Reply #125: So I was right? His attorney isn't claiming 'torture' or 'abuse?'

[msanthrope]

And again, I'm going to challenge you to cite precisely where his attorney claims that Mr. Manning's rights under the Geneva Convention have been violated.***

Not a blogpost that you think sounds familiar because it sounds like something in your (unquoted) Geneva Conventions.

You are 0 for 2 in quoting Manning's attorney. I suspect you will be 0 for 3. You might want to read the Article 138 and its supplement at Coombs' website, to get a handle on what his attorney IS arguing.

Since you've failed to assert a single claim that his attorney has made, I don't have to defend anything.

Now, you wrote:

"I watched what happened that day. Those trying to visit Manning were prevented from seeing him for NO REASON." Really? You were there when Jane Hamsher tried to drive a unregistered vehicle onto a US Marine base? Do tell.


***(I'm going to gloss over the fact that you still haven't explained just how you came to the conclusion that the GC applies to Manning. Let's just run with your hypo--it's fun!)