Although he is not on suicide watch, he is on POI watch. That explains why they take away his linens and pillow, check on him every fifteen minutes, wake him if they cannot see his face, and do not let him exercise in his cell. Those are mandatory conditions for POI prisoners - what the UCMJ considers necessary to prevent him from harming himself. Considering that another commander was immediately relieved for placing Manning on suicide watch, I think it's pretty clear that this commander does in fact have the authority under the law to hold Manning in this matter. To believe otherwise would be to believe that one commander was disciplined for not following the UCMJ whereas another commander is being allowed to break it in the exact same case and same facility. There's a reason psychiatrists recommend rather than order - because it's not their decision, they are merely technical experts whose best professional judgment helps the commander make HIS decision. So you cannot argue that Manning is being held in violation of the law or of his rights, because the commander obviously has the legal authority to make this decision. You can only argue that Manning is being held under the wrong classification - in affect, that the commander, although having the legal right to hold him under this classification, has made the wrong decision to do so.
Your argument that Manning is being held in violation of the law seems to stem from the fact that he is the only prisoner in the facility being held in such a way, yet this argument is easily seen to be facetious and without merit. There is absolutely no requirement under the UCMJ or civilian law that one prisoner be held in the same conditions as other prisoners. There is only a requirement that each prisoner be held in a manner consistent with the law's requirements for his situation. Obviously a man awaiting trial for murdering two prison guards is not going to be imprisoned in the same manner as "everybody else". Neither is Manning. The requirement is only that he be held in legal accordance with his situation, and except for the highly unlikely event of having another prisoner held for identical charges and with identical evaluations, other prisoners' conditions of confinement are not one whit relevant to the condition of Manning's incarceration.
Again, you are proclaiming that he is being held illegally, but your "proof" is that you do not consider necessary the measures being taken by the commander. Yet it is undeniably the commander's decision, and the military is undeniably watching closely - as witnessed by the relief of the previous commander. Manning's lawyer can make reasoned appeals to the commander or go over his head, but clearly if this commander was operating beyond his authority he would be relieved.
I believe you are wrong, you don't even read the posts I made. And given you concepts that you don't trust the government in other areas, it's funny that all of a sudden, anything the .gov does is fine and dandy. Great double standard. You guys all think the government is evil and untrustworthy, then you turn around and say how honest and OK they are about other things, LOL.
WHY is he on POI watch? It is documented he not in danger of hurting himself. Locked in a cell, he is in no danger of anyone else harming him. There has to be a reason for the POI and MAX security. What is it? No one can still give a reason. "just because" isn't a reason. Your whole argument boils down to the " it must be OK, since they are doing it" Brilliant. Do you also believe we found Saddam's WMD when they told us they knew where they were? Did you believe them when they said prisoner abuse in Bagram didn't happen?
Do you have any legal reason why someone, not even convicted of any crime, and is not suicide risk, and is a model prisoner, and is not a threat to others, is still locked down? Oh, that's right, it's OK because it already happened. Amazing logic.
So why the harsh treatment? You still can't answer that. He is innocent until proven quilty. Every other detainee isn't treated like him. These are all facts.
You need a valid reason to put him on POI, and no one can give one. The military won't even give a reason, they just blow it off. You would think they could tell everyone why, don't you? It's not a secret or anything.
Again, the UCMJ does NOT allow punishment. Period. So how is it when ONE person gets treated uniquely from EVERYONE else, and his treatment is MANY times harsher, and he is a MODEL PRISONER, and NOT A SUCIDE RISK, can you justify this?
He is not a threat to himself
He is not a threat to others.
So why the over the top treatment that no one else is getting?
Again, you can't punish him just because you "think" he is guilty. By your standards, he should be in a low-class confinement because he leaked documents. He didn't rob, murder, rape, rob, or do anything violent. This would be like a "white collar" crime, but yet somehow you and everyone else think that he is Jack Bauer, and will kill the guards and escape if he is locked-down nin his cell all day. Talk about double-standards.