To clarify: Villiard noted that, while Manning is in a solitary cell (i.e., he doesn't have a cellmate), it's not like he is in a hole somewhere. Villiard stated that he had toured the facility where Manning and other detainees were being held. While he doesn't have 24/7 access to the detainees, he was able to tour the space, talk with those directly responsible for his care and confinement, and see the cell where Manning is housed.

Villiard stated clearly to me that Manning has access to psychological, spiritual, and medical care. When I asked him if Manning would be able to access care during the 23 hours of his "solitary confinement," if needed, Villiard gave an unambiguous confirmation that Manning's access is not denied. Villiard added that he is able to speak with other cellmates in cells adjacent to him - i.e., while he's in his own place, he is not isolated any more than others in the maximum custody area.

I asked if it was typical for detainees to wait 5-7 months without receiving a trial or even being formally accused, and Villiard noted that he was not familiar enough with the case to know those details. He referred me to the military commission responsible for his legal case, but as of the time I posted this, I have not spoken with them yet.

My concern here is not so much with Greenwald's overall point - i.e., that we should be concerned about the rights of the detainee who has not been given access to a speedy trial. I would agree that 7 months is a long time to wait. I think it's time to move forward with a case against Manning. My concern is that the breathless sensationalism and the, "I'm done with Obama! He's just like Bush!" claims are misguided, and hurt our case and our credibility.

If you are serious about human rights, civil rights, prisoner treatment, etc., then by all means, get involved. But know the facts before you start throwing the President under the bus. Private Manning deserves access to justice and access to legal and psychological counsel, and he is receiving both. It's evident, on its face, that suspicion of Manning is warranted and that, if he did what he's being accused of, it's a violation and a serious one at that.

Lt. Villiard said to me that he enjoys his job, and enjoys the opportunity to be "as transparent as humanly possible" about the work of the Dept. of Defense. He noted that the cause of transparency is harmed when journalists write op-eds and make misleading claims. It diminishes trust in the relationship between reader, journalist, and the subject who is interviewed.

Villiard specifically referred me to page 11 of the comments, in which the Marines responded to Greenwald's article with some rebuttal and clarification - clarification which was not added to the body of Greenwald's opinion piece. The clarification, from "Quantico Information", is as follows:

Safety and Security = Job #1 at the Brig I'm very disappointed with the information presented as "facts" in this opinion editorial, as I helped the author obtain answers to questions he had about the facility here at Quantico. The notion that the Marines posted at Quantico's brig are anything but professional is absurd. Not only are they responsible and accountable for the detainee's security, they are also responsible and accountable for the detainee's safety. ANYONE attempting to harm a detainee in their charge would find themselves in a very difficult situation. Thanks for letting me have my say. These are the questions AND answers provided to the journalist last night. You guys can decide if the Op-ed was fair: Q1) Is Pfc. Manning restricted on what he can watch on television? A1) Pfc. Manning, as well as every other maximum custody detainee, is allotted approximately one hour of television per day. He may view any of the available channels. Viewing time may fluctuate slightly depending on the number of detainees being held at the time, but each detainee will be allotted an equal amount. Q2) Is there anyone Pfc. Manning is not allowed to correspond or visit with? A2) Pfc. Manning, as well as all other maximum custody detainees, is allowed to correspond and visit with only those HE has personally identified as whom he would like to correspond and visit with. Q3) Is Pfc. Manning allowed to converse with other detainees? A3) Pfc. Manning is allowed to converse with other detainees as long as the conversation does not interfere with good order and discipline. Q4) How much time does Pfc. Manning get outside of his cell each day? A4) Pfc. Manning is allotted one hour of recreation time per day, as is every other maximum custody detainee. Depending on the weather, his recreation time may be spend indoors or outdoors. Activities may include calisthenics, running, basketball, etc. Q5) Is Pfc. Manning allowed to exercise in his cell? A5) No detainees are allowed to exercise in their cell. As a matter of safety, all exercise must be supervised. Q6) What type of bedding is Pfc. Manning issued? A6) Pfc. Manning, as well as all other detainees, is issued adequate bedding. Furthermore, A maximum custody detainee is able to receive the same privileges that a detainee classified as general population may receive. These privileges include but are not limited to sending and receiving mail, command visitation, personal visitation. A maximum custody detainee also receives daily television, hygiene call, reading and outside physical activity without restraint. He receives the same approved daily meals from the base food service master menu as any other service member would receive. Due to a potential of either high probability of escape, those likely to be dangerous or violent, and those whose escape would cause concern of a threat to life, property, or national security; maximum custody detainees are under constant supervision and have regular interaction with authorized supervisory personnel assigned to the facility to include physicians.

Hopefully, there are lessons to be learned here for Kossacks who are concerned about government openness, transparency, prisoner treatment, etc.