America's Shame

[Lucky]

The alleged source of the Wikileaks documents has now been imprisoned in horrible conditions for seven months, despite not only NOT being CONVICTED of a crime, but not even being CHARGED with one. Bradley Manning is suffering needlessly in a system that Americans should be ashamed of:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/no-naps-and-no-clothes-in-bed-mannings-cell-life-2164841.html

[TampaYankee]

The alleged source of the Wikileaks documents has now been imprisoned in horrible conditions for seven months, despite not only NOT being CONVICTED of a crime, but not even being CHARGED with one. Bradley Manning is suffering needlessly in a system that Americans should be ashamed of:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/no-naps-and-no-clothes-in-bed-mannings-cell-life-2164841.html

It is not surprising that the excesses of warrantless wiretaps, Guantanimo, Abu Grahib, and extraordinary rendition have spilled over into our treatment of U.S. citizens. Once we embark down this road it is only natural that applications are broadened to citizens, justified by the same arugments used for justifications of the prior excesses. Liberty and justice is easy to lose, they are hard to sustain. So many are willing to compromise the principles thinking it could never happen to them. That is how creep overtakes the system and things end up where many never intended. It really is true that those who choose not remember history will repeat it.

This breakdown in American values has even infected our Congress where now the interest of the parties is paramount to the interest of the country. Our political differences no longer stop at the waters edge with one party trying to undercut the foreign policy of the sitting administration. We have descended even to pitching a snit fit to block a seriously important international treaty support by all living past Presidents and Secretaries of State, just because some issues didn't go the way of the majority of the minority party.

I'm thoroughly disgusted with the decline in living our values and principles. Frankly, the recent history of serious compromise of those fundamental principles that I learned about in public school and I grew up understanding as fundamental American values give me pause about where this country is going. I wonder if we are capable of sustaining those American ideals, the Ideals that I thought were the concrete foundation of American Exceptionalism. That or I totally misunderstood the lessons of those values I thought enshrined in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution and misread the prior devotion of the country to those principles.

FWIW

[Lucky]

FWIW? Sadly, not much these days. The country seems on track to take more liberties from us without much objection. The Patriot Act was pushed through without real consideration, and I'll bet trying to remove any of its provisions will prove next to impossible.

[ihpguy]

Interesting what Arlen Specter had to say about two of the Supremes he helped get through, Roberts and Alito. He was not too happy with their activist bent in their rulings.

[Lucky]

Interesting what Arlen Specter had to say about two of the Supremes he helped get through, Roberts and Alito. He was not too happy with their activist bent in their rulings.

I haven't been able to find his comments on the 2 Supremes. All if find is his cannibalism remarks.

Do you have a link?

[KYTOP]

The alleged source of the Wikileaks documents has now been imprisoned in horrible conditions for seven months, despite not only NOT being CONVICTED of a crime, but not even being CHARGED with one. Bradley Manning is suffering needlessly in a system that Americans should be ashamed of:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/no-naps-and-no-clothes-in-bed-mannings-cell-life-2164841.html

Well I have read other news stories about this with a different take on things. For example he is not allowed sheets, or clothing other than shorts because he is considered a suicide risk. Imagine the story if he actually hung himself in his prison cell from a sheet, shirt, or other article of clothing while in Federal Custody. He has a light into his cell 24/7 so the guards can check to make sure he has not harmed himself. He is in solitary confinement and it is normal for such persons in any prison to only receive 1 hour out of their cell for exercise a day and that exercise can be limited. It is also normal to limit their time for television. I do not expect as a tax payor to pay for him to have 100 cable channels 24/7. It is also not unusual to limit someone like this from news reports. It should also be remembered he is still a soldier and therefore falls under military confinement rules. There is much more about his confinement and the reason, that this story has so conveniently left out in order to slant their take on the situation. Do I feel sorry for him? Easy answer... No.

[JKane]

I'd mostly agree with you KY, IF he'd been convicted of something--but he hasn't, he hasn't even been accused! He is both an American citizen and serviceman, as such there can be no justification for stripping him of both due process and the presumption of innocence.

If he's as mentally precarious as portrayed then he probably belongs in a hospital, not a bare concrete cell with a light 24/7, until he is fit to stand trial.

What purpose in the world does limiting a prisoner's access to news serve? I would think a vital part of participating in your own defense is understanding what the jury pool (or court marshal panel) has been told about you!

[KYTOP]

I'd mostly agree with you KY, IF he'd been convicted of something--but he hasn't, he hasn't even been accused! He is both an American citizen and serviceman, as such there can be no justification for stripping him of both due process and the presumption of innocence.

But as a serviceman he falls under the Uniform Code of Military Justice and Military Law

and actually does not have all the rights that a non-military person may have such as confinement without charges. This is allowed under our constitution. Maybe he should have actually read some of those papers he signed when he chose to join the military.

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

[JKane]

I understood he's under the UCMJ, but had assumed it has somewhat similar provisions... can the UCMJ run counter to the Constitution?

By the way, I've been meaning to mention somewhere, Wikipedea needs donations for their hosting fees, as people do your year-end donations please keep that in mind! It's surprising how many times in a week I end up there, so I'm glad I finally contributed the other day. There's also the EFF.

[Guest Conway]

But as a serviceman he falls under the Uniform Code of Military Justice and Military Law

and actually does not have all the rights that a non-military person may have such as confinement without charges. This is allowed under our constitution. Maybe he should have actually read some of those papers he signed when he chose to join the military.

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

Absolutely! He is a soldier accused of leaking classified information detrimental to the well being of US Troops. He is not entitled to the same rights as a non-enlisted citizen.

He should be grateful they haven't tried him. Because he will likely end up in front of a firing squad convicted of high treason when that day does finally come.

He has two choices- face the firing squad or roll on that scumbag Julian Assange so that he faces a firing squad.

Personally, I think that both of them deserve the bullet.

[Lucky]

The cold replies as to this man's situation are disheartening. Either we are a government that stands above the others or we are not. What is the harm in providing this man reasonably comfortable living arrangements before his trial? Do you really believe in the "innocent until proven guilty" concept of our system of justice?

The loss of human rights is always easier to tolerate when it isn't happening to you.

[Guest Conway]

The cold replies as to this man's situation are disheartening. Either we are a government that stands above the others or we are not. What is the harm in providing this man reasonably comfortable living arrangements before his trial? Do you really believe in the "innocent until proven guilty" concept of our system of justice?

The loss of human rights is always easier to tolerate when it isn't happening to you.

I believe that a traitor to his country should be treated accordingly. He is being treated according to the terms he agreed to when he voluntarily chose to enlist. In that regard, I don't find his treatment any worse than that shown to other well known traitors (who are usually executed in public).

[Lucky]

I believe that a traitor to his country should be treated accordingly. He is being treated according to the terms he agreed to when he voluntarily chose to enlist. In that regard, I don't find his treatment any worse than that shown to other well known traitors (who are usually executed in public).

Once again, he hasn't been convicted or even charged.

[lookin]

I find I agree with all of my esteemed and learned fellow posters. (Well, except for that firing squad stuff. )

He did sign up for military law, so it applies to him, although I doubt military law really requires him to "verbally confirm that he is alright" every five minutes. If true, that piece doesn't seem either humane or constitutional. But, applied fairly, military law is what he gets.

I also share Lucky's sense of despair that some are willing to kick him to the curb before he's even been charged, let alone tried. What if we or a loved one ever needed the justice system to be there for us?

More urgent, in my opinion, is whether we think as U. S. citizens that we have a right to due process. If we pretend we don't, or pretend that Private Manning doesn't, then pretty soon we won't have it. I think we're giving up a bunch of rights these days and, in my opinion, agreeing to snatch away the rights of others is only going to speed up that process.

[Guest Conway]

Once again, he hasn't been convicted or even charged.

According to the military law, he doesn't have to be. I'm sure that he will be treated according to that law's due process as it is spelled out.

[Lucky]

Manning's mistreatment continues:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/04/us/04manning.html?hp

[MsGuy]

Lucky, anyone who thinks that Manning is being subjected to this treatment for his own protection or as standard military proceedure is in wilful denial.

The Justice Department is under serious political pressure to find a way to bring a big felony case against Assange. Oddly enough, folks, under existing law and as things stand, a criminal case against Assange will be difficult to prosecute and might well get tossed on appeal. Now if Assange had solicited Manning to steal the documents rather than been an after the fact recipiant, Justice would have a much more solid case. The government is doing its damnest to break Manning and get him to testify (contrary to all his prior statements) that a conspiracy existed between Manning and Assange to obtain the docs. Show trials aren't only for Russia.

Personally, I suspect Assange is a nut case and Manning a silly fool who had no idea what he was getting himself into. I also think that they've managed to do harm to America. But that isn't the same thing as approving the government brutally coercing false testimony out of the kid in order to get at Assange.

Guys, I don't care if Manning winds up locked away for 50 years and Assange right along with him (if there's a legitimate conviction). This isn't about them or what they did, it's about what kind of country you want to live in. I think that's why Lucky is kicking up a such a fuss.

And more power to him for doing so.

[Guest zipperzone]

Personally, I suspect Assange is a nut case and Manning a silly fool who had no idea what he was getting himself into.

To call him "a silly fool" is, IMO, grossly understating it. He is downright stupid to think he would get away with it.

[TampaYankee]

I find I agree with all of my esteemed and learned fellow posters. (Well, except for that firing squad stuff. )

He did sign up for military law, so it applies to him, although I doubt military law really requires him to "verbally confirm that he is alright" every five minutes. If true, that piece doesn't seem either humane or constitutional. But, applied fairly, military law is what he gets.

I also share Lucky's sense of despair that some are willing to kick him to the curb before he's even been charged, let alone tried. What if we or a loved one ever needed the justice system to be there for us?

More urgent, in my opinion, is whether we think as U. S. citizens that we have a right to due process. If we pretend we don't, or pretend that Private Manning doesn't, then pretty soon we won't have it. I think we're giving up a bunch of rights these days and, in my opinion, agreeing to snatch away the rights of others is only going to speed up that process.

Here, here!!

[TampaYankee]

Lucky, anyone who thinks that Manning is being subjected to this treatment for his own protection or as standard military proceedure is in wilful denial.

The Justice Department is under serious political pressure to find a way to bring a big felony case against Assange. Oddly enough, folks, under existing law and as things stand, a criminal case against Assange will be difficult to prosecute and might well get tossed on appeal. Now if Assange had solicited Manning to steal the documents rather than been an after the fact recipiant, Justice would have a much more solid case. The government is doing its damnest to break Manning and get him to testify (contrary to all his prior statements) that a conspiracy existed between Manning and Assange to obtain the docs. Show trials aren't only for Russia.

Personally, I suspect Assange is a nut case and Manning a silly fool who had no idea what he was getting himself into. I also think that they've managed to do harm to America. But that isn't the same thing as approving the government brutally coercing false testimony out of the kid in order to get at Assange.

Guys, I don't care if Manning winds up locked away for 50 years and Assange right along with him (if there's a legitimate conviction). This isn't about them or what they did, it's about what kind of country you want to live in. I think that's why Lucky is kicking up a such a fuss.

And more power to him for doing so.

Another "Here, Here!!" shout out.

[lookin]

Chief State Department spokesman P. J. Crowley resigned today after calling Manning's treatment 'ridiculous, counterproductive and stupid'.

Crowley's resignation statement said that his comments about Bradley's pre-trial detention "were intended to highlight the broader, even strategic impact of discreet actions undertaken by national security agencies every day and their impact on our global standing and leadership. The exercise of power in today's challenging times and relentless media environment must be prudent and consistent with our laws and values."

Crowley made the remarks at MIT on Thursday, Obama was asked about the remarks at a press conference on Friday, and Crowley was out two days later.

Seems like the U. S. has spent two-and-a-half centuries championing our values at home and throughout the world and, now, just when they're needed most, we appear hell-bent on acting like we never heard of them.

What gives?

[MsGuy]

Chief State Department spokesman P. J. Crowley resigned today after calling Manning's treatment 'ridiculous, counterproductive and stupid'.

The Adminstration is spinning that Crowley hasn't gotten along with Clinton from the git-go. The prop being sold is that he knew he was on his way out soon anyway and engineered a little personal publicity in an effort to land a better post after getting bumped.

Whether the Admin's spin has any basis in fact is anyone's guess.

[Lucky]

Just when I was starting to think that Obama might not be so bad after all, he revives Guantanomo and endorses the action against Bradley Manning. I can't believe that Obama is a liberal at heart. But with the Republicans failing so far to come up with a credible candidate, it looks like we have Obama until 2016. He sure pulled the wool over the eyes of so many longing for a change after Bush.

[MsGuy]

I think both Cris Christie and Scott Walker have the makings of a credible candidate, assuming one or the other craves the nomination enough to thread his way through the primaries. Surely the (R )'s aren't crazy enough to go with Palin or Hucklebee. And Romney's Mormonism still hurts him with Baptists and his prior identification with "socialized medical care" is killing him with the Teabaggers.

[Guest zipperzone]

........it looks like we have Obama until 2016. He sure pulled the wool over the eyes of so many longing for a change after Bush.

I've said it before & I'll say it again - you could have had a Clinton if it wasn't for the stupidity of Oprah being determined to get a black man into the White House. And whatever you may think of Clinton, she would be a hell of a lot better than what you got