"The treatment of Manning at the Marine Corps brig at Quantico, Virginia, is by now infamous. But the episode that led to a regime of forced nudity could easily find itself in a Kafkaesque narrative. Manning had requested to be moved from “Maximum” custody (i.e., 24-hour solitary confinement), having endured seven unimaginably dark months. When Quantico commander Col. Daniel Choike claimed that he was considered at risk of self-harm, Manning remarked on the absurdity of that logic since he could “conceivably do so with the elastic waistband of his underwear or with his flip-flops.” In other words, Manning tried to reason (even joke) with the Quantico commander after months of notably exemplary behavior. Almost immediately, Manning’s forced nudity was enforced and was ordered to continue “indefinitely” as a “precautionary measure.” He was also required to stand naked outside his cell during inspection. David Coombs, his attorney, wrote that a “sarcastic quip [w]as justification to increase the restrictions imposed on him under the guise of being concerned,” noting that the designation of Suicide Risk Watch would have required a psychologist recommendation (which Choike had not obtained). Psychologists for Social Responsibility wrote an open letter to the Pentagon stating “unequivocally that removal of clothing is not an accepted or reasonable procedure for avoiding self-injury.”
Manning’s body was stripped of every article of clothing in front of prison guards, a “suicide-proof sleeping garment” later issued to cover his icy nakedness at night. Manning has since been transferred to the Midwest Joint Regional Correctional Facility at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, presumably due to public pressure, although it is still unclear how the move will bring his case closer to a court date. But, as I will describe shortly, the shivering discipline of the law does not point merely to a cruel and empty inanity, but highlights the law’s actual ubiquity. Compare the words of Candidate Obama in October 2007 (“When I’m President, we’ll reject torture—without exception or equivocation”) to President Obama explicitly defending Manning’s treatment as “appropriate and meet[ing] our basic standards,” later denouncing him as guilty before any legal proceedings had taken place by flatly remarking, “He broke the law” at a San Francisco fundraising event in April 2011. Attorney Kevin Zeese, who serves on the steering committee of the Bradley Manning Support Network, cited “undue command influence” in the US military justice code:" (thanks Maryam)
Manning’s body was stripped of every article of clothing in front of prison guards, a “suicide-proof sleeping garment” later issued to cover his icy nakedness at night. Manning has since been transferred to the Midwest Joint Regional Correctional Facility at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, presumably due to public pressure, although it is still unclear how the move will bring his case closer to a court date. But, as I will describe shortly, the shivering discipline of the law does not point merely to a cruel and empty inanity, but highlights the law’s actual ubiquity. Compare the words of Candidate Obama in October 2007 (“When I’m President, we’ll reject torture—without exception or equivocation”) to President Obama explicitly defending Manning’s treatment as “appropriate and meet[ing] our basic standards,” later denouncing him as guilty before any legal proceedings had taken place by flatly remarking, “He broke the law” at a San Francisco fundraising event in April 2011. Attorney Kevin Zeese, who serves on the steering committee of the Bradley Manning Support Network, cited “undue command influence” in the US military justice code:" (thanks Maryam)
