Bradley Manning in the light of history
Read Time:1 Minute, 16 Second
While reading over the Bradley Manning case, it becomes clear that history has a habit of, while not exactly repeating, entertaining a familiar theme.
There are elements of l’affaire Dreyfus, one of many of the political prisoners of the former Soviet Union and South Africa, with a pinch of the Rosenberg show trial.
In a peculiarly horrible sense of deja vu, the force feeding of psychotropic, ‘anti depressant’ drugs, sensory deprivation, excessive restraint, concerted abusive behavior, all which which is condoned and justified by the ‘great and the good’ of the land, is redolent of the excesses of the Stasi and, when it wasn’t buried deeper than Hades, the mouthings of the Politburo of any Soviet satellite puppet state. “Nothing to see here, citizen. It is for your protection. Now, return to America’s Got Talent, and we shall think of this no more….”
There is never an excuse for the behavior of either the Pentagon or the The White House, and history will judge them harshly. It’s a high profile hissy fit, of people who have been shown to be incompetent, greedy, and venal in equal measure.
The last, personal turn of the screw of my conscience came with the remembrance of Wallflower, by Peter Gabriel. It says all this writer could say, with infinitely more elegance and power.
The Land of the Free, indeed…
References:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/mar/16/hear-bradley-manning-because-chains
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreyfus_affair
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosenbergs
Happy
0 %
Sad
0 %
Excited
0 %
Sleepy
0 %
Angry
0 %
Surprise
0 %
0
0
Manning is being treated just like any other prisoner. He is not being singled out for special treatment. The very concept is a stretch given that dozens of different people see him every day, including the Red Cross and no one but Manning is saying he is being mistreated. How many people can reasonably be expected to cover up and keep secret this so called “torturous” treatment.
Has he been charged with a crime? Have they proved that he leaked the documents?
Has any harm come from the publishing of the papers?
Have they proved that he is guilty of any crime? It isn’t about treatment, it’s about holding him prisoner at all. He hasn’t been shown to be dangerous to others. He should be allowed out on bail until he is charged and convicted.
I conclude that he is a POLITICAL prisoner, whatever his treatment has been.
It is clear to me that Bradley Manning is a political prisoner. We used to criticize countries like Russia and China for having political prisoners held without charges for long periods of time. Well, I don’t think we can criticize any country anymore. All of the stuff we learned in grade school about Freedom and Liberty is now obsolete. We have become something a lot less than our founding fathers imagined and fought for.
If I am going to choose an “expert” whose opinion I trust, it would have to be that of Amnesty Intl. over the Pentagon, or even the president (lying or not).
“Manning hasn’t been convicted of any offence, but military authorities appear to be using all available means to punish him while in detention. This undermines the United States’ commitment to the principle of the presumption of innocence.”
That last sentence says it all. But the US has not been too keen on behaving in a principled manner for some time.
An excellent discussion that is both civil and informative.
I think the way a person looks at the Bradley Manning saga, reflects how one views Wikileaks. I admire Wikileaks and I see the way Manning is being treated, however appropriate, as if a board of directors and the CEO of a Fortune 500 company jumps all over a janitor who had access to their secret company files and blabbed to the competition. Manning couldn’t have a lower rank and him having access is insane. He is a scapegoat. Bigger heads should roll.
I agree that a mere Specialist 4th class should NEVER have had access to such information. It is insane indeed and I agree that he is probably a scapegoat. The idiot that initiated this “open information” program should be in a cell next to Manning for sheer idiocy.
“He is a scapegoat. Bigger heads should roll.”
Hence L’affaire Dreyfus…
And it’s not like the handling of any Federal Prisoner. UCMJ has no right of Habeas Corpus for a start.
I’m with you on this my man.
Sorry friend. You wrote a brilliant piece but you are wrong on at least one point in your comment, and that is in regard to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and writs of Habeus Corpus:
“The military justice system commonly uses four writs: mandamus, prohibition, error coram nobis, and habeas corpus. A writ of mandamus is an order from a court of competent jurisdiction that requires the performance of a specified act by an inferior court or authority.[1] The writ of prohibition is used to prevent the commission of a specified act or issuance of a particular order.[2] The writ of error coram nobis is used to bring an issue before the court that previously decided the same issue. It allows the court to review error of fact or a retroactive change in the law that which affects the validity of the prior proceeding.[3] The writ of habeas corpus is used to challenge either the legal basis for or the manner of confinement.[4]”
This is from Wikipedia. There is an avenue for Manning and his lawyers, but if they haven’t done it already that means they know there is no basis for it. If they have filed such a writ it apparently was denied.
No harm intended old man. Just adding to the discussion you know.
Useful to know.
However,
“they know there is no basis for it.”
is quite an assertion. It’s certainly your opinion, but it’s far from an attested fact.
As an attorney, when I say “they know there is no basis for it” I mean just that. If I were representing this young man, and I believed that he were being abused I would file the proper paperwork. If I didn’t however, and realized that it was just the sad fear of a lonely young man who finds himself on the wrong side of the justice system I would not file the writ.
The fact is he’s a scared kid who doesn’t understand why he has to get naked, and take anti-depressants. He doesn’t understand why he can’t go home, or if he even did something wrong. Don’t for a moment think that I am not sympathetic to his plight, I am, but when you say there is no avenue for Habeus Corpus within the UCMJ I have to call you on it.
🙂 Unless I’m aphasic, I believe I admitted I’d got that wrong, although the whole habeas corpus thing in the US got muddied when the Patriot Act got hustled in.
Sorry again. The U.S. Constitutional protections remained in place despite the Patriot Act, including Habeus Corpus.
This is a well considered post, however the only one who is saying that Manning is being abused is Manning. In point of fact is he is being treated no differently than any federal prisoner who is on suicide watch. It is my understanding that the Red Cross, as well as the Bureau of Prisons, including the Pentagon, has taken a close look at Manning’s treatment and found that he is being treated humanely. Even the president inquired and was informed that Manning was not in any way being abused. Lying to the president would be very foolish indeed.
In conclusion it never hurts to keep a weather eye on these things as only careful scrutiny will prevent them from happening. I would have been most concerned if Manning’s complaints were ignored. Excellent post.
With due respect, you’re making the rash a priori assumption that someone may have lied to the President for him to make the assertion he did, rather than the Presdient is simply lying. Based on the track record of the people elected to that position, I’d go for bald face lying as the least energy solution.
“With respect to Private Manning, I have actually asked the Pentagon whether or not the procedures that have been taken in terms of his confinement are appropriate and are meeting our basic standards. They assure me that they are. I can’t go into details about some of their concerns, but some of this has to do with Private Manning’s safety as well.”
is a masterful piece of political non-answer.
As to the Red Cross, I’d like to see that since google news seems to be unaware of any assertion by the Red Cross on the Manning case.
The Pentagon would mostly skin their mother’s on live TV to cover their own arses, so they are unreliable…
Amnesty, however, do have an opinion
http://www.amnesty.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=19193