Bradley Manning tortured

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Bradley Manning tortured

Postby Belial » Wed Dec 15, 2010 8:15 pm UTC

Yeah, so really, fuck Julian Assange, he's just a figurehead.

How about what's happening to Bradley Manning, the guy who allegedly leaked the documents that has the US in such a tizzy?

Oh, turns out we've held him in solitary confinement for 7 months without a trial in arbitrarily ridiculous and torturous conditions.

Bradley Manning, the 22-year-old U.S. Army Private accused of leaking classified documents to WikiLeaks, has never been convicted of that crime, nor of any other crime. Despite that, he has been detained at the U.S. Marine brig in Quantico, Virginia for five months -- and for two months before that in a military jail in Kuwait -- under conditions that constitute cruel and inhumane treatment and, by the standards of many nations, even torture. Interviews with several people directly familiar with the conditions of Manning's detention, ultimately including a Quantico brig official (Lt. Brian Villiard) who confirmed much of what they conveyed, establishes that the accused leaker is subjected to detention conditions likely to create long-term psychological injuries.

Since his arrest in May, Manning has been a model detainee, without any episodes of violence or disciplinary problems. He nonetheless was declared from the start to be a "Maximum Custody Detainee," the highest and most repressive level of military detention, which then became the basis for the series of inhumane measures imposed on him.

From the beginning of his detention, Manning has been held in intensive solitary confinement. For 23 out of 24 hours every day -- for seven straight months and counting -- he sits completely alone in his cell. Even inside his cell, his activities are heavily restricted; he's barred even from exercising and is under constant surveillance to enforce those restrictions. For reasons that appear completely punitive, he's being denied many of the most basic attributes of civilized imprisonment, including even a pillow or sheets for his bed (he is not and never has been on suicide watch). For the one hour per day when he is freed from this isolation, he is barred from accessing any news or current events programs. Lt. Villiard protested that the conditions are not "like jail movies where someone gets thrown into the hole," but confirmed that he is in solitary confinement, entirely alone in his cell except for the one hour per day he is taken out.

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

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

For that reason, many Western nations -- and even some non-Western nations notorious for human rights abuses -- refuse to employ prolonged solitary confinement except in the most extreme cases of prisoner violence. "It’s an awful thing, solitary," John McCain wrote of his experience in isolated confinement in Vietnam. “It crushes your spirit." As Gawande documented: "A U.S. military study of almost a hundred and fifty naval aviators returned from imprisonment in Vietnam . . . reported that they found social isolation to be as torturous and agonizing as any physical abuse they suffered." Gawande explained that America’s application of this form of torture to its own citizens is what spawned the torture regime which President Obama vowed to end:

This past year, both the Republican and the Democratic Presidential candidates came out firmly for banning torture and closing the facility in Guantánamo Bay, where hundreds of prisoners have been held in years-long isolation. Neither Barack Obama nor John McCain, however, addressed the question of whether prolonged solitary confinement is torture. . . .

This is the dark side of American exceptionalism. . . . Our willingness to discard these standards for American prisoners made it easy to discard the Geneva Conventions prohibiting similar treatment of foreign prisoners of war, to the detriment of America’s moral stature in the world. In much the same way that a previous generation of Americans countenanced legalized segregation, ours has countenanced legalized torture. And there is no clearer manifestation of this than our routine use of solitary confinement . . . .

It's one thing to impose such punitive, barbaric measures on convicts who have proven to be violent when around other prisoners; at the Supermax in Florence, inmates convicted of the most heinous crimes and who pose a threat to prison order and the safety of others are subjected to worse treatment than what Manning experiences. But it's another thing entirely to impose such conditions on individuals, like Manning, who have been convicted of nothing and have never demonstrated an iota of physical threat or disorder.

In 2006, a bipartisan National Commission on America's Prisons was created and it called for the elimination of prolonged solitary confinement. Its Report documented that conditions whereby "prisoners end up locked in their cells 23 hours a day, every day. . . is so severe that people end up completely isolated, living in what can only be described as torturous conditions." The Report documented numerous psychiatric studies of individuals held in prolonged isolation which demonstrate "a constellation of symptoms that includes overwhelming anxiety, confusion and hallucination, and sudden violent and self-destructive outbursts." The above-referenced article from the Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law states: "Psychological effects can include anxiety, depression, anger, cognitive disturbances, perceptual distortions, obsessive thoughts, paranoia, and psychosis."

When one exacerbates the harms of prolonged isolation with the other deprivations to which Manning is being subjected, long-term psychiatric and even physical impairment is likely. Gawande documents that "EEG studies going back to the nineteen-sixties have shown diffuse slowing of brain waves in prisoners after a week or more of solitary confinement." Medical tests conducted in 1992 on Yugoslavian prisoners subjected to an average of six months of isolation -- roughly the amount to which Manning has now been subjected -- "revealed brain abnormalities months afterward; the most severe were found in prisoners who had endured either head trauma sufficient to render them unconscious or, yes, solitary confinement. Without sustained social interaction, the human brain may become as impaired as one that has incurred a traumatic injury." Gawande's article is filled with horrifying stories of individuals subjected to isolation similar to or even less enduring than Manning's who have succumbed to extreme long-term psychological breakdown.

Manning is barred from communicating with any reporters, even indirectly, so nothing he has said can be quoted here. But David House, a 23-year-old MIT researcher who befriended Manning after his detention (and then had his laptops, camera and cellphone seized by Homeland Security when entering the U.S.) is one of the few people to have visited Manning several times at Quantico. He describes palpable changes in Manning's physical appearance and behavior just over the course of the several months that he's been visiting him. Like most individuals held in severe isolation, Manning sleeps much of the day, is particularly frustrated by the petty, vindictive denial of a pillow or sheets, and suffers from less and less outdoor time as part of his one-hour daily removal from his cage.

This is why the conditions under which Manning is being detained were once recognized in the U.S. -- and are still recognized in many Western nations -- as not only cruel and inhumane, but torture. More than a century ago, U.S. courts understood that solitary confinement was a barbaric punishment that severely harmed the mental and physical health of those subjected to it. The Supreme Court's 1890 decision in In re Medley noted that as a result of solitary confinement as practiced in the early days of the United States, many "prisoners fell, after even a short confinement, into a semi-fatuous condition . . . and others became violently insane; others still, committed suicide; while those who stood the ordeal better . . . [often] did not recover sufficient mental activity to be of any subsequent service to the community." And in its 1940 decision in Chambers v. Florida, the Court characterized prolonged solitary confinement as "torture" and compared it to "[t]he rack, the thumbscrew, [and] the wheel."

The inhumane treatment of Manning may have international implications as well. There are multiple proceedings now pending in the European Union Human Rights Court, brought by "War on Terror" detainees contesting their extradition to the U.S. on the ground that the conditions under which they likely will be held -- particularly prolonged solitary confinement -- violate the European Convention on Human Rights, which (along with the Convention Against Torture) bars EU states from extraditing anyone to any nation where there is a real risk of inhumane and degrading treatment. The European Court of Human Rights has in the past found detention conditions violative of those rights (in Bulgaria) where "the [detainee] spent 23 hours a day alone in his cell; had limited interaction with other prisoners; and was only allowed two visits per month." From the Journal article referenced above:

International treaty bodies and human rights experts, including the Human Rights Committee, the Committee against Torture, and the U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture, have concluded that solitary confinement may amount to cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment in violation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman, and Degrading Treatment or Punishment. They have specifically criticized supermax confinement in the United States because of the mental suffering it inflicts.

Subjecting a detainee like Manning to this level of prolonged cruel and inhumane detention can thus jeopardize the ability of the U.S. to secure extradition for other prisoners, as these conditions are viewed in much of the civilized world as barbaric. Moreover, because Manning holds dual American and U.K. citizenship (his mother is British), it is possible for British agencies and human rights organizations to assert his consular rights against these oppressive conditions. At least some preliminary efforts are underway in Britain to explore that mechanism as a means of securing more humane treatment for Manning. Whatever else is true, all of this illustrates what a profound departure from international norms is the treatment to which the U.S. Government is subjecting him.

* * * * *

The plight of Manning has largely been overshadowed by the intense media fixation on WikiLeaks, so it's worth underscoring what it is that he's accused of doing and what he said in his own reputed words about these acts. If one believes the authenticity of the highly edited chat logs of Manning's online conversations with Adrian Lamo that have been released by Wired (that magazine inexcusably continues to conceal large portions of those logs), Manning clearly believed that he was a whistle-blower acting with the noblest of motives, and probably was exactly that. If, for instance, he really is the leaker of the Apache helicopter attack video -- a video which sparked very rare and much-needed realization about the visceral truth of what American wars actually entail -- as well as the war and diplomatic cables revealing substantial government deceit, brutality, illegality and corruption, then he's quite similar to Daniel Ellsberg. Indeed, Ellsberg himself said the very same thing about Manning in June on Democracy Now in explaining why he considers the Army Private to be a "hero":

The fact is that what Lamo reports Manning is saying has a very familiar and persuasive ring to me. He reports Manning as having said that what he had read and what he was passing on were horrible -- evidence of horrible machinations by the US backdoor dealings throughout the Middle East and, in many cases, as he put it, almost crimes. And let me guess that -- he’s not a lawyer, but I'll guess that what looked to him like crimes are crimes, that he was putting out. We know that he put out, or at least it's very plausible that he put out, the videos that he claimed to Lamo. And that's enough to go on to get them interested in pursuing both him and the other.

And so, what it comes down, to me, is -- and I say throwing caution to the winds here -- is that what I've heard so far of Assange and Manning -- and I haven't met either of them -- is that they are two new heroes of mine.

To see why that's so, just recall some of what Manning purportedly said about why he chose to leak, at least as reflected in the edited chat logs published by Wired:

Lamo: what's your endgame plan, then?. . .

Manning: well, it was forwarded to [WikiLeaks] - and god knows what happens now - hopefully worldwide discussion, debates, and reforms - if not, than [sic] we're doomed - as a species - i will officially give up on the society we have if nothing happens - the reaction to the video gave me immense hope; CNN's iReport was overwhelmed; Twitter exploded - people who saw, knew there was something wrong . . . Washington Post sat on the video… David Finkel acquired a copy while embedded out here. . . . - i want people to see the truth… regardless of who they are… because without information, you cannot make informed decisions as a public.

if i knew then, what i knew now - kind of thing, or maybe im just young, naive, and stupid . . . im hoping for the former - it cant be the latter - because if it is… were fucking screwed (as a society) - and i dont want to believe that we’re screwed.

Manning described the incident which first made him seriously question the U.S. Government: when he was instructed to work on the case of Iraqi "insurgents" who had been detained for distributing so-called "insurgent" literature which, when Manning had it translated, turned out to be nothing more than "a scholarly critique against PM Maliki":

i had an interpreter read it for me… and when i found out that it was a benign political critique titled "Where did the money go?" and following the corruption trail within the PM’s cabinet… i immediately took that information and *ran* to the officer to explain what was going on… he didn’t want to hear any of it… he told me to shut up and explain how we could assist the FPs in finding *MORE* detainees…

i had always questioned the things worked, and investigated to find the truth… but that was a point where i was a *part* of something… i was actively involved in something that i was completely against…


And Manning explained why he never considered the thought of selling this classified information to a foreign nation for substantial profit or even just secretly transmitting it to foreign powers, as he easily could have done:
Manning: i mean what if i were someone more malicious- i could've sold to russia or china, and made bank?

Lamo: why didn’t you?

Manning: because it's public data

Lamo: i mean, the cables

Manning: it belongs in the public domain -information should be free - it belongs in the public domain - because another state would just take advantage of the information… try and get some edge - if its out in the open… it should be a public good.

That's a whistleblower in the purest and most noble form: discovering government secrets of criminal and corrupt acts and then publicizing them to the world not for profit, not to give other nations an edge, but to trigger "worldwide discussion, debates, and reforms." Given how much Manning has been demonized -- at the same time that he's been rendered silent by the ban on his communication with any media -- it's worthwhile to keep all of that in mind.

But ultimately, what one thinks of Manning's alleged acts is irrelevant to the issue here. The U.S. ought at least to abide by minimal standards of humane treatment in how it detains him. That's true for every prisoner, at all times. But departures from such standards are particularly egregious where, as here, the detainee has merely been accused, but never convicted, of wrongdoing. These inhumane conditions make a mockery of Barack Obama's repeated pledge to end detainee abuse and torture, as prolonged isolation -- exacerbated by these other deprivations -- is at least as damaging, as violative of international legal standards, and almost as reviled around the world, as the waterboard, hypothermia and other Bush-era tactics that caused so much controversy.

What all of this achieves is clear. Having it known that the U.S. could and would disappear people at will to "black sites," assassinate them with unseen drones, imprison them for years without a shred of due process even while knowing they were innocent, torture them mercilessly, and in general acts as a lawless and rogue imperial power created a climate of severe intimidation and fear. Who would want to challenge the U.S. Government in any way -- even in legitimate ways -- knowing that it could and would engage in such lawless, violent conduct without any restraints or repercussions?

That is plainly what is going on here. Anyone remotely affiliated with WikiLeaks, including American citizens (and plenty of other government critics), has their property seized and communications stored at the border without so much as a warrant. Julian Assange -- despite never having been charged with, let alone convicted of, any crime -- has now spent more than a week in solitary confinement with severe restrictions under what his lawyer calls "Dickensian conditions." But Bradley Manning has suffered much worse, and not for a week, but for seven months, with no end in sight. If you became aware of secret information revealing serious wrongdoing, deceit and/or criminality on the part of the U.S. Government, would you -- knowing that you could and likely would be imprisoned under these kinds of repressive, torturous conditions for months on end without so much as a trial: just locked away by yourself 23 hours a day without recourse -- be willing to expose it? That's the climate of fear and intimidation which these inhumane detention conditions are intended to create.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

The Reaper
Posts: 4008
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Contact:

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby The Reaper » Wed Dec 15, 2010 8:24 pm UTC

There's also the possibility that keeping him in solitary is keeping him safe from bad people that may do bad things to him. I recently came up with a similar theory for Assange as well.

But yea, that sucks.

They should install shatter-resistant TVs in the walls in solitary, so people can be taught things while they're there, like maths or something. If you're going to lock someone up in a tiny room, might as well try to get some utility out of it.

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby Belial » Wed Dec 15, 2010 8:26 pm UTC

The Reaper wrote:There's also the possibility that keeping him in solitary is keeping him safe from bad people that may do bad things to him. I recently came up with a similar theory for Assange as well.


Are we worried that pillows might try to assassinate him too?

I think it's way more likely that by putting him in the care of the institution he embarassed, we left the morally bankrupt and arbitrarily vicious fox guarding the henhouse.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

Princess Marzipan
Posts: 7717
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby Princess Marzipan » Wed Dec 15, 2010 8:27 pm UTC

The Reaper wrote:There's also the possibility that keeping him in solitary is keeping him safe from bad people that may do bad things to him.
Oh yeah that totally explains the denial of simple comforts like sheets, pillows, and physical exercise.

edit: god dammit Belial, you never lost your touch it seems
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.

Dark567
First one to notify the boards of Rick and Morty Season 3
Posts: 3686
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:12 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere(in the US, I don't venture outside it too often, unfortunately)

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby Dark567 » Wed Dec 15, 2010 8:31 pm UTC

Belial wrote:
The Reaper wrote:There's also the possibility that keeping him in solitary is keeping him safe from bad people that may do bad things to him. I recently came up with a similar theory for Assange as well.


Are we worried that pillows might try to assassinate him too?

Yeah, unless he's on suicide watch, there isn't really an excuse for this. Maybe he is in solitary for his own protection, dubious but whatever, he still shouldn't be treated like some ultra violent criminal(as if even ultra violent criminals needed to be treated in such away).
I apologize, 90% of the time I write on the Fora I am intoxicated.


Yakk wrote:The question the thought experiment I posted is aimed at answering: When falling in a black hole, do you see the entire universe's future history train-car into your ass, or not?

User avatar
Jessica
Jessica, you're a ...
Posts: 8337
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 8:57 pm UTC
Location: Soviet Canuckistan

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby Jessica » Wed Dec 15, 2010 8:31 pm UTC

I've never understood putting someone in solitary for their own good. It's done often to other prisoners as well (trans women in male prisons being one example), but solitary is possibly one of the worst things you can do to someone. Not being able to talk to anyone for days, weeks, months... it's horrible.

"We're trying to help you by causing you extreme mental anguish!"
doogly wrote:On a scale of Mr Rogers to Fascism, how mean do you think we're being?
Belial wrote:My goal is to be the best brain infection any of you have ever had.

Sero
Posts: 321
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 2:31 am UTC

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby Sero » Wed Dec 15, 2010 8:38 pm UTC

Yeah, the 'for his own protection' argument is bullshit. There is a distinct difference between keeping someone separate from the general prisoner population and punitively denying them basic amenities like being allowed to exercise in one's cell or a pillowcase for one's bed.

I got ninjaed several times before I got around to replying, because, I...just had to sit, for a little while, after reading that article, feeling physically sick.

It is not, in fact, anything wikileak's has released, but how the US government has reacted, that has caused a growing feeling of disgust and despair in me, as to the amoral...well, evil-ness of large portions of the unelected part of the US government.
Princess Marzipan wrote:Dear God, we seriously just went and dug up CITATIONS for TORTURE being a WAR CRIME.

We have been fucking TROLLED, dear readers.

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby Belial » Wed Dec 15, 2010 8:42 pm UTC

Sero wrote:It is not, in fact, anything wikileak's has released, but how the US government has reacted, that has caused a growing feeling of disgust and despair in me, as to the amoral...well, evil-ness of large portions of the unelected part of the US government.


Oh well, it turns out it doesn't matter if you like them, as long as you're abjectly fucking terrified to say or do anything against them ever again.

Land of the free indeed.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

Greyarcher
Posts: 708
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 3:03 am UTC

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby Greyarcher » Wed Dec 15, 2010 8:46 pm UTC

The hell is that. Where are those checks and balances, dammit.

Hmmm, here's for hoping they make a civil suit based on unjust confinement conditions or somesuch.
In serious discussion, I usually strive to post with clarity, thoroughness, and precision so that others will not misunderstand; I strive for dispassion and an open mind, the better to avoid error.

User avatar
mmmcannibalism
Posts: 2150
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 6:16 am UTC

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby mmmcannibalism » Wed Dec 15, 2010 8:48 pm UTC

I've never understood putting someone in solitary for their own good. It's done often to other prisoners as well (trans women in male prisons being one example), but solitary is possibly one of the worst things you can do to someone. Not being able to talk to anyone for days, weeks, months... it's horrible.


That sounds more like prisons aren't good at dealing with protecting people in ways other then complete isolation.

on topic

Somehow I'm not surprised, and I'm starting to be disgusted at the fact that this doesn't surprise me anymore.
Izawwlgood wrote:I for one would happily live on an island as a fuzzy seal-human.

Oregonaut wrote:Damn fetuses and their terroist plots.

++$_
Mo' Money
Posts: 2370
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 4:06 am UTC

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby ++$_ » Wed Dec 15, 2010 8:50 pm UTC

People in my country continue to torture others with impunity.

I want to see some fucking justice already.

Sero
Posts: 321
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 2:31 am UTC

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby Sero » Wed Dec 15, 2010 8:55 pm UTC

Gods help me if they refer to this as 'enhanced' detainment, or something. That word is so close to becoming a dirty word in my mind.

mmmcannibalism, I long since went past starting to be disgusted with it. Though I am starting to be disgusted with how quickly these things fall out of the public eye, including mine. Guantanamo, waterboarding, now this?

...Anyone else ever get the feeling that the thought 'violent upheaval may be the only way to fix things' is starting to creep out of the domain of the tinfoil wearing militia member and into validity for the sane, everyday citizen?
Princess Marzipan wrote:Dear God, we seriously just went and dug up CITATIONS for TORTURE being a WAR CRIME.

We have been fucking TROLLED, dear readers.

User avatar
Qaanol
The Cheshirest Catamount
Posts: 3069
Joined: Sat May 09, 2009 11:55 pm UTC

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby Qaanol » Wed Dec 15, 2010 9:05 pm UTC

The article is making an argument (with perhaps far too many adjectives) that the 8th amendment to the US Constitution has been violated: “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”

There is also the 6th amendment to consider: “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.”

Since I’m pretty sure that Manning is a accused of a crime, this means he has a right to a speedy and public trial. Since he was on duty in the military, the venue in which he gets tried is apt to be a court martial. That in no way detracts from his right to a speedy and public trial, however.

I will mention the 5th amendment as well: “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

The first part says that as an active-duty serviceman in wartime, he can be held without having been indicted by a grand jury. But the latter part says he cannot be deprived of liberty without due process of law. Now maybe I’m some radical left-winger with an unorthodox interpretation of the Constitution, but when I read that, combined with the “speedy trial” provision, it tells me there ought to be some maximum length of time he can be held before trial, defined either in legislation or precedent. Depending on whether that is more or less than 7 months, we may have another issue here.

So the manner in which he is being held likely violates the 8th amendment protection against cruel and unusual punishment, as detailed in the original post. There is also the possibility that the length of his detainment without trial may add two more Constitutional rights he is being deprived of, but I don’t have the expertise to say for sure.
wee free kings

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby Belial » Wed Dec 15, 2010 9:08 pm UTC

In most states, if you're out on bail, you can file for a dismissal based on the 6th amendment after 6 months if a trial has failed to materialize.

If you're being held without bail, that time is generally significantly shorter.

He's been in for 7, and not even plans for a trial have coalesced
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

++$_
Mo' Money
Posts: 2370
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 4:06 am UTC

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby ++$_ » Wed Dec 15, 2010 9:10 pm UTC

Qaanol wrote:So the manner in which he is being held likely violates the 8th amendment protection against cruel and unusual punishment, as detailed in the original post.
Unfortunately, if your name happens to be Scalia, you don't think so. ("It's not punishment, because he hasn't been convicted of a crime. We're just holding him before trial, and during that period we're allowed to be as cruel and unusual as we like. The punishment comes LATER.") And Scalia is on THE GODDAMN SUPREME COURT.

Nordic Einar
Posts: 783
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 7:21 am UTC

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby Nordic Einar » Wed Dec 15, 2010 9:56 pm UTC

I just sent several emails to MSNBC and CNN, as well as individual program directors at those stations. I'll likely do so for the NYT, Huffington Post, etc encouraging them to follow this story.

Un-fucking-believable. I cannot even begin to fathom how corrupt our government has become, or the possible solutions to this problem.

User avatar
Sockmonkey
Posts: 1214
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 11:30 pm UTC

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby Sockmonkey » Wed Dec 15, 2010 9:57 pm UTC

My gut reaction to this is to advocate actions that I'm certainly not allowed to on this forum.

User avatar
Oregonaut
Posts: 6511
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Oregon

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby Oregonaut » Wed Dec 15, 2010 10:03 pm UTC

I'm probably setting myself up for a fall here, and please for fuck's sake read that I'm not condoning this, but the way the military conducts imprisonment is not the way the civilians do. We are much harsher on our own people.

There is also the fact that this gentleman has a history of spilling top secret information. Putting him in Gen Pop in Quantico will either get him killed, or he'll say something he ought not to to someone who will tell the warden. He shouldn't be denied sheets, pillows, or monitored daylight time. But I'm digging through the UCMJ to see what it has on this.

EDIT:

Ok this is what I've discovered thus far. I'm sorry for the double post, but this is after my digging.

According to § 809. Art. 9. Imposition of restraint, he can be detained on suspicion. Specifically, (d) No person may be ordered into arrest or confinement except for probable cause. There is probable cause.

So his incarceration is not strictly illegal.

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

I don't know why they're doing what they're doing. It certainly seems punitive, and I would hope that the ADJ is helping him. It feels excessive to me, but we can't apply civilian judicial conventions to a military trial process.
- Ochigo the Earth-Stomper

The EGE wrote:
Mumpy wrote:And to this day, librarians revile Oregonaut as the Antichrist.

False! We sacrifice our card catalogues to him in the name of Job Security!

User avatar
dedalus
Posts: 1169
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 12:16 pm UTC
Location: Dark Side of the Moon.

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby dedalus » Wed Dec 15, 2010 11:34 pm UTC

@Oregonaut: Regardless of the military not being the same as civil service, there's a difference between not being tried as a civil servant, and not being given basic human rights.

Quick question; is Bradley allowed to receive mail where he is? And how could you get it to him there? Because really, we could sit around being angry about it, and that won't change a thing, or we could maybe write to other people protesting, and that probably wouldn't change anything either. But that guy's done an amazing thing, and the thing I think I could do that would have the most impact is send him a letter. Because hell, that's at least some human contact...
doogly wrote:Oh yea, obviously they wouldn't know Griffiths from Sakurai if I were throwing them at them.

User avatar
TheGrammarBolshevik
Posts: 4878
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Going to and fro in the earth, and walking up and down in it.

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Wed Dec 15, 2010 11:38 pm UTC

Oregonaut wrote:we can't apply civilian judicial conventions to a military trial process.

Why not? The ethical and legal reasons behind the prohibition of torture don't generally have "Oh, unless you're in the military then it's fine" as a qualifier.
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.

User avatar
Arancaytar
Posts: 1642
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 12:54 am UTC
Location: 52.44°N, 13.55°E
Contact:

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby Arancaytar » Thu Dec 16, 2010 12:22 am UTC

TheGrammarBolshevik wrote:
Oregonaut wrote:we can't apply civilian judicial conventions to a military trial process.

Why not? The ethical and legal reasons behind the prohibition of torture don't generally have "Oh, unless you're in the military then it's fine" as a qualifier.


Since he quoted that punishing prisoners without trial isn't fine even if they are in the military, I guess that's not what he said. The point is they might have legal grounds to detain him, but they're likely treating him much worse than they're technically allowed to (let alone should be allowed to).
"You cannot dual-wield the sharks. One is enough." -Our DM.
Image

User avatar
Oregonaut
Posts: 6511
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Oregon

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby Oregonaut » Thu Dec 16, 2010 12:25 am UTC

Did you miss where I said it feels excessive to me?

As far as solitary, what are we supposed to do? He has TS//SI info. He has shown that he is willing to talk about it. You put him with someone else, they are going to talk. You now have two people who are in possession of information they shouldn't legally be.

God damn it I am not going to sit here and defend something I feel is wrong, but neither am I going to sit here and pretend that the situation is anything but really fucking complicated.

I have said that the ADJ needs to step in and get him time to exercise. Military personnel in prisons do not, by law, require three hots and a cot. Two meals, and a place free of contamination. Yes, it sucks. Yes, it is horrible. But that's what we all signed up for. He broke the law. He could have turned his badge over and said that he didn't want to do what he was doing. But as much as I like his sentiment, I dislike the fact that he broke the law.
- Ochigo the Earth-Stomper

The EGE wrote:
Mumpy wrote:And to this day, librarians revile Oregonaut as the Antichrist.

False! We sacrifice our card catalogues to him in the name of Job Security!

User avatar
TheGrammarBolshevik
Posts: 4878
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Going to and fro in the earth, and walking up and down in it.

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Thu Dec 16, 2010 12:29 am UTC

Yes, I get that you're not a bad person and that you respect human rights. I specifically don't understand what aspects of civilian judicial standards you think should not apply to the military, and why.

Or am I misunderstanding, and you're just saying that we can't apply those conventions because that just happens to be the unfortunate way that the law is set up?
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.

User avatar
Oregonaut
Posts: 6511
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Oregon

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby Oregonaut » Thu Dec 16, 2010 12:31 am UTC

When I signed the contract and stated the Oath of Enlistment, my constitutional rights went byebye.

The fifth amendment rights? Gone. Replaced, in part, by Article 31 of the UCMJ. That's what happens.
- Ochigo the Earth-Stomper

The EGE wrote:
Mumpy wrote:And to this day, librarians revile Oregonaut as the Antichrist.

False! We sacrifice our card catalogues to him in the name of Job Security!

Glmclain
Posts: 442
Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 12:51 pm UTC

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby Glmclain » Thu Dec 16, 2010 12:34 am UTC

You didn't sign something that says "It's cool if you torture me" though.
You Samoans are all the same! You have no faith in the essential decency of the white man's culture!

User avatar
Oregonaut
Posts: 6511
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Oregon

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby Oregonaut » Thu Dec 16, 2010 12:36 am UTC

I'm sorry, I still don't buy solitary as torture. It isn't prohibited by the Geneva Conventions, and it has not been prosecuted to date to my knowledge.
- Ochigo the Earth-Stomper

The EGE wrote:
Mumpy wrote:And to this day, librarians revile Oregonaut as the Antichrist.

False! We sacrifice our card catalogues to him in the name of Job Security!

User avatar
TheGrammarBolshevik
Posts: 4878
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Going to and fro in the earth, and walking up and down in it.

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Thu Dec 16, 2010 12:39 am UTC

The Geneva Conventions don't make things torture; they merely attempt to recognize them as such.
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby Belial » Thu Dec 16, 2010 12:43 am UTC

Oregonaut wrote:As far as solitary, what are we supposed to do? He has TS//SI info. He has shown that he is willing to talk about it. You put him with someone else, they are going to talk. You now have two people who are in possession of information they shouldn't legally be.


The stuff what's free and already public knowledge on the internet?
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
Oregonaut
Posts: 6511
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Oregon

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby Oregonaut » Thu Dec 16, 2010 12:44 am UTC

Detainment of prisoners is covered through the Geneva Conventions and LOAC. That's where I'm drawing it from. Detainment of high profile prisoners in solitary would seem sensible, if for no other reason than to protect him. To a lot of military personnel, he put lives in risk. There will be people in Quantico who will want to hurt him, stupidly.

That goes back to what I'm saying though, if he isn't even allowed to run the yard, the warden needs to be contacted by Manning's senator.

Actually, you want to start somewhere? Start there. Contact his senator. Tell his senator that not allowing him exercise is repugnant. It is something that they can't argue against, and you can use it against them in the press.

@Belial, I guarantee he knows more than just what was out on the net.
- Ochigo the Earth-Stomper

The EGE wrote:
Mumpy wrote:And to this day, librarians revile Oregonaut as the Antichrist.

False! We sacrifice our card catalogues to him in the name of Job Security!

Glmclain
Posts: 442
Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 12:51 pm UTC

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby Glmclain » Thu Dec 16, 2010 12:52 am UTC

He's been kept in a room alone for 7 months. He isn't allowed to exercise, he has no blankets, no pillow. The psychological effects of this are horrific. This is psychological torture, plain and simple.
You Samoans are all the same! You have no faith in the essential decency of the white man's culture!

User avatar
Oregonaut
Posts: 6511
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Oregon

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby Oregonaut » Thu Dec 16, 2010 12:59 am UTC

And the effects on sources and methodology could be equally bad. How about instead of batting the ball back and forth, you take my advice and call his senators, representatives, and your senators and representatives. Tell them to allow him to fucking exercise. It's a start, and that's the one thing I can't see an excuse the military could use to cop out of.
- Ochigo the Earth-Stomper

The EGE wrote:
Mumpy wrote:And to this day, librarians revile Oregonaut as the Antichrist.

False! We sacrifice our card catalogues to him in the name of Job Security!

User avatar
frezik
Posts: 1336
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 7:52 pm UTC
Location: Schrödinger's Box

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby frezik » Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:03 am UTC

Qaanol wrote:There is also the 6th amendment to consider: “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.”


Didn't work for Kevin Mitnick, and his crimes were against corporations, not the government. "Speedy trial" is just too vague of a term.
I do not agree with the beer you drink, but will defend to the death your right to drink it

Dark567
First one to notify the boards of Rick and Morty Season 3
Posts: 3686
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:12 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere(in the US, I don't venture outside it too often, unfortunately)

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby Dark567 » Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:08 am UTC

frezik wrote:
Qaanol wrote:There is also the 6th amendment to consider: “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.”


Didn't work for Kevin Mitnick, and his crimes were against corporations, not the government. "Speedy trial" is just too vague of a term.

Well, most of the time defenses actually wave that right, as they feel its more important to give themselves time to put together a proper defense. Usually by time someone is incarcerated, the prosecution has already compiled a set of evidence in order to get the arrest warrant, so the defense is.... well on the defense I guess.
I apologize, 90% of the time I write on the Fora I am intoxicated.


Yakk wrote:The question the thought experiment I posted is aimed at answering: When falling in a black hole, do you see the entire universe's future history train-car into your ass, or not?

User avatar
Qaanol
The Cheshirest Catamount
Posts: 3069
Joined: Sat May 09, 2009 11:55 pm UTC

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby Qaanol » Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:09 am UTC

Oregonaut wrote:When I signed the contract and stated the Oath of Enlistment, my constitutional rights went byebye.

The fifth amendment rights? Gone. Replaced, in part, by Article 31 of the UCMJ. That's what happens.

Are you in earnest? Because the fifth amendment is specifically worded so that is does apply to members of the military. If our country is requiring its service personnel to waive their constitutional rights in order to serve, then we've got to do something about that.
wee free kings

++$_
Mo' Money
Posts: 2370
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 4:06 am UTC

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby ++$_ » Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:10 am UTC

According to Mitnick, he didn't waive his speedy trial rights. He claims that a judge determined that he was too dangerous to release because someone convinced the judge that he could start a nuclear war by whistling over the telephone.

I don't know if this is true, though, because I wasn't able to find any independent source for it.

Dark567
First one to notify the boards of Rick and Morty Season 3
Posts: 3686
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:12 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere(in the US, I don't venture outside it too often, unfortunately)

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby Dark567 » Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:14 am UTC

++$_ wrote:According to Mitnick, he didn't waive his speedy trial rights. He claims that a judge determined that he was too dangerous to release because someone convinced the judge that he could start a nuclear war by whistling over the telephone.
I heard thats why he was put into solitary instead of normal jail. I am trying to find out whether or not he waived his right to speedy trial or not.

EDIT: It also seems like because the judge thought this, he wasn't allowed bail... still not finding anything about waiving the 6th amendment though.
I apologize, 90% of the time I write on the Fora I am intoxicated.


Yakk wrote:The question the thought experiment I posted is aimed at answering: When falling in a black hole, do you see the entire universe's future history train-car into your ass, or not?

User avatar
Oregonaut
Posts: 6511
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Oregon

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby Oregonaut » Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:16 am UTC

Qaanol wrote:
Oregonaut wrote:When I signed the contract and stated the Oath of Enlistment, my constitutional rights went byebye.

The fifth amendment rights? Gone. Replaced, in part, by Article 31 of the UCMJ. That's what happens.

Are you in earnest? Because the fifth amendment is specifically worded so that is does apply to members of the military. If our country is requiring its service personnel to waive their constitutional rights in order to serve, then we've got to do something about that.


Article 31 is essentially the same thing. But there have to be differences between the way military justice is handled and the way civilian justice is handled. Look up Article 31, and you'll see that it is essentially the same, but with some key differences.

Right to search and seizure are handled the same, to a degree, but you are on a military installation and you do not "own" the barracks room you're in. Driving is only with the permission of the base commander, and can be revoked at the drop of a hat. They won't take away your license, they'll just throw you in the brig if you drive on base.

The systems are different.

Edit:

http://www.ucmj.us/sub-chapter-6-pre-trial-procedure/832-article-32-investigation

I don't know how long the investigation will take to be considered "thorough".
- Ochigo the Earth-Stomper

The EGE wrote:
Mumpy wrote:And to this day, librarians revile Oregonaut as the Antichrist.

False! We sacrifice our card catalogues to him in the name of Job Security!

User avatar
frezik
Posts: 1336
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 7:52 pm UTC
Location: Schrödinger's Box

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby frezik » Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:25 am UTC

Dark567 wrote:
frezik wrote:
Qaanol wrote:There is also the 6th amendment to consider: “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.”


Didn't work for Kevin Mitnick, and his crimes were against corporations, not the government. "Speedy trial" is just too vague of a term.

Well, most of the time defenses actually wave that right, as they feel its more important to give themselves time to put together a proper defense. Usually by time someone is incarcerated, the prosecution has already compiled a set of evidence in order to get the arrest warrant, so the defense is.... well on the defense I guess.


Hard to find good citations on this case (happened during the primordial Internet, and most of the Internet back then would have been very biased in favor of Mitnick), but as I recall, the government withheld most of the evidence from the defense until a few months before the trial. He took a plea bargin, in part because his legal advisers had no time to make an effective defense.

I often wonder where the people talking about Wikileaks were back then. And why anybody thought the Obama Administration would be different when the Clinton Administration clearly wasn't.
I do not agree with the beer you drink, but will defend to the death your right to drink it

User avatar
Oregonaut
Posts: 6511
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Oregon

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby Oregonaut » Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:33 am UTC

I'd presume that the whole idea really hyped up with Bush the Lesser and the whole Haliburton debacle.
- Ochigo the Earth-Stomper

The EGE wrote:
Mumpy wrote:And to this day, librarians revile Oregonaut as the Antichrist.

False! We sacrifice our card catalogues to him in the name of Job Security!

Sero
Posts: 321
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 2:31 am UTC

Re: Bradley Manning tortured

Postby Sero » Thu Dec 16, 2010 4:13 am UTC

Would his senator be Oklahoma? Am I understanding wikipedia right? Or...? Does anyone know?
Princess Marzipan wrote:Dear God, we seriously just went and dug up CITATIONS for TORTURE being a WAR CRIME.

We have been fucking TROLLED, dear readers.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests