The treatment of Manning and eventual treatment of Assange will be our generation's Vietnam - an active demonstration of our government's willingness to lie to and abuse us, a touchstone for all who are seeking a reason not to cooperate.
The treatment of Manning and eventual treatment of Assange will be our generation's Vietnam - an active demonstration of our government's willingness to lie to and abuse us, a touchstone for all who are seeking a reason not to cooperate.
It would certainly be nice if that was the case. However, it's much more likely the average American doesn't know (or care) about Manning, other than the occasional footnote on the 10 o'clock news, and in a year or two he will be forgotten.
Except we're not talking about policy, we're talking about this generation's Vietnam. The average American knows about Vietnam. The average American knows about 9/11. The average American does not know about Manning, nor is likely to in a year's time.
Waco and Ruby Ridge were also "active demonstration[s] of our government's willingness to lie to and abuse us, a touchstone for all who are seeking a reason not to cooperate."
Bradley Manning made an oath to serve as a faithful soldier and broke it. He received the same treatment any prisoner in this country does and I can find little wrong in what happened to him.
At Ruby Ridge, a man had his entire family shot to death by federal agents over a missed court date and an entrapment scheme, while at Waco, the federal government badgered a doomsday cult into killing themselves at the very least.
> He received the same treatment any prisoner in this country does and I can find little wrong in what happened to him.
It's your prerogative whether you "find little wrong" with the way any person is treated, but the bit about his treatment being the same as any other prisoner is pretty willfully obtuse.
The suicide watch he was placed on was a bum-standard procedure, believe it or not.
The judge in his trial has ruled that he was kept in prevention of suicide status far longer than was necessary, but they don't seem to have innovated any special procedures for Manning.
At the same time, it's not everyday that an intelligent soldier with mental issues and possible gender identity confusion on the most far-reaching modern case of deliberate information leakage comes into your brig. Manning's own lawyers admit that he joked about killing himself, and especially at first there was the real danger of being killed by one of the other prisoners. And the fallout of Manning being killed in prison would be extreme, to say the least.
Manning was not treated like a general prisoner, but at least part of that was because he wasn't just a random prisoner accused of a normal crime.
Comments
Everyone paying attention feels this way.
The treatment of Manning and eventual treatment of Assange will be our generation's Vietnam - an active demonstration of our government's willingness to lie to and abuse us, a touchstone for all who are seeking a reason not to cooperate.
The treatment of Manning and eventual treatment of Assange will be our generation's Vietnam - an active demonstration of our government's willingness to lie to and abuse us, a touchstone for all who are seeking a reason not to cooperate.
It would certainly be nice if that was the case. However, it's much more likely the average American doesn't know (or care) about Manning, other than the occasional footnote on the 10 o'clock news, and in a year or two he will be forgotten.
We're lucky, then, that the Average American has no effect on policy.
I'm afraid that indifference might well have an effect on policy.
Except we're not talking about policy, we're talking about this generation's Vietnam. The average American knows about Vietnam. The average American knows about 9/11. The average American does not know about Manning, nor is likely to in a year's time.
Waco and Ruby Ridge were also "active demonstration[s] of our government's willingness to lie to and abuse us, a touchstone for all who are seeking a reason not to cooperate."
Except three times as much, really.
Bradley Manning made an oath to serve as a faithful soldier and broke it. He received the same treatment any prisoner in this country does and I can find little wrong in what happened to him.
At Ruby Ridge, a man had his entire family shot to death by federal agents over a missed court date and an entrapment scheme, while at Waco, the federal government badgered a doomsday cult into killing themselves at the very least.
> He received the same treatment any prisoner in this country does and I can find little wrong in what happened to him.
It's your prerogative whether you "find little wrong" with the way any person is treated, but the bit about his treatment being the same as any other prisoner is pretty willfully obtuse.
The suicide watch he was placed on was a bum-standard procedure, believe it or not.
The judge in his trial has ruled that he was kept in prevention of suicide status far longer than was necessary, but they don't seem to have innovated any special procedures for Manning.
At the same time, it's not everyday that an intelligent soldier with mental issues and possible gender identity confusion on the most far-reaching modern case of deliberate information leakage comes into your brig. Manning's own lawyers admit that he joked about killing himself, and especially at first there was the real danger of being killed by one of the other prisoners. And the fallout of Manning being killed in prison would be extreme, to say the least.
Manning was not treated like a general prisoner, but at least part of that was because he wasn't just a random prisoner accused of a normal crime.