Chelsea Manning

Former State Department Official Says Access to Intelligence-Sharing System Was Tightened After Manning's Leaks

Says the leaks undid many of the benefits of the system

|

(Reuters)—Washington had to restrict access to an intelligence-sharing system after the biggest leak of classified information in U.S. history, a former official said on Friday at the sentencing hearing of Bradley Manning, the soldier convicted of the leaks.

Tightening access to the system undid the very benefits the system was meant to provide, according to Susan Swart, a former U.S. State Department official who was responsible for the movement of diplomatic cables when they were leaked and published by the anti-secrecy website WikiLeaks in 2010.

NEXT: Dunphy Reviews Balko's "Rise of the Warrior Cop"

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. arrest who arrested manning. ban from gov jobs who thinks manning should be charged. arrest/charge criminals manning exposed.
    charge nsa w espionage.
    espionage/spying=to look at/listen to/record someone/something w/o their knowledge or permission, and is legal if its looking at/listening to/recording public property, the outside of things that are outside or in public, anything you have permission to see, things w probable cause or potentially resonable suspicion of finding evidence of crime/gov misconduct, and gov info that is legally sapose to be public
    leaking classified info is legal. breaching a paid confidentality contact may result in oweing a refund and loss of occupational licence, not arrest. gov confidentiality agreements to keep info secret that is sapose to be public, is illegal and a void contract. leaking classified info that is sapose to be public, or is probable cause of gov misconduct, is honorable, deserve reward, and what people are sapose to do.
    ‘causing intelligence to be published’, ‘transmitting defense information’, is freedom of press and speech.
    manning’s search and seizure is lawful there was probable cause of crime/gov misconduct.
    its legal to share (gov info that is legally sapose to be published) with the public
    public sector(gov) is sapose to be the public’s employees and be publicly viewable
    whistle blower law-cant legally get in trouble for reporting crime/gov-misconduct

  2. its gov’s job to report and try to stop crime/gov-misconduct, and protect everyone=under the law=not letting some get away w the same type of misconduct you dont let others get away with, =no spying on everyone while baning every1 to spy on u
    us army subject schedule no. 27-1 is “the obligation to report all violations of the law of war”
    it is a felony to attempt to use the classification system to hide a crime or protect the powerful from embarrassment. Such material remains unclassified even after being stamped.
    Title 18 US Code contains the law. Executive order 13526 declares that crimes and embarrassing material CANNOT be classified:

    Sec. 1.7. Classification Prohibitions and Limitations.
    (a) In no case shall information be classified, continue to be
    maintained as classified, or fail to be declassified in order to:
    (1) conceal violations of law, inefficiency, or administrative error;
    (2) prevent embarrassment to a person, organization, or agency;
    Also see
    403 U.S. 713 (1971)
    NEW YORK TIMES CO. v. UNITED STATES.
    No. 1873.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.