Welcome to Bennett's Study

From the Author of No Land an Island and Unconscionable

Pondering Alphabetic SOLUTIONS: Peace, Politics, Public Affairs, People Relations




UNCONSCIONABLE: http://www.unconscionableusforeignrelations.com/ http://www.unconscionableusforeignrelations.com/author/ http://www.unconscionableusforeignrelations.com/book/ http://www.unconscionableusforeignrelations.com/excerpt/ http://www.unconscionableusforeignrelations.com/contact/ http://www.unconscionableusforeignrelations.com/buy/ SearchTerm=Carolyn+LaDelle+Bennett http://www2.xlibris.com/books/webimages/wd/113472/buy.htm http://www.prweb.com/releases/2014/08UNCONSCIONABLE/prweb12131656.htm http://bookstore.xlibris.com/AdvancedSearch/Default.aspx? http://bookstore.xlibris.com/Products/SKU-000757788/UNCONSCIONABLE.aspx


Monday, July 29, 2013

Tool at court conflicts interests, manages message

Beyond Manning: 
Rights under siege by dying breed
Editing, end comment by 
Carolyn Bennett

Denial of access

According to the Washington Post, the judge in the Bradley Manning case “wrote her (master’s) thesis on what was to prove a remarkably prescient topic: the media’s right of access to military cases. In a published version” of the thesis, Denise Lind “indicated that she supported opening up military justice to scrutiny, arguing that existing restrictions on access to proceedings ‘violate the media First Amendment right of access.’”

Lind-Manning court
Fourteen years later

Journalist Alexa O’Brien reported today in a Democracy Now discussion that in the military court-martial of Pvt. Bradley Manning, Judge Colonel Denise Lind has contended that “there was no First Amendment legal precedent for public access to the court documents.” 

In lieu of First Amendment rights of free press, O’Brien said, Judge Lind “would read these really long, mile-a-minute recitations of the motions into the court record,” depriving direct access; “so that we in the media operations center had to actually scribble these things down in our notebooks.”

This breach and its consequences are enormous and far-reaching, O’Brien said,

We are talking about setting legal precedent for the future of national security reporting and also whistleblowers;

More than that: this judge’s contention contains a threat to people who are simply using the Internet, communicating in legally protected speech (First Amendment rights)

because the government in this case is essentially asserting that (since) the enemy uses the Internet and you publish intelligence or you aid the enemy with whatever is classified as intelligence, which in this case only has to be true and useful to the enemy (the government’s definition), if it doesn’t have anything to do with classified information you could be brought up on the charge of aiding the enemy.

O’Brien emphasizes that the press should have had access to public records in the Manning case; and it “tells you (the court's ruling: restricting access, re-interpreting the Bill of Rights) leans more toward a long record of Colonel Denise Lind’s deference (obsequiousness) to the government, the prosecution, and doing whatever she can to help them manage this trial and the public perception about it.”

Conflict or appearance of conflict of interest 
Corruption, Kickback?

Associate dean for academic affairs at the George Washington University Law School Lisa Schenck told the Washington Post she met Judge Denise Lind in 1999 when the two women “shared an office in the criminal law division at JAG’s (Judge Advocate General’s Corps) Rosslyn (Virginia)  headquarters.” At the same time Judge Lind is presiding over the Manning trial, she is teaching part time at GW. Schenck also revealed that Lind, according to the Post article, “has already been informed that she will take up a new position as a judge on the U.S. Army Court of Criminal Appeals, when the Manning trial ends”; however, Schenck assures the Post that Lind, reportedly a registered Democrat, “will not be swayed by the politics of the case.” 

It smells, Michael Ratner said today on Democracy Now.

The offer of the higher-court position Ratner said he “found pretty extraordinary.… (though) not necessarily illegal; but … it’s interesting to me that she’s going upstairs during the very trial that’s going on, given that promotion.
“It reminded me,” he said, “when… the judge in Daniel Ellsberg’s case, the federal judge during Ellsberg’s trial on espionage was offered to be the head of the FBI, secretly, by the Nixon administration. And, of course, there was a huge stink.” Now Judge (Col.) Denise Lind on the Manning case is being offered a higher position but there is no outrage from media.. 

“Think about the higher position:  she’s sitting up there on the higher court when the Bradley Manning conviction is going to be (assuming there’s a conviction because he’s already pleaded to 10 counts) reviewed. 
She won’t sit on it, but her fellow judges are going to be sitting there, and are they going to want to reverse one of their fellow judges? (he asks rhetorically)
So, basically, it stinks.  


hen an inordinately powerful, incestuous cabal destroys the bedrock ─ constitutional law, human rights conventions ─ the great challenge to be faced by later, able generations, if their minds have not been further compromised by the gadgetry they consume, will be to reconstruct, to reestablish the “good” before moving forward.  

I expect the powerful and selfish are keenly aware of this. By the time their waste has run its course; when the corrupt have laid waste to all they can, taken from the land, its people, its principles ─ they will necessarily die off.

Sources and notes

“Bradley Manning Awaits Verdict after Trial Ends with Prosecution ‘Smears’ and Harsh Gov’t Secrecy,” July 29, 2013, http://www.democracynow.org/2013/7/29/bradley_manning_awaits_verdict_after_trial

“In Bradley Manning case, Judge Lind prefers to keep low profile but ruling may have big Impact” (Billy Kenber, Washington Post published: July 24), http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/more-than-bradley-mannings-fate-lies-with-judge-denise-lind-in-case-about-leaking-info/2013/07/24/fb546d14-f496-11e2-aa2e-4088616498b4_story.html

“A letter to my family and friends about the NDAA and me” by Alexa O'Brien on October 3, 2012 12:00 AM, http://www.alexaobrien.com/secondsight/ndaa_hedges_et/ndaa_letter_to_my_friends_and_family.html

Journalist Alexa O’Brien

Since January 2011, Alexa O’Brien has covered the WikiLeaks release of U.S. State Department Cables, JTF memoranda known as the ‘GTMO files’, and revolutions across Egypt, Bahrain, Iran, and Yemen, as well as the prosecution of Bradley Manning and the U.S. investigation into WikiLeaks. She has interviewed a preeminent U.S. foreign policy expert on the Cambodia cables, and published hours of interviews with former GTMO guards, detainees, defense lawyers, and human rights activists, as well as WikiLeaks media partners Andy Worthington, a GTMO historian and author; and Atanas Tchobanov, the Balkanleaks’ spokesman and co-editor of Bivol.bg.

As a result of her work covering the Global War on Terror; the 2011 revolutions across the Middle East and North Africa; and her extramural activities helping to organize the original occupation of Wall Street in New York and five other American cities on September 17, 2011, the U.S. Government and private security contractors attempted to falsely link her and a campaign finance reform group, which she helped found, to Al Qaeda and ‘cyber-terrorists’.

She subsequently became party to a lawsuit brought against the Obama administration for Section 1021(b)(2) of the National Defense Authorization Act FY2012 with author Chris Hedges and five other plaintiffs. Section 1021(b)(2) allows for the indefinite detention without trial or charges of anyone, who by mere suspicion alone are deemed by the Executive (branch of U.S. government) to be terrorist sympathizers.

Her testimony and submissions were central to U.S. District Judge Katherine Forrest’s ruling granting a permanent injunction on Section 1021(b)(2). In June, the 2nd Circuit (was) expected to rule on the Department of Justice’s midnight appeal of Forrest’s September 2012 injunction.

For a year and a half, Alexa O’Brien has produced the only available pre-trial transcripts of Bradley Manning’s secret prosecution. She has provided (a) some of the only analysis available on his case, (b) a forensically reconstructed appellate exhibit list, (c) witness profiles, and (d) a searchable database of the available court record.

Because of her familiarity with the proceedings and investigative work, she has been able to ‘un-redact’ a selection of court documents.

The Freedom of the Press Foundation awarded her a generous grant for her work covering the Bradley Manning trial. Her work was shortlisted for the 2013 Martha Gellhorn Prize for Journalism.

With a background in political philosophy, Alexa O’Brien began her professional life as a stringer in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, for a company that produced segments for the Asian Economic Channel. She went on to light motion picture film and television in the United States and internationally: in countries such as Haiti. Her work for the United Nations Population Fund ‘Worldwide Information Campaign’ was shown at The Hague International Forum; and she has lit numerous television shows and segments for CNN, the BBC, Arts & Entertainment, and the History Channel; as well as stills for photographer Steven Klein in American Vogue. http://www.alexaobrien.com/secondsight/about.html

JTF: Joint Task Force

A joint task force is a multi-service ad-hoc military formation. The task force concept originated with the United States Navy around the beginning of the Second World War in the Pacific.

‘Combined’ is the British-American military term for multi-national formations.
CTF - Commander Task Force, sometimes Combined Task Force
CCTF - Commander Combined Task Force
CJTF - Combined Joint Task Force

“Transcript |U.S. v Pfc. Manning, Table of Contents” by Alexa O'Brien on April 10, 2013 11:59 PM, http://www.alexaobrien.com/secondsight/wikileaks/bradley_manning/transcripts/us_v_pfc_bradley_manning_transcripts.html

Human rights attorney Michael Ratner

Michael Ratner is “known for human rights activism” and he and the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) are currently attorneys in the United States for publishers Julian Assange and WikiLeaks. Ratner was co-counsel in representing the Guantanamo Bay detainees before the United States Supreme Court, where, in June 2004, the court decided his clients have the right to test the legality of their detentions in court.

An attorney and President Emeritus of the non-profit human rights litigation organization (CCR) based in New York City, Ratner is also president of the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR) based in Berlin. He is a past president of the National Lawyers Guild and author of many books and articles including a textbook on international human rights; The Trial of Donald Rumsfeld: A Prosecution by Book; Against War with Iraq; Guantanamo: What the World Should Know. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Ratner


Bennett's books are available in New York State independent bookstores: Lift Bridge Bookshop: www.liftbridgebooks.com [Brockport, NY]; Sundance Books: http://www.sundancebooks.com/main.html [Geneseo, NY]; Mood Makers Books: www.moodmakersbooks.com [City of Rochester, NY]; Dog Ears Bookstore and Literary Arts Center: www.enlightenthedog.org/ [Buffalo, NY]; Burlingham Books – ‘Your Local Chapter’: http://burlinghambooks.com/ [Perry, NY 14530]; The Bookworm: http://www.eabookworm.com/ [East Aurora, NY] • See also: World Pulse: Global Issues through the eyes of Women: http://www.worldpulse.com/ http://www.worldpulse.com/pulsewire http://www.facebook.com/#!/bennetts2ndstudy


No comments:

Post a Comment