db: Lawyer: Bradley Manning Left Naked In Jail Cell

[zoony]

I guess my outrage is that military/intelligence leadership gives Private ****kicker access to this info.

What a bunch of ****ing morons, seriously. I'm glad this stuff was posted on wikileaks. Could have been a lot worse. I hope they're embarassed and I hope some heads roll. besides this manning douche I mean.

[ardowling]

I guess my outrage is that military/intelligence leadership gives Private ****kicker access to this info.

What a bunch of ****ing morons, seriously. I'm glad this stuff was posted on wikileaks. Could have been a lot worse. I hope they're embarassed and I hope some heads roll. besides this manning douche I mean.

You know man, some of the M.I. junior guys that I met in my career were the most pompous know it all Soldier I knew, god I hate painting a broad brush but it is what it is.

[sacase]

I guess my outrage is that military/intelligence leadership gives Private ****kicker access to this info.

What a bunch of ****ing morons, seriously. I'm glad this stuff was posted on wikileaks. Could have been a lot worse. I hope they're embarassed and I hope some heads roll. besides this manning douche I mean.

What are they supposed to do? How are you going to train junior analysts? The stuff he leaked is relatively low level stuff. Once you have a security clearance it means you have been vetted as to being suitable for having access to classified information. Now depending on where you are working, that will dictate your need to know. Obviously the more experienced you get the chances of you being given access to more sensitive programs grows. Now I am wondering what your solution to this problem would be. First, people ***** about agencies not sharing, now that they are sharing they ***** about it even more.

As far as the drivel JMS has posted, it is exactly that, he has no friggin clue of how message traffic is handled, what systems it resides on and what classification level a lot of stuff is. Several years ago I used to work for the DATT. I routinely interacted with the COM, the DCM, the RSO and the COS. WB is exactly right in what he is saying. Its easy to tell that JMS has no experience working in the IC.

Just for JMS, please note where it states suicide watch is a Commanders program. Guess who makes the ultimate determination?

Army Regulation

http://www.martin.amedd.army.mil/meddepts/bh/Pam%20600-22.pdf

Navy regulation

Note that it talks about the Commander and the Commander Leadership, not the Doctor. They consult with Doctors, but the Commander makes the decision.

http://doni.daps.dla.mil/Directives/01000%20Military%20Personnel%20Support/01-700%20Morale,%20Community%20and%20Religious%20Services/1720.4A.pdf

Hmm, which one means more....Military Regulation or NBC....Guess which I choose.

[zoony]

What are they supposed to do? How are you going to train junior analysts?.

Are you freakin' kidding me? How about not giving mr. emotionally unstable 18 year old access to diplomatic cables discussing the inner workings of Ghadafi's regime?

most small corporations have tighter processes surrounding internet access. :doh:

[sacase]

Are you freakin' kidding me? How about not giving mr. emotionally unstable 18 year old access to diplomatic cables discussing the inner workings of Ghadafi's regime?

Again, how would you fix it? How many 18 y/o emotionally unstable kids are given access and don't leak info? 99.99999999999999% Most of these kids understand the sensitivity of the information they are working with. Honestly, if we started saying things like you can't be 18, you can't drink, you can't commit adultery, you can't have financial problems, etc, the only people you would have left in the IC would be Mormons!

[Westbrook36]

Hey, Sergeant, there is a guy down in cell 81A saying he is going to kill himself. He is actually making a noose as we speak.

"Well, it is 3am but I imagine we should try to rustle a judge or something to give us authority. I read someone on the internet once say that we don't have the authority to put someone on suicide watch, even though it happens everyday. NBC news is eminently qualified to state what rules govern the military."

You are right, Sergeant. I will try to call the judge. I hope the prisoner doesn't have enough time to kill himself. If he does, liberals like JMS who look for any angle to argue for those who would hurt our country, will then claim it was cruel and unusual that we allowed him to kill himself.

---------- Post added March-9th-2011 at 06:04 AM ----------

It is really difficult to hold a rational civil discussion when libs like JMS are making preposterous statements like the documents were SBU. Either you have no earthly idea how documents get classified or you are the least informed person I ever met. Those are the only two choices.

JMS, I am sorry you didn't get to meet anyone important during your travels in the ME. Normally Ambos will meet with any American who walks up to the front of a US Embassy much like Bill Gates will meet with anyone who walks up to the Microsoft corporate headquarters.

---------- Post added March-9th-2011 at 06:16 AM ----------

Are you freakin' kidding me? How about not giving mr. emotionally unstable 18 year old access to diplomatic cables discussing the inner workings of Ghadafi's regime?

most small corporations have tighter processes surrounding internet access. :doh:

Zoon, the military does not grant security clearances. He had to complete a SSBI and his clearance level was granted so there must have been no red flags.

My main beef is the unfettered alone access to the trasure trove given that he was able to DL so many documents and walk out without raising an eyebrow.

[Redskins Diehard]

There are 4 levels of classification in the US government: Top Secret, Secret, Confidential, and Unclassified. There is no such classification as SBU...except in JMS's head. Bradley Manning illegally accessed and downloaded information from the DoD SIPRnet. SIPR is classified at Secret which means it has access up to an including Secret information. Nobody is claiming he accessed "Top Secret" information. That would have meant he downloaded from JWICS. No doubt a lot of the cables were labeled, note I did not say "classified", SBU. Which is why wikileaks really didn't get any interesting information.

And for those that are worried about the kind of trial Manning will face....trial by courts martial will include a jury...except they call it a panel. And will include officers and NCOs.(just another note that JMS is wrong on in this thread)

[Predicto]

HIt is really difficult to hold a rational civil discussion when libs like JMS are making preposterous statements like

Stop yammering about "libs" or this lib will stop agreeing with you.

This is not a liberal/conservative issue.

[JMS]

There is no such classification as SBU...except in JMS's head.

:doh: What an idiotic thing to say without doing the slightest bit of due diligence.

Classified information in the United States

The U.S. government uses the terms sensitive but unclassified (SBU), Sensitive Security Information (SSI), Critical Program Information (CPI), For Official Use Only (FOUO) or Law Enforcement Sensitive (LES) to refer to information that is not confidential, secret, or top secret, but whose dissemination is still restricted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classified_information_in_the_United_States

CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION

AP3.3. SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED (SBU) AND LIMITED OFFICIAL USE

(LOU) INFORMATION

AP3.3.1. Description. Sensitive But Unclassified (SBU) information is

information originated within the Department of State that warrants a degree of

protection and administrative control and meets the criteria for exemption from

mandatory public disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (reference (g)).

Before May 26, 1995, this information was designated and marked "Limited Official

Use (LOU)." The LOU designation will no longer be used.

Basically everything that is not classified in the DoD or State Dept, every paper, report, brief, email or computer; get's an SBU stamp, tag or disclaimer. It's placed on every floppy disk, or memory stick ( when they used such things) to hold unclassified data.

I didn't make up that classification and if you had the gumption to run a simple google search you could have confirmed as much.

[Predicto]

I know I quoted that exact passage.....

No it doesn't become legal, it just lowers the charge further, and makes it harder to give him real time.

It's a crime to carelessly handle secret material, you can definitely be prosecuted for that. But it's a much more serious crime to conspire with somebody to publish it, or to hand it directly to somebody who will use it in a way detrimental to the security of the nation. The latter charge is what they would like to get Manning on. If they have to settle for the former it will be much harder to give him serious time.

The article says that they are having trouble directly connecting Manning with Assange. The article does not say that they are having trouble showing that Manning took classified information and gave it to SOMEONE. That is still espionage. He is still in deep doodoo. It just means that they have less dirt on Assange, not that Manning has any reason to get off scot free, or any of the other speculation you have been filling this thread up with.

[JMS]

There are 4 levels of classification in the US government: Top Secret, Secret, Confidential, and Unclassified. There is no such classification as SBU...except in JMS's head. Bradley Manning illegally accessed and downloaded information from the DoD SIPRnet. SIPR is classified at Secret which means it has access up to an including Secret information. Nobody is claiming he accessed "Top Secret" information. That would have meant he downloaded from JWICS. No doubt a lot of the cables were labeled, note I did not say "classified", SBU. Which is why wikileaks really didn't get any interesting information.

JWICS isn't a DoD network rather it's owned and managed by the NSA.

Yes Manning is suspected of downloading secret data, not clear if it was housed on SIPRNet. The DoD has about 14 global networks of varying levels of security and those are only engineered to points of presense at different bases, camps or forts. Installations also run their own networks independent of DISA, the DoD's telcom. Manning is suspected of downloading after action reports dealing with combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan which were secret. Manning is not suspected of releasing the Diplomatic Cables which frankly made a larger splash in the newspapers. That data was not classified as secret, but did carry the classification SBU which is still a crime to diseminate. It is unclear who leaked this State Department material to Wikileaks but Mannings name is not among those in consideration because typically Army Intelligence personel don't have access to global diplomatic cables, even the SBU ones, and the state departement doesn't mix diplomatic data with DoD traffic on the same networks.

And for those that are worried about the kind of trial Manning will face....trial by courts martial will include a jury...except they call it a panel. And will include officers and NCOs.(just another note that JMS is wrong on in this thread)

I haven't been wrong on anything in this thread yet... The uniform code of military justice does not guarantee a jury of your peers and they don't call a jury a "panel" but a board. The board is not similar to a jury rather it more closely resembles a court with multiple judges.

The article says that they are having trouble directly connecting Manning with Assange. The article does not say that they are having trouble showing that Manning took classified information and gave it to SOMEONE. That is still espionage. He is still in deep doodoo. It just means that they have less dirt on Assange, not that Manning has any reason to get off scot free, or any of the other speculation you have been filling this thread up with.

No it's not. Downloading a bunch of classified material on a FOB is not a crime. Do it all the time. or at least I used too before the policy changed. Today folks burn all that material to DVD's to transport it....If you are authorized to work with such material and need to transport it between classified systems you are absolutely empowered to package it up and move it as you need too. There are restrictions in where you can keep the data and how you store the data and requirements on who can carry it between secure locations... but to simple copy it is not a crime.

Now if Manning was careless with this material and it ended up in the wrong hands, that's a crime. It's just not as serious a crime as espianage.

The worst offense is if Manning knowingly handed it to an enemy of the United States, or someone who he knew would use it against the interests of the United States, or can be shown to have done these things himself. The most severe penelties are reserved for this catagory of breach and that's what they are desparately trying to apply to PFC Manning. And that is what they can not prove so far.

As for Astrang, it's really not clear he's done anything wrong. He published classified material which came into his hands. That is not a crime which the US has a lot of sucess in prosecuting. The Washington Post, NY Times, LA Times all published excerpts from the Wikileaks pages. It's going to take some very nimble leagal moves to pin any type of charge on Astrang. Which as I've said is one reason why the US government has not filed any charges on Astrang. He'sbeing held for extradition to sweeden on rape charges. For the high crime of having concentual sex with somebody but failing to use a condome and relate this in a timely manor to his partner. It's a charge the scandinavian government interviewed him for before the wikileaks fame and declined to punish. A charge they somehow resurected after his wikileaks fame. All very dubious.

---------- Post added March-9th-2011 at 01:39 PM ----------

Just for JMS, please note where it states suicide watch is a Commanders program. Guess who makes the ultimate determination?

Navy regulation

Note that it talks about the Commander and the Commander Leadership, not the Doctor. They consult with Doctors, but the Commander makes the decision.

http://doni.daps.dla.mil/Directives/01000%20Military%20Personnel%20Support/01-700%20Morale,%20Community%20and%20Religious%20Services/1720.4A.pdf

Hmm, which one means more....Military Regulation or NBC....Guess which I choose.

Your source material, which was an interesting read..

Under Intervention.

(4) If a Service member’s comments, written communication

or behaviors lead the command to believe there is imminent risk

that the person may cause harm to self or others, command

leadership must take safety measures that include restricting

access of at-risk personnel to means that can be used to inflict

harm and seek emergent mental health evaluation consistent with

reference (.[B][/b]

A synonym for emergent is early. Two day's after the fact may mean early in your book but not so much in the dictionary or english language.

And just to further put this into perspective. You are defending a decision which a Marine judge ended, and a Brig Commander who has subsequently been removed from his position.

[Redskins Diehard]

JWICS isn't a DoD network rather it's owned and managed by the NSA.

Yes Manning is suspected of downloading secret data, not clear if it was housed on SIPRNet. The DoD has about 14 global networks of varying levels of security and those are only engineered to points of presense at different bases, camps or forts. Installations also run their own networks independent of DISA, the DoD's telcom. Manning is suspected of downloading after action reports dealing with combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan which were secret. Manning is not suspected of releasing the Diplomatic Cables which frankly made a larger splash in the newspapers. That data was not classified as secret, but did carry the classification SBU which is still a crime to diseminate. It is unclear who leaked this State Department material to Wikileaks but Mannings name is not among those in consideration because typically Army Intelligence personel don't have access to global diplomatic cables, even the SBU ones, and the state departement doesn't mix diplomatic data with DoD traffic on the same networks.

I haven't been wrong on anything in this thread yet... The uniform code of military justice does not guarantee a jury of your peers and they don't call a jury a "panel" but a board. The board is not similar to a jury rather it more closely resembles a court with multiple judges.

.

You really are clueless. Have you ever observed a trial by courts martial? Ever? Even on a movie or tv?

And you may want to brush up on your knowledge of military networks....30 people in my office spit coffee and soda out their nose when reading your post.

[JMS]

You really are clueless. Have you ever observed a trial by courts martial? Ever? Even on a movie or tv?

Excellent retorical response. Personal attacks without pointing out any actual objection in my post, which was 100% correct by the way.

Here is a copy of the Uniformed Code of Military Justice. you will note that the words jury or panel do not appear in the code. The word used is Board.

http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/ucmj.htm

And you may want to brush up on your knowledge of military networks....30 people in my office spit coffee and soda out their nose when reading your post.

I would not have guessed you knew 30 people who could drink coffee through their noses.

Let's see what did I say? The DoD has about 14 global networks... I was probable short...

1. NIPRNet
   
2. SIPRNet
   
3. DISN-LES
   
4. Defense Switched Network (DSN)
   
5. Defense Red Switch Network (DRSN)
   
6. Enhanced Mobile Satellite Services (EMSS)
   
7. Defense Message System (DMS)
   
8. Secure Mobile Environment Portable Electronic Device (SME-PED)
   
9. DISN Video Services - Global
   
10. DoD Teleport System
    
11. Transport Services (class and unclass)
    
12. Anti-Drug Network - ADNET
    
13. INMARSAT
    
14. DISN Satellite Transmission Services-Global (DSTS-G)
    
15. JHITS
    
16. WCO or JLC
    
17. Real Time Services (RTS)
    

http://www.disa.mil/services/voice_video_data.html

Please note that JWICS does not appear in the list of DISA Networks. As I stated it is owned and managed by the NSA not the DoD. Hense the name "Joint Worldwide IntelligenceCommunications System".... I believe DISA is involved in it from an engineering stand point, but it's an NSA asset.

[Redskins Diehard]

Excellent retorical response. Personal attacks without pointing out any actual objection in my post, which was 100% correct by the way.

Here is a copy of the Uniformed Code of Military Justice. you will note that the words jury or panel do not appear in the code. The word used is Board.

http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/ucmj.htm

I would not have guessed you knew 30 people who could drink coffee through their noses.

Let's see what did I say? The DoD has about 14 global networks... I was probable short...

1. NIPRNet
   
2. SIPRNet
   
3. DISN-LES
   
4. Defense Switched Network (DSN)
   
5. Defense Red Switch Network (DRSN)
   
6. Enhanced Mobile Satellite Services (EMSS)
   
7. Defense Message System (DMS)
   
8. Secure Mobile Environment Portable Electronic Device (SME-PED)
   
9. DISN Video Services - Global
   
10. DoD Teleport System
    
11. Transport Services (class and unclass)
    
12. Anti-Drug Network - ADNET
    
13. INMARSAT
    
14. DISN Satellite Transmission Services-Global (DSTS-G)
    
15. JHITS
    
16. WCO or JLC
    
17. Real Time Services (RTS)
    

http://www.disa.mil/services/voice_video_data.html

Please note that JWICS does not appear in the list of DISA Networks. As I stated it is owned and managed by the NSA not the DoD. Hense the name "Joint Worldwide Intelligence Communications System".... I believe DISA is involved in it from an engineering stand point, but it's an NSA asset.

1) Is the NSA part of DoD? You talk about them like they are mutually exclusive conditions.

2) According to some woman who was the Director for Network services at DISA...JWICS is part of the DISN http://www.disa.mil/conferences/forecast_industry/slides/moran.ppt if you are interested

You didn't answer the question....have you ever observed a courts martial? You made the claim that he would not receive a trial by a jury of his peers...but rather a "tribunal". It does look like you have sense learned that it isn't the Code of Uniformed Military Justice like you referred to it in the first post. That got some coffee and soda spitting going on also.

[JMS]

1) Is the NSA part of DoD? You talk about them like they are mutually exclusive conditions.

Yes the NSA is entirely different from the DoD. The National Security Agency is a civilian organization like the CIA which does crypto and signals intelligence for the US Gov.

2) According to some woman who was the Director for Network services at DISA...JWICS is part of the DISN http://www.disa.mil/conferences/forecast_industry/slides/moran.ppt if you are interested

I would agree with that. Because DISA uses fiber optic backbone and because we learn how to use fiber more efficiently at a rate approaching Moore's law for CPU speed... Meaning we can double the bandwidth on fiber optic cables every 12 months about... Thus 95% of the fiber which the DoD leased in the early 1980's is dark, unused. The NSA takes advantage of this dark fiber by routing their traffic over the DoD trunks. But the technology of the trunks is such that this can be done without any co-mingling of the data. Just like the NIPR and SIPR networks both traverse the same lines but are not co-mingled. The NSA still owns and manages JWICS. If you got a JWICS connection you would pay the NSA for it, not DITCO or DISA. DISA does engeering tasks for the NSA on JWICS but it's not a DoD Asset.

You didn't answer the question....have you ever observed a courts martial? You made the claim that he would not receive a trial by a jury of his peers...but rather a "tribunal". It does look like you have sense learned that it isn't the Code of Uniformed Military Justice like you referred to it in the first post. That got some coffee and soda spitting going on also.

I stand by my statement, A court marshal is not conducted with a jury of ones peers, rather a board of officers who act as co judges rather than jury members. And by the way about the word Tribunal which you seem to take such offense too.

The definition of "tribunal" is "a court of justice" or "a place or seat of judgment." Just not one which necessarily uses a jury.

I think that was our most civil bit in this conversation. Here is to more exchanges like that.

[Westbrook36]

JMS, your google has failed you. The probem with your approach in this thread is you are solely relying on news reports and google and ignoring those with real experience. For example, you couldn't be more wrong about courts martials. Any enlisted can request a "jury" of their peers; I.e. Other enlisted members will serve and determine guilt or ignorance.

As for classifying, SBU isn't a classification. It is usually followed by NOFORN to guard certain information from FSNs who work overseas. It guards useless information for the most part. You would never find SBU on any classified network. This is where your critical lack of experience and understanding is making you look really silly. Seriously, you contended the docs Manning took was SBU. There are no smileys on the internet to show how much of FAIL that is.

[Redskins Diehard]

Yes the NSA is entirely different from the DoD. The National Security Agency is a civilian organization like the CIA which does crypto and signals intelligence for the US Gov.

I would agree with that. Because DISA uses fiber optic backbone and because we learn how to use fiber more efficiently at a rate approaching Moore's law for CPU speed... Meaning we can double the bandwidth on fiber optic cables every 12 months about... Thus 95% of the fiber which the DoD leased in the early 1980's is dark, unused. The NSA takes advantage of this dark fiber by routing their traffic over the DoD trunks. But the technology of the trunks is such that this can be done without any co-mingling of the data. Just like the NIPR and SIPR networks both traverse the same lines but are not co-mingled. The NSA still owns and manages JWICS. If you got a JWICS connection you would pay the NSA for it, not DITCO or DISA. DISA does engeering tasks for the NSA on JWICS but it's not a DoD Asset.

I stand by my statement, A court marshal is not conducted with a jury of ones peers, rather a board of officers who act as co judges rather than jury members. And by the way about the word Tribunal which you seem to take such offense too.

The definition of "tribunal" is "a court of justice" or "a place or seat of judgment." Just not one which necessarily uses a jury.

I think that was our most civil bit in this conversation. Here is to more exchanges like that.

Well you are incorrect about NSA not being part of DoD. http://www.defense.gov/orgchart/#v Maybe that explains why you don't think JWICS is a DoD network.

So what would you consider a jury of Bradley Manning's peers? A board or all enlisted? Of all Non-Coms? Of all PFC's? Of all PFC's that have recently been demoted in rank? The fact of the matter is his "jury" will be made up of a pool of military members that are both officers and non-commissioned officers(enlisted).

[Westbrook36]

I'd be curious to hear JMS' explanation on what he believes the difference is in a jury and a panel of judges. He purposely used one term instead of the other. Anyone whp has been in the military 15 minutes knows how a CM works and that you can choose to be tried by a jury of your peers. Now JMS will quote legal speak out of the UCMJ without any depth of understanding on how it really works.

[Redskins Diehard]

JMS, your google has failed you. The probem with your approach in this thread is you are solely relying on news reports and google and ignoring those with real experience. For example, you couldn't be more wrong about courts martials. Any enlisted can request a "jury" of their peers; I.e. Other enlisted members will serve and determine guilt or ignorance.

As for classifying, SBU isn't a classification. It is usually followed by NOFORN to guard certain information from FSNs who work overseas. It guards useless information for the most part. You would never find SBU on any classified network. This is where your critical lack of experience and understanding is making you look really silly. Seriously, you contended the docs Manning took was SBU. There are no smileys on the internet to show how much of FAIL that is.

Well I do disagree with one point. You will always find information of lesser classification on systems intended to process higher classifications of data. You'll find Unclassified on Secret and TS systems. Just never the other way around...legally.

[Westbrook36]

In the military, "peers" means enlisted for enlisted and officers for officers. Rank plays no part in the determination.

[Redskins Diehard]

In the military, "peers" means enlisted for enlisted and officers for officers. Rank plays no part in the determination.

Someone that actually knew the answer wasn't supposed to give it!

But the one role that it does play is that you can't have someone junior sitting in. So you would never have LT sitting on the panel for a MAJ etc. In the case of young Bradley Manning I guess they won't pull a PVT out of basic or AIT!

[JMS]

JMS, your google has failed you. The probem with your approach in this thread is you are solely relying on news reports and google and ignoring those with real experience. For example, you couldn't be more wrong about courts martials. Any enlisted can request a "jury" of their peers; I.e. Other enlisted members will serve and determine guilt or ignorance.

And they offer that option without the term "jury" or "peers" appearing in the code of military justice?

Or maybe like my position in this discussion you only think you know what's being said.

http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/ucmj.htm

As for classifying, SBU isn't a classification. It is usually followed by NOFORN to guard certain information from FSNs who work overseas. It guards useless information for the most part. You would never find SBU on any classified network. This is where your critical lack of experience and understanding is making you look really silly. Seriously, you contended the docs Manning took was SBU. There are no smileys on the internet to show how much of FAIL that is.

and again I would find your empiracle evidence commanding on the SBU classification if You could even get the synopsis of my position correct. And of course if I had not already posted the DoD circular on classified data which speaks to SBU designation..

Just for the record I never said manning didn't take and leak secret data. I said

1. The dod couldn't tie him to Astrang, which is a huge problem for prosecutors. Not my opinion but I sited several news sources which confirm this.

2. That manning didn't leak the diplomatic cables which were SBU not Secret. Leaking SBU data is still a prosecutable crime, just not as big of penalties and not something Manning is being accused of.

3- Finally I said that the Feds will have a hard time prosecuting Astange even though he published secret material. This is because the NY Times, Washington Post and LA Times also published parts of that data, and historically they don't get prosecuted for such, AND the supreme court has already ruled that bloggers and folks who run web sights have the same protections under the law as the news papers and conventional journalists.

[JMS]

duplicate post.

[Redskins Diehard]

And they offer that option without the term "jury" or "peers" appearing in the code of military justice?

Or maybe like my position in this discussion you only think you know what's being said.

http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/ucmj.htm

and again I would find your empiracle evidence commanding on the SBU classification if You could even get the synopsis of my position correct. And of course if I had not already posted the DoD circular on classified data which speaks to SBU designation..

Just for the record I never said manning didn't take and leak secret data. I said

1. The dod couldn't tie him to Astrang, which is a huge problem for prosecutors. Not my opinion but I sited several news sources which confirm this.

2. That manning didn't leak the diplomatic cables which were SBU not Secret. Leaking SBU data is still a prosecutable crime, just not as big of penalties and not something Manning is being accused of.

3- Finally I said that the Feds will have a hard time prosecuting Astange even though he published secret material. This is because the NY Times, Washington Post and LA Times also published parts of that data, and historically they don't get prosecuted for such, AND the supreme court has already ruled that bloggers and folks who run web sights have the same protections under the law as the news papers and conventional journalists.

http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/law/mcm.pdf

If you are so inclined to actually learn how a courts-martial is run. If you are interested in what the actual composition of the courts-martial is. Part II, Chapter 5.

You have made a lot of incorrect assertions in this thread. You have claimed knowledge of how the composition of a courts martial. You were incorrect.

You claimed JWICS is not a DoD network....incorrrect

NSA not in DoD.....incorrect

Claimed SBU is a level of classification....incorrect

[Westbrook36]

And they offer that option without the term "jury" or "peers" appearing in the code of military justice?

Or maybe like my position in this discussion you only think you know what's being said.

http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/ucmj.htm

Didn't I just predict in my last reply that you would next quote legal speak out of the UCMJ without any depth of understanding of what you were talking about? Listen, I have a copy of the MCM on my deak and my official duties include recommending legal courses of action to the commander because I am the senior enlisted in my command. You have two choices. You can take me at face value when I say you are categorically wrong or you can just keep googling and reading and hoping you can prove incorrect statements. Your choice. .

and again I would find your empiracle evidence commanding on the SBU classification if You could even get the synopsis of my position correct. And of course if I had not already posted the DoD circular on classified data which speaks to SBU designation..

Just for the record I never said manning didn't take and leak secret data. I said

1. The dod couldn't tie him to Astrang, which is a huge problem for prosecutors. Not my opinion but I sited several news sources which confirm this.

2. That manning didn't leak the diplomatic cables which were SBU not Secret. Leaking SBU data is still a prosecutable crime, just not as big of penalties and not something Manning is being accused of.

3- Finally I said that the Feds will have a hard time prosecuting Astange even though he published secret material. This is because the NY Times, Washington Post and LA Times also published parts of that data, and historically they don't get prosecuted for such, AND the supreme court has already ruled that bloggers and folks who run web sights have the same protections under the law as the news papers and conventional journalists.

I love argueing with people like you on the internet! What you do is make incorrect statements early in a thread and then ever so slightly change your position as it becomes obvious you are wrong on issues. If I was not on a BB I would simply multi quote your original post that Manning "didn't leak secret documents" and that what he leaked were on the "sensitive but unclassified network". If anyone wants to check, yourself included, its right there on page 2.

Seriously, this is just getting embarrassing for you now.

For your next trick, prop up an easy to knock down strawman which doesn't address any of your inaccurracies or refutes any incorrect statements made by you previous. Ensure you use google. This has been a winning technique thus far.