Last active
3 years, 10 months ago
  • The “voluntary” signing statements demands seem Soviet-like—a sophisticated attempt to confuse the prisoner and his sense of autonomy and judgment and decision making. A whole other level of torture….

  • The use of a 76 Board after so much time smells a little. To assess his mental health? Is there a 77 Board to assess the state of his ethics? Make him ill with solitary and drugs, and then measure it? I smell sulphur. What everyone should be measuring is justice. Like, how much of it is there? And why. And how you determine what to measure in that case (justice).

  • I find Dawn5′s comment fascinating: “…the only reason he (Manning) can’t do something about it is there is no place to appeal it to.” The absence of a confrontable authority? Kafkaesque. I would suggest starting at the top. Who knows how to write to or call the White House? Specifically, the President.

  • There have been insinuations that Manning is gay. Being gay (if he is, and that’s no one’s business but his), being 5’2″, and weighing 105 pounds would make him a target for generalized bullying and punishment. If that is going on, it does not reflect well on the Department of Defense, which is well-known for tolerating all kinds of sexual and homophobic harassment. Add religious intolerance, weak cross-cultural understanding, successful enemy formation conditioning (patriotism), and you have a recipe for Inquisition-like behavior toward the identified inside Enemy of National Security. Notice it is so-called National Security, not the nation, that he is accused of betraying. Morell even mentions the attack helicopter revelations as being part of Manning’s betrayal. I think the nation saw war crimes being committed in that clip. The National Security apparatus does not like being made accountable for its war crimes. Who will bring charges against the war criminals? One could equally well admonish Morell and those he speaks for that the Nuremberg Rules protect the reporting of war crimes and require the punishment of war criminals. Un-prosecuted war crimes make the nation less secure.

  • Morell’s language and body language message: the Pentagon doesn’t have to answer to anyone.

  • Morell seemed arrogant, highly authoritarian, but mainly very, very angry underneath.

  • A great deal of law has been written around the Nuremberg Trials. Others know far more about it than I. The Nuremberg Defense argues that a soldier is not responsible for war crimes ordered by a superior officer. Command Responsibility argues that the superior officer is responsible for war crimes he ordered and/or carried out. The question is: Is there a Nuremberg principle that allows a soldier to refuse to carry out an illegal (war crimes) order? Or to expose what the soldier feels is a war crime? Cheney and Bush lied the U.S. into a war with Iraq, invading a non-belligerent foreign country, killing large numbers of that population; suspended habeas corpus; “legalized” torture; invented the contradictory term “illegal enemy combatant.” Bush/Cheney (Obama) covered up the truth to commit war crimes; Private Manning presumably revealed the truth to prevent or expose war crimes. Who is right? Can Manning argue some kind of Nuremberg principle in his own defense?

  • sterling150 became a registered member

    2011-01-23 08:04:20View | Delete