Pride Fucking With You

Margaret Sullivan, the Times public editor, took that paper to task yesterday for not having a reporter at the trial of Bradley Manning:

The newspaper’s absence was noticed, and criticized, by many media watchers. Beyond the story itself, The Times, which considers itself the paper of record, had an obligation to be there — to bear witness — because, in a very real sense, Private Manning was one of its most important sources of the past decade.

The Wikileaks story was a huge one for the Times, but they always seemed to be resentful and sullen about how they got that story (Bill Keller’s recounting of Julian Assange’s B.O. is a prime example). The reason is simple: the Times thinks, as the paper of record, that it should have gotten Manning’s leak directly, not via Wikileaks. So even though he’s a key source, the best English-language coverage of the Manning trial is at the Guardian.

Pride only hurts, it never helps.

Share On Facebook
Share On Twitter
Share On Google Plus
Share On Pinterest
Share On Reddit

119 replies
  1. 1
    Maude says:

    Now they’re worried about the media watchers.

  2. 2
    Mark S. says:

    The media no longer sees itself as a check on government power and corruption. They prefer tire swings and MC Rove.

  3. 3
    NonyNony says:

    @Mark S.:

    The media no longer sees itself as a check on government power and corruption.

    Always remember that there was only a brief, limited amount of time when “the media” actually saw itself as a check on government power and corruption. And it was that brief, limited span of time between the invention of highly-regulated broadcast radio and the rise of loosely-regulated cable television.

    Prior to the invention of television, “the media” was a highly partisan affair mostly aligned to the interests of the publishers of the papers. Who were generally also high-mucky-mucks in the local Republican or Democratic parties. So “the media” was looking out for the interests of a handful of rich bastards and the interests of two major political parties. Where “the media” reported something negative about a rich bastard it was typically because the bastard that owned the paper really hated that guy and didn’t mind making him look bad.

    What we’ve been seeing the last few decades is a regression to the pre-broadcast media landscape, where a few rich bastards own the “presses” and get to set the agenda. The few decades between the 1940s and the 1980s were the outliers. We can’t count on “the media” to act as a government watchdog – except in the case of the interests of rich bastards. Then the media will howl if there’s anything that is going to make life uncomfortable for them (and surprise – taxes are going up for rich bastards and “the media” is howling about how terrible it is).

  4. 4
    c u n d gulag says:

    Oh, for the LIBERAL NY Times of the mid-late ’60’s to early ’80’s!

    The “Old Gray Lady” grows paler and paler with every year.

    Thank the FSM for Paul Krugman!

    Oh, and while we’re talkin’, NY Times – how about putting a white-hot spotlight on how Nihilistic the Republican Party has become.
    Besides what you allow Paul Krugman to write, I mean…

  5. 5
    Napoleon says:

    @NonyNony:

    except in the case of the interests of rich bastards.

    A great recent example of this is how the press suddenly took an interest in privacy the second it came to light that law enforcement had acquired a bunch of e-mails from and to Petraeus (same with Congress).

  6. 6
    Rex Everything says:

    DID YOU KNOW??? that Balloon Juice’s very own ABL doesn’t give a shit about Bradley Manning?

  7. 7
    lacp says:

    And here’s our friends at the Times doing a little austerity pimping:
    http://www.nakedcapitalism.com.....omist.html

  8. 8
    Wag says:

    Well at least she got this one right.

  9. 9
    Snarki, child of Loki says:

    @Napoleon: “the press suddenly took an interest in privacy the second it came to light that law enforcement had acquired a bunch of e-mails from and to Petraeus”

    Which is why all of the harm that is inflicted on us proles needs to be vigorously inflicted on our Lords and Masters.

    Because *some people* just won’t get the point, otherwise.

  10. 10
    Todd says:

    The actual story wasn’t so much about the mediocre quality of the data that got released, but should have instead been about why so much allegedly sensitive unencrypted (albeit overclassified) information was in the complete and seemingly unsupervised control of a 19 year old army private.

    That’s just stupid.

  11. 11
    liberal says:

    @NonyNony:

    Always remember that there was only a brief, limited amount of time when “the media” actually saw itself as a check on government power and corruption.

    Over the history of the “neutral, objective” corporate press, which is perhaps roughly 100 years, that’s undoubtably true. I don’t think it’s true if you go back earlier, though.

  12. 12
    liberal says:

    @lacp:
    You can’t post that here. That site, and probably the author of that piece, are critical of Obama. Blasphemers!!one!

  13. 13
    liberal says:

    @c u n d gulag:

    Oh, and while we’re talkin’, NY Times – how about putting a white-hot spotlight on how Nihilistic the Republican Party has become.

    Well, to be fair, you could ask that of the entire MSM, or for that matter the entire elite.

    One of my favorite statements on this topic:

    Protip for future history grad student: the cohort of earnest, decent intellectual apologists for today’s radical GOP would be a great topic

  14. 14
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @NonyNony: Broadcast media was given a mandate to provide some public service in return for the use of publicly owned airwaves. Privately printed newspapers did not have such a requirement. Why, for a time, they chose to behave as if they did is something I for which I have no ready explanation.

  15. 15
    Jason says:

    The New York times would not have printed Manning’s leaks. Most likely they would have reported the security breach and quietly turned him in to the authorities. This isn’t the days of the Pentagon Papers any more, the mainstream media have embraced the mentality of the security state.

  16. 16
    Cassidy says:

    @liberal: People are critical of President Obama on a regular basis here. It’s the ones that say stupid shit that get treated like assholes. People should say less stupid shit.

  17. 17
    The Moar You Know says:

    Anyone read “Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire”?

    Now would be a good time. The media is not going to change, is not going to be your friend, is not going to help anyone but those with money.

    Circulation? They don’t give a shit about that, the folks with money eventually just buy the outlets up (as we had happen very quietly here in San Diego last year) and will put the product out at a total loss if needed, just to keep their message the dominant one.

  18. 18
    Ted & Hellen says:

    At BJ, Bradley Manning is history’s greatest monster, far worse than Bush, Cheney, or Hitler.

    Must NOT release classified documents that make our wars of aggression and murder look bad; to do so is the worst crime imaginable.

  19. 19
    gene108 says:

    The few decades between the 1940s and the 1980s were the outliers.

    HUAC and their Hollywood witch hunt wouldn’t have happened, if we had a more rigorous media.

    Most of the justifications of Jim Crow laws – blacks are lazy, stupid, etc. – wouldn’t have existed, if we had a rigorous media.

    Watergate, the Pentagon Papers, and maybe a few other things were the only time the media really stuck it to the powerful.

    Otherwise the media has always been perfectly content to go along with the conventional wisdom of the day.

  20. 20
    Amanda in the South Bay says:

    He had the clearance and need to know. I don’t see that you can realistically do anything other than restrict MI MOSs to people 25 and older? There are lots of young enlisted in the military with clearances and access. Also a lot easier to get a TS when you are 19.

  21. 21
    handsmile says:

    Last week, the readership of the Guardian voted Bradley Manning to be its 2012 Person of the Year. He received a total of 70% of votes cast, far outpolling second-place nominee Malala Yousafzai at 22%. The other four top vote-getters were Pussy Riot, Danny Boyle, Nate Silver, and Fabiola Gianotti. (Unfortunately only percentages are listed, not vote totals).

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/worl.....NTCMP=SRCH

    Mistermix: Glad that you endorsed the Guardian’s superb coverage of the Manning trial. While I’ve appreciated Soonergrunt’s occasional updates on the issue, his links are usually to US media accounts which are typically stenographic.

    The Guardian’s principal correspondent on the trial, Ed Pilkington, was featured on “Up with Chris Hayes” a couple weeks ago on a segment discussing Wikileaks/Manning/US security classification.

  22. 22
    Schlemizel says:

    @gene108:

    I don’t think you have that exactly right. Back before TV cities had multiple newspapers, often they published their bias right on the masthead, The X Republican, The Y Democrat, hell the Minneapolis Star was not named for the North Star! You could read stories that made your side look good & the other side look bad. But that worked to some extent because someone was going to be looking for crime and corruption no matter who was in power.

    TV sought to avoid that sort of divide & tried to expose crime, corruption and ugly truths no matter what. ER Murrow’s stuff on CBS is really the best of the genre. But reality has a well known liberal bias. Honest reporting had to be stopped and they have done a great job of that.

  23. 23
    DecidedFenceSitter says:

    @Amanda in the South Bay: As someone who works in the industry – there are loads of things they SHOULD have done, but the Security Officer was lazy and lenient.

    Namely for one: Don’t let your people bring writable media into a secured space, and then take it with them when they leave.

  24. 24
    Forum Transmitted Disease says:

    He had the clearance and need to know.

    @Amanda in the South Bay: He had the clearance. He most assuredly did not have “need to know” for everything that he compiled, downloaded and then handed off to foreign nationals.

    He deserves execution, nothing less. That he will not get it is an obscenity. Same for that walking four-star security breach, Petraeus.

  25. 25
    Cassidy says:

    @Forum Transmitted Disease:

    He deserves execution, nothing less. That he will not get it is an obscenity. Same for that walking four-star security breach, Petraeus.

    You’re gonna give kitchen implement a sad for not recognizing the true patriotic genius of Manning.

  26. 26
    cathyx says:

    This is the first post about his unlawful pretrial punishment hearing on Balloon Juice.

    ETA: And it’s not even about it, but about the coverage of it in the NYT.

  27. 27
    Full Metal Wingnut says:

    @c u n d gulag: that made me chuckle. Reminds me of Even the LIBERAL Dick Morris…

  28. 28
    liberal says:

    @Cassidy:
    From some people (perhaps yourself), but certainly not the majority of people here.

  29. 29
    handsmile says:

    Could I be let out of moderation, please? I have to go to the bathroom. (And I promise never to write P*ssy again. Or even Gian*tti.)

  30. 30
    Lojasmo says:

    @liberal:

    So because a majority here are not critical of Obama, no article critcal of Obama can be posted here.

    Please read the post about saying stupid shit.

  31. 31
    Ben Franklin says:

    It’s all Media. They don’t like someone pointing out their lack of fortitude and Authoritarian proclivities. They immediately attacked him, then they ignored him, then they think they won.

  32. 32
    Full Metal Wingnut says:

    @Cassidy: ha! Well I don’t know about execution, but this isn’t some my Lai or pentagon papers shit. Whistleblowing by definition is not an arbitrary information dump, throw everything out there and see what sticks affair.

    I can entertain (a la Aristotle, it is the mark of an educated mind and all that) the idea that maybe maybe it was good that some of the stuff was exposed, but he (or is it she now?) is far from a hero in my eyes. Just a disturbed, attention-starve youth.

  33. 33
    Cassidy says:

    @liberal: I believe in credit where credit is due and not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good. There are a lot of things that I’d like to see done, but I don’t see the logic in blaming one man for a hostile political environment. I think a lot of emo-progs live in a world of feelings and that if the POTUS would just make them feel good, things would get done the way they want, but that’s not how real life happens. Political victory is about taking what you can get, especially when the other side works in bad faith and exploits the rules, and getting enough traction for it to expand later.

  34. 34
    Cassidy says:

    @Full Metal Wingnut: I’ve actually begun to be aympathetic, but only because of how his jailers have treated him. I think what Manning has [alledgedly] done is wrong and he should serve time for it if convicted. I think he has no concept of the Army Values and violated his oath. I also think he should never have been in. He was weak, mentally and emotionally, and this action was his outlet to vent his frustrations against his chain of command. Before the war(s), someone like him would have washed out in Basic and been identified as someone who wasn’t going to make it. The need for bodies in seats because of boy blunder laid the foundation for his treason.

  35. 35
    Ted & Hellen says:

    @Forum Transmitted Disease:

    He deserves execution, nothing less. That he will not get it is an obscenity.

    People who think like you are the obscenity. When was the last time you called for GW Bush’s execution?

  36. 36
    Ben Franklin says:

    Keller on Wiki in 2011……

    On The WikiLeaks Model

    Last week, Yahoo’s Cutline blog reported that the Times had considered creating its own version of WikiLeaks — a site where leakers and whistle-blowers could deposit documents directly to the paper in a secure manner.

    Keller says the paper is still thinking about the idea, but it’s not a definite yet, mainly because there are many legal and ethical questions to consider.

    “It makes it a little harder to verify the actual material that’s placed in your drop box if you don’t know the chain of custody. So we’re still a ways from deciding to do it,” he says. “But I do think there’s a real advantage in having professional journalists who have studied the subject and who have the right kind of skepticism meter and know how to supply intelligence context — to have people like those handle documents rather than to have them just tossed into the blogosphere.”

    http://www.npr.org/2011/02/01/.....-wikileaks

  37. 37
    Ted & Hellen says:

    @liberal:

    @Cassidy:
    From some people (perhaps yourself), but certainly not the majority of people here.

    HA!

    Cassidy is one of Obama’s biggest BJ testicle bathers.

  38. 38
    Full Metal Wingnut says:

    @Cassidy: exactly. Several close family members and friends have been officers and enlisted. They are some of the smartest and most hardworking people I know. Military perception has really gone to shit thanks to our last president. You know. The one before Obama. What was his name again?

  39. 39
    Forum Transmitted Disease says:

    When was the last time you called for GW Bush’s execution?

    @Ted & Hellen: Every day of my life.

    Speaking of obscenity, you no-talent county-fair caricaturist, how’s your doodling “career” going?

  40. 40
    Ben Franklin says:

    Heh. The Chimpy McFreak Brothers aren’t done with us yet.

  41. 41
    Full Metal Wingnut says:

    @Cassidy: actually came damn close to OCS ten years ago. Back when I was more conservative and believed in the first war we were fighting. Boy am I glad I was talked out of that.

  42. 42
    liberal says:

    @Lojasmo:
    Please pull your head out of your ass.

  43. 43
    Cassidy says:

    @Ted & Hellen: I support the President and don’t apologize for that. I prefer progress over principle, especially principles as empty and vapid as yours. You and your kind are the tweens of politics flittering from the next version of One Direction and Hannah Montana of the day, hoping that one day you’ll get to see a nice edgy haircut, a wink and a kiss, and a verbal reacharound. Then the next eelction cycle starts, you throw away your old t-shirts and look for the next savior in disguise. In the end, all you have is a shelf full of one hit wonders and has beens who never accomplished anything, much like yourself.

  44. 44
    Mnemosyne says:

    @cathyx:

    This is the first post about his unlawful pretrial punishment hearing on Balloon Juice.

    Huh? Soonergrunt has done multiple posts about Manning’s hearings and provided some really good coverage. Or is your complaint that soonergrunt was reporting the facts and posting the transcripts but wasn’t saying that Bradley Manning is the most tormented political prisoner since Nelson Mandela?

  45. 45
    Schlemizel says:

    @Douche & Bag:

    If you are so unhappy here perhaps you could find a blog more suited to your tasted & leave us awful people to our private misery.

  46. 46
    Cassidy says:

    @Full Metal Wingnut: Heh, 10 years ago I was trying to convince the wife to let me go SF. I am glad I was talked out of that as well.

  47. 47
    Ben Franklin says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    Get back to your paying job, barfly.

  48. 48
    Ted & Hellen says:

    @Cassidy:

    Did you major in creative writing at community college?

  49. 49
    Schlemizel says:

    @cathyx:

    Thanks for proving you do not read BJ – it saves time having to read anything you post about the conversations here.

    Shorter: check the archives asshole

  50. 50
    Cassidy says:

    @Mnemosyne: Seconded. Sooner’s posts have been very informative.

  51. 51
    liberal says:

    @Forum Transmitted Disease:

    That he will not get it is an obscenity.

    No, the obscenity is a blog full of commenters who participated in a war of aggression and think–with the moral acuity of a small child—that “just following orders” gets them out of the fact they participated in a heinous crime, and then come here and rant and rave about Bradley Manning.

  52. 52
    Thomas F says:

    @Rex Everything: Thank you for mentioning this. Let’s not forget the embarrassing episode on this site, not too long ago, when ABL/Imani Gandy tried to run cover on behalf of the Obama Adminstration during its inhumane treatment of Pfc. Manning.

    Let’s face the facts. There are two or three front-pagers here, as well as scores of commentors, who are willing to defend any action by the current administration, however grotesque and/or unconstitutional. One can cite several prominent examples — the NDAA, the authorized murder of a 16-year old American citizen, or the (ongoing) violation of Pfc. Manning’s 6th Amd. right to a speedy trial and 8th Amd. right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment.

    We’re not talking about lesser evilism here. These people don’t even pretend to pay lip service to their personal disappointment with the above-mentioned actions. They baldly defend them as both right and just.

    Greenwald had ABL pegged. When she laughably attempted to play the misogyny card in response, she gave the game away.

  53. 53
    Cassidy says:

    @Ted & Hellen: No. Originally I was a film major. :D

  54. 54
    Ted & Hellen says:

    @Cassidy:

    Heh, 10 years ago I was trying to convince the wife to let me go SF. I am glad I was talked out of that as well.

    Pretty sure the entire country is glad. Thank you for not serving.

  55. 55
    Schlemizel says:

    @Cassidy:

    That is one of the most concise descriptions of the total collapse of military discipline posted!

    The volunteer army is failing because the load placed on it far exceeds the desire of qualified people to join.

  56. 56
    liberal says:

    @Forum Transmitted Disease:

    He deserves execution, nothing less.

    So you think Daniel Elsburg should have been executed, just to be clear on things?

    And should dissidents in countries whose governments we disapprove of should be executed when they break similar laws, or do we make exceptions for them?

  57. 57
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Ben Franklin:

    Aww, did I hurt your fee-fees by pointing out your moral outrage about front-pagers not covering the stories you wanted them to cover was once again factually (and embarrassingly) wrong?

  58. 58
    Ben Franklin says:

    @Thomas F:

    Heh. I, too don’t give a shite what ABL gives a shite about. Too many put winning at optimal level.

    It reminds me of the Bush Admin; End justifies Means

    Too many here reflect and mimic that attitude ‘ I’d rather have progress than principle’.

  59. 59
    Mnemosyne says:

    Wow, ABL is so all-powerful that people even complain about her in posts she didn’t write!

  60. 60
    Ben Franklin says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    That’s quite a run-on sentence, barfly. Heh.

  61. 61
    Cassidy says:

    @Ted & Hellen: Actually, I did a number of years, just chose not to go SF.

    I’m going to make this easy for you. 1) My ego is way to big for someone like you to effectively insult me. I don’t seek or need validation from most people, especially not the likes of you. You simply aren’t capable. I’ve been called worse, by much better people. 2) You’re not witty. You’re not unique, and you’re not special. I can go to the gentrified side of town, spit in any direction, and find someone spouting the same bullshit you do. I’ve heard it all. We’ve heard it all. You’re about as common as those flea market wall hangings you make.

  62. 62
    Mandalay says:

    @Forum Transmitted Disease:

    He deserves execution, nothing less. That he will not get it is an obscenity. Same for that walking four-star security breach, Petraeus.

    You believe that Petraeus should be executed?

  63. 63
    Ben Franklin says:

    Well, the BJ trollops seem to have effectively derailed a thread with some substance.

    MISSION ACCOMPLISHED

  64. 64
    Ted & Hellen says:

    @Cassidy:

    I’m going to make this easy for you. 1) My ego is way to big for someone like you to effectively insult me. I don’t seek or need validation from most people, especially not the likes of you. You simply aren’t capable. I’ve been called worse, by much better people. 2) You’re not witty. You’re not unique, and you’re not special. I can go to the gentrified side of town, spit in any direction, and find someone spouting the same bullshit you do. I’ve heard it all. We’ve heard it all. You’re about as common as those flea market wall hangings you make.

    You keep mentioning my trashy artwork. Do you want to buy one?

  65. 65
    Cassidy says:

    @Ben Franklin:

    Too many here reflect and mimic that attitude ’ I’d rather have progress than principle’

    You’re quoting me, so I’ll respond. The arc of progress in this country is slow and ponderous, at best. Principle is great, but if you never win, then you’ve got nothing. I’ll take little victories all day long.

    It’s kind of like boxing. If you put two fighters in the ring, one a power puncher with poor technique but thunder in his hands vs. a technician who can stick and move and throw fast and fluid combos, odds are you’re not going to see a knockout. Sure, the puncher may get lucky and land something, but more than likely the audience is going to get a clinic on the sweet science. Little victories pave the road of progress.

  66. 66
    Cassidy says:

    @Ted & Hellen: No thank you.

  67. 67
    Ted & Hellen says:

    @Cassidy:

    one a power puncher with poor technique but thunder in his hands…

    Let me guess: And lightening in his legs?

  68. 68
    ericblair says:

    @Amanda in the South Bay:

    There are lots of young enlisted in the military with clearances and access. Also a lot easier to get a TS when you are 19.

    This is a problem with our clearance system: essentially, it’s easy to clear a kid from the sticks who has never gone anywhere, doesn’t know anybody, and doesn’t know anything as long as he hasn’t gotten convicted or toked up too much. Now you’ve given somebody who just fell off the turnip truck access to highly sensitive information in a stressful, confusing, and possibly hostile and deceptive environment. What could possibly go wrong?

  69. 69
    Cassidy says:

    @Ted & Hellen: Umm, no. Actually, typically, power punchers have poor to marginal foot work. They’ll plod forward and aren’t really light on their feet. So, when a quicker opponent moves in, they don’t respond well to well placed combos that jump from the head to the body. It’s easy to put a power puncher on their heels, in which case they really can’t generate the power they need for a KO. The metaphor of “thunder in the hands” is an old one for boxing that tries to describe the amount of force and power that is generated in a single blow. For examples you can look up Dan Henderson’s KO of Michael Bisping or Johnny Hendricks recent flash KO of John Fitch or his recent starching of Martin Kampmann. These are MMA examples, so the boxing technique isn’t nearly as good. Also see the recent KO of Pacman.

  70. 70
    cathyx says:

    Link the posts on the pretrial punishment hearings, please. I can’t fathom how I missed them.

  71. 71
    Schlemizel says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    I believe DSM-V missed a very persistent mental disorder routinely displayed here on BJ.

    A few people have serious mental problems that are presented as anger for real or perceived failings of certain FP’ers. ABL holds the record I believe for the number & extent that this disorder has unhinged the sufferers.

    These poor deluded people pop up & post inappropriate attacks on thread not about or by the FP’er often proving they do not read BJ or certainly not the FP’er being attacked.

    I’ll be honest & admit that I am not ABLs biggest fan – she has run off screaming incorrectly too often and trys to turn minor issues into hair on fire conflagrations. But thats her thing & I can usually tell in the first few sentences if it is worth it to me to finish her post.

    As a (relatively) healthy individual I move on. If one were suffering from some sort of bizarre mental disorder ones reaction might be to post (in all caps just for the attention) in an unrelated post some non sequitur that would do . . . well what exactly? Make us see ones POV? No that hardly seems possible. Make JC dump the FP’er? Ha, as if. See thats the real clue that this is a mental disorder. They keep repeating the same stupid trick over and over & never get the result they want

    Unless their real desire is to prove themselves as irrelevant and deserving of humiliation – and that probably IS covered in DSM-V

  72. 72
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @liberal: I don’t think Manning should be executed, but I do think here is a qualitative difference between what Manning did and what Ellsberg did. I also think that the pretrial treatment Manning has received should go a long way toward mitigating any sentence he would receive if found guilty.

  73. 73
    Cassidy says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: It will be added as time served. Unfortunately, everything that has happenned to him to this point, while malicious and wrong, has been done within the confines of rules and regulations.

  74. 74
    cathyx says:

    @Cassidy: Have you been paying attention to the hearings? You must not be or you wouldn’t be saying that.

  75. 75
    Schlemizel says:

    @cathyx:

    Yes, please let us do the search for you, its what we live for

  76. 76
    cathyx says:

    @Schlemizel: If you are going to tell me that soonergrunt has done posts on the pretrial punishment hearings, then the burden of proof is on you. I can’t prove something that isn’t there.

  77. 77
    Cassidy says:

    @cathyx: 1) Yes I have. Are you referring to his treatment or the time served portion? 2) I’ve been in a couple of courtrooms and involved in enough administrative actions to be confident in how the Army conducts this stuff. The Army is fairly predictable in this sort of thing. You’d be surprised at what the Judge takes into account.

  78. 78
    cathyx says:

    @Cassidy: I’m talking about the hearing going on right now. Have you been following it? Testimony from the officers at Quantico admit to not following orders.

  79. 79
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @cathyx: Can’t link from my phone but take a look at SG’s post from November 28. Or look at posts with the category “Bradley Manning.”

  80. 80
    Ben Franklin says:

    @cathyx:

    I can assure you, they are extant. A little tightly focused on the legal ramifications, but still there.

  81. 81
    Cassidy says:

    @cathyx: Today? right this second, no. Link please.

  82. 82
    Thomas F says:

    @Mnemosyne: @Schlemizel: Let’s not get too cute about this too quickly (I realize this is BJ, and the whole world revolves around clever terminology that only this community comprehends after awhile, but I hope maturity might prevail, however temporarily).

    I cited ABL for a very specific reason. Her disappointing defense of Manning’s treatment is indicative of a schizophrenia that currently plagues American liberalism. It involves Manning, the drone program (including the authorized murder of Anwar Al-Awlaki’s 16-year old son), the administration’s unprecedented (read: worse than the Bush Admin.) prosecution of whistleblowers, the failure to close Gitmo, the NDAA, and other matters. On the one hand, there’s the deep-seated sense that these actions are deeply wrong and, in some cases, illegal and downright evil. There is little doubt that they would be grist for the mill during any Republican Adminstration — calls for impreachment, criminal prosecution, and the rest. On the other hand, there is an equally fervent belief in the essential decency of Barack Obama. He simply couldn’t want these things to occur, his hands are tied, etc.

    This schizophrenia is interestingly played out here at BJ. Some FP’ers periodically post helpful information about Manning and his case — with the implication that it is something about which liberals and progessives should be concerned. However, what gets left unaddressed is the fact that there is a portion of the BJ community that forthrightly defends not only the prosecution but the pre-trial treatment of Manning.

    I think this contradiction should at the very least be pointed out. A more optimistic person than myself might hope that it is one day resolved.

  83. 83
    Schlemizel says:

    @cathyx:

    Actually if you looked you could prove it – the original charge, from you, was that this has never been mentioned on BJ before. If you were a regular reader you would have seen several posts by soonergrunt exactly on this point.

    There is a very handy search feature – use it & stop wasting everyone else time because you can’t be bothered to verify your charge even after it has been pointed out you are wrong.

    A normal person might check first & then either admit they were wrong or if they still couldn’t find something ask for help. You made a wildly inaccurate charge & when confronted said “prove it”. Well, no, I don’t see the point in doing your work for you, sorry

  84. 84
    Ben Franklin says:

    @Thomas F:

    A more optimistic person than myself might hope that it is one day resolved.

    There are serious persons here who don’t just fluff their ego feathers as they pander to the accepted trope…..but they are not Legion. When I proffer that same point you make, they say “you should have been here in 2004”.

  85. 85
    lacp says:

    So I put up a link to a piece comparing the heads of state for Italy and Ecuador, and it turns into Obots vs. Firebaggers. This would lead me to believe that if I linked a pic of a cute baby penguin, it would spark a furious exchange of comments on drone strikes. Or something.

  86. 86
    Cassidy says:

    @lacp: Firebaggers just can’t resist taking an oppurtunity to fling poo. It’s in their nature.

  87. 87
    Mandalay says:

    @cathyx: @cathyx:

    Link the posts on the pretrial punishment hearings, please.

    Here’s one:
    http://www.balloon-juice.com/2.....nt-4012643

  88. 88
    lacp says:

    @Cassidy: I’m more than a little firebaggerish myself, but I find it easier to run on coffee than on outrage.

  89. 89
    gvg says:

    @cathyx: No there was a lot of coverage here back at the time about his pretrial detention and how lawful it is/was. I don’t think I’d even care about him with out that.

    Result is I know good and bad about him and have decidedly mixed feelings about what should happen to him. I also think no one should be kept in solitary as I think it causes humans to go insane. real serious solitary, not just seperate cell where you still see other people some and not just jailors. I might consider a few exceptions if the individual was exceptionally cunning in a murderous way…something like the silence of the lambs guy which I believe was fictional, but it might be possible for someone like that to really exist. I only consider the exception because I would think it too much of a burden on the jailors to keep themselves safe. I don’t see this position as having anything to do with Manning. It’s something I’ve been thinking about for years before I ever heard of him.

  90. 90
    Schlemizel says:

    @Thomas F:

    Who are you? I was responding to that BS post from “rex everything” Sorry if there was some confusion about that. Rexie’s post was the one that had no relationship to the post, unless that is a sock puppet you can ignore my post about it

  91. 91
    Ted & Hellen says:

    @Cassidy:

    Firebaggers just can’t resist taking an oppurtunity to fling poo. It’s in their nature.

    Says BJ’s recently most prolific Obot poo flinger.

  92. 92
    Ben Franklin says:

    Since the thread has been stolen, let me attempt to steal back.

    Our new AG? Heh…..drones for dispensaries and rogue States.

    http://www.emptywheel.net/2012.....ules-dead/

  93. 93
    handsmile says:

    @Cassidy:

    Colonel Denise Lind, presiding military judge in Manning’s recently-completed Article 13 hearing apparently disagrees with your assertion.

    Evidence and testimony introduced by both prosecutors and defense attorneys, including Manning’s own direct testimony, on questions of unlawful confinement at Quantico, was of sufficient gravity to persuade her to postpone Manning’s trial from February 4 to March 16 at the earliest.

    Testimony from Col. Daniel Choike, former commander of Quantico and prison psychiatrist Capt. William Hoctor, among others, raised such serious questions on matters of precedence and Defense Department obstruction to compel that delay.

    From all public evidence thus far, whether or not “[E]verything that has happenned to [Manning] to this point…has been done within the confines of rules and regulations” remains to be determined.

  94. 94
    El Cid says:

    I am a terrible person. I really do enjoy the occasional threads filled with comments by people who genuinely hate each other.

  95. 95
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Thomas F: that’s not a schizo streak in “liberalism.” It points instead to the idea that not all liberals are civil libertarians. Those that are care quite a bit about executive power and civil liberties stuff, are appalled that there are many others who think that those are bad things but not very high on the list of stuff to worry about. Hence there are nasty fights about who the Real Liberals are, with the civil libertarians railing at the non-civil-libertarians about how they must be authoritarians at heart.

  96. 96
    Ben Franklin says:

    If you’re near Ft Mead…………

    http://www.bradleymanning.org/.....s-hearings

  97. 97
    Cassidy says:

    @Ted & Hellen: I’m sorry. I’ll come down to your level. DRRRRRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNEEEEEEZZZZZ! MUUUUUUUURRRRRRRRDDDDDDDDEEEEERRRRRRR! WORSE THAN BUSH! ARGLE BARGLE!

  98. 98
    Cassidy says:

    @handsmile: She may very well determine that they were wrong, but I guarantee you that there is nothing that specifically says that what they did wasn’t allowed. This is a spirit vs. letter of the law kind of thing.

  99. 99
    gvg says:

    Prior manning coverage

    Nov 28th sooner grunt http://www.balloon-juice.com/2.....t-hearing/
    There is a whole catagory on this blog Bradley Manning

    John Cole in March http://www.balloon-juice.com/2.....ntrast-11/

    There is stuff back to at least 2010. I also found Mistermix had posted about manning. Use the search feature at the top of the blog. it’s easy

  100. 100
    Thomas F says:

    @Schlemizel: My apologies for the confusion.

    @FlipYrWhig: This is a fair point; liberalism is not monolithic. But I don’t think it is too far of a stretch to say that a unifying strand undergirding liberal opposition to the Bush Administration’s prosecution of the war on terror was that it involved egregious abuses of executive power. One needn’t have been a dogmatic civil libertarian to have believed so. Indeed, one doesn’t be so nowadays to be wary of the current administration’s assumptions of unchecked power.

  101. 101
    Mandalay says:

    @Cassidy:

    I guarantee you that there is nothing that specifically says that what they did wasn’t allowed

    That may be true from what is known, and I expect that those who had any interaction with Manning were constantly reminded “Don’t you dare screw up”, but do you think that we really know everything that they did to Manning?

    I don’t understand how you can “guarantee” that nothing expressly forbidden was ever done to him.

  102. 102
    Walker says:

    My wife and I always laugh out loud at those movies from the 80s and 70s where the person on the run from some evil conspiracy finally makes it to the NY Times (or any other media outlet). As if that is supposed to mean they are now safe.

  103. 103
    Cassidy says:

    @Mandalay: Because I was in the Army for 13 years and I know how that stuff works. As far as what you’re insinuating (assault, etc.) that’s a whole ‘nother animal. I’m talking about the suicide watch, isolation, etc. There is no doubt in my mind that those actions are all easily justified within the letter of the regulations. AAMOF, I’m very sure that a couple of days were spent looking through the appropriate regs to make sure they covered their ass.

  104. 104
    handsmile says:

    @Cassidy:

    Appreciate your reply, but respectfully, I don’t fully comprehend it. If Lind rules that Manning was subjected to unlawful pre-trial punishment at Quantico, does that not mean that those actions were not allowed/permissible under specific military prison rules and regulations? I alluded above to Choike and Hoctor because each testified to matters that they believed to be in violation of such rules.

    Perhaps you could expand on the “spirit v. letter” distinction?

    ETA: In the time it took me to type this, I see your response to Mandalay somewhat addressed this matter. While I acknowledge your experience, I don’t share your confidence that all was permissible.

  105. 105
    Ben Franklin says:

    @handsmile:

    Perhaps you could expand on the “spirit v. letter” distinction?

    Asked and answered…..

    Because I was in the Army for 13 years and I know how that stuff works.

  106. 106
    cathyx says:

    The pretrial confinement hearing and the pretrial punishment hearing are not the same thing. What this post is talking about is the pretrial punishment hearing that is happening right now. The reason you don’t know about this is because no one here or in any mainstream media are reporting on it.

  107. 107
    Full Metal Wingnut says:

    @Walker: that would make a great horror movie actually. You make it that far, character and audience expecting to be saved, and you realize the Times is in bed with it, and you’re still fucked.

  108. 108
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @handsmile: Largely,I think he means that the paperwork was done correctly so that if someone looked at it they would see nothing wrong. At the same time, the regulations were applied in a way that was abusive.

  109. 109
    Cassidy says:

    @handsmile: Not a problem. A lot of it is about language and terminology. Today, NCO’s don’t “punish” Soldiers; instead, “corrective action” is taken. It amounts to the same thing, but punishment is what the UCMJ hands out, corrective action is what an NCO does to correct poor behavior.

    Secondly, when administering “corrective action” the corrective action must fit the infraction. So, theoretically, you’re not supposed to take a Soldier outside and smoke the shit out of him anymore for being late. Instead you do something that’s related to being on time. But, it’s vague enough to where if I take the Soldier outside and make him sprint around the building for time, “Oh, you’re late. Do it again.”, I can make a guy run sprints until he pukes. Or, make the guy sign in every hour on the hour one day for every minute he was late, etc. You can make a person’s life hell. I never did those things, FYI, just using them as an example of the vague wording of regulations and the ways that military leadership use to exploit it.

    So, what we’re seeing with Manning is the officers and NCO’s utilizing things like suicide watch to cause sleep deprivation, isolation, etc. that, while intended to be short term, doen’t have a specific time frame for use. You don’t put a guy on suicide watch for 3 days. You put him on it until it’s determined that he’s no longer a threat to himself. There is nothing that says you have to wake the guy up every hour, but hey, we’re just checking to see he’s okay. We’re looking out for him. We’re holding him in isolation to protect him, anyone and I mean anyone could try and harm him. We’re protecting him!

    What I’m getting at is their exploiting vague language and “who me” type behavior. Hopefully, the judge will see through the bullshit and the people who are doing this will be tried as well. More than likely, a few wil get letters of reprimand, a couple may face UCMJ, and everyone else just moves on.

    ETA: It’s permissable until someone with rank calls bullshit.

  110. 110
    Mandalay says:

    @Cassidy:

    Gotcha.

    Care to hazard a guess on Manning’s eventual sentence?

  111. 111
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @cathyx: perhaps you could explain the difference between the two hearings? From where I am sitting it appears to be an ongoing hearing about Manning’s pretrial confinement.

  112. 112
    handsmile says:

    @Cassidy: , @Omnes Omnibus:

    Again, appreciate your replies. Cassidy, your account of “corrective action” reminds me of tales my retired Navy SEAL b-i-l relates (troublingly wistfully).

    Yet on the specific matter of suicide watch in the Manning case, this article would seem to suggest that there was more than cynical adherence to regulations: “Wikileaks suspect Manning mistreated by military, psychiatrist says”:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/medi.....intcmp=239

    This paragraph in particular:

    “The failure to act on the doctor’s recommendation was an apparent violation of the instructions under which marine installations operate. The regulations state that “when prisoners are no longer considered to be suicide risks by a medical officer, they shall be returned to appropriate quarters.”

    As to your maxim, “It’s permissible until someone with rank calls bullshit,” yeah I know that one only too well.

  113. 113
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @handsmile: Yeah, this is where I part company with Cassidy. I do not think that the guards operated within the letter of the law. I think they used the regs as cover for abuse.

  114. 114
    Schlemizel says:

    @cathyx:

    BTW – since you either are incapable of doing a search or unwilling to admit what you found I’ll help you out – there were at least 12 previous stories dealing with Manning’s treatment on BJ including one titled:
    Of Course It Was Abuse

    but no, the mistreatment of Bradley Manning has never been brought up here before

  115. 115
    Cassidy says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: They’re both the same thing to me. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not excusing their behavior or justifying it. I’m just not confident they’ve done anything illegal (vs. wrong) in the sense they’ll see any kind of punishment for it.

    @handsmile: I can’t speak for the Marines, but in the Army, a Medical Officer’s reccommendation is exactly that. If the doc says this guy needs to be off his feet for 2 weeks, that’s generally what happens, but the Commander always has the discretion to override that.

  116. 116
    Cassidy says:

    @Mandalay: I have no idea. My knowledge at that point is no better than anyone else’s. I do believe that Manning will not be a free man until he’s middle aged. I also think that all this time will count as time served. I could easily be wrong. She might throw it all out. I don’t know how I feel about that, tbh.

  117. 117
    Rex Everything says:

    @Mnemosyne: I guess I’ll have to explain it to the retarded wing.

    In calling attention to the fact that ABL posted and tweeted about not giving a shit about Bradley Manning, I was just reminding Mistermix that while he’s bashing the Grey Lady—always a noble & worthwhile activity—its present culpability is shared by the organization he calls home.

    BJ front pagers tend to forget BJ’s own sins with surprising ease when it’s convenient to do so.

  118. 118
    Rex Everything says:

    @Mnemosyne: Guess I’ll have to explain it for the slow kids:

    I brought up ABL’s disdainful tweets and posts on the Manning affair in an attempt to remind Mistermix that the Grey Lady is hardly alone. BJ front pagers seem to have short and very selective memories.

  119. 119
    Rex Everything says:

    @Schlemizel: SCHOOL’S IN, SHIT-FOR-BRAINS: Mistermix’s post is about the Times being too proud to treat the Manning case with the attention it deserves. ABL, over the past couple years, dug herself in so deep asserting that Manning probably wasn’t tortured, she finally just started saying she didn’t give a shit about him. These behaviors actually have quite a bit in common. They’re both examples of pride leading to sullen resentment. Which, by the way, is the theme of MM’s post. Dumbass.

Comments are closed.