Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 65

Thread: update on Manning's torture

  1. #1
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    53

    Default update on Manning's torture

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13138050

    Highlight of the conduct of the Third Reich, er, the US government:
    Pte Manning's civilian lawyer David Coombs has said the soldier has been under 24-hour surveillance and has been forced to relinquish his clothing before bedding down for the night, then forced to stand naked at roll call.

    Officials have repeatedly denied Pte Manning has been mistreated, although last month a top US state department official, spokesman PJ Crowley, resigned after saying the military's treatment of the Wikileaks suspect was "ridiculous and counterproductive
    Informed sources also believe Manning is not permitted to play online poker.
    Last edited by davidbfpo; 04-20-2011 at 11:46 AM. Reason: Use quotes

  2. #2
    Council Member Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    North Mountain, West Virginia
    Posts
    990

    Default

    I don't feel sorry for the guy. The U.S. Government should treat him with the decency to which any prisoner is entitled. On the other hand this isn't the Vietnam War period when everything the Government did should be regarded as some sort of nefarious Government conspiracy. The little homosexual sold out his country so he's no hero in my eyes.

  3. #3
    Council Member carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Denver on occasion
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    The U.S. Government should treat him with the decency to which any prisoner is entitled.
    The question is, are they?
    "We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene

  4. #4
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,021

    Default I won't join in this Bravo Sierra

    If I want to hear from David Coombs (his Practice Areas, Attorney Profile, Representative Cases), about the Manning Case, I will go direct:

    Dave Coombs' Blog with Manning Updates

    No regards here - and no "Third Reich" in LTC Coomb's statements either.

    Mike

  5. #5
    Council Member Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    North Mountain, West Virginia
    Posts
    990

    Default

    CNN reports that Manning is being moved to a joint-service correctional facility at Leavenworth. I have never been part of his Amen Corner so complaints about his treatment have mainly been below my radar screen.

  6. #6
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default Appears so...


  7. #7
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    53

    Default

    Yeah, that "We will do whatever we want to do. is definitely more reminiscent of the little Bush group.

  8. #8
    Council Member 120mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Wonderland
    Posts
    1,284

    Default

    So... We are refusing to answer the mail to a UN Human rights investigation, a German Parliament inquiry and some hippies from Amnesty International?

    F*ck them. While we are at it, evict the evil dictator club known as the UN off our shores and withdraw from it.

    Shoot the little traitor in the head, like he deserves. Once he is tried and convicted, of course.

  9. #9
    Council Member SteveMetz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Carlisle, PA
    Posts
    1,488

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 91bravojoe View Post
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13138050

    Highlight of the conduct of the Third Reich, er, the US government:


    Informed sources also believe Manning is not permitted to play online poker.
    Officials at the detention center said Manning was not "forced" to stand naked during roll call, but elected to. If the accusations are accurate, Manning is a chronic liar with a victim complex. He has a vested personal interest in portraying himself as a victim. Yet you seem to have accepted his word over that of military officials who have not been accused of lying and who have no vested interest in misportraying the situation.

    I'll disagree. IMO, you've been duped by the propaganda of Manning's supporters.

  10. #10
    Council Member gute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    322

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 91bravojoe View Post
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13138050

    Highlight of the conduct of the Third Reich, er, the US government:


    Informed sources also believe Manning is not permitted to play online poker.
    Really, the Third Reich? Give the hyperbole a break.

    The princess is a douche.

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Durban, South Africa
    Posts
    3,902

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SteveMetz View Post
    Officials at the detention center said Manning was not "forced" to stand naked during roll call, but elected to. If the accusations are accurate, Manning is a chronic liar with a victim complex. He has a vested personal interest in portraying himself as a victim. Yet you seem to have accepted his word over that of military officials who have not been accused of lying and who have no vested interest in misportraying the situation.

    I'll disagree. IMO, you've been duped by the propaganda of Manning's supporters.
    Whatever Steve.

    Personally an intelligent person would be prudent to not take the government and sadly also the military at its word.

    Like Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib this is another own goal by the US government.

    Try to read this article with and open mind and see if it helps... Lessons from Manning's transfer out of Quantico

  12. #12
    Council Member J Wolfsberger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    806

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JMA View Post
    Try to read this article with and open mind and see if it helps... Lessons from Manning's transfer out of Quantico
    For future reference, Glenn Greenwald is not a go-to-guy for anything resembling accurate reporting or rational commentary. On this issue, he is part of a Left wing anti-war, anti-Bush chorus trying to accomplish ... something.

    To give an example of just what level these people are operating at, they apparently planned, at some point, to enter Marine Corps Base Quantico and stage a protest about the alleged mistreatment of Mr. Manning. They were outraged that the Corps didn't want to play that game with them. That level of childish detachment from reality should, at a minimum, indicate a certain lack of credibility.

    Mr. Manning is being held in the brig pending Court Martial. If found guilty of the charged offenses, and depending on any consequences that directly resulted from his actions, the penalties range from decades in prison to death. He is apparently severely depressed, understandably so, and under suicide watch. His military record contains numerous examples of inappropriate outbursts, some of which became physical. Given the behavior of his supporters, if he were to commit suicide it would result in an hysterical conspiracy theory about how the evil somebody-or-other killed him and made it look like a suicide to conceal something-or-other. For these reasons he is being held under very strict and close supervision.

    Steve raised a couple of other relevant points. I'll also add to 120mm's points by adding that "UN Human rights investigation, a German Parliament inquiry and some hippies from Amnesty International" don't have the credibility they used to have - but that's a debate for another thread.

    In summary, this issue only has legs with conspiracy cranks and some domestic politicals.
    Last edited by J Wolfsberger; 04-21-2011 at 03:03 PM.
    John Wolfsberger, Jr.

    An unruffled person with some useful skills.

  13. #13
    Council Member SteveMetz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Carlisle, PA
    Posts
    1,488

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JMA View Post
    Whatever Steve.

    Personally an intelligent person would be prudent to not take the government and sadly also the military at its word.

    Like Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib this is another own goal by the US government.

    Try to read this article with and open mind and see if it helps... Lessons from Manning's transfer out of Quantico
    I got to about the third sentence of the article. When the author simply repeated Manning's story line about "inhumane treatment" as if it were fact, I recognized the story was propaganda, not analysis.

    After all, what's the source of information that Manning has been "tortured" or "treated inhumanely"? Answer: Manning says so. Believe what you want but based on what I know about him and what is in his interests, I don't consider him credible.
    Last edited by SteveMetz; 04-21-2011 at 03:30 PM.

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Durban, South Africa
    Posts
    3,902

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by J Wolfsberger View Post
    For future reference, Glenn Greenwald is not a go-to-guy for anything resembling accurate reporting or rational commentary. On this issue, he is part of a Left wing anti-war, anti-Bush chorus trying to accomplish ... something.
    You don't get it do you John?

    This is exactly why you need to read what this guy says and not bother with what some flunky spin-doctor from the government says.

    If you are able to rebut him and not just blow him off then you are on firmer ground. At the moment all I hear is attempts to trash his supporters.

    OK, so lets try the New York Times - Soldier in Leaks Case Will Be Made to Sleep Naked Nightly - or is that just some left-wing liberal rag?

    ...then maybe you can trash the 250 legal academics who signed a petition on the matter - or are they just a bunch of lunatic lefties who are aiding and abetting an enemy of the state?

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Durban, South Africa
    Posts
    3,902

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SteveMetz View Post
    I got to about the third sentence of the article. When the author simply repeated Manning's story line about "inhumane treatment" as if it were fact, I recognized the story was propaganda, not analysis.

    After all, what's the source of information that Manning has been "tortured" or "treated inhumanely"? Answer: Manning says so. Believe what you want but based on what I know about him and what is in his interests, I don't consider him credible.
    Steve, maybe you work off a different definition of torture but the one that counts is this one:

    ...any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him, or a third person, information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in, or incidental to, lawful sanctions. --UN Convention Against Torture
    I can understand that some people are pissed at this guy and want him to "pay" for what he has done... but at least convict him first before you start screwing with his body and his mind.

  16. #16
    Council Member J Wolfsberger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    806

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JMA View Post
    This is exactly why you need to read what this guy says and not bother with what some flunky spin-doctor from the government says.
    Salon is an opinion site, generally left of center, with contributers ranging from world class to execrable. Mr. Greenwald is at the wrong end of that spectrum, and I stopped paying attention to him long ago. If and when I hear from respected third parties that's he's begun making sense, I may reconsider. (Incidentally, he built his reputation in the 1990s with what I considered over the top criticism of Pres. Clinton, and I was not a Clinton supporter.)

    If you are able to rebut him and not just blow him off then you are on firmer ground. At the moment all I hear is attempts to trash his supporters.
    I'm not attempting to trash him or his supporters. For all I know, in his personal life he is kind to children and stray dogs, and visits the elderly every Sunday after volunteering at the homeless shelter. That doesn't change the fact that he is not a credible source for anything.

    OK, so lets try the New York Times - Soldier in Leaks Case Will Be Made to Sleep Naked Nightly - or is that just some left-wing liberal rag?
    Yes.

    ...then maybe you can trash the 250 legal academics who signed a petition on the matter - or are they just a bunch of lunatic lefties who are aiding and abetting an enemy of the state?
    Yes.

    Finally,

    I can understand that some people are pissed at this guy and want him to "pay" for what he has done...
    First, what he is alleged to have done. He hasn't been tried, yet. Until he is tried, he is in custody of military authorities. I expect them to take appropriate precautions to ensure he isn't a danger to himself or others. They appear to be doing so.

    ... but at least convict him first before you start screwing with his body and his mind.
    As I and others have pointed out, the allegations that anyone, other than himself, is "screwing with his body and his mind" are not arising from credible sources.
    Last edited by J Wolfsberger; 04-21-2011 at 04:56 PM.
    John Wolfsberger, Jr.

    An unruffled person with some useful skills.

  17. #17
    Council Member SteveMetz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Carlisle, PA
    Posts
    1,488

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JMA View Post
    Steve, maybe you work off a different definition of torture but the one that counts is this one:



    I can understand that some people are pissed at this guy and want him to "pay" for what he has done... but at least convict him first before you start screwing with his body and his mind.
    My point has nothing to do with being pissed off. It has to do with military officials saying one thing and Manning saying something different, and my assessment of which of the two are more credible given their character and vested interests. I have to believe that people who accept Manning's account of events rather than the one offered by military officials aren't basing that on inherent credibility, but on ulterior motives and predispositions.

  18. #18
    Council Member J Wolfsberger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    806

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JMA View Post
    If you are able to rebut him ...
    I didn't address this above, but it deserves a separate response anyway.

    The U.S. has a cottage industry of people engaged in evidence, fact and knowledge free "reasoning." They congregate at both extremes of the political spectrum, left and right. We have people referred to as "Birthers" who insist Mr. Obama wasn't born in the U.S. or, seemingly, to his mother, and we have people called "Truthers" who believe the World Trade Center was blown up by the C.I.A. because steel doesn't melt and stress yield curves are independent of time and temperature. (I assume they believe I-beams grow on structural steel trees, and alloying is a form a sympathetic magic.)

    It is a complete waste of time to try to rebut every crackpot theory that gets thrown out there. Instead, it is up to the proponents to present credible evidence substantiating their allegations. (And they can't seem to comprehend that allegations are not evidence.)

    Specifically, and to your point in adding the quote regarding torture, Mr. Manning's "pain or suffering" result from conditions of confinement "... arising only from, inherent in, or incidental to, lawful sanctions" undertaken, as I said above, to protect him from himself and others while he awaits trial. I am unaware of any agenda free, nonpartisan organization or group that has presented evidence otherwise.
    John Wolfsberger, Jr.

    An unruffled person with some useful skills.

  19. #19
    Council Member davidbfpo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    13,185

    Default Why?

    Why have the US military authorities not allowed an independent assessment of the accused / prisoner physical and mental health? I assume that there is such a person, is this not an Inspector General's role?

    Instead it appears that his treatment is far from proper care and custody. Which gives some cause for concern and the clear possibility of an "own goal".

    Then one must acknowledge that in the USA, especially in Federal cases, the threat of and use of pre-trial detention is used to undermine the accused's wish for a full trial.
    davidbfpo

  20. #20
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    89

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JMA View Post

    ...then maybe you can trash the 250 legal academics who signed a petition on the matter - or are they just a bunch of lunatic lefties who are aiding and abetting an enemy of the state?
    Apparently you have never been inside a modern U.S. law school. You can't walk inside a single one of them and take a piss without getting at least 40-50 ultra-left wing law professors wet. Just about any of these "legal academics" would happily sign anything anti-military and pro wiki-leaks without bothering to independently check the underlying facts.

    So the fact that 250 of them signed a petition doesn't mean a damn thing. What is curious is that the petitioner can't seem to round up more than 250.

Similar Threads

  1. Gen. Petraeus Warns Against Using Torture
    By SWJED in forum US Policy, Interest, and Endgame
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-11-2007, 06:23 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •