrest_and_charges">It's not like it's some sort of secret:

Manning was arrested on May 26, 2010, and held at first in a military jail at Camp Arifjan in Kuwait.<25> He was charged on July 5 under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) with violations of UCMJ Articles 92 and 134 for "transferring classified data onto his personal computer and adding unauthorized software to a classified computer system in connection with the leaking of a video of a helicopter attack in Iraq in 2007," and "communicating, transmitting and delivering national defense information to an unauthorized source and disclosing classified information concerning the national defense with reason to believe that the information could cause injury to the United States."<26> He was also one of those named in the Twitter subpoena later in December, when the U.S. government tried to obtain access to the Twitter accounts of several of those involved.<27>

On March 2, 2011, an additional 22 charges were preferred, including wrongfully obtaining classified material for the purpose of posting it on the Internet, knowing that the information would be accessed by the enemy; the illegal transmission of defense information; fraud; and aiding the enemy. CBS reported that the new charges involved the leaking of the Afghan and Iraq war logs, and a quarter of a million State Department cables; according to ABC News, the charge sheets said Manning had transferred 380,000 records about Iraq, and 90,000 about Afghanistan. In all, CBS said, he is accused of having leaked over half a million documents and two videos. Prosecutors told Manning's lawyers they would not seek the death penalty, though the charge of aiding the enemy is a capital offense. They said if convicted he will face life imprisonment, reduction in rank to the lowest enlisted pay grade, a dishonorable discharge, and loss of pay and allowances.<28>

See? Charges have indeed been filed. It's not some sort of secret. The claims that he hasn't been charged are lies, plain and simple.

Now, feel free to roll your eyes at more facts if that makes you feel better, but you just can't escape facts at the end of the day.

[elias49]

187. "Focus on the things that matter, like what's going on in Japan..."

Hey. I have an idea! You go first!
Your post isn't worth debate, but some folks here take issue with men being treated like animals. I give them credit for their humanity.
You clearly are not among that group, so, indeed, 'focus on something that matters' and leave questions about the distinction between man and beast to those who give a shit.
Thank you.

:thumbsdown:

[zorahopkins]

191. Is JUSTICE Worth It Or Not?

I vote "YES".

I think Justice is always worth my time and capital.

[tekisui]

197. Yes, he is. He has not been tried or convicted. He should be treated

with the dignity that every person deserves. And those who like to trumpet his 'suicidal
standing as justification should realize that the conditions he has been subjected to are likely the very cause for any thoughts of suicide. Extended isolation has been proven to cause insanity. Which is likely why it was used, to break him into a shell of a person.

What is fucked up about this is that he is effectively being punish before a trial and before a conviction.

[ReggieVeggie]

202. slaves "broke the law" when they broke their chains and ran

Wisconsin is something that matters? Then where the fuck is Obama?

[The Second Stone]

205. Sometimes you have to defend the accused before they

are found innocent or guilty to protect the rights of everyone. Manning is innocent under the law until proven guilty and is entitled to be treated as though he were innocent. The fact is that I would object to a guilty person being treated this way after conviction. Jeffery Dahmer got better treatment after conviction.

[Mimosa]

206. The man hasn't had a TRIAL for heaven's sake.

WTH are YOU posting this?

Without a TRIAL YOU do not know he broke any laws. Where did you go to school?

*BTW, I love is Manning worth our 'capital'.

[fascisthunter]

209. yes, and you aren't

how clever of a name

[BulletproofLandshark]

211. "The man clearly broke the law."

You sound like fucking Nancy Grace, convicting someone before they have even gone to trial.

[Macoy51]

213. YES

YES.

Just the fact that this question is even raised is disturbing to me. I don’t care if manning is the worst mass-murderer in history. His treatment is unacceptable.

All prisoners must be treated with a basic level of dignity. I wonder how long we would remain silent if Bush was still President?



Macoy

[Lucinda]

214. I'm pretty capable of being concerned with more than one issue at a time.

:hi:

[treestar]

217. Absolutely not.

He's just the newest fodder for the Obama obsessed. Every issue that comes along is all about bashing Obama.

And this one is ridiculous, since it's just the military justice system operating, as it has for years and there were no complaints before.

[genna]

220. Should there be whistle blowers who break the law and call attention to governmental malfeasance?

If your answer is no, then our time and energy is better spent on other causes like Huffington Post blogging or campaigning for Social Security cuts.

IF your answer is yes, then Manning is a political prisoner whose treatment serves as a warning for anyone who calls wrong for the next bout of government malfeasance.