BULLY BOY 
PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL-AID 
TABLE
IF YOU THOUGHT HE LEARNED A DAMN THING FROM HIS FIRST TERM, YOU WERE WRONG.
PICKING A CABINET IS JUST AS CONFUSING FOR CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O THIS GO ROUND AS IT WAS LAST.
IF WE CAN ALL SET ASIDE CONCERNS FOR THE STATE OF THE COUNTRY, WE CAN JUST SIT BACK AND LAUGH AT THE INEPTITUDE AND THE INABILITY TO LEARN FROM MISTAKES AS WE GO FROM THE GIDDY HIGH OF ONE FAILED NOMINATION TO THE NEXT.
WHO BROUGHT THE POPCORN?
FROM THE TCI WIRE:
Today is the 921st day
 Iraq War veteran Bradley Manning has spent in military custody.  Today,
 he again spoke in court and we start with that because the US military 
has yet again demonstrated it is a culture that refuses to adapt and is 
so rooted in the status quo that it is responsible -- continues to be 
responsible -- for the deaths of its own.
Background, Monday April 5, 2010, WikiLeaks released US military video of a July 12, 2007 assault in Iraq. 12 people were killed in the assault including two Reuters journalists Namie Noor-Eldeen and Saeed Chmagh. Monday June 7, 2010, the US military announced that they had arrested Bradley Manning and he stood accused of being the leaker of the video. Leila Fadel   (Washington Post) reported
 in August 2010 that Manning had been charged -- "two charges under the 
Uniform Code of Military Justice. The first encompasses four counts of 
violating Army regulations by transferring classified information to his
 personal computer between November and May and adding unauthorized 
software to a classified computer system. The second comprises eight 
counts of violating federal laws governing the handling of classified 
information." In March, 2011, David S. Cloud (Los Angeles Times) reported
 that the military has added 22 additional counts to the charges 
including one that could be seen as "aiding the enemy" which could 
result in the death penalty if convicted. The Article 32 hearing took 
place in   December. At the start of this year, there was an Article 32 
hearing and, February 3rd, it was announced that the government would be
 moving forward with a court-martial. Bradley has yet to enter a plea 
and has neither affirmed that he is the leaker nor denied it. The 
court-martial was supposed to begin before the election but it was 
postponed until after the election so that Barack wouldn't have to run 
on a record of his actual actions. 
Bradley
 appeared in military court yesterday and we'll note various details 
about the case itself.  But the most important detail is one that 
effects all serving and veterans who have served -- as well as their 
family members.
Leave it to the Associated Press to miss what's right before its own eyes: "His
 pretrial testimony appeared to support the military's argument that it 
was trying to protect Manning from harming himself by keeping him in 
strict isolation, taking away his clothes and shakling him when he was 
outside his cell."  Did it?
No, it did not.  AP,
 from time to time, exists solely to keep Dorothy Parker's adage alive: 
You can lead a whore to culture but you cannot make her think.
Taking away his clothes was never about his protection.  And, at Third, we noted
 that as soon as those details became public and we pointed out that 
there were non-cloth items he could be provided with to wear if it 
really was about his safety.  (And didn't the military then suddenly 
discover that to be true?)  It was not about his protection.
Bradley
 being forced to sleep in the nude -- nude and on full display -- is not
 normal, it is not therapeutic and for the AP to suggest that it is is 
as offensive if they started running "She asked for it" columns on rape.
If
 the US military wasn't trying to punish Bradley (I believe they were 
trying to humiliate him, my opinion), their actions do not suddenly 
become 'good.'  It goes to the larger issue that you have a  lot of 
idiots who don't know what they're doing.
Forcing anyone to be on public display is humiliating and counter-productive enough, adding nudity to it?  
Immediately
 after he was taken into military custody, Bradley was transferred from 
Iraq to Kuwait.  He was not told what was taking place or if he would 
stay there or be moved.  Extraordinary rendention was already well known
 and discussed in the press.  When Jane Mayer was an actual reporter and
 not the partisan hack she's since morphed into, you could read all 
sorts of tales by her about what the US government was allowing to be 
done in the name of 'interrogation.'
In such a
 climate, a very young man, already under stress, was taken into 
military custody.  He had no idea what would happen to him.  In Kuwait, 
at one point he made a knoose.  He's called it that in his testimony.  
The artist rendering of what prosecutor held up is not actually a 
knoose.  It's a sheet with a series of knots in it.  
The
 military prosecution is attempting to assert that this knoose or 
'knoose' along with another statement is why certain measures were taken
 with Bradley.  The AP apparently feels it is their job to make the military's case for them as opposed to being a skeptical press.
The
 statement?  Arriving at Quantico, he was admitted.   When he was being 
admitted into Quantico, Bradley wrote on a form, in response to a 
question about suicide, "always planning and never acting."
Are you telling me that the US military didn't have a follow up?
If there was a follow up verbal question, then there was a follow up verbal response.  Why isn't that noted?
Because it wouldn't back the military's assertion?  Possibly.
That's disturbing.  More disturbing would be that there was no verbal follow up to a statement like that on a form.  
To
 be clear, that statement is perfectly 'normal.'  At different points in
 their lives, many Americans will consider suicide.  Maybe for a few 
seconds each time they do, maybe in an elaborate fantasy that has 
actually deals with something other than suicide.
The
 statement is not 'troubling.'  For a number of reasons.  One, it is an 
opening to discuss a serious issue and, two, it demonstrates that the 
person being assessed has some comfort level discussing the issue.  
Someone being admitted who was planning to kill themselves and wanting 
to kill themselves once admitted to a facility, most likely would be 
close-lipped about any sucidal thoughts.
The 
narrative that the military prosecutor presented to the military court 
is that Bradley arrived back in the US and wrote during the intake 
assessment that he was "always planning and never acting" upon.  
"Planning" should have resulted in Bradley being asked to define 
"planning."  Is that thinking, is that an abstract, is that an elaborate
 plan?  If you were to take your own life, how would you do it?  A whole
 string of questions were prompted by "always planning and never 
acting."
Where were those questions?
Was
 someone too uncomfortable to ask?  Was a medical professional not 
present at intake?  That seems strange considering the high-profile 
nature of Bradley's case even then; however, I would assume the military
 would train those working at Quantico or any other brig on suicide.
What
 it appears is that, at best, Bradley suffered because the military is 
not training those required to do supervision on issues like suicide.   
Yesterday, the Defense Dept released
 the US Army's suicide numbers for last month: "20 potential suicides: 
five have been confirmed as suicides, and 15 remain under investigation"
 which is an increase of five from September's numbers.   DoD notes that
 2011 resulted in 165 deaths confirmed as suicides and that 2012 has 
seen 105 confirmed and 61 which are still being investigated.  So if all
 under investigation currently were to be ruled suicide, October will be
 the month that 2012 surpassed 2011 for number of army members taking 
their own lives (166 is the number of suicides if the 61 under 
investigation end up determined to be suicides).  With two months of 
data remaining for the calendar year, it is likely 2012 will see an 
increase in the number of suicides.
Quantico
 brig would be a natural location for potentially at-risk persons.  
Those working at Quantico should have a minimum level of training.  That
 minimum level should have included staff providing direct supervision 
-- eyes on -- of Bradley being alarmed over what public nudity might do 
to the mental well being of a supposed suicide risk.
There
 was nothing healthy about what was done to Bradley.  If the military's 
narrative, as presented by the prosecution, is correct, then the Defense
 Dept is the cause of suicides.  It's not merely failing to provide 
assistance, it's creating an unhealthy environment that encourages and 
assists suicides via its own ignorance and negligence.
This is not an abstract.  There is a suicide crisis in the military today. 
Senator
 Patty Murray is the Chair of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee.  
This week, she proposed that the Defense Authorization Bill be expanded 
so that it will "require DoD to create a comprehensive, standardized 
suicide prevention program."
Senator
 Patty Murray:  Time and time again, we've lost servicemembers and 
veterans to suicide.  But while the Departments of Defense and Veterans 
Affairs have taken important steps towards addressing this crisis, we 
know more must be done.  We know that any solution depends upon reducing
 wait times and improving access to mental health care; ensuring proper 
diagnosis; and achieving true coordination of care and information 
between the Departments.  This amendment would require a comprehensive, 
standardized suicide prevention program across the DoD.  It would 
require the use of the best medical practices, in suicide prevention and
 behavioral health programs to address serious gaps in the current 
programs.
Murray's remarks appear in full in the November 28th snapshot. 
 I strongly support Murray's proposal.  Not only that, I hope attorneys 
around the country start thinking class-action lawsuit against DoD.  A 
huge number of veterans and servicemembers have taken their own lives.  
They've often done so because the help they needed was not present and 
the people who should have seen the risks weren't trained to see the 
risks.
If the military is going to stand by 
the assertion that what Bradley experienced -- the 'diagnosis' and the 
'treatment' -- was standard and humane military treatment, then it's 
really time for lawyers to start filing law suits against the DoD and 
the VA regarding suicides.
| 
RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot" "Ali al-Dabbagh refuses to fall on Nouri's sword" "Bradley Manning" | 
 
 
No comments:
Post a Comment