Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The persecution and prosecution of Bradley Manning
#21
Bradley Manning for Nobel Peace Prize?

Published: 06 February, 2012, 21:49

AFP Photo / Paul J. Richards
(22.3Mb) embed video

TAGS: Crime, Internet, USA, WikiLeaks

Bradley Manning, the US soldier accused of passing secret materials to Wikileaks, has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.

*The nomination was proposed by The Movement of Icelandic Parliament, which asserts that revelations produced by the documents Manning allegedly exposed "have helped to fuel a worldwide discussion about America's overseas engagements, civilian war casualties, imperialistic manipulations, and rules of engagement."

RT spoke to one of the members of The Movement, MP Birgitta Jonsdottir.

She said the group "wanted to raise awareness about the situation with Private Bradley Manning, whom way too few people know of."

"It is extremely important that we honor the whistleblowers of our world," she said, so people will not be silenced from performing their civic duty "by reporting on crimes, be it corporate, state or military."

Jonsdottir believes Manning has as much chance to win the prize as any other nominee.

But, Icelandic MP said, the decision on a Nobel Peace Prize is a very politicized matter, "because peace just like war is a very political issue."

Manning was arrested in May 2010 on suspicion of having passed classified materials to WikiLeaks. After a pretrial hearing concluded last month, it was announced that the case would be tried in a military court.

Manning faces 22 charges of violating the military code, from theft of records to aiding the enemy.

If found guilty, he could face life in prison or execution. The soldier has pleaded not guilty to all charges.

*Clark Stoeckley, an artist who has dedicated much of his work to the Manning case, believes that "he will probably be one of the highest vote-getters for this Nobel Peace Prize," and he hopes Manning wins.

Stoeckley also believes winning the prize will dramatically improve Manning's situation, because "it will be hard to keep him in prison after winning prize like that."
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
Reply
#22
Quote:Bradley Manning, the US soldier accused of passing secret materials to Wikileaks, has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.

*The nomination was proposed by The Movement of Icelandic Parliament, which asserts that revelations produced by the documents Manning allegedly exposed "have helped to fuel a worldwide discussion about America's overseas engagements, civilian war casualties, imperialistic manipulations, and rules of engagement."

This is of course well meant. But as you stated in post # 18:

Quote:The Prez has already passed judgment (guilty) on him, and he is obviously going to get about as unfair a legal 'deal' as they can manage.

So we may have one Nobel Peace Prize winner utterly adverse to another Nobel Peace Prize winner.

Maybe Manning will be proud enough to refuse to accept that Prize?
Reply
#23
[TABLE="width: 0"]
[TR]
[TD="class: postHeader, colspan: 2"]

Stratfor "Source" James Casey Leaves FBI

[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
One of the "sources" that Stratfor chief Fred Burton queried for information about Wikileaks was "a senior FBI Hqs agent and former DSS agent" with the email jimcasey58@aol.com.
They were evidently quite close. In October of 2007 Burton sent along Stratfor's Terrorism Intelligence Report for review by jimcasey58@aol.com, and this was the reply forwarded to other Stratfor employees:
From: jimcasey58@aol.com [mailto:jimcasey58@aol.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 4:43 PM
To: burton@stratfor.com
Subject: Re: Terrorism Intelligence Report Security Contractors in Iraq:
Tactical and Practical Considerations
Good Stuff Fred! I can just picture you and I strapping on a big ol one
and leading a Blackwater team into a dangerous motorcade! OK, so maybe
the most dangerous thing we do is cut in line at Starbucks. We're
too old (and smart) for this other shit. Jim

In October 2010, jimcasey58@aol.com sent an email to Burton on the announcement that the Pentagon was anticipating a "massive Iraq war leak":
From: James Casey
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 14:39:34 -0400
To:
Subject: Re: WikiLeaks plans major' announcement within hours as Pentagon
braces for massive Iraq war leak
This is why………..even though the FBI is always the first to be
criticized for not playing nice-nice in the sandbox………….the
concept of "widely sharing of information" is not always a great idea.
For a number of years I have used the very example of "a slick sleeved
private, siting in a tent in Baghdad, looking at thousands of classified
reports on SIPRNET", as a bad way to business. Even I didn't think that
was going to be the exact scenario that has played out with this WikiLeaks
fiasco. Maybe everybody at the DNI and DHS who have been pimping the
"share by rule, withhold by exception," concept for the last nine years
will change their tune a little, and acknowledge that "need to know" is
still a valuable idea.

Sounds exactly like the defense being pursued by Bradley Manning's attorneys at the moment.
Burton considered jimcasey58@aol.com a source, probing him for inside information. On 11-27-2010, Burton sent an email with the subject line "Wikileaks":
Jim: How bad will the next round be? Got any idea?
Burton clearly felt jimcasey58@aol.com was his own little Wikileaks window into the DoJ. So on 1-26-2011 when Burton sent an email to secure@stratfor.com saying he had intelligence that the DoJ had a "sealed indictment" on Assange, you have to wonder where it came from.
Now I'm thinking, might as well put the email address "jimcasey58@aol.com" through a search and see what comes up. Lo and behold, there's only one non-Stratfor related hit: a Collier County, Florida bid solicitation for "Security Consultant," starting on January 26, 2012 and ending on February 1, 2012:
[Image: collier1.jpg]
James M. Casey, LLC
James Casey
1370 Fryston Street
Suite 100
Jacksonville, FL 32259
(571) 246-7249
Jimcasey58@aol.com

What is James M. Casey, LLC? Glad you asked. Because the Florida Times-Union has an article datedyesterday that tells us 25 year FBI veteran James Casey is retiring from the FBI that very day to start his own business: James M. Casey, LLC:
[Image: Casey-LLC2.jpg]
After 25 years of service in the FBI and four as the special agent in charge of the Jacksonville Division, James Casey is leaving to start his own business in investigations.

The 53-year-old Casey steps down from running the Jacksonville operation today. On Thursday, he begins his new gig in the private sector running James M. Casey, LLC, Intelligence/Diligence/Risk, a firm designed to look into corporate and government programs that could involve white collar crime and compliance issues.
Casey acknowledged he'll be a one-man operation at his office that will be located in the EverBank Building, 501 Riverside Ave., in Jacksonville. But he will work with several contractors and specialize in security and investigative services.
Casey leaves a career in law enforcement that included details in 2004 and 2005 with the National Security Council in Washington, where he served under Condoleezza Rice when she was National Security Advisor.
Casey said he's proud of his government work but he's looking forward to the civilian enterprise.

Just in case you were wondering who at the FBI was leaking to Stratfor, the dots are all connected for you: Nobody. Because James Casey is gone from the FBI. Retired. Poof! Worried that they gave him the boot because he was singing like a canary to Stratfor, and they didn't want to launch an internal leak investigation? Well there's a Florida county government site that lists Casey as a bidder on a contract that ended a month ago.
No doubt it's just another coincidence that Wikileaks says it released the first Stratfor email with Burton citing his DoJ intel on Assange on January 29. (Note on 3/2: trying to confirm if this is a Wikileaks typo or if it was released and embargoed on 1/29 jh).
And I'm sure the appearance of the Times-Union article only two days after the big Stratfor email dump is yet another coincidence. It will certainly be a Reader's Digest "was my face red!" moment when reporter Drew Dixson finds out that the subject of his puff piece was the FBI agent sending emails to Stratfor about Wikileaks who was all over the news and he missed it!
Moral of the story: Bradley Manning gets charged with "aiding the enemy" for potentially leaking information that was available on the SIPRNET to hundreds of thousands of people. This guy gets a gold watch and no investigation for potentially leaking the existence of a sealed DoJ indictment of Julian Assange that I imagine almost nobody knew about.

If I were Bradley Manning's lawyer I'd be putting James M. Casey, LLC on my witness list pronto. He seems to be the chatty type.
http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2012/03...eaves-fbi/

"The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it." Karl Marx

"He would, wouldn't he?" Mandy Rice-Davies. When asked in court whether she knew that Lord Astor had denied having sex with her.

“I think it would be a good idea” Ghandi, when asked about Western Civilisation.
Reply
#24
March 5th, 2012
by William Blum
http://www.killinghope.org
The Saga of Bradley Manning, Julian Assange, and Wikileaks, to be put to ballad and film

"Defense lawyers say Manning was clearly a troubled young soldier whom the Army should never have deployed to Iraq or given access to classified material while he was stationed there ... They say he was in emotional turmoil, partly because he was a gay soldier at a time when homosexuals were barred from serving openly in the U.S. armed forces." (Associated Press, February 3)

It's unfortunate and disturbing that Bradley Manning's attorneys have chosen to consistently base his legal defense upon the premise that personal problems and shortcomings are what motivated the young man to turn over hundreds of thousands of classified government files to Wikileaks. They should not be presenting him that way any more than Bradley should be tried as a criminal or traitor. He should be hailed as a national hero. Yes, even when the lawyers are talking to the military mind. May as well try to penetrate that mind and find the freest and best person living there. Bradley also wears a military uniform.

Here are Manning's own words from an online chat: "If you had free reign over classified networks ... and you saw incredible things, awful things ... things that belonged in the public domain, and not on some server stored in a dark room in Washington DC ... what would you do? ... God knows what happens now. Hopefully worldwide discussion, debates, and reforms. ... I want people to see the truth ... because without information, you cannot make informed decisions as a public."

Is the world to believe that these are the words of a disturbed and irrational person? Do not the Nuremberg Tribunal and the Geneva Conventions speak of a higher duty than blind loyalty to one's government, a duty to report the war crimes of that government?

Below is a listing of some of the things revealed in the State Department cables and Defense Department files and videos. For exposing such embarrassing and less-than-honorable behavior, Bradley Manning of the United States Army and Julian Assange of Wikileaks may spend most of their remaining days in a modern dungeon, much of it while undergoing that particular form of torture known as "solitary confinement". Indeed, it has been suggested that the mistreatment of Manning has been for the purpose of making him testify against and implicating Assange. Dozens of members of the American media and public officials have called for Julian Assange's execution or assassination. Under the new National Defense Authorization Act, Assange could well be kidnaped or assassinated. What century are we living in? What world?

It was after seeing American war crimes such as those depicted in the video "Collateral Murder" and documented in the "Iraq War Logs," made public by Manning and Wikileaks, that the Iraqis refused to exempt US forces from prosecution for future crimes. The video depicts an American helicopter indiscriminately murdering several non-combatants in addition to two Reuters journalists, and the wounding of two little children, while the helicopter pilots cheer the attacks in a Baghdad suburb like it was the Army-Navy game in Philadelphia.

The insistence of the Iraqi government on legal jurisdiction over American soldiers for violations of Iraqi law something the United States rarely, if ever, accepts in any of the many countries where its military is stationed forced the Obama administration to pull the remaining American troops from the country.

If Manning had committed war crimes in Iraq instead of exposing them, he would be a free man today, as are the many hundreds/thousands of American soldiers guilty of truly loathsome crimes in cities like Haditha, Fallujah, and other places whose names will live in infamy in the land of ancient Mesopotamia.

Besides playing a role in writing finis to the awful Iraq war, the Wikileaks disclosures helped to spark the Arab Spring, beginning in Tunisia.

When people in Tunisia read or heard of US Embassy cables revealing the extensive corruption and decadence of the extended ruling family there one long and detailed cable being titled: "CORRUPTION IN TUNISIA: WHAT'S YOURS IS MINE" how Washington's support of Tunisian President Ben Ali was not really strong, and that the US would not support the regime in the event of a popular uprising, they took to the streets.

Here is a sample of some of the other Wikileaks revelations that make the people of the world wiser:

In 2009 Japanese diplomat Yukiya Amano became the new head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, which plays the leading role in the investigation of whether Iran is developing nuclear weapons or is working only on peaceful civilian nuclear energy projects. A US embassy cable of October 2009 said Amano "took pains to emphasize his support for U.S. strategic objectives for the Agency. Amano reminded the [American] ambassador on several occasions that ... he was solidly in the U.S. court on every key strategic decision, from high-level personnel appointments to the handling of Iran's alleged nuclear weapons program."
Russia refuted US claims that Iran has missiles that could target Europe.
The British government's official inquiry into how it got involved in the Iraq War was deeply compromised by the government's pledge to protect the Bush administration in the course of the inquiry.
A discussion between Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh and American Gen. David H. Petraeus in which Saleh indicated he would cover up the US role in missile strikes against al-Qaeda's affiliate in Yemen. "We'll continue saying the bombs are ours, not yours," Saleh told Petraeus.
The US embassy in Madrid has had serious points of friction with the Spanish government and civil society: a) trying to get the criminal case dropped against three US soldiers accused of killing a Spanish television cameraman in Baghdad during a 2003 unprovoked US tank shelling of the hotel where he and other journalists were staying; b )torture cases brought by a Spanish NGO against six senior Bush administration officials, including former attorney general Alberto Gonzales; c) a Spanish government investigation into the torture of Spanish subjects held at Guantánamo; d) a probe by a Spanish court into the use of Spanish bases and airfields for American extraordinary rendition (= torture) flights; e )continual criticism of the Iraq war by Spanish Prime Minister Zapatero, who eventually withdrew Spanish troops.
State Department officials at the United Nations, as well as US diplomats in various embassies, were assigned to gather as much of the following information as possible about UN officials, including Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon, permanent security council representatives, senior UN staff, and foreign diplomats: e-mail and website addresses, internet user names and passwords, personal encryption keys, credit card numbers, frequent flyer account numbers, work schedules, and biometric data. US diplomats at the embassy in Asunción, Paraguay were asked to obtain dates, times and telephone numbers of calls received and placed by foreign diplomats from China, Iran and the Latin American leftist states of Cuba, Venezuela and Bolivia. US diplomats in Romania, Hungary and Slovenia were instructed to provide biometric information on "current and emerging leaders and advisers" as well as information about "corruption" and information about leaders' health and "vulnerability". The UN directive also specifically asked for "biometric information on ranking North Korean diplomats". A similar cable to embassies in the Great Lakes region of Africa said biometric data included DNA, as well as iris scans and fingerprints.
A special "Iran observer" in the Azerbaijan capital of Baku reported on a dispute that played out during a meeting of Iran's Supreme National Security Council. An enraged Revolutionary Guard Chief of Staff, Mohammed Ali Jafari, allegedly got into a heated argument with Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and slapped him in the face because the generally conservative president had, surprisingly, advocated freedom of the press.
The State Department, virtually alone in the Western Hemisphere, did not unequivocally condemn a June 28, 2009 military coup in Honduras, even though an embassy cable declared: "there is no doubt that the military, Supreme Court and National Congress conspired on June 28 in what constituted an illegal and unconstitutional coup against the Executive Branch". US support of the coup government has been unwavering ever since.
The leadership of the Swedish Social Democratic Party neutral, pacifist, and liberal Sweden, so the long-standing myth goes visited the US embassy in Stockholm and asked for advice on how best to sell the war in Afghanistan to a skeptical Swedish public, asking if the US could arrange for a member of the Afghan government to come visit Sweden and talk up NATO's humanitarian efforts on behalf of Afghan children, and so forth. [For some years now Sweden has been, in all but name, a member of NATO and the persecutor of Julian Assange, the latter to please a certain Western power.]
The US pushed to influence Swedish wiretapping laws so communication passing through the Scandinavian country could be intercepted. The American interest was clear: Eighty per cent of all the internet traffic from Russia travels through Sweden.
President of the European Council Herman Van Rompuy told US embassy officials in Brussels in January 2010 that no one in Europe believed in Afghanistan anymore. He said Europe was going along in deference to the United States and that there must be results in 2010, or "Afghanistan is over for Europe."
Iraqi officials saw Saudi Arabia, not Iran, as the biggest threat to the integrity and cohesion of their fledgling democratic state. The Iraqi leaders were keen to assure their American patrons that they could easily "manage" the Iranians, who wanted stability; but that the Saudis wanted a "weak and fractured" Iraq, and were even "fomenting terrorism that would destabilize the government". The Saudi King, moreover, wanted a US military strike on Iran.
Saudi Arabia in 2007 threatened to pull out of a Texas oil refinery investment unless the US government intervened to stop Saudi Aramco from being sued in US courts for alleged oil price fixing. The deputy Saudi oil minister said that he wanted the US to grant Saudi Arabia sovereign immunity from lawsuits
Saudi donors were the chief financiers of Sunni militant groups like Al Qaeda, the Afghan Taliban, and Lashkar-e-Taiba, which carried out the 2008 Mumbai attacks.
Pfizer, the world's largest pharmaceutical company, hired investigators to unearth evidence of corruption against the Nigerian attorney general in order to persuade him to drop legal action over a controversial 1996 drug trial involving children with meningitis.
Oil giant Shell claimed to have "inserted staff" and fully infiltrated Nigeria's government.
The Obama administration renewed military ties with Indonesia in spite of serious concerns expressed by American diplomats about the Indonesian military's activities in the province of West Papua, expressing fears that the Indonesian government's neglect, rampant corruption and human rights abuses were stoking unrest in the region.
US officials collaborated with Lebanon's defense minister to spy on, and allow Israel to potentially attack, Hezbollah in the weeks that preceded a violent May 2008 military confrontation in Beirut.
Gabon president Omar Bongo allegedly pocketed millions in embezzled funds from central African states, channeling some of it to French political parties in support of Nicolas Sarkozy.
Cables from the US embassy in Caracas in 2006 asked the US Secretary of State to warn President Hugo Chávez against a Venezuelan military intervention to defend the Cuban revolution in the eventuality of an American invasion after Castro's death.
The United States was concerned that the leftist Latin American television network, Telesur, headquartered in Venezuela, would collaborate with al Jazeera of Qatar, whose coverage of the Iraq War had gotten under the skin of the Bush administration.
The Vatican told the United States it wanted to undermine the influence of Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez in Latin America because of concerns about the deterioration of Catholic power there. It feared that Chávez was seriously damaging relations between the Catholic church and the state by identifying the church hierarchy in Venezuela as part of the privileged class.
The Holy See welcomed President Obama's new outreach to Cuba and hoped for further steps soon, perhaps to include prison visits for the wives of the Cuban Five. Better US-Cuba ties would deprive Hugo Chávez of one of his favorite screeds and could help restrain him in the region.
The wonderful world of diplomats: In 2010, UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown raised with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton the question of visas for two wives of members of the "Cuban Five". "Brown requested that the wives (who have previously been refused visas to visit the U.S.) be granted visas so that they could visit their husbands in prison. ... Our subsequent queries to Number 10 indicate that Brown made this request as a result of a commitment that he had made to UK trade unionists, who form part of the Labour Party's core constituency. Now that the request has been made, Brown does not intend to pursue this matter further. There is no USG action required."
UK Officials concealed from Parliament how the US was allowed to bring cluster bombs onto British soil in defiance of a treaty banning the housing of such weapons.
A cable was sent by an official at the US Interests Section in Havana in July 2006, during the runup to the Non-Aligned Movement conference. He noted that he was actively looking for "human interest stories and other news that shatters the myth of Cuban medical prowess". [Presumably to be used to weaken support for Cuba amongst the member nations at the conference.]
Most of the men sent to Guantánamo prison were innocent people or low-level operatives; many of the innocent individuals were sold to the US for bounty.
DynCorp, a powerful American defense contracting firm that claims almost $2 billion per year in revenue from US tax dollars, threw a "boy-play" party for Afghan police recruits. (Yes, it's what you think.)
Even though the Bush and Obama Administrations repeatedly maintained publicly that there was no official count of civilian casualties, the Iraq and Afghanistan War Logs showed that this claim was untrue.
Known Egyptian torturers received training at the FBI Academy in Quantico, Virginia.
The United States put great pressure on the Haitian government to not go ahead with various projects, with no regard for the welfare of the Haitian people. A 2005 cable stressed continued US insistence that all efforts must be made to keep former president Jean-Bertrand Aristide, whom the United States had overthrown the previous year, from returning to Haiti or influencing the political process. In 2006, Washington's target was President René Préval for his agreeing to a deal with Venezuela to join Caracas's Caribbean oil alliance, PetroCaribe, under which Haiti would buy oil from Venezuela, paying only 60 percent up front with the remainder payable over twenty-five years at 1 percent interest. And in 2009, the State Department backed American corporate opposition to an increase in the minimum wage for Haitian workers, the poorest paid in the Western Hemisphere.
The United States used threats, spying, and more to try to get its way at the crucial 2009 climate conference in Copenhagen.
Mahmoud Abbas, president of The Palestinian National Authority, and head of the Fatah movement, turned to Israel for help in attacking Hamas in Gaza in 2007.
The British government trained a Bangladeshi paramilitary force condemned by human rights organisations as a "government death squad".
A US military order directed American forces not to investigate cases of torture of detainees by Iraqis.
The US was involved in the Australian government's 2006 campaign to oust Solomon Islands Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare.
A 2009 US cable said that police brutality in Egypt against common criminals was routine and pervasive, the police using force to extract confessions from criminals on a daily basis.
US diplomats pressured the German government to stifle the prosecution of CIA operatives who abducted and tortured Khalid El-Masri, a German citizen. [El-Masri was kidnaped by the CIA while on vacation in Macedonia on December 31, 2003. He was flown to a torture center in Afghanistan, where he was beaten, starved, and sodomized. The US government released him on a hilltop in Albania five months later without money or the means to go home.]
2005 cable re "widespread severe torture" by India, the widely-renowned "world's largest democracy": The International Committee of the Red Cross reported: "The continued ill-treatment of detainees, despite longstanding ICRC-GOI [Government of India] dialogue, have led the ICRC to conclude that New Delhi condones torture." Washington was briefed on this matter by the ICRC years ago. What did the United States, one of the world's leading practitioners and teachers of torture in the past century, do about it? American leaders, including the present ones, continued to speak warmly of "the world's largest democracy"; as if torture and one of the worst rates of poverty and child malnutrition in the world do not contradict the very idea of democracy.
The United States overturned a ban on training the Indonesian Kopassus army special forces despite the Kopassus's long history of arbitrary detention, torture and murder after the Indonesian President threatened to derail President Obama's trip to the country in November 2010.
Since at least 2006 the United States has been funding political opposition groups in Syria, including a satellite TV channel that beams anti-government programming into the country.
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
Reply
#25
President Obama feels your Constitutional right to due process can be what ever secret 'process' he makes up.
This week, US Attorney General Eric Holder outlined the administration's supposed legal authority to secretly target US citizens for execution without ever notifying them of the accusations against them, officially charging them with a crime or offering them the opportunity to respond. Since the whole world is a battlefield in the vague 'war on terror,' the only due process afforded to someone who has been targeted for extrajudicial execution is a secret 'review' by the executive branch.
Just as the public demanded the release of the Bush Administration's Torture Memos to expose the ludicrous rationale behind their secret torture program, we too must demand to know the legal rationale for a program that allows our president to unilaterally choose to deprive someone of life and liberty - without the victim even being charged with a crime.
Holder's speech was a cheap attempt to feign transparency without actually releasing the legal memos that define the administration's execution policy.[SUP]1[/SUP] We need your help to demand the Obama administration release these memos immediately. Can you please sign our petition demanding the Obama administration release the Execution Memos?
Sign our petition demanding the Obama administration produce the internal memos and legal justification for their targeted execution program.
Click here to sign: http://action.firedoglake.com/page/s/release-the-memo
The administration's refusal to even outline this non-judicial 'due process' that allows US citizens to be secretly put on a kill list is beyond troubling to say the least.
As Salon writer Glenn Greenwald put it:
...the 'process' which Eric Holder yesterday argued constitutes "due process" as required by the Fifth Amendment before the government can deprive of someone of their life: the President and his underlings are your accuser, your judge, your jury and your executioner all wrapped up in one, acting in total secrecy and without your even knowing that he's accused you and sentenced you to death, and you have no opportunity even to know about, let alone confront and address, his accusations; is that not enough due process for you?[SUP]2[/SUP]
The ACLU, New York Times and others have been suing the Obama administration for months in hopes of securing the release of the Execution Memos, but as one of the least-transparent administrations in recent history, they have repeatedly blocked their release.[SUP]3[/SUP]
If left unchallenged, this secretive program could continue to expand under Obama and future presidents, and further erode America's most basic principles of justice. Without the memos we do not know exactly how far the Obama administration believes this unprecedented power extends. We need your help to build a groundswell of pressure to force the release of any and all legal justification for the targeted killings program so there can be an open debate in this country about our president's unilateral authority to kill.
Sign our petition demanding the Obama administration produce the internal memos and legal justification for their targeted killing program.
This is a serious and dangerous precedent, and anyone who took issue with the Bush Torture Memos should be even more concerned about this latest power grab by the president. I hope you'll join us in fighting to release these memos.
Deepest Thanks,
Brian Sonenstein
Director of Online Activism,
Firedoglake.com

1. Holder's Regressive Defense of Targeted Killings, Kevin Gosztola, FDL's Dissenter, 3/6/2012.
2. Attorney General Holder defends execution without charges, Glenn Greenwald, Salon.com, 3/6/2012.
3. The Worst Administration on FOIA, Kevin Gosztola, FDL's Dissenter, 3/5/2012.
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
Reply
#26
Malice v. Nobility

Scooter Libby v. Bradley Manning

by SAUL LANDAU
After 9/11, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, a Yale graduate with a law degree from Columbia, and fellow neo cons plotted to twist and invent "intelligence" data to convince the public that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction, so as to build a case for invading Iraq.
From 2001 to 2005, Libby served as Assistant to the Vice President for National Security Affairs, Chief of Staff to the Vice President of the United States and Assistant to President George W. Bush.
Libby and fellow neo cons stressed Bush's dubious claim that "the British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." (2003 State of the Union Address)
Cheney repeated that Saddam Hussein was "trying once again to produce nuclear weapons" in March. ("Meet the Press")
The CIA was asked to investigate. Joe Wilson a former US Ambassador and expert on Africa got chosen for the mission. His wife, Valery Plame, worked as a covert CIA operator.
Wilson dismissed the "yellow-cake tale". His New York Times op ed ("What I Didn't Find In Africa, July 6, 2003) suggested the Bushies had invented pretexts for the Iraq war.
Libby and fellow war plotters Karl Rove and Richard Armitage, not satisfied by their success in making war, wanted to punish their Washington enemies. They leaked Plame's name to the mischievous columnist Robert Novak to punish her husband, Wilson. Novak's story ended her CIA career, and exposed her agents and contacts.
A jury later convicted Libby of obstruction of justice and perjury around the case. A judge sentenced him to 30 months in prison, and fined him $250,000. Bush, months later, commuted his term. But no one got charged with plotting to distribute false information to lure the public to war. The New York Times had even helped the campaign by publishing the lies as news stories on its front page.
Count the Bush cabal's accomplishments: thousands of dead US military personnel and contractors, and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis; hundreds of thousands wounded, physically and mentally here and there. Iraq remains broken. 13000 Iraqis died violently last year. W. Bush destroyed Iraq's integrity. His profligate war spending vastly increased the national debt. His definitive biography might be called: "Lying The Nation Into War."
Libby served some months in prison. But the neo con gang should be called simply "cons" as in convicts. Most of them got great jobs instead.
In November 2005, a Marine Corps unit killed 24 unarmed Iraqi men, women and children in Haditha, Iraq. Investigators determined all died from multiple gun shot wounds at close range apparently as payback for an Iraqi rebel attack on a US convoy in which a Marine Corporal died the mini My Lai of Iraq.
This January 24 a US military judge handed down harsh sentences. Squad leader, Staff Sgt. Frank G. Wuterich, pleaded guilty of war crimes and received a maximum of 90 days in prison and a reduction in pay and rank. He served no time in the brig. One Marine was acquitted; six others had their cases dropped. (Dirk Adriaensens, Truthout, February 28, 2012)
No US official has been charged for the massive number of civilian deaths in Iraq, or for lying as a pretext for war. Who remembers the Nuremberg laws?
Now look at Private Bradley Manning's ordeal. He had access to and allegedly released to Julian Assange of Wikileaks hundreds of thousands of secret documents. These documents exposed not secrets vital to our enemy, but lies, corruption and crimes by US officials and those of other countries. Manning's defense team stresses that what Wikileaks published wasn't or shouldn't have been secret.
Manning did however embarrass US officials by exposing their illegal, stupid, selfish and downright inane activities. If he illegally distributed those documents, why doesn't the Justice Department charge the New York Times and other newspapers that gleefully distributed this supposedly classified (mortifying) material? One video Manning allegedly released spread virally. US helicopter gunship members get orders to fire on Iraqis because one (a Reuters cameraman) might have a weapon (a video camera). We witness from the camera mounted on the gun the massacre of a group of men near the cameraman, and then of others who subsequently arrive to help the wounded, including a child in a van. Humanitarian behavior in Iraq? Who invited us there?
Was this classified because Iraqis didn't know our troops did such things or because it disgraces our military?
With vindictiveness aforethought the military held Manning for months in solitary confinement often naked with the light on all night in the Quantico Virginia Marine Base. Solitary "crushes your spirit and weakens your resistance more effectively than any other form of mistreatment." (John McCain, on his two years of solitary confinement in Vietnam)
Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, The Center for Constitutional Rights, the ACLU and the New York Times concluded that solitary confinement constitutes torture, designed to break a person. The UN Special Rapporteur on Torture tried to investigate Manning's prison conditions. The military refused his request for an unmonitored visit.
The 24 year-old Manning faces 22 charges, including "aiding the enemy." If convicted, the government will call for life imprisonment, unless Manning implicates Julian Assange in the "conspiracy" to expose the "secret" sins of US national security. Members of the Icelandic Parliament have nominated Manning for a Nobel Peace Prize. Let's help him win it as a free man.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/03/09/s...y-manning/

"The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it." Karl Marx

"He would, wouldn't he?" Mandy Rice-Davies. When asked in court whether she knew that Lord Astor had denied having sex with her.

“I think it would be a good idea” Ghandi, when asked about Western Civilisation.
Reply
#27
At what point does the persecution of Manning get traction and start working against the government that is jailing him? At some point it has to click with the public that Manning is being jailed because he stood up against a war crime torture government. At what point does this start to backfire?


Manning, a proud hero to many Americans, is currently rotting in jail as we talk and enjoy our coffee. At what point does the government try to come up and stand in front of the American public with Manning around its neck like an Albatross?
Reply
#28
Albert Doyle Wrote:At what point does the persecution of Manning get traction and start working against the government that is jailing him? At some point it has to click with the public that Manning is being jailed because he stood up against a war crime torture government. At what point does this start to backfire?


Manning, a proud hero to many Americans, is currently rotting in jail as we talk and enjoy our coffee. At what point does the government try to come up and stand in front of the American public with Manning around its neck like an Albatross?

Given the current status of Sheeple ignorance and MSM/Intel Propaganda, I would NOT hold my breath!......I think life in prison awaits him with NOT much bleating from the sheeple!....[sadly]. Assange, if the get him, will be executed. IMHO [Such is the advanced state of the fascism]! Folks, the 'system' has NO checks and balances - it is corrupt to the CORE and needs only one thing - a complete REVOLUTION and its overthrow! [peacefully]
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
Reply
#29
The Bradley Manning Support Network is under investigation by the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command, as revealed by a copy of a Freedom of Information Act request response. In this case, the request for records pertaining to the activist umbrella group was denied, but the reason for the denial - that "an active investigation is in progress with an undetermined completion date" - is obviously news in and of itself, which is presumably why none of the infotainment outlets posing as news organizations have reported on the development thus far.

As of 1:30 PM CST, the FOIA scan indicating that a network of activists who advocate on behalf of a celebrated accused whistleblower are being pursued by a branch of the U.S. military has not been mentioned by a single news organization with a web presence. Searching Google News brings up nothing; searching Google itself brings up two blogs with what we may presume to be very little reach (building up an audience has less to do with quality than it does with packaging, which is why Thomas Friedman is so popular). Quite possibly there will be mentions of all this by tomorrow in at least a few more places - but having spent years working in the media, analyzing the media, and sometimes being covered by the media, it wouldn't surprise me if coverage were relegated to a handful of specialist sites and perhaps Wired (which itself does some of the best and most crucial reporting on such issues as the NSA Utah Data Center only to have its revelations ignored by general outlets in favor of Secret Service prostitution scandals).
Complaints of this sort are often brushed off by journalists with the more "respectable" outlets with the response that everyone has their pet issue that they believe deserves special attention. In this case, such an excuse wouldn't hold water, nor does today being Sunday serve to explain away the complete absence of coverage thus far. Back in early 2010, when the Wikileaks Twitter account put forth a series of messages to the effect that one of its volunteers had been stopped and questioned and that others were being aggressively pursued by agents of the State Department, there was zero coverage of the incident at all. And the claims of state interference weren't exactly dubious; just a few days prior, Wikileaks had released Pentagon documents that proved the U.S. military was already considering how best to disrupt the organization. Back then, Wikileaks just wasn't on the radar of the U.S. media on the whole. Only later in the year would editors collectively agree that Wikileaks was indeed maybe some sort of big deal - soon after which it collectively decided that it was easier and more fun to ask probing questions about whether or not Julian Assange thinks highly of himself than it was to look through the actual documents that were providing to the world. And of course it became not only clear, but abundantly and repeatedly clear, that a number of covert operations were in the works against Wikileaks and individuals close to it. At any rate, they would eventually agree that this strange new transparency group was shaping up to be a major story, but only long after it had become obvious. Its notability having been eventually established even by the American media reckoning, there's no viable excuse on "Sorry, We Don't Agree That's Notable" grounds for that incident to have been entirely ignored. It's just hard to look back at that day and make the case that it didn't represent a massive failure on the part of the media to see a story coming, even when plenty of other observers saw it quite clearly.
There's probably more at play here than simply groupthink. In both the Wikileaks/State Department incident and the incident I'm bitching about this time, the story was only apparent to the extent that one kept an eye on certain Twitter feeds, particular reddit sections, and other relatively newfangled venues of the sort that didn't exist ten years ago and which still have attached to them certain vaguely disreputable, quasi-comical connotations in the minds of countless producers and editors. Meanwhile, more and more stories of the sort that clearly merit coverage can be expected to emanate from these allegedly unconventional nooks and crannies, the info itself having been placed on Scribd or pastebin or some other such thing instead of delivered in a press release or spoken at a podium by some well-paid liar. At some point, those whose profession calls upon them to be aware of what's happening are going to have to learn to contend with how much of those happenings are now happening on online thingamajigs with silly names.
To be fair, some professionals of that sort have indeed learned how much data can be gleaned from well-executed examinations of social networking platforms. Unfortunately, most of them work in the surveillance and intelligence sectors of government agencies or private contractorstors, rather than newsrooms, and are engaged in keeping tabs on such parties as the Bradley Manning Support Network.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/07/01...y-U-S-Army

"The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it." Karl Marx

"He would, wouldn't he?" Mandy Rice-Davies. When asked in court whether she knew that Lord Astor had denied having sex with her.

“I think it would be a good idea” Ghandi, when asked about Western Civilisation.
Reply
#30
Bradley Manning still rots in jail while we let him...
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Stand for Bradley Manning this Saturday at Fort Meade! Peter Lemkin 33 35,336 18-05-2017, 08:17 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  President of International War Crimes Tribunal May Have Worked to Shield Israelis From Prosecution Magda Hassan 1 3,271 18-06-2013, 11:21 AM
Last Post: David Guyatt
  UN Demands Prosecution of Bush-era CIA Crimes Adele Edisen 5 4,660 06-03-2013, 09:35 PM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  The Inhumane Conditions of Bradley Manning’s Detention Ed Jewett 30 14,504 30-04-2011, 05:36 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  Dirty Pols use Parliamentary Privilege to Beat Prosecution in Expenses Scandal. David Guyatt 3 4,884 03-12-2010, 01:04 PM
Last Post: Magda Hassan
  Trial (Persecution) Without End For Wecht Peter Lemkin 7 12,365 02-11-2008, 10:44 PM
Last Post: Charles Drago

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)