4 ms·

Was Manning's treatment due process? Because it seems she was stripped naked and kept in isolation for several years. I think I'll take the exile, thanks Barry

by timje1 13y ago

Was Manning's treatment due process? Because it seems she was stripped naked and kept in isolation for several years. I think I'll take the exile, thanks Barry.

disposition2 13y ago
Pretty sure the precedent was set before Barry was even in politics. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act
- ajays 13y ago
  Yep. People are "shocked" at Manning's treatment, when Jose Padilla suffered something similar: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jos%C3%A9_Padilla_%28prisoner%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jos%C3%A9_Padilla_%28prisoner%2...
exit 13y ago
referring to Obama by "Barry" is off putting, in the way referring to Manning as "he" would be.
- dredmorbius 13y ago
  "Barry" was Mr. Obama's chosen nickname, and he didn't give it up until college: http://www.newsweek.com/when-barry-became-barack-84255 http://www.newsweek.com/when-barry-became-barack-84255 I think you're reaching looking for an insult here. I'm seeing a lot of grandstanding and assumed affront in this post (Pincas above as well). It's not becoming. People can be asses and still do the right thing on occasion. And sometimes a nickname is just a nickname.
  - selmnoo 13y ago
    The reason 'exit might have found it off-putting is because it's almost only the right wing crowd that chooses to use this term now (and only in critical contexts). Take a 5-minute trip to freerepublic forums and you'll see what I mean. Small side note: Referring to Manning as 'he' in events she was involved in before Manning to choose to publicly make a switch shouldn't be an issue -- that's something Manning herself suggested actually. So for the grandparent post to have used the 'he' pronoun would not have been an issue at all.
  - FireBeyond 13y ago
    Yes, and no. I didn’t see many people referring to either of the Presidents Bush as “George”.
    - pawn 13y ago
      No, it was the single letter, W.
      - dredmorbius 13y ago
        Or "Shrub". God bless you Molly Ivans.
  - dragonwriter 13y ago
    > "Barry" was Mr. Obama's chosen nickname, and he didn't give it up until college Which would make its use understandable if Obama gave it up in college a few months ago, and the person using it was someone who had interacted with him frequently during the time he was using it. Less so when he graduated from college before many of the adults using it were born, much less became aware that Mr. Obama existed. > I think you're reaching looking for an insult here. I think you're reaching looking for a justification for the equivalent of mocking a mid-career professional by persistently using a nickname they stopped using in kindergarten.
- timje1 13y ago
  It was a joke, an attempt to give the final statement a jovial, chat between friends vibe. I could have used Bazza (it's a British thing) or Prezzy. Too late to edit it now.
antiterra 13y ago
Manning was in the military, and the operating interpretation of Article I is that Congress and the President have the power to regulate the Armed forces, the rest of the US Constitution and civilian law largely notwithstanding. Draconian punishment and treatment, while concerning, is nothing new for those subject to the UCMJ, even if the code itself appears to prohibit it[1]. The scary scenario would be the classification of Snowden as an enemy combatant, who would then be subject to military justice. I hope that all three branches of the US government consider that to be a ridiculous stretch of the imagination. [1] http://uscodebeta.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title10-section813&num=0&edition=prelim http://uscodebeta.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-pre...
- girvo 13y ago
  Would you put money on the fact that they wouldn't do that?
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  - rtpg 13y ago
    I would. They would gain nothing from doing it, and everything to lose (especially in the court of public opinion). Plus the case is already pretty clear, he's gone and admitted everything anyways. Literally nothing to gain from trying to put him through a military tribunal.
    - rfnslyr 13y ago
      They would gain nothing from doing it, and everything to lose (especially in the court of public opinion). That shit has sailed before it was built.
    - herge 13y ago
      There's 158 guys in cages in Guantanamo that would beg to differ...
phaus 13y ago
The judge in his case ruled at one point that he was being illegally mistreated. What I find outrageous about that is that they only cut a small fraction of the time he had already served off of his sentence as a result. In America, such severe misconduct by the authorities is supposed to result in the defendant walking (And I say this as a person who believes that he was otherwise guilty of SOME of the charges due to his wholesale leak of 700000 files that had nothing to do with government crimes). If we compromise our values in the name of defending freedom, there is no freedom left to defend.

by timje1 13y ago

Was Manning's treatment due process? Because it seems she was stripped naked and kept in isolation for several years. I think I'll take the exile, thanks Barry.

disposition2 13y ago

Pretty sure the precedent was set before Barry was even in politics. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act

ajays 13y ago
Yep. People are "shocked" at Manning's treatment, when Jose Padilla suffered something similar: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jos%C3%A9_Padilla_%28prisoner%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jos%C3%A9_Padilla_%28prisoner%2...

exit 13y ago

referring to Obama by "Barry" is off putting, in the way referring to Manning as "he" would be.

dredmorbius 13y ago
"Barry" was Mr. Obama's chosen nickname, and he didn't give it up until college: http://www.newsweek.com/when-barry-became-barack-84255 http://www.newsweek.com/when-barry-became-barack-84255 I think you're reaching looking for an insult here. I'm seeing a lot of grandstanding and assumed affront in this post (Pincas above as well). It's not becoming. People can be asses and still do the right thing on occasion. And sometimes a nickname is just a nickname.
- selmnoo 13y ago
  The reason 'exit might have found it off-putting is because it's almost only the right wing crowd that chooses to use this term now (and only in critical contexts). Take a 5-minute trip to freerepublic forums and you'll see what I mean. Small side note: Referring to Manning as 'he' in events she was involved in before Manning to choose to publicly make a switch shouldn't be an issue -- that's something Manning herself suggested actually. So for the grandparent post to have used the 'he' pronoun would not have been an issue at all.
- FireBeyond 13y ago
  Yes, and no. I didn’t see many people referring to either of the Presidents Bush as “George”.
  - pawn 13y ago
    No, it was the single letter, W.
    - dredmorbius 13y ago
      Or "Shrub". God bless you Molly Ivans.
- dragonwriter 13y ago
  > "Barry" was Mr. Obama's chosen nickname, and he didn't give it up until college Which would make its use understandable if Obama gave it up in college a few months ago, and the person using it was someone who had interacted with him frequently during the time he was using it. Less so when he graduated from college before many of the adults using it were born, much less became aware that Mr. Obama existed. > I think you're reaching looking for an insult here. I think you're reaching looking for a justification for the equivalent of mocking a mid-career professional by persistently using a nickname they stopped using in kindergarten.
timje1 13y ago
It was a joke, an attempt to give the final statement a jovial, chat between friends vibe. I could have used Bazza (it's a British thing) or Prezzy. Too late to edit it now.

antiterra 13y ago

Manning was in the military, and the operating interpretation of Article I is that Congress and the President have the power to regulate the Armed forces, the rest of the US Constitution and civilian law largely notwithstanding. Draconian punishment and treatment, while concerning, is nothing new for those subject to the UCMJ, even if the code itself appears to prohibit it[1]. The scary scenario would be the classification of Snowden as an enemy combatant, who would then be subject to military justice. I hope that all three branches of the US government consider that to be a ridiculous stretch of the imagination. [1] http://uscodebeta.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title10-section813&num=0&edition=prelim http://uscodebeta.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-pre...

girvo 13y ago
Would you put money on the fact that they wouldn't do that?
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- rtpg 13y ago
  I would. They would gain nothing from doing it, and everything to lose (especially in the court of public opinion). Plus the case is already pretty clear, he's gone and admitted everything anyways. Literally nothing to gain from trying to put him through a military tribunal.
  - rfnslyr 13y ago
    They would gain nothing from doing it, and everything to lose (especially in the court of public opinion). That shit has sailed before it was built.
  - herge 13y ago
    There's 158 guys in cages in Guantanamo that would beg to differ...

phaus 13y ago

The judge in his case ruled at one point that he was being illegally mistreated. What I find outrageous about that is that they only cut a small fraction of the time he had already served off of his sentence as a result. In America, such severe misconduct by the authorities is supposed to result in the defendant walking (And I say this as a person who believes that he was otherwise guilty of SOME of the charges due to his wholesale leak of 700000 files that had nothing to do with government crimes). If we compromise our values in the name of defending freedom, there is no freedom left to defend.