Do you work there? Do you write policy for Military correctional facilities? Beyond that, have you ever spent time in a prison or correctional facility? Then how do you know what the royal “they” plans to do in the least?
Oh, golly! Is that all? She’s only hanging out in that federal prison for the next 35 years, so why would she be bothered with a little smattering tiny bit smidgen indefinite solitary confinement when her social seams must certainly be busting right now!?!
Other than that tidbit, first let me suggest reading up on “empathy”, and second, a search for “disappointed in BoingBoing” may be the list you’ve always been eager to join.
She is in prison for 35 years. I don’t plan to discuss the merits of that sentence.
I do, however, think that starting a grassroots campaign to “stop her torture” when her torture is currently a strongly worded letter with a vague threat is a bit insane.
Boing Boing also received a letter COMMANDING they show up in federal court and present all of their records for their Tor node under severe threat. Did people get equally worked up? Of course not, because Cory was responsible with his journalism. He made it clear that nothing bad actually happened and that it was most likely a misunderstanding with a lot of language of threat to scare them into compliance.
There were justifications given (such as the dubious claim that it deterred theft,) but the real reason is pretty much the same one as for anything in basic training: it enforces attention to detail. By requiring you to follow a specific policy of recording this tedious information, the theory goes, you’ll show that you can handle highly detailed work in the “real” military. This applies similarly to how you store your clothing, make your bed, etc.
It’s mostly bullshit, of course. It’s not like anyone looks back over your service record and sees notes like “Kept perfect hospital corners on his bunk throughout basic training.” However it does help to weed out those who’ll put up with crap like that. (Others of us viewed it as just another hazing ritual kind of thing.)
Also, the whole point of Basic Training is to break the trainees down so they can rebuild them. I thought this was a silly cliche until I went to BMT. It’s not.
They have lots of little touchy rules in part because they don’t expect anyone to be able to follow every single rule. You might as well be Mormon. (hah!)
The control they exercise over you in basic training is control you give them, but once you’re there you don’t really get a choice about taking it back.
The pervasive rules make it so that they can punish, really, anyone within the rules if needed. And if they don’t like something you did, it’ll be needed.
Ugh I’d Google it but I’m lazy… there’s a prison farm in Sweden (I think) that has no locks and one guard who goes home at night. None of the inmates leave. And the only issue they have is hikers wandering in and asking for a room as they think it’s a hotel.
Article 134 being one of those catch-alls to do exactly that. That one always got me riled up when considering that, if the authorities fail to find an “actionable” offense, well they’ve got 134 to stand on in case you neglected the good order of the service, etc.:
Though not specifically mentioned in this chapter, all disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces, all conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, and crimes and offenses not capital, of which persons subject to this chapter may be guilty, shall be taken cognizance of by a general, special or summary court-martial, according to the nature and degree of the offense, and shall be punished at the discretion of that court.
Bully for you. Anyone who is already held behind bars for 35 years may find even the suggestion, or as you note, the threat, of being placed into solitary confinement as mentally and physically troubling as the solitary confinement is itself.
Is Boing Boing languishing in a federal pen for the next 34+ years? Is BB a single entity lacking the monetary fortitude or the benefit of easy access to legal information and analysis? But thanks for the strawman.
“Indefinite solitary confinement” seems like a “vague threat” to you? Now THAT’S insane.
Especially when the threat is leveled at someone who already knows what it is like to be thrown in solitary confinement and to wonder if she will ever get out.
Anyway I could be way off base here but that’s my understanding of the logic for UCMJ. Soldiers are proxies of our government and can be expected to be in lands with laws that don’t match ours and we need a clear, systematic way of setting and keeping rules.
The UCMJ is harsher than civilian law, the logic follows, because an agent of the Gov is held to a higher standard than a civilian.
None of that is to say that I agree with the implementation, or any of it, this is just how I understand the thing to be justified.
I will have to disagree with this viewpoint. I don’t think anyone has ever found the suggestion of possible torture to be as bad as the actual torture.
You might have an argument that you could build an environment of fear where the threat of torture/violence was as bad/worse than the actual violence. I dont think anyone has ever been tortured by mere suggestion.
