USAF Lt. Col: Bradley Manning has rights!

[witness23]

You give me entirely too much credit ....... but I'll take it nonetheless ....

I must be careful that my singularity of your posts aren't taken as having a "bromance" or "man-crush" on you.

 

[Turtle]

Fair enough ... I accept your assertion that it was an inadvertent error.

Yeah, it was just badly phrased. I wrote "liberal blogs," then thought I should probably state where it came from, and did so without realizing that a direct connection was made between the two.

The singularity eh ?

That almost sounds scientific .... or somethin' ....

Too much Sheldon Cooper.

And kinda sounds kinda like some vast liberal/libertarian conspiracy .....

Newp. Simply watched too much Sheldon Cooper last night.

If I had to guess, some of what's there probably gets restated elsewhere as well ..... possibly a libertarian blog or two ..... and maybe even a few conservative ones as well, depending on the mindset ...

If I had to guess, I'd say it's been restated in a plethora of places of all types. The more sensational something is, the more it gets replicated. Bradley Manning being tortured is pretty sensational, since waterboarding and torture has been in the minds of most everyone these days, so using that term is a pretty sensational way to push buttons. Never mind that fact that many other prisoners are subjected to the very same conditions and very few of those who call it torture in Manning's case call it torture in the other cases.

Of course, some folks might even see things in a similar way, having come to those conclusions on their own ....

Almost certainly. But some folks wouldn't take the time to go to the original, original source, that of Coomb's site, and see the facts as they were presented by him, and then come to their own conclusions. Many people prefer other's conclusions to their own. It's easier that way.

(I expect people are Googling Sheldon Cooper by now)

 

[usafk9]

I concur, Witness. Way entertaining. Most definitely the parts about relinquishing your liberties when you take the oath, and the alleged pretrial confinement TORTURE of the suspect that falls in line with ACA confinement standards that are followed by most states, including...........wait for it.........MICHIGAN!

Oh, and please keep making your quarterlies in a timely fashion, Greg. That contract that you deem of little value to you means something to me. Or should we look at the 'arrangements' you have with a broker or shipper to be equally moot after you've lived up to your end? Sorry, man, you'll have to share in 'the sacrifice'.

Fifteen years and four months is when I'm scheduled to collect my first check. And no. I'm not holding my breath. Wife isn't for hers, either.

You are now being returned to your regularly scheduled bromance (sorry, couldn't help it.....never used that word before).





What the heck was I thinking wandering into this room?

 

[RLENT]

I must be careful that my singularity of your posts aren't taken as having a "bromance" or "man-crush" on you.

.... indeed Dahlink ..... indeed .....

 

[AMonger]

It's a bit of a stretch to think that Karen Kwiatkowski is a household name, and it's obvious she thinks that the military should be run like a civilian bureaucracy complete with the social experimentation and political correctness that's so fashionable today.

Lt. Col Kwiatkowski does not back political correctness. She is probably a paleoconservative/libertarian hybrid, like me, though I've never heard her label herself. I've read countless of her articles, though, so I'm fairly confident about that.

The thing is, being a paleoconservative, she reveres the rule of law and Bill of Rights, unlike today's so-called conservatives, who slobber over all things official and governmental, regardless of what that does to our rights.

My guess is that you're substantially to the left of Lt. Col. Kwiatkowski, but you just don't realize it, and even if you're not really LEFT, but just kind of squishy neo-con. Did you back Bush the Dimmer?

The way he's being treated in prison sounds like speculation on the part of his advocates. He's actually got blankets and pillows, although they might not be soft enough for his tender white flesh. He doesn't have cotton sheets because they don't want him to hang himself. There's no reason to feel sympathy for this punk - hopefully, others like him in that are in the military will think twice before they ignore the oath they took when they volunteered.

This says loads about you and about others who share your views. Your statement shows that you would detain him punitively. At this point, not having been tried, he's guilty of nothing. Pre-trial confinement is only to ensure that he is present for his trial. Yet you're applying it as a deterrent to others--that his conditions are bad enough that others won't follow suit. For that to be true, his current confinement has to be punitive. That's not the American Way. Please renounce your citizenship immediately.

The comparison between the victimized fictional movie character and Manning is just a load of BS. Manning released highly classified documents and in doing to provided aid to our enemies. Anyone who is remotely familiar with the Constitution knows that's treason,

Allegedly released documents.

Assume for a moment that you're right (you're not, but let's go with it anyway for the sake of argument). Even if that's true, he hasn't yet had a trial, so as of this moment, he's guilty of nothing. I realize that there are a lot of people who are in favor of shooting anyone who does anything that could remotely have the potential for possibly having a theoretical, minute negative impact on our glorious troops, but in American jurisprudence, we have this principle called a trial, and another one called the presumption of innocence, both of which exist under both civil law and the UCMJ. As yet, Pvt. Manning hasn't had his day in court. That being the case, Mr. Lenin, do you think you might remove the thumbscrews, just for now?

and anyone who's been in the military knows that orders must be followed without exception.

Never seen the Nuremberg Trials, have you? That defense didn't work so good then, and it's not valid now.

The exact extent of the damage done will take a while to evaluate

And yet you're ready to have the guy executed. The facts can come in later. They're just minor inconveniences in today's America.

and even then probably won't all be public knowledge. The fact that people are shocked because he's been tossed into a jail cell for what he's done says something about our society in general.

I don't think anybody's shocked that he's being detained for trial. But at this point, he's not guilty of a d*** thing, and you regard no hardship as undue and are ready to hang the guy. That's what's shocking. That's what says something about society.

 

[EnglishLady]

Can someone give a brief outline of what would be the norm in a military prison for someone awaiting trial.

 

[witness23]

Lt. Col Kwiatkowski does not back political correctness. She is probably a paleoconservative/libertarian hybrid, like me, though I've never heard her label herself. I've read countless of her articles, though, so I'm fairly confident about that.

The thing is, being a paleoconservative, she reveres the rule of law and Bill of Rights, unlike today's so-called conservatives, who slobber over all things official and governmental, regardless of what that does to our rights.

My guess is that you're substantially to the left of Lt. Col. Kwiatkowski, but you just don't realize it, and even if you're not really LEFT, but just kind of squishy neo-con. Did you back Bush the Dimmer?


This says loads about you and about others who share your views. Your statement shows that you would detain him punitively. At this point, not having been tried, he's guilty of nothing. Pre-trial confinement is only to ensure that he is present for his trial. Yet you're applying it as a deterrent to others--that his conditions are bad enough that others won't follow suit. For that to be true, his current confinement has to be punitive. That's not the American Way. Please renounce your citizenship immediately.



Allegedly released documents.

Assume for a moment that you're right (you're not, but let's go with it anyway for the sake of argument). Even if that's true, he hasn't yet had a trial, so as of this moment, he's guilty of nothing. I realize that there are a lot of people who are in favor of shooting anyone who does anything that could remotely have the potential for possibly having a theoretical, minute negative impact on our glorious troops, but in American jurisprudence, we have this principle called a trial, and another one called the presumption of innocence, both of which exist under both civil law and the UCMJ. As yet, Pvt. Manning hasn't had his day in court. That being the case, Mr. Lenin, do you think you might remove the thumbscrews, just for now?




Never seen the Nuremberg Trials, have you? That defense didn't work so good then, and it's not valid now.



And yet you're ready to have the guy executed. The facts can come in later. They're just minor inconveniences in today's America.



I don't think anybody's shocked that he's being detained for trial. But at this point, he's not guilty of a d*** thing, and you regard no hardship as undue and are ready to hang the guy. That's what's shocking. That's what says something about society.

Well said sir.

 

[witness23]

.... indeed Dahlink ..... indeed .....

Now that's funny

 

[RLENT]

Gotta luv Zsa Zsa .....

 

[witness23]

Gotta luv Zsa Zsa .....

Her and Mr. and Mrs. Howell the III, luvvie.

 

[aristotle]

I predict Manning has a very dire future and will never know freedom again. He is certainly entitled to a speedy trial and swift justice per the UCMJ. ... can't say as much for that effeminate Australian elf. As long as Obama remains in office, Assange shouldn't sweat too much. Birds of a feather, sorta. It appears the only thing closer to Obama's heart than the homosexual lobby is the siren call of America haters. Yes, elections have consequences.

 

[Black Sheep]

My guess is that you're substantially to the left of Lt. Col. Kwiatkowski, but you just don't realize it, and even if you're not really LEFT, but just kind of squishy neo-con. Did you back Bush the Dimmer?

You obviously have no clue where my political core beliefs lie, but your philosophy does indeed seem to be hybrid, to say the least. Sounds like the "anything goes" group that is so concerned with individual rights and somehow forgets about responsibilities. And yes, I did support W when given the choice between him and Al Gore or John Kerry. The "dimmer" label takes away any credibility you might have in this argument. That old liberal label was just plain silly to begin with, considering his academic accomplishments were superior to either of his Democrat opponents. But hey, Alinsky's rules are effective.

This says loads about you and about others who share your views. Your statement shows that you would detain him punitively. At this point, not having been tried, he's guilty of nothing. Pre-trial confinement is only to ensure that he is present for his trial. Yet you're applying it as a deterrent to others--that his conditions are bad enough that others won't follow suit. For that to be true, his current confinement has to be punitive. That's not the American Way. Please renounce your citizenship immediately.

The "American Way"?? What exactly is that, not that it matters because what applies right now to Manning is the Military Way as defined by the UCMJ. It also might be the case that they're keeping him in solitary for his own protection, since he's an open homosexual and accused of being a traitor.

Allegedly released documents.
Never seen the Nuremberg Trials, have you? That defense didn't work so good then, and it's not valid now.
And yet you're ready to have the guy executed. The facts can come in later. They're just minor inconveniences in today's America.
I don't think anybody's shocked that he's being detained for trial. But at this point, he's not guilty of a d*** thing, and you regard no hardship as undue and are ready to hang the guy. That's what's shocking. That's what says something about society.

He's been recorded admitting to stealing and releasing the documents, bragging about how easy it was. You're also mis-stating what I said, which was that he's entitled to a speedy trial.
Obviously, you've never been in the military and don't know WTF you're talking about. When an individual signs a contract and takes the oath there are certain civilian processes that left behind because this self-centered concern about all these "rights" takes a back seat to the missions and duties that are assigned. The reason that Manning is in the brig right now is because he disobeyed orders, and that's enough reason right there to get court-martialed. The military simply can't function without the command structure being strictly enforced, and spoiled brats like this can't be allowed to openly defy authority because it gets people killed. For soldiers that are in combat situations, or even those in close support roles, it's essential that this fundamental rule take place above their "rights". There's a reason you don't see "Question Authority" bumper stickers on military bases.

 

[AMonger]

You obviously have no clue where my political core beliefs lie, but your philosophy does indeed seem to be hybrid, to say the least.

I got a pretty good handle on your political beliefs by your stance on rights. No one whose stance on rights is as amorphous as yours is a conservative. Col. Kwiatkowski is.

And yes, I did support W when given the choice between him and Al Gore or John Kerry. The "dimmer" label takes away any credibility you might have in this argument. That old liberal label was just plain silly to begin with, considering his academic accomplishments were superior to either of his Democrat opponents. But hey, Alinsky's rules are effective.

"The Dimmer" isn't a liberal label; it's a label given him by people who were far more conservative than he to differentiate him from his father, who, though not a conservative either, had more brain cells than his son.

The "American Way"?? What exactly is that, not that it matters because what applies right now to Manning is the Military Way as defined by the UCMJ. It also might be the case that they're keeping him in solitary for his own protection, since he's an open homosexual and accused of being a traitor.

1. We are talking about the American military, right? So that would be the American Way, and the Bill of Rights still applies to him.
2. First I've heard of the homosexual bit. You have anything to back that up?
3. He is not accused of being a traitor. Treason is not part of the charges.

Obviously, you've never been in the military and don't know WTF you're talking about. When an individual signs a contract and takes the oath there are certain civilian processes that left behind because this self-centered concern about all these "rights" takes a back seat to the missions and duties that are assigned.

I was in the military, and was taught during basic training how we didn't forfeit any rights, and how the Bill of Rights still applies. There was a specific class taught on that during basic. Also covered were the legality of orders. Were you sick that day of basic?

The reason that Manning is in the brig right now is because he disobeyed orders, and that's enough reason right there to get court-martialed.

The reason Manning is there is because he embarrassed the government by revealing what *******es they've been.

 

[jaminjim]

Is there anyone that either carries a weapon or that leads people that carry them that you have any respect for?

 

[jaminjim]

Can someone give a brief outline of what would be the norm in a military prison for someone awaiting trial.

That would depend on what they are accused of.
AWOL from a weekend work detail = a walk in the park.
Mouthing off to a superior = cleaning the park
Striking a superior = mysteriously bunked with the biggest angry man of the opposite race.
Failure to deploy = see above with the addition of the word gay.
Murderer = depends.
Child molester = Kept with the general population if left in the hands of NCO's

 

[RLENT]

I predict Manning has a very dire future and will never know freedom again.

That's one way it could go ....

I'm curious though why you think that, given that the military answers to civil authority, specifically the CIC first, then Congress.

Considering who the CIC is at the moment, and your comments below about Assange ...... something ain't jivin' .....

He is certainly entitled to a speedy trial and swift justice per the UCMJ. ... can't say as much for that effeminate Australian elf.

What would Assange be entitled to ?

As long as Obama remains in office, Assange shouldn't sweat too much.

Oh .... I would disagree entirely ....

Birds of a feather, sorta.

I would say that they are polar opposites.

Now if you had said W and Obama instead, that I coulda got onboard with

It appears the only thing closer to Obama's heart than the homosexual lobby is the siren call of America haters. Yes, elections have consequences.

You left out the Muslims .... don't forget the Muslims .....

 

[Pilgrim]

Is there anyone that either carries a weapon or that leads people that carry them that you have any respect for?

Just read the last line of the signature quote in the post above yours (#53) - tells you all you need to know. You're commenting to someone who simply does not understand the military, but in this day and age that's fairly common. We even have a president that doesn't understand the military, its purpose and how it must function in order to be effective.

 

[RLENT]

Just read the last line of the signature quote in the post above yours (#53) - tells you all you need to know.

Actually it might tell ya many different things .... but before that would ever happen, you would actually have to have the desire to know and then ask ...

You're commenting to someone who simply does not understand the military ....

That's not necessarily true (although it possibly might be) - because it's not the only possible answer. Another possiblity is:

"You're commenting to someone who understands the military all too well ....."

 

[AMonger]

Just read the last line of the signature quote in the post above yours (#53) - tells you all you need to know. You're commenting to someone who simply does not understand the military, but in this day and age that's fairly common. We even have a president that doesn't understand the military, its purpose and how it must function in order to be effective.

Served in the military, with security clearances like Manning's. So yes, I do understand the military. Like Smedley Butler, a bona fide war hero, medal of honor awardee, and more medals than chest, maybe it's my military service that has brought me to what I believe.

When I was in, the government at least pretended to obey the Constitution.

 

[AMonger]

Actually it might tell ya many different things .... but before that would ever happen, you would actually have to have the desire to know and then ask ...


That's not necessarily true (although it possibly might be) - because it's not the only possible answer. Another possiblity is:

"You're commenting to someone who understands the military all too well ....."

Your sig line shows that you understand, too.