Bradley Manning Access Blocked By U.S., Says U.N. Torture Monitor

GENEVA — A U.N. torture investigator said Monday he is frustrated at being denied an unmonitored visit to a U.S. Army private suspected of giving classified material to WikiLeaks.

Juan Mendez said the U.S. government "has not been receptive to a confidential meeting" with Pfc. Bradley Manning. He said in a statement that a monitored conversation would be counter to the practice of his U.N. mandate.

Officials at the U.S. mission in Geneva said they weren't immediately able to comment.

Pentagon spokesman U.S. Marine Col. Dave Lapan said in a statement, however, that Mendez is free to meet with Manning with his consent but said an unmonitored visit can't be guaranteed.

"At Quantico, such a guarantee is only reserved for attorney-client communications," he said.

Manning is being held in solitary confinement in Quantico, Virginia, for all but an hour every day. He is stripped naked each night and given a suicide-proof smock to wear to bed. Amnesty International says the treatment may violate Manning's human rights.

Comments

[Jerry Villano]

01:13 AM on 04/22/2011

why dont these UN torture monitors go to Iran, N Korea, Cuba, Venezuela. Mynamar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Russia, Pakistan, or seek out Al Queda, Taliban, or any Radical Muslim group. who actually torture, chop of hands, feet, heads. Hang homosexuals, Beat and torture women and non believers. NO!! they worry about a coddled American Soldiers who is watched and pampered like a rock star.

[Richard H Stafursky]

08:51 PM on 04/21/2011

Bush all over again.

[treadway123]

03:55 PM on 04/21/2011

I understand human rights an Bradely rights! What about the rights of all those soldiers he endangered with his actions? Who will know for years to come what he destroyed in human intelligence ability to collect an serve our loved ones! i can understand his fusteration with information he may thought should be made public, but not he nor the wilileak guy are professional enough to have made SAFE choice's for America or His Soldiers! What if one of his leaks now lead to a direct killing of our military or intelligence community----------than what, will u still say his conditions are to harsh? I think he should have been icolated from population, interrigated endlessly an I certainly DO NOT agree with them stripping him naked in his cell. Other than that he deserves the punishment he gets, he betrayed his country.

[sophiemaki]

01:59 PM on 04/14/2011

Lt David E Coombs is Bradley's defense attorney.
i assume he is in the military.
Jack Rice said he would be gladly defend Bradley.
This is not right.
Obama .where are you?
i will never vote for Obama unless he does something about this..
this is pathetic .

[CrzyRussell]

09:15 PM on 04/14/2011

and what is not right about it?

[sophiemaki]

09:45 PM on 04/14/2011

if you do not understand ..human rights.
i am not going to be the one to explain it your simple mind..

[SmolderingRuin]

04:29 AM on 04/18/2011

He's right where he always is, on the wrong side, lying his a** off:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmvxc-hcKPw

[Angie Cordeiro]

10:29 AM on 04/14/2011

Stop the Secrecy
Allow Official Visits to Bradley Manning

http://action.firedoglake.com/page/s/manning_visits?source=bmsn

"Marine rules clearly state that people "conducting official government business, either on behalf of the prisoner or in the interest of justice," can be allowed "official visits" not subject to monitoring by the brig. That explicitly includes Members of Congress like Rep. Kucinich.

Rep. Kucinich, a member of the House Oversight Committee, has been trying to visit Manning in prison for more than two months. The Congressman repeatedly wrote to Secretary Gates and other military officials requesting a visit to investigate the allegations of torture-like conditions to which Manning has been subjected. And the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture has opened an official investigation into PFC. Manning's conditions."

[kwyang]

01:41 PM on 04/14/2011

There's a gulf of difference between "can" and "should". We CAN also just let Manning go and tell everyone our laws mean nothing and anytime you don't feel like obeying them, just go ahead and break them without consequence. But we shouldn't.

What secrecy, anyway? It's not like his lawyer can't visit him. He even has a friend visiting him. The lawyer I can understand as required, but letting a friend visit an accused traitor is a luxury as is. Aldrich Ames and Robert Hansen don't have any friends who can visit, why should Manning?

[Christine Gallo]

12:14 AM on 04/15/2011

Quite simply because both Ames and Hansen have both been convicted of crimes. Manning has not. He has not, to my knowledge, even been formally accused of any crimes, and it is going on 11 months now.

This is a disgrace, and one that I hope is brought up frequently during Obama's next Presidential race. He deserves to have to account for turning his back on this young man, and his "crime" of embarrassing this country. That appears to be the reason that the military cannot bring Manning up on treason charges, because it is apparent to all who have read the WikiLeaks reports that there is nothing that would endanger the country in those documents.

[Rick Storm]

07:23 AM on 04/14/2011

Terrorism has replaced Communism as the rationale for the militarization of the country [America], for military adventures abroad, and for the suppression of civil liberties at home. It serves the same purpose, serving to create hysteria.

HOWARD ZINN, Terrorism and War

[duxguts]

02:55 AM on 04/14/2011

No we won't talk to Cuba. Don't you know they imprison people for telling the truth and refuse to let them have visitors.

[Mudge]

12:45 AM on 04/14/2011

What is new about the United States violating human rights? We all know about all about it. It is the way this country conducts business.

And what is anyone going to do about it? Voting doesn't work, and as Emma Goldman said, "If voting changed anything they would make it illegal."

[sepuck]

12:30 AM on 04/14/2011

This man is not his lawyer why would he have unmonitored access to a federal criminal never the less one charged under the UCMJ. If he want to talk to him I do not see why he can't with his lawyer present.

[William J Unverferth Sr]

08:09 AM on 04/14/2011

Having a third party involved means that the attorney client privilege is NOT in force as the third party is NOT his attorney.

[iriemeditation]

10:26 PM on 04/13/2011

NOT IN MY NAME!!! Free our Freedom Fighter Manning!!!

[William J Unverferth Sr]

08:10 AM on 04/14/2011

IN MY NAME give him a fair trial and enforce the verdict by a jury of his peers, it's the American way.

[1776 or 1984]

09:25 PM on 04/13/2011

The fundamental nature of the lie in which we all live is....

Empire, not Republic

[demonmom]

06:01 PM on 04/13/2011

Oh my god is that the he/she from Code PinK? He/she needs to get a job instead of milking off the pathetic leftists

[deezus]

04:18 PM on 04/13/2011

If criminals were allowed to kill themselves, wouldn't that save our country a lot of time and money?

[SGTDBK]

04:48 PM on 04/13/2011

It would, but if the criminal did it while in custody then the imprisoning body would be liable if they determined a previous comment was made about suicide and insufficient action was taken to stop a suicide from occurring.

[Angie Cordeiro]

08:05 PM on 04/13/2011

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmudiyah_killings

[Christine Gallo]

07:20 PM on 04/16/2011

Sgt. who exactly is liable for those showers that killed servicemen in Iraq? Has the military taken sufficient action to stop further deaths from occurring by shower?

I can appreciate your loyalty to people in service to this country, but some members of the military have made horrific errors of judgement in these wars. Hearing the criticism may be difficult for you, but please don't be condescending to the people with whom you are communicating.

You may not approve Wikipedia, but as you had to concur from Angie Cordeiro's posting, the information was accurate. The information she referred to was not just available on Wikipedia. She could have heard a special report, read a magazine article, and used Wikipedia to garner names and dates for this posting.

This is not a court of law. We are having a discussion. Most of us attempt to be civil, and even when we hold different opinions, try to communicate our point of view clearly, without tearing down the opponent.

If you would like to do that type of battle, perhaps you would be better served on some knee jerk, reactionary, conservative web site. Maybe one run by Glen Beck, or Rush Limbaugh.

[altosax]

09:06 PM on 04/13/2011

But if that happened, how would the people that own for-profit prisons make a buck?

[mike dougles]

03:10 PM on 04/13/2011

War crimes and torture under Obama.

well at least he closed gitmo and got rid of the patriot act

[Brian Waters]

04:44 PM on 04/13/2011

Ahhh sarcasm!

[LF Drew]

01:41 PM on 04/13/2011

For a Constitutional scholar, Obama is awfully comfortable denying PFC Manning his Constitutional rights. Is it the 5th and the 8th Amendment they are treading over keeping Manning locked away, without trial, without sound sleep?

I'm not sure. See, I'm not a Constitutional scholar. But I am conscientious, I am for all citizens' rights being respected, and I am yet again appalled that we parade around questioning other countries' human rights records while casting a blind eye to our own shortcomings here at home...

[William J Unverferth Sr]

01:46 PM on 04/13/2011

For the charges he's facing pre-trial confinement is NOT uncustomary in Civilian courts neither is denial of bail. Sleep deprivation has not been shown to be a fact. He may be sleeping lousy because he is confined, if so that is not sleep deprivation like blaring a loud horn every 5 minutes (other brig residents would be making a fuss over this though). He is allowed Dr. Visits if he isn't sleeping he should talk to the doctor.

[OrangeSalad]

02:24 PM on 04/13/2011

There is a letter authored by two scholars and signed by more than 250 additional scholars so we don't have to guess or listen only to the WH propaganda.

Here is an excerpt:
"He [Manning] is currently detained under degrading and inhumane conditions that are illegal and immoral.
The sum of the treatment that has been widely reported is a violation of the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment and the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee against punishment without trial. If continued, it may well amount to a violation of the criminal statute against torture, defined as, among other things, “the administration or application…of… procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or the personality.”..."President Obama was once a professor of constitutional law, and entered the national stage as an eloquent moral leader. The question now, however, is whether his conduct as commander in chief meets fundamental standards of decency."

Here is the link to the entire letter
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2011/apr/28/private-mannings-humiliation/

[bjreg3]

08:31 PM on 05/15/2011

How do "they" know he's held under those conditions and were these two "scholars" ( I use that term laughingly) actually were there? ? Is it another "fairy tale" from leftists on this matter or is there a basis in fact? Simply having 250 people sign something doesn't mean squat and I'm suprised you would "fall" for that! Propaganda goes both ways and i frankly give about as much credence to your letter that to what the WH says.