Unfortunately, I have to concur with Glenn Greenwald in his condemnation of the treatment of Bradley Manning. I agreed with P.J. Crowley. I consider him to have made a principled stand, as he clearly sacrificed his career to protest Bradley’s treatment. The president ought to have been shamed, but instead he forced Crowley out. I am not one of the people who supports what Manning did, but he’s an American citizen and a human being and he should be treated like one.
About The Author
BooMan
Martin Longman a contributing editor at the Washington Monthly. He is also the founder of Booman Tribune and Progress Pond. He has a degree in philosophy from Western Michigan University.
13 Comments
Recent Posts
- Day 14: Louisiana Senator Approvingly Compares Trump to Stalin
- Day 13: Elon Musk Flexes His Muscles
- Day 12: While Elon Musk Takes Over, We Podcast With Driftglass and Blue Gal
- Day 11: Harm of Fascist Regime’s Foreign Aid Freeze Comes Into View
- Day 10: The Fascist Regime Blames a Plane Crash on Nonwhite People
I am not sure that they can prove what they are alleging he “did.” Seems like they’re trying to coerce a full confession out of him by progressively driving him crazy while he awaits the long overdue process.
They’ll never go to trial unless they’ve got something they’re sure they can get a conviction with.
If that never happens, they just keep torturing him until he’s too damaged to stand trial, then keep him imprisoned as long as they like.
It’s a win/win for them; in the worst case they’ve made a horrifying example of him, nobody’s going to try that again.
-Jay-
There is something very strange about this whole case. Al Jazeera English interviewed the guy who turned him in today. The guy was very creepy. He just gave off vibes of something not being right either in his head or what he was saying or having to say.
What publicly appears to be true is that Bradley Manning is being punished before trial. The only reason that I can think of as to why that would be happening is to create false evidence. Or the Marines are being vindictive.
The President’s relationship to the rights guaranteed under the Constitution has been very strange from the beginning. Especially for a lecturer in Constitutional law.
Heh, how do you define strange exactly?
Booman,
Why don’t you support Bradley Manning? He exposed all sort of shameful and illegal activity on the part of our own government and others around the world. What is a principled person supposed to do in circumstances such as those he faced?
I assume he has the same feelings as Radley Balko (the only person worth reading at Reason magazine):
Balko is free to make whatever assumptions he likes about Manning’s motivations and his psychiatric condition, but he is hardly qualified to make a real judgment about either. I am also free to make the assumption that Bradley Manning acted courageously based on principal, and to consider him a latter-day Daniel Ellsberg.
In fact, now that I think about it, didn’t they try to show that Ellsbert had psychiatric problems as well?
In any case, Bradley Manning exposed things that badly needed to be exposed, and whatever his motivation, or whatever his psychiatric state I thank him for that.
What illegal activity? What were Mannings intentions? I read he just dumped a ton of info and gave them to Assange. I have yet to hear that Manning was after a specific illegal activity.
The treatment of Bradley Manning isn’t about Manning. It’s sending a message to any other potential government whistleblowers, regardless of their circumstances, that they risk not just prison time but being utterly broken, physically and mentally, if they follow their conscience. The piling on of charges and the prison treatment of him are all of a piece.
Whether you approve of Manning’s actions or not is immaterial. This isn’t about what he did; it’s about what other people inspired by him (and by WikiLeaks) might do. That they’re not even bothering to wait for a conviction tells us, first, that due process is considered an annoying formality, and second, that our government still has a lot it’s hiding from us, and that some of it is uglier than we can imagine.
I think the way they are treating Bradley Manning has two purposes. I think one purpose is, as you have said, to send a strong message to anyone else who contemplates exposing government misdeeds. I think another purpose is specifically to completely break Bradley Manning in order to punish him severely for exposing government misdeeds.
Yesterday I attended an Arab Women’s Conference. The keynote speakers were Layla Al Arian, daughter of Sami Al Arian, and Noor El Ashi, daughter of Ghassan El Ashi of the Holy Land Fund, a Muslim charity that was shut down by the Bush administration shortly after September 11, although the contributions they made were not different from those of non-Muslim organizations such as the Red Cross. If you are unfamiliar with the cases of Sami Al Arian and Ghassan El Ashi and the Holy Land Fund, I encourage you to read something about them. You could also check out the case of the L.A. Eight, specifically my Palestinian friend and colleague Michel Shehada (a Christian, by the way), and how they were persecuted by the U.S. government for twenty years (Michel’s ordeal ended a couple of years ago, finally, but his life will never be the same, though he seems to be thriving now).
As I listened to Layla and Noor tell their stories (and as I recall Michel’s twenty-year ordeal) the question that kept repeating in my mind is why the government continues to relentlessly go after these people and others like them, given the fact that they must know they have no case whatsoever. Your analysis of the Bradley Manning situation is the only one that makes sense in these three cases. They are looking to send a warning to others. Do not advocate publicly for the “wrong” causes and the “wrong” people (in all three cases, the Palestinian people, among others), and do not attempt to give aid of any kind to ease the suffering of the “wrong” people. If you do, the United States government will do whatever it takes to destroy your life, and your family too.
Manning is not a whistleblower. What crimes did he expose? Why do a random dump instead of specific documents leading to prosecution of a person or group.
People are truly gulible. They believe things without one iota of proof.
Manning’s lawyer has been portraying Manning as a victim. He is blaming the US military of abusive treatment of Manning.
Glenn Greenwald chimes in and escalates the story.
Greenwald is in Brazil.
Manning’s lawyer is deflecting attention from the charges against his client. Not once have I heard or read that the lawyer has proclaimed that Manning is innocent.
The result of the lawyer’s tactics is that some people belive that Manning’s father is a creep that isn’t telling the truth about his son’s treatment and Barak Obama is a liar.
The problem is that people don’t look at the entire situation and what is being told about Manning. It is the old emotional drama and lack of facts that sway people.
Greenwald doesn’t care for Obama.
Manning’s lawyer is looking out for his client.
All of a sudden, whatever the lawyer and Greenwald say is 100% true.
No wonder the US got into the Iraq War in 2003. This the same thing.
I find it fascinating that progressives are completely ignoring what Bradley Manning’s father had to say about his son’s situation. Well, not all of them. Those that do acknowledge his comments try to undermine them by making wild accusations about the father’s character.