Stewart

We are «speaking» an open letter to the US gov on video. We have 15 countries and approx 60 people on board so far. We are also collecting personal video messages from people to the US gov. They need to be relevant, intelligent, defensible, respectful, and are encouraged to be impassioned and personal if applicable (those who have been affected by the Iraq or Afghanistan wars for example).

We would like people to join us and to submit clips in defense of Bradley Manning. He is a critical part of this process. Please consider joining this global message and adding your voice!

Info at: http://www.support-julian-assange.com

Thanks all!

MANNING DETAINED IN QUANTICO MARINE BRIG:

Quantico Marine Brig is the pretrial confinement facility for the Washington, DC, region for persons awaiting trial or on trial in all branches of the military. PFC Manning will be prosecuted by the Army. On July 29, 2010, Manning was transferred from Kuwait where he had been held since May. He was sent to Quantico presumably because of the seriousness of his alleged crime. The Quantico Brig has 27 individual cells, divided into several wings. There are no detainees on either side of Manning’s cell. Manning’s cell consists of a bed bolted to the wall, a mattress with a built-in pillow, a quilted cover of jean-like fabric, water fountain/sink, mirror, and toilet. The entire front wall of Manning’s cell is bars, so he can see the guard when he/she passes. He can talk to any other detainee in the wing, but cannot see them. Villiard would not verify whether there are other detainees in Manning’s wing.

There is a different area in the brig for detainees held in «solitary confinement.» Those cells do not have open bars in the front, and the detainee cannot see out except for a small window, nor can he hear or speak to others.

The military distinguishes between being held in a solitary cell for 23 hours per day and being held in «solitary confinement» . . . a fine point, indeed. The Geneva Conventions ban solitary confinement as cruel and unusual punishment.

VISITATION RIGHTS:

In order to visit Manning, he must put your name on his visitors’ list. Manning may have visitors on weekends and holidays. These visiting hours are in addition to the one hour per day when Manning is allowed out of his cell. Legal and medical visits are handled separately. Lt. Villiard was not free to tell me if Manning has had visits from family members.

MAIL RESTRICTIONS:

Manning is permitted to receive mail, but only if he puts the name of the sender on his list of people whom he will «allow» to send him mail. If the sender’s name is not on Manning’s list, the mail is returned to sender.

HELD INCOMMUNICADO WITHOUT WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS:

Bradley Manning is effectively shut off from receiving all mail from well-wishers. So if you wrote to him, he did not get it. If you have advice for him, he cannot receive it. If you want to volunteer to help him, you cannot tell him. I have no idea if Manning has been told this policy.

I believe this fits the definition of being held «incommunicado».

The Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Bill of Rights states «In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial. . .»

READING MATERIAL RESTRICTIONS:

Manning is not permitted to receive reading material mailed to him by individuals. Even if Manning were to put my name on his list to «allow» my mail to be delivered to him, I would not be able to send him any books, magazines, or newspapers. If he wants to receive a book or magazine, he would have to request a form from the guard and write down his request. His request would be reviewed by a committee to determine if the book or magazine contained anything «improper for individuals in a confinement facility to be reading, such as pornography or anything like that.»

One could argue that pornography, not being illegal, might be quite appropriate for an incarcerated person. Does the military code now prohibit persons from reading porno? When I asked Lt. Villiard to define «or anything like that,» he promised to research this point and get back to me with a more detailed answer.

If the request is approved, supposedly Manning could receive the book or magazine in the mail, but only if it came from an established source such as Amazon or Border’s Books. There are no newspaper subscriptions available in the brig, but on several occasions the brig commander has brought his own newspaper to the brig and asked if anyone wanted to see a section, such as the sports section. Villiard stated he did not know if Manning had ever expressed interest to read the commander’s newspaper.

Villiard promised to find out if and how Manning can receive newspapers. I am also awaiting detailed answers for whether Manning is allowed writing materials, money, and «PX calls» which means requesting «comfort items» like gum and paper from the base store.

For questions pertaining to Manning’s trial, persons may contact Lt. Col Rob Manning (no relation), Public Affairs Officer for the US Army, Military District of Washington; phone 202-685-4899.

Manning’s attorney is David E. Coombs .

There are several Bradley Manning support web sites at:

http://bradleymanning.org/el
http://www.couragetoresist.org
http://standwithbrad.org/ .

See also The Army Field Manual: Sanctioning Cruelty?

Dr. Amy L. Beam
Educator, IT consultant

are there things that shouldn’t be written in a letter lest it will not be forwarded? like some support, for instance saying that he didn’t do anything wrong?

is it possible to send books to him?

thx,

Achim

I am not American citizen. But what the leakage Bradley is accused of has been of the most interest to the rest of the world also. However, the webpage seems to pretend that this is an American-centric question. But it is not. The issue is world-wide, and so is Bradley’s situation, and should be the concerns about him.

With these considerations in mind, I wonder whether you consider appropriate, or convenient, for non-Americans to join your support campaign.

Best regards, and good chance!

The process is just knowledge, simply the synthesis of more diverse data than any one institution or group of similar institutions normally consider from inside their institutionally confined perceptions.

Is it not inherent that «the enemy» holds half the knowledge one would need to resolve the contradictions between two opposing perceptions?

If the highly titled experts are derived from the common people, and the experts are failing, between the two, would you seek better knowledge from those who became experts, or the common people?

If you can recognize that wars exist because opposing egotistical leaders are so intellectually lazy that they simply blame the other guy for all problems, and attack, instead of learning and synthesizing the knowledge on which the enemy’s mind makes its decisions, then you hold the knowledge of why every peace and anti-war organization online, which have been offered the knowledge to promptly manifest their goals, with the offer to answer and verify the answer of every related question they can ask, have not responded to the offer from a mere common person (mind) without organizational high titles and credentials.

Are not the US military Generals and their highly titled previous military «expert consultants» routinely losing their wars to mere peasants because the Generals and their experts talk to only Generals and experts, instead of mere peasants?

Eventually, Brad will learn that he could have been promptly released from prison, but his egotistical support group leaders and lawyers, like military Generals and their wars, could not further feed their egos if he was released before his imprisonment could be milked for its maximum «donations» and «organization leadership ego gratification».

Respectfully, DougBuchanan.com