“Manning has been charged with unlawfully downloading classified information and transmitting it “with reason to believe that the information could cause injury to the United States.” He has been incarcerated at Quantico for five months and has yet to receive the military equivalent of a preliminary hearing.
Nevertheless, Manning is in “maximum custody.” Also, under a “Protection of Injury” order, he is confined to his cell for 23 hours a day, even though his lawyer says a psychologist has determined he isn’t a threat to himself. His lawyer also says that Manning is denied sheets and is unable to exercise in his cell, and that he is not allowed to sleep between 5 a.m. and 8 p.m. If he attempts to sleep during those hours, he is made to sit up or stand by his guards.
Some speculate that by treating Manning harshly, officials hope to induce him to implicate WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange (though Assange would be subject to civilian, not military, justice). But a desire to secure his cooperation isn’t a justification for protracted imprisonment under the conditions imposed on Manning.
…regardless of one’s view of his alleged conduct, the conditions under which he is being held are indefensible.”
This editorial really doesn’t even go far enough in emphasizing how absolutely disgusting it is that, in the United States of America, the supposed “land of the free,” we have a man in solitary confinement, being denied bail, being treated as one might expect the government to perhaps treat Osama Bin Laden, and no one gives a flying rat’s ass.
But let me remind the various cheerleaders of statism of a certain document called the Constitution.
Specifically, the Sixth Amendment:“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.”
Also, the Fifth Amendment:“No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”
Lastly, the Eighth Amendment:“Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”
Is all that clear enough for you? Because it’s pretty damn unambiguous to me. I am just repulsed.
- or-nothing reblogged this from statehate
- johnr48 reblogged this from laliberty and added:
- statehate likes this
- forestsofaspen reblogged this from statehate and added:
- dddaniels reblogged this from statehate
- laliberty reblogged this from statehate
- hufflewhat likes this
- missgreenwalt said: How is this allowed if it is so obviously wrong?
- missgreenwalt likes this
- graceinmyheart likes this
- militanttrash likes this
- ostrichridingcowboy reblogged this from incisorteeth and added:
- occu-pirates likes this
- rezby reblogged this from statehate and added:
- appropinquabamus likes this
- saturdaymorning reblogged this from statehate
- allyouladiespopyopussylikedis likes this
- statehate posted this