American torture leaves Bradley Manning catatonic

[captain morgan]

First - make a point by letting him go. Second - revise the existing legislation to benefit the people involved. That means, if the military ****s up because they are witholding information that would be better off revealed, then the whistleblower can live his free life. If the whistleblower reveals information that legitimately causes a threat to national security - then AFTER proving as much - they can choose to put the individual in confinement.

This action will support and promote vigilantism. Manning acted as judge, jury and executioner all based on his subjective interpretation of the situation.

As far as whistle blower issues are concerned.. First, I agree and support that ideal, however, there must be a structure in place to facilitate the process. Manning had a number of options he could have pursued once he exhausted internal channels including releasing these docs to a Senator or House Representative... Instead, he released them to an entity that maintains a sole directive of embarrassing/disrupting national gvts.

As far as the 'withholding of info', Manning released as many documents as he could on a carte blance basis, there was no selectivity in the documents that he forwarded to wikileaks.

This would help the system focus on the issue at hand - which is the consequence of revealing pertinent information. Not the act of revealing information itself. If there is no harm to public safety - indeed in this case there is benefit - to revealing that information, then the whistleblower should not be punished for the sake of queen and country's reputation.

As mentioned, there needs to be internal options made available (first) and alternate options in terms of gvt (considering that the military is an arm of gvt).

None the less, you have hit on possibly the most important point: "If there is no harm to public safety"... Manning had no clue what the fallout would/will be and it is more than likely that the animosity between nations that these docs have generated will result in doors being closed to programs that may have benefited high needs groups.

With that in mind, I'd suggest that Manning's actions did and will cause harm.

 

[EagleSmack]

First - make a point by letting him go.

LMAO. Funny

Ok... lets move right to the second option.

Second - revise the existing legislation to benefit the people involved. That means, if the military ****s up because they are witholding information that would be better off revealed, then the whistleblower can live his free life.

A single member of the military of ANY rank cannot be the one to make the decision of what information can or cannot be released. It just doesn't work that way.

If the whistleblower reveals information that legitimately causes a threat to national security - then AFTER proving as much - they can choose to put the individual in confinement.

Well that is your opinion and obviously you are welcome to it.

This would help the system focus on the issue at hand - which is the consequence of revealing pertinent information. Not the act of revealing information itself. If there is no harm to public safety - indeed in this case there is benefit - to revealing that information, then the whistleblower should not be punished for the sake of queen and country's reputation.

Intelligence gathering is such that little pieces of info that separately may seem harmless but collectively may be very harmful.

For example...

"All I said was that I passed out a lot of Cold Weather Gear to the 5th Marines today. What is the harm?" said the Supply Sergeant

"Well. A few guys from the 5th Marines were overheard that they were deploying in December, but wouldn't say where. Now it is well known that the 5th Marines are going someplace cold in December." was the reply by NIS.

Yes, I get it. They are following protocol. But that protocol needs to be refined to better reflect a fair judgment of the act in question. Part of any fair trial process is that that the quantum effect of any act also helps determine if it is a negligent act.

Negligence Definition

The kid knew that revealing this information would not cause any real harm, but would instead help. He didn't commit any act of negligence so why should he be punished for it?

It has not helped out at all and has caused harm. That is why it is such a big case. Nevertheless, he was an analyst entrusted with confidential material that he distributed en masse. If that is not negligence I don't know what is. That is EXTREME NEGLIGENCE. He knew better.

In fact it is so serious that he may stay in solitary for the rest of his life like the Walkers.

We can't excuse it just because 'that's the way it's been done for years'.

I do not think I am excusing anything that has been done to him. I am agreeing with it.

 

[mentalfloss]

It has not helped out at all and has caused harm. That is why it is such a big case.

Okay, let's go with this.

What exactly is the harm that has been caused by the release of this information?

 

[CurioToo]

So, he made comments about committing suicide with his underwear, and now his underwear is being taken from him at night.

Why is this a problem? He threatened suicide, they are responding appropriately. End of story.

Perhaps his lawyer wants to go on suicide watch every night?

Ditto EagleSmack's Badabing!

Determined suicidal folk do not share in advance their intention - if they did, what would be the point.

 

[BaalsTears]

The treatment of Private Bradley Manning is an internal American affair. Foreign outrcries over his treatment violate American sovereignty.

 

[mentalfloss]

Long-term solitary confinement is enough to constitute torture - just ask McCain:

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

Is long-term solitary confinement torture? : The New Yorker

 

[EagleSmack]

Okay, let's go with this.

What exactly is the harm that has been caused by the release of this information?

Well you think it is great. That is fine.

Look at all the damage control the Obama Administration has had to do because of this enormous leak. It hasn't been spattered all over the political world because it was harmless. People have been outed saying this or that in what was supposed to be said in confidentiality, etc. The list goes on.

Nevertheless, the degree of harm is irrelevant. Because you say the info is harmless is only an opinion. That is why we must stick to what is legal or not.

Did Bradley do anything illegal? ---- Of course he did.

Was he negligent?----- Absolutely. He's an Intel Analyst and it is made very clear that the passing of any confidential material to someone who doesn't "NEED TO KNOW" is a punishable offence. Anyone who gets a clearance knows that.

 

[CurioToo]

I thought the rationale behind solitary was the fact the man is an advertised gay person which would invite advances whether he
liked the idea or not.

If he was within the general milieu he could as easily be knifed by the rough crowd as well.

Not sure about the New Yorker's opinion - but I find their publication way out in left field when it comes to incarceration information.

 

[EagleSmack]

Long-term solitary confinement is enough to constitute torture - just ask McCain:

Is long-term solitary confinement torture? : The New Yorker

That is an opinion. MANY people are in solitary for one reason or other. I cannot believe Canada does not have one person in conditions similar to Mannings.

Just because some say that solitary is torture does not make it so. Here in Massachusetts a man (who murdered his wife) is in prison trying to get a sex change. He has said that it is "Torture" and "Cruel and Unusual Punishment" for the State of Massachusetts not to make him a woman.

You know what they say... Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

 

[mentalfloss]

Well you think it is great. That is fine.

Look at all the damage control the Obama Administration has had to do because of this enormous leak. It hasn't been spattered all over the political world because it was harmless. People have been outed saying this or that in what was supposed to be said in confidentiality, etc. The list goes on.

Obama's always doing damage control. That's what politicians do when government is the root cause of any wrongdoing. I don't see how that isn't a symptom of the more positive effect - putting accountability into government and transparency.

Nevertheless, the degree of harm is irrelevant. Because you say the info is harmless is only an opinion. That is why we must stick to what is legal or not.

Sure it's an opinion. But I haven't seen anything from these leaks that causes any legitimate threat to the people that live in the U.S.

Was he negligent?----- Absolutely. He's an Intel Analyst and it is made very clear that the passing of any confidential material to someone who doesn't "NEED TO KNOW" is a punishable offence. Anyone who gets a clearance knows that.

Yes, but aside from the fact that he didn't really do anything wrong, just because it's a law - that doesn't mean they should get to torture the guy. Let's look at this as realists and not just as slaves of legality here.

If he revealed something that would harm us - that's pretty bad.
If he revealed something that helps us - that's good.

Just because the law is imperfect, doesn't mean that it can't be amended to respect these more than reasonable conditions. Besides, that's how the law is supposed to work. It shouldn't be based on some infantile virtue-ethics system. It's there to justly punish those who have intentionally done something harmful to others - whether it is criminal or tort-based.

The multitudes of reaction to this are proof that his actions aren't overwhelmingly perceived as negligent by the public. If it was an open-closed case, there wouldn't be any controversy. He would be a verified villain.

But he's not.

 

[EagleSmack]

Obama's always doing damage control. That's what politicians do when government is the root cause of any wrongdoing. I don't see how that isn't a symptom of the more positive effect - putting accountability into government and transparency.

Bradley's job was not putting more accountability in government. He was a soldier.

Sure it's an opinion. But I haven't seen anything from these leaks that causes any legitimate threat to the people that live in the U.S.

More opinion.

Again... threat level is irrelevant.

Yes, but aside from the fact that he didn't really do anything wrong, just because it's a law

He did A LOT wrong. That is why he is at Quantico.

- that doesn't mean they should get to torture the guy.

They're not torturing him.

Let's look at this as realists and not just as slaves of legality here.

I am being a realist. I really believe he belongs where he is.

If he revealed something that would harm us - that's pretty bad.
If he revealed something that helps us - that's good.

I believe he has harmed us. The US Govt agrees.

Just because the law is imperfect,

I think the law is dead on correct.

doesn't mean that it can't be amended to respect these more than reasonable conditions.

I don't think giving out ANY confidential material under ANY circumstances is reasonable. The line is clear. It is not open to interpetation.

Besides, that's how the law is supposed to work. It shouldn't be based on some infantile virtue-ethics system. It's there to justly punish those who have intentionally done something harmful to others - whether it is criminal or tort-based.

Crime and Punishment. That is what this is. We both know Spec. Manning knew he was doing something illegal. You sign a document saying you will not pass any information of any nature before they even grant you a clearance.

The multitudes of reaction to this are proof that his actions aren't overwhelmingly perceived as negligent by the public. If it was an open-closed case, there wouldn't be any controversy. He would be a verified villain.

But he's not.

It does not matter what the public thinks and I would think most Americans believe Manning is getting what he deserves anyways.

The case has not been tried but when it is Bradley will be charged with knowingly and willfully passing confidential information beyond the borders of the US. Free of emotions and public opinion, those will be the charges (at minimum).

 

[ironsides]

Well yea - they follow the rules even if those rules are totally devoid of any moral compass.

It's insane.

There needs to be movement on this fast because the worse his condition gets, not only is he suffering, but the worse the U.S. looks on the international front.

He did what spy's get shot for, assumption: He was sworn to some security level that he violated even though what he revealed may have not been top secret it was confidential. Even if he didn't have access to the material, he hacked into it, still he could be facing the death penalty. (which I don't think he will) He will have a court martial. since he is or was on a suicide watch, what they did for his safety was appropriate.

 

[mentalfloss]

This suicide watch thing.. Has anyone even questioned what brought that determination before assuming he wanted to kill himself? Nevermind the fact that being in solitary confinement for a year might make you want to snuff it?

About 30 minutes later, the PCF Commander, CWO4 James Averhart, came to my cell. He asked me what had happened during my recreation call. As I tried to explain to him what had occurred, CWO4 Averhart stopped me and said “I am the commander” and that “no one could tell him what to do.” He also said that he was, for all practical purposes, “God.” I responded by saying “you still have to follow Brig procedures.” I also said “everyone has a boss that they have to answer to.” As soon as I said this, CWO4 Averhart ordered that I be placed in Suicide Risk Status.

If you received this sort of treatment from these dummies, you might be inclined to exit stage left as well..

When the guards came to my cell, I noticed a change in their usual demeanor. Instead of being calm and respectful, they seemed agitated and confrontational. Also, instead of the usual two to three guards, there were four guards. Almost immediately, the guards started harassing me. The first guard told me to “turn left.” When I complied, the second guard yelled “don’t turn left.” When I attempted to comply with the demands of the second guard, I was told by the first, “I said turn left.” I responded “yes, Corporal” to the first guard. At this point, the third guard chimed in by telling me that “in the Marines we reply with ‘aye’ and not ‘yes.’” He then asked me if I understood. I made the mistake of replying “yes, Sergeant.” At this point the forth guard yelled, “you mean ‘aye,’ Sergeant.”

The harassment by the guards continued as I was escorted to my one hour of recreation. When I arrived at the recreation room, I was told to stand still so they could remove my leg restraints. As I stood still, one of the guards yelled “I told you to stand still.” I replied “yes Corporal, I am standing still.” Another guard then said, “you mean ‘aye’ Corporal.” Next, the same guard said “I thought we covered this, you say ‘aye’ and not ‘yes,’ do you understand?” I responded “aye Sergeant.” Right after I replied, I was once again yelled at to “stand still.” Due to being yelled at and the intensity of the guards, I mistakenly replied, “yes Corporal, I am standing still.” As soon as I said this, I attempted to correct myself by saying “aye” instead of “yes,” but it was too late. One of the guards starting yelling at me again, “what don’t you understand” and “are we going to have a problem?”

Once the leg restraints were taken off of me, I took a step back from the guards. My heart was pounding in my chest, and I could feel myself getting dizzy. I sat down to avoid falling. When I did this, the guards took a step towards me. I instinctively backed away from them. As soon as I backed away, I could tell by their faces that they were getting ready to restrain me. I immediately put my hands up in the air, and said “I am not doing anything, I am just trying to follow your orders.” The guards then told me to start walking. I complied with their order by saying “eye” instead of “yes.”

"Only later did I learn that there had been a protest outside the gates of Quantico the previous day...The rally was intended to bring attention to the conditions of my confinement. It is my belief that my treatment on 18 January 2010 by the guards and later by the PCF Commander was related to this protest and my earlier complaints."

2011-03-10 Bradley Manning placed on "suicide risk" as punishment for January 18 Quantico protest, letter says | WL Central

 

[EagleSmack]

He did what spy's get shot for, assumption: He was sworn to some security level that he violated even though what he revealed may have not been top secret it was confidential. Even if he didn't have access to the material, he hacked into it, still he could be facing the death penalty. (which I don't think he will) He will have a court martial. since he is or was on a suicide watch, what they did for his safety was appropriate.

Indeed. He has violated a number of laws. A lot of the information he passed on he was not privy to see. He was not in the "need to know".

When I was in I had a Secret Clearance for a period of time. That didn't mean I could go looking through any secret file I wanted to. It just meant that I could be trusted with handling and being around Secret material. That is it!

A person with a Top Secret clearance is not even supposed to LOOK at any Confidential material that does not concern him. So sending Confidential material to WikiLeaks is obviously a clear violation.

This suicide watch thing.. Has anyone even questioned what brought that determination before assuming he wanted to kill himself? Nevermind the fact that being in solitary confinement for a year might make you want to snuff it?

If you received this sort of treatment from these dummies, you might be inclined to exit stage left as well..



2011-03-10 Bradley Manning placed on "suicide risk" as punishment for January 18 Quantico protest, letter says | WL Central

Ok... so they yelled at him. That's torture nowadays? I guess the Marines tortured me then! LMAO. C'mon Bradley Manning... grow a pair.

His own peeps are saying he's catatonic and deteriorating.

 

[captain morgan]

Long-term solitary confinement is enough to constitute torture - just ask McCain:

Fine, put Manning in general population. Will that suit you?

Obama's always doing damage control. That's what politicians do when government is the root cause of any wrongdoing. I don't see how that isn't a symptom of the more positive effect - putting accountability into government and transparency.

How about Manning's accountability? It seems like he is the root cause of this problem.

Sure it's an opinion. But I haven't seen anything from these leaks that causes any legitimate threat to the people that live in the U.S.

You'll likely never be privy to the fallout from these leaks so any one individual's opinion on what the damage is irrelevant. The cables were private for a reason mentalfloss.

Yes, but aside from the fact that he didn't really do anything wrong, just because it's a law - that doesn't mean they should get to torture the guy. Let's look at this as realists and not just as slaves of legality here.

If he revealed something that would harm us - that's pretty bad.
If he revealed something that helps us - that's good.

Who are you to say that nothing wrong was done? In fact, who are you to say that no one is (or will be) harmed by Manning's actions?

You go on about how a legal position is somehow wrong, but make no effort in recognizing that this particular is in place for a reason. On that note, exactly what was revealed that is so beneficial to society at large?

Just because the law is imperfect, doesn't mean that it can't be amended to respect these more than reasonable conditions. Besides, that's how the law is supposed to work. It shouldn't be based on some infantile virtue-ethics system. It's there to justly punish those who have intentionally done something harmful to others - whether it is criminal or tort-based.

 

[ironsides]

This suicide watch thing.. Has anyone even questioned what brought that determination before assuming he wanted to kill himself? Nevermind the fact that being in solitary confinement for a year might make you want to snuff it?

If you received this sort of treatment from these dummies, you might be inclined to exit stage left as well..



2011-03-10 Bradley Manning placed on "suicide risk" as punishment for January 18 Quantico protest, letter says | WL Central

"If you received this sort of treatment from these dummies, you might be inclined to exit stage left as well.."

So you use Wikilaeks to support you statement don't start sounding like someone else we all know.

 

[Johnny Utah]

Manning deserves everything that's coming to him, even if it's the death penalty..

 

[ironsides]

Indeed. He has violated a number of laws. A lot of the information he passed on he was not privy to see. He was not in the "need to know".

When I was in I had a Secret Clearance for a period of time. That didn't mean I could go looking through any secret file I wanted to. It just meant that I could be trusted with handling and being around Secret material. That is it!

A person with a Top Secret clearance is not even supposed to LOOK at any Confidential material that does not concern him. So sending Confidential material to WikiLeaks is obviously a clear violation.



Ok... so they yelled at him. That's torture nowadays? I guess the Marines tortured me then! LMAO. C'mon Bradley Manning... grow a pair.

His own peeps are saying he's catatonic and deteriorating.

Of course it is, any clearance is on a need to know basis. As for torturing him, he was in the Army he might have construed it as torture.

 

[captain morgan]

I'll tell ya... It sure is shocking to see the move in some to justify high treason.

I can't for one minute fathom the degree of twisted logic that can justify Manning's position and yet complain about being held responsible for those actions.

 

[Johnny Utah]

You really want to expose Manning to torture let him endure Celine Dion's Music Videos 24/7..