For updates and ACTIONS, go to Bradley Manning Support Network
What we can be doing right now, for the next few months, to help Manning: organizational support (join BMSN or assist them) – push for awards, Nobel & Human Rights awards – educate and inform the public – weekly call-ins to select person(s) involved in the trial – sign petitions – and more…
Artists! We are currently requesting stencils to use in the Bradley Manning Global Awareness Campaign. Please make submissions on the Tumblr. Everyone else, start planning your paint, chalk, banner campaign now, it will begin around April 6. Updates soon. The tumblr also welcomes other submissions of anything related to Manning.
Very thoughtful and important article on the question of Manning’s gender identity in The Washington Blade, “America’s Leading Gay News Source.” Note that no conclusion is drawn about Manning’s gender identity, but a cogent argument is laid out that it is currently simply not possible to know what Manning wishes. Also please note that this is published in a gay news source, so it isn’t part of a hidden agenda to downplay the issue.
By Rainey Reitman
[Excerpt - click title for full article]
Some thoughtful feminist scholars have recently called on the Bradley Manning Support Network to begin referring to the accused WikiLeaks whistle-blower with a female pronoun. Emily Manuel’s essay in Global Comment highlighted why many of us who strongly support transgender rights are sensitive to the pronouns we use when we refer to Manning.
As an ardent supporter of Bradley Manning and a feminist, I have given this issue a great deal of thought. Given the unusual and perhaps unprecedented circumstances of the situation, I wanted to explain why I’m still calling him Bradley. In so doing, I also hope to demonstrate why folks who care passionately about queer and transgender rights should come out in support.
Arraignment news summary:
by Logan Price – theguardian
[Excerpt - for full article, click title]
Before the charges were read, Manning’s attorney asked the judge about her prior knowledge of the case, the issues surrounding it, and any previous opinions she may have had about it. She stated that she had known nothing of the case besides Manning’s name “and that it involved classified material”. When asked if she had spoken to friends or colleagues about the case, she said she hadn’t. She held no prior opinion, we were told.
For what must be the biggest controversy of the decade, I found this hard to believe. It reaffirmed my skepticism and brought to mind what many have already said: this trial is a sham.
President Obama, ultimately the judge’s commander, does have an opinion about the matter – as he told me when I asked for his view at a fundraiser in San Francisco last April, at the end of Manning’s extended solitary confinement at Quantico Marine Base.
In his mind, Bradley Manning was already guilty. The conversation was caught on tape, and legal experts have argued that the president’s statement should be grounds for dismissal.
Some people are held to the law and others are not. Recalling the killing of journalists working for Reuters in the “Collateral Murder” video allegedly released by Manning, this is exactly this kind of selective enforcement that motivated WikiLeaks‘ revelations – and which brought me and my peers to Zuccotti Park last fall to use the only means we have to hold accountable those whose criminal acts brought us to economic crisis.