FBI Director will be holding a Press Conference at 11AM EST today

originally posted by: RickinVa
a reply to: Gryphon66

no problem. here ya go:

fas.org...

here is a company that will build you a "place of custody" and guarantee it meets NSA standards:

www.armagcorp.com...


took about 60 seconds.... you are welcome

Cute.

Meaningless in regard to the Espionage Act ... but again, you look like you know what you're talking about ...

Except of course, you don't.

LOL ... did you notice up in the left hand corner of the page, it notes that DCID 6/9 that you're so proud of has been superceded by ICD 705?

Note: DCID 6-9 has been rescinded and superseded by ICD 705.

So again, can you provide the legal definition of "place of custody" ... please and thank you.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Again, you're just pasting together your own words.

Define "place of custody" vis-a-vis the Espionage Act.

Can you do that? or not?

a reply to: Gryphon66

CAN you deny national security incompetance, on a professional ,national and personal spectrum? ?

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: RickinVa
a reply to: Gryphon66

no problem. here ya go:

fas.org...

here is a company that will build you a "place of custody" and guarantee it meets NSA standards:

www.armagcorp.com...


took about 60 seconds.... you are welcome

Cute.

Meaningless in regard to the Espionage Act ... but again, you look like you know what you're talking about ...

Except of course, you don't.

Provide the legal definition of "place of custody" ... please and thank you.

I do not know what you are asking for?

The only legal place of custody for classified information is set forth and regulated by NSA.

For starters like I just linked you above, classified material secret and above must be stored in Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities or SCIF's... been like this for decades.

Espionage has nothing to do with what I am talking about, you are confused.

fas.org...

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: Gryphon66

CAN you deny national security incompetance, on a professional ,national and personal spectrum? ?

Yes.

originally posted by: RickinVa

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: RickinVa
a reply to: Gryphon66

no problem. here ya go:

fas.org...

here is a company that will build you a "place of custody" and guarantee it meets NSA standards:

www.armagcorp.com...


took about 60 seconds.... you are welcome

Cute.

Meaningless in regard to the Espionage Act ... but again, you look like you know what you're talking about ...

Except of course, you don't.

Provide the legal definition of "place of custody" ... please and thank you.

I do not know what you are asking for?

The only legal place of custody for classified information is set forth and regulated by NSA.

For starters like I just linked you above, classified material secret and above must be storage in Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities or SCIF's... been like this for decades.

Espionage has nothing to do with what I am talking about, you are confused.

fas.org...

You don't know what I'm asking for?

You posted an outdated manual and failed to note that it had been rescinded ON THE SAME PAGE YOU LINKED?

You haven't even read the snippet of the Espionage Act you're supposedly explaining?

Oh ... wait ... you really don't even know what we're talking about here do you ...

Good lord ... here ... 18 USC § 783

Place of custody has nothing to do with the Espionage Act so why the heck are you hung up on that?

Place of custody is where the information is supposed to be stored according to the legal guidelines set forth by NSA...

If your "place of custody" does not meet the NSA standards, they will deny you access to classified information, plain and simple until you are in compliance.

This would be done long before you ever received your first piece of classified information.

This only applies to people who try to do the right and legal things when it comes to classified information, but since Hillary didn't ask for permission, she did what she wanted... which was and is illegal no matter how you slice and dice it.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Then why are you here wasting our time,we don't buy the crap ,YOU DO.
We take a more NATIONALIST view, where when people screw like this in the passed they get "disappeared" or find a "plane crash".
Where secrecy federal regs trump CIVILIAN admiralty law "mistakes".
YOU know, LIKE FOSTER.
Accept when someone gets done THAT way it is KEPT secret unlike...YOUR people.
WE'LL see at election.

a reply to: RickinVa

Read it Rick.

Before you embarrass yourself further, I implore you.

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: Gryphon66

Then why are you here wasting our time,we don't buy the crap ,YOU DO.
We take a more NATIONALIST view, where when people screw like this in the passed they get "disappeared" or find a "plane crash".
Where secrecy federal regs trump CIVILIAN admiralty law "mistakes".
YOU know, LIKE FOSTER.
Accept when someone gets done THAT way it is KEPT secret unlike...YOUR people.
WE'LL see at election.

Do you own the forum? Are you and your buddies the only ATS members that count? Then leave off speaking for "us."

I'm sure you do take a "Nationalist" view Cav, when you're cogent enough ... which doesn't seem to be right now.

I'm going to ignore you out of courtesy.

a reply to: Gryphon66

I HAVE no followers who aren't the same,in many ways, if YOU don't get it,BEST look at diplomatic law and up your game.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: RickinVa

Read it Rick.

Before you embarrass yourself further, I implore you.

Lets start over.. you are severely confused.


Are you aware that the National Security Agency is the agency that mandates the rules and regulations concerning the storage and transmittal of all United States Government classified information.

Do you understand that basic simple fact... it has absolutely nothing to do with the Espionage Act.

Place of custody is set forth by NSA... there is no argument against that.


Secret and above classified materials MUST BE KEPT inside a NSA APPROVED container INSIDE a NSA APPROVED room. Any conditions outside of that basic rule HAS to have a WAIVER from NSA. Period. If you want to tell me that is not true, you have no idea what you are talking about....sorry.

originally posted by: RickinVa

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: RickinVa

Read it Rick.

Before you embarrass yourself further, I implore you.

Lets start over.. you are severely confused.


Are you aware that the National Security Agency is the agency that mandates the rules and regulations concerning the storage and transmittal of all United States Government classified information.

Do you understand that basic simple fact... it has absolutely nothing to do with the Espionage Act.

Place of custody is set forth by NSA... there is no argument against that.

Secret and above classified materials MUST BE KEPT inside a NSA APPROVED container INSIDE a NSA APPROVED room. If you want to tell me that is not true, you have no idea what you are talking about....sorry.

Okay dude ... read back up ... I'm going to spoon feed you just this one time ...

Xcathdra and others here are currently discussing 18 USC § 783. This is known as the Espionage Act. It was first passed in 1917 under the old Federal coding system.

Xcathdra has copied and pasted the text about six or eight times above ... you should be able to find it on your own.

We are specifically discussing section (f).

In section (f) you will find the reference to "place of custody."

You're welcome.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: RickinVa

Okay dude ... read back up ... I'm going to spoon feed you just this one time ...

Xcathdra and others here are currently discussing 18 USC § 783. This is known as the Espionage Act. It was first passed in 1917 under the old Federal coding system.

Xcathdra has copied and pasted the text about six or eight times above ... you should be able to find it on your own.

We are specifically discussing section (f).

In section (f) you will find the reference to "place of custody."

You're welcome.

And once again, that place of custody is set forth by the existing National Security Agency rules and regulations concerning classified information.

You're most welcome.

Place of custody has nothing to do with the Espionage Act other than the term is used. NSA defines place of custody. Period.

a reply to: introvert

Already posted. Stop- trolling and read whats posted.

originally posted by: RickinVa

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: RickinVa

Okay dude ... read back up ... I'm going to spoon feed you just this one time ...

Xcathdra and others here are currently discussing 18 USC § 783. This is known as the Espionage Act. It was first passed in 1917 under the old Federal coding system.

Xcathdra has copied and pasted the text about six or eight times above ... you should be able to find it on your own.

We are specifically discussing section (f).

In section (f) you will find the reference to "place of custody."

You're welcome.

And once again, that place of custody is set forth by the existing National Security Agency rules and regulations concerning classified information.

You're most welcome.

You didn't even know what we were talking about a minute ago. You linked an outdated and rescinded policy guide that was MARKED ON IT'S FACE that it was rescinded and replaced and the little advertisement you linked noted the NEW MANUAL number (ICD 705). You missed that detail. You didn't until a second ago understand that we were talking about the Espionage Act ...

You've missed a lot of things. Your predictions fail. Now you're just basically clawing at straws to seem relevant.

If you happen to say something factual, or even on topic, I'll be glad to respond. If not ...

/shrug

a reply to: Gryphon66

Trying to get you to learn what you are talking about so you stop making false claims about stuff thats doesnt apply.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Its been answered by me, others and Director Comey.

Stop trolling and dragging the thread of topic.


I urge people to double check and verify what you post. You intentionally ignore facts / laws you don't understand and you make false claims about the law and its application.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: introvert

Already posted. Stop- trolling and read whats posted.

I did. Haven't seen the answers I asked for.

I'd also ask that you refrain from the obligatory "troll" nonsense and address the topic at hand.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: RickinVa

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: RickinVa
a reply to: Gryphon66

no problem. here ya go:

fas.org...

here is a company that will build you a "place of custody" and guarantee it meets NSA standards:

www.armagcorp.com...


took about 60 seconds.... you are welcome

Cute.

Meaningless in regard to the Espionage Act ... but again, you look like you know what you're talking about ...

Except of course, you don't.

Provide the legal definition of "place of custody" ... please and thank you.

I do not know what you are asking for?

The only legal place of custody for classified information is set forth and regulated by NSA.

For starters like I just linked you above, classified material secret and above must be storage in Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities or SCIF's... been like this for decades.

Espionage has nothing to do with what I am talking about, you are confused.

fas.org...

You don't know what I'm asking for?

You posted an outdated manual and failed to note that it had been rescinded ON THE SAME PAGE YOU LINKED?

You haven't even read the snippet of the Espionage Act you're supposedly explaining?

Oh ... wait ... you really don't even know what we're talking about here do you ...

Good lord ... here ... 18 USC § 783

I urge people to double check and verify what you post. You intentionally ignore facts / laws you don't understand and you make false claims about the law and its application.

The statute is 18 USC 793 not 783.