babble-intro-img
babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.

Bradley Manning and Wikileaks

70 replies [Last post]

Comments

contrarianna
Offline
Joined: Aug 15 2006

Pogo wrote:

When Svend Robinson went in front of the judge for standing by First Nations on Lyall Island he didn't pretend that his choice put him above the law, he accepted his punishment as a necessary result of the choice that he had made.  The first rule of law breaking is that you have to be willing to accept the consequences.


I hardly think Svend's few hours or whatever in custody compares to prolonged systematic abuse.

So now torture is now "the law" in your view?
Well, that is a view held by many today in the land of the free. Your view of "the law" obviously doesn't include international law on human rights:
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/01/23/detainees
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11313-psychological-torture-as-bad...

Although many think Manning should be awarded for what he did, there is is no one here who thinks he will evade the government/military injustice system that coerces confessions.

For his service to humanity he will be, and is now, severely treated and perhaps cognitively destroyed (if the psychologists who study such abuse are to be believed), but you have can rest content with your view of "the law"--too bad the concept of justice escapes you.


VanGoghs Ear
Offline
Joined: Mar 8 2010

contrarianna wrote:

Pogo wrote:

When Svend Robinson went in front of the judge for standing by First Nations on Lyall Island he didn't pretend that his choice put him above the law, he accepted his punishment as a necessary result of the choice that he had made.  The first rule of law breaking is that you have to be willing to accept the consequences.


I hardly think Svend's few hours or whatever in custody compares to prolonged systematic abuse.

So now torture is now "the law" in your view?
Well, that is a view held by many today in the land of the free. Your view of "the law" obviously doesn't include international law on human rights:
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/01/23/detainees
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11313-psychological-torture-as-bad...

Although many think Manning should be awarded for what he did, there is is no one here who thinks he will evade the government/military injustice system that coerces confessions.

For his service to humanity he will be, and is now, severely treated and perhaps cognitively destroyed (if the psychologists who study such abuse are to be believed), but you have can rest content with your view of "the law"--too bad the concept of justice escapes you.

I'm not so sure you yourself fully understand the meaning of the words service, law, and justice, other than your concepts of them

get off yr high horse


contrarianna
Offline
Joined: Aug 15 2006

VanGoghs Ear wrote:

I'm not so sure you yourself fully understand the meaning of the words service, law, and justice, other than your concepts of them

get off yr high horse

Not so high, though from the sewer it might look so.


Noah_Scape
Offline
Joined: Oct 24 2007

Corbin said: "He pretty much fucked his life up by doing this... I hope he thinks it's worth it."

    I feel like I got something for free. I got truth, I got info I should have had all along - knowing what our diplomats are doing and saying in our name. Manning is paying for it. I am feeling like I should bear part of his burden somehow.

  How can I make up for it? Can we make it better for Manning?

  Sending money to Manning's defense might help.

  Protesting?? It worked in Egypt and Tunisia [not likely in America though, they are too entrenched in "nondemocracy"]

  Outright assault perhaps - lets storm the jail and yank him to freedom {but where does that exist?}


VanGoghs Ear
Offline
Joined: Mar 8 2010

contrarianna wrote:

VanGoghs Ear wrote:

I'm not so sure you yourself fully understand the meaning of the words service, law, and justice, other than your concepts of them

get off yr high horse

Not so high, though from the sewer it might look so.

did you read post 33

I doubt you ever doubt your righteous self and your lack of humility certainly doesn't raise you above anyone other than in your own mind.


VanGoghs Ear
Offline
Joined: Mar 8 2010

Noah_Scape wrote:

Corbin said: "He pretty much fucked his life up by doing this... I hope he thinks it's worth it."

    I feel like I got something for free. I got truth, I got info I should have had all along - knowing what our diplomats are doing and saying in our name. Manning is paying for it. I am feeling like I should bear part of his burden somehow.

  How can I make up for it? Can we make it better for Manning?

  Sending money to Manning's defense might help.

  Protesting?? It worked in Egypt and Tunisia [not likely in America though, they are too entrenched in "nondemocracy"]

  Outright assault perhaps - lets storm the jail and yank him to freedom {but where does that exist?}

it amazes me how things have changed for the worse among progressive movements in North America from the civil rights movement to now - no one seems to care or understand words like sacrifice, the greater good, selfless action, it's like we want change but only as long as I or anyone else don't have to feel any pain - soft and phony and going nowhere - sorry for the harsh words but it's true


M. Spector
Offline
Joined: Feb 19 2005

If we paid any attention to right-wing creeps like you we would never organize defence campaigns to support victims of official persecution. Nelson Mandela would have died in prison. We'd just shrug our shoulders and walk away and say "he knew the risks".

Fortunately we understand concepts like justice, morality, and solidarity. That's where we part company with the likes of you.


contrarianna
Offline
Joined: Aug 15 2006

VanGoghs Ear wrote:

contrarianna wrote:

VanGoghs Ear wrote:

I'm not so sure you yourself fully understand the meaning of the words service, law, and justice, other than your concepts of them

get off yr high horse

Not so high, though from the sewer it might look so.

did you read post 33

I doubt you ever doubt your righteous self and your lack of humility certainly doesn't raise you above anyone other than in your own mind.

Yeah, I saw your post 33 though I was being kind in not drawing direct attention to it.

Your comparison is a pathetic and incoherent one between protestors (who seek to effect change by demonsratitive bodily example) and whistleblowers who aim to effect change by releasing information. There is legislation in many areas (including to some extent the US) which protect the anonymity of whistleblowers. No comparison.

Even so. are you saying its ok for ML King  to be tortured because he has put himself at the mercy of racists? He plays the public protest card so he deserves whatever abuse he gets? No responsibility left for the legalized thugs? Charming.


VanGoghs Ear
Offline
Joined: Mar 8 2010

contrarianna wrote:

VanGoghs Ear wrote:

contrarianna wrote:

VanGoghs Ear wrote:

I'm not so sure you yourself fully understand the meaning of the words service, law, and justice, other than your concepts of them

get off yr high horse

Not so high, though from the sewer it might look so.

did you read post 33

I doubt you ever doubt your righteous self and your lack of humility certainly doesn't raise you above anyone other than in your own mind.

Yeah, I saw your post 33 though I was being kind in not drawing direct attention to it.

Your comparison is a pathetic and incoherent one between protestors (who seek to effect change by demonsratitive bodily example) and whistleblowers who aim to effect change by releasing information. There is legislation in many areas (including to some extent the US) which protect the anonymity of whistleblowers. No comparison.

Even so. are you saying its ok for ML King  to be tortured because he has put himself at the mercy of racists? He plays the public protest card so he deserves whatever abuse he gets? No responsibility left for the legalized thugs? Charming.

is it really that unclear - i never said deserved anywhere in there - it's about willingness to go against the powerful without fear and this idea espoused nowadays that it can somehow be done without any pain or sacrifice -  I thought it went without saying that obviously torture is wrong and money should be raised for Mannings defence - why not ask questions instead of insults and I would try and clarify

 


NDPP
Offline
Joined: Dec 28 2008

A Nation Stripped Bare: Fascism has Come to America  -  by Chris Floyd

http://www.chris-floyd.com/component/content/article/1-latest-news/2099-...

"This is what the administration of President Barack Obama has demonstrated -- indeed has proudly proclaimed -- in its treatment of the young man it is avowedly, openly torturing for telling the truth about American war crimes, Bradley Manning. There can be no mistaking tthe meaning, implications and import of Barack Obama's actions...

Fascism has come to America."


contrarianna
Offline
Joined: Aug 15 2006

VanGoghs Ear wrote:

is it really that unclear - i never said deserved anywhere in there - it's about willingness to go against the powerful without fear and this idea espoused nowadays that it can somehow be done without any pain or sacrifice -  I thought it went without saying that obviously torture is wrong and money should be raised for Mannings defence - why not ask questions instead of insults and I would try and clarify

Yes, your statements are that unclear though your unpleasant sentiments are not:

1)your main comparison between protesters and whitleblowers is absurd for the reasons already stated.

2)Using that false equation you conclude that unlike the old days whistleblowers are unwilling to put themselves on the line for their actions, --despite there being no correlative to different modes of dissent.

3)Even so, no-one"expects", as you seem to imply, that Manning, who took the risk, will escape the systematic abuse and torture of the state.

Yet for you, to even to draw attention to continued and increasing abuse, and suggest it should stop (which would not even be on the MSM radar if it wasn't for "whiners" like Glenn Greenwald)  equates for you to "it's like we want change but only as long as I or anyone else don't have to feel any pain - soft and phony and going nowhere"

Following that, and similar statements your statement, "I thought it went without saying that obviously torture is wrong and money should be raised for Mannings defence", rings hollow.


NDPP
Offline
Joined: Dec 28 2008

Kingdom of Evil  - by Arthur Silber

http://powerofnarrative.blogspot.com/2011/03/kingdom-of-evil.html

"If you feel assaulted in the depths of your being by the mere recitation of the facts -- and you should -- you are experiencing but the faintest shadow of what Manning experiences in capitivity. Manning, is, I remind you, only the 'accused'.

I can only say that the US government and the military of which it is so proud, put Torquemada to shame. This is evil, those who seek to impose this fate on a human being are engaged in evil of an especially monstrous kind.

This is also the US government and its military. Mark it well."


M. Spector
Offline
Joined: Feb 19 2005

NDPP wrote:

Kingdom of Evil  - by Arthur Silber

http://powerofnarrative.blogspot.com/2011/03/kingdom-of-evil.html

"If you feel assaulted in the depths of your being by the mere recitation of the facts -- and you should -- you are experiencing but the faintest shadow of what Manning experiences in capitivity. Manning, is, I remind you, only the 'accused'.

I can only say that the US government and the military of which it is so proud, put Torquemada to shame. This is evil, those who seek to impose this fate on a human being are engaged in evil of an especially monstrous kind.

This is also the US government and its military. Mark it well."

This is recommended reading for all the sick fucks who think Manning is simply paying the price for being a dissident.


Catchfire
Online
Joined: Apr 16 2003

M. Spector wrote:
This is recommended reading for all the sick fucks

Spector, please stop insulting other babblers. Thanks.


M. Spector
Offline
Joined: Feb 19 2005

Which babblers did I insult? Please give me their names.


Catchfire
Online
Joined: Apr 16 2003

Yes, well, sadly, that's a game I won't be playing with you. Don't call other babblers "sick fucks." That's about all you need to take away from this.


contrarianna
Offline
Joined: Aug 15 2006

Quote:

Saturday, Mar 5, 2011 07:06 ET

By Glenn Greenwald

    *

Bradley Manning's forced nudity to occur daily

brig officials now confirm to The New York Times that Manning will be forced to be nude every night from now on for the indefinite future -- not only when he sleeps, but also when he stands outside his cell for morning inspection along with the other brig detainees.  They claim that it is being done "as a 'precautionary measure' to prevent him from injuring himself."

....
UPDATE:  Robert Parry, at Consortium News, documents how crucial was forced nudity to the Bush detention and interrogation regime; Marcy Wheeler recalls how Bush-era official documents emphasized the importance of prolonged nudity in breaking down detainees; and in The Guardian, Ryan Gallagher writes about "Bradley Manning and the stench of U.S. hypocrisy."
 
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/03/05/manning/ind...


M. Spector
Offline
Joined: Feb 19 2005

Catchfire wrote:

Yes, well, sadly, that's a game I won't be playing with you. Don't call other babblers "sick fucks." That's about all you need to take away from this.

I didn't call any babblers sick fucks.

And this is not a game.


MegB
Offline
Joined: Nov 28 2001

M. Spector wrote:

Catchfire wrote:

Yes, well, sadly, that's a game I won't be playing with you. Don't call other babblers "sick fucks." That's about all you need to take away from this.

I didn't call any babblers sick fucks.

And this is not a game.

Yeah, you did actually.  In fact, a search of your most recent posts has turned up a treasure trove of direct and implied insults.  So stop it already.


Catchfire
Online
Joined: Apr 16 2003
Bradley Manning Humiliated and Abused: Why Is Exposing a War Crime More Dangerous Than Committing One?

Quote:
Bradley Manning is accused of humiliating the political establishment by revealing the complicity of top U.S. officials in carrying out and covering up war crimes. In return for his act of conscience, the U.S. government is holding him in abusive solitary confinement, humiliating him and trying to keep him behind bars for life.

The lesson is clear, and soldiers take note: You're better off committing a war crime than exposing one....

In fact, the record indicates Manning would be far better off today - possibly on the lecture circuit rather than in solitary confinement - if he'd killed those men in Baghdad himself.

Hyperbole? Consider what happened to the U.S. soldiers who, over a period of hours - not minutes - went house to house in the Iraqi town of Haditha and executed 24 men, women and children in retaliation for a roadside bombing.

"I watched them shoot my grandfather, first in the chest and then in the head," said one of the two surviving eyewitnesses to the massacre, nine-year-old Eman Waleed. "Then they killed my granny." Almost five years later, not one of the men involved in the incident is behind bars. And despite an Army investigation revealing that statements made by the chain of command "suggest that Iraqi civilian lives are not as important as U.S. lives," with the murder of brown-skinned innocents considered "just the cost of doing business," none of their superiors are behind bars either.


NDPP
Offline
Joined: Dec 28 2008

Bradley Manning Now 'Catatonic': Obama ENOUGH!

http://warisacrime.org/content/bradley-manning-now-catatonic-obama-enough

"As Obama's crime of the destruction of Bradley Manning continues to unfold before our very eyes, Manning's friend David House now tells us that over 8 months in isolation with movement and sleep restrictions placed on him have been having their intended effect. House told MSNBC that by the end of January Manning appeared 'catatonic'...

All for the crime of reporting war crimes and criminal behaviour even among the highest-ranking officers in Iraq.."

webform to Whitehouse letters : please help


NDPP
Offline
Joined: Dec 28 2008

Stripped Naked Every Night, Bradley Manning Tells of Prison Ordeal

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/11/stripped-naked-bradley-manni...

"Bradley Manning, the US soldier being held in solitary confinement on suspicion of having released state secrets to WikiLeaks, has spoken out for the first time about what he claims is his punitive and unlawful treatment in military prison.."


M. Spector
Offline
Joined: Feb 19 2005

Margaret Kimberley wrote:
If members of the Norwegian Nobel committee do not feel embarrassment for making Barack Obama a peace prize laureate, then they are as shameless as the man they foolishly chose to honor. Barack Obama is every bit the authoritarian as his predecessor George W. Bush. He too believes in his right to declare anyone an enemy combatant and restrict their rights to due process. He too has cracked down on whistle blowers and is determined to ferret them out and punish them.

The continued psychological torture of Pfc. Bradley Manning is the latest case in point....

Manning's one hour [per day] outside of his cell allows him only to walk in circles in another room. He is denied the use of sheets and now is forced to sleep naked and stand naked outside of his cell when it is inspected....

Among the files which Manning allegedly leaked is a video showing American soldiers shooting a Reuters photographer and his driver, and an innocent bystander and his young children, and then laughing as an already dead body is crushed by an armored vehicle. The soldiers also enjoy themselves. They are positively gleeful about committing murder, laughing at their victims and pleading with their superiors to allow them to kill more people.

Anyone who reveals this grotesque behavior becomes a de facto enemy of the state. It was so during the Bush administration and now it is so as Obama sits in the oval office. Ultimately, Barack Obama is responsible for Manning's treatment. Even if he did not directly order it, he certainly is aware of it now, and if it continues, it is because he wants it to.

B.A.R.


NDPP
Offline
Joined: Dec 28 2008

the latest 'de facto enemy of the state' is PJ Crowley US Foreign Affairs representative, forced to resign, apparently because of remarks he made criticizing the treatment of Manning by the US Military.


M. Spector
Offline
Joined: Feb 19 2005

Yep:

Obama fires P.J. Crowley for condemning abuse of Manning

Glenn Greenwald wrote:
On Friday, State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley denounced the conditions of Bradley Manning's detention as "ridiculous, counterproductive and stupid," forcing President Obama to address those comments in a Press Conference and defend the treatment of Manning. Today, CNN reports, Crowley has "abruptly resigned" under "pressure from White House officials because of controversial comments he made last week about the Bradley Manning case." In other words, he was forced to "resign" -- i.e., fired.

So, in Barack Obama's administration, it's perfectly acceptable to abuse an American citizen in detention who has been convicted of nothing by consigning him to 23-hour-a-day solitary confinement, barring him from exercising in his cell, punitively imposing "suicide watch" restrictions on him against the recommendations of brig psychiatrists, and subjecting him to prolonged, forced nudity designed to humiliate and degrade. But speaking out against that abuse is a firing offense. Good to know. As Matt Yglesias just put it: "Sad statement about America that P.J. Crowley is the one being forced to resign over Bradley Manning." And as David Frum added: "Crowley firing: one more demonstration of my rule: Republican pols fear their base, Dem pols despise it."

Of course, it's also the case in Barack Obama's world that those who instituted a worldwide torture and illegal eavesdropping regime are entitled to full-scale presidential immunity, while powerless individuals who blow the whistle on high-level wrongdoing and illegality are subjected to the most aggressive campaign of prosecution and persecution the country has ever seen. So protecting those who are abusing Manning, while firing Crowley for condemning the abuse, is perfectly consistent with the President's sense of justice.


politicalnick
Offline
Joined: Mar 6 2011

I believe there are reports that they will not seek the death penalty. The maximum he can be senteced to in that case is 55 years.

I personally think he is a hero for humanity in exposing US sponsored torture and human rights violations but he should have stuck to that and not released meaningless, unrelated documents.


M. Spector
Offline
Joined: Feb 19 2005

So his great crime was releasing "meaningless unrelated" documents?

At this point, the death penalty would be a more humane prospect than the alternative Manning faces - being driven insane and tortured for the rest of his life.

Quote:
If another country were meting out similarly sadistic treatment to a captured American POW, the Pentagon and the American media would be howling about war crimes. But Manning's treatment has been largely blacked out of the corporate-controlled mass media.

WSWS


politicalnick
Offline
Joined: Mar 6 2011

M. Spector wrote:

So his great crime was releasing "meaningless unrelated" documents?

No, his big crime was catching the yanks with their pants down and exposing them to the world as duplicitous arrogant SOB's. The document release is all they have an actual law against.


NDPP
Offline
Joined: Dec 28 2008

How the So-Called Guardians of Free Speech Are Silencing the Messenger  - by John Pilger

http://www.zcommunications.org/how-the-so-called-guardians-of-free-speec...

"Reality is no longer what the powerful say it is. Of all the spectacular revolts across the world, the most exciting is the insurrection of knowledge sparked by WikiLeaks. The heroic Bradley Manning is kept naked under lights and cameras 24 hours a day. Greg Barns, director of the Australian Lawyers Alliance, says the fears that Julian Assange will 'end up being tortured in a high security American prison', are justified. Who will take responsibility for such a crime?"


M. Spector
Offline
Joined: Feb 19 2005

politicalnick wrote:

M. Spector wrote:

So his great crime was releasing "meaningless unrelated" documents?

No, his big crime was catching the yanks with their pants down and exposing them to the world as duplicitous arrogant SOB's. The document release is all they have an actual law against.

Perhaps you could explain to us all how Manning could have exposed the imperialists without releasing any documents.

Perhaps you could also explain how Manning could have violated his oath of secrecy without breaking any laws.

Perhaps you could explain why he's facing a possible death penalty and the certainty of torture for the rest of his life, if all he did illegally was release "meaningless unrelated documents".

Margaret Kimberley, quoted above, in describing one of the "meaningless unrelated" documents that Manning released, wrote:

Among the files which Manning allegedly leaked is a video showing American soldiers shooting a Reuters photographer and his driver, and an innocent bystander and his young children, and then laughing as an already dead body is crushed by an armored vehicle. The soldiers also enjoy themselves. They are positively gleeful about committing murder, laughing at their victims and pleading with their superiors to allow them to kill more people.

Perhaps you could explain why your overriding concern for the supposed unlawfulness of Manning's actions in releasing these documents trumps his heroism in doing so?

Or, perhaps you can't.


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or register to post comments