Breaking Story

[Perknose]

If the story as outlined below proves to be the whole truth and nothing but the truth, then it would appear that the powers-that-be are going to arguably unethical lengths to fuck with Bradley Manning and his lawyers, using flimsy and suspect pretenses.

UPDATE: As they have done several times before, Jane Hamsher today drove David House to visit Bradley Manning at the Quantico brig -- this time, as they announced ahead of time, House intended to deliver to brig officials a petition relating to Manning's detention conditions which has been signed by 42,000 people (only House is on the approved visitors list, so Hamsher typically drops him off, waits at a base McDonald's nearby (as she's been instructed to do), and then picks House up once his visit is done). Today, they went to the brig and House attempted to enter, the same way as always, but, as of 1:45 2:15 pm EST, both of them have been detained for 45 minutes 1 hour and 20 minutes, and told that they are not permitted to leave or else they will be arrested. They have now been told -- without explanation -- that they are not permitted to enter, and Hamsher's car is being towed off the brig's property and impounded. Here is House's live Twitter feed sent during this episode (start at the bottom and read up):

And from Hamsher (read from bottom, up):


UPDATE II: More from Hamsher:

The claim is that Hamsher has only electronic rather than prnted proof of car insurance -- the same proof she's had every other time she brought House there, though without a petition -- and they have thus impounded her car. They also, though, are refusing -- without any explanation -- to let House visit Manning despite his being on the approved visitor list. So much for Manning's once-a-week reprieve from solitary confinement.

 

[shortylickens]

Quantico is my neck of the woods. I suspect to see a story on this in the local paper and TV news shortly.

My experience in general is those guys are very serious about their badassery. And confined to a stateside base surrounded by civilians they often feel it necessary to go out of their way to act Marine-like. Every once in a while this rubs the local civilian populace the wrong way, whether it be wives, contractors, or DoD employees. And given that the area is crawling with politicians of both the civilian and veteran persuasion, it usually becomes a huge incident for a short while, and then blows over quickly.
Nothing good will come of the poor soul in the brig, but this will be an excellent opportunity for glory hounds to get their 15 minutes.

 

[Fingolfin269]

I would write something here but am afraid doing so may result in something unpleasant happening to me.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Wow, I can't believe the brig in Quantico is preventing a film producer (Jane Hamsher) and a reporter (David M House) from seeing an alleged spy.

 

[maluckey]

What I see is that they are now enforcing what is typically required to enter and vist a prisoner. In this case it's proof of insurance (on hand, in writing) to enter a military base. Remember, a military base is NOT under the same laws as the United States. If they wish to search the car, detain the car, seize the car, they can....ESPECIALLY if it's not following the laws of the base and/or state in which the base is located, then they can do so. MPs do normally suffer fools gladly.

They are also likely irritated that the smug prick (the suspect) is being allowed visitors at all.

He's most certainly going to be charged with voluntary disclosure of classified material, which could end up with decades behind bars if all counts are added up. He could be charged with treason. The maximum penalty for treason can be death under aggravated circumstances.

The MPs are certainly no friends of that prick, and will likely follow to the letter, all requirements spelled out, if given the chance.

I would...and then some

 

[pcgeek11]

What I see is that they are now enforcing what is typically required to enter and vist a prisoner. In this case it's proof of insurance (on hand, in writing) to enter a military base. Remember, a military base is NOT under the same laws as the United States. If they wish to search the car, detain the car, seize the car, they can....ESPECIALLY if it's not following the laws of the base and/or state in which the base is located, then they can do so. MPs do normally suffer fools gladly.

They are also likely irritated that the smug prick (the suspect) is being allowed visitors at all.

He's most certainly going to be charged with voluntary disclosure of classified material, which could end up with decades behind bars if all counts are added up. He could be charged with treason. The maximum penalty for treason can be death under aggravated circumstances.

The MPs are certainly no friends of that prick, and will likely follow to the letter, all requirements spelled out, if given the chance.

I would...and then some

I agree with this.

 

[WelshBloke]

What I see is that they are now enforcing what is typically required to enter and vist a prisoner. In this case it's proof of insurance (on hand, in writing) to enter a military base. Remember, a military base is NOT under the same laws as the United States. If they wish to search the car, detain the car, seize the car, they can....ESPECIALLY if it's not following the laws of the base and/or state in which the base is located, then they can do so. MPs do normally suffer fools gladly.

They are also likely irritated that the smug prick (the suspect) is being allowed visitors at all.

He's most certainly going to be charged with voluntary disclosure of classified material, which could end up with decades behind bars if all counts are added up. He could be charged with treason. The maximum penalty for treason can be death under aggravated circumstances.

The MPs are certainly no friends of that prick, and will likely follow to the letter, all requirements spelled out, if given the chance.

I would...and then some

And this is why the military should always be under civilian control.

 

[waggy]

And this is why the military should always be under civilian control.

why? because they are fallowing the regs?

 

[MotF Bane]

And this is why the military should always be under civilian control.

It is.

 

[WelshBloke]

why? because they are fallowing the regs?

You didnt get any bitterness and revenge seeking from that post?

It is.

I know.

 

[piasabird]

Who cares. The whole post looks like posted together newspaper bits. Who want tho read this baloney?

 

[actuarial]

He's most certainly going to be charged with voluntary disclosure of classified material, which could end up with decades behind bars if all counts are added up. He could be charged with treason. The maximum penalty for treason can be death under aggravated circumstances.

So why hasn't he been? I guess the principles which you're trying to protect don't apply when someone does something you don't like?

I would be ashamed if my government had a 'suspected' criminal in solitary confinement (unless it was for his own or others' protection), military or otherwise.

 

[Infohawk]

Who cares. The whole post looks like posted together newspaper bits. Who want tho read this baloney?

The title is the worst, especially coming from a mod. How about naming the title "Government conspiring against Bradley Manning." That way people can decide if they want to waste their time on this or an anarchist420 post.

 

[Lemon law]

Thank you Perknose for posting this thread, its in the finest tradition of this forum. And raises questions about the conduct of our government.

Our collective civil rights are always no greater than any individual American who is having her or his right's being violated.

 

[Infohawk]

its in the finest tradition of this forum.

LOL. Finest tradition and P&N in the same sentence... ridiculous even for you LL.

 

[pcgeek11]

And this is why the military should always be under civilian control.

They are. They work for the President, Secretary of Defense, Secretary of XXX Service ... who are all Civilians.

Reading the article it seems to be some what biased. I think most of this is from the misguided perception that civilians have about the Military Justice System.

 

[ProfJohn]

Manning should spend a long long time in jail for his actions that directly threatened the lives of multiple Americans and those who are risking their lives to work with us.

In a lot of other countries he would be executed for his actions.

 

[trenchfoot]

What I see is that they are now enforcing what is typically required to enter and vist a prisoner. In this case it's proof of insurance (on hand, in writing) to enter a military base. Remember, a military base is NOT under the same laws as the United States. If they wish to search the car, detain the car, seize the car, they can....ESPECIALLY if it's not following the laws of the base and/or state in which the base is located, then they can do so. MPs do normally suffer fools gladly.

They are also likely irritated that the smug prick (the suspect) is being allowed visitors at all.

He's most certainly going to be charged with voluntary disclosure of classified material, which could end up with decades behind bars if all counts are added up. He could be charged with treason. The maximum penalty for treason can be death under aggravated circumstances.

The MPs are certainly no friends of that prick, and will likely follow to the letter, all requirements spelled out, if given the chance.

I would...and then some

For the most part, agreed.:thumbsup:

I figure if the MP's don't follow the letter of the law, they will be in a world of hurt when the after-action report shows up.

 

[lupi]

don't do the crime if ya don't want to do the time.

 

[KK]

We need to impeach that traitor in chief obama.

 

[JEDIYoda]

And this is why the military should always be under civilian control.

That`s why we lost the war in Vietman you frakin idiot!!

 

[Sinsear]

If Manning committed suicide in his cell I would shed not a tear.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Thank you Perknose for posting this thread, its in the finest tradition of this forum. And raises questions about the conduct of our government.

Our collective civil rights are always no greater than any individual American who is having her or his right's being violated.

Your an idiot Lemon Law....I thought you had more brains than this.
The dude while serving in our military released classified information.
This particular individual has rights -- the rights that are granted him by the military!!

 

[Perknose]

They also, though, are refusing -- without any explanation -- to let House visit Manning despite his being on the approved visitor list. So much for Manning's once-a-week reprieve from solitary confinement.

THIS is a separate issue from any (bogus) claim that her electronic proof only (it is valid proof and was enough each and every time before) of registration requires that they impound her car.

Nevertheless, House, the attorney, has done NOTHING wrong. He has run afoul of NO regulation, no matter how petty.

He IS Manning's attorney and IS on the approved visitor list and yet they are refusing to let him have his legally mandated visit.

Therefore, this is not a question of the MP's following the letter of the law of their regulations, but rather, in barring the attorney, of flouting THEIR OWN LEGAL DIRECTIVES.

 

[pcgeek11]

THIS is a separate issue from any (bogus) claim that her electronic proof only (it is valid proof and was enough each and every time before) of registration requires that they impound her car.

Nevertheless, House, the attorney, has done NOTHING wrong. He has run afoul of NO regulation, no matter how petty.

He IS Manning's attorney and IS on the approved visitor list and yet they are refusing to let him have his legally mandated visit.

Therefore, this is not a question of the MP's following the letter of the law of their regulations, but rather, in barring the attorney, of flouting THEIR OWN LEGAL DIRECTIVES.

It is odd on its face. However we have only heard / read one side of the story. I would like to hear what the other side has to say before making any wild claims of abuse etc.

Solitary confinement isn't abuse IMO.