kim roy on May 26, 2012 at 4:44 PM

I cannot speak for the systems of the other services, but the Navy-Marine Corps Intranet (NMCI) has a triple-entry login (ID Smart Card, Bio-scan, PIN) which ensures what is called non-repudiation. That means that anything done under your login is done by you, with no denial recourse. If you leave a machine logged in, unlocked, with your ID card in the reader (pulling it logs out immediately), you are rightly liable for any actions taken on that machine.

Email attachments within the NMCI are indeed subject to surveillance. Encrypted emails can be sent using PKI, but classified materials are still not permitted on “black” (unclassified) systems, they must be emailed using the “red” (classified) SIPRNET. Violations are subject to very severe penalties, all of which end up at Leavenworth.

The motion specifically targets the government’s use of the phrases, “relating to the national defense” and “to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation.”

If such phrases are in the laws, and might be considered unConstitutionally vague, then the defense has a point. But usually an indictment lists one or more sane examples (usually the more egregious ones) of these instances.

unclesmrgol on May 26, 2012 at 9:49 AM

Those phrases relate to definitions of various levels of classified material. Those definitions are not vague at all, of themselves. However, those who are charged with classifying an item or a communication, must often employ subjective judgement regarding which definition best fits, and therefore which level of classification to apply, as there can be ambiguities over the potential harm related to the improper release of the item in question.

What is never in question, is that once classified, only an entity of equal or higher authority can raise the classification of an item, and only an entity of higher authority can downgrade or rescind the classification. Any attempt to suggest that Manning acted appropriately fails under those regulations. And there would be no burden of proof that actual harm has resulted from his actions. The release of the classified items constitutes exposure to the potential harm, and that is the violation itself, whether or not the potential is realized.

An individual chain of command can’t be expected to babysit every person under their charge, especially not one that was granted Top Secret (SCI) security clearance by the DoD. Those are the people that the government most expects to be trustworthy.

mintycrys on May 26, 2012 at 12:12 PM

Not so. there is no presumption of trust regarding classified materials. Items classified above Confidential (or Unclass NoForn) requires Two-Person Integrity from cradle to grave. Safes for such material are all double-combination locked, with strict controls over no person having both combinations in their possession. There is a failure in the system for Manning to have been in contact with the materials unattended by a second party, and for that, someone higher in the chain of command should be accountable. But that is irrelevant to Manning’s actions and intentions.

RightXBrigade on May 27, 2012 at 12:52 AM

Manning is a traitor and you’re a f’ing idiot.

And PFCs don’t have the authority to decide something is over classified.

And hope he does the right thing.

He burned data onto CDs and DVRs. The fact that that is even physically possible (machines should be locked down and do not need RW drives in the vast majority of cases) is nothing short of outrageous incompetence that someone higher up the food chain should have to answer for.

There were systemic problems as with Major Hassan who practically telegraphed his jihadist intentions not only to his equals but to his commanders.

But they will all skate no doubt and this will be called an anomaly.

It was not always so.

CorporatePiggy on May 26, 2012 at 1:26 PM

That’s good for a start but there’s always a way. Our PCs at work are like that, as I found when I tried to move stuff off a computer that was being replaced. What I ended up doing was emailing it to one of my email accounts and then emailing it back to the new PC. I could have cut and paste sensitive information into an email and sent it. Not sure if email is being watched as it should be.

All those roadblocks do is make people more creative. Not telling you anything you don’t already know, but it all comes down to the character of the person with the information. Sometimes people change or get through the firewalls.

Maybe *people* need to be assessed every so often.

Cage fight to the death with hammers, this tird and Nidal Hasan, then I get to shoot the winner.

Akzed on May 26, 2012 at 9:42 AM

Shouldn’t we have a raffle for charity or something? We should all have a chance at this fine opportunity.

The judge gave that argument roughly the same credence as your average episode of Finding Bigfoot

Have they tried looking in the White House?

I denounce myself.

But they will all skate no doubt and this will be called an anomaly.

It was not always so.

CorporatePiggy on May 26, 2012 at 1:26 PM

I agree with you about the procedures. Every SCIF I’ve worked in limited RW capability to a few machines and any recordable device isn’t permitted.

But, I’m not so sure that those who allowed the lax procedures will get away with it. Something tells me that the other shoe will drop after trial. Keep in mind the defense wants to put the US Army on trial and posit that dear little innocent Bradley is being used as a scapegoat for the faults of other senior personnel.

In any case, there was no question that what Bradley Manning was doing was wrong and he knew it as he was committing what essentially is treason even if the prosecution figured out (correctly) that it is easier to keep this bastard behind bars for a very long time with lesser charges than treason.

Could anyone really take this seriously?

It’s a predictable strategy. Manning’s “lawyers” don’t have a defense. Manning did indeed cause great harm to this nation by leaking classified documents. So, the defense strategy is to put the US Army on trial. In other words, that it is the Army and not Manning that is at fault.

Manning is a scumbag and anyone who would defend him is even worse. Yeah, I know the old “lawyers are merely advocates for their clients” meme but there is a big difference between making sure the scumbag gets due process and try to get him off even though it is clear he is guilty.

It seems even the military courts move at a glacial pace now. In WWII, Manning would have already had her firing squad.

Speaking of which, why is Assange still breathing?

18-1 on May 26, 2012 at 9:39 AM

I completely agree. It’s frustrating to me that not do the leftist Gandhi the cow manure eater fans disagree with us, but there are mean right-wingers who disagree with us. Swift justice doesn’t have to be a kangaroo court if we are open-minded and responsible. In fact, the 6th Amendment guarantees a speedy trial for the defendant. If the Founding Fathers had know about today. They would also have added a clause about speedy trial for the benefit of the victim.

mintycrys on May 26, 2012 at 12:12 PM

He burned data onto CDs and DVRs. The fact that that is even physically possible (machines should be locked down and do not need RW drives in the vast majority of cases) is nothing short of outrageous incompetence that someone higher up the food chain should have to answer for.

There were systemic problems as with Major Hassan who practically telegraphed his jihadist intentions not only to his equals but to his commanders.

But they will all skate no doubt and this will be called an anomaly.

It was not always so.

Hardly. They’re all adults. An individual chain of command can’t be expected to babysit every person under their charge, especially not one that was granted Top Secret (SCI) security clearance by the DoD. Those are the people that the government most expects to be trustworthy.

Bottom line is, he was sneaky and stole classified information of his own accord. At worst, some of those along his chain of command might each receive an LOR, but even that would be undeserved, as they were more than likely following the proper protocol that was expected of them.

mintycrys on May 26, 2012 at 12:12 PM

I do agree with most of your comment in principle. Well stated too. And there probably isn’t a bigger defender of the military than me. But I will say that in the last couple years of being in, the access to SIPR nets and what was posted on them was very concerning. Material was controlled better before. Than Manning tookj advantage of the system makes him no less dispicable or guilty in my eyes, but a look to the future. I hope The Army has at least cracked down on access and supervision.

And what’s with the big slam against bigfoot out of nowhere. What did he ever do to you?

The travesty about this case like so many others (Ft. Hood comes to mind) is that his co-defendants should be his direct supervisors and their officer.

Chain of command works both ways. Or at least it used to.

CorporatePiggy on May 26, 2012 at 9:36 AM

Hardly. They’re all adults. An individual chain of command can’t be expected to babysit every person under their charge, especially not one that was granted Top Secret (SCI) security clearance by the DoD. Those are the people that the government most expects to be trustworthy.

Bottom line is, he was sneaky and stole classified information of his own accord. At worst, some of those along his chain of command might each receive an LOR, but even that would be undeserved, as they were more than likely following the proper protocol that was expected of them.

His guilt is incontrovertible and the punishment is clear: treason during wartime is punishable by death.

Immolate on May 26, 2012 at 11:55 AM

The problem is he wasn’t charged with treason. NONE of the charges against him carry the death penalty IIRC.

Manning will NEVER see the light of day again.

They won’t execute him but his life will end in a Military Prison many years from now.

Cage fight to the death with hammers, this turd and Nidal Hasan, then I get to shoot the winner.

Akzed on May 26, 2012 at 9:42 AM

…I’ll sell tickets!…you sell the refreshments.

They would have to prove that experiencing transgender behavior equals insanity. I am sure the transgender community would have a vocal response to such a defense.

Dr Evil on May 26, 2012 at 10:08 AM

Are you kidding? Eric Holder is probably planning to tell the miilitary that they must allow cross-dressing, and guys in skirts can use the ladies room. ;)

It’s been a while since we checked in on our old pal Breanna Bradley Manning and her his ongoing saga of alleged treason.

Awww… You’re no fun anymore.