Bradley Manning Faces Death Penalty

[rmnunez]

Actually the issue is whether its accurate to characterize Manning as a political prisoner and his precautionary incarceration as some sort of torture. I disagree with these characterizations and I've explained why, Zee gets very excited about this issue, but can't seem to get beyond these distorted characterizations.

What is so unreasonable about needing even 7 months to put together such a complicated case?

Suppose only about a third of the materials the military has discovered Manning passed on to Wikileaks have been published, and the government would prefer the rest of them don't get broadcast, how would that affect Manning's situation?

Assange is a participant in this Wikileaks scandal, Manning is his source and the government wants to prosecute Assange. Would it be wrong for the government to use Manning's situation in bargaining with Assange? How about using information from Manning against Assange?

I think its an "open and shut case" to prove Manning improperly disseminated the mass of classified diplomatic cables to Wikileaks and that its unlikely he would be sentenced to death, but probably will be sentenced to about 30 years in military prison.

I also think the situation Manning is in offers the government all sorts of bargaining techniques to apply on Assange and this is the goal. I think Manning must be kept in 'limbo' until it is clear either Assange is completely unsympathetic to the poor Private's plight or unaffraid of whatever the government claims they found out from him.

No doubt Manning will be convicted in a court martial. His advocates won't be able to offer all sorts of expert witnesses to highlight the private's loable intentions and righteous indignation, he's going to get a military general sitting on the bench trully disgusted with the revolting private. No bleeding heart Legal Aid and ACLU entourage will prance around the military court's chambers entreating a jury to admire this reckless misconduct, I expect the jury will be calling for Manning's crucifixion!

[tishe]

Didn't the defence lawyers ask for a " mental capacity?' Are they are still waiting the outcome of that? 7 months is not long at all considering what they are accusing him of.

[rmnunez]

Yes, I'd expect a lengthy psychological evaluation could be helpful, this was very strange behaviour. I know the critical left thinks there was nothing "strange" in what Manning did, that it would be a natural reaction to the outrageous stuff revealed by these diplomatic cables, but frankly, I didn't think the diplomatic cables were outrageous at all.

[Zeebadee]

Actually the issue is whether its accurate to characterize Manning as a political prisoner and his precautionary incarceration as some sort of torture. I disagree with these characterizations and I've explained why, Zee gets very excited about this issue, but can't seem to get beyond these distorted characterizations.

Distorted characterizations??? "Precautionary incarceration"??? Next you'll want us to believe that Manning is being held for his own good.

What is so unreasonable about needing even 7 months to put together such a complicated case?

"Complicated case"?? You must be joking, you've characterized it all along as cut and dried, Manning is guilty! Has the government got a case or doesn't it?? Since evidence of his guilt should have been necessary to effect an arrest, how many months of incarceration would you consider reasonable before scheduling a trial?

Suppose only about a third of the materials the military has discovered Manning passed on to Wikileaks have been published, and the government would prefer the rest of them don't get broadcast, how would that affect Manning's situation?

Since Manning has absolutely no control over what's already been released, it shouldn't affect his situation at all.

Assange is a participant in this Wikileaks scandal, Manning is his source and the government wants to prosecute Assange.

The let the government go after Assange.

Would it be wrong for the government to use Manning's situation in bargaining with Assange? How about using information from Manning against Assange?

This is the crux of the issue. The government is going to subvert the Constitution in an effort to break Manning and get evidence, real or imagined, to go after Assange.

I think its an "open and shut case" to prove Manning improperly disseminated the mass of classified diplomatic cables to Wikileaks and that its unlikely he would be sentenced to death, but probably will be sentenced to about 30 years in military prison.

How can that be in such a "complicated case"??

I also think the situation Manning is in offers the government all sorts of bargaining techniques to apply on Assange and this is the goal.

Disgusting. You must be at the bottom of the lawyer pool, as low as that may be. Perhaps Manning should just be tortured until he says whatever it is that the government wants him to say, true or not.

I think Manning must be kept in 'limbo' until it is clear either Assange is completely unsympathetic to the poor Private's plight or unaffraid of whatever the government claims they found out from him.

Anything Manning says now will always be suspect. Of course, our current administration isn't really interested in the truth, it only wants a pretext that can be defended as rational for any abuse of the Constitution.

No doubt Manning will be convicted in a court martial. His advocates won't be able to offer all sorts of expert witnesses to highlight the private's loable intentions and righteous indignation, he's going to get a military general sitting on the bench trully disgusted with the revolting private. No bleeding heart Legal Aid and ACLU entourage will prance around the military court's chambers entreating a jury to admire this reckless misconduct, I expect the jury will be calling for Manning's crucifixion!

This is just sickening. You really have hit a new low.

[Zeebadee]

Didn't the defence lawyers ask for a " mental capacity?' Are they are still waiting the outcome of that? 7 months is not long at all considering what they are accusing him of.

Ok, please explain why 7 months isn't long at all. Does the government have any evidence? Then why not go to trial? If it was you in jail would 7 months still seem reasonable?

[minorwork]

Ok, please explain why 7 months isn't long at all. Does the government have any evidence? Then why not go to trial? If it was you in jail would 7 months still seem reasonable?

Knew a guy was 2 years getting his trial. Good guy too. Bi-polar though and could not handle alcohol at all. This country does not offer good programs for the mentally ill. Drew eight years and credit for time served. Left a small vanilla bottle with Estes rocket fuel in it at a gas station convenience store parking lot and called in a bomb threat to watch the action. What a cluster that was. Damn fruitcakes anyhow. Try to help 'em and get it in the end.

[tishe]

Doesn't matter if he is a "Political prisoner." Doesn't matter if it has been 7 months. He messed up. He made the sad mistake of f------ with the Military and, sad to say, our government. He may be a scapegoat, a martyr, dude messed up.
@ rmnunez,, they will not call for his crucifixion. Too much publicity, too much doubt, too much at stake. Did ya all ever think, he blew it? No matter the reasons, not exactly a smart boy. I will duck now.

[Dan74]

Doesn't matter if he is a "Political prisoner." Doesn't matter if it has been 7 months. He messed up. He made the sad mistake of f------ with the Military and, sad to say, our government. He may be a scapegoat, a martyr, dude messed up.
@ rmnunez,, they will not call for his crucifixion. Too much publicity, too much doubt, too much at stake. Did ya all ever think, he blew it? No matter the reasons, not exactly a smart boy. I will duck now.

Did Gandhi "mess up"?

[rmnunez]

To compare Manning with Ghandi is far beyond hyperbole.

[Dan74]

To compare Manning with Ghandi is far beyond hyperbole.

No it isn't. They both broke the law. Neither used violence.

[rmnunez]

They were both male too.

[Dan74]

Look, like it or not, but laws CAN be broken for the greater good. No actual harm was done through WikiLeaks.

Gandhi's resistance unlawfully occupied British factories. Should they have been put in jail?

If I might make one small point also: You support the Patriot Act and Fisa, because it's for the greater good, right? Isn't that breaking the law, for the "greater good"?