The Torture of Bradley Manning(vice.com)
vice.com
The Torture of Bradley Manning
http://www.vice.com/read/the-torture-of-bradley-manning
4 comments
Age should definitely be taken into account. He was a kid when he did this. Do you really think he understood all the ramifications of his actions?
Manning's a hero.
I knew vice was liberal and slightly anti-american, but this takes it to a whole new level of hate. There is nothing new about prosecuting a soldier for releasing classified information to the enemy (which is in effect what Manning did) the fact that he did it in the name of transparency doesn't absolve him of guilt. He swore to protect any secrets divulged to him and to protect his fellow country men, he failed on both counts.
I'm sorry that anyone thinks its okay to betray one's country and fellow people in such a way.
I'm sorry that anyone thinks its okay to betray one's country and fellow people in such a way.
Can you actually, you know, read the article before commenting on it? It's not very long.
Here, I'll help by pasting one of the more important paragraphs right here:
At Quantico, Pfc. Manning treatment wasn’t by the book: the sleep depravation and stripping of clothes; the humiliation; the taunts and mockery; the nine months of putting Pfc. Manning in protected custody citing concerns over suicide—concerns that were rebuffed relentlessly by both Pfc. Manning himself and qualified psychiatrists. That’s why Coombs is looking to have the case against his client thrown out, and Manning’s own testimony this week only accentuated the living nightmare he was made to endure for nearly a year while only a half-hour drive from the capital of the nation. As testimonies from Quantico staff, health professionals, and the private himself continued late into the night all week, often for hours without intermissions, more unraveled about not just the torturous conditions imposed on Pfc. Manning but the blatant mismanagement in the same institution he is accused of blowing the whistle on.
Here, I'll help by pasting one of the more important paragraphs right here:
At Quantico, Pfc. Manning treatment wasn’t by the book: the sleep depravation and stripping of clothes; the humiliation; the taunts and mockery; the nine months of putting Pfc. Manning in protected custody citing concerns over suicide—concerns that were rebuffed relentlessly by both Pfc. Manning himself and qualified psychiatrists. That’s why Coombs is looking to have the case against his client thrown out, and Manning’s own testimony this week only accentuated the living nightmare he was made to endure for nearly a year while only a half-hour drive from the capital of the nation. As testimonies from Quantico staff, health professionals, and the private himself continued late into the night all week, often for hours without intermissions, more unraveled about not just the torturous conditions imposed on Pfc. Manning but the blatant mismanagement in the same institution he is accused of blowing the whistle on.
Oh I saw that: Manning's crime wasn't quiet by the book either. Never in America's History has a natural born citizen released so much private government data for no other reason than to allow his country men to be embarrassed and slaughtered.
But the article completely ignores his crime, making him sound like a mistreated child, not a treasonous bastard
But the article completely ignores his crime, making him sound like a mistreated child, not a treasonous bastard
What is so bad about what he did? Someone had a video of a helicopter shooting children, and he gave that video to the media. Technically treason, but is it really that bad? Who is the victim of this crime?
> ...for no other reason...
Bias, exposed.
Bias, exposed.
Yup! I would shout it from the rooftops! I hate people who betray their friends family and fellow countrymen! Who break their word and pass off information that will definitely lead to their friend's death!
As someone who has served, I am disgusted by Manning too, but that doesn't mean that the Government should be treating him in the manner that it has.
> There is nothing new about prosecuting a soldier
His prosecution has not yet begun. This article is about the months of torture he has endured while awaiting prosecution. Nor does the article make any claims about his guilt or innocence (apart from using the term "alleged", and thereby not pre-declaring his guilt before trial as you have done). Presuming that he is guilty: do the guilty deserve torture? This isn't a case of "information extraction", the excuse that is often used nowadays. This is punishment, nothing but vengeance. I don't care what he's done; his treatment does not sit well with me.
His prosecution has not yet begun. This article is about the months of torture he has endured while awaiting prosecution. Nor does the article make any claims about his guilt or innocence (apart from using the term "alleged", and thereby not pre-declaring his guilt before trial as you have done). Presuming that he is guilty: do the guilty deserve torture? This isn't a case of "information extraction", the excuse that is often used nowadays. This is punishment, nothing but vengeance. I don't care what he's done; his treatment does not sit well with me.
Joining the military may strip you of legal rights, but it doesn't strip you of any human rights. The article is about human rights violations, not whether or not the government has committed a crime in the US legal system.
(Consider more obvious human rights violations protected by law in certain jurisdictions: stoning people to death for adultery, killing someone's entire family for writing an anti-government blog post, the list goes on. The mistreatment of Manning is just another entry in this long list.)
(Consider more obvious human rights violations protected by law in certain jurisdictions: stoning people to death for adultery, killing someone's entire family for writing an anti-government blog post, the list goes on. The mistreatment of Manning is just another entry in this long list.)
>but it doesn't strip you of any human rights.
In fact it does. When you join the Army you become property of the US Army. You lose most all legal and civil protection.
In fact it does. When you join the Army you become property of the US Army. You lose most all legal and civil protection.
Human rights are inalienable and cannot be taken away by the United States government or any other government.
I was married to a soldier for many years. They protect your right to get three square meals a day, to get your mail and to get something like four hours of sleep a day. They will make allowances for behaviors that would normally be termed "insubordination" if you have been awake excessively long (I can't recall the exact number of hours this applies to, possibly 24 hours). There isn't much else you can count on.
I am not saying that justifies torture. But your rights are substantially different in the military. You are officially AWOL if you are late to formation (i.e. Being late to work is a potentially serious crime if they want to make a big deal out of it). You cannot call in sick. You show up for formation and after formation you request sick call. If the doctor puts you on profile and bed rest, you might be excused from work for a few days.
Etc.
It is not a normal job.
I am not saying that justifies torture. But your rights are substantially different in the military. You are officially AWOL if you are late to formation (i.e. Being late to work is a potentially serious crime if they want to make a big deal out of it). You cannot call in sick. You show up for formation and after formation you request sick call. If the doctor puts you on profile and bed rest, you might be excused from work for a few days.
Etc.
It is not a normal job.
Not exactly, something is only so if generally agreed by the public, and in this case the GP agrees that the Army can take any rights it wants.
At this point, you've failed to read my post twice. Could you please read the whole thing before responding again? Thanks. It's only four sentences.
So the "collateral murder" video wasn't worth airing?
That being aside, torture is wrong.
That being aside, torture is wrong.
The events in "Collateral Murder" had already been reported, in detail, almost scene-for-scene, because Reuters was shown the video shortly after the event.
Nope.
In WWII such things happened all the time. its not always clear who the enemy is, and it's far better to be alive and sorry than dead.
For more information on chaotic wars look no further than Orwell's account of the Spanish Civil War. There were more than three sides who would alternate alliances on an almost daily basis, Orwell himself would shoot anyone who held a gun and appeared to be a threat -- and he was supposed to be a non-partial reporter!
Also it's unclear what torture took place, the article fails to mention anything worse than what happens to child molesters in regular prisons, and Manning's crime is of the same caliber, whether you like the US's actions or not betraying your word and countrymen is a terrible crime.
Also it's unclear what torture took place, the article fails to mention anything worse than what happens to child molesters in regular prisons, and Manning's crime is of the same caliber, whether you like the US's actions or not betraying your word and countrymen is a terrible crime.
He should have his day in court.
I wonder if there's a legal framework for reducing his sentence due to the harsh, probably Unconstitutional treatment?