Search

band annie's Weblog

I have a parallel blog in French at http://anniebannie.net

Date

July 31, 2013

Wolf Pack everyone has a voice

Your vision will become clear only when you can look into your own heart. Who looks outside, dreams; who looks inside, awakens. – Carl Jung

More About Our Company

What is the Wolf Pack?

Wolf Pack is a resource for young men.

Are you a young man (around the ages of 16-20) – excited by the possibilities of manhood, yet searching for ways to understand yourself, life, women, sex and that growling voice in your belly that demands to be nourished with a sense of purpose?

“In schools you get taught algebra, how to read, to write – but no one teaches you about yourself” – Sam

Perhaps you’d like to enjoy your connections with women more? You’ve reached a point where you realise WHO you are, speaks more loudly than parroting clever lines or acting cool and confident.

“Through pride we are ever deceiving ourselves. But deep down below the surface of the average conscience a still, small voice says to us, something is out of tune.” – Carl Jung

The Pack

Is a safe and welcoming environment offering brotherhood, mentorship and mutual respect – everyone has a voice. Wolf Pack is a source of emotional support, acceptance, accountability and man time! Within the pack, we share our gifts and challenges, drawing upon our mutual strength to discover greater understanding and enjoyment of ourselves, other men, women (grr!), fatherhood and living with a deep sense of purpose. The Pack is a place where men feel they can belong.

Together, we embrace the gifts of masculinity, exploring and living all aspects of being, whilst becoming fully integrated men.

“For the strength of the Pack is the Wolf, and the strength of the Wolf is the Pack.” – Rudyard Kipling

To find out more about Wolf Pack, visit the Blog

Advertisements

In Bradley Manning case, Judge Lind prefers to keep low profile but ruling may have big impact

But some of the Manning case has been heard behind closed doors, and Lind rejected requests for official transcripts to be provided, forcing supporters to crowd-source funding for their own stenographers.“If you read her article, she gives the appearance of someone who would be eager to see greater transparency in military courts,” said Shane Kadidal, a lawyer with the Center for Constitutional Rights. However, when the center made an application seeking the release of transcripts, filings and court orders, Lind rejected the requests, which Kadidal described as “a slap-dash treatment of what we thought was a pretty serious issue.”

Latest from National Security

Bradley Manning found not guilty of aiding the enemy

Bradley Manning found not guilty of aiding the enemy

Julie Tate and Ernesto Londoño 12:46 AM ET

Manning was found guilty of other charges, but the verdict was a striking rebuke to military prosecutors.

Manning’s conviction said to raise odds of Assange prosecution

Manning’s conviction said to raise odds of Assange prosecution

Billy Kenber 1:50 AM ET

Prosecutors portrayed WikiLeaks founder as co-conspirator; civil liberties groups fear chilling effect.

Lind, a registered Democrat, according to voting records, has been a military judge since 2004. Her only previous brush with public attention came in 2010, when she presided over the case of Col. Terrence Lakin.Lakin, an Army flight surgeon who refused to deploy to Afghanistan because he believed “birther” conspiracy theories that President Obama was not born in the United States, was sentenced to six months in military prison.

According to friends, Lind prefers to keep a low profile and doesn’t read newspaper or online reports about herself.

Schenck, who met Lind in 1999 when they shared an office in the criminal law division at JAG’s Rosslyn headquarters, described her as someone who “reads criminal law for fun.” Lind has continued to teach a summer course at George Washington University during the Manning trial.

“There’s no down time with Denise Lind. She’s intense; she’s really intense,” said Schenck, describing her friend as a keen skier and someone who runs five miles every day.

“If she doesn’t run, she’s, like, totally wired,” she added.

Under the military justice system, Manning could have elected to be tried by a panel of officers and enlisted personnel. Instead, he decided to be tried by a single judge.

Lind cannot have failed to notice some of the intense scrutiny she is under and the political attention the case has attracted. She reacted angrily when a covert recording of Manning’s testimony was posted on the Internet, and activists wearing black T-shirts with the slogan “Truth” have been in a Fort Meade, Md., courtroom every day.

Trevor Timm, executive director of the Freedom of the Press Foundation, said it has been “disappointing to see that almost every ruling, whether they’re major or minor, seems to go against the defense.” Other activists highlighted Lind’s rulings on Manning’s right to a speedy trial — the defendant spent three years in pretrial confinement, but the judge found the delays had been “reasonable.”

Schenck said Lind has already been informed that she will take up a new position, as a judge on the U.S. Army Court of Criminal Appeals, when the Manning trial ends. And she said Lind will not be swayed by the politics of the case.

“She’s oblivious to the media,” Schenck said. “She’s not afraid to do the right thing. If the guy was not guilty, she would acquit him.”

source

Bradley Manning Verdict @ Democracy Now

CLICK ON IMAGEbradley_manning_new_600

Bradley Manning case shows that US government’s priorities are ‘upside down’

Posted: 30 July 2013

‘It’s hard not to draw the conclusion that Manning’s trial was about sending a message: the US government will come after you’ – Widney Brown

Despite an acquittal on the most serious “aiding the enemy” charge against him, today’s verdict against the US Private Bradley Manning reveals the US government’s misplaced priorities on national security, said Amnesty International this evening.

Amnesty International’s Senior Director of International Law and Policy Widney Brown said:

“The government’s priorities are upside down. The US government has refused to investigate credible allegations of torture and other crimes under international law despite overwhelming evidence.

“Yet they decided to prosecute Manning who it seems was trying to do the right thing – reveal credible evidence of unlawful behaviour by the government. You investigate and prosecute those who destroy the credibility of the government by engaging in acts such as torture which are prohibited under the US Constitution and in international law.

“The government’s pursuit of the ‘aiding the enemy’ charge was a serious overreach of the law, not least because there was no credible evidence of Manning’s intent to harm the USA by releasing classified information to WikiLeaks.

“Since the attacks of September 11, we have seen the US government use the issue of national security to defend a whole range of actions that are unlawful under international and domestic law.

“It’s hard not to draw the conclusion that Manning’s trial was about sending a message: the US government will come after you, no holds barred, if you’re thinking of revealing evidence of its unlawful behaviour.”

The court martial today found Manning guilty of a range of additional charges, including ten lesser charges relating to misuse of classified information to which he had already pleaded guilty. Amnesty insisted that any sentence imposed for the other charges must take into account information relating to Manning’s reasonable belief that he was exposing serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law.

Amnesty believes it undermines accountability when the US government is so selective about who it chooses to investigate and prosecute. This is particularly true when they seem intent on punishing those who reveal unlawful government behaviour and protecting those who actually engaged in or ordered such behaviour.

The hundreds of thousands of documents Manning released to WikiLeaks included videos and dossiers that pointed to potential human rights violations – including breaches of international humanitarian law – by US troops abroad and the CIA closer to home.

Earlier this month Amnesty described the judge’s decision not to drop the charge accusing Manning of “aiding the enemy” as ludicrous and as a decision which “makes a mockery of the US military court system”.

I am Bradley Manning

see also Democracy Now on Bradley Manning : http://www.democracynow.org/live/bradley_manning_verdict

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑