Welsh MP says UK must challenge US over treatment of marine being detained for alleged leak of state secrets to WikiLeaks Britain risks losing its moral authority if it fails to officially challenge the US government on its “cruel and uneccessary” treatment of the US marine Bradley Manning, parliament is to be told. Ann Clwyd, chair of the all-party parliamentary group on human rights, will on Monday evening say UK’s credibility in “places where human rights are not nearly so well observed” is at risk. She will call on the government to offer practical support to the British-based relatives of Manning, who is currently imprisoned on a US marine base, accused of leaking state secrets to the WikiLeaks website. “I do not want us to get drawn into a discussion of the rights and wrongs of the WikiLeaks revelations. I would like us now to concentrate on the current conditions of detention for Bradley Manning,” Clywd is expected to say at the adjournment debate speech. “Manning’s case is important because of the message it sends out to the rest of the world about what kind of treatment the United States thinks is acceptable for people in detention. And, for us, it is important what we say – or what we don’t say – because of the message that it sends out about what kind of treatment we in the United Kingdom and in the UK government think is acceptable. “That matters in places where human rights are not nearly so well observed. People will pay attention in China and in Russia. And in Libya where we want to be on the side of those fighting for freedom from state repression. “And most of all in Afghanistan: It matters to those UK and US service personnel fighting in Afghanistan what kind of image Britain and the US have in the world.” Clwyd will draw on her experiences during the seven years she spent as special envoy to Iraq on human rights. “It is my view that some of the greatest damage was caused to British and American efforts in Iraq when the stories of prisoner abuse emerged,” she will say. “It undermined our moral authority at a time when we needed to explain that we were fighting for a better future for Iraq “The United States – and the UK, in the way we respond to actions of the US – needs to preserve that moral authority if we are to have a positive impact on the world and lead by example.” Praising The Guardian’s coverage of Manning’s treatment in the US, Clwyd said she would be willing to visit the solider if his family asked her to. “I have read the several accounts of Bradley’s treatment which have appeared in the press – some very good accounts have been in the Guardian and from David Leigh in particular,” she will say. But the account to which she has paid most attention is Bradley’s own, in which he complains of “improper treatment” and “unlawful pre-trial punishment”. Clwyd is the only politician to have directly questioned the foreign secretary, William Hague, over the government’s position on Manning. She has sponsored an early day motion calling for the government to raise the case with the US administration. The motion is supported by 37 MPs, including co-sponsors Peter Bottomley, Jeremy Corbyn, Mark Durkan and Paul Flynn. Hague has previously said the UK government has not intervened because Manning’s lawyer has said the soldier “does not hold a UK passport, nor does he consider himself a UK citizen”. “Our standing on this matter is limited,” Hague said during a parlimentary debate last month. “[Manning] is not asking for our help, nor considering himself British.” But Clwyd is expected to call Hague’s response a red herring. She will point out that Manning’s mother, Susan, is Welsh and lives in Pembrokeshire, where Manning lived between the ages of 13 and 17. and she will point to calls from Manning’s lawyer, David Coombs, for his client’s detention status to be changed. Manning’s treatment in the military prison in Quantico, Virginia, “ignores the repeated recommendations of the marine corps’ own appointed psychiatrists”, Coombs has said. His treatment “serves no purpose other than to humiliate and degrade Bradley Manning. I regard it as cruel and unnecessary.” Human Rights Watch has called on the US government to “explain the precise reasons behind extremely restrictive and possibly punitive and degrading treatment” that Manning alleges he has received. Amnesty International has said “Manning is being subjected to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. This is particularly disturbing when one considers that he hasn’t even been brought to trial, let alone convicted of a crime.” The UN special rapporteur on torture is understood to have raised his concerns with the US administration and is waiting for a response. Clwyd quoted a recent column written for the Guardian by PJ Crowley , who resigned as spokesman for the US state department after criticising Manning’s treatment, in which he repeated his conviction that it was “ridiculous, counterproductive, and stupid”. Bradley Manning Foreign policy US military US national security WikiLeaks United States Amelia Hill guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Welsh MP says UK must challenge US over treatment of marine being detained for alleged leak of state secrets to WikiLeaks Britain risks losing its moral authority if it fails to officially challenge the US government on its “cruel and uneccessary” treatment of the US marine Bradley Manning, parliament is to be told. Ann Clwyd, chair of the all-party parliamentary group on human rights, will on Monday evening say UK’s credibility in “places where human rights are not nearly so well observed” is at risk. She will call on the government to offer practical support to the British-based relatives of Manning, who is currently imprisoned on a US marine base, accused of leaking state secrets to the WikiLeaks website. “I do not want us to get drawn into a discussion of the rights and wrongs of the WikiLeaks revelations. I would like us now to concentrate on the current conditions of detention for Bradley Manning,” Clywd is expected to say at the adjournment debate speech. “Manning’s case is important because of the message it sends out to the rest of the world about what kind of treatment the United States thinks is acceptable for people in detention. And, for us, it is important what we say – or what we don’t say – because of the message that it sends out about what kind of treatment we in the United Kingdom and in the UK government think is acceptable. “That matters in places where human rights are not nearly so well observed. People will pay attention in China and in Russia. And in Libya where we want to be on the side of those fighting for freedom from state repression. “And most of all in Afghanistan: It matters to those UK and US service personnel fighting in Afghanistan what kind of image Britain and the US have in the world.” Clwyd will draw on her experiences during the seven years she spent as special envoy to Iraq on human rights. “It is my view that some of the greatest damage was caused to British and American efforts in Iraq when the stories of prisoner abuse emerged,” she will say. “It undermined our moral authority at a time when we needed to explain that we were fighting for a better future for Iraq “The United States – and the UK, in the way we respond to actions of the US – needs to preserve that moral authority if we are to have a positive impact on the world and lead by example.” Praising The Guardian’s coverage of Manning’s treatment in the US, Clwyd said she would be willing to visit the solider if his family asked her to. “I have read the several accounts of Bradley’s treatment which have appeared in the press – some very good accounts have been in the Guardian and from David Leigh in particular,” she will say. But the account to which she has paid most attention is Bradley’s own, in which he complains of “improper treatment” and “unlawful pre-trial punishment”. Clwyd is the only politician to have directly questioned the foreign secretary, William Hague, over the government’s position on Manning. She has sponsored an early day motion calling for the government to raise the case with the US administration. The motion is supported by 37 MPs, including co-sponsors Peter Bottomley, Jeremy Corbyn, Mark Durkan and Paul Flynn. Hague has previously said the UK government has not intervened because Manning’s lawyer has said the soldier “does not hold a UK passport, nor does he consider himself a UK citizen”. “Our standing on this matter is limited,” Hague said during a parlimentary debate last month. “[Manning] is not asking for our help, nor considering himself British.” But Clwyd is expected to call Hague’s response a red herring. She will point out that Manning’s mother, Susan, is Welsh and lives in Pembrokeshire, where Manning lived between the ages of 13 and 17. and she will point to calls from Manning’s lawyer, David Coombs, for his client’s detention status to be changed. Manning’s treatment in the military prison in Quantico, Virginia, “ignores the repeated recommendations of the marine corps’ own appointed psychiatrists”, Coombs has said. His treatment “serves no purpose other than to humiliate and degrade Bradley Manning. I regard it as cruel and unnecessary.” Human Rights Watch has called on the US government to “explain the precise reasons behind extremely restrictive and possibly punitive and degrading treatment” that Manning alleges he has received. Amnesty International has said “Manning is being subjected to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. This is particularly disturbing when one considers that he hasn’t even been brought to trial, let alone convicted of a crime.” The UN special rapporteur on torture is understood to have raised his concerns with the US administration and is waiting for a response. Clwyd quoted a recent column written for the Guardian by PJ Crowley , who resigned as spokesman for the US state department after criticising Manning’s treatment, in which he repeated his conviction that it was “ridiculous, counterproductive, and stupid”. Bradley Manning Foreign policy US military US national security WikiLeaks United States Amelia Hill guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Welsh MP says UK must challenge US over treatment of marine being detained for alleged leak of state secrets to WikiLeaks Britain risks losing its moral authority if it fails to officially challenge the US government on its “cruel and uneccessary” treatment of the US marine Bradley Manning, parliament is to be told. Ann Clwyd, chair of the all-party parliamentary group on human rights, will on Monday evening say UK’s credibility in “places where human rights are not nearly so well observed” is at risk. She will call on the government to offer practical support to the British-based relatives of Manning, who is currently imprisoned on a US marine base, accused of leaking state secrets to the WikiLeaks website. “I do not want us to get drawn into a discussion of the rights and wrongs of the WikiLeaks revelations. I would like us now to concentrate on the current conditions of detention for Bradley Manning,” Clywd is expected to say at the adjournment debate speech. “Manning’s case is important because of the message it sends out to the rest of the world about what kind of treatment the United States thinks is acceptable for people in detention. And, for us, it is important what we say – or what we don’t say – because of the message that it sends out about what kind of treatment we in the United Kingdom and in the UK government think is acceptable. “That matters in places where human rights are not nearly so well observed. People will pay attention in China and in Russia. And in Libya where we want to be on the side of those fighting for freedom from state repression. “And most of all in Afghanistan: It matters to those UK and US service personnel fighting in Afghanistan what kind of image Britain and the US have in the world.” Clwyd will draw on her experiences during the seven years she spent as special envoy to Iraq on human rights. “It is my view that some of the greatest damage was caused to British and American efforts in Iraq when the stories of prisoner abuse emerged,” she will say. “It undermined our moral authority at a time when we needed to explain that we were fighting for a better future for Iraq “The United States – and the UK, in the way we respond to actions of the US – needs to preserve that moral authority if we are to have a positive impact on the world and lead by example.” Praising The Guardian’s coverage of Manning’s treatment in the US, Clwyd said she would be willing to visit the solider if his family asked her to. “I have read the several accounts of Bradley’s treatment which have appeared in the press – some very good accounts have been in the Guardian and from David Leigh in particular,” she will say. But the account to which she has paid most attention is Bradley’s own, in which he complains of “improper treatment” and “unlawful pre-trial punishment”. Clwyd is the only politician to have directly questioned the foreign secretary, William Hague, over the government’s position on Manning. She has sponsored an early day motion calling for the government to raise the case with the US administration. The motion is supported by 37 MPs, including co-sponsors Peter Bottomley, Jeremy Corbyn, Mark Durkan and Paul Flynn. Hague has previously said the UK government has not intervened because Manning’s lawyer has said the soldier “does not hold a UK passport, nor does he consider himself a UK citizen”. “Our standing on this matter is limited,” Hague said during a parlimentary debate last month. “[Manning] is not asking for our help, nor considering himself British.” But Clwyd is expected to call Hague’s response a red herring. She will point out that Manning’s mother, Susan, is Welsh and lives in Pembrokeshire, where Manning lived between the ages of 13 and 17. and she will point to calls from Manning’s lawyer, David Coombs, for his client’s detention status to be changed. Manning’s treatment in the military prison in Quantico, Virginia, “ignores the repeated recommendations of the marine corps’ own appointed psychiatrists”, Coombs has said. His treatment “serves no purpose other than to humiliate and degrade Bradley Manning. I regard it as cruel and unnecessary.” Human Rights Watch has called on the US government to “explain the precise reasons behind extremely restrictive and possibly punitive and degrading treatment” that Manning alleges he has received. Amnesty International has said “Manning is being subjected to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. This is particularly disturbing when one considers that he hasn’t even been brought to trial, let alone convicted of a crime.” The UN special rapporteur on torture is understood to have raised his concerns with the US administration and is waiting for a response. Clwyd quoted a recent column written for the Guardian by PJ Crowley , who resigned as spokesman for the US state department after criticising Manning’s treatment, in which he repeated his conviction that it was “ridiculous, counterproductive, and stupid”. Bradley Manning Foreign policy US military US national security WikiLeaks United States Amelia Hill guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Navy pilots, Gurkhas and troops serving in Afghanistan among those to lose jobs in initial round of military redundancies Some 1,600 navy personnel and 1,000 soldiers will lose their jobs in the initial round of defence cuts, senior military officials have announced. Gurkhas will be among those going in the army’s first round of redundancies, while troops now serving in Afghanistan may not be saved and Navy pilots will be among those losing their jobs. Around half the redundancies in the army are expected to be compulsory. The head of army manning, Brigadier Richard Nugee, said the 3,500-strong Brigade of Gurkhas would lose about 50 soldiers. There was a surplus number of Gurkhas because changes made to their terms of service in 2008 meant they could now serve for 22 years rather than the previous 15-year limit. “Opportunities for promotion within the brigade are being severely limited by the current situation,” Nugee said. “We are committed to a strong and vibrant Brigade of Gurkhas into the future and therefore must take action to ensure that, like the rest of the army, their structures and manning are in the best possible shape by the end of this process.” Fifteen out of the 59 navy fast jets pilots will be made redundant as a result of the decision in last year’s defence review to get rid of Britain’s fleet of Harrier jumpjets. The redundancies are part of 17,000 in the armed forces – 7,000 from the army, 5,000 from the RAF, and 5,000 from the navy – announced in the review. Military Defence policy Gurkhas Richard Norton-Taylor guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Navy pilots, Gurkhas and troops serving in Afghanistan among those to lose jobs in initial round of military redundancies Some 1,600 navy personnel and 1,000 soldiers will lose their jobs in the initial round of defence cuts, senior military officials have announced. Gurkhas will be among those going in the army’s first round of redundancies, while troops now serving in Afghanistan may not be saved and Navy pilots will be among those losing their jobs. Around half the redundancies in the army are expected to be compulsory. The head of army manning, Brigadier Richard Nugee, said the 3,500-strong Brigade of Gurkhas would lose about 50 soldiers. There was a surplus number of Gurkhas because changes made to their terms of service in 2008 meant they could now serve for 22 years rather than the previous 15-year limit. “Opportunities for promotion within the brigade are being severely limited by the current situation,” Nugee said. “We are committed to a strong and vibrant Brigade of Gurkhas into the future and therefore must take action to ensure that, like the rest of the army, their structures and manning are in the best possible shape by the end of this process.” Fifteen out of the 59 navy fast jets pilots will be made redundant as a result of the decision in last year’s defence review to get rid of Britain’s fleet of Harrier jumpjets. The redundancies are part of 17,000 in the armed forces – 7,000 from the army, 5,000 from the RAF, and 5,000 from the navy – announced in the review. Military Defence policy Gurkhas Richard Norton-Taylor guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Navy pilots, Gurkhas and troops serving in Afghanistan among those to lose jobs in initial round of military redundancies Some 1,600 navy personnel and 1,000 soldiers will lose their jobs in the initial round of defence cuts, senior military officials have announced. Gurkhas will be among those going in the army’s first round of redundancies, while troops now serving in Afghanistan may not be saved and Navy pilots will be among those losing their jobs. Around half the redundancies in the army are expected to be compulsory. The head of army manning, Brigadier Richard Nugee, said the 3,500-strong Brigade of Gurkhas would lose about 50 soldiers. There was a surplus number of Gurkhas because changes made to their terms of service in 2008 meant they could now serve for 22 years rather than the previous 15-year limit. “Opportunities for promotion within the brigade are being severely limited by the current situation,” Nugee said. “We are committed to a strong and vibrant Brigade of Gurkhas into the future and therefore must take action to ensure that, like the rest of the army, their structures and manning are in the best possible shape by the end of this process.” Fifteen out of the 59 navy fast jets pilots will be made redundant as a result of the decision in last year’s defence review to get rid of Britain’s fleet of Harrier jumpjets. The redundancies are part of 17,000 in the armed forces – 7,000 from the army, 5,000 from the RAF, and 5,000 from the navy – announced in the review. Military Defence policy Gurkhas Richard Norton-Taylor guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Navy pilots, Gurkhas and troops serving in Afghanistan among those to lose jobs in initial round of military redundancies Some 1,600 navy personnel and 1,000 soldiers will lose their jobs in the initial round of defence cuts, senior military officials have announced. Gurkhas will be among those going in the army’s first round of redundancies, while troops now serving in Afghanistan may not be saved and Navy pilots will be among those losing their jobs. Around half the redundancies in the army are expected to be compulsory. The head of army manning, Brigadier Richard Nugee, said the 3,500-strong Brigade of Gurkhas would lose about 50 soldiers. There was a surplus number of Gurkhas because changes made to their terms of service in 2008 meant they could now serve for 22 years rather than the previous 15-year limit. “Opportunities for promotion within the brigade are being severely limited by the current situation,” Nugee said. “We are committed to a strong and vibrant Brigade of Gurkhas into the future and therefore must take action to ensure that, like the rest of the army, their structures and manning are in the best possible shape by the end of this process.” Fifteen out of the 59 navy fast jets pilots will be made redundant as a result of the decision in last year’s defence review to get rid of Britain’s fleet of Harrier jumpjets. The redundancies are part of 17,000 in the armed forces – 7,000 from the army, 5,000 from the RAF, and 5,000 from the navy – announced in the review. Military Defence policy Gurkhas Richard Norton-Taylor guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Bianna Golodryga Spins for Clinton, Worries That Obama Is ‘Giving in Too Much’ to GOP on Budget
April 4, 2011 No Comment
Good Morning America’s Bianna Golodryga conducted a fawning interview with Bill Clinton on Monday and fretted that Barack Obama is “ giving in too much to Republican demands ” on the 2011 budget. The ABC journalist offered the former President, the ex-boss of GMA co-host George Stephanopoulos, no tough questions. Instead, she chose broad, softball queries about the Clinton Global Initiative. At one point, Golodryga, who is married to Barack Obama’s former budget director, fawned, “We also saw your daughter moderate a panel yesterday. What was she talking about?” The reporter also pushed Clinton as to whether Obama should “take on those who question where he was born.” She challenged, “ I mean, do you think at this point, do you think the President should just say, ‘You know what? I'm sick of taking the high road’ and just either fight back or handle this once and for all? ” GMA has repeatedly tried to tie the Republican Party in general to the birther movement. On March 17 , Stephanopoulos highlighted comments by Donald Trump. On February 17 , 2011, he badgered Congresswoman Michele Bachmann to declare the President a Christian and a citizen: “You know, a sizable number of GOP primary voters are questioning President Obama's faith and citizenship. Can you just state very clearly that President Obama is a Christian and he is a citizen of the United States? A transcript of the April 14 segment, which aired at 7:13am EDT, follows:
Continue reading …NBC Uses Obama Re-election Bid to Pressure GOP Candidates to Announce; No Mention of President’s Weak Poll Numbers
April 4, 2011 No Comment
At the top of Monday's Today on NBC, co-host Matt Lauer touted “breaking news” of President Obama announcing his re-election bid: “…the expected announcement comes with a prediction, he could become the first candidate ever to raise a billion dollars.” Lauer then added: “Will Republican hopefuls sitting on the sidelines be compelled to dive in as well?” While fill-in co-host Ann Curry noted the announcement was “not a surprise” the broadcast still lead with a full report on the topic. Like Lauer, White House correspondent Savannah Guthrie highlighted Obama's fundraising efforts while noting the lack of formal announcements from Republican candidates: “The President is already planning fundraising trips this month to Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco and New York, while the Republican race is still off to a slower start.” A sound bite was featured from Washington Post political analyst Chris Cillizza, who predicted: “I think the President announcing or forming his committee to raise money will, in fact, be an alarm, a wake-up call for some of these Republicans to say, 'I better get in now because I'm starting to lag behind and that's always dangerous.'” Meanwhile, the report failed to discuss the President's actual chances for re-election, making no mention of his weak poll numbers. The latest Gallup poll shows Obama's approval and disapproval ratings tied at 46%, hardly a strong position for an incumbent president. Here is a full transcript of the April 4 segment: 7:00AM ET TEASE: MATT LAUER: He's in. President Obama has kicked off his re-election bid in a new web video this morning. And the expected announcement comes with a prediction, he could become the first candidate ever to raise a billion dollars. Will Republican hopefuls sitting on the sidelines be compelled to dive in as well? [ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Breaking News] 7:03AM ET TEASE: ANN CURRY: And today's announcement that the President will seek re-election is not a surprise, but the timing is a bit unexpected, Matt. MATT LAUER: That's right, the new web video was posted on the campaign website overnight and now NBC News has learned the President plans to file the appropriate paperwork this morning, making it all official. Again, not unexpected. We'll get the very latest from the White House in a live report coming up straight ahead.
Continue reading …NBC Uses Obama Re-election Bid to Pressure GOP Candidates to Announce; No Mention of President’s Weak Poll Numbers
April 4, 2011 No CommentAt the top of Monday's Today on NBC, co-host Matt Lauer touted “breaking news” of President Obama announcing his re-election bid: “…the expected announcement comes with a prediction, he could become the first candidate ever to raise a billion dollars.” Lauer then added: “Will Republican hopefuls sitting on the sidelines be compelled to dive in as well?” While fill-in co-host Ann Curry noted the announcement was “not a surprise” the broadcast still lead with a full report on the topic. Like Lauer, White House correspondent Savannah Guthrie highlighted Obama's fundraising efforts while noting the lack of formal announcements from Republican candidates: “The President is already planning fundraising trips this month to Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco and New York, while the Republican race is still off to a slower start.” A sound bite was featured from Washington Post political analyst Chris Cillizza, who predicted: “I think the President announcing or forming his committee to raise money will, in fact, be an alarm, a wake-up call for some of these Republicans to say, 'I better get in now because I'm starting to lag behind and that's always dangerous.'” Meanwhile, the report failed to discuss the President's actual chances for re-election, making no mention of his weak poll numbers. The latest Gallup poll shows Obama's approval and disapproval ratings tied at 46%, hardly a strong position for an incumbent president. Here is a full transcript of the April 4 segment: 7:00AM ET TEASE: MATT LAUER: He's in. President Obama has kicked off his re-election bid in a new web video this morning. And the expected announcement comes with a prediction, he could become the first candidate ever to raise a billion dollars. Will Republican hopefuls sitting on the sidelines be compelled to dive in as well? [ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Breaking News] 7:03AM ET TEASE: ANN CURRY: And today's announcement that the President will seek re-election is not a surprise, but the timing is a bit unexpected, Matt. MATT LAUER: That's right, the new web video was posted on the campaign website overnight and now NBC News has learned the President plans to file the appropriate paperwork this morning, making it all official. Again, not unexpected. We'll get the very latest from the White House in a live report coming up straight ahead.
Continue reading …