When people say “you don’t have all the facts” it makes me mad
because the thing I’m talking about
the thing that makes me scream and shout
is that the facts are not there to be had
The other day we were debating the case of Bradley Manning, which is not so much a debate as a running game of Yayboo (Yay! Boo! Yay! Boo! It’s such a lot of fun to do. If you like it say Yay! and if you don’t say Boo!), most people either think he’s a hero or a dirty traitor (I’m on the hero side) but there isn’t a lot of subtlety of opinion. Anyway, someone from the dirty traitor camp said “How do you know Bradley Manning’s being tortured. Have you been to Quantico? Well, then, shut up hahaha” or words to that effect.
A Martyr to Honesty
That inspired the little poem above. No, I haven’t been to Quantico. I live several thousand miles away and can’t afford the air fare, for starters. Secondly, Dennis Kucinich couldn’t get in to see him, either. In fact, the only visits he’s getting are from his lawyer. I would say that this, right there, is mistreatment. Certainly, it’s evidence that the government wants to keep something hidden. And when they want to keep something hidden, that something is probably no good.
There is no reason whatsoever for a government to keep secrets. Not in a democracy. Democracy is supposed to mean rule by the people. The people can’t rule if the government is keeping secrets from them. I’m not buying the national security thing. That’s just an excuse to start wars. I’m not buying the “you can’t handle the truth” argument, either. If there are aliens visiting this planet, I want to know. I can’t think of any good reason for the government to keep secrets from its people. It’s not as if they are planning a surprise birthday party for us.
Also, Bradley Manning has not been convicted of anything. Now, there are only two good reasons for keeping a person in jail before their trial. First, if the crime was totally heinous and bloody like a murder or something and there is reason to believe that the suspect, if released, will do it again. The other is if you think they’ll run away, and precautions can be taken to prevent that. Bradley Manning shouldn’t be in jail at all, but free on bond.
At some point, the government is going to have to let Bradley Manning be seen. A whole lot of people will be watching.
www.gurukalehuru.com 
Don’t forget that Manning is a member of the military and in a military brig, not a civilian one. Thus phrases like “free on bond” have no relevance to his current situation. When he joined the military he presumably signed papers making him beholden to the military chain of command and the military rule book. It’s a completely different world by design as the rules are written with the safety and morale of the entire military in mind. He chose to sign over many of his civilian rights when he joined the military. That choice was his to make and he made it so now must live with the consequences. Also, if he’s the tough soldier he was trained to be I find it hard to side with you in declaring a short guest list to be mistreatment. Our military surely trains our soldiers to deal with much tougher things than that! If he was really stripped of his clothes, same thing – surely he’s been trained to deal with far worse than a little embarassment. Some people wouldn’t even find that embarassing 🙂 His living conditions are likely a thousand times better than those of about 75% of the world’s population so I just don’t buy the whiny poor baby’s being tortured stuff. Is he a tad miserable? Sure. But then, so are two year olds when they’re sent to time out and clearly the military has put the guy in their version of time out.
You say, “I can’t think of any good reason for the government to keep secrets from its people.” Well I can and the reason is the failure of education systems. They create masses of people with no real critical thinking skills and no inclination to research various sides of an issue. Think of the “Rush said it’s true so it must be true” ilk. Do you read the comments sections on web sites? It’s frightening to see the lack of education, lack of empathy beyond their front door, lack of respect for different ways of thinking and seeing the world, etc. You’re intelligent, well read, and would likely thrive on transparent government – but you’re more the exception than the rule. Never forget that.
Your characterization of Bradley Manning, who, if the charges against him are actually true, risked his freedom to save the world from government secrecy gone mad and is therefore a hero to all future generations, as a whiny poor baby, puts you on the side of the government against the people, on the side of secrecy against the side of truth.
Sure, there are a lot of low information voters out there. Let them have all the information. They wouldn’t do any worse with it than they are doing now.
I could have said that better. My point is, torture or not, his treatment is clearly punitive. Since he hasn’t been tried yet, it shouldn’t be.
Not on any side and don’t believe Bradley’s government is “against the people…”. But let me point out that it isn’t just Bradley’s government – it is (or was) his employer. Employers take punitive action all the time against employees (job terminations, demotions, the projects no one wants, etc.) if they have their own proof of wrong doing. In Bradley’s case you can be sure his employer has run investigative programs against the logs on his personal computer at work and, from that, they know for certain if he stole data. You don’t know one way or the other but they DO know. There isn’t a company in existence that wouldn’t punish someone who was stealing company data, regardless of what they intended to do with it. Bradley knew, or should have known, his own employer would be even more punitive than the average employer over data theft.
“Side of secrecy…..against the side of truth…” They aren’t mutally exclusive so again – no sides here. Just observation, commentary, expansion of ideas, etc.