So all he has to do is rotate his existing prize 180 degrees.

————————————————————–
813. ART. 13 PUNISHMENT PROHIBITED BEFORE TRIAL

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 required to insure his presence, but he may be subjected to minor punishment during that period for infractions of discipline.

—————————————————————

Note the part about arrest and confinement not being more rigorous than required to insure his presence. Nothing more than required to ensure that he shows up at court martial should be happening in the brig, and it sure appears to be.

Also note
——————————————————–
810. ART. 10. RESTRAINT OF PERSONS CHARGED WITH OFFENSES

Any person subject to this chapter charged with an offense under this chapter shall be ordered into arrest or confinement, as circumstances may require; but when charged only with an offense normally tried by a summary court-martial, he shall not ordinarily be placed in confinement. When any person subject to this chapter is placed in arrest or confinement prior to trial, immediate steps shall be taken to inform him of the specific wrong of which he is accused and to try him or to dismiss the charges and release him.
———————————————————-

This is really about a speedy court martial.

Now, I think that a court martial is probably warranted, I was in the Marine Corps, and think that he should be brought up on charges, but the military should do this correctly, 100% by the UCMJ, which it appears they are not, and that makes me mad. What is worse, in my opinion, is it is Marines doing this. They should have more pride and honor than to stoop to these violations of the UCMJ, which may make a court martial not be effective.

why is it counterproductive? because it’s unlikely that it will facilitate cooperation from pfc. manning that will be useful in something that can be labeled as a trial.

why is it ridiculous? because it derides any due process of law enforcement.

why is it stupid? because it widens the gap between the discontent and the dutiful. a military apparatus that is confident or competent with regards to enforcing its regulations looks different.

btw, here’s the article 138 complaint filed by pfc. mannings counsel. it’s a painful read, possibly even for u.s. military personnel.

.~.

And while I agree that the US government is blind to its own hypocrisy, I’m not sure that the Chinese government is any better at acknowledging theirs: every time Beijing screams about “Western imperialism” whenever someone brings up China’s occupation of Tibet counts as hypocrisy to me.

It may be contrary to the UCMJ.

When individuals join the US Military, they suspend exercising certain of their rights. They take an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution.

The reason he is being kept in solitary confinement 23 hours a day without clothing, items, or furniture is not for his detriment. In the view of the current Executive administration, Bradley Manning must stand trial, period, no excuses. There’s more to his confinement than the circumstances he is experiencing. There are close controls on who can see him, when, what they can have when they do so, no physical contact can be made, thorough searches, clothing swaps for visitors, etcetera. The administration wants no chance of there being any credible way to claim that he died to protect a national secret or some corrupt politician or officer. The security hole is in the sun, and he’s going to remain in the sun so there’s no “what happened in the dark?” questions.

23 hours a day in a cell.
-Nothing any maximum security prison doesn’t already do.

Forbidden to exercise in his cell.
-Thats what the hour is for. He could slip and hurt himself in his cell… or something.

Not able to sleep 5am-8pm.
-9 hours to sleep.

Stripped naked before bedtime.
-Don’t see the issue here, now humiliation is abuse?

Yeah it sucks and they need to put him on trial, but abuse? He’s read the UCMJ, it’s required reading.. he knew what he was looking at when he did what he did. Real hero’s deal with the consequences, and by all accounts he is doing so. The lawyer is just doing his job and making Manning out to be mamby pamby, which presumably he is not.

Classy.

yeah, please break down the charges. there are some more than you cared to mention. please reconnect to what we are discussing here.

.~.

Innocent until proven guilty is the basis of a legal system, or it is not.

Where do you want to live?

Nothing any maximum security prison doesn’t already do.

If we’re putting someone in a maximum security prison for transferring some computer files, what do we do with violent criminals while they’re awaiting trial? Shoot them into the sun?

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/03/30/090330fa_fact_gawande

The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law says, “psychological stressors such as isolation can be as clinically distressing as physical torture.”

And sure, many prisoners in this country are subjected to torture. I think that speaks terribly of all of us. But I think it’s far, far worse when we torture someone who hadn’t even been charged with a crime, and who still hasn’t been convicted.

I don’t see how any American who claims to care about the ideals of our nation can support this.

humiliation = “embarrassment, mortification, shame, indignity, ignominy, disgrace, discomfiture, dishonor, degradation, discredit, belittlement, opprobrium; loss of face; informal blow to one’s pride/ego, slap in the face, kick in the teeth, comedown.”

humiliation is defined as
“Feeling disrespected.
A loss of stature or image.
An image change reflecting a decrease in what others believe about your stature.
Induced shame
To reduce the pride or fail to recognize the dignity of another
An event perceived to cause loss of honor and induce shame.
Feeling powerless.
Being unjustly forced into a degrading position.
Ridicule, scorn, contempt or other treatment at the hands of others.”

Root: from Latin humilis, low, lowly, from humus, ground. Literally, “reducing to dirt”.

“Humiliation of one person by another (the humiliator) is often used as a way of asserting power over them, and is a common form of oppression, bullying or abuse used in a police, military, or prison context during legal interrogations or illegal torture sessions… Humiliation activities such as stripping a prisoner naked or having them simulate sex acts are often contrary to policies in police or prison settings. Nevertheless, these humiliation tactics have been used by secret police and military interrogators as a way of eliciting cooperation or breaking down the resistance of a prisoner.”

Yes, the R’s aren’t joining in opposition to Obama and his admin on this issue. Yes, that’s ‘unfortunate’ (but also entirely predictable).

Where you’re very wrong is saying D’s would have opposed this under Bush. The Democrats mounted no real opposition to Bush’s policies of torture or indefinite detention.

It’s also been clearly demonstrated that a majority of the public can pretty easily be brought to the same position through careful poll wording.

This is an issue on which there is bipartisan agreement: the executive branch (and the military which it commands) needs to be unchecked in virtually any power claimed for national security.

Finally, some of these ‘condemnations’ from the press, if you go read them, are distinctly weaksauce. Same reason, I suspect.

Remand custody – at least in nations that actually respect the presumption of innocence – should be the exception, and not the rule.

In Manning’s case, of course, the presumption of innocence really isn’t a factor. Detention pending trial was a given. Harsh conditions – amounting to torture – were also a given. Complete abandonment by the Washington elite was a given. The target of this treatment is not Bradley Manning the individual; rather, it is The Leaker as a category. The brutality, isolation, and deprivation of liberty inflicted upon Manning is intended to be a warning to those who would be so bold as to think that the public has a right to know information that discredits the establishment.

I said “…inhumane…” in order that it would be apparent that it’s /not/ for /his/ benefit.

O.o