Obama should be impeached

What am I missing here? Is Obama the one who decided the harsh treatment? Is he there personally being harsh to the guy?? I mean, I get the whole Buck Stops Here thingy, but this doesn’t seem to be something that the president has direct responsibility for. And why is everyone so quick to draw the impeachment card?? It seems so spurious. I mean, if you are going to draw it for anything that happens that you don’t like during a presidents term, then the meaning of it gets totally watered down and in the end loses all that meaning in trivialities.

Don’t like Obama? Don’t freaking vote for him in the next election. Sheesh.


Others noted some problems with this.

I will add that as a US citizen he is entitled to a presumption of innocence till found guilty and a few other rights besides which includes not being fucking tortured.

You do realize if you are fine with that happening to him then you are fine with it happening to you or your brother or sister or wife or mother. As long as the government claims they are a traitor then the government can do what they want to them.

Really no different than living under Saddam Hussein was. I thought we were better than that.


The only thing the New York Times article says is that Manning is being forced to sleep naked, something millions of people do of their own volition.

Further, that he is being forced to stand at attention while naked. Not something many people do of their own volition, but being naked where others can see, against your will, is not at all an uncommon situation for a prisoner to find themselves in, even prisoners who are not convicted of crimes.

Anyone here ever been sent to a county lockup? You’re going to get strip searched. You might take a shit in the same room you and 2 other guys sleep in, while they’re in the room with you (although in many places if it’s lower security people try to use the toilet when no one else is in the room.) Jail isn’t fun. It is pretrial confinement and you don’t end up there for no reason at all. For soldiers just like civilians there are protections, but if there is enough evidence to satisfy a court that there is a case against you, and there is evidence that you should not be permitted out free during trial, you’ll end up incarcerated until the trial is over. This is something that thousands of people not named Bradley Manning go through every day of every year.

In some secure housing units in some prisons, guys are forced to strip naked and turn around and do three squats while a guard watches from the other side, every single time they leave their cell.

If a form of suicide prevention that is sometimes used in Naval brigs is having the inmate sleep naked, then there’s really nothing being done to Manning out of the ordinary. You’re entitled to your opinion he isn’t a suicide risk, but that isn’t your job to make that call. If it’s truly the case that Bradley Manning is the first person in the history of brigs to be housed naked because of a fear he might harm himself with his clothing then we might be able to say he’s being unfairly treated. Is it the case that he’s the only person in the history of naval brigs to be thus treated?

The U.S. military justice system operates under the same basic legal and judicial tenets as the civilian criminal justice system with minor variations to account for the unique nature of military service. He is being given due process, has a lawyer, will be tried by a jury, or possibly a judiciary panel, depending on how any pre-trial negations turn out, among other things.

If it was no different than under Saddam he’d already be dead.

What do you “claim” he is, if not a traitor?

Something this thread really exposes to me is that I think a lot of people don’t realize that pretrial confinement is basically the same thing as being in prison. The only difference is a lot of jails will be lower security and you will have more freedom of movement (compared to the most secure prisons, obviously.)

All the unpleasantness that comes with it is there, whether you’re in jail for pretrial confinement or in jail on a short sentence (in most states I’m familiar with convicted persons will be in jail on sentences shorter than 12 months.) If you think the process is the height of genocide and monstrous human behavior then I hate to break it to you, but thousands of people are subjected to pretrial confinement every day of every year right here in the United States. This has been the case since at least the 1700s, where is the great movement to stop this unimaginable injustice? That people who have not been convicted of crimes are forced to surrender their freedom, their dignity (strip searches are part of intake and sometimes happen during your stay) and et cetera. Not to mention they can be disciplined for misbehavior in jail, or if they are deemed to be security problems they can be put in more restrictive lock up in jail. All before a conviction. If that is the crux of the outrage, why is it only coming about with Manning? Is it because so many Americans were generally completely ignorant of the fact that unless you are granted bail, and unless you can make bail when granted, or unless you’re released on your own recognizance or under some form of supervised release, you are incarcerated until the end of your trial?

The UCMJ allows for torture?

There is no presumption of innocence?

The freaking UN decided to investigate torture allegations in this case.

Are we really a country where the UN should feel the need to investigate human rights violations?

As for him being a traitor has he been convicted of it?

My claim is he is a whistle blower. Generally that is something we admire in the US.

In what way has he been tortured? Can someone please mention specifics and not just post a bunch of links. Or if you post links at least tell us the gist of what the links say.

The fact that the UN is investigating this case for torture is meaningless. The UN is mostly populated by third world dictatorships that hate the United States and commit worse atrocities than most of you could imagine on a daily basis. Secondly, just as the fact that Manning has been investigated and arrested does not prove his guilt, existence of “investigations of torture” do not prove the act.

Ok and I agree.

Square that with this:

And this:

What are you calling torture? Being forced to stand naked for inspection?

And what evidence has been presented that he has, in fact, been tortured? From your linked article a Manning SUPPORTER has CLAIMED that he’s being tortured.

More than your presumption of guilt that he’s being tortured based on a claim by one of his supporters. :stuck_out_tongue: Yeah…in the UCMJ you are presumed innocent until proven guilty.

Are we really a country that automatically jumps to the conclusion that torture has been perpetrated simply because some claims it is so? Do you really not see that claims from his supporters that he’s supposedly being tortured and requests to investigate by the UN by those supporters might have other, um, goals than simply to ensure he’s not being tortured??

Then he’ll be able to prove that in court. Sadly for him, I don’t think it’s going to play out that way in reality…and this is a pretty obvious attempt to circumvent that by throwing mud in the water to obscure things and perhaps get things dismissed.


When the Unabomber was arrested he was housed in much the same conditions prior to conviction. Same for many other high profile arrests.

In fact, the Unabomber lives his life in those conditions. We’ve had threads in the past on permanent solitary. It’s a practice that is actually rarer than many think, but common enough (most major prisons have the facilities for it, is my understanding.) However, that’s neither here nor there. Considering the several hundred or perhaps thousands of high profile or high risk prisoners all across the entire country that have been living their lives as Bradley Manning has for the past few months for decades I still don’t get where this outrage is coming from.

I sort of expected it would go to the solitary issue.

Here’s the thing though, lots of people are kept in solitary, just like Manning. Have people complained about it before? Yes, they have. I’m not surprised, it is a harsh practice. I myself have mixed feelings on it.

Is it torture? Well, the United States hasn’t signed any treaties that call such treatment of our own prisoners torture (meaning our own criminals, not POWs.) The laws of the United States do not deem it prohibited. There has been a study saying we should abandon the practice. So, controversial? Yes. Exceptional and something that never existed prior to Bradley Manning? No, it is used frequently enough and existed long before Manning was arrested. Torture? No, not under current legal standards in the United States. Illegal? No, not under current legal standards in the United States.

I get why it is controversial. What I still guess I’m confused about is the “shocked outrage.” It’d be one thing if the people complaining about this were the same people that were complaining about ADX Florence, 23 hour lock downs in state prisons and et cetera. But instead the tone I’m hearing is “OH MY GOD CAN YOU BELIEVE WHAT THEY ARE DOING TO BRADLEY MANNING?” Exactly why are we supposed to be shocked here? You guys do realize the History channel and MSNBC’s “Lockup” have been showing this stuff on TV for like 15 years at this point. If you think the practice should be ended, I have no issue with that. But don’t act like this is some totally abnormal thing that has happened that has no precedence in American penal institutions. That’s what is making me scratch my head, nothing is being done to Manning that isn’t routinely done in the prison system. I don’t mean to say it is done to most prisoners, but it happens enough that it is routine.

Oh man have I missed you!

Wow. You’re playing the Nazi card? Against President Obama? Just. Wow. I have no words. Well, maybe a couple. . . I think my people would have enjoyed simply being naked as opposed to being gassed to death. But that’s just a guess.

Unless, of course, it’s SOP to remove all clothing from someone on suicide watch so they don’t, you know, use them to strangle themselves or some such thing? I was arrested once for an unpaid traffic ticket (lawyer’s fault. Irrelevant story). They took every single solitary thing away from me except my clothing. Everything. If I had been suicidal, I wouldn’t have been the least bit surprised to have found myself nekkid.

Naked for seven hours?

No sheets? No pillow?

Solitary confinement for seven months? (This is the big one…solitary can drive people insane)

Look, as mentioned above I am not expecting the guy to get a cabana by a poll and hot oil rubdowns by naked women. How about the usual jail for people awaiting trial?

“Interviews with several people directly familiar with the conditions of Manning’s detention, ultimately including a Quantico brig official (Lt. Brian Villiard) who confirmed much of what they conveyed, establishes that the accused leaker is subjected to detention conditions likely to create long-term psychological injuries.”

Which one is the patsy we can’t trust?

Who is his supporter again? If you want to discredit evidence cited you need more than “he’s a supporter”. That is itself should make one look closer but does not mean he is lying either.

Then debunk my cites.

I have little doubt he’ll be thrown under the bus and repeatedly run over. The guy is screwed. The powers that be will see to it he is assfucked from now till forever to make anyone else who might want to point out government corruption to think twice and then a third time.

The Unabomber was arrested for violent crimes. The Unabomber was palpably crazy. Manning is none of that.

Was the Unabomber held in those conditions before conviction? Are all prisoners awaiting trial held in those conditions?

Do you agree you are innocent till proven guilty in the US? Should you suffer the maximum punishment while being held and awaiting trial before conviction? Especially for a non-violent crime and no evidence from you that you are a danger to yourself or others?

The level of incarceration you are ok with is generally reserved for the worst of the worst.

I share your desire to see Obama out of office, though I’m happy to wait till 2012. As far as Manning, I hope he is granted a speedy trial, and if found guilty of treason, that he as soon as possible escape the ability to feel even the slightest discomfort.

When you get to a point either in the Federal Government, the military, or even just as a contractor working for said entities in pretty much any field if you get a security clearance that comes with responsibilities.

An accountant that reveals corporate fraud is breaking their duty to keep their client’s information private, but is doing so for the greater good. That can be admirable.

A manager that reveals corporate fraud is breaking their duty to their shareholders. But doing so is for the greater good, that can be admirable.

A person with a security clearance has given up some of the liberties of action that you or I possess. Their is not a “whistle blower” exception when it comes to security clearances and improper release of classified information. Classified information is classified, period. Releasing it is a crime and this is established in statute, you can and will be punished for it. Pretty much the only exceptions are, I believe, the President (and maybe Vice President) have authority to release any information they want at any time as part of their privilege as the elected officers of the Executive Branch (don’t hold me to this…I may be incorrect.) Another exception is, I believe, a sitting member of Congress can read classified information into the Congressional record. You are constitutionally unable to prosecute a sitting member of Congress for reading something into the Congressional record. Of course, unless the member had a security clearance to violate it wouldn’t come up in any case. If I find a bunch of classified documents and disseminate them I’m not committing a crime because I don’t have a security clearance and thus it isn’t a crime for me to release that information. Bradley Manning didn’t fall into a security clearance by accident, he knew what it was and what it meant to break it.

Finally, in the specific case of Manning he’s not really comparable to a corporate accountant or manager that reveals malfeasance. If he had come out to expose one specific thing, yeah maybe. But the vast majority of the stuff he released doesn’t really show any malfeasance by the United States at all. Shit, even most of the parts that do expose some bad stuff about the United States had been previously reported on in various forms. The sheer volume of information he released shows he had no specific intent to blow the whistle on any specific malfeasance, and did not diligent review of what he was releasing. A whistle blower who acts that way is akin to the John Rambo version of a whistle blower and that’s really not as commendable as someone that only violates the position of trust they old as much as is absolutely necessary to blow the whistle. And again, Manning, unlike people outside of the security world, knew there were criminal penalties for him waiting on the other side. Very different from corporate whistle blowers.

An accused person.

I’ll use an example:

The government is infecting poor, rural black men (US citizens) with syphilis to test its progression.

You work for the government and are bound by security clearances not so speak of it.

Are you a traitor if you blow the whistle on this?

(I hope you realize this example is not a hypothetical)

Aldrich Ames, Robert Hansen. Not violent crimes. (Although they resulted in death, much as Manning’s crimes very well could.)

We’re talking about someone accused of some of the highest crimes in the criminal code, I mean people have been executed for this kind of thing, during the 20th century.

In response to your earlier post, any conception that nudity is a special form of torture I reject out of hand. Prisoners in pretrial confinement or in the nastiest maximum security prison are routinely stripped naked. Routinely naked in front of others.

Additionally, Bradley Manning is in the fucking Army (for a bit longer anyway.) If you were shy in the High School locker room let me tell you that you get over that shit pretty fucking quickly in the military. So the nudity thing I just reject out of hand.

The solitary thing I can say “that does seem harsh.” But it is not unprecedented and in fact I almost expect it for high profile detainees. Sometimes to protect the inmate from themselves. I mean can you see all the problems O.J. Simpson or Jeffrey Dahmer might have in general population? Dahmer actually successfully advocated himself out of solitary and was quickly beaten to death by another inmate. Keep in mind Bradley Manning is seen by many as the worst kind of traitor, and he’s being housed with other members of the military (who have committed crimes.) While I’m not aware of anyone claiming his current conditions are for his own protection, if I was running that brig I wouldn’t want any other inmates having access to him at any time.

But finally, the point I’m making is nothing about Manning’s treatment is exceptional. If there was any crime here the Governors of all 50 states, heads of the Department of Corrections in all 50 states and etc would be on trial right now. If your problem is with solitary you need to look at the system as a whole, because Manning isn’t going through anything that doesn’t routinely happen to other people. I won’t even have any argument against someone advocating we get rid of the practice of long term 23 hour lockup my personal opinion is it should be reserved exclusively for people who request it for protection, people who have proven themselves to be unmanageably violent inside prison, and that regardless of how heinous your crimes on the outside you shouldn’t be defaulted to Supermax type conditions.

But don’t act like what is happening to Manning is some big reveal. If you had evidence he was being put on a torture rack or having thumbscrews put in, well shit that’s worth all the shocked outrage. But if your problem is with solitary and nudity, then your problem is with a lot more than just this situation, but should be taken up with the entire American penal system.

Not really Manning, that’s for sure. It provides a convenient opportunity for “shocked outrage” when it stems from a massive wikileaks incident revolving around an unpopular war. :wink: