Hopefully Julian Assange suffers a similar fate.


http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/12/14/manning/index.html



From the beginning of his detention, Manning has been held in intensive solitary confinement. For 23 out of 24 hours every day -- for seven straight months and counting -- he sits completely alone in his cell. Even inside his cell, his activities are heavily restricted; he's barred even from exercising and is under constant surveillance to enforce those restrictions. For reasons that appear completely punitive, he's being denied many of the most basic attributes of civilized imprisonment, including even a pillow or sheets for his bed (he is not and never has been on suicide watch). For the one hour per day when he is freed from this isolation, he is barred from accessing any news or current events programs.

Quote

...he's being denied many of the most basic attributes of civilized imprisonment, including even a pillow or sheets for his bed.

Has this writer ever seen the Fairfax ADC? Give me a break. Regular, everyday defendants are often treated in similar fashion, sometimes even worse (Being stuffed into overcrowded cells, facing regular beatings, rapes, etc.). This is a military brig, and Manning is a traitor, so tough shit as far as I am concerned. I wouldn't even mind if the guards beat his ass a little bit here and there.

Read this Salon.com commentary from user "MaddieP" as well:

Quote

Yes. The US is lawless and cruel. Nothing new to see here. Just ask the bstive americans and any descendant of slaves (both of which groups i belong to). Honestly, if I were to come across secret info I would definitely be sure to have a workable plan beyond just the transfer of the information. IOW, know who you're dealing with. Recognize that should they 'capture' you, you will be mistreated or killed. Just know that going in and be prepared to die either by your own hand or by theirs.

Good God, I sure hope that no one like this has a clearance. Demented assholes abound it seems!

==================================================================================================
"And if any women or children get their legs torn off, or faces caved in, well, it's tough shit for them." -2LT. Bert Stiles, 505th, 339th (On Berlin Bombardier Mission, 1944).

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hopefully Julian Assange suffers a similar fate.

+1

--------------------------------------------------------------
13 4826 0948 82695 25847. Yes.

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hopefully Julian Assange suffers a similar fate.
>

Since he hasn't done anything wrong, I see no reason for that.

idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam



Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.

Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/15/2015 11:06PM by WingNut.

Bradley deserves what he's getting. He signed the paperwork and knew the rules, and for whatever reason, he broke them.

But I believe in freedom of the press.

I don't like what Assange is reporting. But, I don't think any government should be able to punish the press for publishing things they've learned. The government should not have the power to shut down websites, censor media, or arrest people, who print the truth. Whether we like it or not.

But if you are the press and you learn something that you know is classified,confidential and potentially harmful to national security and you knowingly broadcast that shit, wouldn't that cross a certain boundary?

I don't know how Assnage is accountable to American law, but he is certainly responsible for what he has sought to do.

If he wants to play the martyr role, ala Mandela and Gandhi and lock down as a prisoner of consceince, I repsect him but disagree with his motives. But his faggot is going run with the free press defense as if he had no duty or obligation to keep his mouth zipped. His rationales do not make hims ound like a neutral party, but a passive-aggressive sabatour.


TheMeeper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bradley deserves what he's getting. He signed the
> paperwork and knew the rules, and for whatever
> reason, he broke them.
>
> But I believe in freedom of the press.
>
> I don't like what Assange is reporting. But, I
> don't think any government should be able to
> punish the press for publishing things they've
> learned. The government should not have the power
> to shut down websites, censor media, or arrest
> people, who print the truth. Whether we like it
> or not.

idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam



Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.

Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/13/2015 11:57AM by WingNut.

TheMeeper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bradley deserves what he's getting. He signed the
> paperwork and knew the rules, and for whatever
> reason, he broke them.
>
> But I believe in freedom of the press.
>
> I don't like what Assange is reporting. But, I
> don't think any government should be able to
> punish the press for publishing things they've
> learned. The government should not have the power
> to shut down websites, censor media, or arrest
> people, who print the truth. Whether we like it
> or not.


+1

As for Manning, he may not find sanity in solitary, but at least he won't find a dick in his ass, either. Gotta make the best of it I guess.

eeesh has fato hands..

WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> knowingly broadcast that shit, wouldn't that cross
> a certain boundary?

Do you think Bob Novak should have been labeled as a terrorist, put in prison, or assassinated? He outed the name of an undercover CIA agent during a time of war.

Outing was not willfull and intentful if even an "outing" at all.

If you haven't read up on the way Joe Wilson distorted and exaggerated the events, you should. Even the Washington Post pretty much came out and agreed the event and accusation of malicious intent on any of the Bushies part was way far overblown.


TheMeeper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WingNut Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >
> > knowingly broadcast that shit, wouldn't that
> cross
> > a certain boundary?
>
> Do you think Bob Novak should have been labeled as
> a terrorist, put in prison, or assassinated? He
> outed the name of an undercover CIA agent during a
> time of war.

idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam



Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.

Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM

Nothing wrong with ASSange and Manning that a good old fashioned
firing squad couldn't cure.

Doesn't matter what his intent was. He wrote the article and reported Plame's CIA role. I don't care if he had an axe to grind or not, I still don't cast blame on Bob Novak for writing it. I think it's ridiculous that her name was leaked, but we don't live in a fucked up place like China where the government can silence the free press.


WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Outing was not willfull and intentful if even an
> "outing" at all.
>
> If you haven't read up on the way Joe Wilson
> distorted and exaggerated the events, you should.
> Even the Washington Post pretty much came out and
> agreed the event and accusation of malicious
> intent on any of the Bushies part was way far
> overblown.

GIJoe Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Nothing wrong with ASSange and Manning that a good
> old fashioned firing squad couldn't cure.

Yes, we should murder people who tell the truth, but treat phony demagogues like Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin as inspirational leaders. That will send a good message to future generations.

I guess I'm the outlier here...what a surprise.

This guy hasn't even been found guilty yet they are torturing him. It's one thing if he's been through the proper due process and found guilty but this country does have due process - or does that only apply if you're a civilian?

What galls me is that this is a very slippery slope...if it happens to him so easily why couldn't it happen to more and more people? Some people may deserve it certainly but without due process imo this is illegal and torture. We do not work under the Napoleonic Code (guilty til proven innocent).

Another thing that's funny is that the US goes about bandying human rights abuses to other countries yet we go about committing them ourselves. Bit hypocritical of us.

And from whom did Novak get his information?

TheMeeper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Doesn't matter what his intent was. He wrote the
> article and reported Plame's CIA role. I don't
> care if he had an axe to grind or not, I still
> don't cast blame on Bob Novak for writing it. I
> think it's ridiculous that her name was leaked,
> but we don't live in a fucked up place like China
> where the government can silence the free press.
>
>
> WingNut Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Outing was not willfull and intentful if even
> an
> > "outing" at all.
> >
> > If you haven't read up on the way Joe Wilson
> > distorted and exaggerated the events, you
> should.
> > Even the Washington Post pretty much came out
> and
> > agreed the event and accusation of malicious
> > intent on any of the Bushies part was way far
> > overblown.

Manning hasn't had a court declare him guilty, but there is no denying or question as to what he did. He committed treason, pure and simple. Do not forget he was already getting out of the military involuntary due to psychological reasons BEFORE he gave documents to wikileaks. This was his way of saying "Fuck you" to the military.

Where is Assange in helping Manning? Why isn't Assange bending over backwards to help one of the most important contributors to Wikileaks??? He isn't, Manning is just a pawn in Julian Assange's game.

slubdawg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And from whom did Novak get his information?
>

I heard it was Brian Peppers.

Britdrnva~ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I guess I'm the outlier here...what a surprise.
>
> This guy hasn't even been found guilty yet they
> are torturing him. It's one thing if he's been
> through the proper due process and found guilty
> but this country does have due process - or does
> that only apply if you're a civilian?
>
Different rules apply to the military than to a civilian. When I was on one tour, one of the dipshits in my division was found to not only have been dealing drugs, but was also essentially extorting other enlisted sailors by threatening to rat them out as drug users in order to raise prices on them and to extort items from them (books, magazines, favored watch periods).

He was brought up for NJP two different times, before the real story came to light. He was then shipped out in shackles for a Court Martial in San Diego. In the first NJP instance, he was confined to quarters. In the second instance, he was placed in the brig for 15 days and limited to a bread/water regiment (for part of it). Some would consider that torture, but that's how life is in the Navy. The same thing happened (bread and water) before he was booted off of the ship (and before he was tried).

I can't imagine that life was very fun in the slammer at Miramar.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/16/2010 02:52PM by ITRADE.

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Where is Assange in helping Manning? Why isn't
> Assange bending over backwards to help one of the
> most important contributors to Wikileaks??? He
> isn't, Manning is just a pawn in Julian Assange's
> game.

Exactly. Assange is too busy playing the martyr to help the guy who's gonna get shafted much, much harder than he will.

Manning's life is effectively over. Even if he gets out of prison someday, he won't be able to hold a job or escape surveillance. You can't feed yourself on self-righteousness, so the guy's pretty much screwed.

Assange's biggest concerns are that he's having trouble finding a place to hold his websites, financial companies are making it harder to receive donations, and he may have to do a couple years in jail on some trumped-up charges. He'll do some white collar time, write a best-selling book while he's in the clink, and come out on the other side better off than when he went in.

--------------------------------------------------------------
13 4826 0948 82695 25847. Yes.

slubdawg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> And from whom did Novak get his information?

From people within the Bush administration who had absolutely NO business whatsoever handing out national secrets to reporters. Those are the ones who deserve punishment, the ones who pledge their loyalty, people whose duty is to protect this information.

Instead, Libby got his sentence commuted, and Armitage, he wasn't even charged at all.

MrMephisto Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> Manning's life is effectively over. Even if he
> gets out of prison someday, he won't be able to
> hold a job or escape surveillance. You can't feed
> yourself on self-righteousness, so the guy's
> pretty much screwed.




Yeah, the inevitable dishonorable discharge will limit his job options to Pizza Hut or Burger King.

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yeah, the inevitable dishonorable discharge will
> limit his job options to Pizza Hut or Burger King.

... until the background check comes back with "this is the Wikileaks guy."

He won't even be able to get a job at KFC, since he could possible expose their twelve secret herbs and spices.

--------------------------------------------------------------
13 4826 0948 82695 25847. Yes.

The federal law..

"Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, (etc. etc.) relating to the national defense, ... (which) the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates (etc. etc) the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same..."

Journalists have no exemption from this law and it is not protected "free speech" regardless of what oversimplified version of the First Amnedment people would like to believe.

In the Wikileaks case, the assclown Manning transmitted the information to Assange in electronic form (I believe) and Assange reposted that material also in electronic form. Prosecutions in a lot of cases are made or broken on semantics- the words of importance here is WILLFULLY and "the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation"

In the Valerie Plame case, there was no proof or pursuit by prosecutor Fitzgerald to prove a "willfull intent" nor was there any belief that Plames exposure was done with intent or with the result of damaging or threatening her or others. No one was convicted of anything but a process crime, perjury and that perjury did not relate to or reveal any concerted effort to expose or compromise Plame. Libby was a "loyal Bush soldier" who felt a need to play CYA, without knowing what he was CYA'ing.

It's a complicated case, but there is very little there.

idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam



Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.

Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/13/2015 11:58AM by WingNut.

Fitzgerald knew from Day One that Armitage had leaked the info to Novak.

The leak was not a crime. Nor was Novak's publication of same.

Fitzgerald's "investigation" of this non-crime was a travesty, and huge waste of taxpayer dollars.


End of an Affair

It turns out that the person who exposed CIA agent Valerie Plame was not out to punish her husband.

Washington Post, Friday, September 1, 2006; Page A20

WE'RE RELUCTANT to return to the subject of former CIA employee Valerie Plame because of our oft-stated belief that far too much attention and debate in Washington has been devoted to her story and that of her husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, over the past three years. But all those who have opined on this affair ought to take note of the not-so-surprising disclosure that the primary source of the newspaper column in which Ms. Plame's cover as an agent was purportedly blown in 2003 was former deputy secretary of state Richard L. Armitage…

It follows that one of the most sensational charges leveled against the Bush White House — that it orchestrated the leak of Ms. Plame's identity to ruin her career and thus punish Mr. Wilson — is untrue…

Nevertheless, it now appears that the person most responsible for the end of Ms. Plame's CIA career is Mr. Wilson. Mr. Wilson chose to go public with an explosive charge, claiming — falsely, as it turned out — that he had debunked reports of Iraqi uranium-shopping in Niger and that his report had circulated to senior administration officials.

He ought to have expected that both those officials and journalists such as Mr. Novak would ask why a retired ambassador would have been sent on such a mission and that the answer would point to his wife.

He diverted responsibility from himself and his false charges by claiming that President Bush's closest aides had engaged in an illegal conspiracy.

It's unfortunate that so many people took him seriously.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/31/AR2006083101460.html

TheMeeper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> GIJoe Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Nothing wrong with ASSange and Manning that a
> good
> > old fashioned firing squad couldn't cure.
>
> Yes, we should murder people who tell the truth,
> but treat phony demagogues like Glenn Beck and
> Sarah Palin as inspirational leaders. That will
> send a good message to future generations.

I fail to see what Beck and Palin have to do with this but they aren't
in the Quantico Brig or wanted for sex crimes in Sweden. If the spooks
don't get ASSange, maybe the specops will.:)

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Manning hasn't had a court declare him guilty, but
> there is no denying or question as to what he did.

Yes, there is, it's called a "fair trial", and it's why we don't have a dictator who can just pull people off the street and throw them in a dungeon, torture, or kill them without due process of law. (Actually, we do now, thanks to the Bush administration...)

Anyone who doesn't understand this doesn't understand what the basis of American law is (English common law) and why it protects our freedoms. Do a search on "Magna Carta".

No matter how much you THINK you know about Bradley Manning, you still have to bring it in front of a jury and get a conviction before you can subject him to punishment, and that punishment must comply with the restrictions of the 8th Ammendment, which prohibits torture.

You have just decided to hate this guy and therefore you are willing to look the other way while the government stretches the law or even violates it.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/16/2010 10:54PM by tomahawk.

tomahawk Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> eesh Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Manning hasn't had a court declare him guilty,
> but
> > there is no denying or question as to what he
> did.
>
> Yes, there is, it's called a "fair trial", and
> it's why we don't have a dictator who can just
> pull people off the street and throw them in a
> dungeon, torture, or kill them without due process
> of law. (Actually, we do now, thanks to the Bush
> administration...)
>
> Anyone who doesn't understand this doesn't
> understand what the basis of American law is
> (English common law) and why it protects our
> freedoms. Do a search on "Magna Carta".
>
> No matter how much you THINK you know about
> Bradley Manning, you still have to bring it in
> front of a jury and get a conviction before you
> can subject him to punishment, and that punishment
> must comply with the restrictions of the 8th
> Ammendment, which prohibits torture.
>
> You have just decided to hate this guy and
> therefore you are willing to look the other way
> while the government stretches the law or even
> violates it.


You can quote the Magna Carta all you want but Shithead Manning will be
tried by a General Courts Martial under the Uniform Code of Military
Justice. His jury will not be composed of a bunch of pussyies who feel
sorry for him. Boo Hoo. I hope he shits his pants when they read his
sentence. BTW, if he does he will be detailed to clean it up.:)

http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/ucmj.htm#826.%20ART.%2026.%20MILITARY%20JUDGE%20OF%20A%20GENERAL%20OR%20SPECIAL%20COURT-MARTIAL

GIJoe Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You can quote the Magna Carta all you want but
> Shithead Manning will be
> tried by a General Courts Martial under the
> Uniform Code of Military
> Justice. His jury will not be composed of a bunch
> of pussyies who feel
> sorry for him. Boo Hoo. I hope he shits his pants
> when they read his
> sentence. BTW, if he does he will be detailed to
> clean it up.:)
>

It's not about feeling sorry for anybody, it's about following the law. If he is convicted, which I think is likely, he deserves the sentence handed down. Not the special, extra-legal treatment you think he deserves.