Jane Hamsher highlights the difference two people accused of violations of UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice) violations, Bradley Manning and Oliver North. Manning has been accused of leaking classified military documents to WikiLeaks and North was convicted in 1988 on three counts of accepting an illegal gratuity, aiding and abetting in the obstruction of a congressional inquiry, and ordering the destruction of documents during the Iran Contra affair. Writes Hamsher:
When many people hear about Bradley Manning’s confinement, they believe that his conditions simply reflect the way in which the military deals with those who violate the UCMJ. But Oliver North was ultimately convicted of three felonies, which were only vacated due to an immunity agreement granted for his pre-trial testimony before Congress — with the help of the ACLU.
David House is the only person aside from Bradley’s lawyer who visits him regularly. He recently wrote about Bradley’s conditions here at FDL, which include severe restrictions on his ability to exercise, communicate or even sleep. Manning has not been convicted of any crime, nor is there a date for any court hearing. The New York Times recently reported that these techniques are being used to induce Manning to flip on Julian Assange and Wikileaks.
I don’t recall Oliver North being subjected to anything like that while he was awaiting trial.
The difference is obvious - North was following orders from his government, while Manning was disobeying them. Justice is supposed to be blind in America, but only if you're on the right team apparently.